Complex?

[MG 2.0]

I personally think that without him taking notes and writing drafts it maybe is "complex" enough to be considered inspired maybe. Not sure many people would be able to verbally dictate a book without careful planning.

'Single pass' dictation along with a dictation period of 53-74 working days is quite a feat for someone that had little education and or ACTUAL experience at having done a project of this caliber before. He did not revise previous passages or consult written outlines, which is atypical compared to the processes of most professional writers and orators. He didn't have reference to notes or previous material, and his scribes recorded his words as he spoke.

Joseph Smith did not use the formulaic, rhythmic methods characteristic of traditions, such as those of Serbo-Croatian bards, who train for years in formulaic storytelling. Nor is such formulaic structure evident in the Book of Mormon text itself. Unlike many professional storytellers who spend years honing their craft and developing stories, there is little evidence that Smith had the same level of literary training or preparation prior to dictating the Book of Mormon.

The processes used by Churchill, James, and other prolific writers differ significantly from the method attributed to Joseph Smith. Most relied on extensive preparation, revision, or formulaic oral traditions—none of which are clearly evident in Smith’s case. The argument that prolific oral composition by others is a strong reason to disbelieve Smith’s account is not fully persuasive, as his process remains atypical in key respects.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Pirate, it seems very unlikely that Joseph had no notes or outline. It seems he was not directly reading off of them. That would get in the way of the story telling momentum.there were years of time for preparing.

Joseph apparently dictated for periods of time, perhaps hours at a time, with a scribe taking down what he said. Occasionally there might be a "witness" to this process.

Establishing the veracity of the rock-in-the-hat oral dictation to Book of Mormon text, with no notes or drafts would require disinterested observer controls, such as (not an exhaustive list!):

• How Joseph spent his time between dictating sessions - ensuring that he was not consulting notes, drafts, or helpers
• Whether what Joseph dictated was faithfully recorded, no more and no less
• Whether what was recorded appeared in the proofs of the Book of Mormon, no more and no less, and in the correct sequence

I'm not aware of any one of these three points being verified, though I might not need much persuasion that the proofs-to-print process was fairly solid.

Overall, I believe that there are too any potential "holes" in the process for anyone to be sure that the translation account holds up from end to end.

Here is the timeline for "end to end".

https://www.eldenwatson.net/

Click on:
Approximate Book of Mormon Translation Timeline, Introduction page.

Scroll to bottom. Click on:
Approximate Book of Mormon Translation Timeline

This only helps, and only indirectly, with your first concern, but it might be of help.

Regards,
MG

[huckelberry]

MG, I understand as the translation process was done people observe and report no notes. Why would someone not think Joseph had been developing the story for years beforehand? Why wold someone not think he had notes and outlines to consult when he was away from the translation?

It is possible for a person to believe he had no preparation but it appears plausible that he did.

[MG 2.0]

MG, I understand as the translation process was done people observe and report no notes. Why would someone not think Joseph had been developing the story for years beforehand? Why wold someone not think he had notes and outlines to consult when he was away from the translation?

It is possible for a person to believe he had no preparation but it appears plausible that he did.

For me, that just doesn't cover all the bases. Did he come up with the complex chiasmus structures beforehand and rehearse them? If so, who was he performing for? Folks and even scholars at that time were not looking for it as they read the Book of Mormon. It wasn't until John Welch came across it that it was even a thing. Did he come up with the stylometric patterns (different voices) beforehand and then, almost miraculously, keep everything straight as he dictated the book? I don't see where in his situation, growing up where he did, and the hardscrabble life the Smith's were living, the education that he had, that Joseph had the wherewithal/means to come up with the Book of Mormon on his own.

The above two examples are just two of many that folks have come up with that seem to indicate 'there's more to the story' than simple fabrication.

It's hard to accept the 'hand of God' in our day doing a work that is unique in the annals of history/mankind. It's hard NOT to doubt. I'll hand you that.

