Quote:
Originally Posted by Traveler
The Book of Mormon came to us through a young man (early twenties) from the American frontier with no formal education and very little education of any kind. Joseph was given divine help to accomplish the task – there can be no rational argument that Joseph brought forth the Book of Mormon or other scriptures on his own abilities. This, unlike most modern contributions to religious thinking, is not the result of learned scholars and a life time of study. It is a personal observation of mine that there is great difficulty in describing spiritual thing of divine nature among the societies of man. The scriptures often make reference to such things as appearing “foolish”.
I believe the challenge is to perceive such things by their content and contribution. For example there are some rather interesting things in the Book of Mormon about traveling on the Arabian Peninsula that were not known in the Americas during the time of Joseph Smith. If you like I could summarize some of these things I have learned.
I would also point out that one of the main arguments used by the Pharisees and Scribes (the ancient scholars and experts in scripture) concerning the teaching of Jesus was not based on the value of his teachings but that Jesus was not expert and learned. Or in other words that Jesus did not use the accepted methods to learn and qualify his teachings, therefore, they argued that his teaching were bogus. Why should Christians use one method to qualify the rich and deep lessons learned from Jesus and then use a completely different method to learn of Joseph Smith? The method of learning spiritual truth should be the same – regardless of the preceived source.
I believe Jesus put it thus: To judge a tree by it fruit - for a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit nor will a good tree bring forth corrupt fruit.
The Traveler
|
Hello again Traveler,
I really do appreciate your time in responding to my questions of you.
Some thoughts of mine in reaction to your post:
" There can be no rational argument that JS could have brought forth the BOM by his own abilites " I have read very rational arguments that atleast suggest other possabilities.
( your comments please )
" The Arabian peninsula " ( forgive me if this is not the last great fight and extermination of the Nephites material ) I read on the J Lindsay site ( I assume you know who this is ) The catastrophic battle of thousands with swords, breast plates, chariots, etc. I then read sources of absolutly no archeolgy findings at all from this event . ( your comments would again be helpfull to me )
I would agree that the method of learning spiritual truth should be the same, however I sincerly do not see your Jesus and JS comparison. I would further agree that many do not ( and indeed still do not) believe in the truth of what Jesus spoke. The question I had was not really what JS spoke ( my opinion of that is a mute point ) but where the source of the speaking originated ( translation of the BOM). This translation, and the varying historical accounts of the translation, is where I have a really hard time.
Lastly, the " tree and good/bad fruit " is a little confusing to me. Are you suggesting that the choice of Church in which you belong determines good or bad fruit ?
Thanks again for your time,
God bless,
Carl