Quote:
Originally Posted by changed
I have to disagree here – consider Jesus – Jesus walked around performing miracles right in front of people, and not everyone became a believer. They did not have ancient artifacts they had to interpret – 2000 years ago they had the flesh and blood person walking around right in front of them, and that still was not enough.
|
Well, I'm not sure you have understood my post. My argument is not that everyone would become a "believer" if physical proof of the Book of Mormon was forthcoming. So, already you are responding to a claim I did not make. The remainder of your post is in responce to this false premise.
In the interest of clarifying my point, which I think is valid, I offer the following:
My post makes it clear that physical proof does NOT make one a believer, and that it may hinder the process of developing faith. That, I hypothesized, might be the reason why proof of the Book of Mormon has not been made available to us yet.
Proof of the authenticity of the Bible (which is ample), does not prove it's divinity. In my post I explained, by contrast, how proof of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon would also prove that it is divine. First let me explain that.
1) No one knew about the Lehites, Zoramites, Mulekites, Jaredites, or hardly anything about the ancient civilations of the Americas during Joseph Smiths day.
2) Joseph Smith produced a book that makes a lot of claims about civilizations that have not yet been authenticated. Evidence exists, but not smoking gun yet.
3) Joseph Smith claimed that the source of the book were some metal plates that he translated by the gift and power of God, and that the plates were taken away after the translation by an angel.
4) Since there is no way Joseph could have known about these things, and since the plates are not here for us to examine, if one item of proof is produced by archeology, then it not only authenticates the book but also the prophet who produced it; since there would be no other possible explanation for how Joseph could have produced the book.
That situation would leave un-believers is a pretty bad situation. Some might be compelled to accept it (though not in faith) because of the proof, and others might reject it because of pride, to their condemnation. I say condemnation because now they know Joseph Smith was right, and they still reject it.
My point was, it is better that proof is not forthcoming so that people are more likely to exercise faith unto repentance, and truly become converted to the Lord, than for them to all out reject our message dispite the physical proof.
So, let me ask this. If proof emerges - let's say we find an artifact that identifies Lehi and his family, and science authenticates it, for example - what other explanation would there be at that point for how Joseph knew it and no one else in the world did?
Regards,
Vanhin