Job Bautista in his criticisms on 1 Nephi 1:3

In our new conversation, our INC friends had a challenge that he couldn't grasp. Job Bautista's criticisms appeared to be so shallow, as he failed to understand and recognize the text's ancient origins and significance. The complexity of the text confused the understanding of our INC Friend here, simply highlighting the gap in his comprehension. Job Bautista's criticisms lacked the textual understanding, possibly due to overlooking the text's historicity and its deeper meanings. The text's historical origin and significance were as far as I could tell, were overlooked by our INC friends, leading to a misinterpretation of its content. This instance serves as a reminder of the importance of considering the historical context and understanding the meanings when analyzing texts to avoid misconceptions and misinterpretations.

Let's take a look -

From the Comment section
Where Job Bautista opened up
Something he never knew

Job Bautista believed the Book of Mormon was man-made because of the line mentioned, "I make it in my own knowledge." He overlooked that this writing style is ancient. Nephi, for instance, openly shared how he documented their history and identified himself as the writer. Job Bautista's misunderstanding might possibly have come from not understanding and recognizing the traditional way of presenting the historicity of the text and the style of writing. By not grasping this historical context, he wrongly concluded and accused that the Book of Mormon was simply man-made. So, take note here Job Bautista, and to our INC Friends out there, it's crucial to understand the cultural and historical practices of writing to avoid misinterpreting ancient texts like the Book of Mormon or the Bible itself.

So, how did it show the ancient style of writing? The Egyptian style of Writing 

Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? - 1 Corinthians 14:6

In the broader context, 1 Corinthians 14:6 is part of a larger discussion Paul is talking about spiritual gifts, and he specifically speaks about tongues and prophecy within the Corinthian church. In this passage, Paul is emphasizing the importance of understanding and edification within the church over the use of spiritual gifts without interpretation or clear purpose. He stresses that speaking in tongues is not beneficial to the congregation unless it is interpreted, so that the church may receive edification or doctrinal understanding as I call it. Paul is essentially saying, "What good will I be to you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction?"

Neil Andi Anderson in his Comments to Job Bautista's Post.

Another word from Paul himself is in the verses below -

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; - Ephesians 3:3-5

In essence, knowledge plays a crucial role in articulating the history and significant details of concepts revealed by apostles, prophets, and others. It is an integral component of teachings and does not render a person's writings false unless they are fabricated without any basis. Knowledge serves as the foundation for accurately conveying the information passed down by religious figures and historical sources. It ensures that the narratives presented are grounded in truth and authenticity, rather than being mere fabrications or fictional accounts. By leveraging knowledge, individuals can uphold the integrity of their writings and contribute to the preservation of accurate historical and religious accounts. So Knowledge is also taught as one of the Christlike attributes every person should have.

Nephi, as Job Bautista pointed out to be a false prophet with a claim that the writing was just all about his own personal knowledge, or basically making up his own words or history. But little did he know that Nephi's authorship was an ancient style of writing. Nephi learned this, possibly through understanding the Egyptian style of writing, since he was will learned in both Jewish and Egyptian as verse 2 says -

Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians.

This way of writing is known as a Colophon. See the rest of the definition in the wiki if you need to know more about it. Link is in the picture below -

To learn more about it, click here -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colophon_(publishing)

And some church publication regarding this topic, just Go Here.

Now, to go back to our topic. Either Colophon, Incipit, or whatever Hebraic style of writing, it is clear that Nephi's intention is to write down their history or should  I simply says it Journal Writing, and he made it according to the best knowledge that was taught to him by either his Father Lehi, who was the prophet during his days, or the Holy Ghost itself. Job Bautista's Criticism is overreacting and didn't go through any critical thinking. He simply assumes and finds it faulty without knowing the whole context of the story.

In summary, Job Bautista's failure lay in his lack of comprehension regarding the historical significance of writing and his limited awareness of the value of knowledge in the advancement of God's Kingdom. It is imperative to utilize knowledge to gain a comprehensive understanding of God's will, rather than depending on the works of individuals who lack a divine calling.

My response could be a second or third time already.