Mormon? I'm familiar with a lot of the evidence against the Book of Mormon: DNA, anachronisms, language problems, bible plagiarisms, etc.
I just want to know if anyone has ever discovered any evidence that supports the claim of the Book of Mormon being an authentic text. And I don't want to hear about Chiasmus either, because that is ruled out by reputable language experts, due to the how the supposed chiasmus appears in book of mormon text (meaning: it's not truly chiasmus, but a few disjointed phrases separated by a lot of other text, that apologists pick apart and piece back together. Real chiasmus reads like poetry, in successive lines of text.)
I also am not interested in hearing about Mayan temples, because (1) they do not look anything like what is described in the book of mormon (built after the manner of Solomon's temple), and (2) almost all of them were built after 500 AD, having no connection to Book of Mormon chronology.
@Hobgoblinoid - i'm not so sure one could say that the book of mormon is even that good to read as fiction. Mark Twain called the book "chloroform in print" and said that it was a miracle that Joe Smith was able to stay awake while writing it. All the "and it came to pass" phrases make it extremely tedious reading.
@ralph - though most mormons seem to completely ignore the fact that Joe Smith had a lot of people around helping him while writing the book. Some of them were even school teachers with in depth knowledge of the bible. It wouldn't be terribly difficult for Joe, combined with his friends and family to conceive the book.
I just want to know if anyone has ever discovered any evidence that supports the claim of the Book of Mormon being an authentic text. And I don't want to hear about Chiasmus either, because that is ruled out by reputable language experts, due to the how the supposed chiasmus appears in book of mormon text (meaning: it's not truly chiasmus, but a few disjointed phrases separated by a lot of other text, that apologists pick apart and piece back together. Real chiasmus reads like poetry, in successive lines of text.)
I also am not interested in hearing about Mayan temples, because (1) they do not look anything like what is described in the book of mormon (built after the manner of Solomon's temple), and (2) almost all of them were built after 500 AD, having no connection to Book of Mormon chronology.
@Hobgoblinoid - i'm not so sure one could say that the book of mormon is even that good to read as fiction. Mark Twain called the book "chloroform in print" and said that it was a miracle that Joe Smith was able to stay awake while writing it. All the "and it came to pass" phrases make it extremely tedious reading.
@ralph - though most mormons seem to completely ignore the fact that Joe Smith had a lot of people around helping him while writing the book. Some of them were even school teachers with in depth knowledge of the bible. It wouldn't be terribly difficult for Joe, combined with his friends and family to conceive the book.