Please Explain how Joseph Smith could have possibly authored the Book of Mormon.

[Starfish]

I think he had help, Martin Harris, David Whitmer but mostly Oliver Cowdery.

He did have help from them. Martin Harris morgaged his farm to finance the publication. David Whitmer provided a place for the translation, and Oliver Cowdery was a scribe.

There are eyewitnesses who say the translation process was as Joseph described. Some of those witnesses left the Church, but never denied the authenticity of the book. (Some returned to the Church later.)

You know, if you wanted to start a religion, as many have, why go through the trouble and expense of such a book? If it was a fake, then the risk of discovery is too great. You leave yourself wide open to be discredited by the Biblical scholars. Why not just claim a revelation and go from there?

 

[Katzpur]

I think he had help, Martin Harris, David Whitmer but mostly Oliver Cowdery.

Hi, Paul. Since you've always been a reasonable guy, I hope you won't mind explaining this statement. I'm assuming what you meant by it is that Joseph, Martin, David and Oliver got together and authored the Book of Mormon. If that is the case, could you provide some evidence to support your hunch?

Since I'm also assuming you've got enough of a sense of humor to be able to laugh at yourself when the flaws in your reasoning are pointed out to you, here is a link you might enjoy:

A Day in the Life of Joseph Smith, Translator Extraordinaire

 

[SoyLeche]

Hi, Paul. Since you've always been a reasonable guy, I hope you won't mind explaining this statement. I'm assuming what you meant by it is that Joseph, Martin, David and Oliver got together and authored the Book of Mormon. If that is the case, could you provide some evidence to support your hunch?

Since I'm also assuming you've got enough of a sense of humor to be able to laugh at yourself when the flaws in your reasoning are pointed out to you, here is a link you might enjoy:

A Day in the Life of Joseph Smith, Translator Extraordinaire

It is also helpful to note that at one point or another each of these 3 men were at odds with Joseph. At times they didn't like him much at all. It would have been a simple thing to admit to the fraud and destroy Joseph, but none of them ever did.

Doesn't prove anything, but it is still interesting.

 

[Autodidact]

Here are the facts:

He had the equivalent of approximately a 4th grade education.
His family was very poor and lived in a small, rural community in the early 1800's, lacking many resources and exposure to the world.
He was age 22-23 when he translated the BoM. Age 24 when it was published.
He and his family had to work hard to exist. They were farmers. His time to write was very limited.
There are eyewitesses to the translation. His wife said that he only worked on it for a few months, approx. 3 months.
There are eyewitnesses (11) who testified of seeing the gold plates. Some later left the Church but never refuted what they saw.
There are eyewitnesses who worked as scribes while he translated, describing the process.

This is not a thread for listing "errors" in the book. That's not the point. Please explain to me how it is possible, in light of the facts, that he could make up such a book and pass it off as scripture, fooling millions, including scholars, for nearly 180 years?

Doesn't seem hard to me. It reads like the work of a virtually illiterate but intelligent person trying to pass something off as in the style of the King James Bible to me.

What non-Mormon scholars did he fool exactly?

Doesn't seem hard to fool people into believing drivel is divinely inspired. Are you familiar with Scientology?

As to how, he sat down at this kitchen table and wrote it, that's how.

I suppose you also don't want any posts about how there is no such thing as Reformed Egyptian? Or how Joseph Smith incorrectly identified actual Egyptian writing? Or the kinderhook plates? Or how nothing described in the BoM left a shred of evidence as actually having happened? Or anything like that?

 

[cardero]

Madhatter85 writes: Like Pornography for instance, It is an addiction and a filthy Evil of this world but there is nothing in the Bible, BoM, or Doctrine and covenants on this particular subject. So there was a need for continuing revelation on the subject ebcause new things pop up every day that we didn't have before.

Yes but wasn’t the shame of nudity already introduced in the Garden Of Eden and further expressed in the Old Testament?

Are there really any more “evils” that have yet to be covered and confirmed?

Madhatter85 writes: And Cardero, I'm sure you can recieve personal revelation for yourself and your family, just as everyone else on this planet can, according to the will of God. But i reject the notion that you recieve revelation for the planet as a whole because, i believe that role is filled currently by Thomas S. Monson, President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I do not mind that you hold this belief but are you rejecting this notion out of the knowledge and understanding of who I am or because of the messages that I received?

 

[cardero]

Starfish writes: God seems to prefer records. This is how we have the Bible. We believe that more records will be "discovered" that will tell of many people who have had the gospel revealed to them, and of other visits by Christ to teach them the truth. We will discover that God has indeed been very active in the affairs of this world, throughout history.

There is a thread that was recently started in New Religious Movements called The Latter Day Church of Jesus Christ in which a man by the name of Matthew Phillip Gill found 24 brass plates in which he constructed the book of Jeranek. Would this be an example of the continual discovery of revealed gospel?

 

[Popeyesays]

The Church itself foste1996 when it published"View of the Hebrews" in a modern edition.

View of the Hebrews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards,
Scott

 

[Red Pill]

God seems to prefer records. This is how we have the Bible. .

If God prefers records, it seems odd Jesus didn't leave one written by his own hand.
If as you say, God took the trouble to have various people write inspired words through out time, doesn't it seems odd he didn't have his only begotten Son leave a self written record?

Maybe records aren't so important after all. Just nice to have as a historical reference. Of course,to be a reference, the record would have to be true in the first place, and then not altered to benefit the alterer....

 

[SoyLeche]

If God prefers records, it seems odd Jesus didn't leave one written by his own hand.
If as you say, God took the trouble to have various people write inspired words through out time, doesn't it seems odd he didn't have his only begotten Son leave a self written record?

