My take on the BoM so far

[Vanhin]

I think that may be part of what keeps me from accepting the scriptures (in general, not just the Book of Mormon) as actual events. To me they feel like parables or fairy tales with exaggerations that specifically demonstrate what you should and shouldn't do, rather than actual events. I know the scriptures are meant to teach, so I guess it is no surprise, but that is just my impression for what it's worth.

Well I can see that. So, as far as scripture goes, in this thing the Book of Mormon is consistent with other volumes of sacred writ. :)

But I don't see the storytelling in scripture as just allegory. I think the stories are based on factual events, except for the obvious parables. It's just more useful to tell the story simply in a way that highlights the lessons being taught. If you have ever attended an LDS meeting where a lesson was being taught, you will have noticed that we tend to draw upon real life experiences quite often to illustrate gospel principles. It would be counterproductive to relate all the details of a story, even the ones that have nothing to do with the point, and would take up too much time (or space in the case of the plates of Nephi). Sometimes we do try to tell way too much of the story, in an attempt to be complete, and the point is missed and people fall asleep.

In the case of Nephi's writings, it is helpful also to bear in mind that he is writing this after the fact. God had commanded him to essentially duplicate his father's (Lehi's) record for a purpose unknown to him at the time. He was probably already in the Americas when he started writing the books of Nephi, so his accounts of the stories would have probably been simplified accordingly, and perhaps even exaggerated a little in his favor, since he already knew what had happened to his brothers.

As it turns out, there was a purpose to Nephi's duplicate account. In 1828, against his better judgement, Joseph Smith allowed Martin Harris to take the 116 pages of what had been translated to his wife (and others to see). During this time the manuscript was lost... The 116 pages that were lost was the book of Lehi. They were never re-translated and instead the Books of Nephi furnish the relevant accounts of the record of his father.

Anyway, I am glad you are reading the Book of Mormon. you will notice that eventually the first hand accounts end, when Mormon begins narrating and composing the book from historical and sacred records available to him.

Regards,

Vanhin

[HiJolly]

Hi again, HiJolly,

First and most importantly, Hemi is a great cousin :) Thanks for the " Shout ":)

Secondly, If you don't think there was a contradiction, well, I think we might need Hemi here on this thread:)

Thanks for the input

Peace,

Carl

Ok, that's got me curious. Why don't you invite him in? Hemi and I have interesting contrasts in some of our beliefs.

I believe in evolution, he does not, for starters. Yet we both have had significant experiences with our Heavenly Father that shape everything in our lives.

I'd also like to point out (in keeping w/ the OP in this thread) that while it's not a popular view, most Mormons can believe in the Book of Mormon as a purely allegorical work and still be full-blown, temple active Mormons.

Not that I don't think it's literal, I just don't think I HAVE to believe it's literal. I paid particular attention to the temple interview questions this last time around, keeping in mind a brother Hale that doesn't necessarily believe that it's literal. He's good to go!

HiJolly

[Guest ceeboo]

most Mormons can believe in the Book of Mormon as a purely allegorical work and still be full-blown, temple active Mormons.

HiJolly

Hey HiJolly,

How can this possibly be:confused::confused::confused:

Thanks, as always, for your willingness to share with me.:)

Peace,

Carl

[HiJolly]

Hey HiJolly,

How can this possibly be:confused::confused::confused:

Thanks, as always, for your willingness to share with me.:)

Peace,

Carl

I'll grant that it is very rare in the Church and usually happens to some 'intellectual' few. I kinda study a lot, and talk to a lot of Mormon intellectuals, so I've run across it several times. I think believing that the Book of Mormon is true does not necessarily require that the Book be literal. Think of how the Savior's teachings were mostly done as parables. Something along those lines.

In a Biblical parallel, one of the first things new students at seminaries learn, is Biblical criticsm Textual criticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia , which tends to kinda open a whole new way of looking at the scriptures to them. Many become quite agnostic about the scriptures.

A good example of this would be Bart Ehrman, Bart D. Ehrman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia who started out as a evangelical Christian. I recently listened to a lecture by a Scottish Archbishop about "how to read the Bible", and he didn't believe a single story in it was literally true.

Faith is a precious thing!

HiJolly

[deseretgov]

1. Why wouldn't God just have Nephi to slay Laman and Lemuel or smite them himself after they tried to kill Nephi for the whateverth time? He seemed to have no qualms ordering Nephi to kill Laban with his own sword to get the record of the Jews.

