Book of Mormon Internal Consistency

Kerry Shirts

Registered Senior Member
Donald W. Parry, one of the LDS scholars who is involved with the International Dead Sea Scrolls project, mostly with Emanuel Tov, has noted some astonishing things about the Book of Mormon that I have not seen many critics ever grapple with. I will especially enjoy seeing Wild Blue Yonder's refutation of Parry's detailed analysis of the BofM here.

I shall put his material in quotes, then make a few comments of my own. (this in Susan Easton Black's "Expressions of Faith: Testimonies of Latter Day Saint Scholars," pp. 210-220). The thing that amazes me to no end is to see the internal integrity based on the evidence of the text itself, and how it doesn't get messed up, lost, or forgotten. Of course, it could be just more dumb lick with one or two mere characters, but with *hundreds* and in *hundreds* of different situations, contexts, meanings, times, etc.? And put together in the early 1800's in the manner it was produced, and the time it took and under the strenuous circumstances? Have a look at the evidence.

"The internal framework of the Book of Mormon is indeed complex. The events identified in the book cover a time span of approximately 2,600 years and occur in both the Old and New Worlds."

Here again, is something most critics will not realize. They think the BofM is only a New World document, but it clearly states it begins in the Old World in Jerusalem around 600 B.C. They originating culture is their Hebraic, Egyptian background. Interestingly enough, via archaeology and scholarship, it is now well understood that Egyptian culture definitely had a strong influence on the Hebraic culture at just this time, and in this place, Israel from 700-550 B.C. The BofM opens on a correct cultural note, contra WildBlue Yonders mere assertions that it doesn't reflect true ancient cultures.

"The book was written by more than twenty authors, edited and redacted by inspired editors, and translated by a prophet some 1,400 years after the final Nephite prophet hid the gold plates. The work contains the words of both prophet and false prophet, Christ and antichrist, hero and villain. Several languages have influenced the final product, including Adamic, Egyptian, Hebrew, reformed Egyptian, and English. The work contains many literary types—including historical narrative, poetic parallelism, biography, allegory, law code, judgment speech, lamentation, blessing and cursing, prayer, epistle, psalm, and parable. It contains such symbolic figures as metaphor, simile, synecdoche, metonymy, implication, and personification. As in the Bible, prophetic speech forms of various types appear throughout the Book of Mormon. These include the Messenger Formula, Proclamation Formula, Woe Oracle, Oath Formula, Revelation Formula, and Announcement Formula."

Once one looks seriously into the BofM, one sees what it is, an astonishingly fascinating account of ancient peoples and their lives, deaths, hopes, wishes, wars, and peaceful attempts at living. This is not the Oriental fantasy type writing found so often in the writings of travelers tales, and yarns spun in the 1800's, in the days of Joseph Smith. This is a sober, factual, amazing, dreadful, historical, religious view of real lives of real peoples.

"The final composition of the book as translated by Joseph Smith is a product of several earlier sources, including the brass plates, the record of Lehi, the large plates of Nephi, the small plates of Nephi, the plates of Mormon, and the twenty-four gold plates of Ether. Although the book's goals and purposes are religious, the work treats many of the political, social, geographical, historical, and cultural elements that make up any civilization."

And it goes on and on in internal consistently describing of events, times, places, institutions, etc. Literally covering every single type of aspect a genuine ancient civilization would truly be involved with.

"Yet with all of its complexities, the internal consistency of the book is remarkable. Unlike the Bible, which contains literally hundreds of changes made by scribes and copyists, fn the Book of Mormon was transmitted directly from an ancient prophet (Moroni) to a modern prophet (Joseph Smith) and therefore lacks such a large number of errors. That is not to say that the Book of Mormon is free of errors or the mistakes of humanity, but certainly Joseph Smith's statement concerning the Book of Mormon is appropriate here: "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth."

"While the work presents a multitude of names and personalities, its presentation is logical and uniform; second, I will show the harmony that exists in the book's internal history, with special regard to wars and warfare; third, and most significantly, I will examine the book's focus on Christ and show how all references to Jesus Christ are textually consistent.

