COULD Joseph Smith Memorise The Book of Mormon?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 ก.ย. 2024
- A response to the video "Could Joseph Smith have written and recited the Book of Mormon from memory???", released 25/02/2021, which seeks to debunk the idea that Joseph could have written and dictated the Book of Mormon from his mind.
**UPDATE**
It was Martin Harris who lost the pages, not David Whitmer, apologies for the error, and thanks to those who brought it to my attention!
Video Sources:
Original Video: Could Joseph Smith have written and recited the Book of Mormon from memory???
• Could Joseph Smith hav...
Visitation from Moroni and Story Telling
www.churchofje...
Lucy Mack Smith Account
www.josephsmit...
Paper for the Neil A. Maxwell Institute
scholarsarchiv...
Memory World Records
www.guinnesswo...
www.guinnesswo...
The original video is included under 'Fair Use' law for the purpose of critique.
#BookOfMormon #JosephSmith #SaintsUnscripted
![วันเกิดเธอ (TO YOU) - PHUWIN [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_ROx1Bj3T0Y/mqdefault.jpg)
I love the point that the consistency across hundreds of pages and years could be explained by a single author, rather than a historical compilation.
Also language shifts over time. I love reading Thomas Burgess books to my kids. Stories like Peter Rabbit and Reddy Fox. They are a hundred years old and have very different phraseology and word usage. The Book of Mormon spans nearly a thousand years, yet the language is remarkably consistent.
I've heard discussion that the lost 116 pages may have been a bit of a boom. They were Joseph's first draft and a lot of practice for him. Its possible that in doing that writing, he improved, as all of us do when we begin something.
Also the up=North thing is bunk. I have lived in both Boise and Salt Lake City. Me and my family have interchangeablly said going both Up/Down to Boise/Salt Lake. We haven't honored the cardinal direction with respect to word usage. Saying like going Up to Boise and Down to Boise. This is an argument that sounds logical, but isn't tied to any truely universal human behavior. On the Maine coast they refer to places North East of their location as "Down East" because the current flows North East and you sail down current.
Finally, a historian ought to look for examples from contemporary authors, and authors in history. Fiction has been around for centuries. Has anyone created consistent worlds with foreshadowing that was fulfilled before? Is what Joseph did actually Notable or unique? I think you would find authors more prolific, more consistent, and more complex than what Joseph did. A contemporary Mark Twain referred to the Book of Mormon as "Chloroform in print." I think that speaks to the Book Of Mormon not being as special or remarkable as the church believes it is.
Great points all round, thanks! I love the chloroform in print quote!
I wonder if the ‘chloroform in print’ quote refers to how much stuff ‘came to pass’.
On the Lord of the Rings point, I’ve always said names that Aragorn and Arathorn reminded me of the way Nephi and Lehi sound so similar. It’s what happens when an individual person creates names.
@@williamstilgoe61 The full Mark Twain quote does specifically call out "And it came to pass":
All men have heard of the Mormon Bible, but few except the “elect” have seen it, or, at least, taken the trouble to read it. I brought away a copy from Salt Lake. The book is a curiosity to me, it is such a pretentious affair, and yet so “slow,” so sleepy; such an insipid mess of inspiration. It is chloroform in print. If Joseph Smith composed this book, the act was a miracle-keeping awake while he did it was, at any rate. If he, accourding to tradition, merely translated it from certain ancient and mysteriously-engraved plates of copper, which he declares he found under a stone, in an out-of-the-way locality, the work of translating was equally a miracle, for the same reason.
The book seems to be merely a prosy detail of imaginary history, with the Old Testament for a model; followed by a tedious plagiarism of the New Testament. The author labored to give his words and phrases the quaint, old-fashioned sound and structure of our King James’s translation of the Scriptures; and the result is a mongrel-half modern glibness, and half ancient simplicity and gravity. The latter is awkward and constrained; the former natural, but grotesque by the contrast. Whenever he found his speech growing too modern-which was about every sentence or two-he ladled in a few such Scriptural phrases as “exceeding sore,” “and it came to pass,” etc., and made things satisfactory again. “And it came to pass” was his pet. If he had left that out, his Bible would have been only a pamphlet.
@@hunter_w you are comparing books, maybe you could do a comparison of Joseph Smith’s education to this of Tolkien’s “On the academic front, Tolkien never “took a PhD.” as we now sometimes say - he was too busy working professionally on the kind of stuff people normally do PhDs on - but he was awarded a Doctorate of Letters (D. Litt.) and Philosophy by the University of Liege in Belgium”
I've heard it said that Tolkien could've written the entire Lord of the Rings series in Elfin, a language he completely made up. Incredible, yes, but I think we sometimes under estimate the genius of minds to do things. People can hear music and instantly replay it flawlessly on piano. So for Joseph to do what he did, is amazing, but very very far from impossible.
Yes! We absolutely need to stop projecting our own limitations onto him! Thanks for your comment!
I used to tell bedtime stories to my children when they were young. I had 4 different stories that I would tell off and on to mix things up. Each story had many characters, places, settings different voices etc. I would tell the stories at night with no notes or script. The characters, and places were always consistent because I had a visual map in my head. I could see characters, I could see the places where they lived. I could see in my head everything and it was pretty easy for me to tell the story as it unfolded. I could tell one story one night and then another story the next night, and pick up right where I left off and include bits from the story's past. People often tell me I am a good story teller, but I am certainly not unique or particularly gifted. I simply have the ability to visualize stories in my mind's eye. There are millions of individuals who can accomplish this kind of task, its not particularly extraordinary.
It’s extraordinary to me, but that’s not the point! You’re spot on!
Emma stating Joseph as unlearned... this was in the same testimony where she said he didn’t practice polygamy. Her narrative regarding Joseph in part is false, self serving and she becomes an unreliable witness. His mother gave a clearer image when she said he wasn’t as intellectually driven as her other children. If he was uneducated doesn’t that reflect poorly on his parents were Joseph Senior had worked as a teacher and who was directly related to John Smith who developed much of the early theological curriculum at Dartmouth and a mother whose own mother was also an educator. Also why is Joseph poorly educated while Hyrum is also being educated at Dartmouth? Though perhaps not interested on the same level as his siblings evidence this was far from a family who just drug up their children as unread illiterate bumpkins, as Joseph is portrayed when it suits the church.
