[Note to dogeatdog - if you are comfortable giving me your email address I can send you attachments the the original Word formatting - brian@brightbuilders.com]
[Note to others:
There may be some desire to comment that dogeatdog should not send a letter like this to her FIL.
Please be aware:
1) This has already been discussed on 2 other threads.
2) Dogeatdog and I discussed this.
3) She has her reasons for wanting to take this approach. One of them is that her FIL cc'd a whole bunch of people on this discussion without their consent and they are hoping this may engender doubts in some of them. Another is FIL has already shown and unwillingness to leave it be and respect their right to believe as they desire.
Also I apologize for the new thread but wanted to be sure that DogEatDog could find it easily.
For reference:
exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,760572,760777
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,760947,761679---
You state:
“Years ago, before we had DNA testing and complex genetics, leaders of the Church talked frequently about Lamanites from the BOM as being the ancestors of the American Indians. We know from the BOM of three specific migrations of people who came here from Asia or the Middle East: The Nephites, Jaredites and the Mulekites are the three we know about. Today you will find no General Authorities who believe these were THE ONLY three groups of people who once came to the Americas. We now know there must have been many (nobody knows for sure) groups who likely came before the Nephites, and for sure there were likely some who came during and after the BOM was completed. My question is, SO WHAT?”
There are several “so what’s”. The main “so what” is that the Book of Mormon people never existed.
You are alluding to what is generally considered the “Limited geography theory”. This is the idea that the Book of Mormon people took up a very small portion of the America’s and had very limited to no interaction with the other people’s living in the America’s. There are several problems with this idea.
1) The Book of Mormon text does not support this idea. Not at all. In fact there are many things in the Book of Mormon that contradict this:
a. The introduction of the Book of Mormon states that the Lamanites are the “principal ancestors of the American Indians”.
b. 1 Nephi 13:14 states: And it came to pass that I beheld many multitudes of the Gentiles upon the land of promise; and I beheld the wrath of God, that it was upon the seed of my brethren; and they were scattered before the Gentiles and were smitten.
This illustrates that the Indians conquered were Lamanites.
c.There is no reference anywhere in the Book of Mormon to any other people other than these 3 groups. These 3 groups all find each other and interact.
d. The promises made to Lehi and others make it quite clear that this land is a land of promise set aside for them specifically.
e. The narrative of the Book of Mormon requires the Jaredites to be wiped out in order for there to be room for the Lehites. The Jaredites bump into their replacements not once but twice – when the record is found and when Coriantumr lives with them. It makes no sense that all these other people were around with no interaction and with no conflict.
f. The population requirements of both the Jaredites and the Lehites require as vast amount of space, especially based on the sizes of dwellings found in ancient America. The final battles of the Jaredites indicates that just on Coriantumr’s side over 2 million people had been slain – Ether 15:2. It wouldn’t be a stretch to extrapolate that there had been at least 10 million Jaredites 40 years before – before the unending civil war began.
2) This means that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were not prophets. Because they clearly stated on many occasions that the Indians in North and South America were descendants of the Lamanites. I can provide you with numerous quotes if desired.
3) There have been no DNA samples anywhere that show anything other than the American Indians are descendants of people who came across the Bering Strait around 12,000 bc. All DNA evidence clearly shows that the Lehites never existed. Even if it were are relatively small population the DBA could be found.
4) It means Spencer W. Kimball was not a prophet. He clearly stated that the Indians participating in the church’s Indian placement programs were Lamanites and that the participants were becoming white and delightsome.
5) The Mormon church has been recruiting members for many years based on the premise that all American Indians are descendants of the Book of Mormon. They have also recruited Pacific Islanders under the guise that they are descendants of Hagoth. That’s a big problem if they have been doing this converting based on a lie.
6) The general membership of the church still largely believes the Lamanites to be the principle ancestors of the American Indians. This is still used as a common recruiting technique by missionaries, especially in Central and South America. If the leaders know this to not be true why has this practiced not be stopped and why have the church leaders not leveled with church members that this is the case?
-----------------
You state:
“Here are a few reasons why: For the last 183 years, some of the ablest scholars and experts have tried to discredit or disprove its authenticity; even to prove it a forgery. Not one person or group of persons has come close. In fact, more often they have found many things which have proven it to be what the Prophet Joseph has stated all along; These people were real; their religious, economic, political, and social cultures and institutions were real!”
You have provided no evidence, for the claim you are making here. I recognize this statement from Jeffery Holland, but he also, did nothing to back up his claim. In fact there is significant evidence that the Book of Mormon is not authentic. The Book of Mormon has effectively been disproven. Ignoring the evidence does not mean the evidence does not exist. That Mormon doggedly continue to believe the Book of Mormon is true despite it being disproven is very different than it not having been disproven.
There is so much evidence proving the Book of Mormon is false that it is difficult to even know where to begin. I will only endeavor to discuss a small portion as an example – the tip of the ice berg.
