Having it both ways, Joseph Smith telling BoM stories before the plates edition
Posted: Thu Mar 21, 2019 10:15 am
I listened to the John Hamer appearance on Mormon Stories last week -- I think it's on the MS page now but I listened on Facebook live... and he was talking about how Joseph Smith would tell stories in great details about BoM people before he had the plates.
I made a comment about this on Twitter and got a response from one of the insane apologetic infowars type sites, about how JS talks about how he was given a vision of the BoM people beforehand which is why he was able to talk through those stories.
From JS: "I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country, and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people was made known unto me."
From Lucy Mack Smith: "every evening we gathered our children togather [together]...In the course of our evening conversations Joseph would give us some of the most ammusing [amusing] recitals which could be immagined [imagined]. he would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent their dress their man[n]er of traveling the animals which they rode The cities that were built by them the structure of their buildings with every particular of their mode of warfare their religious worship as particularly as though he had spent his life with them...The angel informed him at one time that he might make an effort to obtain the plates <on> the <22nd of the> ensueing september."
It hit me the other day what a mess that apologetic argument is, because it opens the door up to a lot of other issues.
Put another way: If you want to use Joseph Smith claiming visions of the BoM people so clearly that he could retell their story to the smallest details before even having the plates, you then have to explain why Joseph claimed the Hill Cumorah in New York was where the battles were, how he knew a skeleton on a march to Missouri was Zelph was a white Lamanite, why Joseph Smith saw the BoM people with animals/weaponry that didn't exist yet, or how he didn't know that there were other people here before the BoM people arrived since he saw it all in vision.
It's another area where apologists want it both ways -- either Joseph Smith had those visions in such detail but still got it completely wrong as proven by his claims being debunked by history/technology/whatever, or Joseph Smith was rehearsing the Book of Mormon before he even claimed the plates.
I don't know why it took a few days before that side of the argument clicked, but it's a "jerkstore" moment of apologetics I wish I had thought of right away.
I made a comment about this on Twitter and got a response from one of the insane apologetic infowars type sites, about how JS talks about how he was given a vision of the BoM people beforehand which is why he was able to talk through those stories.
From JS: "I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country, and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people was made known unto me."
From Lucy Mack Smith: "every evening we gathered our children togather [together]...In the course of our evening conversations Joseph would give us some of the most ammusing [amusing] recitals which could be immagined [imagined]. he would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent their dress their man[n]er of traveling the animals which they rode The cities that were built by them the structure of their buildings with every particular of their mode of warfare their religious worship as particularly as though he had spent his life with them...The angel informed him at one time that he might make an effort to obtain the plates <on> the <22nd of the> ensueing september."
It hit me the other day what a mess that apologetic argument is, because it opens the door up to a lot of other issues.
Put another way: If you want to use Joseph Smith claiming visions of the BoM people so clearly that he could retell their story to the smallest details before even having the plates, you then have to explain why Joseph claimed the Hill Cumorah in New York was where the battles were, how he knew a skeleton on a march to Missouri was Zelph was a white Lamanite, why Joseph Smith saw the BoM people with animals/weaponry that didn't exist yet, or how he didn't know that there were other people here before the BoM people arrived since he saw it all in vision.
It's another area where apologists want it both ways -- either Joseph Smith had those visions in such detail but still got it completely wrong as proven by his claims being debunked by history/technology/whatever, or Joseph Smith was rehearsing the Book of Mormon before he even claimed the plates.
I don't know why it took a few days before that side of the argument clicked, but it's a "jerkstore" moment of apologetics I wish I had thought of right away.