Emma not only said that Joseph was uneducated. She also said that he could not write or dictate a cogent letter. If that part is true it would tend to rule out him making up this story as he went along without having things read back to him or making it up in advance and memorizing it for later dictation. As for the idea of him having a photographic memory, where is the evidence that such was the case? So Joseph Smith had a photographic memory, but he also had such a poor memory that he could not remember the details of his first vision story well enough to tell it the same way in various versions?
@@r.nathangibbs578 "If that part is true..." There is much evidence that is clearly not true, don't you know that the "translation" process was done by joseph dictating things then having them ready back to him to confirm and so on?, none of this is evidence against making it up in his mind in advance. There is evidence that emma lied in the same text where she described him as unable to write a letter without help to help him look good. The biggest lie of the lds is to convince its people that JS was an illiterate and unimaginative man because it makes his claim seem truthful.
Here's the story of the 116 pages, according to Joseph Smith:
-Martin Harris' wife was concerned about his susceptibility, and was afraid he was being conned.
-Martin Harris asked Joseph if he could take home the 116 pages to show her.
-Joseph prayed. No. No. Yes, but only show them to family.
-Wicked men believed Joseph Smith was a legitimate prophet. They were in league with the devil, and stole the pages. Then, they painstakingly altered the pages, in order to change the translation, so when Joseph translated again, he'd be shown as a fraud. And they don't believe God has the power to do anything about it.
-God does not Tell Joseph where the pages were, or who took them. He doesn't magically teleport the pages to Joseph. He doesn't cause them to miraculously combust. When God's power was needed, He was powerless.
-But God does send an angel to bring Joseph a second set of plates, specially prepared, (instead of simply fetching the pages) so those evil men won't be able to trick people into thinking Joseph is a fraud.
Here's what I believe:
-Martin Harris' family believed he was being conned.
-Seeing the pages alone would prove nothing.
-They hid the pages, thinking if Joseph were a prophet he could re-translate.
-Joseph couldn't re-translate, and knew it. He made up a story further cementing his calling as a prophet, against the devil's cunning opposition.
-Later, Joseph failed in translating the Greek Psalter, Kinderhook Plates, and Egyptian Funerary texts; all which we can professionally translate in modern times, to compare. Also, the Salamander Letter conned more recent Church leaders.
They accept the hat in the seer stone at 0:38 and 1:15 - but then go out of their way to depict incorrectly. His face was IN THE HAT, not looking at it from a comfortable distance where he could focus on the rock. The church knows this, but still tries to make the story more palatable by changing it (yet again).
Baby steps I suppose!
Still makes you wonder why Moroni visited him every year to tell him about the plates!... it was just the plates.. I know if I was investigating it nowadays with the extra details, I most likely wouldn't have joined. Oh yes, the rock that couldn't find treasures...but could tell the BofM. For those who say the rock was saved..to me it would have been more powerful to have actually found treasures before being used to translate the Book of Mormon.
Around 9:16 saints unscripted says “this information does not prove the Book of Mormon is true and shouldn’t be the foundation of anyone’s testimony, BUT it IS data among much else that should be realistically accounted for in any theories of fraud.” So my problem with his statement is that they should be considering the “data” that others have found, I.E. Jeremy Runnels and others, and view it the same way. Their collected data should be realistically accounted for. Not solely basing belief strictly from testimony.
Loving these videos! I always look forward to hearing what your have to say 👏😊
Thanks, and that's a solid point! They do like to cherry pick data for sure!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON That they do! Their arguments never seem to ever be neutral. I guess for an apologetic channel I can see why. For me, if I’m right I’m right but if I’m wrong I’m wrong and I will admit it. As long as I can learn from a situation. They don’t seem to own up to anything that disproves their teachings. There seems to always be an explanation for it and usually they’re not very good. If they cannot come up with anything then it falls back on just having faith.
Your commentary is so smart and satisfying. Its so laborious to wade through these ridiculous arguments and really disect them as you have . I love how you stop and interrupt in the moment to inject your point. It really helps the listener from getting overwhelmed with the nonsensical minutia being thrown out there. Thank you!
You’re very welcome!
In Joseph Smith's defense I would like to relate an almost never mentioned event that happed to Joseph Smith in early childhood. Typhoid ran through the Smith family while Joseph was a small child and he caught it. It eventually settled as a serious infection around the femur in his leg leading to three separate surgeries on the leg, without pain medication or anesthesia, to remove all the infection and allow for healing. The third surgery was the most radical, with completely exposing and scraping all the infection off the bone. I can only assume, and this is pure conjecture, that Joseph was able to endure this immense pain (repeatedly) by dissociating mentally from the extraordinary pain and terror that he was feeling physically. To me, this dissociation experienced early in his childhood explains his ability and propensity to develop a separate fantasy world. Whether he understood that he was developing a fantasy reality and conning many others to join in his fantasy, or if he had an inability to differentiate between his fantasy world and reality, for me, is an unanswered question. I feel deep remorse for the many people who have followed on in this delusion, but I do not find it in my heart to hold Joseph Smith fully accountable. I cannot imagine how a young child could endure, repeatedly, such pain and terror without lifelong emotional and mental scaring.
Well done as always!
Thank you! Cheers!
His imagination was the best explanation. Good analysis again. I actually think the Book of Mormon is very childish in its prose. There are a lot of people who were poorly educated but went on to change the way people saw the world or authored books of great popularity. 'While it is common knowledge that Einstein had difficulty in school, and although technically he wasn't actually homeschooled, Einstein self- taught himself in every sense, particularly in the field of mathematics. ... Albert didn't start speaking until he was 4 years old and he wasn't fluent until age 9.' 'Mark Twain went to work as a printer's apprentice at the ripe old age of 12, and it seems unlikely that he went back to school after that.'