Years ago I thought the closest thing to a 'smoking gun' to discredit the Book of Mormon was the Spaulding Theory. But as time went by I didn't see that as a possibility that explained all the stuff that had to be explained. I haven't seen a theory of Book of Mormon translation that makes sense when having to take everything into account...except that God had something to do with it.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

Joseph apparently dictated for periods of time, perhaps hours at a time, with a scribe taking down what he said. Occasionally there might be a "witness" to this process.

Establishing the veracity of the rock-in-the-hat oral dictation to Book of Mormon text, with no notes or drafts would require disinterested observer controls, such as (not an exhaustive list!):

• How Joseph spent his time between dictating sessions - ensuring that he was not consulting notes, drafts, or helpers
• Whether what Joseph dictated was faithfully recorded, no more and no less
• Whether what was recorded appeared in the proofs of the Book of Mormon, no more and no less, and in the correct sequence

I'm not aware of any one of these three points being verified, though I might not need much persuasion that the proofs-to-print process was fairly solid.

Overall, I believe that there are too any potential "holes" in the process for anyone to be sure that the translation account holds up from end to end.

Here is the timeline for "end to end".

https://www.eldenwatson.net/

Click on:
Approximate Book of Mormon Translation Timeline, Introduction page.

Scroll to bottom. Click on:
Approximate Book of Mormon Translation Timeline

This only helps, and only indirectly, with your first concern, but it might be of help.

Regards,
MG

MG, as an aside—you’ve posted this before, with the same instructions for how to get to the page. Why don’t you just post the link to the page?


https://www.eldenwatson.net/Book of Mormon.htm


What am I missing here?

[I Have Questions]

The Pilgrim’s Progress and View Of The Hebrews both appear to have been heavily plagiarised by Smith.

Question, I have heard those books listed as likely inspiration but am unaware of any actual plagiarism. Do you have examples or are you referring to sources of likely inspiration

The story of Abinadi seems to be a good example of Joseph plagiarising (or “inspired by” if you prefer) a source that he had available to him. See Here for the specific side by side comparison.

And then you’ve entire sections of The Bible that have been directly copied into The Book of Mormon, including errors that were made in the KJV Bible at the time it was put together, and which are found in The Book of Mormon verbatim - which is the smokiest of smoking guns. There is no explanation for those errors etc appearing in The Book of Mormon except that it was lifted, directly, from a KJV Bible that Joseph or another had at hand.

[IWMP]

I personally think that without him taking notes and writing drafts it maybe is "complex" enough to be considered inspired maybe. Not sure many people would be able to verbally dictate a book without careful planning.

Oral story fabricating/telling was a common past-time before radio and television, especially in areas where books were rather scarce. Today, we have with the internet and our smart phones inundations of facts and data and our minds are learning to ignore and not to retain the irrelevant. In that story-telling time, there was not so much data bombarding people, particularly a farm boy of an impoverished family. Given that there would not have been so much distracting information and story telling was a developed skill--and Lucy Mack Smith told us that Joseph was very good at regaling the family with his tales--it makes the feat of writing the Book of Mormon not so impressive.

That makes sense.

[IWMP]

I personally think that without him taking notes and writing drafts it maybe is "complex" enough to be considered inspired maybe. Not sure many people would be able to verbally dictate a book without careful planning.

Winston Churchill, Henry James, Barbara Cartland, John Milton, Frederick Forsyth, Neil Gaiman, Kevin J. Anderson…

All prolific at crafting stories orally with less preparation time than Joseph had.

[huckelberry]

Question, I have heard those books listed as likely inspiration but am unaware of any actual plagiarism. Do you have examples or are you referring to sources of likely inspiration

The story of Abinadi seems to be a good example of Joseph plagiarising (or “inspired by” if you prefer) a source that he had available to him. See Here for the specific side by side comparison.

And then you’ve entire sections of The Bible that have been directly copied into The Book of Mormon, including errors that were made in the KJV Bible at the time it was put together, and which are found in The Book of Mormon verbatim - which is the smokiest of smoking guns. There is no explanation for those errors etc appearing in The Book of Mormon except that it was lifted, directly, from a KJV Bible that Joseph or another had at hand.

Question, your pPilgrams Progress example is striking, thankyou.