A serialized response to John Hamer - Part 7 (last remarks)

I have commented on all of Hamer's arguments up until part 6 of this serialized response. The rest of John Hamer’s presentation follows a different structure, so I will just make some general remarks as a response to the rest of the interview. He is telling about the oral story-telling tradition from Joseph Smith’s time. That’s fair enough, but it adds to the impression that Hamer thinks the Book of Mormon is not much more than just a collection of stories and sermons. He does not seem to be aware of its complexity, which in part has been demonstrated in this response.

Hamer goes on to argue that the timeframe for the Book of Mormon was relatively short but completely manageable. The math he does is not taking into account historical records with information about the days Joseph Smith was busy with other things, traveling, etc. and could not have worked with the translation. Other much more thorough calculations have been done in the past, taking these things into account. Their conclusion is that Joseph Smith dictated the Book of Mormon in about 65 working days, spending approximately 6 hours per day. The average time spent each day is difficult to assess, but the approximate number of days spent can be deduced from historical records. This might not be a big deal as both critics and believers obviously think that there was sufficient time to dictate and write the whole Book of Mormon in that timeframe. But there is also little doubt that there was not much time for additional research in that time period. When Joseph and Oliver were occupied with the translation in the time period from April 7^th to Mid-June, it consisted of dictating and writing essentially in one draft. This is confirmed by eye-witness accounts and the Book of Mormon manuscript.

Hamer also shows a slide with a quote from Lucy Mack Smith’s book. This gets misused a lot by critics in general. They talk, as does Hamer, about his “story-telling abilities”. Let’s look at this portion of the manuscript of Lucy’s book, available at josephsmithpapers.org:

“From this time forth Joseph continued to receive instructions from time to time and every evening we gathered our children togather And gave our our time up to the discussion of those things which he imparted <​un​> to us I think that <​we​> presented the most peculiar aspect of any family that ever lived upon the Earth all seated round in a circle father Mother sons and Daughters listening in breathless anxiety to the <​religious​> teachings of a boy 16 <​19​> yars of age who had never read the Bible through by course in his life for Joseph was less inclined to the study of books than any child we had but much more given to reflection and deep study We were convinced that God was about to bring to light something that we might stay our minds upon some thing that we could get a more definite idea of than anything which had been taught us heretofore and we rejoiced in it with exceeding great joy Uni the sweetest union and happiness pervaded our house no jar nor discord disturbed our peace and tranquility reigned in our midst In the course of our evening conversations Joseph would give us some of the most ammusing recitals which could be immagined he would de[s]cribe the ancient inhabitants of this continent their dress thier maner of traveling the animals which they rode The cities that were built by them the structure of their buildings with every particular of their mode of warfare their religious worship as particularly as though he had Spent his life with them it will be recollected by the reader that all that I mentioned and much more took place within the compass of one short year»

The bold text is the part presented by Hamer.

I don’t know of any other sources which describe Joseph Smith’s story telling skills.  But I would expect that if he was known as a great story-teller from a young age, there would be sources confirming that. Even Lucy’s book is not really saying anything about stories. It tells about “amusing recitals”. They involve descriptions of the ancient inhabitants of the American continent which may or may not involve stories.

But looking at the quoted paragraph, we see that there is a part in the middle (italics added) which is not quoted, which says that Joseph never had read the Bible through and was less inclined to reading than any of his siblings. Doesn’t that contradict the previous statements in the Hamer interview where Joseph Smith has “better than average, if not gifted knowledge of the Bible”? It’s interesting to see how sources are used: A paragraph in Lucy’s book is quoted in part and stretched to fit their narrative. But it skips the middle part which does not fit the narrative. This is intellectual dishonesty.

Conclusion:

In this interview by John Dehlin, John Hamer presents a lot of arguments to prove his theory that the Book of Mormon is solely the work of Joseph Smith. Most of the arguments are weak, some contradictory, some just pointless and many are plain false as demonstrated in this serialized response. The false arguments backfire since they show e.g. that the Book of Mormon demonstrates much knowledge of ancient Jewish practice, it contains language that does not seem to come from Joseph Smith and it is more complex than it first appears. When the arguments to support the theory that the Book of Mormon is an invention by Joseph Smith fall apart, the theory falls apart too. Critics may need to go back to conspiracy theories while believers can be confident in their beliefs that Joseph Smith and the witnesses told the truth and that the Book of Mormon is an authentic, ancient record translated by the gift and power of God.