Radio Free Mormon: Magic and the Book of Mormon (We Need Dan Vogel's Help!)

[_moksha]

It is one of Blixa's favorite books and she has read it over 100 times.

Brodie was a fantastic writer.

That would impress even the most diehard Tolkien addicts. :biggrin:

[_Shulem]

Fawn Brodie included a large appendix in No Man Knows My History.

https://archive.org/details/NoManKnowsM ... y/mode/1up

Apparently there is a section on the Book of Abraham to include prints of the Facsimiles.

Do you think Fawnbaby knew the name of the king in Facsimile No. 3?

Between Brodie and Vogel, I got my work cut out for me -- good time reading.

[_Shulem]

Treasure Seeking
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... g?lang=eng

Joseph Smith’s critics often tried to disparage him by calling him a money digger or a treasure seeker.

A spade is a spade. One who digs for money IS a money digger. One who digs for treasure IS a treasure seeker. Right?

Rather than deny the charge, Joseph acknowledged in his official history that Josiah Stowell had hired him in 1825 to assist in a treasure-seeking venture in northern Pennsylvania.

It's kind of hard to deny having been involved with something when you've been convicted in a court of law. You're damn right he "acknowledged" his "TREASURE-SEEKING" venture because he was a treasure seeker!

“Seeing” and “seers” were part of the culture in which Joseph Smith grew up.

You mean to say that Joe Smith and his loony father WERE the very people that contributed to that culture insomuch as they helped MAKE the culture!

Some people in the early 19th century believed it was possible for gifted individuals to see lost objects by means of material objects such as stones. Joseph Smith and his family, like many around them, accepted these familiar folk practices.

Some people believed, what? What you really mean to say is that Joe Smith and his loony father believed they could see lost objects with stones and practiced this belief for years on end! Yeah, these folk practices cult magic was wholly embraced by the loony Smith family.

How about this:

Tell us ALL about the treasure seeking venture! References, please. Give us all the DIRTY details. Do tell all.

You stoopid Mormons. You're all full of crap. Sugar coating adulterous Joe Smith doesn't make him sweet. He was a liar and a cheat.

[_Shulem]

I frequently fell into many foolish errors

Please note that Smith confesses that he FREQUENTLY fell into foolish errors. In others words, Smith was playing the fool on a frequent basis and the errors of his ways were frequent. Joe was a fool and he admits it. His foolish ways were frequently steeped in error choosing to live that kind of life because it suited him.

and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature

Oh the weakness of YOUTH! Yes, blame it on being young. Blame it on the human nature of just being young. Blaming your character flaws on being young is an excuse.

which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations,

Oh, so you were led into divers temptations by SATAN? You confess to being led and being strung along by the devil in being tempted to commit all kinds of juicy sins. Do tell us all about your sins, Joe. I want to know.

offensive in the sight of God.

Oh, so your sins were offensive to God, were they? Really, are you sure you're not just exaggerating, Joe? Do tell us exactly what those SINS were so we can examine them under the light. I want to know all about your offenses.

In making this confession,

CONFESSION. Are you still feeling guilty, Joe? It sounds like you're simply trying to cover your ass and admit to a little wrong doing, right?

no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins.

Really? So what were those SINS exactly, Joe? Tell me the juicy details and then I can judge whether they are great or not. Did you bang a girl behind the barn? Did you fleece someone of their money by lying about your ability to see treasure in a stone? Just what did you do?

A disposition to commit such was never in my nature.

I think you're just trying to talk yourself out of it, Joe. Your justifying yourself in order to make yourself look good. Tell us exactly what those sins were so we can judge. I think it was in your disposition to do all kinds of devious things because that's why you did them!

But I was guilty of levity

BUT? If IF and BUTS were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas, Joe. You're justifying yourself in your sins. You know, a little levity goes a long way. There is a little levity and there is a lot of levity. Do tell us all about your sins, Joe.

and sometimes associated with jovial company,

Sometimes? I think you're lying, now. Earlier you said you "FREQUENTLY" fell into foolish errors which means you must have frequently been around "jovial" company doing all kinds of foolish things. I want to know all about those activities, Joe. You're guilty, and you know it!

[_Dan Vogel]

I listened to RFM’s theory about a text or notes being in the hat. As I mentioned in the introduction to my biography on Joseph Smith, I too dabbled in slight of hand and stage magic as a teenager and on my mission. I was known as the Mission Magician. I understand RFM’s logic about the hat being unnecessary because it is an unnecessary element in the trick. If a magician could really cut a person in half, he/she wouldn’t need a box. However, RFM also understands that magicians don’t like repeating their tricks because then the observer(s) will know what to look for. I believe this applies to the speculated text-in-hat-theory.

I’m not saying that it could never happen the way RFM suggests, but I seriously doubt it could be the method Joseph Smith relied on. Too many angles; sometimes the room was full of people moving about in the room. Smuggling the tiny text into the hat and changing pages constantly is a problem.

The hat wasn’t introduced as part of the translation trick, but was part of his practice as a treasure seer. So it wasn’t superfluous like a magic box.

The text of the Book of Mormon bears evidence that it was an oral text, rather than a written one. Dan Wees and I talked about this aspect of the Book of Mormon on Facebook a couple of years ago. He pointed out that “a tell-tale sign that Joseph Smith was dictating is ‘backtracking,’ as he needed to correct/modify/clarify what he had previously stated.” One example:

“And now, my son, this was the ministry unto which ye were called, to declare these glad tidings unto this people, to prepare their minds; or rather that salvation might come unto them, that they may prepare the minds of their children to hear the word at the time of his coming” (Alma 39:16).

