From: The Restoration -- of our Hall of Fame Threads

[Kishkumen]

Hi Kishkumen,
It sounds like you would be somewhat in agreement and/or running in tandem with the author that Marcus referred to. William Davis. If so, I’m on board with that. A few years ago, however, the gist of what I was getting from you, Shulem, and others was that The Late War was some sort of ‘bombshell’ that was going to blow the Book of Mormon out of the water.

I was wondering whether or not you still had those strong feelings in that regard. It sounds like you may have mellowed a bit.

Anyway, hope all is well with you.

Regards,
MG

That definitely sounds like Shulem. Shulem enjoys contemplating the imminent end of Mormonism and so forth. I am not at all interested in that. I think you are mistaking my excitement about learning more about the circumstances of the Book of Mormon’s composition for something else. I am sure Shulem reacted with glee to the prospect of this information tanking the Book of Mormon. That fits his personality and approach. I, on the other hand, spend a great deal of time disagreeing with him about that approach. So I am not sure why I am being thrown in with Shulem in this case.

[MG 2.0]

Hi Kishkumen,
It sounds like you would be somewhat in agreement and/or running in tandem with the author that Marcus referred to. William Davis. If so, I’m on board with that. A few years ago, however, the gist of what I was getting from you, Shulem, and others was that The Late War was some sort of ‘bombshell’ that was going to blow the Book of Mormon out of the water.

I was wondering whether or not you still had those strong feelings in that regard. It sounds like you may have mellowed a bit.

Anyway, hope all is well with you.

Regards,
MG

That definitely sounds like Shulem. Shulem enjoys contemplating the imminent end of Mormonism and so forth. I am not at all interested in that. I think you are mistaking my excitement about learning more about the circumstances of the Book of Mormon’s composition for something else. I am sure Shulem reacted with glee to the prospect of this information tanking the Book of Mormon. That fits his personality and approach. I, on the other hand, spend a great deal of time disagreeing with him about that approach. So I am not sure why I am being thrown in with Shulem in this case.

In the early part of your thread you made two statements that seemed rather blunt. But I suppose that your intent may have been something other than a ‘take down’ of the Book of Mormon as being what it purports to be.

Folks, this looks like a smoking gun if I have ever seen one.

The crap is about to hit the fan, my friends.

As Nevo came into the thread and brought up that “curious workmanship” wasn’t unique to the Book of Mormon and The Late War and made comment/contributions that tended towards ‘lessening the blow’ of the ‘smoking gun’ it seemed…at least to me, that you and others sort of backed off of the ‘smoking gun’ and ‘crap hitting the fan’ route that was being taken.

The only reason I bring this up now is that as I look back over many years now with hindsight it appears that a number of ‘smoking guns’ have not taken root. They come and they go. But in the meantime many people lose their faith in the restoration and/or in God/Jesus. It is somewhat unfortunate that this seems to be the case. Those that remain in the church and remain in faith are seemingly those that weather on through some of the ‘smoking guns’ and storms of doubt and continue doing the basics that are harped on over and over again. Scripture study, prayer, church attendance and worthily taking the sacrament, and fulfilling callings, etc.

I totally get that people land in different places as the ‘crap hits the fan’ or there appears to be a ‘smoking gun’, but the truth is those things, in the main, are (or can be) transitory. They come and they go. One thing remains, however. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Priesthood and associated ordinances (temples, baptisms, etc.)

Detractors are always looking for smoking guns and waiting/looking for the next ‘big thing’ to hit the fan and act as a catalyst for more people to lose their testimonies and leave the church.

It is sad to watch. But the fact is, we have total and complete free agency to choose which way we go. That’s the way the world works. And in order to make choices that are REAL there needs be oppositional forces that can turn one one way or another.

Anyway, your old thread stirred up some thoughts…

I do recognize, that your view of the Book of Mormon is rather nuanced and allows for believers to use that book as a scriptural guide for a better life. That I appreciate. But at the end of the day the question is whether or not something is missing in your approach and whether that matters.

Regards,
MG

[Res Ipsa]

Split Thread, UR 4, RI

[MG 2.0]

Split Thread, UR 4, RI

Thank you.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

Mormonism is dying a death from a thousand cuts. There may not be a single smoking gun. Even if there is, mopologists have shown us that they can make someone believe up is down and left is right with enough trickery and lies.

The proof is in the pudding. No one can deny that the church is hemorrhaging members. Even the very elect are being “deceived.”

[Kishkumen]

In the early part of your thread you made two statements that seemed rather blunt. But I suppose that your intent may have been something other than a ‘take down’ of the Book of Mormon as being what it purports to be.

Folks, this looks like a smoking gun if I have ever seen one.

The crap is about to hit the fan, my friends.

