The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
drumdude
God
Posts: 5195
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by drumdude »

Stephen D. Ricks wrote:It is necessary that the Book of Mormon have ancient names, whether from the ancient Near East or from ancient Mesoamerica, if the claim that the book is of ancient origin is to ring true.

Our work has shown that the names and the foreign words in the Book of Mormon are ancient in origin, whether from ancient Hebrew or some other Semitic language, ancient Egyptian, ancient Mesopotamian (Akkadian or Sumerian), or ancient Greek.

I believe we have done our homework showing that the names are ancient in origin. The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon to show that its names are not of ancient origin.
https://www.fromthedesk.org/book-of-mor ... omasticon/
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5777
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Moksha »

So who is denying it already? Elders Coriantumr J. Lebovitz, Thadeus Gidgiddoni, and Boxcar Lachoneus all sound pretty authentic to me.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Marcus
God
Posts: 4995
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Marcus »

the arrogance and condescending tone are palpable.
To those who deny and oppose the Book of Mormon as an historically authentic ancient document, it is a challenge to show that it is not ancient—a task these deniers may find truly daunting, since many of them have little or no language experience outside of English.
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5001
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Philo Sofee »

I have no need to show it's not ancient, what Ricks has to do for me is demonstrate to actual certified and viable Ancient Near Eastern scholars the world over his authentic "ancient" names in the Book of Mormon and they agree this demonstrates the Book of Mormon's authenticity. When they join the church based on that evidence, then we will know to take it seriously. When that happens that will be a huge FIRST step to it. He is talking to the wrong audience. And he KNOWS it. They ALL know it. The challenge is silly.
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6107
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Kishkumen »

I like Stephen D. Ricks very much. He and I read Latin together, nearly the entirety of Vergil's Aeneid, and he attended my wedding at the Timpanogas Temple. He is actually quite a humble and unassuming fellow, and he is highly intelligent. I simply do not agree with the premise. A book is not ancient because the names in it are ancient. I cannot be dated by my name, and neither can my children. My kids have ancient Hebrew names. Are we to assume that they are ancient Hebrews? No, this is all wrong. An ancient book is one which the preponderance of the evidence shows was written in antiquity. Unfortunately, the Book of Mormon is not an ancient book in that sense of the term "ancient book."

Here is what it would take for me to say that the Book of Mormon is an ancient book in that sense:

1. Qualified scholars have access to and thoroughly examine the gold plates.

2. In truly peer-reviewed publications, they make a compelling case, built on a preponderance of evidence, that the the gold plates are an ancient text the translation of which largely agrees with Joseph Smith's translation.

3. Other scholars weigh in on their work and find it unimpeachable.

Names do not prove the Book of Mormon is an ancient text, and those who do not believe the Book of Mormon to be ancient based on the claims of believers do not have an obligation to disprove the antiquity of an English manuscript written by a farm boy in 19th century New York. Rather, those who believe have a long, long way to go before they are able to make a case that others are obliged to take seriously.

Names don't cut it.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Fence Sitter
High Priest
Posts: 397
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:02 am

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Fence Sitter »

1000 years from now, after the apocalypse, an archeologist makes an exciting discovery of a historical text called The Da Vinci Code.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by dastardly stem »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 12:29 pm
I like Stephen D. Ricks very much. He and I read Latin together, nearly the entirety of Vergil's Aeneid, and he attended my wedding at the Timpanogas Temple. He is actually quite a humble and unassuming fellow, and he is highly intelligent. I simply do not agree with the premise. A book is not ancient because the names in it are ancient. I cannot be dated by my name, and neither can my children. My kids have ancient Hebrew names. Are we to assume that they are ancient Hebrews? No, this is all wrong. An ancient book is one which the preponderance of the evidence shows was written in antiquity. Unfortunately, the Book of Mormon is not an ancient book in that sense of the term "ancient book."

Here is what it would take for me to say that the Book of Mormon is an ancient book in that sense:

1. Qualified scholars have access to and thoroughly examine the gold plates.

2. In truly peer-reviewed publications, they make a compelling case, built on a preponderance of evidence, that the the gold plates are an ancient text the translation of which largely agrees with Joseph Smith's translation.

3. Other scholars weigh in on their work and find it unimpeachable.

Names do not prove the Book of Mormon is an ancient text, and those who do not believe the Book of Mormon to be ancient based on the claims of believers do not have an obligation to disprove the antiquity of an English manuscript written by a farm boy in 19th century New York. Rather, those who believe have a long, long way to go before they are able to make a case that others are obliged to take seriously.

Names don't cut it.
Excellent response.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
sock puppet
High Priest
Posts: 397
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:29 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by sock puppet »

drumdude wrote:
Wed Aug 10, 2022 6:02 am
Stephen D. Ricks wrote:It is necessary that the Book of Mormon have ancient names, whether from the ancient Near East or from ancient Mesoamerica, if the claim that the book is of ancient origin is to ring true.

Our work has shown that the names and the foreign words in the Book of Mormon are ancient in origin, whether from ancient Hebrew or some other Semitic language, ancient Egyptian, ancient Mesopotamian (Akkadian or Sumerian), or ancient Greek.

I believe we have done our homework showing that the names are ancient in origin. The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon to show that its names are not of ancient origin.
https://www.fromthedesk.org/book-of-mor ... omasticon/
Why would someone who denies the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon feel any need to prove the names Joseph Smith used are not of ancient origin? Have they shown that each and every name used in the Book of Mormon is of ancient origin? It only takes one modernly-created name to blow the lid off of the name game somehow corroborating the ancient authenticity of the Book of Mormon text.
"I'm not crazy about reality, but it's still the only place to get a decent meal." Groucho Marx
"The truth has no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie." Mark Twain
The best lack all conviction, while the worst//Are full of passionate intensity." Yeats
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1801
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:16 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Dr Moore »

Ancient names does not mean ancient book.

Like 2/3 of the names are found in the Bible or derivatives of names found in Biblical commentaries.

If ancient, then ancient names, yes.

Does not follow that if B then A.

Amateurs.
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: The burden is now upon those who deny the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon

Post by Dr Exiled »

They are always looking for some way to shift the burden from themselves. I guess it sounds good to the faithful who don't look too closely at what is being claimed to force the burden shift.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
Post Reply