Because God had a different purpose of Laman and Lemuel than Laban.

2. I had heard of contraversy over the use of "swords" in the Book of Mormon before, but since I hadn't really seen the context so I witheld judgements. From the context I've seen so far though, it sounds like they are talking about swords how usually think of them. Nephi has Laban's sword which was described in great detail when he aquired it, and it was said they fashioned many swords after it to defend themselves. That does not sound like the wood with razor sharp obsidian attached that I have seen LDS apologists propose as the "swords" referred to in the Book of Mormon. In general it sounds like Nephi and in turn the Nephites had metallurgical knowledge far beyond anything we've found evidence of in the Americas at that time frame. I'm not saying that proves anything, but it just does not sit well with me personally. So do you think that "sword" is just a vague term and we've already found evidence for the weapons of the BoM or that we simply haven't discovered the real weapons of the people in the BoM, or something else entirely?

My jury is still out on this one. I've made wooden swords fashioned after metal ones. But that still doesn't answer the question. For me when I think that about one thousand years of history is compressed into just a few hundred pages; it doesn't make much sense as a historical textbook. Meaning that while there are historical elements included it can hardly be used to come up with a detailed analysis of an ancient civilization. The important things contained in there are spiritual not historical. To me the sword question is irrelevent because we currently don't have enough information. It's like trying to but together a few hundred piece puzzle with over half the pieces missing. So for me, until we get the rest of that information, I'm putting those "contradictions" aside.

3. Why does God seem to use skin color to denote how "good" or "bad" a people are? Being of a brown skin color (not that I've ever remotely felt racially oppressed in my life), the references to "white and delightsome" people and "cursing" with dark skin is a bit unsettling to me. Just to be clear, I don't think that the church is racist and I've never felt uncomfortable in church, but to me that particular symbolism seems to be indicative of men of the time period the book was "translated" in rather than of divine origin.

I think these terms were more relevent back in the 1800's. We know righteousness is not determined by skin color. However there is a scripture in the Bible I believe that talks about a man being cursed but God and his skin turning dark. However this scripture explains that his skin turned black not because of the curse but because God curse the land. Because of this curse the area became arid and had more sunlight. Because of the increased sunlight his skin turned dark. Perhaps it's a similar thing. I don't remember the reference right off hand. I'll find it later.

In any case, I will continue reading but so far my thoughts and feelings lead me to think that it is a product of man, rather than divine truth. But then again I'm only a fraction of the way through, so I'll keep you guys posted :)

P.S. Yes, I'm back, and I'll try to use this site for the original purpose I came here for and not get tangled up in politics.

[Guest ceeboo]

Faith is a precious thing!

HiJolly

Indeed and Amen my friend :):)

Thanks for the reply:)

Peace,

Carl

[DigitalShadow]

Ok, that's got me curious. Why don't you invite him in? Hemi and I have interesting contrasts in some of our beliefs.

I doubt Hemi would come in here, I don't think he likes me very much :)

I believe in evolution, he does not, for starters. Yet we both have had significant experiences with our Heavenly Father that shape everything in our lives.

I'd also like to point out (in keeping w/ the OP in this thread) that while it's not a popular view, most Mormons can believe in the Book of Mormon as a purely allegorical work and still be full-blown, temple active Mormons.

Not that I don't think it's literal, I just don't think I HAVE to believe it's literal. I paid particular attention to the temple interview questions this last time around, keeping in mind a brother Hale that doesn't necessarily believe that it's literal. He's good to go!

HiJolly

I thought part of the baptism was stating that you believe the Book of Mormon to be true or something to that effect? I remember when talking to missionaries, they wanted me to get baptized and went over the questions I would be asked and I couldn't honestly say yes to them all if I only believed the Book of Mormon is purely allegorical (which I have no problem with).

I have no problem following the teachings and most people in Utah mistake me for Mormon unless I tell them, but my lack of faith is what keeps me from becoming a member.

[DigitalShadow]

Well I can see that. So, as far as scripture goes, in this thing the Book of Mormon is consistent with other volumes of sacred writ. :)

But I don't see the storytelling in scripture as just allegory. I think the stories are based on factual events, except for the obvious parables. It's just more useful to tell the story simply in a way that highlights the lessons being taught. If you have ever attended an LDS meeting where a lesson was being taught, you will have noticed that we tend to draw upon real life experiences quite often to illustrate gospel principles. It would be counterproductive to relate all the details of a story, even the ones that have nothing to do with the point, and would take up too much time (or space in the case of the plates of Nephi). Sometimes we do try to tell way too much of the story, in an attempt to be complete, and the point is missed and people fall asleep.