Thank for continuing to share the truth about the Book of Mormon! Keep in mind he Joseph Smith Jr. never translated any portion of the Book of Mormon directly in front of anyone. He was always behind a curtain. Why would he need to be behind anything if God was directing him?
It’s an interesting point, do we have sources saying definitively that he was always behind a curtain?
changing clothes for next fotto
I assumed, when I read The Book of Mormon, that he probably had some notes in the hat.
In later editions of the Book of Mormon, "Benjamin" was changed to "Mosiah," since at the time the Nephites obtained the Jaredite records, Benjamin had handed over the throne to Mosiah his son. However, Hugh Nibley, a prominent 20th century LDS scholar, strongly objected to this change.
That’s from some wiki...This could be one time the internal logic doesn’t work out
Thanks for the additional insight!
There were over 2000 textual changes to the first edition of the BM. The church made 62 changes in the 2013 edition.
It's easy to get the geography "right" when you're making up fictional places!
They accomodate every detail to make it fit in the south of mexico and when something doesn't fit, well is obviously because they have only discovered "1% of the ancient civilizations"
Except when he gets it right.
some really impressive points and evidences, thank you :)
You’re welcome! Thanks for watching :)
Excellent point that it is more difficult to believe the church’s narrative than that he created it.
Thanks, I thought the irony was too much not to point it out!
it was Martin Harris that lost the pages not David Whitmer
Thanks for pointing that out, I clearly got mixed up!
What gets me is that growing up l was shown movies stories narratives that showed JS sitting at a table looking thru urumin and thumin (clear stone looking glasses) with gold plates next to him, as he intercepted.. NOT ever once seeing or being told JS had a stone in a HAT!!
So much of what l grew up with is looking very different... When you uphold significant TRUTH claims and then casually slip some of the transparencies into church essays, that l never was told were added a few yrs ago, never taught in any lesson ? .... Is very concerning.. And then to be gas lighted about it all... Very traumatic experience.. Your belief systems were an integral part of your life. I feel l have more of a personal connection to Jesus than ever before. My tith l now give to those in need.. 🙏😇
John Dehlin recently did a podcast entitled “Visions in a Seer Stone” with William L Davis that is incredibly enlightening in this topic. Davis breaks down early American dictation practices in Protestant Christianity, how Joseph held such a dictation position in his local Methodist church for years, and how the actual text of the Book of Mormon reveals how clearly it is an orally-dictated work of fiction. Check it out-well worth the 3 hour listen/watch :)
Thanks for sharing!
I don't understand the argument that Joseph Smith wrote from memory. I would assume he reviewed the pages numerous times during the process.
And as a writer myself it is typical to have solid visual ideas that don't change. The consistency of a few details does not impress me. Also notes, writers are constantly making notes. Why wouldn't he have created a map he referred to?
I wonder if a writer such as Brandon Sanderson claimed his books to be dictated visions from God how many of his supporters would come up with evidence that sounds an awful lot like these apologetic videos as proof that his visions are from God.
I guess what I’m doing with this video is saying, even IF we go with the premise that Joseph didn’t use any notes, it’s still not impossible fir him to have done it from memory. I would agree with you that what is far more likely is notes were used. The witnesses all had vested interests in declaring the Book of Mormon as coming from God!
Before I saw your comment....I also said....why memory...couldn't he have made notes, including a map...of course..
This was a great analysis as usual. I will say this saints video uses more of the church video showing translation with the hat than the church does in the come follow me manual. As usual the apologetic material is being more forthcoming of the truth than official church material. Its also interesting how the plates themselves have now taken a back seat vs when I was a kid. I was going to recommend you look at all the saints unscripted videos smart move you are ahead of me.
Thanks! Much appreciated! I too am glad the real narrative is finally coming to light!
Yes l too grew up with very squeaky clean fluffy white cloud narratives and moves. I was conditioned as a child teenager and adult to never question.. if l did it was spirit of contention of the devil.. That stuck for ages and sadly the cognitive dissonance is real.
is that tea Emma was serving?
Pre-WoW but yeah, looks to be!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON I read that Brigham enjoyed cups of tea in England. Also that term hot drink might have been misinterpreted, and that Joseph had wine in Carthage. Didn't mean to be flippant, just sorry LDS after WoW miss out on nice healthy cups of tea.
@@anselman3156 No flippancy seen from my end! The whole WoW becomes more and more messy the more research you do!
That’s hilarious! 🤣 I saw that too!
Mr. Packer spoke clear Clingon language from a pulpit during one general conference!! He learned it in a few minutes of instruction.
6 plus years in the 1800s was a long time, people’s days were very long then! We today forget that time is all what is needed to invent, changed, renew or erase events that happened in the far past. The keeper of secrets work generationally, one dies and their beliefs die with them, the new generation is conditioned to a new reality that carries on as the “truth.” So it goes on and on forever!
If there wasn't a problem with the true history of the church then why did it have to be sanitized to make it believable? If the Book of Abraham was not written by the hand of Abraham as Joseph claimed, but rather a funerary text, then logic would seem to indicate that there is a high likelihood that the B of M didn't come about as Joseph claimed as well. There is just something terribly wrong with all the secrecy behind just so many aspects of making the church the only true religion upon the face of the earth.
You're right, "plain and simple truths" aren't so plain and simple after all!
At 10:18. "He wasn't stupid, but his own wife described him as ignorant and unlearned." LOL.
Ok, another point. Since there are several accounts of Joseph using the rock in the hat to translate the BoM, it is often proposed that this was the ONLY method for dictation. There are several other accounts of Joseph dictating from behind a sheet or curtain. Can we also give credence to some of these accounts? Isn't it possible that there were times when he dictated directly with his head in his hat, but other times that he dictated behind a curtain, where he may have had the bible or other materials to draw from?
That’s a good point! I should maybe do one laying out the different methods used and try and settle how it was done, eg what mixture of methods.
@@NEMOTHEMORMON Vogel said in some of the accounts when Joseph Smith would have difficulty translating , he would take a break to pray or read the bible or walk outside. He was likely taking breaks to keep the story straight in his head.
