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.
Marcus
God
Posts: 5035
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 »

Gadianton wrote:
Wed Aug 17, 2022 2:00 am
I agree Marcus, Rick is a legend. I haven't been able to follow this entire thread, have you followed it enough to tell me if MG has responded to any of Rick's posts?
Nah, just the usual. he cherry-picked the middle sentence out of this, which i thought was a great paragraph by Rick, summing up his approach:
It is not necessary to show or even suggest a fledgling prophet contemplating
Macpherson before we can say that once again, we have concrete evidence from
the immediate world of young Joseph Smith displaying additional aspects of the
Restoration - and its subsequent apologetic devices for defense - which were not
so unusual or dependent upon divine inspiration as we once may have believed.

And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point
of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's
veracity or the actual authenticity of his work. The point, instead, is to
demonstrate that many traditional Mormon techniques of defense (whichever
ones may be suggested by the parallels seen here) may not be so relevant or
applicable as some writers have presumed.

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:
Wed Aug 17, 2022 2:10 am
Gadianton wrote:
Wed Aug 17, 2022 2:00 am
I agree Marcus, Rick is a legend. I haven't been able to follow this entire thread, have you followed it enough to tell me if MG has responded to any of Rick's posts?
Nah, just the usual. he cherry-picked the middle sentence out of this, which i thought was a great paragraph by Rick, summing up his approach:
It is not necessary to show or even suggest a fledgling prophet contemplating
Macpherson before we can say that once again, we have concrete evidence from
the immediate world of young Joseph Smith displaying additional aspects of the
Restoration - and its subsequent apologetic devices for defense - which were not
so unusual or dependent upon divine inspiration as we once may have believed.

And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's veracity or the actual authenticity of his work. The point, instead, is to
demonstrate that many traditional Mormon techniques of defense (whichever
ones may be suggested by the parallels seen here) may not be so relevant or
applicable as some writers have presumed.

Yes, I did emphasize an important point he was making.

Regards,
MG
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 »

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. 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
*bump for Gadianton
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 3842
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

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

Post by Gadianton »

Thank you for that, Marcus, I hope I didn't burden you excessively.

MG, sure, he's steering clear of ultimate judgement, but I'm curious if you have any examples of techniques or defenses that escape Rick's criticisms? The word "many" doesn't preclude "all", it just doesn't necessitate "all". If there has never been an example of an apologetic that escapes his criticism, then you are toast, save for arguing maybe somebody might think of something in the future. This, of course, is something we already know independent of Rick and that nobody can secure, no matter how good the argument or evidence. For instance, nobody can say that there will never be an argument or evidence in the future to exonerate Mark Hoffman. But if no believers can offer an argument that escapes the known case against Hoffman, then it's a pointless consideration.

So either provide the argument that escapes Rick's criticism, or admit that "ancient names" in the Book of Mormon is as bogus of an idea as Mark Hoffman's innocence.
User avatar
Rick Grunder
Sunbeam
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:06 am
Location: Sacred Grove II
Contact:

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

Post by Rick Grunder »

First, thanks to everyone for this unaccustomed attention, and for so many kind words. What I’ve tried to say, maybe awkwardly, is that you can’t fight faith - probably shouldn’t - but on the other hand, a lot of apologetic thought and strategy is built on a foundation of sand that deserves to crumble.

Did Joseph Smith go through life like Tommy of the rock opera, as a “deaf, dumb and blind kid . . .”? Did he hear nothing in conversations, did he read no book or Bible passage? Did he never listen to a single hymn? The weakness of apologetic defenders questioning if Smith ever actually saw any given parallel in his culture is this: They presume the final product before the fact: supposing, in advance of the process, no possible "correct" development except Mormonism as it finally turned out. But Joseph didn't have to follow any map; instead, he devised his own.

To point to Mormonism as unique - at any of its stages of development - is not to demonstrate that it was not worked up naturalistically through elements available in Joseph Smith's world. And those elements were not pre-ordained. It is not a question in my mind whether Joseph Smith saw any particular parallels. Instead, I’d say that we learn - from whatever we find in Mormonism - what it was that Joseph assimilated. We can rarely know the precise venues or exact vehicles of that transmission, but why should we need to? If there were countless varied and contrasting ideas handy in Joseph’s own back yard, does that suggest he shut his eyes to ignore the particular ones that showed up in his ministry?

I think Mormonism could have turned into almost anything. And interestingly, the parallels I signal were frequently not the elements most readily available in Joseph’s personal world. Smith partook of whatever bits and pieces of his culture appealed to him, sometimes in self-contradictory manifestations. Some defenders resist the modern Mormon parallels by seemingly requiring a perfect pre-existing example of every aspect of the modern faith, down to the slightest shade of doctrine or the Book of Mormon's most humbly-crafted phrase. "Find and show it all," they seem to demand, "and prove exactly where he encountered it." But if such a burden of discovery is ours, it was never Joseph Smith's.
“I prefer tongue-tied knowledge to ignorant loquacity.”
― Cicero, De Oratore - Book III
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
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 »

Rick Grunder wrote:
Wed Aug 17, 2022 5:04 am
First, thanks to everyone for this unaccustomed attention, and for so many kind words. What I’ve tried to say, maybe awkwardly, is that you can’t fight faith - probably shouldn’t - but on the other hand, a lot of apologetic thought and strategy is built on a foundation of sand that deserves to crumble.

