Source: An Ex-Mormon's BEST Case That Joseph Wrote the Book of Mormon (Part 2) Channel: RestoredTruth Published: May 16, 2026 | Archived: June 20, 2026
Video: An Ex-Mormon's BEST Case That Joseph Wrote the Book of Mormon (Part 2)
Channel: RestoredTruth
Published: May 16, 2026
Duration: 55:48
Views: 5,683
Category: Entertainment
Video ID: RXbm--F2eCo
Description
Hey y'all we're back for Part 2.
Last time we introduced the ex-Mormon argument that Joseph Smith naturally authored the Book of Mormon, this time we go over other arguments he has... Is there a legitimate case to be made? What do critics actually point to as their strongest evidence? And more importantly, does it hold up? We break it all down so you don't have to take anyone's word for it — including ours.
!Subscribe so you don't miss out on more content like this!
Transcript — YouTube panel (human-authored)
0:02 I saw a pillar of light. All I'm saying all I'm say this whole big conversation I don't I think that this where this started was Joseph Smith was a here's here's my point. Joseph Smith was a brilliant man. He was in an environment rich with knowledge and information. There was it was the birthtology. There was sermons. Yeah, there there was Egyptology. And the proof that there was Egyptology is he had papyrus. See, even that you're trying to you're trying to laugh.
0:41 He had mummies. Dude, the dude had mummies. Joseph owned mummies. Finish your point. So So my point is I'm I'm holding Joseph up. I'm holding up the the the knowledge that was in New York. I'm holding up the the vast books that were in New York. I'm holding up the rich religious uh environment where it was like Tik Tok where people were talking about religion and there's all these great ideas being discussed whether Calvinism was right. What's going on?
1:14 What does this have to do with the Book of Mormon? Honestly, because because it's so far I'm describing. Let's go through the documents that he had. Okay, let's go through every single book. You have now not wanted to go through the view of the Hebrews. You don't want to go through the late war. Is there another book you want to go through that they were discussing and debating about? Let's go through it.
1:36 That's the straw man right there is trying to put it into the text. Extractor one. The availability and knowledge of Egyptology during Jesus uh sorry, not Jesus, Joseph Smith's life was very in much in its infancy. So, we can't rely on that. The second thing is that the vast majority of scholars argue that the overlap between Char uh Clark and the Book of Mormon is superficial at best. So, you That's not the No, that's a misrepresentation. No, it's not a misrepresentation.
2:12 The vast majority of scholars, including the ones at Interpreter Foundation in BYU, argue that the overlap is superficial. Yeah, it's vast majority. We're we're going in circles. All I I want to go and finish on this point. Extractor has failed to provide any evidence or any documentation of Joseph Smith talking to these scholars, going to these libraries, getting this information to go and be able to go and refer it to helping write the Book of Mormon. Every single time he has always deflected to 1835 papyrie and mummies for proof that he [clears throat] got this information from the information around him even though he has failed to demonstrate that from earlier accounts preook of Mormon.
2:55 That's my entire concern is that extractor is supposing that because he had these papy in 1835 and he had an interest in learning more about the Middle East later on in his life de is proof for him that Joseph Smith did go and research all this stuff and did have a fascination pre of Mormon. However, he he has not demonstrated with any viable evidence with all this weak uh evidence to go and say that this is proof that he was able to go and create the Book of Mormon because he of later things he did in life prove that he did stuff earlier in his life. It's ridiculous. Here here let me will you accept Joseph Smith history verse five sometime in the second year after the removal to Manchester there was a place where we lived an unusual excitement on the subject of religion it commenced with the Methodists but soon became general uh among all the sects in the region of the country indeed the whole
4:02 district of the country seemed affected by it the whole country The everybody there was talking about religion and the great and no one denied the great the great multitudes united themselves to different religious parties and created no small stir low here and low there. Some were contending for the Methodists, some for Presbyterian, some for the Baptist. I mean I could go on and on. Joseph Smith tells you where he grew up. It was Tik Tok. It was [clears throat] debate. It was so once again intention of religion and what you hold once again extracting you're saying that you're generalizing hey because he had this he had to have pulled from it.
4:43 That's not evidence. He's saying it was everywhere. You're saying it's it's purely circumstantial. And you're the one saying you're the one saying [laughter] that piece of paper in his hand because No, hold up. Hold up. Hold up. It's a straw man. It's a strong man to say because I can't paper in his hand that he didn't know a lot about religion. Let me concede this. He was a dumb.
5:09 He was just a kid. How he was working the farm and plowing the field. [laughter] We never called him dumb. By the way, you to go and say that I was saying that Joseph Smith was dumb. I said he was a farm boy. A farm boy. Let me go and explain it again because you didn't you seem to not remember. A farm boy is somebody who is having pri more prioritizing uh chores and things that he has to do and he's going to be focusing on that more than studying or anything else in his activities.
