The Book of Mormon proves the historicity of the Jewish exodus

[DrStakhanovite]

That's what it would take for me for this quote to make sense. Or am I completely out to lunch here?

Back in the late 90s there was a talking point popular among the cult-ministries that ancient Israelites/Jews didn’t use metals as a textual medium; meaning that they wouldn’t put scriptures on brass or gold plates. These cult-ministries would often appeal to late 19th and early 20th century biblical scholarship, but once you get post Qumran, examples of scriptures on a metal medium start to surface. A famous example is called the ‘Copper Scroll’ (3Q15), although it isn’t a literary work. As you can imagine, this was seen as modern archeology vindicating Joseph Smith and the mopologists savored it. How could Joseph have known, Malkie?

For a lot of Mormons, this all but confirms that the brass plates mentioned by Nephi as a historical reality and with that supposition start speculating on the “how” and “where” such plates could have been manufactured. It operates almost exactly how one might research in preparation for writing a historical fiction novella or something. You get a feel for the landscape of the contemporary scholarly picture and you create something that is broadly consistent with it, hence Noel talking about the “Manassite scribal school”.

To the Mormon Apologist, asking to see the brass plates first before discussing their impact and relevance to Biblical Studies is like asking to see the first actual Greek translation of the Torah that became known as the Septugaint. Of course such a thing no longer exists and is forever lost to history and since the brass plates are no longer in mortal hands, your request is unreasonable.

[DrStakhanovite]

It relates very well. Interesting post, I had never heard of that.

Mormonism has a solution to this problem, there's no need for debates. The prophets, seers, and revelators should know the answers to these very important questions about biblical and Mormon historicity..

There is a short book called ‘Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism’ written by an American historian named George Marsden that gets into this that I think you’d enjoy. Because it is so small, you can pick up a used copy for like 6 bucks on Amazon and it could be read easily in a few days of casual reading.

Briggs kind of kicks off what I’d call the “modernist controversy” where all the major Protestant denominations in America had a reckoning about the kind of scholarship coming out of Europe. You had Darwin, Marx, Freud, higher and lower biblical criticism of the Germans, the rise of professional Archeology and the discovery of “Old Testament” parallels in literary traditions from Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, Syria, etc. All of this could be (and eventually, would be) used to undermine the established claims of Christianity.

The people who wanted to integrate all these advancements and fashions into the curriculum of seminaries and divinity schools came to be called “Modernists” and those who opposed them came to be called “Fundamentalists”, which is how that term was introduced in the American lexicon.

Probably not a spoiler, but the Modernists won and the Fundamentalists peaced out to start their own denominations. For example, the guy who pretty much pioneered presuppositional apologetics, Cornelius Van Til, was teaching at Princeton during this controversy, but left with a lot of others to form Westminster Theological Seminary when Princeton went “liberal”.

In my opinion, you will find a lot of parallels with Mormonism and BYU as well. I think Mormons are starting to go through their own version of the modernist controversy at the moment.

[drumdude]

In my opinion, you will find a lot of parallels with Mormonism and BYU as well. I think Mormons are starting to go through their own version of the modernist controversy at the moment.

There’s no doubt about that. The internet has forced the issue upon them. The problem ahead for Mormonism is that either path leads them to disaster. Fundamentalist Mormonism and Modernism Mormonism will eat at each other and keep the religion dwindling rather than growing.

Look at where the polygamist Mormons are now, and where the Community of Christ is now, and you can get a glimpse at the future of the Brighamite branch.

[DrStakhanovite]

There’s no doubt about that. The internet has forced the issue upon them. The problem ahead for Mormonism is that either path leads them to disaster. Fundamentalist Mormonism and Modernism Mormonism will eat at each other and keep the religion dwindling rather than growing.

Look at where the polygamist Mormons are now, and where the Community of Christ is now, and you can get a glimpse at the future of the Brighamite branch.

Well if it ends up mirroring what happened to the so-called “Mainline” Protestant denominations, then the more progressive the social policy is roughly correlates with a decline in membership and the more conservative approach often keeps membership numbers stable, if not consistently growing.

My take is that the closer a church or denomination gets to popular secular culture, people have trouble finding reasons to stay and maintain the identity. On the flip side, if you take the approach that your church or denomination represents a pinpoint of light in the vast sea of Babylonian darkness that is America, people will more readily maintain the identity.