For antishock: Demonstrate the truth of this proposition...

[_christopher]

Any issues?

"deus ex machina"



If someone wants to believe, they will find a way or just back into the "deus ex machina" card. You cannot argue with unseen faith.


Chris <><

[_antishock8]

Any issues?

"deus ex machina"



If someone wants to believe, they will find a way or just back into the "deus ex machina" card. You cannot argue with unseen faith.


Chris <><

I understand that, however I just want to stick with what the Book of Mormon asserts.

[_cksalmon]

By "prove," I mean:

Construct an argument consisting of unambiguous and true premises the conclusion of which ("the Book of Mormon is not a true history") is necessarily entailed.

I'm going to take a poke at your premise based on the Jaredite Barges story.

All right.

We have:

- 8 small (up to the length of a tree, whatever kind of tree that may be), light-weight, ocean faring vessels that are part boat and part submarine

Here's a painting of the kinds of barges Joseph Smith would have seen and known:

[/img]http://www.nevillgallery.com/davidnapp/normalsize/dn16.jpg[img]

Here's a woodcut (?) of an Eerie canal barge Mr. Smith would have observed on many an occasion:

[/img]http://www.uh.edu/engines/erieboat.jpg[img]

As you can see the description of the barges in Ether fit nicely with these images circa Mr. Smith's time. The changes to the vessels would have been such that they are completely sealed, airtight, top, sides, and bottom; the barges would then have to be incredibly strong to withstand the strains of the ocean, both above and below the surface: waves, wind, torque, inversion*, pressure, and maybe a sea creature or two.

The barge is specifically designed to invert for whatever reason.

- 344 days of uninterrupted sea travel

- No ability to navigate *no sails, submarine, dependent on the elements for propulsion

- Numbers aren't provided, but each "small" and "light" barge the "size of a tree" must hold all provisions, flocks and herds, feed, people, water, human and animal waste, and breathable air

- Numbers in Jaredite party: Jared and his brother, and their families, and also the friends of Jared and his brother and their families

- Stones, touched by a god, illuminate, to whatever degree, the interior of the barges

-------- So, in short, we have the above-listed premise as being stated by the Book of Mormon. If, given the information we have above can be proven to be false, then the Book of Mormon is not true. Any issues? Addendums?

One quibble: Ether specifies that the barges were the "length of a tree," rather than the "size of a tree."

...

It would seem that you've essentially constructed an implication (P-->Q):

If (P) it is not true that the Jaredites completed a successful transoceanic voyage in their eight barges, then (Q) the Book of Mormon is not a true history.

But this just moves us back a single step. One must demonstrate (P) in order to entail (Q).

Chris

[_antishock8]

I would say that's an accurate assertion of my position. If the Jaredite barge story can proven to be false, then the Book of Mormon is not a true history. Are we in aggreement?

Also, your quibble is noted. It's a good catch.

[_Scottie]

One other minor quibble that I seem to recall hearing...

That the voyage was continuous. I seem to remember that it didn't mention continuous in the text? (But I'm too lazy to look it up)

[_antishock8]

One other minor quibble that I seem to recall hearing...

That the voyage was continuous. I seem to remember that it didn't mention continuous in the text? (But I'm too lazy to look it up)

"And thus they were driven forth, three hundred and forty and four days upon the water.", says verse 11. The verses leading up to that passage are very specific reference their travails. There is no indication they made landfall until they "... did land upon the shore of the promised land." That's in the sentence immediately following verse 11.

Again, I prefer to stick with the information the Book of Mormon provides.

[_Scottie]

One other minor quibble that I seem to recall hearing...

That the voyage was continuous. I seem to remember that it didn't mention continuous in the text? (But I'm too lazy to look it up)

"And thus they were driven forth, three hundred and forty and four days upon the water.", says verse 11. The verses leading up to that passage are very specific reference their travails. There is no indication they made landfall until they "... did land upon the shore of the promised land." That's in the sentence immediately following verse 11.