5:47 That's what I need to provided the evidence. I provided the evidence of how he could have known. No, you didn't. No, you didn't. All you provided is what's called appealing to silence. No, it's not silence. It's in your cannon. It's in So again, Joseph Smith history, Joseph Smith history explains that there is a religious revival that the second great awakening is happening. Okay, we already all believe that. I literally said that. No wonder. Isn't that perfect for God to call prophet the moment religious freedom is there? A great awakening is happening. People are more open to God revealing himself. They're searching for ways for God to reveal himself. Isn't just this the perfect opportunity for God to call a prophet. [gasps] Oh my gosh. We believe that this was happening. We are fine that this was happening. There's no issue with it.
6:41 Sure. And so again, Chuck, I'm not I'm not contending that if you Right. There's no issue with any of that. There's no issue. No one said that there was an issue though. What part of Joseph Smith history are you referring to? Extractor one. I just read. Yeah. 15. Do you understand? Do you The whole district seemed the whole district seemed affected. Extractor. Do you understand the basis of my argument? Just because something's there doesn't mean everybody participated or did specific things in that everybody who So, so there's a carnival.
7:16 Oh, did you go and eat the candied apples? Did you go on all the rides? You'd have to go and give those specifications of what that person did at that carnival. The carnival was happening. Did he go? Yes, he went. He went. Okay. What did he do at the carnival? He ate caramel. Hold up. Hold up. That's my direct intention, man. I'm asking. Hey. Hey, extractor. Let's concede this point. Okay. And now what?
7:40 [snorts] That's all. But we can't even concede that. We cannot concede the point because his contemporaries such as Arasmus Turner described him as hairless and not well educated. Emma Smith said that he didn't even know that Jerusalem was a walled city. Everybody knows that. Okay. Other people described him as being poor with grammar. He would as he was translating the plates, he'd look up and say, "What the heck is that? What is this?" And this basic stuff to you and me yet, okay, he was brilliant. Thank you, doctor.
8:09 Right. So, the critics of the critics of Joseph Smith have changed. The first hundred years of Mormonism, it was he was too dumb. He he he couldn't have done this alone. All of these people helped him do it. Then it changed to he's brilliant. And that's been what they've been writing on for the last 80 years. Now, there is contention to be made within his grandmother being a teacher, within the connections of what Joseph Smith had access to in relation to what was being talked about in the Second Great Awakening. I'm fine with all of that. In fact, I'm fine if you want to say he was brilliant. Guess what extractor? People are brilliant but they don't dictate a form of scripture within 69 work within 60 days or 80 working days. Okay.
9:02 And so I don't care if he's brilliant. He still could be brilliant and still lack the ability to dictate something within 60 days. J.R. Tolken is brilliant. Guess how long it took him? A lot longer. It took him many years. Okay, let me conceive the point. Joseph Smith's brilliant. Now what? Now prove to me that the brilliance now translates to the creation of the Book of Mormon.
9:39 Yeah, it it that's what you have to prove. I'm I'm not proving I mean what I'm showing and again my whole thing is showing the environment that Joseph grew up in this religious excitement. He was he was in the frontier of the colonies where uh where they had just had the revolutionary war. I mean all these things were going on. This is the world he grows up in. And the Book of Mormon is similar to what you would see produced. I'm still waiting for you to show me how he could translate his brilliance with the creation of the Book of Mormon. Please show me that.
10:16 So, so real quick, Extra, so I I I can try and steal man your position if you want, but what I think you're what what I think you're failing to realize is that you're it seems like you're committing an appeal to probability fallacy. It's also known as an appeal to possibility, which means that it's the logical fallacy of taking something for granted because it's possibly the case.
10:36 The fact that an event is possible does not event does not imply that the event is probable nor that the event was realized. So this is a this is an appeal to probability fallacy. You're saying well it's possible he had this. It's probable he did this but you're not like yes but it's also probable or possible that he saw the angel Moroni and translated the Book of Mormon by the by the gift and power of God. You're just giving another possibility. This is not none of this is proof that that is manufactured.
11:09 You're just this is the issue. You're just saying he was around religious folk in the second great awakening who were talking about all of these concepts, but you haven't proven the applicational process. That's the issue. There is no applicational process that you have demonstrated. That's the evidence I've been asking [clears throat] extractor. Let me clarify. By applicational process, do you mean how did he do it? Yes.
11:37 Okay. So, I would go to William Davis's book. Um, is his visions of the I know William Davis is correct. I can't remember the title. Visions in a sear stone. Um, where he talks about the laying down heads oral dictation. And when you and you I can even point to faithful LDS scholars that that show through the text that it was an oral dictation and and likely not dependent on on a previous text. There's several clues in there that I agree that the Book of Mormon was an oral dictation because it was inspired by God. Okay. So, we've established these cont.
12:18 He can have the golden plates. He can have the gold plates and still have an oral dictation. And you know that, right? Which is what which is what which is what the LDS scholarship on it proves. Um, yeah. I think again, and Jeff is correct. He can have the gold plates next to him and still do an oral dictation. You know that, right? It wasn't a transliteration. Everyone knows this.
12:45 Well, DNC 10 says that it could. I mean, DN I would argue that DN does suggest that it is a direct Doctrine in Covenants 10 show a transliteration please. Where does that say a transliteration? Joseph Smith never transliterated anything. Even the JST is not a transliteration. Is this what we want to Is this what we want to talk about? Extractor. I want you to make more points and then just blaze on by without substantiating. That's what I want you to [laughter] do.
