Kinderhook Plates Discovery damages BOA Missing Scroll and Catalyst Theories

[Rivers]

14 minutes ago, ttribe said:

And yet, the church continues to publish the facsimiles as part of the Book of Abraham. Seems someone in Salt Lake didn't catch your more nuanced interpret. 

Since we have the facsimiles, why not have the KEP in our scriptures too?

[Pyreaux]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

And yet, the church continues to publish the facsimiles as part of the Book of Abraham. Seems someone in Salt Lake didn't catch your more nuanced interpret. 

In that case they are fulfilling their purpose, as illustrations to a scribes work. That is historically how they are used.

[mfbukowski]

20 hours ago, sunstoned said:

This is a pretty complicated view.  If it works for you then great.

How complicated is your view of the universe and why your view gives your life meaning?

Does it account for problems in linguistic representation of "reality", consciousness and the mind body problem, and how all that fits in with morality?

Have you solved truth vs falsity, good vs evil and the place of science and consciousness in your view?

If it's not at least as complicated, I would like to suggest it  cannot cover all the necessary bases.

[mfbukowski]

20 hours ago, ttribe said:

And yet, the church continues to publish the facsimiles as part of the Book of Abraham. Seems someone in Salt Lake didn't catch your more nuanced interpretation.

Why is this even relevant?

[ttribe]

31 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Why is this even relevant?

It doesn't involve Wiggenstein, so don't worry about it.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, ttribe said:

It doesn't involve Wiggenstein, so don't worry about it.

Oh my.  His name begins with witt, not wigg, which makes your reply witless in more ways than one.

 

Edited May 22, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

23 hours ago, ttribe said:

And yet, the church continues to publish the facsimiles as part of the Book of Abraham. Seems someone in Salt Lake didn't catch your more nuanced interpretation.

Canonized scripture is not made by editors. Perhaps it's you who are missing nuances

[jkwilliams]

18 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh my.  His name begins with witt, not wigg, which makes your reply witless in more ways than one.

 

I think it was an intentional misspelling. Wittgenstein loses its talismanic properties if someone mistypes it on their phone. 

[mfbukowski]

20 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I think it was an intentional misspelling. Wittgenstein loses its talismanic properties if someone mistypes it on their phone. 

No, I think you are thinking of Hairy Potter.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, mfbukowski said:

No, I think you are thinking of Hairy Potter.

I hear the only counter-spell is watching a short clip of Rorty. 

[mfbukowski]

23 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

In that case they are fulfilling their purpose, as illustrations to a scribes work. That is historically how they are used.

They are that and much more, they explain the meanings of various temple gestures and essential to a better understanding of what happens there.  They are right where they belong.  

[mfbukowski]

33 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I hear the only counter-spell is watching a short clip of Rorty. 

Well yes, but it is even better after a nice bowl of mushroom soup....

[ttribe]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh my.  His name begins with witt, not wigg, which makes your reply witless in more ways than one.

 

My apologies. I was taking a brief stop during a 200-mile drive home.

It's lovely to see your ongoing commitment to exemplifying Christ-like behavior, though.

Edited May 23, 2022 by ttribe

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

My apologies. I was taking a brief stop during a 200-mile drive home.

It's lovely to see your ongoing commitment to exemplifying Christ-like behavior, though.

I respond to certain posters in kind.

It's the only thing some understand, apparently.  Sometimes you turn over tables 

Edited May 23, 2022 by mfbukowski

[cinepro]

On 5/17/2022 at 6:34 AM, jkwilliams said:

Did Joseph Smith ever say he was translating otherwise? Just curious.

That's an interesting question. I remembered hearing the JS studied Hebrew, but it looks like it went a bit beyond that.

 

Quote

During his prophetic career, Joseph Smith spent considerable time and effort towards the study of both modern and ancient languages. Historical evidence indicates that Joseph studied, or at least expressed interest in studying, Hebrew, Greek, Egyptian, Latin, and German. Although his study of these languages was evidently limited, and although he never became proficient in these languages, Joseph Smith nevertheless employed his understanding of these languages in his doctrinal discourses that in many instances led him to formulate creative theological innovations. Although he wasn’t a skilled linguist, and his understanding of some of these languages (particularly Hebrew and Egyptian) was highly idiosyncratic, the true value in Joseph’s study of languages was that it catalyzed inspiration that led him to elucidate prophetic insight.

http://jur.byu.edu/?p=15384

If Joseph Smith spent time studying all those languages, he obviously recognized that there was some sort of regular translation to be done.

Edited May 23, 2022 by cinepro

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, cinepro said:

That's an interesting question. I remembered hearing the JS studied Hebrew, but it looks like it went a bit beyond that.

 

If Joseph Smith spent time studying all those languages, he obviously recognized that there was some sort of regular translation to be done.

We tend to forget that he had already weathered the Anton affair, of course, and yet in these instances it did not bother him anymore if a text and it's "translation" could be compared.

He looked at a stone in a hat for the BOM.

I am convinced he no longer cared because he knew that what he wrote were transformations, not literal translations.

There is no basis for thinking he was ignorant of such things

The arguments just don't work.

