Please Explain how Joseph Smith could have possibly authored the Book of Mormon.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by Starfish

This thread was not meant to prove the LDS explanation for the origin of the BoM. That simply can't be done through physical evidence or scientific methods, any more than I can prove that Christ was born of a virgin. We can present evidence all day long, and we cannot prove there was an angel, etc.

This thread was simply asking for another explanation that holds up in light of the facts. One that will satisfy all the skeptics. I'm not asking you to change my mind; that won't happen. But simply an answer that will satisfy yours AND comply with the facts and evidences that we have.

Based on the facts I would say he dictated the book with no supernatural influences and some people wrote it down. There was likely paper and ink. I believe a modern day example would be L Ron Hubbard. He made some stuff up, wrote it down, started a religion and people believed him and now we have scientology. Joe had scribes I guess but it went about the same. He may have had various sources. Lots of people didn't believe him but some did. Those that did had kids and raised more mormons and they actively tried to recruit more people to mormons and still do.

There were no angels, gold plates or translation stones. There were no spirits or angels or long dead people who materialized and appeared. There were no supernatural events.

Thats essentially what we disagree on anyways. That and floating across the ocean in little ships... or that the olmecs are they jaredites... or that these really happened despite there being no historical evidence... This is largely because I regard the BoM as a religious text of stories and tales. Fiction. You regard as a history book, lifes purposes book, guide to being a good person type thing... essentially you think alot more of it then it warrants or deserves imho.

My explanation is one that would not involve the supernatural.

[Starfish]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

Based on the facts I would say he dictated the book with no supernatural influences and some people wrote it down. There was likely paper and ink. I believe a modern day example would be L Ron Hubbard. He made some stuff up, wrote it down, started a religion and people believed him and now we have scientology. Joe had scribes I guess but it went about the same. He may have had various sources. Lots of people didn't believe him but some did. Those that did had kids and raised more mormons and they actively tried to recruit more people to mormons and still do.

There were no angels, gold plates or translation stones. There were no spirits or angels or long dead people who materialized and appeared. There were no supernatural events.

Thats essentially what we disagree on anyways. That and floating across the ocean in little ships... or that the olmecs are they jaredites... or that these really happened despite there being no historical evidence... This is largely because I regard the BoM as a religious text of stories and tales. Fiction. You regard as a history book, lifes purposes book, guide to being a good person type thing... essentially you think alot more of it then it warrants or deserves imho.

My explanation is one that would not involve the supernatural.

Thank you. I think you're getting my point.

However, the facts don't support your theory. But I'll leave it at that.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by Starfish

Thank you. I think you're getting my point.

However, the facts don't support your theory. But I'll leave it at that.

What facts support a supernatural theory? What facts are in conflict with a theory of reality?

[DeepShadow]

Originally Posted by spiritually inclined

I'm sorry, that doesn't cut it. Gaps in the theories can't convince me of all of these questions posed by BalanceFX (a thorough post) that you just brush away with, It had to be written by someone. Who?

Let's see, who in the 19th century knew all 20 points of a Hebrew farewell speech...

That would be NO ONE. The structure was discovered in the last 30 years or so. Any explanation of the BoM's origin must include how it contains this structure.

[DeepShadow]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

What facts support a supernatural theory? What facts are in conflict with a theory of reality?

It's not a matter of facts that support a supernatural theory, but facts that reject a logical explanation of any kind. Supernatural theories such as God, the Devil, fate, luck, reincarnation and time travel are the kinds of things that people reach for when science fails to explain something. Science cannot explain how all 20 points of a Hebrew farewell speech got into the book, nor 50+ common names that unknown at the time, nor the phenomenon of writing on plates at all, nor roads, cement, etc.

Even astronomical chance is an unscientific explanation, because science sets limits to the chances it can explain. It's called statistics. The t-score of the farewell speeches alone exceeds the allowed margins by several orders of magnitude. Likewise the stylometry analyses.

[Katzpur]

But DeepShadow, where are the chariots??? Show me the chariots!!!

[BalanceFx]

Deepshadow... I could never convince you nor would I try nor be it my intention to sway your faith. You believe in the supernatural and that you can communicate with the supernatural and it can communicate with you. Thus the supernatural has become natural for you. I regard the supernatural, that is, gods, angels, demons, ghosts etc as outside our realm of existance and understanding and to be fair... as fabrication and superstition.

Nonetheless you have quite the treasure box of mormon knowledge on the BOM. And a passionate acceptance of what no one regards as proof as your purported evidence. Or so it would seem. Your post on science intrigues me...

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

Science cannot explain how all 20 points of a Hebrew farewell speech got into the book

What is this? Kurz? Can you explain this to me and how it validates your PoV?

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

, nor 50+ common names that unknown at the time

Presumed to be unknown. It is equally possible that he knew of the common names through some normal easily explainable and boring means.

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

nor the phenomenon of writing on plates at all

Interesting or stone boxes... So is it more plausible that there was the concept of time capsules or of storage of religious texts on metal plates and Joe either came upon this knowledge or possibly discovered something in his digging career OR he was a clueless of this information and read from gold plates that were then spirited away by angels.... See this hurts me. When we try to explain something we try to come up with real and possible answers. We dont just make stuff up or give up trying to figure it out and said god did it. When I was shopping for a house my first realtor believed in ghosts and said she couldnt show me a house because it was haunted. She admitted it was silly but teared up as she told me a story of her encounter with a ghost. She sincerely believed this. It effected her and even caused an emotional response. Does this to you mean that ghosts are real?

All Im trying to say is when you approach a problem you want to try the most elegant, simplest and most likely solution or theory. Gold plates, gods and angels is not even remotely close to the most elegant, or simplest or most likely solution. In fact its not a solution at all. Its throwing your hands up and saying god did it and taunting anyone or any theory that disagrees. You want them to provide a plausible solution, a task you have been unable to do yourself.

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

, nor roads, cement, etc.

egads... Ever feel like job?

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

Even astronomical chance is an unscientific explanation, because science sets limits to the chances it can explain. It's called statistics. The t-score of the farewell speeches alone exceeds the allowed margins by several orders of magnitude. Likewise the stylometry analyses.

And poems and chaismus... it all adds up to their must be angels, gods, gold plates and Joe's story is 100% true.

I never said the BoM isnt an interesting and complex story... Which is all you provide me for proof of Joes supernatural story. Do you think this story is beyond a human's ability to create? If god wanted to give us something like that perhaps he could have created a story rock which instills through instantaneous osmosis the story he wishes us to know.

Everything is... oh well thats just a mistranslation.. we fixed it in this edition... or there is no way joe could have known about some event. Well maybe he did... the event occured well before he was born so maybe he knew somehow. Cant you see this lovely coincidence... I told you angels are real.

I do not accept a supernatural explanation. I also don't believe that house was haunted and I got another realtor to show it to me.