Unity of Names and Characters
The Book of Mormon "contains 337 proper names and 21 gentilics (or analogous forms) based on proper names." Of the 337 proper names, "188 are unique to the Book of Mormon": for example, Abinadi, Amalickiah, Amulek, Morianton, Mormon, Moronihah, Kishkumen, Helaman, Hagoth, Gadianton, Omni, and Riplakish; 149 of the 337 proper names are common to both the Bible and the Book of Mormon: for example, Samuel, Isaiah, Gideon, Benjamin, Aaron, Noah, Shem, Timothy, and Jacob. Typical of the ancient Semitic languages from which the Nephite record is derived, the Book of Mormon does not use surnames or attach modern titles to its names, such as Mr., Mrs., Dr., Professor, Reverend, Count, or Earl. The names, as transcribed into the English language, do not use the letters q, x, or w, nor do the names begin with either the characters W or F, a fact shared with the names of the Old Testament. Much can be learned from a study of the names, as Paul Hoskisson has shown, for they may provide an indication of the types of languages used by the Nephites, Jaredites, and Lamanites; present a picture of Book of Mormon civilizations and cultures; and provide external clues about when the Book of Mormon record developed in the ancient world. "

That in and of itself is truly astonishing, but there is far more internal consistency than just this.

"George Reynolds fn and Hugh Nibley have conducted a number of studies of the history of Book of Mormon names and have shown that some have Hebrew and Egyptian roots and relationships. B. H. Roberts pointed out that there is a "quite marked distinction between Nephite and Jaredite proper names." With few exceptions, Jaredite names "end in consonants, while very many of the Nephite names end in a vowel."

Robert J. Matthews has created a serviceable who's who of Book of Mormon personalities, wherein he lists several social, political, and religious groupings present in the book. He places personalities into categories and lists the following numbers of individuals within each group: four antichrists, twenty-seven Nephite military leaders, two Jaredite prophets, two priests of Noah listed by name, twelve disciples of Christ, four robbers, seven explorers, one harlot, twelve heads of the Church, two leaders of the Jews, twelve judges, eight Lamanite kings, one lawyer, thirty-one Jaredite kings, two Jaredite military leaders, six Lamanite military leaders, eleven missionaries, two Mulekite leaders, nine Nephite kings, a number of Nephite and Lamanite prophets, twenty Nephite record keepers, three shipbuilders, five spies, and ten villains."

And not once in the entire 500 year record is there any slip or exchange or mistake of who is who or who did what, etc.

Several other characters or groups listed by Matthews, who are unnamed in the record, include the Amalekite who contended with Aaron, the individual who attempted to slay Ammon, the brother of Jared, the brother of Shiblom, the daughter of Ishmael, the wife of Ishmael, the daughter of Jared, the daughters of the Lamanites, the daughters of Lehi, the five men mentioned in Helaman 9:1-39, the freemen, the Gadianton robbers, the high priests of King Gilead, three Lamanite kings, the Lamanite guards at Gid, the leader of the Zarahemla expedition, the forty-three men of King Limhi who went on the scouting expedition, two mighty Jaredite men, Morianton's maid servant, two queens of the Lamanites, the wife of Lamoni, the wife of Amalickiah, the second king of the Nephites, the servant of Ammoron, the servant of Helaman, the servants of the king of the Lamanites, the three Nephites, the twenty-four Nephites, and the two thousand sons of Helaman.

The record provides thousands of implicit and explicit facts and items about these individuals, both named and unnamed. Yet these facts are always kept straight. Never is an individual described in one way at one point and in another way later, unless the change is explained. The record never mistakenly assigns facts about one individual to another individual.

Although Helaman [to take just one example] is but one of the hundreds of named and unnamed characters identified in the Book of Mormon, not once does the record attribute to him an exact characteristic, familial tie, habit, personality trait, physical description, genealogical affiliation, vocational skill, political office, religious calling, occupation, spiritual or intellectual aptitude, military affiliation, contemporary historical event, or biographical deed that it explicitly attaches to another Book of Mormon personality to the point that there is a discrepancy or contradiction in the text. For example, in "Alma 37:1 Alma anoints his son Helaman to be his successor and entrusts the accumulated plates and the Liahona to him. From that point until the end of "Alma 62:1 where Helaman's death is recorded, this fact remains consistent: no one else is mistakenly described as holding the responsibilities Alma had given to Helaman. Further, the record does not confuse implied statements that are attached to Helaman and his world with another individual, nor does it ever accidentally place him in the wrong geographic locale or historical time frame. As I have set up Helaman as an example, so, too, could other personalities of the Book of Mormon be examined by a careful student, and never would that student discover an inconsistency or lack of agreement in the text. In view of this, it may be stated that the Book of Mormon demonstrates an internal consistency and coherence.

