© 2024 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All content by The Interpreter Foundation, unless otherwise specified, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available here.
Interpreter Foundation is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of their respective authors, and should not be interpreted as the opinions of the Board, nor as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.
The audio file for this article on the Interpreter podcast is actually the audio for Kevin Christensen’s article on Twenty Years After “Paradigms Regained,” Part 2. Is there someone reading this that knows who to contact to get that fixed?
I apologize, my mistake. I’ve corrected it in the article, but it may take an hour or so to propagate to the podcast channels.
Interesting article. Of course anyone who is arguing for continuity is hamstrung by the fact that we don’t know what was on the large plates or Mormon’s abridgement for the time period of the small plates, so lacking some later extensive verbatim quoting of something from the small plates one cannot really say that anything on the small plates was not also found on the large plates. I actually have an article that also deals to some extent with this issue, and there are some discontinuity arguments there that are not found in the other authors that you cited (4th generation prophecy, etc.). You might want to take a gander at it. https://www.academia.edu/40525518/Possibilities_of_a_Reformed_Egyptian_Version_of_the_Small_Plates
Also, you seem to reference Clifford’s theory of the Words of Mormon and seem to imply that most BOM scholars accept his theory. I can tell you in the BOM academic circles I am in, most don’t. It is one theory, and has it’s own problems. Based on the comments of the Interpreter’s editors, they seem to give it preference above all others, but their patent bias should not be interpreted that most accept it.
Jerry,
Thanks for the feedback! We do the best we can with what we have, don’t we? Two things: 1) I mention a four-generation prophecy (not sure it’s the one you reference). 2) I don’t know where each scholar stands on Clifford’s theory. I’m never dogmatic about my interpretive work. Always learning something new. Isn’t BoM prophecy fascinating!