The ideas in the book of mormon were swimming around in his head for years. The idea that Native Americans were descended from a lost portion of ancient Israel was not novel. And what kind of idiot just buys the Church line that Joseph translated the Book of Mormon from scratch in a few months without any critical thinking?
Another excellent video.
Thank you kindly!
Joeseph Smith is to the Book Of Mormon as Tolkien is to The Lord of The Rings. They are both complex fantasy stories, about non existent people. 🧙♂️🧝♀️
Great Video
Thanks!
The stone in the hat is simply an excuse that Joseph Smith used to explain his lack of the gold plates. Apparently, he co-wrote the Book of Mormon with Oliver Cowdery, just as one would write any other book. There was no need for him to act this prophecy nonsense with the hat when no one was looking at him.
Thanks for your comment!
I was not raised Mormon and I have never been Mormon but I read The Book of Mormon out of curiosity as a recently deconverted Christian. From my perspective, The Book of Mormon is really not well written when compared to the Christian Bible which includes the Jewish Tanakh. The Book of Mormon is also not well written when compared to our better or even not so much better works of fiction over the time in which humans have been writing. I'm always surprised when I hear Mormons and even ex-Mormons referring to The Book of Mormon as if it is well written. I guess the only explanations that I can think of for clearly intelligent people to have such unfortunate bad taste is that they were told since infancy that it was a good book and that it would be evil to think otherwise. I can understand that as a person who was brought up Christian.
Three points:
1) Can't forget about how at two points in the book of Mormon (one right after the 116 pages were lost, and one right at the end when he needed to go back and re-write the first few books), "Mormon" and then Moroni make interjections saying "ALSO REMEMBER THIS IS A COMPILATION AND WE COULDNT FIT ANYTHING AND IF THINGS SEEM FISHY MY BAD MY HANDS ARE WEAK" and Mormons 100% will use that to hand wave away innacuracies and references to events that WEREN'T fleshed out.
It's called "counting the hits, and ignoring the misses."
2) Anyone who has worked as a stenographer can tell you, you would be SHOCKED at how quickly you can fill pages transcribing even a conversation.
511 pages sounds like a lot, but dictating that much content in words isn't actually all that big of a deal. Stenographers often need to type upwards of 350 words per minute to keep up. Given there are 267,931 (lets steel-man Joe here a bit, and round up to 269,000 words. Seems nice.) in the BoM, it would take a modern stenographer (let's round down to 300 for more steelmannery), 896.666 (eek!) minutes to type out the whole thing at dictation speed.
That's 15 hours.
Using those same numbers, we get about 525 words per page on the BoM, meaning a stenographer could do a page every minute and a half.
So, if something happened a WHOPPING 15 pages ago, we're looking at about 45 minutes.
You ever tried to remember something you said 45 minutes ago? Any casual dungeon master will acknowledge it's far from impossible to remember a few story details from 45 minutes ago. Tricky sometimes? Sure. But impossible? NOOOO.
3) Finally, let's not forget there is NO reason to suggest Jo couldn't have had more than a rock in his hat, or that he didn't have super convenient access to literally all the manuscript notes of his last "story telling sesh" at his permanent disposal.
Why could he not dictate a few pages (which would take longer because no typewriters back then), and at the end of the day when alone, just... Review a few things for tomorrow?
Whole thing really falls apart quite quickly when you break it down...
3) Building on that, there is nothing to suggest Joseph didn't have access to his works.
JS did not create the BoM in a controlled environment!! Yes his face was in a hat some of the time, but we have no idea what the rest of it looked like. He could have easily have written notes for reference, looked back at previous pages as he was going, etc. The testimonies contradicting this are from Emma, not Oliver. Oliver is the only other person who died knowing the details of the method.
Great video. Great points. Great work.
The fact that he rarely, if ever, preached from it, tells me he made it up.
Heck no! Did he rewrite the missing 116 pages? Again, heck no!
The 116 pages part does add an interesting twist to the memory argument!
I recently watched a documentary about Andrew Jackson, seventh president of the United States from 1829-1837. He had little formal education and was described as unlearned and unable to spell, just as Joseph is described. Yet, Andrew Jackson went on to get a law degree, serve as a general in the army, serve in Congress and, ultimately, as president of the United States. Joseph Smith may not have had a formal education, but he was not unlearned.
116 pages lost by David Whitmer? Shouldn't that be Martin Harris?
Yeah, the mistake is noted in the pinned comment :)
Soooooo many writers do this: Tolkien, CS Lewis, Stephen king, Faulkner and none of their books had plagiarized parts
David Whitmer didn't lose the 116 pages that was Martin Harris.
Yep, I mis-spoke, I think I pinned a comment making that clear, if not, I’ll pin this one
@@NEMOTHEMORMON Just thought I'd mention it.
As for the archeology, some of them are starting to say it took place in Asia now. How's that for internal consistency?
That’s crazy!! Watch them try to sell that to members as “nuance”!
Really!? Please say you have a source. This ought to be good 🤣
More than 20 years ago I place that “ most correct book on the history of humans “ where it belongs… inside my garbage can. Every time I saw it on my self brings me shame.
I find his analysis more balanced and realistic than yours. I’m not LDS. Cheers.
Cool, thanks for letting me know!
Joseph Smith = Best Dungeon Master. Change my mind.
Much like what a child who plays dungeons and dragons does when they create the world in the environment for the game
It is amazing how less credible the story sounds when you replace the word seer stone with a rock, what’s not believe?
It's all in the nuance!
I grew up with videos and pictures of gold plates & the translating glasses. Never once did l hear or see a Hat or rock story. This and other so called historic facts were never talked about or taught. No transparency... Well not in my early vulnerable years....😟 I trust only in my Lord Jesus 🙏🏼😇
The interesting thing about this is going to be how successful Nemo is in his war against the twelve apostles of the Lamb. The Book of Mormon says he is going to lose this war.