In the case of Nephi's writings, it is helpful also to bear in mind that he is writing this after the fact. God had commanded him to essentially duplicate his father's (Lehi's) record for a purpose unknown to him at the time. He was probably already in the Americas when he started writing the books of Nephi, so his accounts of the stories would have probably been simplified accordingly, and perhaps even exaggerated a little in his favor, since he already knew what had happened to his brothers.

That's the problem. I try to read it as a factual account, but by logical mind quickly labels it a fictional account because of the style and the inconsistencies with what we know of the native people of the Americas.

As it turns out, there was a purpose to Nephi's duplicate account. In 1828, against his better judgement, Joseph Smith allowed Martin Harris to take the 116 pages of what had been translated to his wife (and others to see). During this time the manuscript was lost... The 116 pages that were lost was the book of Lehi. They were never re-translated and instead the Books of Nephi furnish the relevant accounts of the record of his father.

Anyway, I am glad you are reading the Book of Mormon. you will notice that eventually the first hand accounts end, when Mormon begins narrating and composing the book from historical and sacred records available to him.

Regards,

Vanhin

That is another thing I've been curious about. Why are those pages lost? Why couldn't Joseph Smith simply translate them again?

[HiJolly]

I thought part of the baptism was stating that you believe the Book of Mormon to be true or something to that effect?

I guess I don't see how "true" necessarily means "literal" or "historical" or "provable". Now I do understand the difficulty of where on earth the angel Moroni comes from, if he were not literally living on the earth. Guess we have to take that in to account.

I believe Moroni, Mormon, Lehi, the golden plates and such were literal. But I'm not so sure about a ton of other stuff, some of which I wonder if they just got 'imagined' by LDS speculation...

I remember when talking to missionaries, they wanted me to get baptized and went over the questions I would be asked and I couldn't honestly say yes to them all if I only believed the Book of Mormon is purely allegorical (which I have no problem with).

I wish you could remember the exact questions. Some have a Preach the Gospel manual handy?

I have no problem following the teachings and most people in Utah mistake me for Mormon unless I tell them, but my lack of faith is what keeps me from becoming a member.

Faith in what?

God?

Joseph Smith as a prophet?

Book of Mormon as true?

Church as being under God's direction?

HiJolly

[HiJolly]

That is another thing I've been curious about. Why are those pages lost? Why couldn't Joseph Smith simply translate them again?

He could, but as he would have been in a different soul state the second time, chances are he wouldn't produce the exact same text. Toss in the possibility of whomever changing the original, and Joseph was in a no-win situation.

Better to just let it go.

HiJolly

[Vanhin]

That's the problem. I try to read it as a factual account, but by logical mind quickly labels it a fictional account because of the style and the inconsistencies with what we know of the native people of the Americas.

DS,

I don't see how the clearly instructive style, which is deliberate I might add, should be viewed as fictitious. It is meant to be scripture. The authors wrote the book by prophecy and revelation. The text itself reveals that they kept other records for the purpose of writing the details of their history. I see the Book of Mormon as a factual account because of the style, and the similarities and consistencies with other ancient Hebrew texts. That speaks to it's authenticity. For example, the Hebrew text of the Bible is full of chiasma, which (to quote Wikipedia) is "the figure of speech in which two or more clauses are related to each other through a reversal of structures in order to make a larger point; that is, the clauses display inverted parallelism." (Chiasmus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

Here's an example from the Bible:

A "Make the heart of this people fat,

B and make their ears heavy,

C and shut their eyes;

C1 lest they see with their eyes,

B1 and hear with their ears,

A1 and understand with their heart, and convert [return], and be healed." (Bible: Isaiah 6:10)

And here's one from the Book of Mormon:

A "…but men drink damnation to their own souls except they humble themselves

B and become as little children,

C and believe that salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.

D For the natural man

E is an enemy to God,

F and has been from the fall of Adam,

F1 and will be, forever and ever,

E1 unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit,

D1 and putteth off the natural man

C1 and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord,

B1 and becometh as a child,

A1 submissive, meek, humble…" (Book of Mormon: Mosiah 3:18-19)

A complex and beautiful chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is the entire chapter of Alma 36.

