A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_grindael
_Emeritus
Posts: 6791
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:15 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _grindael »

I have problems with the eyewitness (among other things). He was a Gentile that lived in Nauvoo and was very familiar with the church, Joseph Smith and was later the editor of the Nauvoo Expositor. He was also a city councilman. So there is that. So was he mistaken here:

The plates...are covered on both sides with HYEROGLIPHICS. He compared them [the KP] in my presence with his Egyptian Alphabet, WHICH HE TOOK FROM THE PLATES FROM WHICH THE Book of Mormon WAS TRANSLATED, AND THEY ARE EVIDENTLY THE SAME CHARACTERS.


That is not the GAEL, they were not the characters which he took from the Book of Mormon. George Moore, a few months later,

He showed me some specimens of the HIEROGLYPHICS, such as, he says, were on the gold plates.


You have to explain away the majority of what a "Gentile" says here, to get that he was shown the GAEL. That involves complication. Lucy Smith called the characters on the plates an Egyptian Alphabet. He then says that Joseph told him he would then be able to decipher them. A "Gentile" was also told at that time about the SIZE of the individual, that he must have been about eight and a half feet high. That may be why the discovery was linked to the Jaredites by Parley Pratt. They were said to be giants. All of this points to the Book of Mormon, not the Book of Abraham. Joseph had just translated the Book of Abraham a year earlier. Did he need to go to the GAEL to get the information he gave in front of Clayton?

Smith's translation:

“they contain the history of the person with whom they were found & he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven & earth.”


Again, would Smith need the GAEL to remember this? Especially since he was working on the Book of Abraham just a year earlier, so it was pretty fresh in his mind. Don says that a lot of people he's shown the KP to, say that the ship picture stands out to them. But there is no mention of it by contemporaries, rather, they mention other things on the plates, that they linked to Jesus and skulls and trees. The picture with the ship does stand out though, because it is bigger than all the rest. But one would have to show real brass plates to people, to get a true reaction, it might not have been so obvious. Check out the one we have and it will become obvious how hard it was to see things on it.

Image

Would that symbol really have stood out to Smith? And Don will bring up Pratt's observation that citizens were comparing with the Egyptian documents being shown by Lucy Smith. I get all that. What my biggest concern here is that A Gentile's specific statement that they were the same characters as the Book of Mormon characters and that is what Smith showed him. And Smith did his "translation" before he made the comparison Don refers to. Days before.

I've never said it would be easy to challenge what Don puts out there, but I think I can do so. We'll see. He has a damn good argument.

There are lots of things to consider here, I don't think it was as simple as Don makes it out to be or that Joseph was only casually interested in them.
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.
_DoubtingThomas
_Emeritus
Posts: 4551
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:04 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _DoubtingThomas »

DonBradley wrote:
You know I don't view Joseph Smith as a charlatan, so in phrasing it that way, you're not trying to represent my views at all.

If you want to ignore the actual issue and just take potshots at me, I'll ignore your posts and let you continue to talk to yourself.


Hi Don!

I don't necessarily view Joseph Smith as a charlatan because I don't have a position. Perhaps he was a Pious fraud, perhaps he had some multiple personality disorder, perhaps he was a prophet of God, or perhaps he really was just a charlatan hoaxer. No one knows what was in his mind.

To me a more important question is: Why do you believe in God and Joseph Smith? Is it because of some religious experience? Is it because you believe that God is an alien and Mormonism makes sense? Is it because of Pascal's Wager? Is it because you see a lot of similarities between transhumanism and Mormonism?

Why do you need Mormonism? How is Mormonism better than secular humanism? How is the spirit of God different from the spirit of Chritmas?

Have you read about cognitive biases? Have you read The Improbability Principle: Why Coincidences, Miracles, and Rare Events Happen by Dr. Hand? Or the Illusion of God's presense by neurologist Dr. Wathey? What are your thoughts?
Sorry for asking a lot
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _sock puppet »

grindael wrote:Sock,

One thing that is interesting is that I believe that the plates were divided into pictures and characters. There is a line drawn near the top of each one and the top of the plates had pictures. I believe that the character that Don disassembles was meant to be a ship. If they were looked at that way by Joseph, (as they were with others close to him) it is less likely (in my opinion, in my opinion, in my opinion) that he would be doing any disassembling of that character.

