charity wrote:Mister Scratch wrote:Certainly I would recall doing something so audacious as announcing that I've found evidence authenticating the historicity of the Book of Mormon. The fact that DCP has never, ever done this in a secular academic setting (at least not to his recollection---I will wait patiently to hear about it from him) is extraordinarily telling.
So when he is in an Islamic studies presentation, he is supposed to suddenly veer from his presentation and announce that he knows the Book of Mormon is true?
No, that's not what I'm suggesting it at all. If he is at an ancient history convention, though, why couldn't he assert, in public, for all to hear, that he believes that the Book of Mormon really dishes the whole truth in terms of ancient American history? He won't do it. Nor will he do it in any print venue outside of FARMS.
Mister Scratch wrote: DCP is very clearly, and quite reasonably, "academically embarrassed" about Book of Mormon scholarship, and he knows that trying to discuss it seriously in a secular academic setting would be career and reputation suicide.
I didn't make myself clear. My fault. I was referring to those discussions about what would be possible theses or dissertation topics. There are simply topics you cannot study and have accepted. And the reason why is usually the prejudice of the academic community.
What, you mean like methods of "curing" homosexuals? Just head to BYU---they'll actually allow you to do that there!
charity" ] What I am saying is that no non-LDS scholar can take the chance that he/she has to say that there is evidence to supoprt the existence of angels. I would say that it isn't Book of Mormon historicity that hasn't been taken seriously. It is that the prejudice against supernatural forces is taken way too seriously.[/quote]
But this isn't correct. We can examine claims such as, "There was smelting of metal in ancient America" without even considering the possibility of angels. Please refer to my above post. It seems clear to me that, even if the Book of Mormon had been discovered in a Central American tomb, its history would still be irrelevant, since, as has been shown repeatedly, there is no evidence to support Book of Mormon historicity.
[quote][quote="Mister Scratch wrote:Cf. DCP's Sorenson references. People---primarily LDS researchers---have been looking for a very, very long time, and have come up empty handed.
You have told me and anyone else who would listen no one takes these people seriously.[/quote]
You told *me* that no one had bothered to investigate.
charity wrote: You have got to be joking here! So every time a faithful LDS goes into a meeting with non-LDS scholars and academics, he is supposed to bear his testimony?
Mister Scratch wrote:Not "every time." Just once would be astounding and extraordinary! DCP cannot recall a single time that he's done this. The best evidence he supplied in this vein were the three Sorenson quotes, and I would defy him, or you, or anyone else to show me where Sorenson is frank and explicit regarding the LDS underpinnings of his arguments. Go ahead, I dare you!
What a crock! When a person is making a presentation on some topic, it would be the heigth of presumption to suddenly go off topioc like that. It is becoming increasingly obvious that you know very little about academic protocols.
Not "some topic," Charity. A topic that is relevant and pertinent to the issues under discussion here. Let me ask you again: Can you show me one instance of an LDS scholar frankly admitting to the Mormon assumptions undergirding his/her investigations into Book of Mormon historicity? Go ahead and provide me with just
one single citation.
Mister Scratch wrote: Just what do you think I'm "demanding"? All I ask is for you or DCP to identify one place in secular academia where historicity of the Book of Mormon has been frankly and openly asserted as God's Honest Truth. They won't do it. They are too embarrassed. I rest my case.
You have no case. There is no place in secular academia or any other academia where bearing testimony of the Book of Mormon has a place. It isn't a matter of embarrassment. Let any secular academic attend a sacrament meeting and he will hear the testimony bearing. That is the place for testimonies.
This isn't what I'm asking for. I want to see an instance of an LDS academic asserting, in a secular academic venue, that the Book of Mormon is a legitimate document of ancient American history. They will not do it. They are too embarrassed.