who is this?

[_Sethbag]

Who is claiming that an unspecified group of people, with an unspecified number of people, at an unspecified time, with unspecified motives, in an unspecified place did all the research for the Book of Mormon and then gave it all to Joseph Smith for an unspecified reason??

And that quote by Hugh Nibley that the Book of Mormon absolutely could not have been written in the 19th century is horse s**t!!

Truly you make Nibley look like a mental midget.

Nibley wasn't a mental midget. But he was operating with half his brain tied behind his back, because his efforts were constrained by the self-imposed requirement that they support the truthfulness of a fundamentally untrue proposition, ie: that Joseph Smith was really a true prophet, who really translated authentically ancient texts, which were accurate records of people who really existed, doing things that really happened.

Faced with that impossible task, he probably did about as well as he could.

You'd probably say the same thing about some brilliant, PhD Catholic apologist, or some brilliant Muslim apologist, or whatever. There are a lot of people way, way smarter than me, believing in, and defending, sincerely, some seriously untrue propositions. If it could happen to all of them, why not also to Hugh Nibley? Do you suppose Dr. Nibley was immune from the inherent problems associated with the belief in, and apologetic defense of, something that isn't actually true? Why? Because he's on your team?

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Terry Ball, no?

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Nibley wasn't a mental midget. But he was operating with half his brain tied behind his back, because his efforts were constrained by the self-imposed requirement that they support the truthfulness of a fundamentally untrue proposition, ie: that Joseph Smith was really a true prophet, who really translated authentically ancient texts, which were accurate records of people who really existed, doing things that really happened.

Faced with that impossible task, he probably did about as well as he could.

Indeed. He would have been humbled to even stand in your presence, or touch the hem of your garment, sethbag.

You'd probably say the same thing about some brilliant, PhD Catholic apologist, or some brilliant Muslim apologist, or whatever. There are a lot of people way, way smarter than me, believing in, and defending, sincerely, some seriously untrue propositions. If it could happen to all of them, why not also to Hugh Nibley? Do you suppose Dr. Nibley was immune from the inherent problems associated with the belief in, and apologetic defense of, something that isn't actually true? Why? Because he's on your team?

Brilliant Muslim apologists or whatever, don't defend all the same positions Nibley did, as you well know. There are very bright scientists who disagree on things like global warming. This does not show that none of them are correct in their opinions, however, or that one is not closer to truth than another. I'm sure you're aware of this.

[_Who Knows]

so who is he? Anyone know (I fixed the link)

Who knows? Some future GA wannabee.

Notice how he averts his eyes right before answering the question "do you believe the Book of Mormon is true". heh.

So DCP thinks there's equal evidence for and against the Book of Mormon? Really? What a load of garbage.

And i love how believers are always saying something like "there's never going to be a lot of evidence - that will force us to believe". What a crock. Evolution is a fact, but still not everyone believes it. I'd settle for 50/50 evidence at this point, not 1/1,000 evidence.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

And I love how believers are always saying something like "there's never going to be a lot of evidence - that will force us to believe". What a crock. Evolution is a fact, but still not everyone believes it. I'd settle for 50/50 evidence at this point, not 1/1,000 evidence.

It is a fact about which scientists are still working out the details, of course. But you knew that.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

so who is he? Anyone know (I fixed the link)

Who knows?

Terry Ball.

[_Scottie]

Does Terry Ball post at all?

Might we know him by a pseudonym?

[_Tarski]

I gotta say, to see a grown man, who works at a university, who is asked whether he thinks document is "true", answer on the verge of tears that he believes it with all his heart is, well, somehow disgusting. Its hard to explain.

And they say it isn't about sentimental feelings. BS.
This isn't some 10 year old in a testimony meeting but a full grow professor.

Ironically, DCP mostly contradicts him on this very point in the same video--the interviews seem to be totally separate.

[_Trevor]

Giving DCP a run for his money. Giving Warren Jeffs... well, you don't want to know what he got from this.

Meet the mormonhunnies...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSvv4kuh_sQ&feature=related

Finally, honest apologia that cuts to the chase.

[_The Dude]

I gotta say, to see a grown man, who works at a university, who is asked whether he thinks document is "true", answer on the verge of tears that he believes it with all his heart is, well, somehow disgusting. Its hard to explain.

And they say it isn't about sentimental feelings. b***s***.
This isn't some 10 year in a testimony meeting but a full grow professor.

Ironically, DCP mostly contradicts him on this very point in the same video--the interviews seem to be totally separate.

Yeah, it's Terry Ball. He got my brother to clean up his life and go on a mission. Nice man.

I believe he's a professor of religion at BYU, so, take that into account Tarski when you call him "full grown".