Posted on 04/27/2006 3:03:34 PM PDT by restornu
The Book of Mormon is often dismissed as gibberish by those who have never taken the trouble to read it. In fact, its very existence poses a serious puzzle if it is not what it claims to be - an ancient record. Below is the Book of Mormon Challenge, an assignment that Professor Hugh Nibley at BYU sometimes gave to students in a required class on the Book of Mormon. The following text is taken from the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.8, Ch.11, Pg.221 - Pg.222:
Since Joseph Smith was younger than most of you and not nearly so experienced or well-educated as any of you at the time he copyrighted the Book of Mormon, it should not be too much to ask you to hand in by the end of the semester (which will give you more time than he had) a paper of, say, five to six hundred pages in length. Call it a sacred book if you will, and give it the form of a history. Tell of a community of wandering Jews in ancient times; have all sorts of characters in your story, and involve them in all sorts of public and private vicissitudes; give them names--hundreds of them--pretending that they are real Hebrew and Egyptian names of circa 600 b.c.; be lavish with cultural and technical details--manners and customs, arts and industries, political and religious institutions, rites, and traditions, include long and complicated military and economic histories; have your narrative cover a thousand years without any large gaps; keep a number of interrelated local histories going at once; feel free to introduce religious controversy and philosophical discussion, but always in a plausible setting; observe the appropriate literary conventions and explain the derivation and transmission of your varied historical materials.
Above all, do not ever contradict yourself! For now we come to the really hard part of this little assignment. You and I know that you are making this all up--we have our little joke--but just the same you are going to be required to have your paper published when you finish it, not as fiction or romance, but as a true history! After you have handed it in you may make no changes in it (in this class we always use the first edition of the Book of Mormon); what is more, you are to invite any and all scholars to read and criticize your work freely, explaining to them that it is a sacred book on a par with the Bible. If they seem over-skeptical, you might tell them that you translated the book from original records by the aid of the Urim and Thummim--they will love that! Further to allay their misgivings, you might tell them that the original manuscript was on golden plates, and that you got the plates from an angel. Now go to work and good luck!
To date no student has carried out this assignment, which, of course, was not meant seriously. But why not? If anybody could write the Book of Mormon, as we have been so often assured, it is high time that somebody, some devoted and learned minister of the gospel, let us say, performed the invaluable public service of showing the world that it can be done." - Hugh Nibley
Structure and Complexity of the Book of Mormon First Nephi gives us first a clear and vivid look at the world of Lehi, a citizen of Jerusalem but much at home in the general world of the New East of 600 B.C. Then it takes us to the desert, where Lehi and his family wander for eight years, doing all the things that wandering families in the desert should do. The manner of their crossing the ocean is described, as is the first settlement and hard pioneer life in the New World dealt with.... The book of Mosiah describes a coronation rite in all its details and presents extensive religious and political histories mixed in with a complicated background of exploration and colonization. The book of Alma is marked by long eschatological discourses and a remarkably full and circumstantial military history. The main theme of the book of Helaman is the undermining of society by moral decay and criminal conspiracy; the powerful essay on crime is carried into the next book, where the ultimate dissolution of the Nephite government is described.
Then comes the account of the great storm and earthquakes, in which the writer, ignoring a splendid opportunity for exaggeration, has as accurately depicted the typical behavior of the elements on such occasions as if he were copying out of a modern textbook on seismology.... [Soon] after the catastrophe, Jesus Christ appeared to the most pious sectaries who had gathered at the temple.
...Can anyone now imagine the terrifying prospect of confronting the Christian world of 1830 with the very words of Christ? ...
But the boldness of the thing is matched by the directness and nobility with which the preaching of the Savior and the organization of the church are described. After this comes a happy history and then the usual signs of decline and demoralization. The death-struggle of the Nephite civilization is described with due attention to all the complex factors that make up an exceedingly complicated but perfectly consistent picture of decline and fall. Only one who attempts to make a full outline of Book of Mormon history can begin to appreciate its immense complexity; and never once does the author get lost (as the student repeatedly does, picking his way out of one maze after another only with the greatest effort), and never once does he contradict himself. We should be glad to learn of any other like performance in the history of literature. - Hugh Nibley, Collected Works Vol. 8
The four types of biblical experts There are four kinds of biblical experts: At the very top are the professionals who have been doing biblical research all their adult lives. They are usually professors in leading universities in various fields that are related to the Bible such as archaeologists, historians, paleographers, professors of the Bible, and professors of Near Eastern languages and literature.
