Dan Vogel versus the late Ted Chandler

[_Tobin]

Well, when the day arrives when we know where the actual hill Cumorah really was, then we'll probably find artifacts. It is still a silly point though. You aren't going to become Jewish because we have artifacts proving there was an ancient state of Israel are you?

Here you go:
http://www.hillcumorah.org/cumorah.php

This is the one Joe was talking about.

Fascinating. I'd like you to provide any quote where Joseph Smith or the Angel Moroni directly referred to Mormon Hill as the Hill Cumorah. I'll give you a hint, there are none. This is just another example of the infantile and unresearched material coming from a Mormon critic I'm afraid.

[_Bret Ripley]

You aren't going to become Jewish because we have artifacts proving there was an ancient state of Israel are you?

[_The Erotic Apologist]

You aren't going to become Jewish because we have artifacts proving there was an ancient state of Israel are you?

[_Bret Ripley]

Well, when the day arrives when we know where the actual hill Cumorah really was, then we'll probably find artifacts. It is still a silly point though. You aren't going to become Jewish because we have artifacts proving there was an ancient state of Israel are you?

Here you go:
http://www.hillcumorah.org/cumorah.php

This is the one Joe was talking about.

There is precious little room for doubt. Oliver Cowdery wrote:

I must now give you some description of the place where, and the manner in which these records were deposited.

You are acquainted with the mail road from Palmyra, Wayne Co. to Canandaigua, Ontario Co. N. Y. and also, as you pass from the former to the latter place, before arriving at the little village of Manchester, say from three to four, or about four miles from Palmyra...

At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height ... here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed.

By turning to the 529th and 530th pages of the Book of Mormon you will read Mormon's account of the last great struggle of his people, as they were encamped round this hill Cumorah.

(Oliver Cowdery, Letter VII., To W. W. Phelps, Esq., Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate, Vol. 1 No. 10, July 1835)

http://contentdm.lib.BYU.edu/cdm/ref/collection/NCMP1820-1846/id/7126

[_Tobin]

There is precious little room for doubt. Oliver Cowdery wrote:
<snip>

And how would Oliver Cowdery know? Are you now claiming he knew more than Joseph Smith or what an Angel of God knew? I really can't believe you'd offer someone's conjecture as proof of anything. Again, just another ridiculous argument from a Mormon critic.

[_bcuzbcuz]

My adult Mormon children would respond with, “Dad, that’s because we are asked to accept the Book of Mormon on faith, and to plant the seed unto it grows into a testimony.”

Yes, I've heard that before, or something very similar.

In England there was a Roman presence for a little under four hundred years. Roman ruins and artifacts abound. In some cities that were originally Roman, residents can't put a shovel in their gardens without turning up some sort of Roman artifact. I had an Uncle that owned a farm on land that was once a Roman fort. He had shoe boxes full of Roman coins that he found after every plowing.

The lack of evidence in the Americas of Book of Mormon history is truly damning. You are left with only a couple of conclusions.

God needs to test faith and somehow made all those artifacts go away (insecure?).

The Book is not true.

It's not logical to assume that God would dictate a new gospel and joke about it's history.

My wife and I just got back from two weeks in Tunisia where we visited and took literally thousands of pictures of Roman amphitheaters, mosaics, villas and baths. Roman artifacts are literally scattered on the ground for the observant viewer. I have similar Roman finds from Turkey, Crete, Barcelona, and Egypt. The Romans were very serious about their love of spectacle and invested huge amounts of resources and time into building every where they conquered.

Even a cursory reading of the BM indicates that thousands and even millions of people supposedly lived somewhere....but left absolutely no evidence that they were there. The BM talks about animals and plants that did not exist in the Americas and neglects any mention of the plants and animals that are and were found there.

Roman coins and even their crude hobnob nails for their boots are scattered throughout Europe, irrespective of climate or soils acidity, and yet no metals of the BM can be found, anywhere in the Americas.

To Tobin: Just point me in the right direction and I'll get out my metal detector and find all the swords of the Nephite-Lamanite battles.

[_Bret Ripley]

There is precious little room for doubt. Oliver Cowdery wrote:
<snip>

And how would Oliver Cowdery know? Are you now claiming he knew more than Joseph Smith or what an Angel of God knew?

If Cowdery didn't get it from Smith (or perhaps an Angel), the alternative seems to be that the second highest-ranking person in the church was just making stuff up. At any rate, here is where you lay out your evidence, presumably statements made by Joseph Smith and Angels, that show that Smith's friend and confidant Second Elder Cowdery didn't know what he was talking about:

I really can't believe you'd offer someone's conjecture as proof of anything.

And here is where you present evidence that Cowdery's statements were meant as "conjecture":



While we're at it, maybe you could also explain the reason for your conjecture that there are two Cumorahs.

Again, just another ridiculous argument from a Mormon critic.

Nota bene: lending credence to an in-context quotation of one of the most important early church leaders amounts to a "ridiculous argument of a Mormon critic."

Gee, Tobin, why so tense?

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Seriously, what keeps the Church from claiming the Book of Mormon took place in a parallel universe? Why would a parallel universe theory for the Book of Mormon be any nuttier than any of the other dozen or so theories floating around out there?

[_vessr]

Seriously, what keeps the Church from claiming the Book of Mormon took place in a parallel universe? Why would a parallel universe theory for the Book of Mormon be any nuttier than any of the other dozen or so theories floating around out there?

I started my thread seeking information about Dan Vogel’s disagreement with Ted Chandler over the translation process, i.e., whether the process involved dictation or copying from another source. I appreciate the responses.

In certain cases, however, I believe that the discussion got derailed. Let me try to get it back on track:

1. I found the posts I was asking about—over two hundred pages of posts in 2007 that were focused, in material part at least, on Dan’s disagreement with Ted’s alleged evidence that the original Book of Mormon manuscript was copied from another source and not dictated.

2. I now understand that Ted may have been seeking evidence to support the Spaulding theory, while Dan was countering that.

3. I now understand that Dan didn’t believe in the Book of Mormon’s divine origins just as Ted hadn’t; but his belief was based on a theory of Smith’s fraud separate from and unrelated to the Spaulding theory.

4. Why did it matter to Ted and Dan whether or not the manuscript was copied or dictated? Couldn’t reasonable minds conclude that the manuscript was fraudulent regardless?

5. As my original search was seeking to understand how so many New Testament passages ended up in the Book of Mormon, I also wondered whether Mormon apologists today have concluded that parts of the Bible were copied from the Bible (i.e. using the Bible during the transaltion process), rather than given to Smith by revelation. Originally, their position was that eyewitnesses to the translation process didn’t see Smith using any documents at all while looking into his hat and, therefore, he never did copy portions of the Bible into the Book of Mormon.

If I misunderstand any of the above, I would appreciate being corrected. If anyone has additional, current information on these subjects, I would appreciated that also.

THANKS

[_The Erotic Apologist]

4. Why did it matter to Ted and Dan whether or not the manuscript was copied or dictated? Couldn’t reasonable minds conclude that the manuscript was fraudulent regardless?

I’m pretty sure Dan would be amenable towards explaining his position on the importance of translation vs dictation. Have you contacted him? In any case, I would readily agree that reasonable minds can and have concluded the Book of Mormon manuscript is fraudulent, i.e. not divine. If Dan, for whatever reason, is not forthcoming, you might try attacking the problem from a direction other than the process of translation. There are many avenues of research open to you.