NOM

I'll raise you most "theology" from a wide variety of religious sources, including Christian, Islamic, Hindu, and even Buddhist or New-Age theology. There is a reason people have been going round and round trying to resolve anachronisms and paradoxes and explain the unexplainable with no real evidence except their particular sacred texts. If God really cared what we believed, and had the power to communicate it to us in one way or another, I have to believe that he would make it clear. Heaven knows I have tried to reach out and that I am ready and willing to follow him. But I'm not going to give anybody any more power over me just because they say that they are one of the few that really knows what God wants. I can point to thousands of prophets or gurus who have the same level or type of evidence, yet make conflicting claims.

Reuben wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:07 pm Bro. Bushman has recently called the Book of Abraham pseudepigrapha. Even though it's a bit of a stretch, we could call the Book of Mormon the same thing.

I assume Bro Bushman means that although the Book of Abraham was not written by the purported author, we may still be able to find nuggets of wisdom within the text anyway. That makes sense because there are some good things to be found in these writings as well as things to be instantly discarded. I suppose the trick is to know the difference, like being able to appreciate what Tolkien said about even the very wisest not being able to see the consequences of all actions while avoiding being seduced into doctrinal speculations of how many tree rings an Ent may possess.

However, when TBMs accept this pseudepigrapha status they will find themselves locked into the conundrum created by Church leader of everything being either completely true or utterly false. When they contemplate Joseph writing the book rather than Abraham, they may go into a faith meltdown.

What I like to do when someone mentions chiasmus... this is from an English Poetry collection, first published in 1744:

Hickory, dickory, dock.
The mouse ran up the clock.
The clock struck one,
The mouse ran down,
Hickory, dickory, dock.

Hickory, dickory, dock.
The bird flew up the clock.
The clock struck two,
Away she flew,
Hickory, dickory, dock

There is no way even a TBM can ignore the possibility that Joseph & Co knew this poem, or this style of writing. Also, many TBMs are not aware chiasmus are found in the Bible.

After they think about this for awhile, I challenge them to find ANY evidence that has no possibility of an alternative explanation consistent with the BoM having a 19th century origin. If they come up with something, a little research usually shows an alternative explanation is possible. The real issue is the unwillingness to look at alternatives. If you are convinced emotionally (through feelings) that something is true, why use logic or reason, or even evidence? With God all magic is possible...

The emotional focus of the church on the book blocks them from looking at the book objectively. I think it is important to take this into account. You have to connect with them emotionally while going through the logic of how the book is fiction.

EternityIsNow wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2017 12:06 am The emotional focus of the church on the book blocks them from looking at the book objectively. I think it is important to take this into account. You have to connect with them emotionally while going through the logic of how the book is fiction.

I'd love to show them this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MYShYPHynBY

I made this edit of video that's often linked to in various ex-Mormon forums after my wife pointed out that the original video's beginning is a feel-good bait and switch. I also identified the ending as a sucker punch and removed that, too. What remains is a representative series of short clips exhibiting people's very Mormon-like reactions to spiritual witnesses of their mutually contradictory and sometimes perilous beliefs.

My favorite is the 19-year-old polygamist girl speaking in what's obviously a testimony meeting, saying she knows that she's doing God's will.

Edit: It just occurred to me that this video won't help them connect emotionally - they're more likely to disconnect - and that I honestly have no idea how to do that. Do you have any ideas?

Reuben wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:28 pm

Hagoth wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:19 pm

Reuben wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:07 pm
Bro. Bushman has recently called the Book of Abraham pseudepigrapha. Even though it's a bit of a stretch, we could call the Book of Mormon the same thing.

That's fascinating. Do you have a source for that? If Bushman is willing to go that far it might be safe to assume that he would believe the same for the Book of Moses and (gulp) the Book of Mormon. I doubt he would go so far as to make the same claim about the keystone of our religion, however, if he is interested in keeping his metaphorical head attached to his metaphorical neck.

Video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=775s&v=QH-v7XUdyD8

It was at this conference (early this year):

http://chass.usu.edu/news/translation-conference

Thanks Reuben, this was fascinating.

Reuben wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2017 4:23 am I'd love to show them this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MYShYPHynBY

This is solid gold. Wow.

I would love, love for DW to see this...