ImageImage

And I see a mistake I made, it should be four ROWS of characters. oops.

I hadn't paid that much attention to the engravings. Interesting observations, grindael.
_grindael
_Emeritus
Posts: 6791
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:15 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _grindael »

I hadn't paid that much attention to the engravings. Interesting observations, grindael.


Actually they are not mine, they are from a contemporary source who saw the plates. There was a "Gentile Club" consisting of Charlotte Haven (who gave us that name) and Sylvester Emmons (who was a City Councilman and later the editor of the Expositor and wrote to the NY Herald as "A Gentile") and a few others, who have given us some good reliable information about what was happening with the plates. When Joseph first saw them he said he could translate them like he did with the Book of Mormon. In 1842 Joseph reread the entire Book of Mormon (as per the Book of the Law of the Lord) so he could correct mistakes and re-publish it in another edition. He published the Book of Abraham. He took over editing the Times and Seasons for a time and included many articles in which he tried to bolster the Book of Mormon with archaeological evidence. In 1840 he prophesied that "records" would be coming forth that would be translated. When he saw the Kinderhook Plates, he was struck by the similarities between the characters on those plates and the ones he supposedly copied from the Book of Mormon. I found over 30 matches between the two. It had been written in Church publications about the Jaredites, that they were "giants". Here are some quotes about the Jaredites,

As to the Jaredites, no more is known than is contained in The Book of Ether. Perhaps "Dighton writing Rock," in Massachusetts, may hold an unknown tale in relation to these Pioneers of the land of liberty, which can yet be revealed. God is great, and when we look abroad in the earth, and take a glimpse through the long avenue of departed years, we can not only discover the traces in artificial curiosities, and common works, and small hills, mountain caves, and extensive prairies, where the Jaredites filled the measure of their time, but, as they were a very large race of men, whenever we hear that uncommon large bones have been dug up from the earth, we may conclude, That was the skeleton of a Jaredite. The mystery of man in this world, has not been unfolded to all, yet; and it may not be, in full, till the Savior comes; but enough has come to light, in these last days, to show that man was made to multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it, whether a few branches of christendom knew it or not. To the point; a beautiful sketch of the Book of Ether is handed down to us, in the Book of Mormon, by Moroni. We give an extract. (The Evening and the Morning Star, Vol.1, No.3, p.22).


Recently so much is said about the discoveries of ancient ruins, that we feel inclined to offer a few ideas upon the subject. Were it necessary, in order to establish the truth of their reality, just as they are found, showing that civilized nations, possessing the highest attainments in the arts and sciences, once occupied this whole land, and we add, world, -- we might go behind the flood of Noah, and bring in the ante-deluvians, those "men of renown," and suppose a few cases of their "ruins" -- for there were "giants in the earth in those days," and put curiosity on the stretch: but there have been a plenty of events since the flood, to answer our purpose, notwithstanding the soil and sand which tumbled round the globe during the year when the "waters prevailed exceedingly," must have buried cities, towns and curiosities equal to any of the nineteenth century.

From many of the speculations of this age upon the grandeur of the ruins, discovered in Central and South America, it might be supposed, that no nations but those of the nineteenth century, could enjoy and execute the prerogatives of national greatness, national refinment, and worldly improvement. So small are the hidden mysteries and mighty acts of God, compared to the sword of a less than Bonaparte, and the 4-745.

As to the original inhabitants of the continent of America, the Book of Mormon, backs up the description of immense "ruins" in Central America, dispels all doubt. And while that book opens the sleeping history of two or three thousand years past, we can see the two families that came out from the tower, spreading from sea to sea, waxing more and more, greater and greater, until they had occupied the entire country fifteen hundred years. In honor of one of the two first families, they were called 'Jaredites.' After they had almost covered the land with cities, and probably made the present prairies by extensive cultivation.

