DiscussMormonism.com

An article posted yesterday on the Deseret News mormontimes.com site represents that findings in Egypt are starting to "prove" the Book of Mormon to be true, under the headline: "Ancient writing support LDS doctrine and teachings." Aside from the time-worn reference to Joseph Smith as an "uneducated farm boy", C. Wilford Griggs (a professor at BYU) claims that "scholars are now admitting that "Joseph Smith got into the antiquities" before experts in the field began their discoveries" - to which I must ask: Who are these scholars? Where are these admissions?

Additionally, he claims that "Many scholars are now admitting that the book accepted as scripture by church members is an ancient book" - again, who are these scholars, and where are these admissions?

My favorite might be his assertion that "as one scholar of antiquities told Griggs, he had no problem with the gold plates and Smith's story would be acceptable 'if you'd get rid of that angel.'" And who would this scholar be?

Anybody here familiar with Griggs and the soundness of his claims?

great questions - who are these scholars? It's just part of the smoke and mirrors game.

skippy the dead wrote:An article posted yesterday on the Deseret News mormontimes.com site represents that findings in Egypt are starting to "prove" the Book of Mormon to be true, under the headline: "Ancient writing support LDS doctrine and teachings." Aside from the time-worn reference to Joseph Smith as an "uneducated farm boy", C. Wilford Griggs (a professor at BYU) claims that "scholars are now admitting that "Joseph Smith got into the antiquities" before experts in the field began their discoveries" - to which I must ask: Who are these scholars? Where are these admissions?

Additionally, he claims that "Many scholars are now admitting that the book accepted as scripture by church members is an ancient book" - again, who are these scholars, and where are these admissions?

My favorite might be his assertion that "as one scholar of antiquities told Griggs, he had no problem with the gold plates and Smith's story would be acceptable 'if you'd get rid of that angel.'" And who would this scholar be?

Anybody here familiar with Griggs and the soundness of his claims?

The fact that no names were given is a dead give away. I predict that if you show up at his office and ask these questions you will be angrily kicked out or given muttering excuses.

Of course he is just speaking in generalities, you know, dumbing it down for the masses. If you went to his office and asked for specific names I bet he would humbly agree that your inquiry is justified and admit that he shouldn't have spoken so broadly about "scholars". Really he means a couple BYU professors think Joseph could have been ahead of his time in Egyptology. Or maybe some postmodernist Brits or humanist wackos cannot mount a decent challenge so they agree by default, and he was referring to them.

Why, it's Kerry Shirts of course!

I imagine building the pyramids was a lot like setting up tables and chairs in the cultural hall. Just on a different scale.
~ Moksha, Essential Relatedness between Egyptian Life and LDS Cultural Habits, Locked Files, BYU Library Basement, 2008

OK... let me help you out here. ;-)

"scholars are now admitting that "Joseph Smith got into the antiquities" before experts in the field began their discoveries" - to which I must ask: Who are these scholars? Where are these admissions?

These scholars are DCP, John Gee, and Kerry.

Additionally, he claims that "Many scholars are now admitting that the book accepted as scripture by church members is an ancient book" - again, who are these scholars, and where are these admissions?

See above, with the addition of a few other BYU professors.

My favorite might be his assertion that "as one scholar of antiquities told Griggs, he had no problem with the gold plates and Smith's story would be acceptable 'if you'd get rid of that angel.'" And who would this scholar be?

Who do you know who is a scholar of antiquity? John Gee comes to mind. He threw in the angel part to sound like he wasn't a believer. ;-)

I'm thinking the author of this article is REALLY sloppy, and Griggs is just your typical apologists. He seems to know how to create an impression that is completely untrue without actually lying. (sigh)

~dancer~

tumult wrote:great questions - who are these scholars? It's just part of the smoke and mirrors game.

Comeon naw...
One of those scolars is good old Professor, he told me personally Hebraism in Book of Mormon is overwhelming.
Amazing that Joseph Smith didn't know anything about the language.

None of the questions posed by the skeptics here really matter to Peter Priesthood. He read the article, felt a burning in his bosom, and now his testimony is that much stronger. The apologist's job is done.

Who Knows wrote:None of the questions posed by the skeptics here really matter to Peter Priesthood. He read the article, felt a burning in his bosom, and now his testimony is that much stronger. The apologist's job is done.

Yup.