13:15 That's okay. Okay. Well, you got you guys have taken me down a journey. Really? I came up here to make a joke that I've spent I mean where we started was Joseph Smith make a joke be honest brother no I did I wrote it in the comments that that I said I was going to find the map we've only cuz somebody said well we've only disco we've only explored like 1/100th of all the archaeological sites in America but we will we'll find the Nephites don't worry we'll find them and my joke that I made in the comments was I've only explored one 100. I don't think we ever will find him.
13:54 I've only No, here was my joke is I was saying I've only that would do something that would put us all into a horrible state that I don't want to be put into in reference to the judgment. So, yeah. Well, when it came up to Nahome and how could Joseph have known about Nahome, I did some study and I don't want to tell you how many hours I've spent looking through maps in in libraries that Yeah. There's no evidence that he had access to Nome at his time.
14:25 Well, but see, but there are a lot of maps that have there are a lot of maps that have the incense road, which was a a high He did not have access to those maps. That's the issue. Yeah, there's no evidence. There is no evidence that there is any related thought or map that Joseph Smith had access to in any regard when he was transmitting the Book of Mormon. Like none whatsoever. Here's what you have.
14:54 So, Adam Clark. So, we've established that he had Adam Clark after 1830. after 1830 he's had Adam Clark commentary Hold on hold on he has established that he had Adam Clark commentary and and the what year did he acquire that well we know at least 1830 okay so after the Book of Mormon thank you okay next no but hold on to your This is good hold on so to your point Adam Clark commentary has a fold out map of the Middle East I so I can put Adam Clark in his hand I can put the map in his hands. So saying he didn't have Show me Show me Show me Adam Clark's map that shows Nahome and the the the uh trail that was followed. Well, so I I know he has a map.
15:43 Show me that map. [clears throat] Okay, so this is as far I'm telling you I'm telling you as far as I've got Arabian Peninsula. This is why I was laughing. This is why I was laughing about I'll find it. Like I'm going to find Please show me. You were filled with you filled with paring with no evidence. That's what you are. This is how far I've come. I can find I can find the the version that of Adam.
16:11 I believe you can find I haven't found a copy. Most of the copies are missing the foldout map. The one online that I can find that was a scan is too blurry to read. Yeah. I can put Adam Clark in Joseph's hands. I can I know that that that commentary had a fold out map. I haven't been able to read it. But so Extractor, here here's the thing. Here's the thing. This is why I made the joke. This is why I made the joke.
16:38 Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Yeah. Hold on. With that map, after you find it, I want you to go and now prove that Joseph Smith had access to that map after you find it. Well, no. See, and I'll concede that right there. So, so what's the point of you bringing up the map if you can't go and prove that he had that map? because you guys keep saying there's no way he could have had it.
16:59 Conceded that he had access to all of these things and yet I then allowed you an opportunity to show me an applicational process and you have failed to do that. You then ran to DNC 10. I told you to substantiate your claim. Then you ran away from DNC 10 and went to the maps and nigh and then I pushed you on the maps and then you can't even substantiate it. And now we're running to a different point.
17:22 So you're all over the place extraction. Chuck, what you're calling running, first of all, is you you asking me questions and me answering. I actually I guess you should show the DNC 10 and you didn't show it because you threw out the thing with the maps. I'm not running. You brought up the maps again. Extractor. No, you're not. Wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on. Hey, business. You're not. You're dishalping. Hey, chat. Put a W if Extractor is running from substantiating anything he brings up. And put an L if I'm just a loser and I'm not correct on that. Ple, please, [laughter] please show me. Okay, chat. Chat.
18:02 Come on, chat. Come on. Joseph, no. Mute him. Mute him. Drop him. Drop him. [laughter] Wait. We got We got dub dub dub dub dub dub. Everyone who who is doing dubs. Mormon do doesn't count. Everyone's doing dubs. Neither does Jeff. The [laughter] my entire argument is that he had access to this information. Yeah, he probably you you've you demonstrated that yeah, he could probably have this information. The chat is on our side extreme. Thank you. Thank you.
18:33 My is my issue was that like okay you you're I actually I haven't really seen like that much demonstration of that he did have access to this. Uh but regardless I it's the exact same thing that Truth just said. How did he apply all this stuff if he had access to it? And that's the thing. See, so what what Colby fails to demonstrate in his writings extractor is the applicational process with Joseph Smith specifically in relation to the Book of Mormon transmission.
19:06 KBY puts together all of these contexts within the Great Awakening in Joseph Smith's time in Palmyra, New York, and what was happening around him, and he puts all of these source texts of what contexts Joseph Smith could have pulled from. But he lacks the ability to dictate the applicational process in his writings. That's my issue with Kobe. Okay. Sorry, to be honest, I didn't hear what you said because I'm reading exactly what I'm reading DNC 10 where it verifies that it's a tight translation.
