Dan McClellan On The Joe Rogan Show

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Fibber,

If the jury is still out, it must be deliberating in a parallel universe where wishful thinking counts as evidence.

Fibber, what piece of evidence do you think best supports its historicity?

[I Have Questions]

The Book of Mormon could be historical. The moon could also have a center made of Jarlsberg cheese. We won’t know for sure until we examine every molecule of each. The jury is still out, and the science is unsettled!

There is solid, objective proof that the Book of Mormon is not 100% what it claims to be. And that’s the plagiarism of the Bible, complete with copied syntax and errors. So if the Church was being honest about it, the narrative should be that the Book of Mormon is a combination of translated ancient plates and some inserted Bible passages from the KJV Bible. That’s the best “truth” that can be claimed with some integrity left intact.

[MG 2.0]

It really isn’t clear to me whether MG consciously intends to deceive.

Not at all. I also trust that others do not have the intent to do so? Trust goes a long way.

Those that have read my 'musings' over a long period of time would...if they are being honest...recognize that my intent is not to deceive anyone. Be that as it may, Limnor, you are free to portray me as you will.

As is the case with a poster who refers to me as "fibber". I know what I am up against but will still consider him to be a friend. Jesus commanded that we love those that hate and/or despise us. Or would consider themselves our enemies.

I am trying to to that nowadays. It's not always easy. Ego can get in the way, right? If we find reasons to not love our neighbors, even in a message board, we end up carrying things with us that are really unnecessary and hurtful. It's also unproductive.

I'm sure you may have your reasons to portray and/or accuse me of being deceptive. It is what it is.

I'm pretty transparent. Just a regular guy. I hope that helps you clear things up...even if just a little.

Regards,
MG

[huckelberry]

Seeing the book as real history makes it function as very solid evidence

Except there is no evidence that it is ancient.

I was thinking first of why people can have a strong emotional attraction to thinking the book is historical. That emotional draw can make stories of angels witnessing and gold plates sound like great evidence. I am remembering thoughts and emotions from myself as youthful believer.

The restoration did not need new ideas as much as renewed foundation for belief. The Book of Mormon does not have new revelation; it says God is here with us. Well that idea lead to the idea of priesthood restoration introduced after the Book of Mormon was presented. Beyond that the restoration rejects the idea that the vast mass of humanity die with no hope. It erased the perversion of teaching God wanted to make sure hell needed to be filled by all those armies of the predestined. In its place a hopeful "can do" is held up encouraging learning, work, love, and a strong society.

[drumdude]

The Book of Mormon could be historical. The moon could also have a center made of Jarlsberg cheese. We won’t know for sure until we examine every molecule of each. The jury is still out, and the science is unsettled!

There is solid, objective proof that the Book of Mormon is not 100% what it claims to be. And that’s the plagiarism of the Bible, complete with copied syntax and errors. So if the Church was being honest about it, the narrative should be that the Book of Mormon is a combination of translated ancient plates and some inserted Bible passages from the KJV Bible. That’s the best “truth” that can be claimed with some integrity left intact.

Same thing with the limited geography theory. What if the whole story took place in a 10 square foot area?

The box gets smaller and smaller every year. Until at some point the church will claim they always taught that the Book of Mormon was just an allegorical amalgamation.

[Marcus]

There is solid, objective proof that the Book of Mormon is not 100% what it claims to be. And that’s the plagiarism of the Bible, complete with copied syntax and errors. So if the Church was being honest about it, the narrative should be that the Book of Mormon is a combination of translated ancient plates and some inserted Bible passages from the KJV Bible. That’s the best “truth” that can be claimed with some integrity left intact.

Same thing with the limited geography theory. What if the whole story took place in a 10 square foot area?

The box gets smaller and smaller every year. Until at some point the church will claim they always taught that the Book of Mormon was just an allegorical amalgamation.

Or a vision. An allegorical vision of events that took place in...Aslan? Middle Earth? Atlantis? There are so many real-life imaginary spaces. Or maybe the Multiverse.

[Gadianton]

I don’t have a lot of insight into what goes into a temple recommend, but it’s starting to sound like so long as you give them your money and recognize their leadership you can get a ticket. Oh and don’t drink that evil coffee.

Coffee is one of the most important lines in the sand, but the more I've reflected on it, the more I realize that I must separate the facade of the faithful culture and the opportunist virtuists, from the reality of the way the institution actually works. No Coke, pearl-clutching at language, refusing to be in a room with face cards, no shopping on Sunday etc, are all ways to amplify one's standing in the group, but one can also defy the norms instead so long as it's in the context of signaling loyalty.

Getting online and delighting in your favorite coffee blend is the exact opposite, it's showing one's refusal to be loyal. J. Golden Kimball was a good example, he became famous in conservative Mormon culture for "coffee and swearing" but he could get away with it because he made it work as a statement for deeper loyalty to his leaders.

You're bringing up good points -- shouldn't commandments be some kind of good in themselves, or at least a means to a greater end? Hugh Nibley got away with criticizing leaders and he probably didn't pay enough tithing for the church to care, but it was all about finding his unique way to prove loyalty and increase his social standing.

One problem this raises is that leaders are psychologically vulnerable to praise and worship, and that's how abuser relatives of apostles can keep on doing it.

[MG 2.0]

Fibber, what piece of evidence do you think best supports its historicity?

Hebraisms. John Welch's work.

Please. No references to Dr. Suess or other works...including the Doctrine and Covenants...they don't hold a candle to what is found in the Book of Mormon having close parallels to ancient Hebraistic structures/poetry.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Sadly for mentalgymnasts of all ages, that's not how this discussion board works. Dr. Seuss can be freely mentioned, and even venerated.

Joseph Smith imitated a style he was familiar with. He wasn't quite as entertaining or as skilled as Dr. Suess, however, and any assertions that he was translating ancient hebraisms into equivalent English structures is laughable.

[Limnor]

Sadly for mentalgymnasts of all ages, that's not how this discussion board works. Dr. Seuss can be freely mentioned, and even venerated.

Joseph Smith imitated a style he was familiar with. He wasn't quite as entertaining or as skilled as Dr. Suess, however, and any assertions that he was translating ancient hebraisms into equivalent English structures is laughable.

I’m wondering how the transition from Hebrew to reformed Egyptian would work. Maybe Welch covers this, I don’t know.

It’s also been argued that Joseph interpreted his religious experiences through his knowledge of the Bible and his cultural environment Why couldn't the same thing explain Hebraisms?