Did Joseph Smith go through life like Tommy of the rock opera, as a “deaf, dumb and blind kid . . .”? Did he hear nothing in conversations, did he read no book or Bible passage? Did he never listen to a single hymn? The weakness of apologetic defenders questioning if Smith ever actually saw any given parallel in his culture is this: They presume the final product before the fact: supposing, in advance of the process, no possible "correct" development except Mormonism as it finally turned out. But Joseph didn't have to follow any map; instead, he devised his own.

To point to Mormonism as unique - at any of its stages of development - is not to demonstrate that it was not worked up naturalistically through elements available in Joseph Smith's world. And those elements were not pre-ordained. It is not a question in my mind whether Joseph Smith saw any particular parallels. Instead, I’d say that we learn - from whatever we find in Mormonism - what it was that Joseph assimilated. We can rarely know the precise venues or exact vehicles of that transmission, but why should we need to? If there were countless varied and contrasting ideas handy in Joseph’s own back yard, does that suggest he shut his eyes to ignore the particular ones that showed up in his ministry?

I think Mormonism could have turned into almost anything. And interestingly, the parallels I signal were frequently not the elements most readily available in Joseph’s personal world. Smith partook of whatever bits and pieces of his culture appealed to him, sometimes in self-contradictory manifestations. Some defenders resist the modern Mormon parallels by seemingly requiring a perfect pre-existing example of every aspect of the modern faith, down to the slightest shade of doctrine or the Book of Mormon's most humbly-crafted phrase. "Find and show it all," they seem to demand, "and prove exactly where he encountered it." But if such a burden of discovery is ours, it was never Joseph Smith's.
Well said Rick
User avatar
malkie
God
Posts: 1478
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

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

Post by malkie »

Rick, it has been stated by one board member that the uncoloured sentence in the following paragraph stands independently from what came before and after (presumably the coloured parts). I haven't seen you address that statement so far.

Would you care to comment?
It is not necessary to show or even suggest a fledgling prophet contemplating
Macpherson before we can say that once again, we have concrete evidence from
the immediate world of young Joseph Smith displaying additional aspects of the
Restoration - and its subsequent apologetic devices for defense - which were not
so unusual or dependent upon divine inspiration as we once may have believed.

And again also, it is probably necessary here for me to emphasize that the point
of all these parallel observations is not to handle the issue of Joseph Smith's
veracity or the actual authenticity of his work. The point, instead, is to
demonstrate that many traditional Mormon techniques of defense (whichever
ones may be suggested by the parallels seen here) may not be so relevant or
applicable as some writers have presumed.

You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
User avatar
Rick Grunder
Sunbeam
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:06 am
Location: Sacred Grove II
Contact:

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

Post by Rick Grunder »

Thanks for your question, Malkie.

Hopefully, my previous post clarifies what I was trying to say in that paragraph from the Macpherson entry: 1) I don’t think it is possible to wrestle issues of faith very effectively using history. But 2), the claims and approaches of religious apologetics are quite vulnerable to an ever-growing database of historical information to which I have tried to add some contributions during the past forty years.

I will just add that if I were caught lifting a single sentence like the obviously dependent one you mention - from someone’s tightly-integrated paragraph - then I don’t know how I could expect to be taken seriously by honest readers. It would be like playing a song without resolving the indispensable final chord.
“I prefer tongue-tied knowledge to ignorant loquacity.”
― Cicero, De Oratore - Book III
User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 1812
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 »

Rick Grunder wrote:
Thu Aug 18, 2022 4:13 am
I will just add that if I were caught lifting a single sentence like the obviously dependent one you mention - from someone’s tightly-integrated paragraph - then I don’t know how I could expect to be taken seriously by honest readers. It would be like playing a song without resolving the indispensable final chord.
Which illustrates rather perfectly the reason why one board contributor is not taken seriously by anyone.
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 »

Dr Moore wrote:
Thu Aug 18, 2022 4:53 am
Rick Grunder wrote:
Thu Aug 18, 2022 4:13 am
I will just add that if I were caught lifting a single sentence like the obviously dependent one you mention - from someone’s tightly-integrated paragraph - then I don’t know how I could expect to be taken seriously by honest readers. It would be like playing a song without resolving the indispensable final chord.
Which illustrates rather perfectly the reason why one board contributor is not taken seriously by anyone.
I could just as well have copied and pasted the complete paragraph highlighting the section that is in question and the meaning of that statement would remain the same. Rick Grunder as much as said that he might have been more clear.

Another poster asked for clarification.

Anyway, I appreciate his attempt to try and integrate the statement in question with the rest of the paragraph.

I don’t think the song analogy fits.

As a point of interest, over the last few years since I became aware of Grunder’s work I’ve appreciated the fact that he has put so MUCH stuff out there. His work literally speaks volumes to early Mormon history. So Rick, even though I don’t agree with your conclusions, I am appreciative of the even handed work you’ve done in early Mormon history.

I’m one of those guys that does see faith in every footstep of the restoration. It is so evident in the lives of the early saints. Their sacrifice and testimonies speak volumes and the hand of God is evident.

At least from this viewers perspective.

Regards,
MG
Post Reply