19:42 Okay. A tight translation. Okay. Yep. Okay. Sure. Sure. Why don't you let's go down this rabbit hole. Okay. So, DNC 10. This is my favorite one. Let me give the background to DNC 10. DNC 10. We We all know it. Okay. You know the background. Okay. Does chat know. Okay. So here he's saying that the evil people took the 116 pages and it says and and what he's saying is if Joseph translates it again the the 116 pages they're going to alter it. Can you just read it?
20:16 Yeah. Okay. It says, "And then they will say and think in their hearts, we will see if God has given him the power to translate. If so, he he will also give him power again. And if God giveth him the power again to re-ransate the 116 pages, or if he translates it again, or in other words, if he bringeth forth the same words, boom, behold, we have the same with us that we have altered him.
20:47 Keep reading. Therefore, they will not agree. And we will say that he has lied in his words, that he has no gift, and that he has no power. The same words. This doesn't prove a transliteration. The same. Oh, bro. Dude, same words. Same words. Same words. Okay. Show me in the 116 pages that it was a transliteration to begin with. No, no, no, no, no. before. Show me the first original manuscript of 116 pages that dictated in a transliteration.
21:20 Oh my goodness. Because guess what I could say? Guess what I could say? Extract. I think I've proven Chad. I've proven my point. You haven't. In order to prove that the same words are about a transliteration, you would have to prove the original manuscript of the 116 pages was a transliteration to begin with. Because guess what? If it was a transmission, it could still be revealed as the same words.
21:52 you you're not realizing that the first the first instance of the first copy, you could still prove that it was a transmission. And that's why it says in Doctrine Covenants 10 that God could reveal to him the same words. It doesn't prove a transliteration. This is a bad argument. We can move on. I'm done with this this argu this No, no. I'm just I'm showing you guys the issue with the argument is he has to prove and you can unmute extractor. He has to prove that the it's a transliteration to begin with. So, can you prove that?
22:38 No, I don't have the 116 pages. Um, no. Prove the process of it. No, prove the process of it cuz you have the information to prove that. I thought you had them extractor. Why are we talking about this? Get out of here if you don't have them. No, guys. Guys, no. This is this is very important. You have to prove that the original manuscript of the 116 pages that was handed to Hyram, I mean, not Hyram. Um, what's his name? Harris. Harris. Yeah. Yeah.
23:07 That it was a transliteration. Now, if I if I really if I really wanted to gish gallop, here's where I would go. I'd say, "Why didn't he use Here's me gish galping. Uh, why didn't he use the sear stone to find the 116 pages? That's a great question. Let me tell you why. Use coconuts. Yeah, let me tell you why. Because the sear stone wasn't used for that. That's why. No, the sear stone literally is to bring forth the scriptures. So, why didn't he just use it to find it?
23:38 Yeah. How How did How did it How did it bring forth the scriptures in relation to the original 116 pages? Well, I don't know. That was the claim. Well, again, that's what you have to prove, bro. [laughter] Okay, do this. Listen, I I I take Sammy has been an absolute trooper. Like I said, I started out with a joke and my joke, this is like an hour ago, even before you were here, extractor.
24:06 One of these days, I'm going to find that map. And it it is a sad thing how much I've I kind of got into maps a little bit. took me down a It's not It's not even going to matter if you find the map. Yeah, I should I should golf. But but no, I do my whole thing my whole [laughter] my whole thing is from this beginning is I think it's a straw man to say there's no way Joseph could have known. And where I've said is he had ancient documents. He used Adam Clark. He was in this burned over what specifically extractor just used Adam Clark for the Book of Mormon or what?
24:46 You're doing it again. So just move it to the syllogism. I'm over it. I just want to bring I want to bring everybody to attention to his attention. Yesterday I was talking to That's the problem. He just makes claims and then zooms past them assuming we have to accept them. So he's back with us. He said we do this and they held this against us. So, um, he he he says he's still one of us. So, [laughter] welcome back extractor. Um, but no, in my heart in my heart, if I if I had the steel man extractor, what he's trying to say is that he had Adam Clark for the for the JST. He had the papyri papyrie for the book of Abraham and the Book of Moses. So, he had access to these things because they were around in the area. So if you use that logic, he had other materials that were around during the time of the Book of Mormon translation that he used for that. Yeah, that's not logic. That's not logic.
25:37 I I know, but that's his argument though. Is that Is that not your argument? Yeah. Well, it it's actually saying it's just a joke, guys. And I understand and I understand that I I will say this. I don't have evidence of Joseph Smith like I don't have a photo of him reading all these books. What I see is is the footprint or the the fingerprints of his usage of these books. And later I we definitely know he had ancient texts um in 1835, very unique and very rare ancient texts. And so I think it I think I've proven a pattern that these things were round. I also think we've established even even me going to Joseph Smith translation 15 where he explains his environment where there was a rich culture even even a crazy culture religious culture that he grew up in and he even at a young age would have of all you're doing is you're just saying the same things that I've disproven and that you've lacked substantiation of no
26:45 why are we doing it again and and my claim Jeff said, "What's my claim?" My claim is every time somebody says, "How could Joseph have known? He couldn't have known this." I think that you've proven that he couldn't have with your whole thing cuz I conceded all of those points and you still lacks the ability to prove it. That's my issue. Well, cuz you just want me to have a photo of him reading these books. Like I said, I've established I actually have a photo of Joseph Smith. I actually have a photo. Guess what?
