Peterson the historical skeptic

[Physics Guy]

Right. That's the kind of thing I mean by saying that calling the Book of Mormon a fraud is a literary judgement on its genre, not just a character assessment of its author.

The common feature of all the superfluous yet inadequate details is indeed just that they are things that Joseph Smith could easily invent or recall. That's a good point. And including details of that kind is indeed clever way to write a long fake history. It's easier than research and also safer, because if you rely on a little book-learning about unfamiliar stuff you might easily commit terrible howlers.

It's also clever because the things that Smith himself knew off the top of his head were also things that his readers would immediately recognise. It's like trying to write a Harlequin romance set in France: if you're actually realistic you'll just baffle your target audience, but if you instead portray the France of popular American imagination people will accept it all happily. C'est la vie.

[MG 2.0]

The Book of Mormon story is just a tale following the model of Noah's Flood. I feel badly for all the people who see it as literal history or make fun of it as though that were the only way to read it.

That is a nice humane way of putting it. (And that is not intended as in any way a denigration or mockery of what you wrote)

The problem with your approach seems to me to be that it ignores the history of the text. Writing a text is an act, and those who act have intentions, and wish to produce certain effects. The Book of Mormon was written by a man who, in the light of what he wrote, said and did, clearly wanted his readers to take the contents of the book he wrote as being a truly ancient and authentic text, which recounted events that really happened in the ancient Americas. When Smith's early followers took it 'as literal history', they were doing exactly what he intended them to do.

It’s interesting to notice that Joseph Smith made a decision to go through a convoluted process to bring the Book of Mormon about. Granted, some of those elements being present in other narratives that were available to him. Angels, stone boxes, etc. But to go through the translation process and the witnesses and movements about the region to continue the translation? Why go through all of that when it wasn’t really necessary to get a book/story out into circulation? Joseph had a hard enough time doing that as it was. Why go through an elaborate charade?

If he was intent on a windfall from publishing the Book of Mormon, in that respect he was a failure.

Are there other authors you can think of that went through and did what Joseph Smith did to get a ‘fictional’ book into print? Anything comparable?

Or is Joseph somewhat of an anomaly in this respect?

Also, it seems like he could have very easily have forgone all the stuff in the Book of Mormon that some scholars look at today (but not at the time of Joseph) as being evidences of its antiquity. He sure made a lot of effort for very little immediate return.

Regards,
MG

[Chap]

If he was intent on a windfall from publishing the Book of Mormon, in that respect he was a failure

Precisely because of all the other stuff he did, I doubt that getting the copyright sold was his sole aim in what he did. But he certainly acted as if he thought it was worth trying. Remind me- did he claim to have received any kind of divine command to try to sell the copyright, or did he just decide to do it?

He certainly did his best to convince people that he had become possessed of an ancient text and had acquired the power to translate it by miraculous means. And he succeeded in so doing, in large enough measure to gather a following around himself that eventually yielded power and riches that he could never have acquired by other means, starting from where he did. And all those young women too, of course.

[MG 2.0]

He certainly did his best to convince people that he had become possessed of an ancient text and had acquired the power to translate it by miraculous means. And he succeeded in so doing, in large enough measure to gather a following around himself that eventually yielded power and riches that he could never have acquired by other means, starting from where he did. And all those young women too, of course.

Very little of the church’s early success had a direct correlation with the ‘ancientness’ of the Book of Mormon.

You didn’t answer my primary series of questions though.

They seem to be the kinds of questions critics seem to ignore.

Joseph engaged in ‘overkill’ for something that may not have required it. Others didn’t go to all that effort.

Why did he choose the hard path?

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

Why did he choose the hard path?

Did he choose the hard path?

2.5% of the entire book is "and it came to pass."

15% is copied verbatim from the KJV. And that's not even going into the similarities with other contemporary writings....

