Big plot hole/logical absurdity in Nephi-Laban story - Page 2 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

SoonerCoug · 09-29-2007, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ute4ever

When Mormon and Moroni were editing the plates, why did they choose to include this story? Were they on the same caffeine rush as Nephi and interpreted it to be a voice from the heavens approving the fable?

Because it's a dang good story.

SoonerCoug · 09-29-2007, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon

No doubt. Or, couldn't God have made the plates disappear from among Laban's possessions and magically reappear at Nephi's house?

No, he couldn't have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon

Why the long, drawn-out process?

Because God does not (or cannot) personally intervene, contrary to the claims of some (including prophets).

YOhio · 09-29-2007, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon

On a more practical note, wouldn't it be nearly impossible to cut someone's head clean off with a sword if holding that person by the hair? Not a lot of room to swing the sword. So, I guess Nephi had to do some hacking/sawing. Wouldn't that get blood all over the place - on Laban's clothes, on Nephi's arms, etc.? It'd be hard to pull off the disguise trick drenched in blood.

Laban was sporting a Hanzo sword.

Jeff Lebowski · 09-29-2007, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon

No doubt. Or, couldn't God have made the plates disappear from among Laban's possessions and magically reappear at Nephi's house? Why the long, drawn-out process?

There you go. Hell, why rely on humans at all? They are notoriously unreliable.

hyrum · 09-30-2007, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

"12 And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands . .

. . .

18 Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword."

Okay, so "the spirit" told Nephi to kill Laban. This was no mere prompting. "The spirit" had a "voice" that said, "Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands."
It also involves a gratuitous killing. Laban had his flaws, but he was not Stalin.

Maybe because Joseph Smith felt like lopping off the head of some rich powerful guy in Palmyra. So he put it in there to have Nephi do it for him vicariously, and, of course, "at the command of God," like a lot of his actual misdeeds.

creekster · 09-30-2007, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

If you add the words "in the 21st century" to the end of the above sentence, I would agree with it.

But I think one of the major flaws in scriptural analysis is looking at barbaric times through modern lenses. No person born before 1700 (and many born after) would even pause at the Nephi Laban story.

Gandhi only works against the British--the Mongols would have just killed him, all his family, all his followers and all those from his hometown and moved on with governing India. It is hard to realize how brutal the world has always been.

You could further qualify it by saying not in the 21st century in some parts of the world. Recall Hassad of Syria's reaction to he atte4mpt to overthrow him a few decades ago: he killed the plotters, there families and then he razed their towns and removed all refernce to them from the maps. This is within most of our lifetimes and from the same culture in which the laban story is set.

Jeff Lebowski · 09-30-2007, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hyrum

Maybe because Joseph Smith felt like lopping off the head of some rich powerful guy in Palmyra. So he put it in there to have Nephi do it for him vicariously, and, of course, "at the command of God," like a lot of his actual misdeeds.

I am not sure if you meant that to be funny Hyrum, but thanks for the laugh anyway.

SeattleUte · 09-30-2007, 04:45 AM

I always detect a note of insincerity in Sooner's posts that makes me slightly quesy. Not sure why, but they tend to give me a feeling of having just downed an oyster from a half shell dipped in chocolate sauce.

SteelBlue · 09-30-2007, 05:57 AM

Aren't some of you going Fawn Broadie on this one? I mean isn't the big complaint most of you have with her book that she pretends to get inside Smith's head as she draws her conclusions?

All-American · 09-30-2007, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I always detect a note of insincerity in Sooner's posts that makes me slightly quesy. Not sure why, but they tend to give me a feeling of having just downed an oyster from a half shell dipped in chocolate sauce.

Speaking of notes of insincerity, why do you bother with "big plot holes or logical absurdities" when you think it's all bogus, anyway?

09-30-2007, 04:45 AM	#18
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	I always detect a note of insincerity in Sooner's posts that makes me slightly quesy. Not sure why, but they tend to give me a feeling of having just downed an oyster from a half shell dipped in chocolate sauce. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

09-30-2007, 05:57 AM	#19
SteelBlue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Norcal Posts: 5,821	Aren't some of you going Fawn Broadie on this one? I mean isn't the big complaint most of you have with her book that she pretends to get inside Smith's head as she draws her conclusions?