The Book of Mormon's New Testament plagiarism challenge!

When I first started this blog, I felt like most of the posts would be from comments I've left on other blogs.

Ironically, I think this is the first one.

Anyways, I'm sure you're familiar with the claim that the BoM plagiarizes from the Bible. More importantly, it contains KJV-styled NT verses in the BoM's OT times.

I brought this up in a debate against someone in Mormanity (viewable here; started with the post's topic being "Amlicites = Amalekites and Joseph = Translator, Not Author" and me presenting evidences that challenge the claim that Smith was a translator and not an author (where do we even begin on that one, I know)).

So aside from the other evidences of authorship I mentioned, I definitely included NT plagiarism in OT times. For support, I gave three quick and thorough citations of plagiarism.

In response, I was given a challenge:
CF:"You discovered a total of three verses in the BoM out of 6,604 which you claim were plagarized and you make the ridiculous assertion that your argument holds weight.

If you can show me a meager 10 percent of pre-3 Nephi text was copied, I'll admit you have a point. That's just 660 verses. If you cannot even do that, we'll call your claim debunked. Sound fair?"

Oh buddy. It was time to flex my critical thinking skills a bit, and I'm kinda proud of myself.

My reply:
"To be specific, I showed three verses that were repeated almost word-for-word from a KJV New Testament that appeared in pre-NT times in the BoM, and significantly so.

I'm going to call you out on the cop-out here. This is an obvious attempt to avoid having to answer why almost exact copies of NT verses appear in OT times in the BoM.

But you're right on one point: if Smith plagiarized, he surely did it more than just three times.

I can find you more plagiarized verses, no prob. but 10%? Let's fix something first: there are significant portions of Isaiah included in your number that needs to be subtracted.

There are also verses that just carry on the story and don't need to be plagiarized from the NT (we'll call them storyline verses. Ex: nearly all of Omni and Words of Mormon, and verses that go along the styles in there).

Why not storyline verses? Because they don't hold much (if any) theological substance. NT verses do, however. And we could agree that the majority of NT verses do, because aside from some parts the Gospels and Acts, the topics these books cover are almost purely theological (and correct me if I'm wrong). And considering that Smith wouldn't want to copy the storyline of the NT into the BoM (save for the visitation of Christ), it's safe to assume that he would only plagiarize from the NT when a line about theology was needed.

I think the best places to find NT verses will be in expositions of what God is saying, what Nephi says to himself, and really anything involving dialogue/monologue or interpretations of spiritual experiences (dreams, for instance).

Also, I would subtract any verses that are copied from the OT. That's mostly Isaiah, but I'm sure there are others.

And really, those are the only places we should expect NT verses in the OT times of the BoM to be in.

So in regards to your challenge, how bout we do this: agree on the number of verses that contain theological substance rather than just pure storyline, subtract verses that already come from the OT, and I'll bump the number of verses I need to find to 15% of the new number.

Then I think we could both properly see how much weight this argument holds.

If I lose, I'll shut up about NT plagiarism in OT times. If I win, then my argument holds substance. I'll be honorable and mention when I think a verse is somewhat disputable.

Agreed?"


I'll let you know the results. I'm really eager to do this.

EDIT: to add to the utility of this challenge, I'm going to try and catch the theological points being made as well. It'd be interesting to see what the BoM is trying to say from a theological standpoint and how much it agrees or disagrees with the NT (ha, maybe I should leave out disagreement in case the Evvies attack..).

Brief moment of insight

Quick thought on why people discount atheists on the spot.

I mean, I'm sure people like me, who are debating a theist in some random blog somewhere, worry about mentioning this in an argument because, all of a sudden, the other side will think you're starting out with these preconceptions that all religion is false (and then you build all of your opinions from there).

But what about those of us who reached that conclusion rather than started out with it? Atheism was an end, not a means to an end. And still isn't (for me, at least).

I have no idea how to counter this, but after reading a comment on facebook to someone's irreligious status, I began to think.

Do people judge atheists this way because they, themselves, start out with a preconception about their religion and form opinions from there?*



(*disclaimer: probably happens everywhere.)

Quotes that amaze me.

