I didn't say it was a perfect book, nor did I imply that it was.
You continue to contradict yourself. You overtly claimed the BoM had no inaccuracies (that means it is accurate in every detail which in my book declares just that, no errors, no inaccuracies and effectively perfe t) and yet in this rather lengthy excuse you now state it does contain errors but rather than holding Smith to the same standard as you do Brodie, you give him a pass because it attacks the very fiber of your religious belief system and blame "...human error, such as punctuation, copying, and distribution...".
The witnesses to how Smith "translated" the reformed Egyptian make it very clear what he supposedly read on his seer stone(s) was a direct translation from God, every letter, every word. Smith confirmed the accuracy of the scribe until certain it was correct and if it wasn't a new letter or word didn't appear on said seer stone because God was checking the accuracy and correctness too. Even Joseph Fielding Smith stated this was how it was done.
So, you can't have it both ways. The BoM cannot contain inaccuracies because what Smith had the scribe write was directly from God and he was not allowed to continue "translating" until God decided it was correct or it contains inaccuracies, not just grammatical but historical imaccuracies. A point you seem to refuse to refute lr provide evidence to the contrary. Simply put I don't accept your assertion it was only to correct misspellings or printing errors.
You were comparing it to Brodie's book which you said was weak due to the research available at the time
is that a direct quote? Perhaps review what I wrote and see if this and that match up.
it was written. Those inaccuracies don't exist in the Book of Mormon. The inaccuracies that exist in the Book of Mormon have all been, AFAIK, the result of human error, such as punctuation, copying, and distribution (publication in different geographical locations). This my claim that those inaccuracies don't exist in the book stands and it should not have been misconstrued, as you did, to mean that it was a perfect book. I never said that it was.
See my comments above.
I suspect we are no longer going to argue the worthlessness of Brodie's book.
You and Richard7 are the only ones who have argued Brodie's book was worthless. I found it quite enjoyable.
You now have a straw man for me to defend and, again, it is about me and not the material.
You are here defending what you claim is true. Seems you must be part of the debate. If you don't want to be a part reconsider posting. Just saying.
Even the Book of Mormon points out its own faults. If there are errors it is due to the weakness of their language in written form.
But God translated these "golden plates" for Smith, yes? Are you claiming God made mistakes in His translation
That same problem still exists today. It is not a perfect book. It doesn't contain any inaccuracies because it is written by the players as it took place from their point of view. It is accurate to their understanding and couldn't be more accurate, but it's not perfect. Besides, who here could be the judge of perfection?
"Their understanding" is opinion, not fact, that you accept as true.