Got a new book today and am almost half way through. Can't.....put......it......down........ Authored by Earl M. Wunderli, "An Imperfect Book," Signature Books, 2013. A phenomenal intriguing analysis of all the apparent ancient aspects of the Book of Mormon that really on closer analysis are not ancient at all, and can quite logically and actually be ascertained to have come from merely Joseph. I am sincerely quite impressed, since I used to use so much of the apologetic that he takes care of in this insightful analysis of wordprints, translation issues, proper names, the Bible in the Book of Mormon, etc. Intriguingly, I visited the BYU bookstore and bought it from there! It yet again appears to me that apologetic arguments are made to sound so much more credible and authentic than they really are.....once one examines things carefully and wades through the rhetorical device which solely focuses on supposedly only ancient explanations....

"It yet again appears to me that apologetic arguments are made to sound so much more credible and authentic than they really are....."

My question is, what took you so long to realize that? :-)

randyj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> My question is, what took you so long to realize
> that? :-)

Compared to my brother who has never realized that, and won't
allow himself to realize that, even though he has been presented
(at his own request) with the information, Kerry didn't take
long at all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2014 03:06PM by baura.

My review of the Wunderli book is here:

http://forums.mormonletters.org/yaf_postsm2632_Wunderli-An-Imperfect-Book-What-the-Book-of-Mormon-Tells-Us-About-Itself-reviewed-by-Richard-Packham.aspx#2632

Richard, my anti virus software suggests that this link is to a potential high risk internet site.

I read most of your essays this is the first time I have had the Vipre software block one of your links.

Thoughts?

Hi Richard, my reading took me from there, to here: http://packham.n4m.org/inotherwords.htm

My former apologist brain took me to one possible counter that it may or may not be useful to address:

'Well, some of those passages are records of what the prophets were speaking out loud at the time, and like a speaking presenting live, they would sometimes have to start saying "in other words", which the writers than faithfully transcribed onto the plates.'

Not that I believe that for an instant, but it might be worth pointing out which of the passages are not quotes from speeches and would have been thought up and engraved at the same time.

squeebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Richard, my reading took me from there, to
> here: http://packham.n4m.org/inotherwords.htm
>
> My former apologist brain took me to one possible
> counter that it may or may not be useful to
> address:
>
> 'Well, some of those passages are records of what
> the prophets were speaking out loud at the time,
> and like a speaking presenting live, they would
> sometimes have to start saying "in other words",
> which the writers than faithfully transcribed onto
> the plates.'
>
> Not that I believe that for an instant, but it
> might be worth pointing out which of the passages
> are not quotes from speeches and would have been
> thought up and engraved at the same time.

Thanks for the suggestion. However, NOWHERE in the Bible are there so many "corrections" in recorded speeches. Even in the Journal of Discourses, what the shorthand reporters took down was edited before being printed, and you won't find so many "in other words," or "that is to say," in the JoD.

I can guarantee that no ancient Hebrew or Egyptian could be
written by anyone, much less ENGRAVED on metal plates as fast as
someone could speak.

The idea that this was some scribe taking down, verbatim, what
some guy was saying is absurd. Shorthand wasn't invented yet.
I can type a lot faster than I, or anyone I know, can write, and
I can't keep up with normal speech. But, remember, we're not
even talking about writing here, we're talking about ENGRAVING
onto gold plates. For that process careful editing would
occur, and a lot of it.

I'm reminded of a scene from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail:"

ARTHUR: What does it say?

BROTHER MAYNARD: It reads ... 'Here may be found the last words
of Joseph of Aramathea.'

BROTHER MAYNARD: 'He who is valorous and pure of heart may find
the Holy Grail in the aaaaarrrrrrggghhh...'

ARTHUR: What?

BROTHER MAYNARD: 'The Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh...'

BEDEVERE: What's that?

BROTHER MAYNARD: He must have died while carving it.

BEDEVERE: Oh, come on.

BROTHER MAYNARD: That's what it says.

