BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 4274
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by MG 2.0 »

Kishkumen wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 12:38 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 6:29 am
It’s fairly well accepted by most people nowadays that Joseph couldn’t have written the Book of Mormon on his own.

Regards,
MG
You mean, it’s fairly well accepted by those who believe by spiritual conviction in the Book of Mormon that Joseph couldn’t have written it?
It would be more accurate to say, “most people in the know”.

That seems to be the general consensus on this board. At least from those I’ve interacted with.

Regards,
MG
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 4274
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by MG 2.0 »

Marcus wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 5:06 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 6:29 am
I like the idea that Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator.

With God being the CEO overseeing the project and the final outcome.

Granted, this is conjecture. But Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out....
Huh. I didn't get at all from Ostler's ink anything like your comments above. Could you explain where in the link you provided that Ostler believes "Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator" ??
He doesn’t, to my knowledge. But his expansion theory allows for it.

Regards,
MG
Marcus
God
Posts: 5905
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by Marcus »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:22 pm
Marcus wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 5:06 pm
Huh. I didn't get at all from Ostler's ink anything like your comments above. Could you explain where in the link you provided that Ostler believes "Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator" ??
He doesn’t, to my knowledge. But his expansion theory allows for it...
Hm. If he doesn't, to your knowledge, then why would you say "Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out" ?

Here's your statement:
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 6:29 am
Ostler wrote:It is my purpose to…offer a theory of the Book of Mormon as Joseph Smith's expansion of an ancient work by building on the work of earlier prophets to answer the nagging problems of his day. In so doing, he provided unrestricted and authoritative commentary, interpretation, explanation, and clarifications based on insights from the ancient Book of Mormon text and the King James Bible ( K J V ) . The result is a modern world view and theological understanding superimposed on the Book of Mormon text from the plates.
I like the idea that Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator.

With God being the CEO overseeing the project and the final outcome.

Granted, this is conjecture. But Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 4274
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by MG 2.0 »

Marcus wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:01 am
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:22 pm
He doesn’t, to my knowledge. But his expansion theory allows for it...
Hm. If he doesn't, to your knowledge, then why would you say "Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out" ?

Here's your statement:
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 6:29 am
I like the idea that Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator.

With God being the CEO overseeing the project and the final outcome.

Granted, this is conjecture. But Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out.
He lays out the idea that the Book of Mormon translation process could be much more “expansive” than some would like to think. It gives an opening to other ways of approaching the translation process.

All we really know is that he purportedly did it through the “gift and power of God”. That gives a certain amount of latitude.

Ostler takes the liberty to expand on that latitude.

He, unlike others (critics?), does not assume that all thinking has been done.

Regards,
MG
Marcus
God
Posts: 5905
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by Marcus »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:22 pm
Marcus wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 5:06 pm
Huh. I didn't get at all from Ostler's ink anything like your comments above. Could you explain where in the link you provided that Ostler believes "Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator" ??
He doesn’t, to my knowledge. But his expansion theory allows for it...
Marcus wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:01 am
Hm. If he doesn't, to your knowledge, then why would you say "Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out" ?

Here's your statement:
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 6:29 am
I like the idea that Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator....But Ostler spills a good deal of ink laying it all out.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:08 am
He lays out the idea that the Book of Mormon translation process could be much more “expansive” than some would like to think. It gives an opening to other ways of approaching the translation process....
But that's not what you said. At all. Nor does it reflect an understanding of the Ostler link you are relying on.

Oh well.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 7:44 pm
Marcus wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 5:06 pm
Huh. I didn't get at all from Ostler's ink anything like your comments above. Could you explain where in the link you provided that Ostler believes "Joseph and possibly others (translation committee?) were involved in the translation process with the final product dictated through the instrumentality of Joseph as translator" ??
He just skimmed to the second paragraph of the Introduction.

25 years of spouting nonsense, lying about reading, and failing over and over to learn by blithely ignoring the cumulative effort to answer him....
Yes, I think you are correct, Doc.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 7909
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University
Contact:

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by Kishkumen »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:20 pm
It would be more accurate to say, “most people in the know”.

That seems to be the general consensus on this board. At least from those I’ve interacted with.

Regards,
MG
What is it that they know?
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by Philo Sofee »

Kishkumen wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:49 am
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2023 11:20 pm
It would be more accurate to say, “most people in the know”.