That is another thing I've been curious about. Why are those pages lost? Why couldn't Joseph Smith simply translate them again?

He could have. But it was wisdom in God that he didn't. I think if you really think about it, you would see that what happened was a plot by Satan to frustrate the work. God forsaw this, and thus prepared through Nephi the solution.

Verily, I say unto you, that I will not suffer that Satan shall accomplish his evil design in this thing. For behold, he has put it into their hearts to get thee to tempt the Lord thy God, in asking to translate it over again.

And then, behold, they say and think in their hearts—We will see if God has given him power to translate; if so, he will also give him power again; And if God giveth him power again, or if he translates again, or, in other words, if he bringeth forth the same words, behold, we have the same with us, and we have altered them; Therefore they will not agree, and we will say that he has lied in his words, and that he has no gift, and that he has no power; Therefore we will destroy him, and also the work; and we will do this that we may not be ashamed in the end, and that we may get glory of the world.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, that Satan has great hold upon their hearts; he stirreth them up to iniquity against that which is good; And their hearts are corrupt, and full of wickedness and abominations; and they love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil; therefore they will not ask of me. (D&C 10:14-21)

The 116 pages were lost, and have never been recovered.

Regards,

Vanhin

Edited October 9, 2008 by Vanhin

[DigitalShadow]

Faith in what?

God?

Joseph Smith as a prophet?

Book of Mormon as true?

Church as being under God's direction?

I have trouble with the concept of faith in general. Believing in something and acting on it even though there is no evidence or even contradictory evidence doesn't make sense to me.

Usually when I tell people that, they try to convince me that I already have faith with examples that take advantage of the fact that "faith" has multiple meanings and connotations. I have frustrated many missionaries with this topic.

[funkymonkey]

That is another thing I've been curious about. Why are those pages lost? Why couldn't Joseph Smith simply translate them again?

Hi DS, welcome back! :)

I'm not much of a scriptorian like a lot of these guys...

I don't think it's that unusual for books to be rewritten or portions of books to be reflected upon and written in books other than their original... Isaiah is reflected upon in multiple books in the bible...and the dead sea scrolls have a lot of re-writings from Isaiah and Revelations too.

[DigitalShadow]

He could, but as he would have been in a different soul state the second time, chances are he wouldn't produce the exact same text. Toss in the possibility of whomever changing the original, and Joseph was in a no-win situation.

Better to just let it go.

HiJolly

He could have. But it was wisdom in God that he didn't. I think if you really think about it, you would see that what happened was a plot by Satan to frustrate the work. God forsaw this, and thus prepared through Nephi the solution.

Verily, I say unto you, that I will not suffer that Satan shall accomplish his evil design in this thing. For behold, he has put it into their hearts to get thee to tempt the Lord thy God, in asking to translate it over again.

And then, behold, they say and think in their hearts—We will see if God has given him power to translate; if so, he will also give him power again; And if God giveth him power again, or if he translates again, or, in other words, if he bringeth forth the same words, behold, we have the same with us, and we have altered them; Therefore they will not agree, and we will say that he has lied in his words, and that he has no gift, and that he has no power; Therefore we will destroy him, and also the work; and we will do this that we may not be ashamed in the end, and that we may get glory of the world.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, that Satan has great hold upon their hearts; he stirreth them up to iniquity against that which is good; And their hearts are corrupt, and full of wickedness and abominations; and they love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil; therefore they will not ask of me. (D&C 10:14-21)

The 116 pages were lost, and have never been recovered.

Regards,

Vanhin

I still don't get why he didn't translate them again. If he did translate them again the worst case scenario is that whoever has the real pages makes fake pages to make it look like he is a fraud, which seems unlikely that someone could produce a reasonably convincing fraud (similar in handwriting and style) in the same time it would take for him to simply retranslate. If he doesn't translate them again he looks like a fraud anyway and just sounds like he is making up excuses, but if he did translate them again, the people who had the real original pages would know he is not a false prophet (even if it is not the exact same words, it would presumably be pretty darn close). Maybe they just wanted to make sure he is truly a prophet? Seems like a logical test to me.

[Vanhin]

I have trouble with the concept of faith in general. Believing in something and acting on it even though there is no evidence or even contradictory evidence doesn't make sense to me.

