President David O. McKay Believed That Joseph Smith Wrote The Book of Mormon

[I Have Questions]

Considering that this is a third-hand account, I don't think it's going to make much of a ripple. It's very possibly true, but given that Nibley is far from prominent nowadays, I think the fact that this book came out years ago but doesn't seem to have caused a splash in the interim suggests that the account isn't going to be regarded as respectable.

I agree.

Regards,
MG

If you agree that third-hand accounts should not be regarded as "respectable" or "believable" then I would simply point out that The Book of Mormon is (if you believe it is what it claims to be) also a third-hand account, in exactly the same way.

[Moksha]

Twenty years from now, the new and revised Interpreter Institute can point to this thread and say, "We've known and been saying for quite some time that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon. So get with the program and don't act so surprised! Even David O. McKay knew this."

[MG 2.0]

I agree.

Regards,
MG

If you agree that third-hand accounts should not be regarded as "respectable" or "believable" then I would simply point out that The Book of Mormon is (if you believe it is what it claims to be) also a third-hand account, in exactly the same way.

One might quibble with that on one critically important difference.

God was involved. (Yes, if you believe that.)

And that would make ALL the difference. It wasn't all 'human to human'.

Regards
MG

[I Have Questions]

If you agree that third-hand accounts should not be regarded as "respectable" or "believable" then I would simply point out that The Book of Mormon is (if you believe it is what it claims to be) also a third-hand account, in exactly the same way.

One might quibble with that on one critically important difference.

God was involved. (Yes, if you believe that.)

And that would make ALL the difference. It wasn't all 'human to human'.

Regards
MG

God’s involvement in it is again an anecdotal third hand account at the point you read about God’s supposed involvement in it. Joseph claimed it. Somebody wrote it down. It was then passed along to others. They in turn passed it along, until it got to your Mummy and Daddy. They then passed it along to you and conditioned you into accepting it as true.

[MG 2.0]

One might quibble with that on one critically important difference.

God was involved. (Yes, if you believe that.)

And that would make ALL the difference. It wasn't all 'human to human'.

Regards
MG

God’s involvement in it is again an anecdotal third hand account at the point you read about God’s supposed involvement in it. Joseph claimed it. Somebody wrote it down. It was then passed along to others. They in turn passed it along, until it got to your Mummy and Daddy. They then passed it along to you and conditioned you into accepting it as true.

That is your conclusion. Not mine.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

God’s involvement in it is again an anecdotal third hand account at the point you read about God’s supposed involvement in it. Joseph claimed it. Somebody wrote it down. It was then passed along to others. They in turn passed it along, until it got to your Mummy and Daddy. They then passed it along to you and conditioned you into accepting it as true.

That is your conclusion. Not mine.

Regards,
MG

I've accurately described the chain of events that brought the Book of Mormon and the account of the translation of it, to you.

[MG 2.0]

That is your conclusion. Not mine.

Regards,
MG

I've accurately described the chain of events that brought the Book of Mormon and the account of the translation of it, to you.

Of course you left some stuff out. That's the problem, IHQ. You make short little accusations/pronouncements that don't have any basis in the full range of facts and experiences that others have had other than yourself and other critics. Your world is just as closed as any fundamentalist religionist.

Your worldview seems to be very cut and dried and black and white. It's not even all that interesting from what I've been able to gather from the very little you share about yourself and your beliefs.

Mummy and Daddy. C'mon. Isn't that a bit simpleminded?

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I've accurately described the chain of events that brought the Book of Mormon and the account of the translation of it, to you.

Of course you left some stuff out.

When did you first come across The Book of Mormon?

[MG 2.0]

Of course you left some stuff out.

When did you first come across The Book of Mormon?

You first. When did you first come across the Book of Mormon and how much time have you spent with it throughout your life?

I'm happy to answer...but I'd like you to do so first in this instance, if you're willing.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

When did you first come across The Book of Mormon?

You first. When did you first come across the Book of Mormon and how much time have you spent with it throughout your life?

I'm happy to answer...but I'd like you to do so first in this instance, if you're willing.

Regards,
MG

No need for you to answer. You first came across the Book of Mormon when Mummy and Daddy took you to Church. The chain of events I’ve articulated it spot on.