ARTHUR: (miming) But if he was dying, he wouldn't bother to
carve 'Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh'. He'd just say it.

BROTHER MAYNARD: It's down there carved in stone.

GALAHAD: Perhaps he was dictating.

baura Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can guarantee that no ancient Hebrew or Egyptian
> could be
> written by anyone, much less ENGRAVED on metal
> plates as fast as
> someone could speak.
>
> The idea that this was some scribe taking down,
> verbatim, what
> some guy was saying is absurd. Shorthand wasn't
> invented yet.

Baura, maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but isn't Packham's thesis that Joseph Smith's scribe was taking dictation while JS was making it up on the fly, not that the supposed initial plate inscribers were taking something down verbatim?

I'm agreeing with Packham's thesis.

LOL, good response!

My virus software gave Richard's site a green/gold medallion of dependability and goodness.


Kathleen Waters

Because I am rather dense - Lol!

Excellent review Richard! Thanks for the link!

Since your change in beliefs, how have your former fellow apologists reacted to you?

Some sympathetic, some quite judgmental, others just thrash and trash me. One said I obviously didn't really know Mormonism, which was fun because others came on and said that was obviously bullshit. Lol! Overall somewhat lukewarm to negative actually. Some are now actually attempting to proseltyze as if they are missionaries and I an investigator. One actually said he would be glad to get the missionaries in touch with me. I said "Oh sure, that certainly would help." Others sympathize. Some want to fight me verbally, of which I am mildly doing. If I actually take the gloves off and hit em with the really tough stuff it will certainly get me ex-ed, and right now is just not a good time for something so drastic and dramatic in my life....... I am allowed to believe anything, just can't totally discuss it......yet. That day will open up however.....so I hint and prod and cajole and tease.

Kerry,

Must be quite a shocking and perhaps depressing (even devastating) realisation for you. From being in 'the Truth restored' to not being in the truth after all.

Now you face a new challenge of all the repercussions of coming out as not only having doubts about the church etc but knowing for yourself that Smith's Book of Mormon is not what he claimed it to be and what the church still declares it to be.

I sometimes envy religious blissful ignorance as an easier way of life.

After watching your LDS apologetic videos the last few years, it's still hard to believe you are here? lol

Thanks for information about that book. I shall have to get a copy.

Actually I am not depressed much at all really. I am still looking at all sides, seeing the arguments, both strong and weak from both sides, and see the apologists' arguments as weaker than I had supposed. It is the actual logical reason for agnosticism about it all. I truly now simply don't know. What I thought was strong arguments have turned out to be more wishful pleading than strong, and so re-evaluation is called for. That is where I am at. But in the meantime there has become so much re-evaluation that there simply isn't a way to continue being an apologist at this time. That simply clutters everything up so far as i can tell. Others will disagree with me, no biggie.....

Reevaluation? Sounds like you haven't figured it out yet.

It actually sounds like a set up.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/27/2014 03:35PM by thingsithink.

I fully empathise with those feelings. It is disappointing to see such weak apologetics. I'd love the church to be true as it would provide something to anchor to, but alas it just does not seem to be so I find myself casting around realising there is nothing certain anymore. It's all just a guess.

That gives me some ideas...

You can see my plug for the Harmons Bangerter Crossing meetup on Sundays elsewhere, and I'll be a little presumptuous and offer an invitation. I know I'll make it there again once or twice before this fall's Exmo Conference, and I'd be honored to buy you lunch from the killer cheapo Chinese buffet they have down in their deli.

Great folks, seriously... And they absolutely understand--better than I--where you're at...

Take care and take it easy...

SLC

It seems to be a process of elimination at the beginning for most people. Whacking at a leaf of evil, but believing the tree is still sound. Once the leaves are gone and you're hacking at branches, it's hard not to at least consider that some of your assumptions might bear re-examination.

It takes time to process, otherwise we would all just lose our minds.


Kathleen Waters

It's good to look at all sides. That's exactly what I did.

I attended church for two solid years, read the book of Mormon, prayed, fasted a couple of times, word of wisdom, tracting with missionaries, home teach. Basically I was A Golden Investigator/Dry Mormon.

