By Tad R. Callister I’m going to read it just to see what arguments he presents but did the BOM ever have a leg to stand on? Even a wobbly leg? Like... if you are a Bible believing person or even any other Holy book such as the Qu’ran does the BOM even compare in being believable with faith? It seems the BOM contradicts many TSCC teachings, so is the BOM the problem or TSCC? When I read the BOM as an investigator there were qualms I had about several verses that the missionaries explained away. But let’s look at this with “eyes of faith” for a second. If you do believe in any form of God no matter what tradition, does the BOM even have a leg to stand on, considering there is no evidence of BOM having happened ANYWHERE? The Bible scrolls are at least discovered and found even some scrolls found open for debate but the BOM just happens to get taken back by the angel. Could someone believe the BOM to be true and not TSCC? I’ve always wondered if anyone went as far to keep a testimony of the BOM and not TSCC even though that probably contradicts itself but there are people who practice all kinds of traditions mixed together so I assume it COULD be possible there is someone out there holding to this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2019 10:34AM by catholicrebel.

extremely boring and of no spiritual value. I had no testimony of the book of mormon and I never did say I did. I wasn't one to bear my testimony anyway. I always have felt that my beliefs were my own and unique even as a mormon. I knew I had differences.

AND I definitely was not one to try to convert by bearing testimony. Even when I two times sent missionaries (to people I wanted so badly to be with me in the next life--one is now my boyfriend again and we laugh about my sending the missionaries), I didn't bear my testimony to them. The only time I ever bore my testimony was when forced. I'm sure I never once said I believe the bofm to be true.

But then I no longer believe the bible to be the word of God either because of things that have happened on this board actually.

Believing any “holy” book requires faith (plus the ability to explain and/or ignore self-contradictions, anachronisms, and logical inconsistencies).

Someone could certainly embrace the BoM and not accept TSCC. There is almost no LDS doctrine in the BoM.

The book comes with a coupon for a lobotomy.

dagny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The book comes with a coupon for a lobotomy.

Oh Dags you are in fine form this morning!!!<giggle>

mel Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
dagny Wrote:

> The book comes with a coupon for a lobotomy.

Thanks lots for the coupon offer, but I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

The book is obvious literary pilferage, filched from a dozen sources at least.

The resultant tale is a long, repetitive, silly catalog of fictional wars.

And bloody boring as hell to read.

<snort>

Maybe reading the BOM triggers an auto-lobotomy ...

The answer is yes and no on the case for the book of mormon.

A hundred years ago the church used mammoth bones and horse bones to prove that both existed in the americas. Of course they didn't have the science to prove the vast time lines of when the animals went extinct.

A hundred years ago the legends of the white god "proved" christ walked the americas. The had not collected and analyzed the legends nor could they read most of the Mesoamerican writing.

A hundred years ago the legends of linguistic similarities between hebrew (and Basque and Welsh) and "native" tongues were still believed.

A hundred years ago "hooked noses" were "proof" of hebrew descent. No DNA data was available or even conceived.

A hundred years ago the great age of archaeology in the americas was just beginning. Hopeful saints waited to hear concrete proof of the nook of mormon.

Today we know better and most claims have withered in the light of science.

And yet, 107 years ago, the New York Times exposed Smith's fraudulent translation of the Book of Abraham.

https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1912/12/29/100076264.pdf

But good mormons only read the deseret news

But Book of Mormon claims are refuted by DNA results.

The ancestors of our native Americans are NOT Jews/Semites.

DNA clearly shows that these people originated in Asia instead.

The guy who discovered that was excommunicated. Then the preface to the BoM was magically changed.

earlier claims for the Value (remember that?) of the BoM were that the 'Plain & Precious Parts' of the Christ's Gospel / the Bible were AWOL...

me: the Plain & Precious Parts of the Christ's Gospel are:

Honesty, Kindness, Respect for others; Repentance & Forgiveness; doing good for others whenever possible.

How much emphasis is there about the Parable of the Good Samaritan in ChurchCo? same for the Golden Rule?

how about the way that Christ taught & exampled (feeding the crowd, healing the sick, calming the storm saving lives, etc.) ...

Not Exactly missing or AWOL, are they?

So in the BoM, Christ made a Brief pit-stop on his way to (wherever he was destined), was their anything new or different there to his teachings, ideals, values? No you say?

