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
The the light of Christ is available to all who seek it!
I am so happy that all of my questions have been answered to know the true nature of the Godhead and Eph. 2: 20
Kingdom of God is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
Eph 2
18 For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
And invariably the answer has been: "I don't know" or "We don't teach that anymore".
Eph 4
7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ:
16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.
“Knowing God” kind of implies knowing that he and Christ (both listed separately here) are not the same personage.
Christians believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are separate Persons, ... but also that they are the one Eternal God.
I believe that our understanding of the nature of the infinite God is limited by the finiteness of our thinking processes.
It appears that God is One ... in the sense that the yolk, the white, and the shell all are egg, ... and perform different functions in the egg.
What I would say, according to my best understanding, ... is that God is a composite being, much like a family, .... with all the Persons involved being recognizable as God themselves.
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
__________________________________________________________
They have, its call the Koran, the anchient works of Budda, THE GOSPEL OF JUDAS, etc. I'm sure there are millions of attempt of writte Book of Mormonesk type writting. Just pick one....Sorry Mr. Nibley......
It reveals me you did not read the whole article or you would not have made those utterances!
Greater minds and real biblical scholars have spoken on this topic and do not make careless remarks such as yours!
It is all about Jesus Christ if you were to attend our Sacarment meeting you would have no doubt!
The other things you mention is those who have a testament about Jesus Christ!
Just like you can't mention your testamony with out mentioning your name right?
Can't relate to your testamony unless you share your trails and tribulations right?
>>>>“Knowing God” kind of implies knowing that he and Christ (both listed separately
>>>>here) are not the same personage.”
>>Christians believe that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are separate Persons, ... >>but also that they are the one Eternal God.
This directly contradicts what I have been told by my protestant and
Catholic friends, but agrees with my perceptions, Being God is a title, and it is shared by God the Father, Jesus Christ (The God of this earth) and the Spirit of God (The Holy Ghost). Jesus Christ being in the express image of God the Father, will look exactly like him so to see him, is to see the father (like truly identical twins) These three personages form the Godhead, and all of them together or independently (Since they are of one heart, might mind and strength) can be called God.
>>I believe that our understanding of the nature of the infinite God is limited by the
>>finiteness of our thinking processes.
Agreed
>>It appears that God is One ... in the sense that the yolk, the white, and the shell all are
>>egg, ... and perform different functions in the egg.
Um, how about like a really close knit team? The egg thing kind of weirds me out, it’s too close to Scientific theories about pre-Big Bang universe (Google Cosmeg and “Big Bang” to see what I am talking about here).
In John 17:21-23 it says:
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
“Even as we are one” When Christ draws a simile about one-ness, I think he knows what he is talking about. He did not mean for the apostles to physically become one being, but to be one in heart might mind and strength.
If god is three personages, there are no issues with Christ standing on the Right hand of God. There is no deception when we hear them talking to or about each other. The baptism of Christ becomes a beautiful example of togetherness not a ventriloquists act. There is no problem about Jesus Christ’s resurrected body, and what did he do with it.
(God being a spirit only came from the Greeks who theorized that any God with a physical form would have a weakness, so Constantine forced the Nicene Creed on the early church after he made himself Pope, there are many who died defending the belief that god was a separate personage from Jesus Christ, it’s in history books) It makes fascinating reading.
>>What I would say, according to my best understanding, ... is that God is a composite
>>being, much like a family, .... with all the Persons involved being recognizable as God
>>themselves
The Godhead is very close to this description. Be careful there are some on this forum who will say you are not Christian if you profess these beliefs of yours too loudly (Grin).
>>They have, its call the...
None of the Works Cited was performed within the time frame listed by Hugh Nibley, so they don't qualify.
(The time frame taken from the translating of the Book of Mormon)
Did you read the whole article, or just the heading?
(God being a spirit only came from the Greeks who theorized that any God with a physical form would have a weakness, so Constantine forced the Nicene Creed on the early church after he made himself Pope, there are many who died defending the belief that god was a separate personage from Jesus Christ, it’s in history books)
Not quite true ... listen to Jesus ...John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, whenBTW ... Constantine was never Pope.
the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Meet the first Pope!!
http://www.reformation.org/meet_the_first_pope.html
I read the same scriptures, but come away with a different meaning.
John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when
the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Yep, God is a Spirit, and more, not just a spirit.
Re-read my post #404, Try to see why I have said what I have said, not interpret it the way you have been taught to interpret.
You don’t have to believe as I do, but understanding would sure be nice :-)
>>Constantine was never Pope
Catholic Encyclopedia, now it may be a different Constantine (it’s kind of confusing the way it’s written) but ( http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04294b.htm ) there was a pope Constantine.
Either way it’s a good internet resource, and fun reading.
Finding Wheat, Barley, Linen and Silk in the Book of Mormon
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1627795/posts
The less knowledge a man has, the more vocal he is about his expertise.
The less knowledge a man has, the more vocal he is about his expertise.
The less knowledge a man has, the more vocal he is about his expertise.
How many thousands is the question, if it was more than 10,000, it wouldn't fit the timeline of the BoM.
And the natives would have to been really dim to have let the best beasts of burden die out.
What I find interesting in the Book of Mormon and Old Testament is the lessons or stories about the the families of the Servants of the Lord!
at present I can't think of any in the New Testament that give an insight to the interal affairs of the families maybe you can think of some?
In the OT you Adam and his challenge with his Sons same with Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Israel, Moses etc all had records of their family disputes etc!
In the BoM you have Lehi and his sons, Mosiah, Alma, Jared etc.
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.