These people are the most credible of all biblical experts and do not let religious views get in the way of the truth. This is why a lot of them consider themselves to be nonbelievers in the modern Christian and Jewish faiths. Their reputation and standing in the academic community is very important to them. This causes them to be cautious and not rashly declare statements upon any subject without presenting verifiable proof for their claims. It is to them that encyclopedias, journals and universities go to for information. Their community is very small, but extremely influential in the secular world. One distinctive feature of this group is the difficulty outsiders face when reading their writings which causes them to be a fairly closed society.
The second group of biblical experts are those who have legitimate degrees and may have initially been in the first group but were spurned by the first group for being unreliable because they disregard demonstrable proof simply because their religious convictions teach otherwise. For them, their religion's teaching overrides real biblical research. Very few of them can be considered Fundamentalists.
The third group of biblical experts are the "biblical experts." These people disregard the works and conclusions of the first group, and view the second group as their mentors. Nearly all anti-Mormons who produce anti-Mormon paraphernalia fall into this group. Their views are purely theological and display ignorance of legitimate biblical studies. Their arguments are non-rational and are frequently sensational hype and empty rhetoric. These people are very vocal and constantly parade their "expertise" upon the unknowing masses by giving seminars in various churches and religious schools. Nearly all of them are Fundamentalists.
The fourth group of "biblical experts" are those who have never read the Bible completely and do not even know the history and contents of the Bible. They are completely reliant upon materials produced by the third group and may have five verses in the Bible memorized to quote at people they encounter (in nearly every instance John 3:16 and John 14:6 are included in these five verses) to give the impression they are experts in the Bible. They usually need the Table of Contents to find various biblical books and are extremely vocal in their condemnation of Mormonism. They personify the wise adage:
The less knowledge a man has, the more vocal he is about his expertise.
They read an anti-Mormon book and suddenly they're experts on Mormonism:
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
The remainder of Christians are those who believe in the Bible but never read it. The Bible is a very complex book for most Christians and seems to possess a power that intimidates them. This is why a normal Christian is impressed whenever he or she encounters an individual who can quote scripture. It is this ignorance of the Bible that causes some to proclaim themselves "biblical experts."
I am not aware of anyone in the first group of biblical experts who are anti-Mormon. If anything, real biblical scholars who know Mormon theology have a profound sense of admiration for it and are usually astonished that so many facets of Mormonism reflect authentic biblical teachings.
They are frequently puzzled at how Joseph Smith could find out the real biblical teaching since modern Judaism and Christianity abandoned them thousands of years ago. Uniquely Mormon doctrines such as the anthropomorphic nature of God, the divine nature and deification potential of man, the plurality of deities, the divine sanction of polygamy, the fallacy of sola scriptura, the superiority of the charismatic leaders over the ecclesiastical leaders and their importance, the inconsequence of Original Sin because of the Atonement of Christ, the importance of contemporary revelation, and so forth are all original Jewish and Christian thought before they were abandoned mainly due to Greek philosophical influence.
Mormonism to these scholars is the only faith that preserves the characteristics of the early chosen people. This doesn’t mean these scholars believe Mormonism is the true religion, since their studies are on an intellectual level instead of a spiritual one.
On the other hand, the leaders of the anti-Mormon movement are nearly all in the third category with a couple in the second. Real biblical experts (who aren’t Mormon) and are in the first category normally refer to the “biblical experts” in the third group as the “know-nothings” or the “Fundamentalist know-nothings.” These terms aren’t completely derogatory, but are accurate descriptions of the knowledge of the “biblical experts” in the third group. Ed Watson - Mormonism: Faith of the 21st Century
I appreciate your perspective.