As Nevo came into the thread and brought up that “curious workmanship” wasn’t unique to the Book of Mormon and The Late War and made comment/contributions that tended towards ‘lessening the blow’ of the ‘smoking gun’ it seemed…at least to me, that you and others sort of backed off of the ‘smoking gun’ and ‘crap hitting the fan’ route that was being taken.

The only reason I bring this up now is that as I look back over many years now with hindsight it appears that a number of ‘smoking guns’ have not taken root. They come and they go. But in the meantime many people lose their faith in the restoration and/or in God/Jesus. It is somewhat unfortunate that this seems to be the case. Those that remain in the church and remain in faith are seemingly those that weather on through some of the ‘smoking guns’ and storms of doubt and continue doing the basics that are harped on over and over again. Scripture study, prayer, church attendance and worthily taking the sacrament, and fulfilling callings, etc.

I totally get that people land in different places as the ‘crap hits the fan’ or there appears to be a ‘smoking gun’, but the truth is those things, in the main, are (or can be) transitory. They come and they go. One thing remains, however. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Priesthood and associated ordinances (temples, baptisms, etc.)

Detractors are always looking for smoking guns and waiting/looking for the next ‘big thing’ to hit the fan and act as a catalyst for more people to lose their testimonies and leave the church.

Yeah, I can see why you think what you think. I did not mean what you thought. I do think the crap has hit the fan in a sense. There actually are people who point to this kind of thing as proof that the LDS Church is not “true,” but I am not relishing that. I think the evidence for the Book of Mormon being a 19th century book is conclusive. That does not mean that I see it as a smoking gun against Mormonism. Or that I am drooling over the prospect of people losing their faith because it is a 19th century book of scripture.

[MG 2.0]

In the early part of your thread you made two statements that seemed rather blunt. But I suppose that your intent may have been something other than a ‘take down’ of the Book of Mormon as being what it purports to be.



As Nevo came into the thread and brought up that “curious workmanship” wasn’t unique to the Book of Mormon and The Late War and made comment/contributions that tended towards ‘lessening the blow’ of the ‘smoking gun’ it seemed…at least to me, that you and others sort of backed off of the ‘smoking gun’ and ‘crap hitting the fan’ route that was being taken.

The only reason I bring this up now is that as I look back over many years now with hindsight it appears that a number of ‘smoking guns’ have not taken root. They come and they go. But in the meantime many people lose their faith in the restoration and/or in God/Jesus. It is somewhat unfortunate that this seems to be the case. Those that remain in the church and remain in faith are seemingly those that weather on through some of the ‘smoking guns’ and storms of doubt and continue doing the basics that are harped on over and over again. Scripture study, prayer, church attendance and worthily taking the sacrament, and fulfilling callings, etc.

I totally get that people land in different places as the ‘crap hits the fan’ or there appears to be a ‘smoking gun’, but the truth is those things, in the main, are (or can be) transitory. They come and they go. One thing remains, however. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and the Priesthood and associated ordinances (temples, baptisms, etc.)

Detractors are always looking for smoking guns and waiting/looking for the next ‘big thing’ to hit the fan and act as a catalyst for more people to lose their testimonies and leave the church.

Yeah, I can see why you think what you think. I did not mean what you thought. I do think the crap has hit the fan in a sense. There actually are people who point to this kind of thing as proof that the LDS Church is not “true,” but I am not relishing that. I think the evidence for the Book of Mormon being a 19th century book is conclusive. That does not mean that I see it as a smoking gun against Mormonism. Or that I am drooling over the prospect of people losing their faith because it is a 19th century book of scripture.

Well it is a book that has the earmarks of being ‘translated’ previous and concurrently to the time of the 19th century.

A lot of folks won’t argue that.

The question, of course, is whether or not it’s purely a product of the early 1800’s.

That discussion is ongoing between believers and skeptics (those that are unable to go along with the angel and the plates story).

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

...I think the evidence for the Book of Mormon being a 19th century book is conclusive....

Yes, it really seems settled. I really appreciated Davis' treatment of that issue, and If I recall correctly, you were the first person here who wrote about Davis' work. After getting information here, I read his doctoral thesis, his articles in the LA papers, and then about his book.

This broad base of knowledge is one of the things i really appreciate about our community.

[Kishkumen]

Well it is a book that has the earmarks of being ‘translated’ previous and concurrently to the time of the 19th century.

A lot of folks won’t argue that.

The question, of course, is whether or not it’s purely a product of the early 1800’s.

That discussion is ongoing between believers and skeptics (those that are unable to go along with the angel and the plates story).

Regards,
MG

I am happy to leave it there. We don’t have to see perfectly eye to eye.

[Moksha]

MG 2.0, do you think there could ever be information to dissuade Church members from believing in the Book of Mormon?

I know Trump supporters have said flat out that nothing could ever make them change their mind about Trump, and it seems that many Mormons hold equally fervent beliefs. It's like Trumpism and Mormonism is coded into their DNA.