The Book of Mormon says:

"And it came to pass that Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines, and did lay that upon men's shoulders which was grievous to be borne...

...The 'Jaredites,' were destroyed for their wickedness, but how many "spacious buildings," and doleful "prisons," remain among the ruins of departed things, as witnesses of their fame and folly, needs a little revelation to unravel: a portion of that spirit which showed a Daniel Nebuchadnezzar's dream and images might solve the mystery. If the "ruins," of Egypt, Balbec, Babylon, and Pompeii, exhibit in the smallest degree, the greatness and glory of the Oriental world, in past ages; so do the "ruins" of Central and South America declare the splendor, genius, intellect, refinement, and power that once actuated the master spirits and their hosts upon these uttermost parts of the earth., It takes some men a great while to consider upon the reality of revelation; they want the privilege of bringing up their "strong reasons" to refute it, when at the same time, a novel or other trite matter, will pass along for truth, without even a hint that all is vanity. -- This is not right: it destroys the efficacy of truth and religion at the same time, and introduces the wild imaginations of men in the place of the revealed will of God. (Times and Seasons, Vol.5, No.23, p.744-47).


And,

For once let us say, that Cain, who went to Nod and taught the doctrine of a "plurality of wives" and the giants who practiced the same iniquity; and Nimrod, who practiced the common stock system, and the Jews, who commenced crossing sea and land to make proselytes without revelation... (Times and Seasons, Vol.6, No.1, p.888).


There is now extant a very erroneous idea of the knowledge of the first families of the earth, from Adam to Abraham. They possessed intelligence derived from God himself: -and they lived to the age of nearly one thousand years, in good health and vigor.- There were men of renown and giants in those days. Now we see dwarfs, mean men, consumption, short lived hypocrites and learned speculators upon all the vicissitudes, calamities and phenomena of nature, without the power to change one hair white or black. Surely we live in peculiar times, which if time permits, we shall speak further upon hereafter. (Times and Seasons, Vol.6, No.1, p.1064)


In the first thousand years, was witnessed the fall of man; the building up of Zion, when Enoch with all his people, walked with God three hundred and sixty five years on earth, and then were taken up into heaven. In the second thousand years, the world was deluged with a flood for its wickedness; the tower was built that men might go to heaven, the language was confounded, the earth divided into continents and oceans; the people scattered upon the face of the whole earth; and America was peopled by the Jaredites. In the third thousand years, Pharaoh and his host were swallowed up in the Red Sea; Israel, the chosen of the Lord, was overshadowed by his glory in a cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night; and the building of the temple of the Lord at Jerusalem.In the fourth thousand years, the ten tribes of Israel were led away captive out of the land of Canaan, and taken to a place by the hand of the Lord that has not yet been discovered by the Gentiles; the Jaredites were destroyed because of their wickedness; Lehi was guided by the matchless power of God to this continent. (Times and Seasons, Vol.3, No.6, p.662. Jan. 15, 1842).


Joseph himself identified the area around Kinderhook as "the plains of the Nephites" and the "Land of Desolation" where both the Jaredites and Nephites supposedly roamed. They found the Zelph Mound east of there. Joseph "translates" a portion of the plates and mentions they are about an important person descended from Ham. Parley P. Pratt writes that they contained the genealogy of one of the ancient Jaredites back to Ham. Sylvestor Emmons wrote to the NY Herald as "A Gentile" who said they were compared by Joseph with the "Egyptian Alphabet which he took from the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated, and they are evidently the same CHARACTERS. (plural). He says that Joseph said he would be able to decipher them. Emmons also comments on the size of the person, that he was very large. Remember what Clayton's Journal said,
I have seen 6 brass plates which were found in Adams County by some persons who were digging in a mound. They found a skeleton about 6 feet from the surface of the earth which was 9 foot high. [At this point there is a tracing of a plate in the journal.] The plates were on the breast of the skeleton. This diagram shows the size of the plates being drawn on the edge of one of them. They are covered with ancient characters of language containing from 30 to 40 on each side of the plates. Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharoah king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.


