Ray A wrote:You seem to be insinuating (though I may be wrong) that, somehow, DCP doesn't really believe the Book of Mormon is historical. DCP has said that if he concluded the Book of Mormon isn't historical, he would no longer believe Mormonism. That surprised even me, as it's a position I don't take, myself. (by the way, I don't have time for exchanges on this at any length. I have real work to do, until Sunday morning.)
No, that isn't what I am insinuating. I am arguing that DCP is embarrassed about his belief in the Book of Mormon as a historical document, and that he knows he would be a laughingstock if he tried to advance these views in a secular academic setting.
Polygamy Porter wrote:by the way, all non biased "academic research" into the origins of the Book of Mormon have all proven it to be nothing but a poorly organized fairytale.
CFR. Not even Coe has said that, and he's one of the most informed non-Mormon academics who has studied Mormonism. In fact those who know more about Mormonism (among non-Mormon academics) are less likely to ridicule it.
This is what Coe said:
The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early immigrants to our hemisphere.
Mister Scratch wrote: No, that isn't what I am insinuating. I am arguing that DCP is embarrassed about his belief in the Book of Mormon as a historical document, and that he knows he would be a laughingstock if he tried to advance these views in a secular academic setting.
I disagree with the former, but agree with the latter.
Polygamy Porter wrote:by the way, all non biased "academic research" into the origins of the Book of Mormon have all proven it to be nothing but a poorly organized fairytale.
CFR. Not even Coe has said that, and he's one of the most informed non-Mormon academics who has studied Mormonism. In fact those who know more about Mormonism (among non-Mormon academics) are less likely to ridicule it.
This is what Coe said:
The bare facts of the matter are that nothing, absolutely nothing, has ever shown up in any New World excavation which would suggest to a dispassionate observer that the Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith, is a historical document relating to the history of early immigrants to our hemisphere.
So he did not explicitly call it a fairytale. Big whoop.
Mister Scratch wrote: No, that isn't what I am insinuating. I am arguing that DCP is embarrassed about his belief in the Book of Mormon as a historical document, and that he knows he would be a laughingstock if he tried to advance these views in a secular academic setting.
I disagree with the former, but agree with the latter.
Very well, but none of this explains why he hasn't presented his views in a secular academic venue. Is he afraid? Embarrassed? What? And, by the way, your Galileo analogy seems seriously misguided, Ray. Galileo faced far more than mere ridicule for his views. What does DCP risk? Getting canned from BYU? I don't think so.
Let me suggest a somewhat better analogy. Suppose you are a medical researcher who discovers a drug which will lengthen the average human lifespan to 250 years, say, or cure baldness. It is an extraordinary discovery. You know that trying to convince the mainstream medical community of your discovery will likely get you laughed at. So, what do you do? Keep to yourself, and not say anything, out of fear? Do you stay completely silent, as the Mopologists have done? Further, do you say, "To hell with all of you antis! I am going to form my own medical journal! That will show you, and, further, it will reassure all of my supporters and financial backers!" Or, would it be better to submit these findings and ideas to the medical community at large? Good ideas should and ought to stand up to scrutiny, Ray. That DCP & Co. have failed to try and advance the historicity of the Book of Mormon in conventional academic venues is a huge, damning blow against them.
P.s.---I am *still* waiting for even one, single instance of a Mopologist frankly admitting to LDS assumptions in a secular, mainstream academic venue. Frankly, I was expecting that someone would come up with at least one.
Let me suggest a somewhat better analogy. Suppose you are a medical researcher who discovers a drug which will lengthen the average human lifespan to 250 years, say, or cure baldness. It is an extraordinary discovery. You know that trying to convince the mainstream medical community of your discovery will likely get you laughed at. So, what do you do? Keep to yourself, and not say anything, out of fear? Do you stay completely silent, as the Mopologists have done? Further, do you say, "To hell with all of you antis! I am going to form my own medical journal! That will show you, and, further, it will reassure all of my supporters and financial backers!" Or, would it be better to submit these findings and ideas to the medical community at large? Good ideas should and ought to stand up to scrutiny, Ray. That DCP & Co. have failed to try and advance the historicity of the Book of Mormon in conventional academic venues is a huge, damning blow against them.
P.s.---I am *still* waiting for even one, single instance of a Mopologist frankly admitting to LDS assumptions in a secular, mainstream academic venue. Frankly, I was expecting that someone would come up with at least one.
I'll have to answer this later. Work calls. If I forget to reply, remind me.
Well they don't know where he comes from
But he sure does come
I bet he is comin' for Danny C P!
And I don't know how he does it
But he sure does it good
I wonder how he does it for free
He gives em Mr. Scratch fever
Mr. Scratch Scratch fever
The first time they got it
It was just ten months ago
They got it from the MDB board
They went and see the Dr. and
He gave them the cure
I think instead, they got it some more
He gives em Mr. Scratch fever
Mr. Scratch fever
It's nothin dangerous
But they do feel pain
They got to ch-ch-change
You know you got it when you're going insane
It makes a grown man cryin' cryin'
It makes em piss the bed
He makes the truth purr with
The stroke of his mouse-hand
They know they gettin' it from Dr. Shades MD Beeee
They know just where to go
When they need their truth man
They know he does it for free
Daniel Peterson wrote:I would not and do not hesitate to publicly describe the witnesses testimonies as evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. I would not hesitate to do so in an academic gathering. Not even slightly. And, in fact, I've probably done so on a few occasions. (I'll have to think about it. I've done many academic presentations to non-LDS scholars, mostly on Islamic topics but some on Mormon topics.)
(emphasis added)
Wait a sec... He's "probably done so"??? Or he actually has? Is it---or should it be--striking that he cannot recall the last time he testified of his faith in front of "an academic gathering"? There is something extremely fishy and dodgy about his remarks here. What, after all, would be more damning for Mopologetics, academically speaking, then for the chief Mopologist to admit that he's embarrassed to discuss his views in a mainstream, secular academic setting? Ultimately, what we are seeing here is tantamount to an admission on DCP's part that he fears that his beliefs may compromise his academic standing.
Scratch are you looking for an occasion of DCP testifying his faith (in general) or giving he opinion that the witness testimonies are evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon at an academic conference? I'm a bit confused by what you wrote and what you quoted. (I enlarged the bits I though relevant).
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07