Big plot hole/logical absurdity in Nephi-Laban story

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Brian

Yes, especially at the end, when cosette is getting married. I came unglued reading that part. what a christ figure val jean is.

I like to contrast that work with his earlier, more pessimistic work, Hunchback, where Hugo treats the Church rather contemptuously.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Brian

ETB emphasized this point when he said that the BoM was of no benefit to the Nephites, who never had the book. It's only for us.

This hero worship attitude is one the reasons I have no desire to go on one of those mormon archeology trips to South America, and with awe, look at the sandal print that might have been made by Alma.

So where does alegory end and factual truth begin? Is the whole trip to the Americas, clear up to the Lamanite annihilation of the Nephites, parable? What about the plates left in the hillside? Was that parable/allegory, the plates symbolizing a concept, left by someone's alter ego, the angel Moroni a symbol of something? It sounds like the makings of an interesting Sunstone article anyway.

Tex, buddy, what's your take on this?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Adam

I think the Book of Mormon is great literature. I think it is absurd in places, hard to understand in places, not easily understood in places, but overall a very inspiring AND interesting work of literature. My complaints with the Book of Mormon can be laid upon Tolstoy and Shakespeare and Twain and the Bible too.

I have never understood the complete lack of respect in the world for the Book of Mormon as a piece of literature. The condemnation is universal, so maybe I'm just brainwashed (if anyone isn't brainwashed, its me), but I think the world is wrong on this one.

It's the language used to convey the stories that make it ordinary. The stories and parables are wonderful, but they are not presented in the great language of the Bible or Shakespeare. It is awkward.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

So where does alegory end and factual truth begin? Is the whole trip to the Americas, clear up to the Lamanite annihilation of the Nephites, parable? What about the plates left in the hillside? Was that parable/allegory, the plates symbolizing a concept, left by someone's alter ego, the angel Moroni a symbol of something? It sounds like the makings of an interesting Sunstone article anyway.

Tex, buddy, what's your take on this?

Can a story be both parable and factual?

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I haven't ever thought that the Spirit literally spoke words to Nephi. Rather, I have always been of the opinion that Nephi realized he was in an advantageous position, considered the situation, determined that Laban needed to be killed, and then felt through the Spirit that his decision was correct. His words of having Laban delivered into his hands were, I think, Nephi's words that he believed were then confirmed by the Spirit.

That's an interesting conclusion, since I always thought Nephi made very clear that the words, whether literally spoken by the Spirit or not, were not his.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Out of curiousity, is it as big of a plot hole or logical absurdity to believe that matter can neither be created nor destroyed, and yet matter is all around, leading us to conclude that matter has ALWAYS existed, meaning there is no beginning or end to time? Science has a bit of a problem explaining that one, don't you think?

Prove it aint so.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I have never believed that the Spirit literally dictated to Nephi as you seem to believe. I would expect the Spirit to have better grammar.

I think Nephi meant the statement to mean more along the lines of "I know this is true. Truth is from God. I am speaking the truth, my words are from God."

My old English isn't that great. Where is the grammatical breakdown in "Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands . ."? To my ear something is off, but I thought it was just clunky writing.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

My old English isn't that great. Where is the grammatical breakdown in "Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands . ."? To my ear something is off, but I thought it was just clunky writing.

Maybe Cali could start off by first explaining why the Spirit would be speaking in English to Nephi at all.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

When did I say he spoke to Nephi in English?

You were complaining about the grammar. The book is written in English. Apparently, that's how you identified that it wasn't really the Spirit speaking.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Let me see if I get your opinion on this straight:

As soon as I see these words, I know what follows will be warped.

I never gave an opinion on whether the Spirit spoke literal words or otherwise. I simply found your conclusion (that Nephi made up his own mind, with a subsequent spiritual confirmation) interesting given that Nephi makes the opposite clear (in my mind).

He details three different divine communications, two of which he at first resisted and the third to which he concedes. How one gets from that to Nephi drawing his own conclusion, esp. when based on English grammar, is puzzling to me.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

As soon as I see these words, I know what follows will be warped.

I never gave an opinion on whether the Spirit spoke literal words or otherwise. I simply found your conclusion (that Nephi made up his own mind, with a subsequent spiritual confirmation) interesting given that Nephi makes the opposite clear (in my mind).

He details three different divine communications, two of which he at first resisted and the third to which he concedes. How one gets from that to Nephi drawing his own conclusion, esp. when based on English grammar, is puzzling to me.

Your conclusion is the conventional conclusion, but I find Cali's intriguing.