BoM "in a different realm"

[Hagoth]

I was listening to the Backyard Professor's response to the people who claim to have found Nephi's temple in Mexico (spoiler: they didn't). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mkU532iCXg

The main presenter mentioned that, unlike most people, he doesn't need any evidence for the Book of Mormon, and he's fine with the notion that it happened in "a different realm." I find this very interesting because I have been predicting that people would start to promote the idea that the BoM is just as true if it didn't actually take place in normal reality, but in some sort of alternate history or parallel universe. Think how conveniently that would relieve believers of that nagging feeling like there should be empirical, or even logical, support for the BoM's historicity.

Has anybody else heard anything along these lines?

[Linked]

This perspective was slapped down pretty hard by Oaks in the opening of a FARMS dinner speech in 1993 - https://rsc.byu.edu/historicity-latter- ... ook-mormon.

Some who term themselves believing Latter-day Saints are advocating that Latter-day Saints should “abandon claims that [the Book of Mormon] is a historical record of the ancient peoples of the Americas.” [2] They are promoting the feasibility of reading and using the Book of Mormon as nothing more than a pious fiction with some valuable contents. These practitioners of so-called “higher criticism” raise the question of whether the Book of Mormon, which our prophets have put forward as the preeminent scripture of this dispensation, is fact or fable—history or just a story.

The historicity—historical authenticity—of the Book of Mormon is an issue so fundamental that it rests first upon faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, which is the first principle in this, as in all other matters.

He spends the rest of the talk saying that it's on non-believers to prove that there weren't Nephites — good luck with that .

But that was a while ago and the advances in DNA research and the internet may have forced a shift. (I've posted about this speech before, sorry for the repeat...)

[Hagoth]

Thanks Linked. I don't remember you posting this before. Good stuff

He spends the rest of the talk saying that it's on non-believers to prove that there weren't Nephites — good luck with that .

I'll get to that as soon as I'm finished wrapping up my iron clad no Easter Bunny proof.

Oaks has the critical thinking horsepower of a nematode. But I agree with him about the Book of Mormon; it is either historical or it isn't. Until Mr. Oaks can prove that there were Nephites, logic compels me to stick with the latter.

[Hagoth]

Ha! I just noticed this from Moksha on another thread:

Sooner or later the apologists will adopt the suggestion that all the events and people existed on Earth 2. "It really is true", but it occurred in another part of reality and not our planet.

The Saints will not have to feel so preposterous when they describe their religion to their non-member friends.

[Linked]

Oaks has the critical thinking horsepower of a nematode. But I agree with him about the Book of Mormon; it is either historical or it isn't. Until Mr. Oaks can prove that there were Nephites, logic compels me to stick with the latter.

His takes are epistemologically violent, any non-indoctrinated seeker of truth would be angry with his comments. I first read this talk as a believer in a religion class at BYU, all I thought then was that this was a bit heavy for a 2 credit-hour religion class. It's funny how much more meaningful it is now.

This bit is choice. Claiming that we have tons of evidence for the Book of Mormon, so we should ignore the areas where there is a lack of evidence because it's basically a draw. And we have the spirit. And it's too complicated to really get to the bottom of it anyway. And if you disagree then you are the one who is being intellectually dishonest, no take backs!

Any more spaghetti to throw against the wall?

Honest investigators will conclude that there are so many evidences that the Book of Mormon is an ancient text that they cannot confidently resolve the question against its authenticity, despite some unanswered questions that seem to support the negative determination. In that circumstance, the proponents of the Book of Mormon can settle for a draw or a hung jury on the question of historicity and take a continuance until the controversy can be retried in another forum.

In fact, it is our position that secular evidence can neither prove nor disprove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Its authenticity depends, as it says, on a witness of the Holy Spirit. Our side will settle for a draw, but those who deny the historicity of the Book of Mormon cannot settle for a draw. They must try to disprove its historicity—or they seem to feel a necessity to do this—and in this they are unsuccessful because even the secular evidence, viewed in its entirety, is too complex for that.

On topic, I don't think the church can endorse an Earth 2 version, it's just too far out there. But it's hard not to get to that point as a believer who is also a truth seeker; it's a decent explanation if you are determined that the church is true and also thinking about things like a metaverse or reality as a simulation.

[Hagoth]

Honest investigators will conclude that there are so many evidences that the Book of Mormon is an ancient text...

I would love to see the church build a museum to house all of those evidences. I suspect the displays would just be walls of text in multiple choice format. Honest investigators would say, "now, wait a minute..."

In fact, it is our position that secular evidence can neither prove nor disprove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

Well, I'm half in agreement there. There is no actual evidence to support the BoM. There is only the illusion of evidence because people like Oaks keep saying it exists. I'm talking about empirical evidence here, the kind that Oaks calls secular. Hebraisms don't count. Those found in the BoM also exist in the Bible. Chiasmus doesn't count. It can be found everywhere, including in books that the church considers fraudulent (e.g. supposed translations by James Strang). Show me a single distinctively Nephite artifact.

How about a museum in SLC that shows side-by-side "secular" evidence of the Nephites alongside another ancient culture of similar size and antiquity, say the Etruscans or Maya. Of course, you couldn't build a museum large enough to house the material evidence for those cultures. On the other hand, a broom closet would suffice for the Nephites, without displacing the brooms. And I would love to see Oaks conduct a tour of that museum.

[moksha]

I wonder if such terms as Quantum Mormonism or even Schrödinger's Mormonism might start appearing in modern literature.

Mormonism can be either true or false depending on whether it occurs in the presence of a believer or non-believer.

