Possible Modern Source for the Book of Mormon

[_Dr Moore]

My overall feeling is that there is something more than cognitive word play going on in the Book of Mormon. If I believed scripture...specifically the Book of Mormon...to be nothing more than fictional then I wouldn't waste my time having discussions with others. It wouldn't be worth my time.

Well, I am just now reaching 5 years into studying the question without bias to my own emotions or the unreliable testimonies of others. I say unreliable because LDS leaders prove themselves unreliable and fallible all the time.

While there are some wonderfully inspiring passages in the Book of Mormon, I am now 100% convinced that it contains too much fiction and 19th century remixing to be an authentic historical record.

[_Themis]

By the way, thanks for the civil exchange. I appreciate that. Not as common as I would hope on this board.

I believe the meanest thing someone said was being a troll. That's hardly being very uncivil and I believe I have treated you civilly. My problem is you don't seem to really want to discuss the evidence either way. Even the stuff you think supports the Book of Mormon. I already know you are not interested in evidence against the Book of Mormon. You have made that quite clear over the years by never investigating both sides. That's what makes us different.

[_mentalgymnast]

I believe I have treated you civilly.

As do I. Thank you.

And don't take what I said in reference to you as any kind of an insult. It's just that I'm rather neutral in respect to you, not having any information and/or knowing a thing about you personally.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

I already know you are not interested in evidence against the Book of Mormon.

Believe me, I've seen it.

Regards,
MG

[_Themis]

I already know you are not interested in evidence against the Book of Mormon.

Believe me, I've seen it.

Regards,
MG

LOl Believe me you haven't. You already admit you don't know much and rely on reading apologetic material which means you don't get an accurate picture. You admit you don't know much of anything about DNA evidence which is in my opinion the most devastating to the Book of Mormon. Most don't since it can take some time to learn the basic science to get a basic understanding of the issue as it relates to Book of Mormon claims of a real people.

[_mentalgymnast]

My overall feeling is that there is something more than cognitive word play going on in the Book of Mormon. If I believed scripture...specifically the Book of Mormon...to be nothing more than fictional then I wouldn't waste my time having discussions with others. It wouldn't be worth my time.

Well, I am just now reaching 5 years into studying the question without bias to my own emotions or the unreliable testimonies of others.

Twenty-five years on my end.

...LDS leaders prove themselves unreliable and fallible all the time.

At times, yes they do.

While there are some wonderfully inspiring passages in the Book of Mormon, I am now 100% convinced that it contains too much fiction and 19th century remixing to be an authentic historical record.

That I am not convinced of. Blake Ostler's expansion theory:

https://soundcloud.com/user-914466958/0 ... t-source-1

https://www.timesandseasons.org/harchiv ... on-theory/

is worth a look if you haven't read/listened to his stuff.

http://blakeostler.com/

http://blakeostler.com/mormon_history.html

A lot of folks haven't even heard of him.

I've resolved to keep an open mind when it comes to the Book of Mormon and the underpinnings of Judeo-Christian faith.

That drives Themis nuts!

Regards,
MG

[_DoubtingThomas]

That I am not convinced of. Blake Ostler's expansion theory:

https://soundcloud.com/user-914466958/0 ... nt-source-

Why are you reading the theories of men? Remember our apostle said, "Excessive reliance on personal teachings or speculations may even draw us aside from concentrating on learning and efforts that will further our understanding and help us go forward on the covenant path.""

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... s?lang=eng

[_mentalgymnast]

I already know you are not interested in evidence against the Book of Mormon.

Believe me, I've seen it.

Believe me you haven't. You already admit you don't know much and rely on reading apologetic material which means you don't get an accurate picture. You admit you don't know much of anything about DNA evidence which is in my opinion the most devastating to the Book of Mormon.

I was looking into this stuff back before Matthew Roper (heard of him?) published his stuff:

https://scholarsarchive.BYU.edu/cgi/vie ... ontext=msr

I read Southerton's stuff back when he was still a Bishop in Australia.
Uncle Dale and his online publications.
Lighthouse ministry (Tanners).
Original LDS "alternate history" boards (ZLMB, mormon-l) in the nineties, and many readings/articles and some books (Carl Sagan for one) dealing with science and religion, etc.

I could go on. I've read both sides and in between. You can't come to grips with that. That's your issue.

I've been around the block at least as times than you if not more, I would wager. But I'm not going to argue back and forth on that.

Regards,
MG

[_DoubtingThomas]

I was looking into this stuff back before Matthew Roper (heard of him?) published his stuff:

https://scholarsarchive.BYU.edu/cgi/vie ... ontext=msr

wow dude you really don't care about what the apostles say.

[_mentalgymnast]

That I am not convinced of. Blake Ostler's expansion theory:

https://soundcloud.com/user-914466958/0 ... nt-source-

Why are you reading the theories of men? Remember our apostle said, "Excessive reliance on personal teachings or speculations may even draw us aside from concentrating on learning and efforts that will further our understanding and help us go forward on the covenant path.""

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... s?lang=eng

I agree with "our apostle".

Balance is key. Attending and being actively engaged in the church is important also...as I'm sure you know.

Regards,
MG