Racism and the Book of Mormon

[_Chap]

It is more likely that the Book of Mormon was filtered through Joseph's brain and so would naturally have included his prejudices and experiences. This would seem to me to most likely explain away all the anachronisms despite various accounts that would suggest the contrary.

Please excuse me, but I really do not see on what basis you feel entitled to say that "it is more likely" that the translation was delivered (if it was 'delivered' at all rather than manufactured) in a way that allowed Joseph Smith's personal prejudices to condition it.

A substantial group of the earliest witnesses give accounts of a quite different nature, stating that Smith read off the words he dictated from what he saw when he looked at the rocks in his hat. That group includes David Whitmer, Martin Harris, Joseph Knight, and William Smith. Though not all give details as full as these witnesses, all early testimony is consistent with what they describe:

http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb. ... djosephsay

You could have said "I am more comfortable with the idea that the Book of Mormon was filtered through Joseph's brain". But that does not make your view more likely, given the evidence against it.

[Schreech]

Please excuse me, but I really do not see on what basis you feel entitled to say that "it is more likely" that the translation was delivered (if it was 'delivered' at all rather than manufactured) in a way that allowed Joseph Smith's personal prejudices to condition it.

A substantial group of the earliest witnesses give accounts of a quite different nature, stating that Smith read off the words he dictated from what he saw when he looked at the rocks in his hat. That group includes David Whitmer, Martin Harris, Joseph Knight, and William Smith. Though not all give details as full as these witnesses, all early testimony is consistent with what they describe:

http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb. ... djosephsay

You could have said "I am more comfortable with the idea that the Book of Mormon was filtered through Joseph's brain". But that does not make your view more likely, given the evidence against it.

Chap, sigh. 'I' feel that the Book of Mormon is entirely from Joseph's brain. I do not believe it to be historical. What I'm trying to do is find out how LDS might see a way around it and still keep faith. What are the options available?

1. Nephites were racist, God is racist and the book is historical.
2. Nephites were racist, but God is not a racist and the book is historical.
3. Loose translation and the book is partly historical and partly 19th century which accounts for all anachronisms.
4. Joseph's creation and the book is not historical (but can still contain messages of value - Racism obviously not being included in the valuable message category)

I'm at no 4 because that is where all the evidence combined leads me. However I appreciate there are other views on this, and to be honest I am totally bamboozled by the mental gymnastics that need to be taken to make the evidence fit any other model than No. 4. I appreciate my logic may be faulty, just put it down to my lack of intelligence.

[_Chap]

Please excuse me, but I really do not see on what basis you feel entitled to say that "it is more likely" that the translation was delivered (if it was 'delivered' at all rather than manufactured) in a way that allowed Joseph Smith's personal prejudices to condition it.

A substantial group of the earliest witnesses give accounts of a quite different nature, stating that Smith read off the words he dictated from what he saw when he looked at the rocks in his hat. That group includes David Whitmer, Martin Harris, Joseph Knight, and William Smith. Though not all give details as full as these witnesses, all early testimony is consistent with what they describe:

http://www.mormonthink.com/transbomweb. ... djosephsay

You could have said "I am more comfortable with the idea that the Book of Mormon was filtered through Joseph's brain". But that does not make your view more likely, given the evidence against it.

Chap, sigh. 'I' feel that the Book of Mormon is entirely from Joseph's brain. I do not believe it to be historical. What I'm trying to do is find out how LDS might see a way around it and still keep faith. What are the options available?

1. Nephites were racist, God is racist and the book is historical.
2. Nephites were racist, but God is not a racist and the book is historical.
3. Loose translation and the book is partly historical and partly 19th century which accounts for all anachronisms.
4. Joseph's creation and the book is not historical (but can still contain messages of value - Racism obviously not being included in the valuable message category)

I'm at no 4 because that is where all the evidence combined leads me. However I appreciate there are other views on this.

Thanks for being so straightforward. I think you are in the best place on that list in terms of the historical evidence (or rather lack of it) relating to the existence of the peoples described in the Book of Mormon.

However, if the Book of Mormon is not historical, then we are faced with the problem that the elaborate structure of mutually supporting claims about how it was delivered are simply so false as to force us to conclude that fraud and delusion were both inseparable ingredients in its production.

Many books that are pure fiction contain uplifting messages of one kind or another. If that is what you feel you need, why not pick an uplifting fiction that is honest about being a fiction? Is it just that you were brought up to revere the Book of Mormon and the habit of doing so is just too strong to break?

[_Mary]

Thanks for being so straightforward. I think you are in the best place on that list in terms of the historical evidence (or rather lack of it) relating to the existence of the peoples described in the Book of Mormon.

However, if the Book of Mormon is not historical, then we are faced with the problem that the elaborate structure of mutually supporting claims about how it was delivered are simply so false as to force us to conclude that fraud and delusion were both inseparable ingredients in its production.

Many books that are pure fiction contain uplifting messages of one kind or another. If that is what you feel you need, why not pick an uplifting fiction that is honest about being a fiction? Is it just that you were brought up to revere the Book of Mormon and the habit of doing so is just too strong to break?

Chap, I left the church 20 years ago because I felt Joseph Smith was an absolute fraud and charlatan. I've tried to temper that view by trying to see the good that I experienced within Mormonism despite it being based on a fraud. To reclaim that part of 'my Mormonism' that I loved. The part where I followed Jesus of Nazareth and all that I felt he stood for - ie service, love, kindness, gentleness,etc. Why should the fact that I believe the church to be based on a fraud rob me of all that I had that was good?

by the way my latest book purchase was by Geza Vermes. Hope that pleases you!

I didn't want this thread to be personal, but am answering since you asked.