27:12 Guess what I extracted? I have a photo of a curtain with the golden plates next to Joseph Smith and then a curtain behind him and then all 80 books that you're referencing are right there. I actually have that photo. Yeah, dude. And it's true. Abraham Lincoln, it's on it's it's all Yeah. Abraham Lincoln took it with his iPhone. Yeah. Um like I have that [clears throat] photo by the way.
27:38 So hold on. So I can send it to you if you want me to extractor. One one claim he did make is he made the laying down heads argument which if anybody wants to address that that is a claim that we can talk about um if you're familiar with it like because that that is that is one of the claims that we can talk about because that is an actual thing that we can substantiate if you want to instead of just saying well he could have had access to this he could have had access to this probability says he could probable as possible so he made the ling the laying down a heads argument do we want to address that or do Before we move on, we can move on. We want to do the we want to do the solos scriptura syllogism with restored and extracted the sol [laughter] we we have a guest that wants to uh debate apparently on this issue as well. I don't know if you guys tell us what he wants to talk about. He
28:29 just I'm I'm cured by Josh last night. So I I will I appreciate this. This has been a good discussion. Thanks guys. It's It's been good. And my point was I really it is the how could Joseph have known argument, right? I do think that that there was a rich culture and there's a lot he could have known. That's my whole point. I can't I I don't have proof that he sat like you said the f I don't have the photo with him in a library. I don't have that. But all but that's my contention is I think that's a bad argument. I think the how could he have known argument is bad because there was a vast knowledge.
29:10 So I'll concede that's not my argument by the way. That's not my argument. So I'll concede that Jose Smith possibly had access to information. Uh but the issue is that my contention is how did he have how did he choose all the good information from the bad during that time? That's that's the contention I have. So it like I I I can't agree that they had access to all that information. Not even close. I mean and and your thing about DNC 10. I mean Royal Scousin has proven uh objectively that Joseph Smith did not translate it word for word. So there's there's no way that any of this stuff functions. For someone to dictate that text and the way that it was done, it's practically impossible.
29:57 just that just the just the dictation itself is practically impossible. Then you just add up all these pieces of information and stuff. The fact that it was written in this kind of like 1600's English that wasn't even in the J in the KJV. I mean all these things are just like crazy out there. How in the world did Joseph Smith do this? You aren't accounting for any of it. Extractor. So I would say that that the argument of a loose translation is absolutely not coming from the words of Joseph Smith or anybody. I I have referred to incorrect that is an argument here. Let me read a quote. Let me read a quote journal post.
30:36 No no let me read let me read a quote from his own journal arguing that let me read a quote from his own journal. I Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God. And then you add that to the doctrine of covenants 10 that says same words. Wait, wait, wait. I'm saying you're doing a lot of heavy lifts again. No, no, no. You just failed. doing a lot of heavy lifting and reading into it because once you compare it extractor, you have to show that the first 116 pages were in correlation to a transliteration before you ever try and use DNC 10. Please show that. I'm just using I'm saying you're the one stop running again and just show you're coming up with theories and like No, I'm using my own words. Royal Scousin isn't even literally not following what I'm saying once cuz I've refuted every single point you've made.
31:39 You're You're looking for exact word fallacies. I'm not I've established my point. Wait, what what exact word fallacy am I looking for? You're you're looking you're looking for I'm showing correlations. I'm showing right here in DNC 10 it says same words and you're the one in reference to what you're the one arguing against the words in the Doctrine of Covenants. It says I'm okay. Same words. Okay. So that would then you would then have to show how did he transmit or translate the first 116 pages. Can you show me how he did that?
32:17 That makes no sense. You're going against same words. I could What are you talking about? If DN same same words of If he said I'm telling the same story of what he said. No, no, no. Same words. Same concepts. He said, extractor. Same words of what? What does same words mean? In reference to what? The the translation of the 116 pages. So, so you're talking about the translation of the 116 pages, correct? Correct.
32:49 So, if it's discussing the same words, it would have to also discuss what does it mean by same words? Well, how did he translate the first 116 pages? How did he do it? I don't It doesn't matter how you I mean I Chuck, we're just Yes, it does. [clears throat] How did he do it? The same. Okay. So, so when I flip open my Book of Mormon and it says, "I, Nephi, having been born of godly parents, how is how is it going to be again? Stop running." How did he how did he do it in the first 116 pages? Please show them.
