A lot of Scholors don't Acknowledge the "Book Of Mormon"...

[markwinfield1]

Thoughts?

[the Ogre]

However, there are many who do. I do not think it is of much concern considering the people in academia who focus on the tight circles of their own personal research or expertise.

[markwinfield1]

Can you please list the 1's that do?

[poulsenll]

Originally Posted by markwinfield1

Can you please list the 1's that do?

I just got back from the annual Maya Meetings here in Austin, TX. These meetings are one of the major venues for information about the Mayan culture and archaeology. One of the invited sholars was Allen Christiansen from BYU who presented a talk on weaving and culture in Guatemala. He is certainly respected among Mayan researchers and is also an active Latter Day Saint. I could list others who are recognized in their fields by the non LDS research community. I am personnaly recognized as a scholar in the field of drug metabolism and toxicology and am a firm believer in the Book of Mormon. President Eyring's father was a world renowned Chemist who pioneered the field of modern chemical Kinetics and his work plays a significant part of any modern book on chemical kinetics. He was always an active member of the Church and had a firm testimony of the Book of Mormon as does his son.

Larry P

[the Ogre]

Originally Posted by markwinfield1

Can you please list the 1's that do?

That's hard for me (my emphasis is in literary criticism and rhetoric), but there is one literary critic I know who has discussed the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith (and is not LDS-he claims Gnostic Judaism): Harold Bloom.

Aaron the Ogre

[Snow]

Originally Posted by markwinfield1

Thoughts?

What do you mean "acknowledge?"

Acknowledge that it exists?

Acknowledge that it is the word of God?

[a-train]

well if allot can't act knowledge, how can they be scholors?

[the Ogre]

Originally Posted by a-train

well if allot can't act knowledge, how can they be scholors?

I think what defines a scholar pivots on what one is a scholar of. I can analyze the BoM as literature, as I'm sure some people have, but I can not discuss it as an ancient document because I know next to nothing about how to even begin and really do not care to. Why it is not important to me? My faith is not based on archeology or anthropology or any other type of scholarship, so it is not important to me. Nor do I think it should be important to gain faith based on the words and philosophies of another person.

Aaron the Ogre

[havejoy]

scholar- definition:a learned or erudite person, esp. one who has profound knowledge of a particular subject.

scholor- definition: I really have no clue.

[NateHowe]

What people acknowledge has very little to do with what is true. Entire civilizations have refused to acknowledge God, but it has not made God any less real or powerful.