First of all, no one has ever even been able to figure out a plausible location for the Book of Mormon. There are over 250 geographical references in the Book of Mormon and no one can find a match for these references . For example, Helaman 4:7 states:
And there they did fortify against the Lamanites, from the west sea, even unto the east; it being a day’s journey for a Nephite, on the line which they had fortified and stationed their armies to defend their north country.
Where is this? – the closest match, the Panama canal is over 100 miles across. A days journey through a jungle would be more in the range of 10 miles. 30 miles at most if you are very generous. This is the dividing line between the huge Nephite and the Lamanite nations so it can’t be some little obscure area somewhere. No one has successfully identified this location to my knowledge. Any guesses are quickly disproven by other geographical references. No one can find a correct match.
In fact every civilization that has been examined in ancient America has been shown to not be a match. Therefore your claim that “more often they have found many things which have proven it to be what the Prophet Joseph has stated all along” cannot be true. They have never even found a definitive spot where the Lamanites and Nephites lived. Until you find a location where they lived you can’t even begin to establish that there is evidence that they existed.
The Book of Mormon narrative is dependent on horses and chariots existing in the Americas.
Alma 20:6 states:6 Now when Lamoni had heard this he caused that his servants should make ready his horses and his chariots.
3 Nephi 3:22 states: And it came to pass in the seventeenth year, in the latter end of the year, the proclamation of Lachoneus had gone forth throughout all the face of the land, and they had taken their horses, and their chariots, and their cattle, and all their flocks, and their herds, and their grain, and all their substance, and did march forth by thousands and by tens of thousands, until they had all gone forth to the place which had been appointed that they should gather themselves together, to defend themselves against their enemies.
However, archeologists have determined that the horse went extinct on the American continent about 8,000 bc.
Additionally these were small horses, more like ponies that would be incapable of pulling a chariot. The counter argument to this is “well archeologists just haven’t found this evidence.” First, your point above is that archeologists have shown the Book of Mormon to be true – that is just plain false, everything that has been found and discovered shows exactly the opposite. Second, if desired, I can show you why archeologists are able determine with a high degree of confidence that horses did not exist in quantity anywhere in the Americas during the time of the Book of Mormon (hint – it’s a lot more than just the lack of fossils).
Next comes the chariots. Which requires the wheel. In fact had the Lehites come across in 600 bc they would have revolutionized ancient America with the wheel. Nearly every aspect of life would be impacted by the wheel. Agriculture would be revolutionized. This would have quickly spread through the entire American continent. However, all archeological evidence shows that there was absolutely no concept of using the wheel as a tool in the ancient America’s.
Alma 11 indicates that the foundation of the entire Nephite economy was barley. However there was no barley in the Americas. (There was a discovery in North America that at a time long before the Lehites existed that something similar to barely existed in a very small area.) However, this does more to disprove the Book of Mormon that prove it because: A) It was in completely the wrong time and the wrong place, B) It illustrates if it did exist on a large scale it would be found by Archeologists. Now had the foundation of the economy been corn, maize or even bananas, coca or coffee beans it could have been viable – these were the staples and valuable plants in the Americas. However, none of these items are ever mentioned at all in the Book of Mormon.
The metallurgy in the Book of Mormon is completely inconsistent with what has been found in the Americas.
The weapons described don’t exist. The battle sites using these weapons don’t exist.
The flora and fauna described in the Book of Mormon are a complete miss for what existed in the Americas. For example neither wheat nor elephants existed in the Americas. There are many more examples. In fact in almost every case if something is mentioned in the Book of Mormon it never existed in the Americas and if something did exist in the Americas it is not mentioned in the Book of Mormon. Oops.
I’ve barely scratched the surface. I literally could go on for hundreds of pages detailing problems with the Book of Mormon that debunk it being a viable historical document.
There are many problems with the text of the Book of Mormon that disprove it.
- Enos was unrealistically old. Then his posterity for the next 6 generations were all 60+ years old when their son was born.
- The Jaredite boats are not plausible.
- Lehi was of the tribe of Joseph but sacrificed at the altar – only Levites could do this – the penalty was death for anyone else.
- The Brother of Jared seeing Jesus conflicts directly with the account of Moses.
- Nephi quotes passages of Isaiah that were not written until after Lehi left Jerusalem.
- Mixing a belief in Christ and the law of Moses makes no sense.
- Captain Moroni & Helaman not communicating in a war for over 2 years makes no sense (especially since they had horses and had a limited geography) – likewise Moroni’s failure to communicate with Pahoran for months makes no sense.)
- There is no plausible explanation for a day and a night and a day without darkness
- Likewise there is no plausible explanation of how there could be 3 days of complete darkness and that no fire could be lit.
- This is just the tip of the ice berg of problems with the narratives in the Book of Mormon.
Tom Ferguson was a very active believing Mormon and an Archeologist. He spent 20+ years looking for archeological evidence for the existence of the Book of Mormon people. After all that time he failed to find a single shred of evidence. Eventually he concluded that the Book of Mormon was not viable.