Maybe records aren't so important after all. Just nice to have as a historical reference. Of course,to be a reference, the record would have to be true in the first place, and then not altered to benefit the alterer....

Except for the fact that there were quite a few others around at the time that were writting it down, you might have a point

 

[Halcyon]

Hi, Paul. Since you've always been a reasonable guy, I hope you won't mind explaining this statement. I'm assuming what you meant by it is that Joseph, Martin, David and Oliver got together and authored the Book of Mormon. If that is the case, could you provide some evidence to support your hunch?

How can I? None exists.

Since I don't believe the Book of Mormon to have actually been translated from golden plates, nor divinely inspired, and since I'm taking the word of the OP that Joseph Smith was incapable of writing such a book alone, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that he had help from a mundane source - the people around him during the writing of the book, Harris, Whitmer and Cowdery.

I'm sure there are a thousand seemingly plausible reasons why each of these men could not possibly have aided Smith in the writing, and I'm sure the followers of Muhammed and that Mormon offshoot guy who wrote the Book of Jeraneck have just as many reasons why their prophet could not possibly have authored their holy book alone either.

It seems a fairly logical suggestion to me, given Lucy Mack Smith's accounts of Joseph Smith Jr. recounting tales of the Nephites as a child added to Cowdery's links with Ethan Smith, plus the general religious environment of the community at the time, that a group of men with Smith as it's imaginative and charismatic heart, set about to write a book and through it start their own religious movement.
This would also explain why none of the men ever renounced their belief in the BoM, because to do so would expose themselves alongside Smith.

What other logical conclusion could you expect a non-believer to come to?

 

[madhatter85]

Yes but wasn’t the shame of nudity already introduced in the Garden Of Eden and further expressed in the Old Testament?

Are there really any more “evils” that have yet to be covered and confirmed?

Yes, i'm sure there will come more evils that we didn't have before now.

I do not mind that you hold this belief but are you rejecting this notion out of the knowledge and understanding of who I am or because of the messages that I received?

Out of my belief in God the Eternal Father, his Son Jesus Christ, In the Validity of the Book of Mormon, in the prophet Joseph Smith, and out of my own experiences and personal revelation and confirmation given to me through the Holy Spirit.

 

[Autodidact]

Except for the fact that there were quite a few others around at the time that were writting it down, you might have a point

No there weren't, or if there were, these have been lost. The earliest written records that later became the gospels date from around 70-100 C.E., according to mainstream scholars.

 

[Popeyesays]

No there weren't, or if there were, these have been lost. The earliest written records that later became the gospels date from around 70-100 C.E., according to mainstream scholars.

That does not mean, however that the documents were lost BEFORE they were copied.

For simple accuracy's sake . . . .

Regards,
Scott

 

[Red Pill]

Except for the fact that there were quite a few others around at the time that were writting it down, you might have a point

So why not Jesus? Wouldn't He be the " buck stops here" guy?

As far as the others, well they don't really completely agree do they? And a couple of the books were most likely written from the same reference collection (Q)but credited to two different authors- so those would naturally agree somewhat.

Of course Paul and Luke didn't even meet Jesus during his mortal ministry- that lets out most of the New Testament right there.

So, why no record directly from Jesus? Maybe he didn't want his writing changed and used for the benefit of religion or man- as other records credited to God have been.

 

[Popeyesays]

So why not Jesus? Wouldn't He be the " buck stops here" guy?

As far as the others, well they don't really completely agree do they? And a couple of the books were most likely written from the same reference collection (Q)but credited to two different authors- so those would naturally agree somewhat.

Of course Paul and Luke didn't even meet Jesus during his mortal ministry- that lets out most of the New Testament right there.

So, why no record directly from Jesus? Maybe he didn't want his writing changed and used for the benefit of religion or man- as other records credited to God have been.

Literacy was very poor, why write it down?

Paul wrote NONE of the Gospels.

Regards,
Scott

 

[*Paul*]

Name a book that has changed the life of millions. A book that is the basis of one of the fastest growing religions and has stood through generations of scrutiny and study.
Whose "author" gave his life for it.

What would it prove?

 

[Ringer]

A bit off topic but had a quick question...

Do they have theological schools/seminaries in the U.S. that are dedicated to the LDS beliefs? Or are LDS teachings incorporated within some mainstream Christian theological seminaries?

 

[Red Pill]

Literacy was very poor, why write it down?

Paul wrote NONE of the Gospels.

Regards,
Scott

Hi Scott;
I thought the arguement was "God likes records"- hence the purpose of writing it down. Literacy at the time was poor, but since the book was meant to be preserved by God, wouldn't He know we would be able to read it centuries later? Since many believe Jesus either was God, or the Son of God - wouldn't He know to write it down for later use?
As for Paul; we agree that he didn't write any of the Gospels- since he wasn't in the picture yet. But he was a contemporary ( per Paul's record) of Jesus, and we were discussing the record of the time- unless I misunderstood.

 

[Red Pill]

A bit off topic but had a quick question...

Do they have theological schools/seminaries in the U.S. that are dedicated to the LDS beliefs? Or are LDS teachings incorporated within some mainstream Christian theological seminaries?

The LDS church is kind of self contained. The high school age kids go to "seminary" -usually taught by a local church member volunteer. The church owns a couple college/ universities where their beliefs are taught. No mainstream Christian seminary that I know of teach the LDS version of Christianity.

 

[Popeyesays]

Name a book that has changed the life of millions. A book that is the basis of one of the fastest growing religions and has stood through generations of scrutiny and study.
Whose "author" gave his life for it.

The Quayyum'l Asma, written by The Bab between 1844 and 1846. He was executed in the Barracks Square in Tabriz, Iran at noon on the 9th of July, 1850.

Regards,
Scott