To quote Twain:

The author labored to give his words and phrases the quaint, old-fashioned sound and structure of our King James’s translation of the Scriptures; and the result is a mongrel—half modern glibness, and half ancient simplicity and gravity. The latter is awkward and constrained; the former natural, but grotesque by the contrast. Whenever he found his speech growing too modern—which was about every sentence or two—he ladled in a few such Scriptural phrases as “exceeding sore,” “and it came to pass,” etc., and made things satisfactory again. “And it came to pass” was his pet. If he had left that out, his Bible would have been only a pamphlet.

[MG 2.0]

Why did he choose the hard path?

Did he choose the hard path?

2.5% of the entire book is "and it came to pass."

15% is copied verbatim from the KJV. And that's not even going into the similarities with other contemporary writings....

To quote Twain:

The author labored to give his words and phrases the quaint, old-fashioned sound and structure of our King James’s translation of the Scriptures; and the result is a mongrel—half modern glibness, and half ancient simplicity and gravity. The latter is awkward and constrained; the former natural, but grotesque by the contrast. Whenever he found his speech growing too modern—which was about every sentence or two—he ladled in a few such Scriptural phrases as “exceeding sore,” “and it came to pass,” etc., and made things satisfactory again. “And it came to pass” was his pet. If he had left that out, his Bible would have been only a pamphlet.

You are also avoiding my questions by setting up a strawman of sorts. And referring to Mark Twain in the capacity of being an expert in Book of Mormon antiquity vs. 19th century composition? C’mon.

For one thing, he seemingly missed all the Hebraism ‘hits’ that modern scholars have spent some intensive efforts and time on. Apparently Joseph wasn’t writing for him.

Anyway, I don’t expect to get much of a response to my core questions asked in my initial post on this thread. Duck and weaving so far.

Why was Joseph the anomaly? Assuming that he was.

Regards,
MG

[doubtingthomas]

.
Joseph had a hard enough time doing that as it was. Why go through an elaborate charade?

Why did the Gnostics create hundreds of false stories about Jesus during intense persecution? Do you have any idea how time consuming it was to write a gospel in the second century?

"In a groundbreaking study on the apocrypha from a Latter-day Saint point of view, Stephen E. Robinson looked at the issue of “lying for God” as a means of understanding the purpose and function of some of the intertestamental apocrypha. In that study, Robinson proposed that deception played a significant part in the production of many apocryphal texts"
https://rsc.byu.edu/how-new-testament-c ... se-gospels

But to go through the translation process and the witnesses and movements about the region to continue the translation?

"The Miracle of the Sun (Portuguese: Milagre do Sol), also known as the Miracle of Fátima, is a series of events reported to have occurred miraculously on 13 October 1917, attended by a large crowd who had gathered in Fátima, Portugal, in response to a prophecy made by three shepherd children, Lúcia Santos and Francisco and Jacinta Marto. The prophecy was that the Virgin Mary (referred to as Our Lady of Fátima), would appear and perform miracles on that date. Newspapers published testimony from witnesses who said that they had seen extraordinary solar activity, such as the Sun appearing to "dance" or zig-zag in the sky, careen towards the Earth, or emit multicolored light and radiant colors. According to these reports, the event lasted approximately ten minutes."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_Sun

[Marcus]

The Book of Mormon doesn’t succeed in being realistic, but it seems to be trying too hard. Noah doesn’t need tools to build his ark. Nephi has a bellows made of animal skins, iron ore accessible from the surface, and a fire that he makes by banging two rocks. As an account of ancient ship-building it’s still ludicrous but it’s also way too much detail. If Nephi smelted iron to forge tools then telling us how he banged rocks is like a modern contractor mentioning that he turned on his power saw.

The Book of Mormon chooses to be specific in the least useful places, but fails to deliver on truly unique information. It goes into a lot more details of the kinds of things Joseph Smith might know than the things he couldn't know. We get all of these details about the building process, but Nephi tells us that he "did not work the timbers after the manner which was learned by men."

