Rejecting Historicity?

The fundamental problem of rejecting the historicity of the Book of Mormon is that it requires rejecting the historicity of the prophetic claims of the Restoration.

As illustrative of what has changed at the MI, a reader sent me the following:

Classic FARMS

The Review 3 (1991): 81:

“Without a real Lehi colony, how could there have been a real resurrected Nephite angel who later visited with Joseph Smith, or real plates, all of which are part of the controlling narrative of the Mormon faith? Hence, whether the Book of Mormon is authentic ancient history and also whether the story of visits of heavenly messengers is accurate are questions within the province of historical inquiry. What this means is that to compromise in a radical way one essential aspect of the founding narrative calls into question all of the other elements.”

The Review 21/2 (2009): 225:

“Joseph Smith deserves to be understood on his own terms and not by any standards we might wish to impose on him. If he claimed to have had in his possession records belonging to ancient peoples of the Americas, then we are obliged to test that claim. Not a mystic who offered only subjective maundering, Joseph claimed to have received through divine means physical objects: actual golden plates and actual ancient instruments once in the possession of an actual ancient people. The Book of Mormon claims to be a real history of ancient peoples. Thus its historicity is linked with its authenticity as scripture revealed by a prophet of God.”

The New Maxwell Institute

The Review 1[sic] (2014): 14:

“There were no ancient golden plates.”