33:23 Well, in DNC 10, it says he would make the same words. Are we Hold on. Are we talking about verse 17? Is that Is that DNC 10? DNC 10 17. Yeah. Yeah. So this is so this is God saying this is what they will say if he translates again or in other words if he bringeth forth the same words behold we have the same with us and we have altered them. So this is this is God or Joseph claiming that this is what the people who have the the lost 16 pages will say. This is not saying that he's going to translate the same words. This is saying hey we have these words. If he does it and he he brings forth the same words, it doesn't matter because we can we can we can alter them. And if he doesn't bring forth the same words, then it doesn't matter because we can show that what the the exact words were. So this is not saying this is not God saying that he's going to bring forth the same words again. But even if it is, Extractor has to show how the original text was brought forth because if it was brought
34:25 forth through a transmission hypothetical, I know. If it if it if it was brought forth through a transmission, he could still transmit the same words extractor. That doesn't prove a transliteration. Want to go and bring up Jeff? I'm actually reading this. So, you're saying they'll say that it doesn't match. But why? But why wouldn't it match? Now I have to Now you're making me read this. It's because the people who have the 116 uh text will use it in malicious ways.
34:59 That's all it's saying. So even if even if it's going to be produced again by Joseph Smith correctly, the people with malicious intent are going to use the 116 pages to either corrupt them or change them or to go and try to disprove Joe Smith in any way they can. Right. And and DNC 8 and 9 describe the process. Oliver Cowry wanted to do it and Joseph Smith said, "Okay, go for it." And then he talks about why he wasn't able to do it and what part of that process was. And it wasn't as you couldn't read the rock very well. It was that he had to mold it over in his head and think about it and he had to I mean it was not this word for word process.
35:40 Again, you still I don't even think people are real. Is anyone else seeing the point of my my position? You're you're right too. Exactly. I I would think you have to prove you have to prove how the 116 pages was translated or transmitted and then by that process you can then create a contention within DNC 10. Well, even I like that Lane did bring up DNC 8 and 9 cuz I do think that that says how it's done, but I don't see Lane to your point. I don't see that that it's showing how it comes to him, but it's not I don't think that helps us one way or the other because it doesn't say whether they're it's the exact words or whether it's not. It's just you got to work it.
36:32 Comes from David Whitmer and this is like 40 years. This is this is like in the 1880s when this comes up and and there's only a couple of declarations of that whole idea. And again, it's coming from David Whitmer who had a different vision of how Joseph Hold up. Hold up. You guys You guys keep bringing up alternative options and it allows Extractor to not deal with my point. I'm going to lose my mind.
36:59 I know. I I honestly I'm going to be honest. I don't I don't understand how going and I'm being honest here. I'm not trying to like like make you like I I don't understand why that process like I'm Lane's explaining the process of how the how it was produced. They looked on the stone words were given happened and and I'm not I'm honestly I'm not trying to argue this point. I literally just am saying that DNC 10 doesn't prove your point cuz you're not dealing with my contention. Yeah. Can you deal with what I said, please?
37:38 Okay. So, and I'm trying I'm trying to understand. So, you're saying how was the 116 pages produced? And he looked in the hat and he No, no, I'm asking you how did he do it? In order for cut out for me. I don't know what how did he do it? Yeah. In order for in order for your DNC thing to even have any relevance, you have to talk about how the 116 pages was put together. Otherwise, it doesn't matter.
38:10 So, walk me through I mean, do do we want to keep doing this? I'll I'll concede if there's a a point here. I don't understand how that makes a difference if it's the same words. If it's the same words, right? it. So, for example, if I transmitted the Book of Mormon, right, through the gift and power of God and God wanted to reveal to me through the same process of transmission the same words that were lost, he could do so. That doesn't prove it's a transliteration.
38:43 Okay, that's the issue. You have to prove how the 116 pages were translated or transmitted. So if you if you prove to me that it was through transliteration then I can see your point. But you can't prove that. That's the issue. Okay. I I mean Okay. I I'll the preponderance of evidence shows that it was a loose translation and I know there's a few people that claim a blame. Let him let him freaking deal with that, please.
39:18 Yeah, sure. deal with it. Okay. So So you're saying he just got like No, an ide pages. He looked in the hat. He dictated to a to a scribe. I think the first two scribes were Emma and Martin Harris. I don't know if anybody and then then he then Martin Harris wanted to show him to his wife cuz she was thrown. Was it a transliteration or was it a transmission? I don't know. You have to show how it's a transliteration cuz that's your point.
40:02 Okay. I mean I the the point that I had was same words and I could go to David Whitmer's testimony of it was okay. Go go go to David Whitmer's testimony of of how it was the same words and it was a transliteration. Um I'm on my phone so I can Hold on. Do you know what a transliteration is? Extractor. Yeah. It's not like you're trying to say it was What is a transliteration? It's it's like the idea but not the exact word for word because when you translate something sometimes it does they don't have the exact word translated from one language to another.
40:40 So you kind of have to have the same concept. Is that what you're saying? So I I a transliteration is you're going to find the correct word whether it's a one for two. It's going to be the it's going to be the word closest to a one for one translation. That's what a transliteration is. So, show me where any of the testimonies prove a transliteration within Joseph Smith's own writings or the witnesses cuz I can show you otherwise. That's the issue. I have proof to show otherwise.
41:12 You don't have proof for your claim. That's my issue. Oh. So, so why were the plates needed at all if it wasn't taking the words off the plate and putting it into English on? That's not the question. I'm waiting for you to show me the transliteration. Okay. I mean, I that that's that's what I'd say about that. I mean I mean I don't you're asking a question. I've said three times I don't know the I I don't have a it's a good it's a good question. I mean I'll give you that. I don't have the answer for it.
