Morley wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 8:26 pm
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 07, 2022 6:57 pm
I haven’t looked at the Book of Mormon in the same way I may have before. So when I read of the destruction at the time when Christ comes to the Americas and see that this narrative isn’t a ‘one off’, but it has bits and strands alluding and/or pointing to it throughout the text…I find that interesting…and even remarkable. Because this is just ONE of many times where a coherent series/timeline of events/people is kept in strict order and contextual coherence.
Yes, it's amazing how every novelist who ever lived can do that.
Research is the key, though, don't you think? Otherwise you get the kind of John-Carter-on-Mars mishmash you end up with in the Book of Mormon.
Obviously, you're big on comparative literature. What novel do you think does a worse job at weaving together the disparate threads of its storyline than
The Book of Mormon? Note that I've already eliminated Edgar Rice Burroughs'
Princess of Mars.
Second question: Which one has more ridiculous anachronisms than
The Book of Mormon? I'm going with
Clan of the Cave Bear (though like you do, I'll have to just pretend that I actually read it).
edit: Your turn. Though, as Marcus suggests, you should probably start a new thread.
That’s OK. I’m not interested in going this direction. I’ve said what I’ve wanted to say. Clan of the Cave Bear? THAT is a blast from the past. If I’m not mistaken that was part of a series. I read Clan of the Cave Bear but I can’t remember if I read the other books that went along with it.
I realize we’re going to have different views in regards to Hardy’s book relative to the discussion having to do with volcanism in the Book of Mormon. That’s OK. I’m perfectly happy to have you go your way. I’ll go mine.
Sources and their legitimacy/credibility are going to vary from person to person. For example, my guess is that you would generally favor cracking open source material that is in disfavor with the early leaders of the church. Tanner’s,etc. You would be less likely, by default, because of your biases and predisposition/presuppositions, to give much credence to Grant Hardy. He’s a believer. Or Terry’s Given’s “By the Hand of Mormon”. He’s a believer.
And for what it’s worth, I look at issues with the Book of Mormon on a hierarchy of importance. I look at what I consider to be the BIG ‘hits’ and then look at other issues and decide whether or not they cancel out or make those hits meaningless. For example, Chiasmus/multiple authors…BIG. Anachronisms…wait and see. Other issues are in the ‘wait and see’ category also because of the BIG hits.
I realize those big hits may not satisfactorily meat up to the expectations and/or demands of others. Probably no purpose in arguing about that fact. It’s just the way it is.
As has been stated more times than I would like to count, when it comes down to it, a belief or testimony in the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon comes through an internal witness of the Spirit in regards to the message and truthfulness of the doctrines taught within the covers of the Book of Mormon. Book of Mormon geography and spending an inordinate time looking and relooking at Book of Mormon issues discourages or takes away time which could be spent reading of the Book of Mormon for the purpose for which it was written. That is, to come to Christ.
When was the last time you picked up the Book of Mormon for that purpose? If not recently, do you feel as though you’ve been able to come closer to the Savior as a result of not spending time within its pages for that purpose? Some people say they have. And that’s OK. To each, his or her own. But I think they may be the minority.
Some folks want to continue on with the main thrust of this thread. I’m willing to let it go that direction at this point.
Thanks for your input.
Regards,
MG