Physics Guy wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:38 am
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 2:42 am
... the Book of Mormon was a one shot deal. One trick pony. A flash in the pan. We have Joseph the farmboy producing a work that has gone on to becoming a recognized book of scripture that has impacted and changed the lives of millions of people and brought them to Christ.
It’s literally one of a kind. Unless you’re going to say The Course In Miracles falls in the same category. Or Dianetics. If so, we may be at an impasse.
I don't understand what point you're making with these phrases, "one trick pony" and "flash in the pan".
For one thing I think you may be misusing "flash in the pan".
Joseph never produced anything like unto the Book of Mormon before or after its production.
Physics Guy wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:38 am
MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 2:42 am
Read the section with the heading: Composition Methodology
Again, if that book about the composition of the Book of Mormon made even one compelling point, why not repeat that point here yourself?
The author says it better than me (emphasis on bolding):
Multiple witnesses declared that Joseph Smith spoke the words of the Book of Mormon rather than personally writing them.38
This observation separates him from more than 99% of all authors who ever published a book.
Historically, the composition technique taught in schools worldwide is called creative writing and comprises three general steps.
Pre-writing: choosing a subject, creating an outline, and performing the required research.
Writing: making the initial draft and combining sections.
Re-writing: revising, content-editing, and all subsequent drafts.39
When dictating a book to a scribe (or stenographer), as Joseph Smith did,
step one is restricted to memory, and step three is eliminated. There is no evidence Joseph engaged in step one in any discernable way, [Page 158]although mental preparations would not be detectable. The manuscript went straight to press without step three enhancements.
Dictating a book without pre-writing or re-writing might be called creative dictation. The advent of smart phones and voice-to-text apps has facilitated cell phone users today to produce long manuscripts using creative dictation and thereby attempt to replicate Joseph Smith’s efforts. The need for a scribe is removed by dictating text messages of 20 to 30 words each (the apparent word blocks Joseph spoke to his scribes40) into the app. These are received in order and copied into an expanding document. Before hitting send, grammar and spelling can be corrected, but once sent, the sequence of the sentences cannot be changed.41 The author does not consult manuscripts or books while dictating.42 Repeat this process 10,000 times until a document of roughly 270,000 words is formed that can be sent to a publisher for typesetting and printing.
Creative dictation is more difficult than creative writing because, as Louis Brandeis, who served as an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1916 to 1939 explained: “There is no good writing; there is only good rewriting.”43 Popular novelist and essayist Robert Louis Stevenson concurred: “When I say writing, O, believe me, it is rewriting that I have chiefly in mind.”44 This inherent limitation of creative dictation is probably why none of the authors in the comparisons charted below elected to recite their books from memory and then send them directly to the printer.
Even genius-level intellects today pre-write, write, and rewrite their books prior to completion.45
https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... of-Mormon/
Physics Guy wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 9:38 am
Sure, there's no positive evidence that Smith rehearsed or used notes. There wouldn't be, would there? How much evidence trail are private rehearsals or secret notes going to leave, when no more than a little bit of rehearsal was needed? Heck, you can rehearse a recitation mentally while lying awake in bed without moving or speaking. It would have been easy enough to produce the Book of Mormon with a lot more support than the official story admits—so easy that I don't see how any accounts of the production details can be considered evidence that Smith couldn't have written the Book.
I don’t think I’ve linked to it yet but this essay written by one your favorite people goes into length on Joseph Smith as storyteller and what hurdles would have to be jumped in order to compose the Book of Mormon.
https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... oryteller/
Literary characteristics of the 1830 Book of Mormon-
Characteristic Quality/Quantity
Word count 269,320
Number of sentences 6,852
Average sentence length 39.3
Reading level 8th grade
Dialect Early English
Punctuation none
Unique words 5,903
College-level vocabulary words (not in Bible) dozens
Original proper nouns 170
Parallel phraseology— chiasms 367
Parallel phraseology — alternates 400
Poetic literary forms (other) 911
Stylometric consistencies at least 4 unique authors
Bible intertextuality hundreds of phrases and integrations
Named characters 208
Socio-geographic groups 45
Geographical locations (Promised Land) over 150
Geographical references (Promised Land) over 400
Ecological references 2,065
Monetary system weights 12 distinct values
Chronological references over 100
Storylines 77 major; additional minor
Flashbacks and embedded storylines 5
Sermons 68 major; additional minor
Sermon topics dozens
Sermon commentary often intricate and multifaceted
Formal headings to chapters and books 21
Editorial promises 121
Internal historical sources quoted at least 24
Subjects discussed with precision at least 3 (e.g. biblical law, olive tree, husbandry, and warfare tactics)
From what I’ve read on this topic over the years my opinion is simply that you’re giving Joseph Smith too much credit for doing something that would have been beyond his reach. You’ve asked me to go through Grant Hardy’s book and spoon feed selections and ‘proofs’ that had meaning to me and yet you’re not willing to read it. The only one here that I’m aware of who says that they’ve read it is honor. He, of course, has his own opinions on what is in the book. But at least he says he’s read it.
There will never be any evidence which convinces the critics in regards to the coming forth of the Book of Mormon as being the work of God. I’ve provided links, not a few, in this thread that let the experts speak for themselves in regards to their research into Book of Mormon origins/translation.
At the end of the day each one of us makes our own determination as to the validity and truthfulness of this modern day scriptural work and whether its testimony of Christ will impact and guide our lives.
I appreciate your viewpoint on this topic.
Regards,
MG
Smith and Cowdery collaborating during the writing of the Book of Mormon is documented in the D&C. They discussed the content. And again, if Smith could have written it on his own he would have the first time he tried but failed. The facts are what they are. Cowdery changed the calculus where before his involvement was a slow process of which we have limited remaining product. With Cowdery's involvement they produced the pre-edited version of the book we have. We have a product of the 19th century whose production was affected by Smith and Cowdery working together in a way Smith working with others prior to that where the result was unable to match what we see when Cowdery was involved.
) up the page and try to make them disappear or pass into irrelevancy. 