The Smithsonian Institute released a clearly written statement that no archeological evidence has ever been found that support the Book of Mormon. It then goes on to outline many ways in which the archeology evidence indicates that such a people never existed.
There are many more examples of the scientific community clearly stating that the Book of Mormon is not archeologically plausible.
The only people who claim that any scientific or archeological evidence exists for the Book of Mormon are those who are already Mormon and have decided beforehand what they believe. In each of these cases they use pseudo-archeology that is not accepted by the archeological and scientific communities. In fact the majority of them have been thoroughly debunked. There does not exist a single shred of evidence that has been peer reviewed by the scientific community that in any way supports the idea that the Book of Mormon people ever existed.
--------------
You state:
“The purpose of the BOM is to bring souls unto God, to learn of His truth, and to find happiness in Christ. Even IF Joseph was a fraud (WHICH HE IS NOT) the BOM does those things, so READING it WILL bring a man nearer to God than any other book. With all the kindness and tenderness I can possibly muster, I invite you to take a little time each day to read the Book of Mormon. I promise you will feel the promptings of the Holy Ghost telling you it is TRUE.”
Please give me examples of things said in the Book of Mormon that bring you closer to Christ. If they are repeats of items already in the Bible those don’t mean much.
Yes, there are some passages about the role of Christ and his atonement, but they are few and far between. There are a few sections like 2 Nephi 4 and the speech of King Benjamin that have some good ideas and morals. However, I can think of nothing that is in the Book of Mormon that uniquely brings me closer to Christ.
I can however think of a number of teachings in the Book of Mormon that do the opposite.
- If I hear voices in my head telling me to murder someone, I should do it. Especially if I need to steal their property really, really bad.
- If I have one wrong thought as my last thought before I die I go to hell – referenced twice one in Alma & one in Moroni
- If people are wicked I better not bury my treasure or it will disappear – multiple references.
- If people have different religious I should consider them of the devil
- People with dark skin are loathsome
- Women are second class citizens hardly worth a mention. Of those mentioned by name in the Lehite's narrative they are a faithless wife, a harlot, or a product of being a believer because of her father's vision.
- Slavery is tolerated.
This is nowhere close to a complete list but illustrates some of the problems.
Furthermore, it is interesting / almost shocking how many things in the Book of Mormon are different than the Mormon church as it is practiced today and how it is historically practiced.
- Jacob 2:24 states: Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
Yes Jacob later states that polygamy could be allowed to raise up seed, but I can definitely show that was not the reason that Joseph Smith began polygamy. I can also definitely show that there were more men in Utah than women while polygamy was practiced.
- Secret combinations are outlined as the primary reason for the fall of the Nephites.
You have asked that we not discuss they temple so I will refrain from discussing details, but if ever there were a case of secret combinations that would be it.
Additionally the LDS church is very secretive about their finances and other practices. Likewise it is secretive about it's true history.
- The God described in the Book of Mormon is a monotheistic God – Jehovah and Elohim are the same personage. Joseph Smith’s theology of God the Father & Jesus as distinct beings did not evolved to many years later. Mosiah 15 is one of several examples. Nowhere in the Book of Mormon is the concept found that they are separate beings, especially if you reference the original 1830 version of the Book of Mormon.
- Wine is clearly allowed. It’s what they used for the sacrament. (Although I’m not sure where they got the grapes.)
- The Book of Mormon decries riches and fine twined linen, yet the church builds billion dollar malls and Apostles wear only the finest of clothing.
- There is no concept of the 3 degrees of glory. Final judgment occurs immediately upon death.
- God is a spirit. (Alma 18:26-28)
- God does not change and has never changed. (Mormon 9:9, Moroni 8:18). Yet Mormon doctrine teaches as Man is God once was, as God is Man will become.
- No mention of the pre-existence.
- Salvation must be attained in this life; after one dies it is too late (Alma 34:34, 2 Nephi 9:38, Mosiah 2:36-39). No mention of baptism for the dead.
- No mention of the Aaronic priesthood. Not concept of teenagers receiving the priesthood.
- No mention of temple sealings and forever families.
- No mention of a first resurrection for the righteous.
- There is no first presidency when Jesus establishes the church – only 12 apostles
- No concept that covenants and ordinances are needed beyond baptism
- The baptismal covenant and prayer is completely different
Again this is not a complete list. For a book that is supposed to be the fullness of the gospel is certainly doesn’t match up very well with the LDS church which is supposed to also be a fulness of the gospel.
I have read and studied to Book of Mormon seriously. I have prayed about it seriously and with real intent and studying and pondering. I found that the more I read it the less I believed it. In fact, the problems and questions that arose as I read the Book of Mormon are a primary reason I stopped believing in the church. I’ve been down the path you suggest. I have done so with real intent and full purpose of heart and I received a very different emotional answer than you did. Dare you be so arrogant to suggest that it is because you are superior to me and that I am the sinner and you are the one without sin qualified to cast the first stone?
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2013 11:30PM by bc.