Even if we doubt the truthfulness of the Bible teachings, just how new / different (therefore necessary) are they from what's found in the BoM?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/16/2019 01:58PM by GNPE.

In thought the case for the BoM was a stone box on Hill Cumorah.

Thank you, thank. I'll be here all week. Try the prime rib and don't forget to tip your waiters, they're great kids.

A case can be made for the Book of Mormon. But that case had nothing to do with much before 1830.

Although not well written and not well thought out, it covers a vast array early 1800s thought.

Could any man have written this book? Yes.

Could a 20 something have written it? Possibly, but most likely with some substantial help.

I hope Craig and his associates are continuing their help.

Tad R. Callister will fatten his wallet with sales of his book. One of the perks of being a general authority, you know those unpaid ministers of Mormonism. Will it actually support the Book of Mormon? Consider the audience it is written to. Those who already believe. If it could actually provide support for doubters and non-believers, where was he during the Swedish Rescue? Jensen and Turley could have used some support from such a hero. :) Maybe the case was that briefcase with a mysterious manuscript inside that never materialized for Hans Mattson.

Mormon 8 :32 all you need to read
"32 Yea, it shall come in a day when there shall be churches built up that shall say: Come unto me, and for your money you shall be forgiven of y

32 Yea, it shall come in a day when there shall be churches built up that shall say: Come unto me, and for your money you shall be forgiven of your sins"

From his own introduction:

"Every aspect of the Book of Mormon bears witness of its divine origin because, in fact, it is divinely inspired."

When a book is introduced with a tautology and an easily disprovable core assertion, that's never a good sign for what is to follow.

"Every aspect"? Seriously?

All of the bloody beheading stories bear witness to its divine origin?

The blatant rip off of the Daughter-of-Herod-dancing-for-a-decapitation story in the New Testament" by simply reworking it in the Book of Mormon as the Daughter-of-Jared-dancing-for-a-decapitation story. (Jared even rhymes with Herod.) Does this bear witness to divine origins?

All of the hillbillyisms and grammatical errors in the first edition that later had to be edited by someone for subsequent editions?

The wholesale plagiarism of whole chapters of Isaiah from the KJV Bible, including parts that are now widely acknowledged as being errors unique to the KJV Bible.

Themes and memes copied from the anti-Masonry political movement that was swirling around upstate NY in the late 1820s (secret combinations, corrupt judges).

I could go on.

I doubt that Callister is going to offer up any new evidence. But if you come across something that looks very persuasive and compelling, please let us know. I would be interested in seeing anything like that. I'm just not motivated enough to buy the book myself because I've seen too many hyperbolic titles and claims made by LDS authors in the past that turned out to be just the same old platitudes and tropes...and this just looks like another one of those types of deals.

Moreover, it sounds (based on comments and prefatory remarks) like his main emphasis is on the spiritual feels that you can get from the Book of Mormon. As in: "If you try hard enough to brainwash yourself and let us help with the brainwashing and if you then want to believe so badly that it makes you feel like crying...well then...that feeling...that feeling that makes you cry...THAT'S THE HOLY GHOST TELLING YOU IT'S TRUE! Feels! It's all about the Feels!"

I don't think there's a legitimate 'case for the BoM'.

Lloyd Christmas: What are the chances of a guy like you and a girl like me... ending up together?

Mary Swanson: Not good.

Lloyd Christmas: Not good like one in a hundred?

Mary Swanson: I'd say more like one in a million.

Lloyd Christmas: So you're telling me there's a chance?

I believe in the Book of Mormon. I have a copy at home somewhere. So it totally exists.

But here’s my direct rebuttal to Ted Callister: https://weirdalma.bandcamp.com/track/ode-to-prophet-joe

That's Funny! Thanks for the link :-)

Even reading the first few pages I already disagree with the arguments he represents but I’ll give an update when I finish. It seems like the same old song though and built on one of the reasons that drove me away, all about your “spirit” testifying it’s true even if all other evidence points elsewhere.

I offered and posted on YT a $1000 dollar bounty for anything Nephite or Lamanite. The response I typically got was. What would it look like?

The Mormon church has made an extraordinary claim. But offered NO proof to the claim. That means it is a fraud. It is really that simple.

Hell the early church leaders didn't even follow the teachings of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon says polygamy is wrong.

That right there proves the church was a loose cannon not really following anything. Not even its own holy book.