I loved attending all the meetings. Sad I know. lol

I was just so interested in History/Theology etc and liking a single Mormon Lady (now age 43), kind of was a big influence to at least keep giving the church the benefit of the doubt as more and more church history and doctrine was uncovered over the internet.

I wasn't looking for a social club, though Mormonism was a pretty decent and safe one. I was looking for The Truth, why is there life, a universe, the purpose of life, why we die, what happens after death etc. It's something I can't help but wonder about every day.

Mormonism claimed some answers (whether real or not). However I couldn't get through the hurdle of the Book of Mormon. It just isn't what Smith claimed it to be. It was quite obvious as I read it that it was packed with the religious arguments of his day and of my own experience investigating various churches. On top of that the obvious anachronisms. It felt an in house Smith job to me. I couldn't understand why no one else in church noticed that.

That was bad enough but then came the Book of Abraham Farce on top. Thanks to Kerry's Videos on that when I was looking for a plausible answer. They really were an absolute joy and fun to watch! I can only describe my experience watching them as Hilarious.

The stone and hat was a bit of a shocker at first also, though it made far more realistic sense afterwards to me as I struggled believing in a magical Urim and Thummim handed down from the old Testament days in the box with the alleged Gold Plates.

There just seem to by an absolute Tidal wave of things hitting me from Google. I tried to be LDS, I probably wanted to be LDS but only if it was true and real and not just another made up one.


Also what disturbed me was the blame culture. The ward members were regularly being blamed for failed convert Numbers! Whenever I asked why is there never any new revelation or scriptures at conference, the reaction was almost instant
"It's our fault, for disobedience", "We are not being obedient enough with what has been revealed". Like auto response! lol

Then the Bishops combined EQ and High Priest meeting where they discussed the Power of the Priesthood to even resurrect from the dead if circumstance needs be, got me a little concerned.

Eventually I just started to wonder if I had got myself involved with a bunch of psycho nutjobs. It also didn't help knowing real church history versus what was being taught. I couldn't take it any more.

From being a 'privilege to know' and the promise of being a forever friend to being effectively shunned because I told the truth about the history to the LDS lady. She actually said she never heard about the hat and stone and neither did her BYU friend and more or less accused me of purposely trying to erroneously fault find. I wasn't looking for errors I was just learning as much as I could. I didn't know what there was to know at the time, but boy was I shocked in the end.

So now I'm agnostic I guess, and the whole Christ died for me/us thing has been blown away too (Thanks to Bart Ehram). Now it's all simply an academic pursuit for me.

I sympathize with your thinking and attempts and efforts in so many ways Zeezrom...... if there is a god, and it/she/he actually does want us to know about it all, then it/she/he will be willing to find ways to communicate the information, otherwise, it's all up to us using our brains...... I can't see it any other way right now.

I was trying to figure out what kind of god there is if not the Mormon God/Father in Heaven. Once you lose the Mormon view of who god is then you don't know what to think of what god could be or is.

After reading a lot of scientific thought I decided to label myself as an apathetic agnostic. It really doesn't matter if there is a god or what that god is like. Maybe it's just the power of a living thing versus something dead, or the innate intelligence of a living thing. It doesn't matter what it is and I don't have to figure it out.

I don't think much about a god now, it just doesn't matter.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2014 12:26PM by danr.

danr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think much about a god now, it just doesn't matter.

Ah, then you are an "apatheist" (google it)

PS; TO add....
Kerry, I'm not trying to embarass you here. What most of us discovered here years & years ago you are barely getting around to see......
The evidence did not surface all of sudden....: Jerald & Sandra Tanner laid down evidence with deadly accuracy in seventies....
Later came Grant Palmer...I'm sure you've heard of them.....
But unfortunately for those gullibles they decided to hang their hats to Jesus WHO is as fraud of a Prophet as Joseph was.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2014 12:32PM by quinlansolo.

I think the title of the thread went something like the BoM gets hammered AGAIN.

