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

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

None of these questions is relevant to a scientific discussion. This is about burden of proof. Until you answer my question, find someone else's time to waste.

Thats not snide? Heh.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

I believe it does support a genuine historical document.

Let's try a different approach. (Secular Web Kiosk and Bookstore :: Three Strikes, You're Out!--The Quick and Dirty Case Against Mormonism)

In case you do not want to read... I will highlight a few things.

Originally Posted by Kyle J. Gerkin

the BoM makes many mundane claims as well, and these fall into spheres such as archaeology, anthropology, biology and linguistics, which are the province of empirical investigation The BoM is essentially a thousand year history of peoples on the American continent

The Book of Mormon claims the following tools existed in ancient MesoAmerica: chariots, steel swords, bellows for blacksmithing, and silk. None of these were in the Americas until the Columbian exchange.

The BoM describes a vast civilization of millions who inhabited cities for hundreds of years, yet no ruins from even a single BoM city have ever been identified. No BoM place-names were in use when Europeans arrived in the New World.

The BoM peoples had a seven-day week, but no Mesoamerican calendar matches this.

The BoM refers to animals and crops that did not exist in America until Columbus arrived: ***, bull, calf, cattle, cow, domestic goat, horse, ox, domestic sheep, sow, swine, elephants, wheat, and barley.

The BoM says that the Native Americans descended from Hebraic (Semitic) origins. However through archaeology and DNA testing, we know that Native Americans descend from Asiatic origins.

There are no examples of "reformed Egyptian" in Mesoamerican history. And no Native American language is related to either ancient Egyptian or Hebrew, whereas a relationship does exist between Native American languages and Asian (Siberian) languages.

As shown in the Mormon South Park Episode, a woman stole a "translation" from Joseph Smith, and demanded that he replace it with an exact copy saying, "If this be a divine communication, the same being that revealed it to you can easily replace it." Smith refused, and wrote the same manuscript from a different point of view.

Joseph Smith was given real egyptian from an ancient Egyptian burial to translate (this was pre-Rosetta stone, and Egyptian could not be read). Modern day scholars agree that his translation is entirely manufactured and incorrect.

I'm not ignoring this... I am not focusing on the supernatural... I've replied to this before... A genuine historical document can be debunked based on the fact that there is no archelogical evidence. We don't have to discuss burden of proof because none is offered that it is legitimate.

As I said... I consider it an allegorical tale of a fantasy race. Floating across the ocean on little boats strikes me as fantasy. Just as being in the belly of whale....

What I don't get is how you rationalize all that away because if we consider its a megachiasmus, that there is 20 common abstract ideas that appear in two texts and 50 common names we can now see that it is a genuine historical document...

I have elaborated on the 20 common abstract ideas.... You yourself said by itself it proves nothing. I would also point out the pointlessness of assigning a chance that joe could have done this on accident as the ideas are both abstract and after 100s of texts, Dr Kurtz here choose this one farewell speech to make a point. I digress...

The 50 common names I have also addressed but as I said I'm not doing a lot of research here... the door is wide open to be slammed shut on this... There were not 50 names unless we make the assumptions you make. (Not you in particular but the article your quoting) As I said why not list your argument in detail.

And megachiasmus... I get chiasmus but google finds only you, here, talking about megachiasmus. What are you talking about? Seriously... do you want to expand on this? Where do you get your research?

I did discover another amusing tid bit... Mitt Romney had a great, great Grandpa. Mr Parley Pratt who had 12 wives. Mr Pratt was murdered because he married a woman who was already married to another man. The other man was none too happy. (still not justified.) But Pratt had a prophesy:

Originally Posted by Parley Pratt

I will state as a prophecy, that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence; and if they are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years of this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by BalanceFx

As I said... I consider it an allegorical tale of a fantasy race. Floating across the ocean on little boats strikes me as fantasy. Just as being in the belly of whale....

Erm, why? The Vikings did it, and there is some evidence the Egyptians did it, there is nothing implausible about Jews doing it too.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Erm, why? The Vikings did it, and there is some evidence the Egyptians did it, there is nothing implausible about Jews doing it too.

Ahh the book of "Ether". A fantastical tale where teeny tiny boats, with holes in the bottom, cross the ocean bringing not only Jewish families but their pigs, flocks and herds. A year of food for everyone... animals... family... and fresh water.

It is the presentation that strikes me as a tale similar to living in the belly of whale.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

Because the order drastically increases the complexity, and thus the probability.