There was an article on the CNN Faith blog recently about how there isn't now and has never been a founding bible (accd. to the writer, who wrote a book on the matter).

Anyone who knows the history of the bible to some extent probably wouldn't be surprised about this. I definitely wasn't, and already believed this before reading the post.

Naturally, the surprise came from the comment section. This one followed a comment that was (loosely) about how the Bible caused white folk from back in the day to consider Native Americans to be heathens, and therefore killed them and took over their land by force (you know, "Manifest Destiny"):
"Native Americans were not living fine but were enslaved by their own barbarism. Sorry they could not sustain themselves like the people in Asia in encountering superior Europeans. Many of them died of diseases and also assimilated into the main population. The Bible enabled mankind establish freedom, human rights, civility and sane laws. No other, because Bible alone is the divinely inspired book in the entire world. We are more educated? Humans are more evil and stupid and more mass-destructive than ever. If you are trult [sic] sorry for Native Americans, please leave the continent and never come back so they can have more room. Hypocrites. Great nations such as USA were well-constructed by Christians but you guys are ruining it."


Wow. Just...wow.

He sure does.

(from Reddit)

The Singularity

Remember that post where I said I replaced hope in God with hope that eventually, we'll reach the singularity?

Time recently published an article about it.

I think you'll find it worthwhile to understand what Ray Kurzweil has to say about the future. Also, if you're interested, the debate between him and PZ Myers about this is pretty interesting.

I don't think that all of Kurzweil's predictions will come true, but I think eventually, they will. I just feel like he doesn't factor in the human side of things: it takes people and knowledge to reach a result, not just accelerating returns on technology development.

Separation of church and state

So many backwards concepts are promoted by the politics of the overly faith-promoting.

One of them is the separation of church and state not being a part of the constitution.

And then, we see a legislative attempt to pass a bill that bans Sharia law, as if that's 1) a valid concern, and 2) not hypocritical.

Anyways. Opponents of the separation will sometimes say things like "separation of church and state can't be found at all in the constitution."

Here's one way to respond to this remark, as quoted in this article:

When Bradley and Mercer asked to identify where the words “separation of church and state” could be found in the Constitution, Frank Knaack of the American Civil Liberties Union shot back, “it probably is alongside right to privacy, separation of powers, [and] other understood concepts from the Constitution that do not exist in those words in the Constitution.”

Finding peace without the Lord

Obama talked about his faith recently. Holding the presidency has got to be one of the most stressful jobs imaginable, so hearing about how his faith plays a role is a big interest to me.

In his speech, he related a quote from Abe Lincoln: “I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go.”

It instantly reminded me of all the times I went to God back when I was a believer.

It also reminded me of the dilemma I saw myself facing once I realized I didn't believe anymore: how do you cope with life without believing God has your back? I used that idea so much I became nearly care-free with it. Still amazes me how incredibly calm I could get over a belief in something that didn't exist (at least, in the Biblical way I was taught He exists).

And sometimes, I honestly wish church was about the recent findings of social and behavioral psychologists and how we can use them to improve our lives. I'm sure there are tons of people out there, young and old, who could really benefit from the instruction.

But for now, I find faith in humanity and the self (as opposed to myself, in which case, I'd sound arrogant).

I find faith in humanity because the singularity is near, and eventually all these problems brought on by human discrimination and stupidity should disappear (namely, my own stupidity). I have faith in the self because, quite honestly, I have this goal in life (that I'll never tell you about, lest I risk my hopefully anonymous identity), and I feel "exceedingly" happy and euphoric whenever I make progress with it.

Honestly, I can't tell you how amazing life is when I pursue this goal. It's not spiritually amazing like worshiping God, but it's extremely uplifting.

So when I start to get down over life, I do one of two things. I either envision how things will be once the singularity comes, and we're all really advanced human cyborgs (and once we know basically everything, won't we be all play?); or, I do something meaningful with my life.

It all stems from acknowledging to myself when life isn't that great and saying "okay, can I do something about it? If so, what? If not, don't worry. Things will be incredibly amazing some day." And furthermore, I can be genuine with that last statement.

It's working really well so far. What do you think? And how do you cope?