Time for fact checking Nemo:
1:00 That’s not gaslighting. Give me a specific example. The reason the rock in the hat narrative wasn’t widespread is because the records of it are dubious. All references come from decades after the translation from people no longer associated with the church. Church historians and leaders (Such as Joseph Fielding Smith, Joseph’s own nephew) who were very familiar with the historical record, simply didn’t find the references credible. Many people today still don’t think the evidence is strong enough to support the rock in hat theory. So if someone believes that and then tells people “there is no good evidence that Joseph translated the Book of Mormon with a seer stone rather than the Urim and Thummim” that’s not gaslighting, they’re telling you their honest belief based on their investigation. And it’s technically true as well. There is no good evidence for the rock in the hat, just some weak evidence that we don’t have good enough reason to throw out completely. Meanwhile there is much more contemporary evidence of the opposite theory.
1:40 full stop. The 85 days is all that matters. It wouldn’t matter even if Joseph had a finished copy of the Book of Mormon to read in his spare time. Dictating 531 pages perfectly while blindfolded in 85 days is not possible, even for someone with eidetic memory.
1:50 the context of this quote is important, Lucy Smith says things like “could not be imagined” because she’s under the impression that Joseph was taught these things by the Angel Moroni, and finds the idea laughable that Joseph could have come up with stuff on his own.
2:25 completely misses the point of no revisions. When we’re viewing the complexity of the Book of Mormon to produce, whichever view of the Godhead is presented (so long as it’s consistent) is equally impressive. Because all good writing is re-writing. Authors spend vastly more time in the revision stages than the inventing stages. Removing that key stage from the writing process makes all the difference. See here: m.th-cam.com/video/yqHlq1F9S6A/w-d-xo.html
2:35 also, those changes really just amount to the wording of sentences and adding clarification. Certainly not significant to how Joseph created the book in the first place. Both versions are fully consistent with LDS theology past and present, as well as what is presented in the rest of the Book of Mormon. The bit about some of the first vision accounts not including the father is also not true. While the Father is not mentioned directly in the 1832 account, it does mention “the testimony from on high” which specifically refers to the line “this is my beloved son, hear him.” So the father is present in that account. To say otherwise would be like saying two accounts are inconsistent because one says Jesus recited the Lord’s Prayer, while the other directly quotes Matthew 6:9-13. m.th-cam.com/video/SqqVJSv7EZw/w-d-xo.html
2:50 you know that actually strengthens Joseph’s case, right? He had the whole first 116 pages taken, then continued along writing the middle portion consistent with a beginning that no longer existed, and then after all that, he had to come back to a portion of the book he had not written about in months, and re-make it in such a way that was consistent and connected well with the middle portion, as well as consistent with Emma and Martin Harris’s memory of the original version, while not seemingly like a direct copy. All while blindfolded and only having spoken/read the words of the 116 pages once.
3:50 this is an incredibly weak argument against the Book of Mormon. Not only does it only cover a small fraction of the names, but the places aren’t even in the right places in relation to each other. So even if that was where he got inspiration for a few of the names (which itself is impossible because those places didn’t even exist in 1830), it provides zero explanation for the Book of Mormon’s geographic consistency. m.th-cam.com/video/8h0Bfc8-gsE/w-d-xo.html
4:10 that’s because we don’t know the names of any mesoamerican cities of that time period whatsoever. We only have the Spanish settlers versions of the names. We very well may have found many Book of Mormon cities, and just don’t know it. We have already mapped every location in 1st Nephi, with Nahom and Bountiful being particular standouts.
5:00 yes, but Joseph isn’t a world record holder, he could hardly write a letter let alone memorize something like that. I would like to see this guy who memorized 54 items in a minute then recite them in reverse. But not just recite them, but recite a cohesive story around each one with no breaks. It would take him hours to get through the whole list. That memorizing skill is done using a specialized strategy utilizing mnemonic devices, and years of practice. And even still, these world record holders you mention couldn’t have written the Book of Mormon in Joseph Smith’s conditions either. And his condition is controlled in a much more impassable way, namely that his time and place simply didn’t offer the resources that would even allow him to cheat in the first place.
5:50 even the world’s best Biblical scholar couldn’t have verbatim reiterated the story of the Bible with the same amount of internal consistency that Joseph made the Book of Mormon with. Joseph would have to be better acquainted with the world of the Book of Mormon than Tolkien ever was with Middle Earth.
7:25 the significance is that the exact same phrasing is being used to make precise references to things mentioned off hand in between dozens of pages of unrelated material that makes specific reference to similar events, but with different wording. Using the last example, Jesus Christ is mentioned thousands of times in the Book of Mormon with over a hundred different titles. But Samuel quotes the exact title King Benjamin used offhand over 200 pages earlier meanwhile the hundreds of other references to Christ in between those two instances use different wording.
8:15 “but, but what if he did though, what if he did come up with and keep track of all these counterintuitive tiny details, it’s technically not impossible. Especially if we ignore all the other incredible feats of memory he was doing at the same time.”
9:00 except that same argument equally applies to the single author and compiler of the Book of Mormon: Mormon himself. Except Mormon had decades of time and mountains of reference material with centuries of analysis and retrospective on those materials. The work was already half done for him. Joseph would be weaving these overarching themes and references on the spot, while also mimicking the style of several different authors.
9:45 “the idea that he did it from memory is a straw man. The real argument is he first accomplished the much more difficult task of inventing a whole consistent intricate world inside his head, and then recited events from that world based solely on memory of his previous trains of thought.”
11:40 In other words. It’s not impossible that Joseph did it, it’s just highly highly unlikely.
11:50 there is no genetic evidence to the contrary, the null hypothesis of a small family mixing in with other ancient inhabitants gives us exactly the results we would expect to find given the available data. As for archeological evidence, there is tons of evidence in favor of the Book of Mormon.
There's a guy in my church who has memorized about 70% of the standard works, including 100% of the BM.
Yup, memorization is most definitely possible!
JK Rowling also created a consistent timeline of events. If anything, this proves that it's one author and not several authors as the bofm says.
Great point! There have been many great works of fiction by a single author!
J.K. did a far better job too, great fun.