This is the information that Joseph had, and then he makes his "translation". Clayton speaks of no comparisons. That comes a week later. So did Joseph give the translation, then later try to back it up in the GAEL? Possibly.

When these little plates were written about later, we learned that they were interpreted in this way by some: Pictures at the top, below a line drawn horizontally on each plate with the hieroglyphics below. Here is what Dan Jones said about them:

“We remember one remarkable occasion that came to our attention while we were there, as an example, to prove what has been said, and to show the irrationality and power of prejudice. On the 16th of April, 1843, a man by the name of Robert Wiley, a merchant in Kinderhook, Pike County, state of Illinois, dreamt that there were some treasures hidden in a hillock known to him in the neighborhood; and after digging for about thirteen feet from the surface, he found six brass plates, four inches long, an inch-and three-quarters wide at one end, and two-and-three-quarter inches wide at the other end; four lists of letters (hieroglyphics) on each side of them. On one of the plates is the picture of three skulls, the largest in the middle, surrounded by rays similar to those one sees surrounding the head of our Savior in the pictures that are made of him now. Underneath the two smaller ones is the picture of two trees, and their branches; on one of the plates is the picture of a large head, and the picture of two hands pointing to it. We saw those plates, and the case was publicized through the newspapers, and I did not hear that anyone disbelieved it; but if the one who found them were to utter a word that angels had anything to do with the matter, we do not think that he would be believed about this, any more than Joseph Smith is believed that he received gold plates. ...And is not the fact that this uneducated Joseph Smith has translated the one set of plates, [Kinderhook] while knowledge of the hieroglyphics has been lost to the world, almost since the time immemorial, apart from a few letters, proof that he also translated correctly the others that were given to him through angelic ministry? [Gold Plates] No doubt these, in addition to the many others that could be noted, are incontrovertible facts in the eyes of every reasonable man.” (Dan Jones, Prophet of the Jubilee, pages 37-38)


That is where I got "lines" from, but they are rows. This is how Jones viewed them. I have another account of someone describing the top half as pictures also.
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.
_Lemmie
_Emeritus
Posts: 10590
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 7:25 pm

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _Lemmie »

DonBradley wrote:by the way, I answered a question from one poster that then leads to another question from that poster. Answered that and that then leads to a comment and implicit question from another poster. Answered that and then that leads to questions from two posters, which when answered leads to yet another question. This could apparently continue ad infinitum, but I will probably get tired of it real quick.

Funny how discussion boards work like that, isn't it? Some would even consider it a positive feature! (Maybe you don't realize how this paragraph reads to someone who has been following this thread and enjoying the conversation.)

sock puppet wrote: Interesting observations, grindael.

Ditto. Thanks, grindael, I always enjoy your contributions.
_I have a question
_Emeritus
Posts: 9749
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 8:01 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _I have a question »

DonBradley wrote:
I have a question wrote:I'm not convinced Mormonism teaches that God is confined to operating within natural laws at all.
But feel free to disengage. Maybe someone else can help me out?


And Mormons teach a literal divine omnipotence, like other Christians do--that God's power is not conditioned by any other pre-existing realities, like say, intelligences or eternal matter? Nope. They don't!


Really? I'm missing something obviously. Please can you point me to some references of Mormon teachings where God's omnipotence is conditioned by other pre-existing realities?
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _Themis »

DonBradley wrote:Having held the pious fraud model at one point, and having seen Dan Vogel's use of it, I can understand its appeal. I think I can ultimately present a more compelling model. If I ultimately get to my various relevant projects surrounding this, and if you read them, you'll have to let me know how I did.


Let us know when you are done. When I say pious, I think Joseph probably believed in God and such, but knew he was making things like the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham. The Book of Mormon is clearly fiction, yet Joseph claimed seeing angelic beings from the Book of Mormon story and claimed to have real plates on which the Book of Mormon story is found. He would have to be really delusional to believe the papyri contained the Abraham story, and God an idiot to go along with it. Some huge problems regardless of what Joseph believed is that figures like Abraham, Moses, Adam were not real people, yet he made very clear claims of revelation and translating from God that they were real, and that the biblical stories were fairly accurate.