Again, I prefer to stick with the information the Book of Mormon provides.

Right, but it doesn't say continuous days. It's a small quibble, not worth arguing about. It still doesn't much help the plausibility of the story.

[_antishock8]

One other minor quibble that I seem to recall hearing...

That the voyage was continuous. I seem to remember that it didn't mention continuous in the text? (But I'm too lazy to look it up)

"And thus they were driven forth, three hundred and forty and four days upon the water.", says verse 11. The verses leading up to that passage are very specific reference their travails. There is no indication they made landfall until they "... did land upon the shore of the promised land." That's in the sentence immediately following verse 11.

Again, I prefer to stick with the information the Book of Mormon provides.

Right, but it doesn't say continuous days. It's a small quibble, not worth arguing about. It still doesn't much help the plausibility of the story.

I know the apologetic argument, that they might have island hopped their way across the ocean, but the prolem is the Book of Ether was very specific about their travel habits, stops, layovers, goings ons, and there was nothing between the 344 days on the water, and landing on the promised land. A lot of space was dedicated to provision gathering, construction, faith testing, etc... It would follow that if there were island hopping in the story it would have been listed.

Regardless. You're right, it doesn't help the story when deconstructed, but more importantly we have to address what the Book of Mormon gives us. It gives us:

And it came to pass that the wind did never cease to blow towards the promised land while they were upon the waters; and thus they were driven forth before the wind... And thus they were driven forth; and no monster of the sea could break them, neither whale that could mar them; and they did have light continually, whether it was above the water or under the water. And thus they were driven forth, three hundred and forty and four days upon the water. And they did land upon the shore of the promised land.

Clearly saving space wasn't an issue with the author of this piece what with the repeated use of "And thus they were driven forth". Continuity is clearly indicated until they made landfall.

Going back to my point, I'm forced to use only what the Book of Mormon provides.

[_cksalmon]

On the Nephi Project website, there is an articleby one
Captain Richard Rothery, Ret. on the plausibility of the Jaredite journey.

Rothery first appeals to his own authority:

Reading Ether, I could see that questions regarding the construction and design of the barges and all facets of the Jaredite voyage required a technical understanding not appreciated by the lay person. However, because my profession required constant 24/7 concentration, and my time at home 24/7 family, it was not until retirement that I really put my mind to the subject of proving that the Book of Mormon is logically fact… nothing far fetched. I knew it had to be; but was still a little elated when my calculations and designs proved positive. As I am probably one of very few if not the only person in the Church with the necessary qualifications to understand what we read in Ether about the barges and the voyage, I now want to let the world know that it could only be there by revelation and is therefore just another of hundreds of reasons the Church and Gospel are true and we are safely in His care so long as we do what is right.

He goes on to describe how the barge would have been constructed and even provides a sketch!

He ends with some hefty circular logic.

The successful transoceanic migrations of the Jaredites and others as depicted in the Book of Mormon scriptures are simply some of the hundreds of undeniable proofs of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as restored through the prophet Joseph Smith in these latter days.

Assumption 1: the Jaredites existed (that's a given)
Assumption 2: the Restoration is true
Assumption 3: the Book of Mormon is true
Assumption 4: the Jaredites' transoceanic voyage was successful, because the Book of Mormon states that it was
His conclusion: the successful voyage of the Jaredites is an undeniable proof of the Restoration (which was assumed to be true at the outset)

Rothery's logic is circular and badly mangled, however interesting his barge theory may be (has he built a prototype?).

Obviously, he finds the story of the Jaredite journey not just plausible, but--in some way unfathomable to me--he actually believes he has demonstrated its historical factuality.

I don't see how my (P) above can be demonstrated to be certainly true any more than I understand why Rothery believes he has proven (P) false.

Chris

[_cksalmon]

Going back to my point, I'm forced to use only what the Book of Mormon provides.

Based on "only what the Book of Mormon provides," can you conclusively demonstrate the veracity of the proposition "the Book of Mormon is not a true history?"

Chris