I was just asking my husband, "If Mormonism is based on early American testimonies, where are all the American Indian Mormons?"
I'm usually tolerant of moral religious beliefs of people who don't wish to kill me (that is, non-Muslims), but as a gnostic leaning Buddhist, such matter-worship makes me nauseous.
You only expect to see polytheistic matter-worship in cultures that produce "cargo cults" and voodoo.
Polytheistic, EG: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=polytheistic or the belief in more than one god. Commonly polytheistic religions have gods for different purposes, the god of war, god of the harvest and fertility, that sort of thing.
Mormons believe in God the Father, Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost. These make up the “God head” a unit so in tune that they are one in might mind and purpose. The link includes the thirteen articles of faith, a list of beliefs written by Joseph Smith Jun.
Please if you have other questions, ask members of the church, not those who do not understand our beliefs because they are not members.
(You wouldn't go to Ford to find out about a Chevy would you?)
>> If Mormonism is based on early American testimonies, where are all the American Indian Mormons?"
There are tons of them in Colorado, and South Dakota.
>>They were all created as mere mortals who ascended to godhood. Joseph Smith said
>>matter was eternal.
>>I'm usually tolerant of moral religious beliefs of people who don't wish to kill me (that
>>is, non-Muslims), but as a gnostic leaning Buddhist, such matter-worship makes me
>>nauseous.
>>You only expect to see polytheistic matter-worship in cultures that produce "cargo
>>cults" and voodoo.
Polytheistic matter worship, you ought to write for Doctor Who. See what happens when those you try to teach a principle they don’t understand?
God is eternal because he was there before us and will be there for the rest of our lives. Matter (Being created by God, before he created us), will also be there for the rest of our lives, and is also eternal.
We do not worship matter.
See the first law of Thermodynamics (http://www.chemistry.ohio-state.edu/~woodward/ch121/ch5_law.htm ) for the eternal nature of matter to us mere mortals
So is it the Mormon position that the horse died out?
Until recently they were called "Saints". Now they want to be called "Christians". The Missouri Mormons dropped the "Saints" label entirely. Unsuspecting folks would never know they are anything other than mainstream Christians as they are now "The Community of Christ".
"I wish to declare I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity,
it has been the plurality of Gods."
(Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet
Joseph Smith pg 369)
also the archaeologist who investigate things like this!
I'm a Calvinist.
MORE MISINFORMATION....
They are NOT related to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints!
So there are 3 in the Godhead that mean the family of God are Father His Son and the Holy Ghost that would be plural even in the Trinity!
You have a different idea of what "eternal" means than most people.
also the archaeologist who investigate things like this!
I'm completely ignorant on such things, so I'll ping the only American archaeologist that I know of here and ask him.
Coyoteman, sorry to bother you, but I need your disinterested expertise here for a bit. Can you verify restornu's statement that horses are native to the Americas and died out sometime after 100 AD? (Restornu, I don't know what year the last mention of horses corresponded to in the Book of Mormon, so the year I picked is a WAG. If I'm far off, will you correct me?)
Just refining the plurality of gods thing (we do not have a "God of storms" or the like)
I have a lot of different ideas, that’s why I am an interesting person to talk to.
(Thanks for the compliment)
Who wants to think exactly like everyone else?
Tell me; Is it eternal punishment because it goes on forever, or because that is one of God’s names?
(I love these questions, you never get the same answer twice and usually you learn some thing you didn’t before)
Remember, David was promised that God would not leave his soul in Hell, after he committed Uriah’s murder so he could marry Bathsheba.
Are you male? If so, don't you get to become a god in the celestial kingdom?
Going from memory, there was a native horse species in the New World. It was different from our modern horses (same genus, different species, I think). It died out with the Pleistocene fauna. I am not sure when the last one was killed and cooked and eaten, but I believe remains have been found as recently as perhaps 10-12,000 years.
Hope this helps. I would have to hustle some books for a better answer. I have Martin's Twilight of the Mammoths here, so if you need more let me know.
I would like to know just what you conjure up your mind when you think these things you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.