I'll put this before the court of opinion, but i'm not persuaded the use of the term 'Verisimilitude' as used in the BOM does anything but bring it into question.

VS is a rhetorical term used to denote a fictional parallel to some reality. Why would the BOM describe itself thus if it was a factual history?

The D-News has a pop at explaining but i don't think they defend it well https://www.deseretnews.com/article/705376673/The-meaning-of-true-correct-historicity-and-verisimilitude.html

If anything, i think their answer is very very unconvincing.

Thoughts?

Brothers and Sisters. For those of you whose testimonies are hanging by a thread because they are based strictly on feelings and have no facts at all for a foundation--in fact quite the opposite--Help is here!

Here are three words to guide you through the maze of Mormon ugly history and outright lies that are popping up every where like Whack-a-Moles.

Correct. Historicity. Versimilitude.

These are your new friends. They are predisposed to be twisted, turned, and muddled in order to aid you in keeping the "maybe" in your testimony alive.

Maybe horses and chariots will eventually turn up.

Maybe someone will find Hebrew writing in the next Mayan pyramid unearthed.

Maybe Zarahemela sunk in tot he gulf of Mexico.

Maybe there is a good reason why there is no Lamanite DNA anywhere ever.

Maybe this article is the lamest apologetics yet--well, no maybe about that. Desperate times call for desperate measures and this article is as desperate a Mormon can get. And just know the author,Brothere Ash broke his arm patting himself on the back.

"Not all LDS Church members believe... that Noah's flood covered every inch of the entire planet"
That would put them in direct opposition to recent church leadership, who doubled-down on that specific event having occurred exactly as written.

As for the rest, it is once again trying to redefine words to fit a specific worldview, rather than adjusting the worldview to fit reality.

It might also be a trial balloon to see how the general membership reacts to attempts at reducing the historicity claims of the church.

ehemaliger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It might also be a trial balloon to see how the
> general membership reacts to attempts at reducing
> the historicity claims of the church.

Maybe. But the article was published 8 years ago...

So much intellectually dishonest about that article.
One that particular stuck out, was him claiming that "critics claim that correct means perfect, and that the book should not contain any errors."

No, critics don't claim that. Critics generally point out that correct means there's evidence to show the book's stories actually occurred (even if there's some leeway in how they were told) -- but there is none. Critics would be wowed by a single piece of evidence showing ANYTHING in the BoM stories ever actually occurred anywhere...but they can't be wowed by that, since there is no such evidence. Not only is it not "perfect," it's not correct in any sense of the word.

Plus, there is this:

“I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of the Church, 4:461.)

“The most correct of any book on earth” was a bold statement to make in Joseph Smith’s day, let alone in our day of sophisticated publication. The statement is still applicable, for the Lord has never rescinded it nor cast doubt upon it.

---From an Ensign article I found on a church site.

"Critics would be wowed by a single piece of evidence showing ANYTHING in the BoM stories ever actually occurred anywhere...but they can't be wowed by that, since there is no such evidence"

But, but... they've just found all this new evidence that corroborates the BoM in Guatamala. This article even gives scriptural references for what they've found! So, obviously, critics just aren't looking hard enough. lol

https://ldsmag.com/how-an-incredible-new-archeological-discovery-corroborates-the-book-of-mormon/

Hehe.

From that link:

"If the Maya lowlands were part of the Book of Mormon world, these grandiose descriptions may not be so far-fetched after all."

Yeah, except nothing "corroborates" the claim that the Maya lowlands were part of the Book of Mormon world. Quite the opposite.

Oh, well. :)

When grasping at straws you go with what you got, and they seem pretty desperate.

They are so desperate its pathetic.....
The Mayans aren't descendants of the jews-lamanites or whatever.Just wish these self proclaimed Mormon apologists will just stop,its enough already.

Everything about Mormonism is VERY VERY unCONvincing.

M@t

IF the events in the BOM actually happened, evidence would not be hard to find. This leaves only one logical conclusion. The fact that LDS Corp is grasping at straws would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.

Gettinreal is right. The thing is, this latest discovery was done by laser technology, used to survey digitally beneath the forest canopy, revealing houses, palaces, elevated highways, and defensive fortifications. You couldn't even see for the trees and overgrowth and yet they found these Mayan, not Nephite, ruins.

The technology is there to find anything and everything and Mormons are still getting Bupkis. It is hilarious at this point. It is ridiculous and embarrassing the lengths Mormons will go to in an attempt to continue the charade. I have no respect for them whatsoever.