I am puzzled at your channel title of "Nemo the Mormon". In your videos you logically deconstruct the theology, history and claims of the LDS church - Mormondom does not permit public criticism and almost always disfellowships and/or excommunicates anyone pointing out the fallacies of this church. So this leaves me wondering (and I fully realize that it's none of my business) if you are currently a Mormon in good standing, a Mormon that is not in good standing, or an ex-Mormon.
He could pick up the Lord of the Rings and do the same thing he’s doing with the Book of Mormon. Is that Scripture? No, it’s just a well written book by an intelligent and creative person. Joseph Smith was both of those things.
I hate how they dumb him down, Joseph was as complex a person as anyone, and the church needs to stop shoehorning him into boxes that fit whatever narrative they’re trying to peddle!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON Agreed!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON they are doing it because, if Joseph wasn't smart enough or educated enough to write the Book of Mormon by himself ...my guess is that the church is hoping people will then accept God helped him..ie it's true...rather then think people wrote it with him andmade it up... least that's my idea.
What have you missed? You missed the whole point about the book. It is not like any other book people are mentioning in the comments, it is the word of God with a promise!
Please explain how he knew about the place Bountiful at the sea side, the lush green place abundant with fruits where they stayed and built the boat to head over here. That place was not known about in his day. It was not on any maps. As far as archeological finds there have been many. Watch some of Wayne May, Rod Meldrum and Michael P's videos. They have found many of the structures described in the Book of Mormon. The Hopewell, the Adena and a whole lot of other ancient peoples all fit in the time line of the Book of Mormon. Mines from the bom time frame and smelting opperations. Many artifacts have been found. These are just a few things. While I do struggle with the leadership from BY onward I have just found too much information in my research for me to just disqualify Joseph Smith.
I think you can believe that the Book of Mormon is divinely inspired and also that Joseph Smith used external sources.
He could have used View of the Hebrews and other sources to understand the time periods of these ancient civilizations so that he could better understand how to translate the Book of Mormon.
If I were translating something from a culture whose language was never previously understood, I would probably read everything I could about what is known about such a culture so I could figure out how to translate the culture's writings.
Of course Joseph didn't memorize the Book of Mormon and didn't make up the story. Archaeologists just found and determined the site in southwest Arabian peninsula as the place called: Naman, or NMN, where Joseph dictated about some 192 years ago. Archaeologists have found numerous ancient stones with paleo-Hebrew inscriptions on them, throughout the Mound Builder's region of the U.S., which Joseph knew nothing about, and the list goes on and on. Remember, the Book of Mormon metal tablets Joseph received were authored by one Mormon, who lived some 1600 years ago, and was his take on the other records he read from, over ~1000 years of his people's history. Even ardent skeptics and enemies of Joseph Smith admitted that they could not explain how a very average, simple farm boy, could translate and recite such an incredible book and with modern, computer word spell, we know Joseph Smith was not the author.
I just have to ask: if you're so opposed to the church and the history of the BoM, why are you a member of the church? I mean no disrespect or attack, but why bother at all?
They try so goddamn hard to defend Joseph Smith!
I know! Some could call it suspicious how much defending he seems to need...
In my opinion, the issue regarding how the BoM came to be is really a secondary issue, but apologists LOVE to talk about it like it's a primary issue for critics. It's not. If the content of the book has been falsified (or if the contents of the book prevent another truth claim of the church from being true), then it doesn't matter how the book came about, it couldn't have come about in the way that the church claims.
Excellent point, the easiest way to misdirect form the main issues is to over inflate side issues. But you know me, I’ll tackle faulty logic wherever I can find it!
Did you decide to upload them to Facebook?
Not yet, still working on it and I'll let you know when I do!
I agree that the rock in the hat discussion has gone mainstream.
The top hat part of the translation was never mentioned in all my years a member until recently.
I’ve been a member for over 50 years and I thought everyone knew. I even taught it in early morning seminary. I was however unaware of multiple first vision accounts and Joseph Smiths promiscuity. I blame CES and Sunday School for doing a lousy job at inservice. Someone is to blame !!! 😝
P. S. I am still a Christian Mormon as of today. Fading fast.
Not to mention that Joseph probably stumbled a lot as he dictated what we was saying to his scribes. Most were either in on it or were brainwashed and so I can easily imagine Joseph saying something like: "And it came to pass that... wait, this part is hard to see... that the Lord came down to Lehi as he knelt by the rock... and he... told him that he needed to flee Jerusalem." Scribe would then say: "Would you like me to write it as you said or like this (insert example)?"
My point is that everyone acts like he just sat down and read a book without any corrections or anything. He probably had pages inside the hat, and he was probably able to regurgitate things he had heard from other talks from various pastors in his area. And his scribes more than definitely helped him word things to sound more eloquent than he originally dictated.
I believe in the Book of Mormon in as much as it is plagiarized correctly. - Bill McKeever
Why does it have to be he memorized it, kept it in his head......why couldn't he have written it all down with notes...whose to say he didn't have helpers, the scribes and his family... he wasn't well educated could just mean he had a basic education, ie he didn't go to higher education like college or university.... he wasn't stupid and they do acknowledge him telling stories...
I know now, View of the Hebrews, is often cited as a book that resembles the Book of Mormon.
Keep in mind its author was the pastor of the same church Oliver Cowdery attended prior to helping Joseph...
All great points!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON thanks...just makes it harder or easier to understand Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon??
Well a couple questions I have. So if he did write stuff down why did no one see him writing away for years? Who paid for all the paper and ink? The smith family was poor, had a small house. So they couldn’t really afford extra paper and ink. Since they had a small house he (Joseph) had to share a room with some of his siblings. Did they see him writing? Have you read the View of the Hebrews. About as similar to the Book of Mormon as Star Wars is too Harry Potter. When Oliver Met with Joseph (1829) the translation was already in place. And let’s say that Joseph had memorized a lot of it and wrote down prices of it. Well that doesn’t account for the the 11 witnesses and the unofficial witnesses. Also, for Nahom and Bountiful in the Book of Mormon.knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/who-called-ishmaels-burial-place-nahom, evidencecentral.org/recency/evidence/bountiful .
@@Luke-ek4nh yeah, but if the family and friends, close ones, anything is possible..