I don't think it weighs very strongly in that direction, and I didn't think so a non-Mormon either. I'm also not convinced that Joseph Smith completely bought into the Kinderhook plates. He made what appears to me to be a very casual comparison of them to the GAEL and then played up the character match. But he literally didn't buy the plates, when the chance was offered. This makes me wonder just how strongly he credited their authenticity.


I don't think he may have bought into them completely either. The one thing about many frauds is that they tend to create frauds based on things they already believe in. I think Joseph believed things like his gold plates did exist. The real problem here is that the kinderhook plates would be a very important find for a real prophet who had real gold plates. This would be the most important question to answer when he was presented with these plates as being real ancient plates. A real prophet who communicated with God on a regular basis, who brought forth two translated texts, as well as restoring the words of Moses(not real :redface: ), would not make a secular casual comparison. They would make a serious inquiry of God. Yet we see this didn't happen. He didn't inquire of God which is a big hit to his claims of being a real prophet who communicates with God all the time, and instead made a very causal comparison to the GAEL, giving a fraud a plausible explanation for later, why he got it wrong. :wink:
42
_grindael
_Emeritus
Posts: 6791
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:15 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _grindael »

Made a mistake here and deleted original comment... sorry
Last edited by Guest on Sun Jul 02, 2017 10:58 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

DonBradley wrote:
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
The realistic option, for God Almighty, was to use a convicted charlatan, and then a tyrant?

I guess none of these people had the wherewithal to be God's restorative spokesperson?

http://www.thefamouspeople.com/18th-century.php

http://www.thefamouspeople.com/19th-century.php

Your position makes absolutely zero sense.

- Doc


Cam,

I initially didn't respond to this because you're talking past me, not to me, and it's hard to have any real dialogue on that basis.

You know I don't view Joseph Smith as a charlatan, so in phrasing it that way, you're not trying to represent my views at all.

Also, the question at hand is who should have been chosen to succeed Joseph Smith as president of the Mormon church at his death in 1844. You proposed myriad and sundry figures of the 1700s and 1800s, virtually all of whom were non-Mormons. That's like saying FDR should have been succeeded by Winston Churchill. He wasn't American, so it was'n even an option. Similarly, non-Mormons don't qualify as Mormon church presidents.

You're playing a game with no rules: ignore the actual historical situation and throw irrelevant answers at it.

Who in the Mormon church should have succeeded Joseph Smith, and why?

If you want to ignore the actual issue and just take potshots at me, I'll ignore your posts and let you continue to talk to yourself.

Don


I mean, you really can't have it both ways. You talk about playing a game with no rules when you state that Elohim and whomever else have to play by arbitrary rules that conveniently fit whatever narrative an apologist creates, you get to ignore historical fact that corroborates the assertion Joseph Smith was a charlatan convicted of conning people, and that anything that is demonstrably wrong with Mormonism's truth claims gets the Mental Gymnast treatment, although you do have the patience of a Catholic saint.

I'm not going to bother to quote the various dodges and weaves you typically like to type out when you're visiting Shady Acres, and thank you for doing so, but you're not going to get a pass and you certainly aren't going to just throw dumb crap without someone parodying you.

My apologies if this post gets your knickers in a twist, but I just don't care to play the weird tit for tat games you people like to play. Pony up hard, demonstrable proof of Mormonism's truth claims or just accept that it's all esoteric apologetic subjectivity with no wider implication for 99% of earth's inhabitants.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_DonBradley
_Emeritus
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 6:58 am

Re: A Reason For Faith: Problematical Apologetics

Post by _DonBradley »

Lemmie wrote:Funny how discussion boards work like that, isn't it? Some would even consider it a positive feature! (Maybe you don't realize how this paragraph reads to someone who has been following this thread and enjoying the conversation.)


I first got on message boards in 1996. I know something of their dynamics. The sort of conversation that's meant to challenge anything I say has only occurred for me here since my return to Mormonism. It isn't the normal dynamic at all.
Post Reply