[why me]

On 5/17/2022 at 12:58 AM, The Unclean Deacon said:

  Mormonism already has so many issues in favor of the criitic and now it appears the Missing scroll and Catalyst theories just became less rational.

a link to Mark Mgee and Don Bradley's discovery - https://www.millennialstar.org/the-mystery-of-the-kinderhook-plates-solved/

 

 

Lets just say that I am a fraudster and a part of that fraud is the writing of the book of mormon. I make up a story about good plates and how I translated them. People believe my story and begin to follow me through a church. I also get 11 people to confirm my fraud whether they are part of fraud or not is not important. Then, a few years later someone comes to me with plates rather similiar to my fraud and asks me to translate them. If I were a fraudster why would I fall for this fraud. However, if I am not a frauster and I really did  find gold plates maybe then I would at least give it a try. This is my take on it.

[Ryan Dahle]

15 hours ago, why me said:

Lets just say that I am a fraudster and a part of that fraud is the writing of the book of mormon. I make up a story about good plates and how I translated them. People believe my story and begin to follow me through a church. I also get 11 people to confirm my fraud whether they are part of fraud or not is not important. Then, a few years later someone comes to me with plates rather similiar to my fraud and asks me to translate them. If I were a fraudster why would I fall for this fraud. However, if I am not a frauster and I really did  find gold plates maybe then I would at least give it a try. This is my take on it.

That's really the problem with trying to leverage the Kinderhook plates as strong evidence of fraud on his part. The historical evidence that Joseph was interested in ancient languages on both a spiritual and secular level is clear. If Joseph had prepared a lengthy translation of the Kinderhook plates, and if his translation was unambiguously declared to be via divine revelation (rather than some sort of secular endeavor), I would understand why people would think it was a big deal.

However, the brevity of the Kinderhook translation, the ambiguity about precisely what manner Joseph arrived at his translation (secular or spiritual?), and the uncertainty about how much credence Joseph himself gave to his brief explanation (whether he thought it was a certain revelation, or merely a plausible explanation based on a tentative language exploration project), all make this pretty much a non-issue.

The way some commentators fawn over this event, as if it holds some sort of deeply probative data about Joseph's prophetic ability, is just odd. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

18 hours ago, why me said:

Lets just say that I am a fraudster and a part of that fraud is the writing of the book of mormon. I make up a story about good plates and how I translated them. People believe my story and begin to follow me through a church. I also get 11 people to confirm my fraud whether they are part of fraud or not is not important. Then, a few years later someone comes to me with plates rather similiar to my fraud and asks me to translate them. If I were a fraudster why would I fall for this fraud. However, if I am not a frauster and I really did  find gold plates maybe then I would at least give it a try. This is my take on it.

Are you saying that if Joseph correctly identified the plates as fraudulent, you would take that as evidence that Joseph was a fraud?

[Rivers]

2 hours ago, Ryan Dahle said:

That's really the problem with trying to leverage the Kinderhook plates as strong evidence of fraud on his part. The historical evidence that Joseph was interested in ancient languages on both a spiritual and secular level is clear. If Joseph had prepared a lengthy translation of the Kinderhook plates, and if his translation was unambiguously declared to be via divine revelation (rather than some sort of secular endeavor), I would understand why people would think it was a big deal.

However, the brevity of the Kinderhook translation, the ambiguity about precisely what manner Joseph arrived at his translation (secular or spiritual?), and the uncertainty about how much credence Joseph himself gave to his brief explanation (whether he thought it was a certain revelation, or merely a plausible explanation based on a tentative language exploration project), all make this pretty much a non-issue.

The way some commentators fawn over this event, as if it holds some sort of deeply probative data about Joseph's prophetic ability, is just odd. 

There’s no need to fawn over the Kinderhook plates when you got the Book of Abraham debacle.

[Ryan Dahle]

4 hours ago, Rivers said:

There’s no need to fawn over the Kinderhook plates when you got the Book of Abraham debacle.

I don't personally see it as a debacle. I think it is definitely more complicated than the Kinderhook plates though. 

[Rivers]

3 hours ago, Ryan Dahle said:

I don't personally see it as a debacle. I think it is definitely more complicated than the Kinderhook plates though. 

Lucky for you. But the Book of Abraham has been a stumbling block for way too many others.

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, Rivers said:

But the Book of Abraham has been a stumbling block for way too many others.

A trait it shares with the Lord Himself:

'Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.

'And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

'And many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken' (Isaiah 8:13-15).

[why me]

11 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Are you saying that if Joseph correctly identified the plates as fraudulent, you would take that as evidence that Joseph was a fraud?

No, if JS was a fraudster who made up the book of mormon 'fraud' he would never even consider those plates. He would know that they were a fraud

[why me]

14 hours ago, Ryan Dahle said:

That's really the problem with trying to leverage the Kinderhook plates as strong evidence of fraud on his part. The historical evidence that Joseph was interested in ancient languages on both a spiritual and secular level is clear. If Joseph had prepared a lengthy translation of the Kinderhook plates, and if his translation was unambiguously declared to be via divine revelation (rather than some sort of secular endeavor), I would understand why people would think it was a big deal.

However, the brevity of the Kinderhook translation, the ambiguity about precisely what manner Joseph arrived at his translation (secular or spiritual?), and the uncertainty about how much credence Joseph himself gave to his brief explanation (whether he thought it was a certain revelation, or merely a plausible explanation based on a tentative language exploration project), all make this pretty much a non-issue.

The way some commentators fawn over this event, as if it holds some sort of deeply probative data about Joseph's prophetic ability, is just odd. 

The fact that he consider them to perhaps be real shows that most likely he was not a fraudster with the book of mormon. He kept an open mind until he realized that something smelled like a fish.