Usually when I tell people that, they try to convince me that I already have faith with examples that take advantage of the fact that "faith" has multiple meanings and connotations. I have frustrated many missionaries with this topic.

DS,

Faith is the evidence, and the witness you receive from God in return, is the proof. If you are seeking for the proof, before exercising faith, you will not find it until it's too late. You will receive no witness until your faith is tried (Ether 12:6). It's important to understand this, because you might actually be right on the verge of receiving the answers you seek to these questions. I believe the ball is in your court.

It would actually be bad advice for me to suggest that you should believe in or act upon everything that ever comes before you in order for you to discern the truth of it. Say, for example, that I come to you and say, "Hey DS! I have discovered that we should worship rocks, but the only way to worship rocks properly is to shoot ourselves in the foot. Then we will mysteriously know that worshipping rocks is the right thing to do."

You would probably tell me to go take a hike, because you already can tell that that is not right. But when someone tells you, "Hey DS, I have found that there is a God, and that by living his commandments, I have had greater happiness in my life. I know we cannot see God right now, but He has promised that if we earnestly seek him, by exercising faith in his Son, we can know for ourselves that it is true.", then that is a different story. Moving ahead in faith, in this instance, is not such a bad thing to do.

For one, our message is good, and you have all the power within you to discern the difference between good and evil. We all do.

For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God. (Moroni 7:16)

You've got to know that the Church and it's teachings are good, and the teachings lead people to be generally good. There are a lot of things said about the Church, but just based on the content of our message, it is fundementally good!

So, in my opinion, that is reason enough to exercise faith, whatever that means in your case, and take that step into the unknown to determine whether it is of God or not. I personally think that the things you have been doing are in the right direction, and they at least demonstrate your desire to have faith. Which thing is prerequisite to actually having faith (see Alma 32:27). The proof is really "in the pudding" in this case. It's as simple as that, even though the trial of our faith may not be. :)

Regards,

Vanhin

[DigitalShadow]

DS,

Faith is the evidence, and the witness you receive from God in return, is the proof. If you are seeking for the proof, before exercising faith, you will not find it until it's too late. You will receive no witness until your faith is tried (Ether 12:6). It's important to understand this, because you might actually be right on the verge of receiving the answers you seek to these questions. I believe the ball is in your court.

It would actually be bad advice for me to suggest that you should believe in or act upon everything that ever comes before you in order for you to discern the truth of it. Say, for example, that I come to you and say, "Hey DS! I have discovered that we should worship rocks, but the only way to worship rocks properly is to shoot ourselves in the foot. Then we will mysteriously know that worshipping rocks is the right thing to do."

You would probably tell me to go take a hike, because you already can tell that that is not right. But when someone tells you, "Hey DS, I have found that there is a God, and that by living his commandments, I have had greater happiness in my life. I know we cannot see God right now, but He has promised that if we earnestly seek him, by exercising faith in his Son, we can know for ourselves that it is true.", then that is a different story. Moving ahead in faith, in this instance, is not such a bad thing to do.

For one, our message is good, and you have all the power within you to discern the difference between good and evil. We all do.

For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God. (Moroni 7:16)

You've got to know that the Church and it's teachings are good, and the teachings lead people to be generally good. There are a lot of things said about the Church, but just based on the content of our message, it is fundementally good!

So, in my opinion, that is reason enough to exercise faith, whatever that means in your case, and take that step into the unknown to determine whether it is of God or not. I personally think that the things you have been doing are in the right direction, and they at least demonstrate your desire to have faith. Which thing is prerequisite to actually having faith (see Alma 32:27). The proof is really "in the pudding" in this case. It's as simple as that, even though the trial of our faith may not be. :)

Regards,

Vanhin

I have been waiting to receive my witness and I will continue to wait. I am keeping an open mind as always.

[Vanhin]

I still don't get why he didn't translate them again. If he did translate them again the worst case scenario is that whoever has the real pages makes fake pages to make it look like he is a fraud, which seems unlikely that someone could produce a reasonably convincing fraud (similar in handwriting and style) in the same time it would take for him to simply retranslate. If he doesn't translate them again he looks like a fraud anyway and just sounds like he is making up excuses, but if he did translate them again, the people who had the real original pages would know he is not a false prophet (even if it is not the exact same words, it would presumably be pretty darn close). Maybe they just wanted to make sure he is truly a prophet? Seems like a logical test to me.