[_Chap]

Chap, I left the church 20 years ago because I felt Joseph Smith was an absolute fraud and charlatan. I've tried to temper that view by trying to see the good that I experienced within Mormonism despite it being based on a fraud. To reclaim that part of 'my Mormonism' that I loved. The part where I followed Jesus of Nazareth and all that I felt he stood for - ie service, love, kindness, gentleness,etc. Why should the fact that I believe the church to be based on a fraud rob me of all that I had that was good?

...

No reason at all. Goodness is a quality easily separable from religious belief, and in some cases it appears not to be present when the belief is definitely present.

Since so much of the Book of Mormon is an imitation of the Bible, it does not surprise me that it should repeat some of the messages that main-stream Christians (of whom I am no longer one) are familiar with from Biblical sources.

[_Tobin]

Okay, just trying to follow on and seek evidence that Lehi may have come over to the Americas with 'racist' ideas already in place (based on skin colour).

I found this book (which I haven't read, but have spent some time checking the reviews)

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7641.html

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Curse-Ham-C ... inw_strp_1

In it Goldenberg argues that there is a preference for one's own skin tone, but beyond that there is no evidence for black Africans being associated with slavery or a 'curse'. The Semitic evidence is just not there from the period in question.

So to me it goes back to a 'loose translation'. It is more likely that the Book of Mormon was filtered through Joseph's brain and so would naturally have included his prejudices and experiences. This would seem to me to most likely explain away all the anachronisms despite various accounts that would suggest the contrary.

I'm quite prepared to believe that there is good in the Book of Mormon, that there are good messages there, but there are certainly bad messages also, and I would put the blame for that on Joseph rather than ancient Israelites in matters concerning race.

LOL

The thought processses you had to go through to make this leap is staggering.

So, let me get this straight, if Lehi, a Semite, did not have a tradition of something that made him and his descendents incapable of something and unlikely to do it at all?!? ROFL

They didn't have a tradition of making ocean going ships, so let's check that off the list too while you are at it and the Book of Mormon is done. That is pretty hilarious. The Book of Mormon is about human beings who are FULLY capable of doing and being any dang thing they want and as nasty and mean to each other as they want too. If we are capable of being racist today, as advanced as we are, I'm sure they were fully able to be racist back then as well.

[_Mary]

The thought processses you had to go through to make this leap is staggering.

So, let me get this straight, if Lehi, a Semite, did not have a tradition of something that made him and his descendents incapable of something and unlikely to do it at all?!? ROFL

They didn't have a tradition of making ocean going ships, so let's check that off the list too while you are at it and the Book of Mormon is done. That is pretty hilarious. The Book of Mormon is about human beings who are FULLY capable of doing and being any dang thing they want and as nasty and mean to each other as they want too. If we are capable of being racist today, as advanced as we are, I'm sure they were fully able to be racist back then as well.

Sadly Tobin, no more ridiculous than you proposing that (if I read you rightly) the Nephites were racist, that they assigned that racism to God, and in so doing Joseph Smith, Brigham Young (in particular) and then every prophet up until 1978 instituted and upheld a destructive and 'racist' view of our black brothers and sisters to the extent that blacks were not deemed 'worthy' to enter the temple, or to participate in priesthood. Both of which are considered essential in Mormon Doctrine for entrance to the highest degree of glory.

That racist theology being so pervasive that Randy Bott in 2012 can still express his 'racist' opinions to the news media.

That's one shed load of racist practices and beliefs and all based on various Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price passages, and interestingly (as I have said before) 18th century ideas on the curse of ham/cain as being a 'black skin' and taught and used to justify the slave trade. Itself a horrible and unchristian practice, which the Quakers (and not Joseph Smith) quickly recognised as such.

There is no evidence in Israel at the time Lehi was supposed to have left, of any doctrine, practice or belief that Black Africans or dark skin was a curse from God. That is a thoroughly modern (17th Century) invention. There is evidence that black African races were known to various peoples at that time as is shown in Egyptian Art for instance. Slavery was based around the spoils of war and being unable to pay off a debt, not around the colour of one's skin.

[_why me]

Chap, sigh. 'I' feel that the Book of Mormon is entirely from Joseph's brain. I do not believe it to be historical. What I'm trying to do is find out how LDS might see a way around it and still keep faith. What are the options available?

Please tell us all how he wrote it? And don't forget the head in the hat.

[_why me]

There is no evidence in Israel at the time Lehi was supposed to have left, of any doctrine, practice or belief that Black Africans or dark skin was a curse from God. That is a thoroughly modern (17th Century) invention. There is evidence that black African races were known to various peoples at that time as is shown in Egyptian Art for instance. Slavery was based around the spoils of war and being unable to pay off a debt, not around the colour of one's skin.

Are we now dealing with africans now? I thought that we were dealing with people from the middle east. We know that in the US there were slaves of black skin. But the indians had "red" skin or brown skin. Not black skin.

The jews were racist even at the time of Christ. Just ask the people who had to live around them. The chosen people are the chosen people.

[_Drifting]

LOL

The thought processses you had to go through to make this leap is staggering.

So, let me get this straight, if Lehi, a Semite, did not have a tradition of something that made him and his descendents incapable of something and unlikely to do it at all?!? ROFL

They didn't have a tradition of making ocean going ships, so let's check that off the list too while you are at it and the Book of Mormon is done. That is pretty hilarious. The Book of Mormon is about human beings who are FULLY capable of doing and being any dang thing they want and as nasty and mean to each other as they want too. If we are capable of being racist today, as advanced as we are, I'm sure they were fully able to be racist back then as well.

Tobin, do you believe that The Book of Mormon is a true historical record of events?