That seems to be the general consensus on this board. At least from those I’ve interacted with.

Regards,
MG
What is it that they know?
I want to know how MG knows what anyone else around here knows.....
huckelberry
God
Posts: 3046
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by huckelberry »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:08 am
He lays out the idea that the Book of Mormon translation process could be much more “expansive” than some would like to think. It gives an opening to other ways of approaching the translation process.

All we really know is that he purportedly did it through the “gift and power of God”. That gives a certain amount of latitude.

Ostler takes the liberty to expand on that latitude.

He, unlike others (critics?), does not assume that all thinking has been done.

Regards,
MG
I resisted saying this for a while but am now failing to resist.

I can understand how the idea of a loose translation could clarify the nature of the Book of Mormon and how it creates an inspiring story by expanding on a framework of real world facts.

The following facts can make a strong foundation for beginning. There was (and is) a real Jerusalem. there is desert to the south. There are large oceans to cross between those deserts and the Americas. There have been people living in the Americas. There was a real Jesus who was crucified outside of Jerusalem. People believed he was raised from death and was glorified.

Now to expand, wouldn't it by neat if Jesus visited the Americas? That could make a great story. It could be filled with inspiring instruction and sermons. It could have adventures and people leaving the old world for the new. It could chronicle these peoples conflicts and disputes over faith. It could help people overcome conflicts by giving an new basis to have confidence that Jesus survived death and has a supernatural status.

The framework is solid for a start and the expansion inspiring.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 4274
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by MG 2.0 »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:50 am
Kishkumen wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:49 am
What is it that they know?
I want to know how MG knows what anyone else around here knows.....
Over on the “If Plates, Then God” thread I seem to remember that there were a number of folks that expressed some degree of doubt as to whether Joseph Smith could have been the sole author of the Book of Mormon.

It sounds like we now have those on this thread who are suggesting that he was the sole author.

Or some other theory?

That’s the conundrum that seems to present itself in considering Lundwall’s arguments. We still need to get past the fact of Joseph dictating the Book of Mormon within a short amount of time and keeping mostly everything straight so that very little serious/substantial editing had to be done.

It’s a convoluted text with multiple strands of narrative that intertwine with each other over a long arc of history, including Hebraisms, etc., that make it even more unlikely that Joseph simply rolled the narrative off his tongue day after day without tripping up.

Philo, I don’t seem to remember your thoughts in regards to the ‘down and dirty’ process by which Joseph wrote/translated the Book of Mormon.

Regards,
MG
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 4274
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: BYP Hosts Dr. John Lundwall - The Book of Mormon is WHOLLY Anachronistic

Post by MG 2.0 »

huckelberry wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 2:35 am
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2023 12:08 am
He lays out the idea that the Book of Mormon translation process could be much more “expansive” than some would like to think. It gives an opening to other ways of approaching the translation process.

All we really know is that he purportedly did it through the “gift and power of God”. That gives a certain amount of latitude.

Ostler takes the liberty to expand on that latitude.

He, unlike others (critics?), does not assume that all thinking has been done.

Regards,
MG
I resisted saying this for a while but am now failing to resist.

I can understand how the idea of a loose translation could clarify the nature of the Book of Mormon and how it creates an inspiring story by expanding on a framework of real world facts.

The following facts can make a strong foundation for beginning. There was (and is) a real Jerusalem. there is desert to the south. There are large oceans to cross between those deserts and the Americas. There have been people living in the Americas. There was a real Jesus who was crucified outside of Jerusalem. People believed he was raised from death and was glorified.

Now to expand, wouldn't it by neat if Jesus visited the Americas? That could make a great story. It could be filled with inspiring instruction and sermons. It could have adventures and people leaving the old world for the new. It could chronicle these peoples conflicts and disputes over faith. It could help people overcome conflicts by giving an new basis to have confidence that Jesus survived death and has a supernatural status.

The framework is solid for a start and the expansion inspiring.
But then on top of that one needs to determine whether or not it is reasonable to think that a young man of Joseph Smith’s age could have engaged in this expansion on his own under the conditions we find him in.

A flash in the frying pan the Book of Mormon it was. Nod to Yoda.

Each person needs to determine that for themselves.

Regards,
MG
Post Reply