Historicity of the BOM

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

i dont understand the sentiment some people share that regardless if it took place or not i believe its an inspired book. not saying thats what you are saying, but to say the message it teaches is important and nothing else is a little weird.

it is very important to know, or feel that joseph smith translated the book or mormon. its absolutely important.

i think this is why the church doesnt really talk about the way in which joseph smith 'translated' the book of mormon. as it wasnt really a translation, as much as it was revelation. but it is important that that revelation was inspired by him being in physical possession of literal plates. if it was a contrived, inspired story, count me out.

I'm only saying that I've read the book several times and can't deny the truths within it. I don't need to have physical proof to know that it's a book of scripture written by ancient prophets and brought forth for us in today's world.

I've never doubted that the plates existed either. My personal experiences are enough to convince me of their existence and nothing can detract me from that belief.

I don't have a problem that you have a different point of view, just as you are accepting of my point of view. Perhaps it's because we've had diffent life experiences as far as the BoM is concerned. Nothing wrong with that.

As for your comment and I'll paraphrase here "...to say the message it teaches is important and nothing else is a little weird", I can only respond by saying this: I don't have to try heroin to know it's bad for me.

I realize that that's a little harsh of a comment and please don't take it personally, as that's not my intention. I'm just saying that some things require more faith to accept them. At least that's my experience.

You're a good man fusnik - I appreciate this topic.

[ute4ever]

Another thing,

The BoM people were a very blessed people who had priesthood rights and roles, and an understanding of gospel principles that rivals our day; prophets, seers, scriptures, etc. They can one-up us because thousands of people saw the resurrected Christ.

However, in due time, the vast majority chose wickedness and were utterly destroyed.

I look at the lack of physical evidence as a message from God, saying people with so many blessings and knowledge who choose to openly rebel against him for so long of a time will be utterly destroyed, and I don't think that "destruction" was merely limited to the loss of their mortal lives.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I'm only saying that I've read the book several times and can't deny the truths within it. I don't need to have physical proof to know that it's a book of scripture written by ancient prophets and brought forth for us in today's world.

I've never doubted that the plates existed either. My personal experiences are enough to convince me of their existence and nothing can detract me from that belief.

I don't have a problem that you have a different point of view, just as you are accepting of my point of view. Perhaps it's because we've had diffent life experiences as far as the BoM is concerned. Nothing wrong with that.

As for your comment and I'll paraphrase here "...to say the message it teaches is important and nothing else is a little weird", I can only respond by saying this: I don't have to try heroin to know it's bad for me.

weird was the wrong word to use on my part. different is what i should have said. me of all people, who has a very liberal view of the gospel and my place in it should not be calling anyones belief system weird.

my comments were more of an extension of a conversation i had with a friend very similar to the one we are having here. he essentially said, he doesnt really care if lehi or nephi came across the ocean blue, as he knows the principle contained in the bom are true and lead to eternal salvation.

this struck me as 'weird' as i could not figure out how he reconciled the bom being the cornerstone of our religion and possibly being a made up story, a fairy tale of sorts.....i dont understand the mindframe of one who thinks this way. like i said if its a story that was made up, count me out.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

I look at the lack of physical evidence as a message from God, saying people with so many blessings and knowledge who choose to openly rebel against him for so long of a time will be utterly destroyed, and I don't think that "destruction" was merely limited to the loss of their mortal lives.

i can see this point of view. wouldnt you think that if the people were distinguished by a mark on the skin, and names that represented to lines of thought, that some remnant of this would be left behind?

mormon died in what 400 ad? 1823 is only 1400 years away, thats not that much time.

this is why, in part, i believe it disingenious to teach people of south america that the book of mormon teaches the story of their people. or the missionaries in guatemala to teach that tikal was the place of old lamanite temples.

i think the group of people in the book of mormon is a very very small sampling of people who were already here.

[Archaea]

I can't say I did that.

For a non-industrialized society, I don't see it as strange that remnants of significant value have not been found.

I agree it must have been a very small segment, but what should one expect from a few families that constantly warred with one another. The numbers couldn't have been as immense as we once liked to believe.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I can't say I did that.

For a non-industrialized society, I don't see it as strange that remnants of significant value have not been found.

I agree it must have been a very small segment, but what should one expect from a few families that constantly warred with one another. The numbers couldn't have been as immense as we once liked to believe.

i served in south america, had friends and brothers who served in central america and all of us at one time taught about how great it was to be a lamanite in the last days.

i was trying to figure out how many people came across the sea with lehi.

25 maybe?

how could 25 people in the span of 600 years grow to hundreds of thousands? is this possible?

[Archaea]

now if they commingled with existing populations and had any significant influence for any period of time, then that could explain larger numbers.

Somebody with an equation should compute how many children can be created in 600 years assuming normal infant mortality and normal adult mortality.

It can't be that great, but I could err.

[Goatnapper'96]

he felt the Church should never go down the "Indigenous North, Central and South Americans are the direct descendents of the society upon which the BOM is centered" road. He believed that the likelihood was that there were many societies in the Americas and that the Lamanite/Nephite was just one of them.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Somebody with an equation should compute how many children can be created in 600 years assuming normal infant mortality and normal adult mortality.

It can't be that great, but I could err.

I've read studies of projected population growth and the accounts of BoM populations, and the numbers don't add up. Either the populations spoken of in the BoM are greatly exagerated or the rate of population growth during the time of the BoM was off-the-charts unprecedented for that period time.

[Archaea]

with existing populations?

I use the pharoahs of Egypt as analogy. Different families came into power from time to time, and there was even allegedly a time when certain pharoahs were lighter skinned.

If the Nephites merged with existing populations and only had political dominance for brief periods, otherwise living as nomads in hiding, it could explain discussions of populations.

I haven't read the demographic studies, but bellieve there are more than one angle from which examine it. And it's possible that the victors did not view the wars from the same angle used by Mormon and Moroni.