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.
Chap
God
Posts: 2308
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:42 am
Location: On the imaginary axis

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

Post by Chap »

Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) expressed himself at some length on the topic of the poem ascribed to 'Ossian' in his book A Journey to the Western Islands, which you can read online here:

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2064/2064-h/2064-h.htm
I suppose my opinion of the poems of Ossian is already discovered. I believe they never existed in any other form than that which we have seen. The editor, or author, never could shew the original; nor can it be shewn by any other; to revenge reasonable incredulity, by refusing evidence, is a degree of insolence, with which the world is not yet acquainted; and stubborn audacity is the last refuge of guilt. It would be easy to shew it if he had it; but whence could it be had? It is too long to be remembered, and the language formerly had nothing written. He has doubtless inserted names that circulate in popular stories, and may have translated some wandering ballads, if any can be found; and the names, and some of the images being recollected, make an inaccurate auditor imagine, by the help of Caledonian bigotry, that he has formerly heard the whole.

I asked a very learned Minister in Sky, who had used all arts to make me believe the genuineness of the book, whether at last he believed it himself? but he would not answer. He wished me to be deceived, for the honour of his country; but would not directly and formally deceive me. Yet has this man’s testimony been publickly produced, as of one that held Fingal to be the work of Ossian.

It is said, that some men of integrity profess to have heard parts of it, but they all heard them when they were boys; and it was never said that any of them could recite six lines. They remember names, and perhaps some proverbial sentiments; and, having no distinct ideas, coin a resemblance without an original. The persuasion of the Scots, however, is far from universal; and in a question so capable of proof, why should doubt be suffered to continue? The editor has been heard to say, that part of the poem was received by him, in the Saxon character. He has then found, by some peculiar fortune, an unwritten language, written in a character which the natives probably never beheld.

I have yet supposed no imposture but in the publisher, yet I am far from certainty, that some translations have not been lately made, that may now be obtruded as parts of the original work. Credulity on one part is a strong temptation to deceit on the other, especially to deceit of which no personal injury is the consequence, and which flatters the author with his own ingenuity. The Scots have something to plead for their easy reception of an improbable fiction; they are seduced by their fondness for their supposed ancestors. A Scotchman must be a very sturdy moralist, who does not love Scotland better than truth: he will always love it better than inquiry; and if falsehood flatters his vanity, will not be very diligent to detect it. Neither ought the English to be much influenced by Scotch authority; for of the past and present state of the whole Earse nation, the Lowlanders are at least as ignorant as ourselves. To be ignorant is painful; but it is dangerous to quiet our uneasiness by the delusive opiate of hasty persuasion.

But this is the age, in which those who could not read, have been supposed to write; in which the giants of antiquated romance have been exhibited as realities. If we know little of the ancient Highlanders, let us not fill the vacuity with Ossian. If we had not searched the Magellanick regions, let us however forbear to people them with Patagons.
After the publication of Johnson's book, James Macpherson who claimed to have discovered and translated the 'Ossian' manuscript wrote to Johnson challenging him to a duel, and on Johnson declining threatened him in another letter, which received a famous reply:
MR. JAMES MACPHERSON.

I RECEIVED your foolish and impudent letter. Any violence offered me I shall do my best to repel; and what I cannot do for myself, the law shall do for me. I hope I shall never be deterred from detecting what I think a cheat, by the menaces of a ruffian.

What would you have me retract? I thought your book an imposture; I think it an imposture still. For this opinion I have given my reasons to the publick, which I here dare you to refute. Your rage I defy. Your abilities, since your Homer, are not so formidable; and what I hear of your morals inclines me to pay regard not to what you shall say, but to what you shall prove. You may print this if you will.

SAM. Johnson.
There are certainly some very interesting parallels with the Book of Mormon - though I do not think Smith ever issued a threat of the kind Johnson received!
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
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 »

IHAQ wrote:
Thu Aug 11, 2022 1:26 pm
Interestingly, a commenter on Sic Et Non has discovered the contents of the Book are already available for free, here:
https://onoma.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Main_Page
Spencer: "As a novice in the area of linguistics, I am curious as to what sort of overlap there is between the Dictionary and the "Book of Mormon Onomasticon""

This is the Book of Mormon Onomasticon, by the same people, in its latest and most developed form.
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... igins.html
and from the Introduction:
INTRODUCTION

We who created and who maintain this onomasticon
work under the belief that the Book of Mormon is an ancient document...
So, the conclusion is assumed before the testing begins. Well. So much for the academic integrity of this piece.
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 »

If only the Lord of the Rings could have been added to the LDS canon back in the 1950s. Surely Dr. Hugh Nibley could have found many ancient proofs for the Ents. Additionally, President Hugh B. Brown could have pointed to the working relationship with the Elves and Gimli's part in the Fellowship to encourage the Church to accept those of African heritage. It would have made the entire Mormon experience less opprobrious to those approached on the street. Potential members may have braved the Mines of Moria to reach Salt Lake City.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
PseudoPaul
Star B
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2021 2:12 pm

