NOM

In researching for my book review of Harrell, "This is My Doctrine" I re-read Brant's very interesting book "Translating the Book of Mormon," Greg Kofford, 2011, today, and realized I missed the muthuh of all muthuhs of arguments that gives the entire enterprise for authenticity to the Book of Mormon away, so I thought I'd better share it here with you all for fun and intellectual profit.

He's discussing the various evidences various scholars have used on whether the translation of the Book of Mormon is a loose one or a tight one, a literalist one. On page 167-168 he is discussing John Tvedtnes's ideas as opposed to Bramwell's, on how Hebrew gives us clues. Gardner's response, though specific to Tvedtnes' argument, can be generalized onto a wider screen here. Brant notes:

"Of all these initial assumptions, Tvedtnes's is the most fascinating. He argues for Hebrew while noting the that the text was written in the language of the Egyptians. The problem with all these assumptions, however, is that they dictate the conclusion. If we assume we find Hebraisms and then we do, it appears as though we have validated the assumptions, even if what we find might have another explanation... the assumptions simply form a circular chain of logic, where assumption predicts and defines the Hebraism, and finding a Hebraism demonstrates that the assumption must have been correct." (p. 167)

To generalize: Of all the assumptions of any ancient parallel in attempting to show the Book of Mormon is ancient, "The problem with all these assumed ancient parallels is that they dictate the conclusion." If we assume the Book of Mormon is ancient, and then find ancient parallels to it, the assumptions simply form a circular chain of logic, where assumption predicts and defines the ancient parallel, and finding the ancient parallel demonstrates that the Book of Mormon is ancient must have been correct.
Replace the word Mesoamerican for the word ancient in the argument and you get the exact same effect.

I always laugh at chiasmus in the BOM as evidence of hebrew origins when the same is used by the Strangites as evidence for Strangs translations.

http://www.strangite.org/Chiasmus.htm

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 5:38 pm I always laugh at chiasmus in the BOM as a evidence of hebrew origins when the same is used by the Strangites as evidence for Strangs translations.

http://www.strangite.org/Chiasmus.htm

GOOD catch! LOL!!!

Apologeticsislying wrote: ↑Sat Oct 19, 2019 4:04 pm If we assume we find Hebraisms and then we do, it appears as though we have validated the assumptions, even if what we find might have another explanation...

This was a big wakeup call for me, when I realized that better explanations were being pushed aside to make room for the more faith promoting ones.

One example is the days on which Joseph Smith was visited by and received the plates from Moroni. I don't know how many times I read that Joseph was visited by Moroni and received the plates on the Jewish Feast of Trumpets, thus symbolically ushering in the gathering of Israel. It wasn't until I read Quinn that I found out there is a better, but less inspiring, answer. Joseph's dealings with Moroni fell on the Autumnal equinox, the date that his family's magical parchments (and popular magical grimoirs like Reginald Scot's Discoverie of Witchcraft, from which the Smiths' Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehovah parchment was copied) said were best for summoning guardian spirits and tricking them out of their treasure.

I suspect JS copied/modified the Spalding book, combined with KJV over a rather long time period, then took his manuscript, put it in his hat, and read to people - not from a seer stone, but straight off his copied manuscript that he had hiding in his hat. How likely of a scenario would this be? Have others suggested it?

Abraham Lincoln was known for using his hat to keep papers in - people from that time period knew about this.

What size was Joseph Smith's hat? http://mormonhistoricsites.org/wp-conte ... OTHING.pdf
was it large enough to conceal a manuscript?

Another BoM quote I recently ran across:

SPALDING WITNESS...
“I left the state of New York, late in the year 1810, and arrived at this place, about the 1st of Jan[uary]. following. Soon after my arrival, I formed a co-partnership with Solomon Spalding, for the purpose of re-building a forge which he had commenced a year or two before. He very frequently read to me from a manuscript which he was writing, which he entitled the ‘Manuscript Found,’ and which he represented as being found in this town. I spent many hours in hearing him read said writings, and became well acquainted with its contents. He wished me to assist him in getting his production printed, alleging that a book of that kind would meet with a rapid sale. I designed doing so, but the forge not meeting our anticipations, we failed in business, when I declined having any thing to do with the publication of the book. This book represented the American Indians as the descendants of the lost tribes, gave an account of their leaving Jerusalem, their contentions and wars, which were many and great. One time, when he was reading to me the tragic account of Laban, I pointed out to him what I considered an inconsistency, which he promised to correct; but by referring to the Book of Mormon, I find to my surprise that it stands there just as he read it to me then.- Some months ago I borrowed the Golden Bible, put it into my pocket, carried it home, and thought no more of it.- About a week after, my wife found the book in my coat pocket, as it hung up, and commenced reading it aloud as I lay upon the bed. She had not read 20 minutes till I was astonished to find the same passages in it that Spalding had read to me more, than twenty years before, from his ‘Manuscript Found.’ Since that, I have more fully examined the said Golden Bible, and have no hesitation in saying that the historical part of it is principally, if not wholly taken from the ‘Manuscript Found.’ I well recollect telling Mr. Spalding, that the so frequent use of the words ‘And it came to pass,’ ‘Now it came to pass,’ rendered it ridiculous. Spalding left here in 1812, and I furnished him the means to carry him to Pittsburgh, where he said he would get the book printed, and pay me. But I never heard any more from him or his writings, till I saw them in the Book of Mormon.”
~Henry Lake, Conneaut, Ashtabula Co. O. September, 1833 – E.D. Howe’s, Mormonism Unvailed, pages 281-282 ~

Wow I've never have seen this before. How very interesting... I don't know much about this guy, I shall have to look some things up. Pretty damning.