[Just This Guy]

The main presenter mentioned that, unlike most people, he doesn't need any evidence for the Book of Mormon, and he's fine with the notion that it happened in "a different realm." I find this very interesting because I have been predicting that people would start to promote the idea that the BoM is just as true if it didn't actually take place in normal reality, but in some sort of alternate history or parallel universe. Think how conveniently that would relieve believers of that nagging feeling like there should be empirical, or even logical, support for the BoM's historicity.

Yikes. So if you go with the "A different realm" idea, at that point the BoM is literally indistinguishable from Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Star Wars, or Star Trek. Or any other fictional universe.

[Hagoth]

Yikes. So if you go with the "A different realm" idea, at that point the BoM is literally indistinguishable from Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Star Wars, or Star Trek. Or any other fictional universe.

No. They don't claim to be true, so we needn't fret about whether we need to take them seriously. But what about Greek, Norse, African, Mayan, Polynesian....etc. mythology? They have been presented to their various believers as truth, so I guess they might potentially be true in a different realm. Unless, whew, you have living prophets who can assure us that only our different realm stories are true and vital, while all the rest are a stupid waste of time. ♫ We thank the O God for a prophet to guide us in these other realms ♪.

[DPRoberts]

I wonder if the next step is to have the BOM story happen on another planet. The planet would need it's own place called Jerusalem for people to migrate from, but not it's own Christ, since the atonement that happened on our planet is supposed to be infinite and apply to all worlds. Then, of course, Mormon trickster God can just reveal what happened in Jerusalem while leaving out the small detail of that Jerusalem being extraterrestrial​. Christ can still visit the far off planet because of, you know, god magic.

Now put it a bizillion light years away and it's completely unfalsifiable.

I missed my calling as an apologist

ETA: Somehow I missed where Hagoth quoted the penguin about earth2. Thought I was original, but got beat by the better bird. I did provide some doctrinal justification, however.

[Cnsl1]

I propose we take Oaks up on his 1993 suggestion for a continuance, and to take it up again after his hung jury of 1993.

Since that time, we've obtained a good deal of additional evidence, particularly DNA, which we know has both overturned and solidified a great number of legal cases. So, yes, Mr Oaks, it's time to retry the case. Do you have anything you need to add in discovery? Please give us your evidence so we can prepare. Oh, what's that? Your evidence is still a lack of evidence? I'm sorry, Sir, the absence of evidence is not evidence. And that's the bulk of your case?

At least the church is wise enough not to parade out some well meaning crackpot like Rod Meldrum to argue evidence. No offense intended, Rod. You seem a decent fellow. And crackpot is perhaps too strong. But your evidence is laughable.

In my opinion of course.

[Spicy McHaggis]

It reminds me of the old Stephen Colbert bit "truthiness".

[nibbler]

The BoM took place in a different realm, did it?

Sorry I can't come to clean the building this Saturday. You see, I've already cleaned three today on a different planet.

But I do pay my tithing bishop, I'm just paying it in an alternate reality.

I wear my garments both day and night. Somewhere in the multiverse.

I served a mission in another dimension. I was made AP. Hot breath on fingernails, polishes fingernails on chest.

Members are asked to sacrifice a lot, all because of the truth claims. It stands to reason that the sacrifice should be made in the same realm, dimension, reality, planet where the truth claim took place. Otherwise it might not count.

[Bonfire]

How time is calculated is problematic, considering our calendars are relative to the moon and stars as seen from particular places on Earth, each successive generation being required to know and remember subtle shifts such as leap years, pole shifts, and moon phases.

What if tens of thousands of years ago there were interstellar explorers expected to return from space travel as a signal that there would be no asteroids headed for our Solar System, but they never arrived home.

The Book of Mormon is a compilation of summaries by Moroni that he showed to Joseph Smith because his realm was no longer going to be allowed to exist. When you live for thousands of years and a forest can burn in a few hours you have to do something to save the realm when you're being overrun by longer-lived creatures calling themselves "man" in their own language yet look nothing like your fellows at the Tower of Babel.

Nor do they tell time as you do.

An armada of Caliphate family wouldn't want to settle for how we've adapted to live while they were gone.

[Hagoth]

Hi Bonfire!

To understand the BoM time and place we have to remember that it took Lord Xenu trillions of years to capture all of the Thetans and dump them into volcanoes on earth... wait a minute... sorry, wrong cult. It's easy to confuse them when they were both pulled out of the same realm.

Nevermind.

[moksha]

Yikes. So if you go with the "A different realm" idea, at that point the BoM is literally indistinguishable from Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Star Wars, or Star Trek. Or any other fictional universe.

If the Church were to add the Lord of the Rings, The Silmarillion, and the Hobbit to their canon, they would have much more evidence. LDS apologists could find quadruple the parallels with the ancient runes and the Elvish languages alone.

For the absence of Nephite evidence, they could point to part of Middle Earth falling into the Sea at the end of the First Age and the overthrow of Morgoth.

[Hagoth]

Yikes. So if you go with the "A different realm" idea, at that point the BoM is literally indistinguishable from Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, Star Wars, or Star Trek. Or any other fictional universe.

Now that I think about it, that seems to be where we're heading. After you deal with all of the problems, facts, archaeology, contradictions, anachronisms, etc. all LDS scripture is reduced to collections of words that are indistinguishable from fiction. The big difference is that when it claims to be truth it stops being mere fiction and becomes just plain old fraud. Isn't that what RFM always says about things like the Book of Abraham? It's indistinguishable from fraud, so why should you assume that it is anything more?

[moksha]

It's indistinguishable from fraud, so why should you assume that it is anything more?

A good apologist would turn that around and say that being indistinguishable from fraud proves it is true.