Others in the Book of Lehi

[_charity]

Not all apologists are created equal. Just because someone who is LDS makes some kind of statement, doesn't make him/her an apologist.

Show me a statement by Royal Skousen or Terryl Givens. Then I will think someone who knows has made a credible statement.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Hamblin is now suggesting that since the Maccabean Jews found an ancient book indicating that the Spartans were descendants of Abraham, this suggests that the Nephites might have conceived of "other" in non-modern categories. So, applying Hamblin's suggestion to the Nephite context, maybe when Nephi wrote that "it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations" he was actually thinking that the Mayans were descendants of his dad. After all, if the events of the Restoration were really a Restoration, Lehi probably had a secret harem of wives just like Joseph Smith. For all that Nephi knew, his dad could have propagated whole civilizations full of strange people who spoke a completely different language and had completely different beliefs and customs!

[_Runtu]

Not all apologists are created equal. Just because someone who is LDS makes some kind of statement, doesn't make him/her an apologist.

Show me a statement by Royal Skousen or Terryl Givens. Then I will think someone who knows has made a credible statement.

I'm just saying people on the other board have used that argument before. I don't consider Royal Skousen an apologist. He's done a nice job on the critical text, but that doesn't necessarily make him an apologist. And I have to say I am not all that familiar with Givens, other than his appearance in The Mormons.

[_charity]

I'm just saying people on the other board have used that argument before. I don't consider Royal Skousen an apologist. He's done a nice job on the critical text, but that doesn't necessarily make him an apologist. And I have to say I am not all that familiar with Givens, other than his appearance in The Mormons.

Dr. Givens is the author of "By the Hand of Mormon" as well as numerous other short pieces,and he has a new book coming out soon, "When Souls Had Wings" which is about the history of knowledge and thought on the pre-existence. He is a professor of literature at a University back east.

[_Runtu]

Dr. Givens is the author of "By the Hand of Mormon" as well as numerous other short pieces,and he has a new book coming out soon, "When Souls Had Wings" which is about the history of knowledge and thought on the pre-existence. He is a professor of literature at a University back east.

So how does being a professor of literature make one an apologist? I do know he's a "high talker" and enjoys fulminating on Mormon dance. Just kidding :)

I suppose one of these days I'll have to read his book.

[_charity]

Dr. Givens is the author of "By the Hand of Mormon" as well as numerous other short pieces,and he has a new book coming out soon, "When Souls Had Wings" which is about the history of knowledge and thought on the pre-existence. He is a professor of literature at a University back east.

So how does being a professor of literature make one an apologist? I do know he's a "high talker" and enjoys fulminating on Mormon dance. Just kidding :)

I suppose one of these days I'll have to read his book.

He can speak expertly on the Book of Mormon as literature. It often takes shots for being "bad literature." He can credibly speak to that issue.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

I'm just saying people on the other board have used that argument before. I don't consider Royal Skousen an apologist. He's done a nice job on the critical text, but that doesn't necessarily make him an apologist. And I have to say I am not all that familiar with Givens, other than his appearance in The Mormons.

Dr. Givens is the author of "By the Hand of Mormon" as well as numerous other short pieces,and he has a new book coming out soon, "When Souls Had Wings" which is about the history of knowledge and thought on the pre-existence. He is a professor of literature at a University back east.

He scrapped another book about how he could prove the Book of Mormon actually occurred. It was titled, "When Pigs have wings".

Reply to the OP, I thought Solomon Spaulding was the original author of the Book of Lehi.

[_Runtu]

He can speak expertly on the Book of Mormon as literature. It often takes shots for being "bad literature." He can credibly speak to that issue.

Then I'll definitely have to read his stuff. I have an MA in literature and literary theory, and I'm not convinced the Book of Mormon is great literature. Of course, I've been told many times by Dr. Peterson and others that it's not supposed to be great literature but is supposed to be a religious history.

[_John Larsen]

He can speak expertly on the Book of Mormon as literature. It often takes shots for being "bad literature." He can credibly speak to that issue.

Then I'll definitely have to read his stuff. I have an MA in literature and literary theory, and I'm not convinced the Book of Mormon is great literature. Of course, I've been told many times by Dr. Peterson and others that it's not supposed to be great literature but is supposed to be a religious history.

I really enjoyed his book By the Hand of Mormon. He didn't convince me that the book is great literature, but he did a good job in his book and he discusses some difficult issues. It is well written.

I don't think I would classify his work as apologetics though.

You should pick it up and read it.

John

[_Blixa]

If being a professor of literature at a University back east is all it takes to speak expertly and credibly on whether or not the Book of Mormon is good literature...