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

Post by PseudoPaul »

Kishkumen wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:40 am
PseudoPaul wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:27 am
I think you're missing the larger issue - historicity is an academic question that by definition can't be answered with faith. The moment you try to make an appeal to faith or miracles you've left the topic of historicity altogether - the same would apply if you tried to bring God into a conversation about math.
I appreciate you for continuing to articulate this sane point of view. Unfortunately, LDS apologetics has inured people to the idea of having faith dictate historical issues. Evidence and logical argument take a back seat to testimony. Apologists have no compunction about forcing history into a box that is built by Joseph Smith, so to speak. If one looks at a lot of their idiosyncratic takes on the evidence of ancient history, for example, one sees a clear pattern of interpreting through the lens of Mormonism, consciously and deliberately.

MG is just a little less artful in his way of expressing the same attitude and taking the same position.

There is no way in hell that I could or would join him there, even if I were active LDS.
I think a lot of people who get into apologetics are unaware that apologetics isn't an academic discipline. "Good" apologetics may require some kind of "scholarship" in a colloquial sense, but there is no academic rigor. Hence, MG's misconception that historicity could ever be a matter of religious faith.
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 »

Pasted from the Galma thread.

How many variations on root consonants LM and ML are found in the Book of Mormon?

Alma
Amulek
Amaleki
Amalikiah
Amlici
Helem
Helaman
Amulon
Lamah
Laman
Lamoni
Lemuel
Limhah
Limher
Limhi
Mulek
Quite a few of these names apply to 2, 3 or 4 people.

Origin:
Elam - son of Shem, son of Noah. Name appears in several other Old Testament passages.

It’s like Elam gave Joseph a 25 for 1 deal on ancient names.
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 »

PseudoPaul wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:09 pm
I think a lot of people who get into apologetics are unaware that apologetics isn't an academic discipline. "Good" apologetics may require some kind of "scholarship" in a colloquial sense, but there is no academic rigor. Hence, MG's misconception that historicity could ever be a matter of religious faith.
Indeed.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

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

Post by MG 2.0 »

Rick Grunder wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:14 am

For a much longer and more detailed version of the data above, with citations, see my Mormon Parallels entry 229, available for free download:

http://www.rickgrunder.com/parallels/mp229.pdf
I read through this. Interesting stuff. It seems to me that as we gaze back through historical literature, fabricated and/or real, that we’re going to observe types and shadows bumping up against each other with intermixing elements that can be used to show relationships which may or may not show actual correlation/connection.

And again we come back to the issue of just how much would Joseph have bumped up against all this stuff that critics say he did.

Regards,
MG
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 »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:27 pm

I read through this. Interesting stuff. It seems to me that as we gaze back through historical literature, fabricated and/or real, that we’re going to observe types and shadows bumping up against each other with intermixing elements that can be used to show relationships which may or may not show actual correlation/connection.

And again we come back to the issue of just how much would Joseph have bumped up against all this stuff that critics say he did.
:D there is no we, that would be your issue alone.

I am amazed at how stupid and clueless Joseph Smith has become to the current apologists. When i was growing up, Mormons had a much better opinion of him.

Researchers like william davis respect his charisma and creativity, but apparently mentalgymnast thinks otherwise. :roll:
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8952
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

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

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:27 pm
Rick Grunder wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:14 am

For a much longer and more detailed version of the data above, with citations, see my Mormon Parallels entry 229, available for free download:

http://www.rickgrunder.com/parallels/mp229.pdf
I read through this.
Typical MG. You didn't "read through" crap, and that's why you had nothing to say about a well-sourced 24-page document. God, I hate it when Mormons lie about reading.

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 3628
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

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

Post by MG 2.0 »

Marcus wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:43 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:27 pm

I read through this. Interesting stuff. It seems to me that as we gaze back through historical literature, fabricated and/or real, that we’re going to observe types and shadows bumping up against each other with intermixing elements that can be used to show relationships which may or may not show actual correlation/connection.

And again we come back to the issue of just how much would Joseph have bumped up against all this stuff that critics say he did.
:D there is no we, that would be your issue alone.
OK. Not including you. 😉
Marcus wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:43 pm
I am amazed at how stupid and clueless Joseph Smith has become to the current apologists. When i was growing up, Mormons had a much better opinion of him.
Nowhere did I say he was stupid.
Marcus wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:43 pm
Researchers like william davis respect his charisma and creativity, but apparently mentalgymnast thinks otherwise. :roll:
I listened to his interview on Gospel Tangents. I also read what others have had to say in regards to his conclusions, etc. His is one voice among many. I do think he is correct in his understanding that Joseph’s native intelligence was in no way sub par.

Regards,
MG
Last edited by MG 2.0 on Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply