Laman and Lemuel - Ancient Jerusalem Class System - Book of Mormon Evidence

[GmaM11]

The difference between the Bible and the BoM is this. The Bible is 66 books written by 40 authors over 1000 years, that has origins outside of time, yet is internally consistent. The BoM is a novel which draws materials from several books of the day, put together by a group of men over a period of 7-10 years. It is not internally consistent, and tells us nothing new. It is a fairly imaginative novel, with caricatures rather than characters, set in a fantasy world..with no evidence.

[jkebendixen]

This is definently a further aspect about the family of Lehi that I have not thought about in the past. Sure gives an interesting take on the family dynamic

[kramd1]

supposition of the book of mormon tale Does NOT constitute evidence.

This is not evidence as the title suggests.

[jkebendixen]

@kramd1 It's part of a video series called Book of Mormon Evidences. Look at it as a whole, not just a single video.

[kramd1]

@jkebendixen Really. Why all the waffle ? "evidence" buried .

I suppose after years of conditioning to this type of "evidence" you loose touch with what evidence is.

It appears to be a conditioning to believe lies.

[jkebendixen]

@kramd1 I dont think you're getting the picture here. This is a documentary on the Book of Mormon. Explaining this to you and inviting you to open your eyes a little rather than only narrowly look at one snippet of the information presented and criticize it as a whole. This invitation isn't anywhere near conditioning or anything, if you looked at my comment, I was in no way telling you that you should trust the video or anything of the sort. You have every right to believe what you believe.

[kramd1]

@jkebendixen Why then does this and many LDS videos contain in the title " Book of Mormon Evidence"

They present many of these videos with no evidence . Please read the title , then listen to the video ( and all the others entitled "evidence" ) then tell me it's evidence ? Maybe you have adopted a polly Mormon attitude of sweet message equals evidence. It simply does not. This is a lie.

[jkebendixen]

@kramd1 I wouldn't necessarily categorize a documentary on the Book of Mormon as a "sweet message" but from what I understand, whether evidence is considered valid or relevant is a matter of opinion. The video series presents a further insight on specific details of the Book of Mormon and it's relation to known culture and history of the times they correlate with basically finding the common denominators that exist between the Book of Mormon and other known sources.

[jkebendixen]

@kramd1 If you are not interested in the family dynamics of the family of Lehi and how they relate to the culture at that time, what would you be interested in? (keep in mind that this video is aimed towards those who have an interest in the Book of Mormon as well) What would you consider a valid evidence that should be presented in the videos instead of what is present already?

[kramd1]

@jkebendixen Where supposition and tales of the Book itself are held out as evidence is pure and simply deceitful. Family dynamics of a novel don't represent evidence neither does possible parallel. These videos are in a public domain and your saying they are intended for those that are "interested in the B of M " my interest as many others having googled " Book of Mormon Evidence" is that " evidence" There is none and it's not like a one off anomaly, more like Tsunami of BS.

[jkebendixen]

@kramd1 You're idea that the Book of Mormon is simply a novel is truly you're opinion. Just as many have their own opinions based on their own study on the matter. Considering this to be deceitful I find quite odd as they are stating fact. They state instances found in culture and history and then instances found in the Book of Mormon, nothing deceitful, just presenting information. Now as I have mentioned before, it is a series called Evidences of the Book of Mormon, relevance is up to you.

[kramd1]

@jkebendixen The definition of evidence: Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof. mormon scholars ie:  anthropologist, linguist and archaeologist , In this and many LDS videos, tout EVIDENCE as if it is scientific, purposely display scientific qualifications as if to qualify the evidence as scientific. That is deceitful.

[moparmonster1965]

@jkebendixen It's not just a novel, but rather, Joseph Smith's attempt to launch himself into prophethood, and he stole liberally from the Bible to do so, incorporating a number of ideas and outside influences, but the plagiarization of the KJV is the most telling.

[jkebendixen]

@moparmonster1965 I understand where you are coming from, but I can honestly find more evidence supporting that the book was divinely inspired than you would to support your claim that the book was legitimately an invention based on plagiarism

[moparmonster1965]

@jkebendixen If I could prove to you that there are long passages that come directly from the KJV, first published in 1611, would you believe me?

And what you claim is evidence of divine inspiration is all based on the church's opinion of itself, not reality, but feel free to tell me what makes you think so.

It's also not just the theft of the Bible in the text, but combined with all of the other problems of the BOM, LDS history, and the doctrine itself, there's a lot of explaining to do.

[jkebendixen]

@kramd1 Also, if you dont mind me asking... why is someone who thinks the Book of Mormon was fabricated and seems to have their mind made up googling "book of mormon evidence"?

[kramd1]

@jkebendixen Do I need a reason ? I could ask the same of you. Why does someone who does no question the lack of verifiable evidence defend the deceit and perpetuate the lie ?