Problems with the Catalyst Theory
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2023 9:56 pm
More and more, mopologists are running for and taking cover in what is referred to as the catalyst theory. With the Book of Mormon, the gold plates weren't used for translation, but just there while the production in English were the magical appearance of words above a stone in a hat. The Book of Abraham wasn't a linguistic translation of the papyri, but such papyri was merely a prop so that with it, Joseph Smith would be receptive to the story of Abraham being planted by God in Joseph Smith's brain while Smith thought he was really translating. This is problematic for so many reasons.
- God could have, but must have forgot to have Abraham write his own story down on a piece of papyrus so that God could make sure it found its way into Joseph Smith's hands for translation.
- God is not honest, but had to fool Joseph Smith into thinking he was linguistically translating, particularly from the papyri. But apparently, God is a good liar--so good that Smith and his scribes really thought they were linguistically translating the papyrus, as is obvious from the Kirtland Egyptian Papers (KEP).
- Even having had a private audience in the grove with Elohim and Jehovah, that was not enough for Joseph Smith later to trust inspiration from God--Smith needed 'ancient records' to translate (this sort of dovetails with the claim that Joseph Smith had a Jupiter talisman with him at Carthage Jail; Smith thought certain objects had special, supernatural powers and properties).
- Why did Joseph Smith need an 'object' for the catalyst for inspiration sometimes, but not others? To wit, commandment codified as part of the D&C.
- God could have inspired Smith with real, additional truths when Smith was presented with the Greek Psalter and/or Kinderhook Plates. They could have been the 'catalyst' to prepare Smith to be receptive to the new truths. But, no, God needs to remain capricious and inconsistent.
- Pseudepigrapha? Why did God need to concoct stories about ancient characters (fictional or not) to convey truths? Couldn't they have all been direct do's and don'ts such as there are in D&C?
- Why, with respect to the Book of Abraham, did God stop inspiring him from the end of 1835 until late 1842? That is, why didn't the papyri have the catalyst effect on Joseph Smith for those almost 7 years? I mean, if it wasn't a linguistic translation that would have taken concerted mental effort to accomplish, why did the BoAbr inspiration stop for so long?--all Joseph Smith needed to do was have an open mind, get the inspiration and write it down. That didn't take all that long for much more voluminous Book of Mormon. Why did God have Smith and his scribes begin in 1835 if God was just going to go on a 7-year inspiration hiatus?
- Why did Joseph Smith not present the BoAbr to the general membership at a GC to propose that it be canonized as scripture? (The Book of Mormon was canonized under the direction of Smith, right away after the church was organized.) What was holding Smith back on canonizing the BoAbr?