@@user-bw3fl7fj9w But even when some were excommunicated they ( some of the 11 witnesses) never went back on their testimony.
It is rather complex to be from memory or fictitious at all
Has anybody memorized the Book of Mormon? Or anybody that is memorising ? I think perhaps doesn't have to do much with our testimony but just for curiosity.... Thank you so
When I was active in "the church" I read The Book of Mormon because I had to. Now I can honestly say that it is extremely boring and dull. I was falling asleep reading it. As a missionary I was more eager to read The Bible and random ads in the free news papers than The Book of Mormon. So, yeah, a peasant could have written something like that, especially if he had a scribe.
I remember when I was younger asking my mum why the Book of Mormon was so difficult for me to read. I’m an avid reader, and I’ve been reading from a very young age, but I could never get into a flow with the Book of Mormon. Didn’t stop me persevering and reading it cover to cover though!
@@NEMOTHEMORMON I read it twice in Russian, twice in English and a dozen of chapters in German. But I enjoyed it only once. It was on my mission and I could only read church materials. I was book hungry. Plus, it was my first time reading in English. In different circumstances, I would never read something that boring.
When I was investigating....I read it in three months...I was almost addictive...not so much interesting... I can't explain it..I've heard others say it.. members say you felt the truth, spirt...I don't know... but, afterward I always felt a struggle to read it. I have to say I'm generally like that... now, I'm trying to figure out why we use Book of Mormon instead of Jesus in the New Testament..I know they prefer Book of Mormon more correctly translated....but, I'd rather hear and learn from jesus's words and voice in the Gospels of the New Testament
@@user-bw3fl7fj9w the church insists on reading BoM because it somehow confirms that Joseph Smith was a prophet. People get this idea because they feel some level of inspiration when they read some parts of it. It is called "Elevation Emotion". Mormons call it Holy Ghost and use it as a lie detector. As for me, I feel more inspiration rewatching the last battle in The Endgame. When The Falcon says: "On your left", tears burst through my eyes and I get goosebumps all over my body. Nothing experienced in the church made me feel better.
Also, the church is focused on the BoM because it is slightly harder to prove that it is a fraud. The Book of Abraham has been destroyed by professional Egyptolohists long time ago.
Joseph was clearly a savant when it came to story telling. He also had the opportunity to look back on his manuscript and review for the days session. He may also have had help from Rigdon or other contemporaries. Nobody claims he did this from memory, except Mormons creating a straw man.
What I think would be a great doctorate paper is to gather writings and journals from Joseph’s time, to see what may be happening. I think there is likely a correlation to doctrinal discussions in the nation, region, congregation, or even hamlet that affected doctrines put into the BOM. For example, there was probably a korihor type atheist wandering about that was present on Joseph’s mind. More telling is the prohibition on polygamy in the BOM. Sects in nearby areas were already practicing spiritual wivery. So to get his starter religion out of that controversy, he adds anti polygamy verses.
If only he could have known that he would be a philanderer in his later life and adopt polygamy as an excuse, he would have left those parts out of the BOM.
My bet is that in nearly every story of any significance in the BOM, there is a contemporary controversy that a Joseph tries to address by adding a section in the BOM about it.
Has anyone seen the Saints Unscripted episode where they pose a Canadian geography theory to the BM?
Not seen it, but i've heard the great lakes theory banded about, got a link?
He should have memorized it, he made it all up
Keep working on those Saint unscripted videos. Good work!
Thanks, will do!
Have you read, Saints...I'm just on vol 1...and, it makes it all seem crazy to me
I've been considering this point for awhile. Joseph Smith was either a prophet, or a real creative genius. It's hard to say he was a genius, based on his journal writing and other non prophetic writings.
Isnt it more likely he’d already written the whole book before bringing in scribes to make his story more “amazing”? I think the lengths he says he went thru to keep the plates methods hidden reveals the actual truth. I think he went to great lengths to keep his transcript hidden. Taking a few pages at a time, hiding them in the bottom of a hat, and fooling scribes into thinking he was reading from a seer stone.
Those 116 pages that went missing are still hidden today. It’s not an enormous task to keep pages of a transcript from the eyes others. Especially when you’re known for telling fantastic stories to keep peoples eyes from looking at certain things. I’m sure he uttered many times “no don’t look in there, the Lord will curse you!”.
The top hat translation theory has only been presented to members recently and one medium used by JS to translate. This was not taught me and others in previous decades. The narrative that was used and most members are familiar with is there was a curtain between the scribe and JS. JS sat on one side of the table with the stones and golden plates and read to the scribe what to write down. No top hat was ever mentioned by the missionaries or in lessons and church material.
hasnt it ever been considered that the book was written already over the past 6yrs. and originally it was to be a novel, till someone pointed out that with a few alterations, he could turn it into a sacred work brought to him by spirits. That could explain the variations in the first visit story. Yrs later, el ron hubbard, a sci fi writer, turned his novels into a very rich organization. scientology I believe.
People don't have ideologies, ideologies have people. Scary that Mormonisn is still a thing. I am good with Bible because of fulfilled prophecy and facts that are demonstrable and has more explanatory power with a systematic theology. Love the the videos Nemo.
Cheers! Always enjoy your insights in the comments, thank you!
It's important to compare JS's translation of the plates compared to the papyrus. Since JS didn't have the same amount of time to prepare for the the BoA, it took him 7 years to complete it. No doubt the preparation talked about by Lucy Mack Smith's recounting JS's story telling comes into play.
There is also great value to looking at the printer's manuscript. It's full of errors. What we have today has gone through multiple revisions and fixes.
There are many other possibilities.
Co-conspirators. Why not?
Swap out scripts on the way to the printing press.
Notes in the hat. RFM did an entire episode on this.
Must not discount the ingenuity and craftiness of JS. A decade of con-manning, magic tricks, psychic readings, etc led up to the translation charade.
Proof?
What is the possibility that Joseph had a photographic mind?
How do you say the BofM came to be?
I bet if we could see the first completed pages before it was published for the 1st time a lot of the claims they say wouldn't hold as strong as today, I mean he had a whole year before publishing it so he had time to make revisions and adjustments of whatever didn't match up
Mighty slim dismissal of conspiracy and assertion of fact by Saints Unscripted.