According to the revelation I quoted, the people would have falsified the documents, if it turned out that they were a perfect match after the retranslation. Just like many things having to do with God, physical evidence is not what converts people. The Lord knew their hearts. They clearly were not honorable people, or they would have returned the manuscript to Joseph to begin with.

But let me explain something to you that you may not have thought of. The Prophet did produce the same story in "not the exact same words", but it was under the title 1 Nephi and 2 Nephi, and not Lehi, and it was authored by Nephi and not Lehi. That explains, perhaps, why the manuscript was lost for good. The conspirers, whoever they were, did not have a leg to stand on at that point, and their snare was in vain. Joseph clearly did the right thing. God in his wisdom forsaw this incident, and it served many purposes, including a very harsh lesson of obedience for Joseph.

Now, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them. And you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened. Nevertheless, it is now restored unto you again; therefore see that you are faithful and continue on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have begun. (D&C 10:1-3)

Regards,

Vanhin

[Vanhin]

I have been waiting to receive my witness and I will continue to wait. I am keeping an open mind as always.

I know DigitalShadow. :)

Sincerely,

Vanhin

[DigitalShadow]

According to the revelation I quoted, the people would have falsified the documents, if it turned out that they were a perfect match after the retranslation. Just like many things having to do with God, physical evidence is not what converts people. The Lord knew their hearts. They clearly were not honorable people, or they would have returned the manuscript to Joseph to begin with.

But let me explain something to you that you may not have thought of. The Prophet did produce the same story in "not the exact same words", but it was under the title 1 Nephi and 2 Nephi, and not Lehi, and it was authored by Nephi and not Lehi. That explains, perhaps, why the manuscript was lost for good. The conspirers, whoever they were, did not have a leg to stand on at that point, and their snare was in vain. Joseph clearly did the right thing. God in his wisdom forsaw this incident, and it served many purposes, including a very harsh lesson of obedience for Joseph.

Now, behold, I say unto you, that because you delivered up those writings which you had power given unto you to translate by the means of the Urim and Thummim, into the hands of a wicked man, you have lost them. And you also lost your gift at the same time, and your mind became darkened. Nevertheless, it is now restored unto you again; therefore see that you are faithful and continue on unto the finishing of the remainder of the work of translation as you have begun. (D&C 10:1-3)

Regards,

Vanhin

To me, religion requiring faith is a convenient way to remove the need for traditional evidence in order for belief. I am open to other explainations, but so far my experiences in this world have led me to that conclusion. I would be incredibly happy if something convinced me otherwise because I would like to believe that there is more to our existence than the physical world, but for now my opinion remains unchanged.

I thank you for all your insight so far :)

[Vanhin]

To me, religion requiring faith is a convenient way to remove the need for traditional evidence in order for belief. I am open to other explainations, but so far my experiences in this world have led me to that conclusion. I would be incredibly happy if something convinced me otherwise because I would like to believe that there is more to our existence than the physical world, but for now my opinion remains unchanged.

I thank you for all your insight so far :)

Anytime brother. :)

Vanhin

[Traveler]

........

2. I had heard of contraversy over the use of "swords" in the Book of Mormon before, but since I hadn't really seen the context so I witheld judgements. From the context I've seen so far though, it sounds like they are talking about swords how usually think of them. Nephi has Laban's sword which was described in great detail when he aquired it, and it was said they fashioned many swords after it to defend themselves. That does not sound like the wood with razor sharp obsidian attached that I have seen LDS apologists propose as the "swords" referred to in the Book of Mormon. In general it sounds like Nephi and in turn the Nephites had metallurgical knowledge far beyond anything we've found evidence of in the Americas at that time frame. I'm not saying that proves anything, but it just does not sit well with me personally. So do you think that "sword" is just a vague term and we've already found evidence for the weapons of the BoM or that we simply haven't discovered the real weapons of the people in the BoM, or something else entirely?

.....

One of the interesting finds in the South Americas is that the ancients (Classic era) performed a type of brain surgery as a remedy for an ancient disease. We know this from specific skulls that were found. There is a name for this type of surgery that I remember but I do not remember how to spell so I will not include that in my post. The problem is that this surgery requires a specific type of drill in order to remove a “plug” from the skull that is then replaced and able to heal. The drill must be very strong and sharp to accomplish this clean removal of the plug (about 2 inches in diameter). Such a drill is assumed to be a high quality metal – of higher quality than most knives available today. There has never been any indication that the Americas could have ever produced or knew how to produce any metal or metal alloy capable of drilling a plug from a human skull. Just because something cannot be found or lack of evidence does not mean that it does not or could not exist.