41:48 Okay, there you go. But it's still okay. However, it was obtain. If you take David Whitmer, he put a word on the page and then DNC 10 said it's the same. No. And why would you correlate the two? You can't correlate the two without proving the first 116 pages are transliteration. you concede your whole argument of Doctrine Covenants 10 if based on the transliteration not being proven within the original manuscript of the 116 pages.
42:19 That's the issue. And and I would Yeah. I mean I I would say you're making the opposite argument really cuz we have David I'm not I'm using Joseph Smith's own journal. Can you read read me that again? What is the I Joseph Smith translate I Joseph Smith brought forth the Book of Mormon by the dictation of the spirit. So you're saying he doesn't because he doesn't transliterate it because he doesn't use the word transliterate.
42:53 There is no reference in Joseph Smith writings that he's doing a transliteration correctly. Okay. He says it's by the gift and power of God. It's by the Holy Spirit and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. He says completely opposite. Yeah. Extractor. An example of a transliteration would be like using spelling uh Nephi. Ne hi. Uh that's probably not how it was spelled or or or pronounced at the time. That's a transliteration of a name. Just like Messiah is is a transliteration of the Jewish word.
43:31 Yeah. I was just saying you're you're reading a lot into a vague journal entry. That's me. It's not vague. I can give you I again stop saying I'm reading it into it if you can't even prove your side of the argument. I have DNC. [laughter] I mean to be honest is mute. No, you haven't. DNC is mute until you prove the 116 pages were a transliteration extractor. I mean, you have a problem. You know how when you look at historical evidence, you don't look at 1835 and then use that as a standard to read back into 1825, right? You know, you can't do that.
44:09 You're supposed to look at 1825 first and then build a case off of that that leads to 1835. You don't use DNC 10 and then read that back into history. You build off of the transmission process of the Book of Mormon of the 116 pages first and then use that as a timeline stamp to then read it to DNC10. Well, so so what you're saying is like using your example, you can't take a statement in 1838 and read it back into something that happened in 1829. Is that what you're saying?
44:46 [clears throat] or something that was stated in 1835 and read it back into 1829. That's not that's not how you utilize historical criteria. Correct. Okay. Yes, I would agree with that because that puts into a question which is what you've been doing this whole time. Yeah. I mean it that No, I it doesn't put into question foundational a foundational problem that I have because and again it's going to seem like a dish gal, but you brought up this issue.
45:16 Oh my gosh. Do not jump to the first visions while we're dealing with [laughter] the transmission process. You are literally the worst Gisher in the most century. Let's do priesthood. No, I'm using your example and you're not. No, Chuck, to use your exact words. Use my example with the translation of the Book of Mormon, please. My Hold on, Chuck. My is I like how you can't you can't you literally can't. Every single point I bring up, you have to run to a different point every single time.
45:44 Hold up. Hold up, Chuck. You have to admit this was you kind of got yourself in a thing here cuz you point you have to read do it with the first vision accounts. You have to read it in order. You have to read it in order and build a historical account. And so yeah, that's easy. I'll do it with the first vision accounts after you deal with this. I'll be I'll I'll be I'll be honest with my critique. I won't run around like you have been.
46:10 So again, I haven't Okay, so here's I'll use this standard. I'm presenting with the first vision accounts cuz guess what? It doesn't do anything. Let's move on. Completely dismantle every single point you've brought up. No, it doesn't. You're just saying that it does. So that's why you can't prove it. Prove you've done what you've done. I brought you I prove otherwise. Just prove otherwise.
46:33 I'll do it right here. I brought you canonized with the book of prove otherwise. I brought you canonize where it says same words DNC 10 and in relation to what is a journal that we don't know you brought a journal entry that has a vague reference to it you have it you haven't journal entries journal entries yeah to me multiple journal entries not just one person multiple people yeah again prove the transliteration of 116 pages. Go. Stop running through this.
47:11 DNC 10. You can't read DNC 10 and use it as a historical point and read it into history. No, he's reading Yeah, he's reading it into Right. Then he said he could have words. Oh my god. He's not. He's not. Oh my gosh. I can't. You can't deal with my positions ever. Chuck, let's let's move on. Let's move on. I My brain can't My brain can't do it. I don't follow you. [laughter] How did Joseph Smith translate the Book of Mormon? I'm just cur curious how you think he did it is so according to what you're saying.
47:49 I think I Yeah. So, so my naturalistic explanation of how it is possible that he produced the text was he grew up in a very religious environment. His own parents fast. So, and he he uh he knew a lot about Native Americans. That that was actually a big part of the culture. Hold on. It's key. No, we've been talking about that for two hours. Fast forward. I want to hear you say that. Then he gets to the dictation.
48:20 Yeah. Then he gets to the dictation and he used the laying on down heads method which can be shown that it it follows that that that also that method also produces uh uh good stuff. So he's reading a napkin. He's reading paper. What what is he reading? Yeah, he's got an idea and he worked it out. He started talking about Welcome to John Turner 2.0 You know, here we completely ignore.