If the Book of Mormon were written by multiple authors I think the book would be less consistent wouldn't it?
Nemo or Nehor that is the question
This makes me think of the incredible world created in the book Dune. Also, how do we know that the entire book was truly dictated from a hat? I question this.
is the question...Are there people with photographic memories? Well Yes. there were two guys in my group in the mtc that became senior after 2 months in our Japanese mission. they could look at a page of japanese and recite it back in less than 20 minutes. they were instantly fluent. I believe js had a photographac memory and had a very high manipulative emotional IQ.
can joseph smith memorize the book of mormon? i guess that would be the equivalent of people beating super mario 64 blind folded in under an hour. with hard enough work would that be possible? and if it was done, would it be plausible to say God was behind someone playing super mario 64 since it was less than an hour since most people take weeks?
Many explanations for the origin of the Book of Mormon exist. How does Occam's Razor land on your side of the fence?
I’d be interested as to what you think my side of the fence is. As to the Razor, I think the explanation that requires the least assumptions is that he created the Book and those around him were also in on it and defended it. Your have to make way more assumptions for the divine origin. However Occam’s Razor deals with likely hood, not possibility.
@@NEMOTHEMORMON I figured that you didn't believe that the book was genuine, and I agree, the book is obviously a produced of his time. Where I disagree is that the people who helped with the publication were part of a cover up. The apologist video does make a good point, that there were many, many early witnesses affirming Joseph's divinity in translating the book. There are so many people, that in my opinion we stumble into the world of conspiracy, trying to explain how each faithful testimony was a lie. In my opinion it it more likely that Joseph acted alone, or almost alone in his fraud. Perhaps even Joseph started buying into his own narrative, perhaps long before he began dictaion. That is speculation though. Regardless, based on his character and decision making, he seemed to be passionate about his beliefs, whatever they were.
I don’t think it requires as much conspiracy or assumption as you think. You can treat most of those who have testimony as members of a class. That class being people emotionally, financially, or socially invested in the success of the BoM and the wider LDS movement. Therefore you only have to assume that those with a vested interest may lie to further that interest, not an unreasonable assumption to make of anyone! But again, as the Razor only deals with probability, you could just as easily be correct in your assertion.
@@NEMOTHEMORMON Yes, I admit that people with financial or other ties to the church may lie for their own profit, including the highest ranking church leaders. On top of that they have access to all of the church's history, flaws, financial expoilts and any other skeleton in the closet you could think of. I think it likely that some of them flat out don't believe in the church and I'm sure that others are able to put the church's problems on the shelf and or devise apologist explanations. I guess my point with all if this is that I doubt that even though they have decided on the narrative to teach the church, I doubt they are all in agreement.
Oh for sure! If we’re talking about the current leaders of the church, you only have to look at a single session of conference to see they aren’t all singing from the same hymn sheet as it were!
Ok nemo you have me confused what do you believe? You don't believe the BoM? As you know nemo Moroni told Joseph Smith his name would be had for good and evil throughout the world. Well that prophecy is fulfilled every second of every minute every minute of every hour every hour of every day every day of week every week of every month every month of every year and year after year going forward. Don't you think that was clever of him to say in his history? Will you find someway to deny this prophecy?
The Book of Ether 🤦♂️
I would love to see you face check the new movie “the witnesses” ! Was just shown this movie 100% accurate history
You don't believe mormon teachings. So, tell us what do you believe? Do you believe in a God? If so tell us about him. Do you believe in an after life? If so tell us about it. Are you muslim?
The book of Mormon is boring and repetitive.
The Book of Mormon, as a work of literature, is not very impressive. About ten percent of the material was "borrowed" from the Old and New Testaments; many of the stories are similar to stories found in the Bible; and a lot of the preaching from the various characters sounds like preaching from the Nineteenth Century. Also, the fifth chapter of Jacob is a mess. The book is not anything special.
You never read carefully. It's very complex and too complicated to be made up by Joseph Smith. There is so much more than what you mentioned.
@@giuliom3564 Gabriel García Márquez wrote One Hundred Years of Solitude. If you are interested in a book with some REAL complexity, read that. It's a masterpiece. As for Joseph Smith's book...? You might be confusing redundancy for complexity. The Book of Mormon is REDUNDANT, not complex. (It's also poorly written and dull.)
For one thing the book of mormon asks the reader to inquire of the holy spirit if it be true or not. If the holy spirit verifies that it is indeed true is there someone who can nullify this without risking blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. In addition the Bible teaches that no one can say Jesus Christ is Lord unless the Holy Spirit gives him this utterance. Just about every word every sentence in the book of mormon declares Jesus as Lord. The book of mormon is not a book that can be trifled with and it has severe warnings to those who have a mind to discount its supreme authority. In short don't do this. This book is infinitely larger than any man. The book of mormon is indeed holy scripture and a person can be saved by reading it.
Thanks for your insight! I only have one question, saved from what?
@@NEMOTHEMORMON “Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.” Roman's 11 22
So, if I’m understanding correctly, the Book of Mormon can save us from the severity of god? The severity which befalls us if we don’t believe? Doesn’t that seem quite coercive?
Actually, you can’t be saved by just reading it. Even according to mormon doctrines.
The Book of Mormon is true, and it's a God given scripture, It is not about historical factuality but spiritual truth and wisdom for these days.
The Book of Mormon holds immense spiritual value to a great many people. However, if the arguments are going to be made in its defence from a historical and factual point of view, those defences must stand up to critique in a historical and factual way.
He didn’t write anything from memory. Joseph did not make up the story. He read the gold plates, translating them into English, and his scribe wrote it down. There is no argument about how long it takes to write a huge story. The gold plates are a compiled record of many different prophets throughout the generations who passed down the plates from generation to generation. It was Mormon who took the best bits that God told him to take, and he put them together in one book. The Book of Mormon.
You are not even believing what your own leaders are saying now. You are in denial. Seek the truth by studying the real Word of God. The Holy Bible.