The Traveler

[LDSpunkrocker]

One of the interesting finds in the South Americas is that the ancients (Classic era) performed a type of brain surgery as a remedy for an ancient disease. We know this from specific skulls that were found. There is a name for this type of surgery that I remember but I do not remember how to spell so I will not include that in my post. The problem is that this surgery requires a specific type of drill in order to remove a “plug” from the skull that is then replaced and able to heal. The drill must be very strong and sharp to accomplish this clean removal of the plug (about 2 inches in diameter). Such a drill is assumed to be a high quality metal – of higher quality than most knives available today. There has never been any indication that the Americas could have ever produced or knew how to produce any metal or metal alloy capable of drilling a plug from a human skull. Just because something cannot be found or lack of evidence does not mean that it does not or could not exist.

The Traveler

are you talking about trepanation?

[Guest The_Doctor]

1. Why wouldn't God just have Nephi to slay Laman and Lemuel or smite them himself after they tried to kill Nephi for the whateverth time? He seemed to have no qualms ordering Nephi to kill Laban with his own sword to get the record of the Jews.

2. I had heard of contraversy over the use of "swords" in the Book of Mormon before, but since I hadn't really seen the context so I witheld judgements. From the context I've seen so far though, it sounds like they are talking about swords how usually think of them. Nephi has Laban's sword which was described in great detail when he aquired it, and it was said they fashioned many swords after it to defend themselves. That does not sound like the wood with razor sharp obsidian attached that I have seen LDS apologists propose as the "swords" referred to in the Book of Mormon. In general it sounds like Nephi and in turn the Nephites had metallurgical knowledge far beyond anything we've found evidence of in the Americas at that time frame. I'm not saying that proves anything, but it just does not sit well with me personally. So do you think that "sword" is just a vague term and we've already found evidence for the weapons of the BoM or that we simply haven't discovered the real weapons of the people in the BoM, or something else entirely?

I don't if anyone has given answers similar to my answers, because I haven't read all of the posts yet.

1. How I see it is that Laban was a bigger threat then Nephi's brothers. Also Heavenly Father would in the future need to use their descendents to deal with the corruption of the Nephites; though I suppose that Heavenly Father could have used something else to deal with the Nephites.

2. I believe that Laban's sword was a traditional sword. But through time they forgot how to make swords like Laban's sword, so they came up with a new kind of weapon; kind of like how we have no idea where the Ark of the Covenant is. We just forgot, though there's some other ideas of why we don't know where it is. I'm going back to the sword thing now; making swords like Laban's sword may have not been a realistic idea where they were living. Perhaps there wasn't enough ore or building mines in the area was not easily done.

[Traveler]

are you talking about trepanation?

Yes - thanks.

The Traveler

[KTMxer_250f]

Ya know, all this evidential analysis is interesting and can definitely help your testimony at times, but if your REALLY trying to find out if the Bom is true, you need to not get caught up on the little details. You need to open your heart and really read and pray about the book of mormon. Even though everyone once in a while I hear controversial things about the Bom, theres always another side to the debate. Like the DNA thing for instance, i read this great article explaining and debunking that whole argument.. Anyways thats besides the point.

It's very heard to put aside all the things you hear from critics, but i have a testimony that if you do you will gain a witness of its divinity, and when you do hear the critics they will have no effect on you. Its really amazing. I went through the same thing, I always used to wonder and kinda doubt but after really wanted to know and reading and really paying attention in church and putting my heart and all my effort into it, I just know. Its weird cuz you think you would be swayed, but Its like i dont even budge. I just have that foundation. I cant explain it any other than that besides you just know its true and you are unaffected by any critical claims.

And also I as far as peoples claim that he just made it up... Lets see how you or anyone else would do trying to make a similar record!!!! This is an assignment at BYU:

"Since Joseph Smith was younger than most of you and not nearly as experienced or well-educated as any of you at the time he copyrighted the BOM, 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 and involved 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 BC; 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 BOM); 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 par with the Bible. If they seem overly-skeptical, you might tell them that you translated the book from the 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 gold plates, and that you got the plates from an angel. Now go to work and good luck!

To this date no one has completed the assignment"

Edited October 10, 2008 by KTMxer_250f