My point was that if the order is variable in the historical examples Kurtz used, then why would the order you gave be the "official" one? If the actual ancient Hebrew farewell speeches didn't always use that order, where does that order come from?

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

Well, the problem is, Kurtz isn't sure where these came in. He presumes they are Greek because he only found them after the Hellenization, but the Dead Sea Scrolls and many other documents have revealed that many elements formerly deemed Hellenic/Christian were actually Hebrew in origin.

At any rate, they are on the list in this instance because they are found in the King Benjamin speech. Some could argue that this is evidence of forgery: it's too perfect. The only problem is, what documents were available for Joseph to copy this pattern from?

Hang on... so these elements aren't in Hebrew farewell speeches generally, but they're in the speech in the Book of Mormon? If that's the case, then why is their inclusion in the Book of Mormon evidence of a link with Hebrew farewell speeches?

Because coincidences are measureable. Wreck of the Titan had some astounding coincidences with the actual Titanic, but the t-score is still well within the range allowed by statistics. A coincidence that exceeds .095% exceeds the realms of science.

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

About the same, I'd wager, but note your assumptions: does the Book of Mormon say that they had metal armor? City of the Sacred Well cites stone and wooden armor for a mysterious group that predated the Mayans. We haven't found any of that armor, either, but we have statuary and paintings to show it existed.

It does describe them having swords, and in some cases describes those swords being "made bright" by various things. I know that obsidian knives were common enough in ancient Central and South America, but there's quite a bit of difference between a small blade of sharpened rock and a full sword. Also, obsidian's as black as... well... obsidian. It's not the sort of thing that could be "made bright".

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

We also have the painted walls at Bonampak illustrating conflicts between light and dark-skinned people, similar to the stories of the Book of Mormon. There's lots of evidence that is open to interpretation, so "no trace" is a little deceptive.

Judging by the photo series I found, it looks like the walls at Bonampak depict conflicts between very dark-skinned people and people of varying skin tone from dark to very dark.

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

Absolutely, but in the second case, the article is of questionable origin until it is proven a forgery or proven genuine: there are two burdens of proof. Hence, I'm not trying to meet one of those burdens of proof, only rebutting people who fail to meet the other.

Ah. Fair enough, I guess.

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

Great! Let's set up a thread!

I'll post something tomorrow, but you can go ahead if you feel like it.

Hmm... it looks like I'll be reading Moby Dick again. I hope I haven't bitten off more than I can chew.

[BalanceFx]

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

In court, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution--that would be you. If you want to convince people the book was forged by Smith, you need actual evidence of a forgery, and you need enough to account for ALL the data.

In all seriousness where do you get off? You want me to prove that the BoM is a forgery when there is no evidence that its not to begin with?

The earth is round, the sky is filled with spirits and god is a sheep, thats invisible and undetectable and lives in peru and that sheep says the BoM is a fairy tale. The sheep will answer your questions if you baa at night and only if you do so sincerly and honestly. Ask of the sheep yourself and you will see he is true.

Now your the prosecution... prove my invisible sheep is wrong. What court would hear this case anyways? Judge judy?

I'm the prosecution? I disagree. Im the defense for reason. You are arguing common names and poetry to prove a point archeological and dna evidence clearly disproves.

[Katzpur]

One question for you, Balance... Why do you believe that archeological evidence is more compelling and more valid than linguistic evidence? Among scholars, one would carry no more weight than the other.

[gnostic]

Originally Posted by DeepShadow

The only problem is, what documents were available for Joseph to copy this pattern from?

The Bible.

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Erm, why? The Vikings did it, and there is some evidence the Egyptians did it, there is nothing implausible about Jews doing it too.

The problem here, is that the Israelites were never a sea-faring nation, like their neighbour, the Phoenicians. There are no evidences whatsoever that the Hebrews built any ship capable of travelling such distance.

Also the last group of Israelites, to migrate over the New World, the Ephraimites didn't have land on the coast, so how would they know what to construct sea-worthy ships? There is big difference to design of the ship to travel the sea, then boats for rivers and lakes to catch fishes. The only thing noticable about the port city of Joppa was ferrying timbers from Tyre to the city. Nothing to indicate that their ships could travel through the open sea of the Mediterranean, or the Atlantic Ocean.

As to the Vikings, they did belonged to sea-faring people.

You are comparing apple and lemon.