Doctor Steuss wrote:Sorry, didn't know that my comment would be such a derailment. I guess ignore it and simply use this one instead (hopefully this won't cause the same):
Doctor Steuss wrote:One of the things I find “odd” is the highly refined Christology prior to the incarnation.
Do you mean that the Book of Mormon prophets knew way too much about Christ and his mission before his birth? Kind of like Joseph had built a time machine, traveled back to the days of the nephites, and then told them what to write?
Here's another conflated verse:
4 Nephi 1:6 6 And thus did the thirty and eighth year pass away, and also the thirty and ninth, and forty and first, and the forty and second, yea, even until forty and nine years had passed away, and also the fifty and first, and the fifty and second; yea, and even until fifty and nine years had passed away.
In summation the verse says 59 years went by.
And yet another reason to not be surprised that Joseph Smith "dictated" the "translation" without notes. If this isn't a big fat "ummmmmmm", then I don't know what is.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
And Nephi didn't have a build a boat big enough to take two of some kinds of animals, 7 of others, all the food to feed them for a year. He just had to get a small family across the Atlantic. No big.
You really believe that the story of Noah is true?
I believe there was a man named Noah, and he was a propeht and he built a boat and put some animals on it. I don't know if all the details of the flood described in the Bible are true, such as the extent of the flood, world wide, or just the world as Noah knew. That kind of thing.
Doctor Steuss wrote:One of the things I find “odd” is the highly refined Christology prior to the incarnation.
Yeah, that's totally odd. Mormons rationalize that with the arguments that Adam and Eve, and the early Patriarchs actually had the full gospel and knew about Jesus, only the rest of the Israelites didn't know it because they weren't righteous enough, and so were stuck with the lesser law.
I find that very unconvincing. You're right that the whole Christianity thing in 600 BC is very incredible.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Sethbag wrote:Out of curiosity, is there anyone who has replied in this thread so far who hasn't actually read the Book of Mormon? I'm trying to figure out where Steuss is coming from on this one. At least the exmos and still-members-in-name-only critics here I would assume have read it before.
Do you disagree with my comment that many who criticize it, and many who believe in it have never actually read it?
Ah, I must have misunderstood how it was being asked. You're probably right, actually. I had mission companions who'd never read the whole Book of Mormon all the way through, and I'm quite sure a lot of anti-Mormons, especially those coming from a nevermo background like Evangelical Christians, probably never read it from cover to cover.
This was a perfectly valid observation of yours, and I'm sorry I derailed it. For some reason I thought you were insinuating that a lot of the criticism of the Book of Mormon on this board comes from people who never read it. My mistake.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Sethbag wrote:Ah, I must have misunderstood how it was being asked. You're probably right, actually. I had mission companions who'd never read the whole Book of Mormon all the way through, and I'm quite sure a lot of anti-Mormons, especially those coming from a nevermo background like Evangelical Christians, probably never read it from cover to cover.
This was a perfectly valid observation of yours, and I'm sorry I derailed it. For some reason I thought you were insinuating that a lot of the criticism of the Book of Mormon on this board comes from people who never read it. My mistake.
The misunderstanding was on my part. When I went and re-read my comments, I had to remind myself where I was coming from. It wasn't written very clearly.
I was one of those “never read the Book of Mormon” people for a long time (at least in regards to a cover-to-cover read). I think it was last year when I finished my first cover-to-cover read. Right now, I’m working my way through the original 1830 version (under suggestion from Don Bradley). It’s definitely changing some of my views… for better or worse.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
Yes. The whole jaredite in a barge scenario is odd to me.
Another weird thing about the Book of Mormon are the faceless females. There are only six listed by name and three of those are from the Bible (Sariah, Mary, Eve, Sarah, Abish, and Isabel). The Bible looks like a feminist rally compared to the Book of Mormon. The women are identified typically as a possession to a man and they spend a good deal of their time murmuring, complaining, pleading.
"I think one of the great mysteries of the gospel is that anyone still believes it." Sethbag, MADB, Feb 22 2008
Doctor Steuss wrote:IF the Book of Mormon is authentic, a lot of Joseph made its way into the pages in my opinion (there are aspects that mirror 19th Century American Protestantism a bit too much to have been “Nephite” in my view).
Dude, Joseph writing himself into the pages of the Book of Mormon is a large part of my reasoning for rejecting it, especially in light of the aspects you mention.
Doctor Steuss wrote:IF the Book of Mormon is authentic, a lot of Joseph made its way into the pages in my opinion (there are aspects that mirror 19th Century American Protestantism a bit too much to have been “Nephite” in my view).
Dude, Joseph writing himself into the pages of the Book of Mormon is a large part of my reasoning for rejecting it, especially in light of the aspects you mention.
It's painfully obvious to me.
Congratulations. Want a cookie?
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski