The Book of Mormon... have you read it?

[ParkerD]

I am sure they are quite well aware of the statement “garbage in, garbage out”. And as Rebecca has documented, writings ascribed to JS are clearly not consistent because of editorial work by his scribes. The man was barely literate, and may have had some learning problems. His sense of inferiority may have driven him to do what he did.

I fully agree with the critics of the study, who say that a lot more possibilities ought to be plugged into the methodology.
One must start with hypotheses, and prove or disprove them. This is the methodology of science. Your criticism that they only included two works without any hypothetical framework, is a criticism of THEIR PARTICULAR USE OF THE PURPORTED scientific method THEY CLAIM TO HAVE USED.

Actually, Longfellow did better than Barlow. If the methodology is actually very strong, they may have taken from Henry and Jane Schoolcraft, who were productive at the time the BOM was written. Longfellow, in turn, took from the Schoolcrafts’ work. Henry acknowledged this in defense of Longfellow.

Jerusha,
Bias in becomes bias out. Have a nice day.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Jerusha,
Bias in becomes bias out. Have a nice day.

Please back this up with something more than your BIASED opinion.

 

[Jerusha]

Parker, I do so enjoy debating with you.

Thanks for the support, Rebecca.

 

[ParkerD]

Please back this up with something more than your BIASED opinion.

Rebecca J,
There would be no way that anything I would say would be considered by yourself to be unbiased.

The Book of Mormon is a compilation of the writings of many people, each with their own writing style and word usage and syntax. For an unbiased study of the Book of Mormon’s claim of origin, the statistical analysis would need to break down the book into each different author’s segment, and analyze that segment or compare that segment to a broad sample. The use of only two “controls” was outright laziness on the part of those purported scholars. They would know better than that coming out of any university statistics course, especially dealing with such a complex authorship topic.

And to leave out Joseph Smith’s letters to Emma or any other personal document from him, was sheer laziness, given their supposed intent. I have sent an email to Stanford University public relations asking about the study and its relationship to the university. Hopefully, I’ll receive an answer in a few weeks…

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I would read the Book of Mormon if I had a copy just as I have read portions of the Quran.

I will not buy one nor will I allow the LDS Church to deliver one as I do not wish to debate with them.

I did not buy my Quran either, it was sent to me.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Rebecca J,
There would be no way that anything I would say would be considered by yourself to be unbiased.

Your record on this isn’t all that great ParkerD. Especially in light of siting the nutcase Mayan astronaut theorist as evidence of something. I find you questioning Stanford statisticians vs. believing nutcase theorist, to somehow have brought your ability to discern truth into question.

The Book of Mormon is a compilation of the writings of many people, each with their own writing style and word usage and syntax. For an unbiased study of the Book of Mormon’s claim of origin, the statistical analysis would need to break down the book into each different author’s segment, and analyze that segment or compare that segment to a broad sample. The use of only two “controls” was outright laziness on the part of those purported scholars. They would know better than that coming out of any university statistics course, especially dealing with such a complex authorship topic.

This is your claim, that has not been backed up by scientific evidence. There is no proof that each book of the Book of Mormon was written by different authors. Indeed, that is what this sort of study would flesh out. If there are different authors of each book, there should be different writing styles. Different uses of words and grammar.

And to leave out Joseph Smith’s letters to Emma or any other personal document from him, was sheer laziness, given their supposed intent. I have sent an email to Stanford University public relations asking about the study and its relationship to the university. Hopefully, I’ll receive an answer in a few weeks…

Just another assertion, an opinion, that you cannot backup up.

 

[ParkerD]

If there are different authors of each book, there should be different writing styles. Different uses of words and grammar.

That was what I said. There are those differences, but if the scholars (name removed by moderator)ut the entire book into their analysis as one whole to be compared with, the output would not differentiate. How would the computer know to do the differentiation without getting the programming and the segmentation into sections of the book, to find the differences?

 

[RebeccaJ]

That was what I said. There are those differences, but if the scholars (name removed by moderator)ut the entire book into their analysis as one whole to be compared with, the output would not differentiate. How would the computer know to do the differentiation without getting the programming and the segmentation into sections of the book, to find the differences?

The analysis would show each book was written by a different author. That is the beauty of it. What you are proposing is the opposite of sound statistical methodology.

 

[Jerusha]

How would the computer know to do the differentiation without getting the programming and the segmentation into sections of the book, to find the differences?

The Jockers study uses the chapter divisions as in the modern BOM, but the text is from the 1830 edition. Thus, one can find that author #1’s work is similar to that chapter. Author #2’s work is secondarily similar to that chapter, and so on. It goes CHAPTER by chapter, just as I think you are saying it should.

In terms of translation, just as Joseph Smith’s scribes edited his dictation, so also is a translation dependent on the language patterns of the translator.

 

[ParkerD]

The Jockers study uses the chapter divisions as in the modern BOM, but the text is from the 1830 edition. Thus, one can find that author #1’s work is similar to that chapter. Author #2’s work is secondarily similar to that chapter, and so on. It goes CHAPTER by chapter, just as I think you are saying it should.

In terms of translation, just as Joseph Smith’s scribes edited his dictation, so also is a translation dependent on the language patterns of the translator.

Jerusha,
I think you have understood my meaning, except that Mormon inserted comments in several places beginning with the Words of Mormon as he completed the abridgement. Sometimes he quoted from a primary source such as when he quoted both Almas (several times), Amulek, Mosiah’s sons, King Benjamin, Abinadi, Helaman, Nephi, and Christ. Other times he was narrating the abridgement of the history, and the writing style changes. There are other examples such as the letter from Pahoran.

The writing style changes when you begin reading Jacob, compared with the writing style in 1 Nephi and 2 Nephi. Then you have the allegory that Jacob quotes from the Brass Plates in Jacob 5, and there is a writing style change in that chapter.

So are you saying that these statisticians detected all of these differences in writing styles and syntax in their studies through the methods they used? I didn’t see evidence of that conclusion.

 

[distracted]

Have any of you guys ever read the Book of Mormon?

I have the book of Mormon at home and I often read it too. Have you ever read it, if so then how did you get it?

It is called the book of Mormon because it was a guy called Mormon who put all the books together and collectively made one book out of it.

That’s a bit like calling the bible the book of John, or the book of Peter, or what ever…

Why wasn’t it given a proper decent name?

why go through… say, a singles search kind of agency to see what is out there when you are already happily married?? (to the one God has chosen for you)

 

[Garland]

Hi all, the church of satan has a book of thier own. I personally would not want to read it either. OH the book of mormon is most likely another part of that one. Garland

 

[Jerusha]

So are you saying that these statisticians detected all of these differences in writing styles and syntax in their studies through the methods they used? I didn’t see evidence of that conclusion.

Greatly simplified, they used word frequency counts. And this statistic WAS sensitive to the different styles. Yes, we are in accord about multiple authorship.

 

[Zundrah]

why go through… say, a singles search kind of agency to see what is out there when you are already happily married?? (to the one God has chosen for you)

I am happily married to christ - not joseph smith!
…but try telling the mormons that…LOL

Maybe I should just burn that mormon book or something…

xxx zundrah xxx

P.S …is it blesphemy for a protestant and catholic to go to a mormon church / temple? I think it must be!

 

[distracted]

I am happily married to christ - not joseph smith!
…but try telling the mormons that…LOL

Maybe I should just burn that mormon book or something…

xxx zundrah xxx

P.S …is it blesphemy for a protestant and catholic to go to a mormon church / temple? I think it must be!

not if they are going just to learn something (so they can u/stand their mormon acquaintences…)… but personally, i prefer ignorance (so called)… not sure why… :shrug:gotta think about it… If i had someone to go w/ me… i might consider for the intellectual aspect… (?)

 

[Zundrah]

not if they are going just to learn something (so they can u/stand their mormon acquaintences…)… but personally, i prefer ignorance (so called)… not sure why… :shrug:gotta think about it… If i had someone to go w/ me… i might consider for the intellectual aspect… (?)

Well I think that going to a mormon church would be the same as going to a mosque…
Mormon church - they’ll do their best to brain wash you.
I think that going to a mormon chruch would be like dabbeling in the accult!

xxx zundrah xxx

 

[ricko]

“We heard a voice from out of the bright light above us, saying, 'These plates … have been translated by the power of God. The translation of them which you have seen is correct …” (History of the Church, vol. 1, pp.54-55). On another occasion Joseph Smith stated that he “told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth …” (vol. 4, p.461).

Here, from the “most correct of any book on earth” is the example of an uneducated con man with a vivid imagination,

One of the most frequent mistakes in the first edition of the Book of Mormon is the use of “was” instead of “were.” The following are extracts from the first edition of the Book of Mormon in which “was” has been changed in later editions to “were”:

“… Adam and Eve, which was our first parents …” (p.15).
"… the bands which was upon my wrists … " (p.49).
“And great was the covenants of the Lord …” (p.66).
"… the arms of mercy was extended towards them; for the arms of mercy was extended … " (p.189).
"… the priests was not to depend … " (p.193).
“… those that was with him” (p.195).
“… there was seven churches …” (p.209).
"… there was many … " (p.209).
"… I had much desire that ye was not in the state of dilemma … " (p.241).
"… they was angry with me, … " (p.248).
"… there was no wild beasts … " (p.460).

P.S., The LDS state that God did the translation and the writing of that translation was approved by God before the next page would appear. To those of us with opened minds we know that regardless of the claims of divine translation by the LDS, we can see that the BOM was written by Joseph Smith who was poorly educated.

 

[ParkerD]

Zundrah,
I think you have no idea what you’re talking about. Attending a Mormon church service would be like attending in person a mini version of what you may have seen on a Mormon Tabernacle Choir broadcast, but also with the “sacrament” of bread and water during the service. There is nothing mysterious about it. A person offers a prayer to begin, there are hymns sung by everyone who wants to sing while sitting in their seat, there are talks given by a couple of assigned members (adults or youth), and there may be a special musical solo or choir. The message is Christian basics: love your neighbor, have faith, be kind, follow the Savior in deed and word, etc.

I’ve never been afraid to attend someone else’s church services. People are usually very nice to strangers. Have a good evening.

 

[ParkerD]

“We heard a voice from out of the bright light above us, saying, 'These plates … have been translated by the power of God. The translation of them which you have seen is correct …” (History of the Church, vol. 1, pp.54-55). On another occasion Joseph Smith stated that he “told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth …” (vol. 4, p.461).

Here, from the “most correct of any book on earth” is the example of an uneducated con man with a vivid imagination,

One of the most frequent mistakes in the first edition of the Book of Mormon is the use of “was” instead of “were.” The following are extracts from the first edition of the Book of Mormon in which “was” has been changed in later editions to “were”:

“… Adam and Eve, which was our first parents …” (p.15).
"… the bands which was upon my wrists … " (p.49).
“And great was the covenants of the Lord …” (p.66).
"… the arms of mercy was extended towards them; for the arms of mercy was extended … " (p.189).
"… the priests was not to depend … " (p.193).
“… those that was with him” (p.195).
“… there was seven churches …” (p.209).
"… there was many … " (p.209).
"… I had much desire that ye was not in the state of dilemma … " (p.241).
"… they was angry with me, … " (p.248).
"… there was no wild beasts … " (p.460).

P.S., The LDS state that God did the translation and the writing of that translation was approved by God before the next page would appear. To those of us with opened minds we know that regardless of the claims of divine translation by the LDS, we can see that the BOM was written by Joseph Smith who was poorly educated.

Rick,
Thanks for this perfect example of what I have tried to communicate several times. God communicates to humankind through our mind and our heart, using our own language. What you have posted illustrates that principle. Why would you expect God to correct Joseph Smith’s grammar? Grammar is a human method whereby we interact with each other and try to make ourselves understood. The translation process used a human method, but with divine help. God left it to a man to “correct” the grammar after Joseph had the initial message of the book given to him. God does not do for man what man can do for himself.

 

[pnewton]

I would read the Book of Mormon if I had a copy just as I have read portions of the Quran.

I will not buy one nor will I allow the LDS Church to deliver one as I do not wish to debate with them.

I did not buy my Quran either, it was sent to me.

FYI - When I was in Bryce NP this June the gift shop was giving them away. I didn’t take one, but that is because I have already read the BOM in my early adulthood. The Quran makes a more interesting read. BOM seems too made up and fictional.