48:51 Have you Have you ever read Have you ever heard Hiby's talk how to write an anti- Mormon book? No. No. Would be perfect at it. Gish all over the place. Don't be Don't have an internal consistency and uh just run around. What you're No, what you're framing as a gish gallop is actually me just saying here. You've said this is a gish gallop multiple times. What do you mean? [laughter] No, I told you that when I was talking about that was just for the seed stone little little galloped out there. But no, I've been on my whole issue. I have been laser focused like beautifully focused on Can you read one for us?
49:33 I have been laser focused on upstate New York and one for us. Oh, if this is insulting, you guys are just mean insulting me with scripture. All right. 81 Oliver Calry. Verily I say unto you, I assure those does the Lord liveth who is your God and your redeemer. Even so surely and you shall you receive a knowledge of whatsoever things you ask in faith with an honest heart, believing that ye shall receive a knowledge concerning an engravings of old records which are ancient which contain those parts of my How far do you want me to go? Just the whole verse.
50:18 Wait, which verse? I just started at one. 81. Okay. Of my scripture which has been spoken by the manifestation of my spirit. Oh, how is it spoken? With an honest heart. Believe you shall receive knowledge concerning the engravings. A knowledge concerning their engravings. A knowledge concerning the engravings. What engravings are they talking about? Wait, did you have me read this to verify that he didn't that Oliver Cry actually didn't see the plates that he had to see them through his spiritual eye?
50:54 No, you are literally Holy hell. This is why I called you. This verse, that's what I get out of this. He saw the He saw the place with his spiritual eye. That is That is hilarious. This is why they call you a liar. I'm getting my highlighter out. He [clears throat] He didn't So he Wait, he didn't see the plates. Reread it. Reread it. He didn't see the plates. He couldn't see the plates. Reread it.
51:21 So when we're trying to figure out how we're trans I like how I like how your pride is coming in the way right now. He can't just This is what we call pride of XMOS right here. DNC 81. [laughter] Yeah. How how how is the reference of scripture? How was it brought forth? So wait, hold on. I'm looking for the How was scripture brought forth? Read the last sentence for me. Uh I'm looking for where he actually saw the Someone else pull it up cuz he won't. Read the last sentence for me.
51:51 Manifestation of my spirit. He saw in reference to what? That's not what it says. That's not what it says. Don't lie. Don't lie, can't Chuck. Listen. Don't lie. That's not what it says. Comes from secondhand accounts. Hold up. It doesn't come from the second account. He just had me read it. Hold up. Don't let him run away. This is not This is in reference to the context. Content in the scripture, not the golden plates seeing them. We're talking about the content in it.
52:24 Reread the verse again. You have to admit that was pretty funny. No, it wasn't. It's annoying of you running away again. I don't like it. I really don't like I'm being good. I'm being so good. faith. You calling me a liar is is kind of derogatory. I don't really like that term, but I will I will concede that he says that it comes through the spirit. But that doesn't undo that this the words are the same. That's my whole claim. What is that called?
52:56 I'm reading it right there where he's not seeing physical plates. Think about the physical plates in 81. The a the He's saying the ancient concerning the engravings of old record. No, he's saying the content. Read it. You shall the the engravings of old records. Oliver Calry isn't holding the plates. That's my point. It is not a lie. It is what it says. And the fact that I have a the fact that I have a different interpretation is is it's not a different interpretation.
53:28 Your interpretation is just horrible because it's not found in the verse. It comes. It come. It's not talking about seeing the golden plates, bro. Right. He He's just He's just getting it through the spirit. He doesn't In reference to what what is he getting through the spirit? [laughter] What is he getting through the spirit? Extractor. You'll receive a knowledge concerning the engravings of the records. What does engraving mean?
54:01 Oh my gosh. Yeah. What does that mean? The Yeah, the He's talking about the gold plates. No, no, no. What is he talking about when he says engravings? The words. Oh, thank you. So, he will receive what of the words. How will he receive the words? Through what? Through the spirit. Thank you. Disprove your entire position again. In two ways. You're [laughter] it doesn't because it doesn't say you'll call cognitive dissonance right now. No, this is this is cognitive dissonance.
54:36 This is cognitive dissonance because I have a verse that says same words. Yours says words through spirit. There this comes before DNC 10. Again, proving my point of transmission which still can be used to say same words. Same words don't mean transliteration extractor. Okay. I just you have to admit that was pretty You had me read something about the translation and he can't see the plates.
55:01 It's not talking about seeing the plates. It's not talking about Holy cow. It's fun. This is fun. Hey, can I go on to my my open soulless script Torah argument cuz I I feel like I'm frustrating and I'm really not trying to be I'm I literally am not trying to be belligerent. I You're good. You're good. You're just you prove to me your arguments prove to me that there's no way Joseph Smith could have created a book alone. That's all you've done. Thank you. Okay.
55:29 The restored truth is that God has never stopped reaching out to humanity. He continues to reveal, guide, and pursue a relationship with us today. So remember, keep your knees on the ground and your eyes towards heaven.