Kerry, I've got to ask if your chess and other creative activities have changed in any way since your brain has been "liberated."...

It is good to look at everything and analyze all the information. Otherwise, you can't be sure about what you find out. I grew up in the LDS church, attended BYU and served a mission. I not only walked the walk, I studied the resources, extensively. I read everything. The BOM at least 12 times,the Bible, all the the official scriptures. I also read "Jesus the Christ," "A Marvelous Work and a Wonder (several editions)," several times each; all the teaching manuals and various other books written by prophets, apostles and 70's that were supposed to help me be more spiritual.

I really, really wanted things to make sense. Unfortunately, they didn't and I realized I was being bamboozled and had wasted years of my life on a cult that really didn't care about me personally at all. Especially seeing as how I was female and all that. Totally worthless. Major research universities seem to think that I have valid thoughts and observations on a variety of subjects, but not the LDS church; and I went into it wanting to prove it right. Oh well.

I hope you are able to figure things out so that you can be happy and at peace. Best of luck.

I understand I am late to the party of seeing the obvious from the other side. When one is enmeshed in apologetics, the best way I can describe it is you actually CANNOT see the other side. It's truly weird. You CANNOT think objectively, and cannot even begin to ask questions that will help you see or learn objectively. Mormonism literally saturates your thinking. There is no other paradigm. I honestly don't know how else to describe it really. I'm not mad, almost more disappointed, but I am getting after it on historical Jesus issues, Book of Mormon, etc. Now that I have finally and actually am learning how to think critically, a lot of things are getting more exciting to me to read. I'm getting 2 Richard Carrier books on the Historical Jesus tomorrow. I have already read the one on Kindle, but the Historical Jesus one will be fun to read for me. I hear it's a lulu. As a Mormon apologist i still wouldn't even know Carrier exists. Now that I do, I am astonished at his and other critical thinkers ideas which I literally would not have even begun to think, let alone think about. Weird, but that's the truth.

A well-known "ex-Mormon Activist" (let's just refer to him as "Dr. T." because he has apparently acquired some adversaries here for some reason I've yet to fathom) and I have a running friendly discussion on what the Q12/15 believe and whether they know the church isn't what it claims to be...

It's a regular discussion here as well, and I won't claim any certainty of my views, but I think many of them are "immersed in that sea of denial," and I think your "anti-testimony" (big smiley face) is evidence to that effect.

I first came here over a dozen years ago as a "technical Nevermo" who was delighted to find a community since I'd grown up among Mormons, never bought the party line (probably because I was essentially an atheist for many years), but then wound up in a similar "alternate universe" when I slipped into alcoholism and addiction; my take on the bizarre person I was is that the cognitive reality was very similar, and it took some fortunate--and particularly painful--circumstances that brought actual reality crashing down around me in order to begin my recovery after arresting my disease.

Addictions expert Patrick Carnes describes "Addiction as a pathological relationship with a mind-altering/mood changing experience," and I think that adequately characterizes Mormons immersed and enmeshed in their lifestyle and culture. It is self-validating, and the flow of "outside information" is restricted and always processed through perceptual filters, beliefs, and paradigms...

That's a little harsh perhaps, but I think much of it is applicable. BTW, nowadays I spend a bit of time letting most ex-Mormons know "It's okay to drink in moderation" and that a fear of descending into alcoholism, while real, needs to be considered outside of the fierce moral judgments the church imposes. I do worry about a few I've observed, but they are a really small minority, and nothing good would come of trying to impose my beliefs for myself on them.

Dr. T. (he really is a PhD, and possibly the smartest person I've ever met, and I know some authentic geniuses) was really cute one time he flew into town to meet me for lunch. I got there a little early because it was close, he was already there finishing up a beer; he said he hadn't wanted to drink one in front of me... I bought him another...

From what I've seen, you do possess one of the valuable requisite qualities to get through this stuff, the ability to laugh at yourself...

Remind me of my own advice on that subject should I appear to be taking myself too seriously at some point in the future.