I had forgotten that part- it sounds like he felt a little uneasy about previous explanations, and threw that in to cover in advance for any mistakes he might have made. Any questions or contradictions can be answered with a simple response that god gave them a special, 'different' way.

...Don't get me wrong, I think this was a brilliant move on Joseph's part that adds a lot of depth to the book without having to actually come up with anything new and challenging details.

Exactly. "not after the manner of men" adds a great fantasy element.

[MG 2.0]

Of course we are not obliged to receive the text as Smith almost certainly wanted us to receive it - a true record of ancient events in the Americas. We can use it for any purpose we wish - a moral fable, or an interesting study of early 19th century religious imagination, or as a textbook example of a relatively successful fraud, that brought its perpetrator power, relative riches, and access to rather a lot of young women.

What forethought he must have had:

During the time Smith reportedly had the gold plates in Manchester, they were said to have been hidden in several places. Several accounts have survived which detail the help of Alvah Beeman. Lucy Smith remembered that Beeman "came from the village <of Livonia>, a man in whom we reposed much confidence...it was resolved that a portion of the hearth should be taken up and the plates buried under the same." This was just before a "large company of men came rushing up to the house armed with guns" looking for the gold plates.39 Martin Harris mentioned "old Mr. Beman" as one of the treasure seekers who had been "digging for money supposed to have been hidden by the ancients."40 The gold plates were eventually "put into an old Ontario glass-box." Martin Harris, said, "Old Mr. Beman sawed off the ends, making the box the right length to put them in, and when they went in he said he heard them jink [clink], but he was not permitted to see them. He told me so."41
Beeman's daughter Mary related what she heard about her father and the gold plates:

Father became acquainted with Father Joseph Smith, the Father of the Prophet, he frequently would go to Palmira to see Father Smiths and his family, during this time Brother Joseph Smith came in possession of the plates which contained the Book of Mormon. Soon as it was noised around that there was a golden Bible found (for that was what it was called at that time) the minds of the people became so excited and it arose at such a pitch that a mob collected together to search the house of Father Smith to find the records. My Father was there at the time and assisted in concealing the plates in a box in a secluded place where no one could find them.42
After being hidden under the hearth, they reportedly were placed in the Smith's cooper's shop.43 Finally the plates were "nailed up in a box and the box put into a strong cask made for the purpose, the cask was then filled with beans and headed up."44 The barrel-making skills of the Smiths may have been useful here.
Fearing the hostile money-diggers around Manchester, Emma's family allowed her and her husband to move back home to Harmony, Pennsylvania. Her brother Alva helped transport the couple and their barrel of beans to the Hale property where Joseph started dictating the text of his book. In 1829, after the dictation was completed and the type was being set, Smith wrote a letter from Harmony to Oliver Cowdery about their stay in southern New York and Pennsylvania: "the people are all friendly to <us> except a few who are in opposition to ev[e]ry thing unless it is some thing that is exactly like themselves and two of our most formadable persacutors are now under censure and are cited to a tryal [trial] in the church for crimes which if true are worse than all the Gold Book business."45
Emma's father Isaac later remembered his daughter's and son-in- law's stay at his home:

I was informed they had brought a wonderful book of Plates down with them. I was shown a box in which it is said they were contained, which had, to all appearances, been used as a glass box of the common sized window-glass. I was allowed to feel the weight of the box, and they gave me to understand, that the book of plates was then in the box-into which, however, I was not allowed to look.46

https://user.xmission.com/~research/about/inven2.htm

All this to “access…rather a lot of young women”?

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

.
Joseph had a hard enough time doing that as it was. Why go through an elaborate charade?

Why did the Gnostics create hundreds of false stories about Jesus during intense persecution? Do you have any idea how time consuming it was to write a gospel in the second century?

I’m asking why Joseph Smith did it. Was he anomalous in his time/age? He surely could have gotten by with a LOT less hardship and sacrifice.

One thing I suppose we can agree on, and that is that Joseph put a lot of stock in the Book of Mormon, and it’s importance for one reason or another.

Regards,
MG