Joseph Smith had a penchant for digression as he groped for words and a thread of thought for his largely impromptu dictation of the Book of Mormon. In this example, when he finally gets back to the original thought it doesn’t quite fit. Alma 16:16-19—

“[A] And it came to pass that Alma and Amulek,
[...came over into the land of Zarahemla]

[1] Amulek having forsaken all his gold, and his silver, and his precious things, which was in the land of Ammonihah, for the word of God,
[2] he being rejected by those which were once his friends, and also by his father and his kindred;
[3] therefore, after Alma having established the Church at Sidom,
[4] seeing a great check,
[5] yea, seeing that the people were checked as to the pride of their hearts,
[6] and began to humble themselves before God,
[7] and began to assemble themselves together at their sanctuaries to worship God before the altar,
[8] watching and praying continually,
[9] that they might be delivered from Satan, and from death, and from destruction:

Now as I said, Alma having seen all these things, therefore he took Amulek and came over to the land of Zarahemla, and took him to his own house, and did administer unto him in his tribulations, and strengthened him in the Lord.

And thus ended the tenth year of the reign of the Judges over the people of Nephi.”

This is a huge mess that might take more than a rearrangement of sentences to fix.


As far as the fear of being destroyed kept people from looking into the hat because the stone was in it: David Whitmer said he looked but couldn’t see anything. Harris said he was afraid to look because he would want to see God, and no man could see God and live. Nevertheless, he switched the stone in the hat to test Joseph Smith. So I don’t think that would have kept people from looking into the hat.

[_consiglieri]

Thanks for weighing in, Dan!

I think you make a fair point about the digressions in the text being a sign of oral transmission. But what about those parts that evince a complexity beyond the normal ability to dictate without some sort of written preparation? Like my analysis of 3 Nephi 11-27? I think something more than pure dictation is going on in places like this. I think we have oral dictation. I think we have reading from prewritten texts like the Bible. And I think there was something in between in some places. The use of or reference to unpublished writings.

I think the text suggests at least these three methods.

[_moksha]

Do oral ramblings lend themselves to chiasmus or real-world bullseyes like Nahom*, Moroni, Cumorah, the extensive quotations from Isaiah, or the place names from the Vern Holley maps?

*

[_Shulem]

Thanks for weighing in, Dan!

I think you make a fair point about the digressions in the text being a sign of oral transmission. But what about those parts that evince a complexity beyond the normal ability to dictate without some sort of written preparation? Like my analysis of 3 Nephi 11-27? I think something more than pure dictation is going on in places like this. I think we have oral dictation. I think we have reading from prewritten texts like the Bible. And I think there was something in between in some places. The use of or reference to unpublished writings.

I think the text suggests at least these three methods.

Many thanks to Dan the man, too. And you are certainly welcome to say more, as much as you like. I'll be watching your videos with keen interest and am slowly digesting your book -- reading some sentences/paragraphs over and over.

BUT, I have to second consiglieri's point about there being more than dictation going on with the Book of Mormon narrative. The first thing that popped in my mind was the Nephite money system of coins and weights. I no longer have my notes on that particular but as I recall it would be hard to make that up out of thin air by simply dictating through the terminology and math. Isaiah is another example whereby script was copied and slightly altered. The fact that there is a running calendar internal to the Book of Mormon also suggests that at a minimum the scribal manuscript was carefully maintained and reviewed in order to keep the story consistent and on track.

I think there is more than just oral dictation going on with the makings of the Book of Mormon. Perhaps a combination whereby Smith did invent stories throughout his novel but carefully crafted prewritten script was used to fill in other areas.

Let's keep this matter an open book. More discoveries pertaining the making of the Book of Mormon will be realized as we combine our efforts in wanting to understand and know what really happened. It's inevitable that realization will unfold before our eyes in our day of enlightenment and as the human race shifts into new understandings. Covid 19, I suppose, is going to be a blessing in disguise as it helps the human race come together and be more AS ONE.

Great job on your podcasts, RFM! Woohooo!!!

[_Shulem]

He pointed out that “a tell-tale sign that Joseph Smith was dictating is ‘backtracking,’ as he needed to correct/modify/clarify what he had previously stated.”

Yes, that is something to consider. There are several glaring cases throughout the Book of Mormon that make this case in point. As an apologist, I used to think that they were proof in showing that the ancient prophet was etching his words in gold and was kind of stumbling over what he was saying and correcting it with his sharp point scribbling into gold leaf. It does indicate a thought process in action wherein modification was taking place in real time and that the original was repeated by Joseph Smith in translation.

[_Chap]

...
The text of the Book of Mormon bears evidence that it was an oral text, rather than a written one. Dan Wees and I talked about this aspect of the Book of Mormon on Facebook a couple of years ago. He pointed out that “a tell-tale sign that Joseph Smith was dictating is ‘backtracking,’ as he needed to correct/modify/clarify what he had previously stated.” One example:
...
Joseph Smith had a penchant for digression as he groped for words and a thread of thought for his largely impromptu dictation of the Book of Mormon. In this example, when he finally gets back to the original thought it doesn’t quite fit.

That kind of thing leapt out at me when as a Nevermo I began to read parts of the Book of Mormon.

Earlier on in this thread we discussed the evidence of the 'in other words ...' passages, which also point to Smith having to get himself out of a mess created by having dictated stuff that either did not make sense or conveyed a wrong impression and had to be corrected:

http://mormondiscussions.com/viewtopic. ... 0#p1223740

Remember these words from Fitzgerald's not very literal translation of Omar Khayyam's poem ?

The moving finger writes; and, having writ, moves on: nor all thy piety nor wit shall lure it back to cancel half a line, nor all thy tears wash out a word of it.

Well, Smith often tried his best to find a way round that ...