Historical Unity of Warfare
The Book of Mormon recalls historical situations, characters, and places that are external to the chronological and geographic setting of the Jaredites, Nephites, and Mulekites. Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Solomon, the building of Solomon's temple, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zedekiah, the exodus from Egypt, and the great tower are mentioned in the book but do not belong to its immediate setting. Genealogical references presented in the record make solid connections between the house of Israel in the Old World and the family of Joseph in the New World. The family of Jared is directly linked with the era of the great tower, and the family of Lehi is shown to belong to the setting of Jerusalem shortly before its destruction by Babylon.

The Book of Mormon also sets forth a host of historical references, characters, and circumstances that so far are found only within its pages. Consider, for example, the treatment of wars and warfare in the work. The book features fifteen major conflicts, including the "Early Tribal Wars," the "Wars of King Laman's Son," the "War of Amlici," the "Destruction of Ammonihah," the "War of the Ammonite Secession," the "Zoramite War," the "First and Second Amalickiahite Wars," the "Rebellion of Paanchi," the "War of Tubaloth," the "War of Moronihah," the "War of Gadianton and Kishkumen," the "War of Giddianhi and Zemnarihah," the "Rebellion of Jacob," and the three phases of the "Final Nephite Wars." The Book of Mormon writers and editors dedicated anywhere from a few verses (Rebellion of Paanchi, Helaman 1:1-13) to twelve chapters (Second Amalickiahite War, Alma 51 to each of the major conflicts.)

Students of the Book of Mormon can attach to many of the fifteen major wars approximate dates or seasons, geographical locales, underlying causes, battle tactics, military maneuvers, and final outcomes. Further, individual campaigns and engagements existed within each major war. Within the framework of the fifteen major wars mentioned above, John L. Sorenson has identified more than one hundred distinct conflicts in the record. His identification includes the Lamanite, Nephite, and Zeniffite initiatives; Nephite versus Nephite conflicts; and confrontations between the Lamanites and the Anti-Nephi-Lehies.

Further, we find in the book references to attacks and counterattacks; army pursuing or fleeing from army; strategies and political maneuvers; violent contentions; defeats and victories; mobilization of groups; preparations for war; marching armies; captives and prisoners of war; deployment, redeployment, and the positioning of troops; military spies; dissident forces; fortifications of cities and sites; the capture, loss, and recapture of cities; descriptions of combat, guerrilla movement, the flanking of troops, and other tactics; the raising of armies and recruitment of soldiers; strategic offenses and defenses; descriptions of military leaders and dissenters; the reinforcement of troops; armies against organized robbers; slaughter; bloodshed; and the extermination of entire peoples. In addition, the record identifies many of the weapons and armor used by different warriors at various times, including the sword, cimeter, bow and arrow, breastplate, shield, head-plate, arm-shield, club, sling, and "all manner of weapons of war" ("Alma 2:12).

Yet with all these details, the presentation of wars and warfare in the Book of Mormon contains a textually consistent account that both recalls historical reality and lacks contradictory elements. From the first battle mentioned in "2 Ne. 5:34 to the final Nephite battle at Cumorah (Mormon 6:5-15), all of the wars and battles are interwoven into the Book of Mormon text to create a harmonious narrative. The connection between warfare and textual consistency in the Book of Mormon serves as an example of the book's integrity and correctness. Similar arguments could be made about all other historical references in the Book of Mormon.

Unity of Focus on Christ
Years ago, Susan Easton Black tabulated all of the occurrences of the names and titles of Jesus in the Book of Mormon. Though Black's goals were different from those of this article, the results of her findings are quite instructive. According to Black, 101 names or titles of Christ are presented in the Book of Mormon. These include the names/titles Lord God Omnipotent, Redeemer of Israel, Shepherd, and Son of the Living God, each of which is found once in the work. The names/titles Stone, True Messiah, Mighty One of Jacob, and Great Creator are each found twice; the names/titles Holy One of Israel, Lamb of God, Lord Jesus Christ, Redeemer, and Messiah each appear 10 or more times; and the names/titles Christ, God, Jesus, Lord, and Lord God are each found at least 100 times in the book. In all, the 101 names/titles of Christ are collectively presented 3,925 times in 6,607 Book of Mormon verses. Black's tabulation of the names and titles shows that on average, one name or title of Christ appears once every 1.7 verses.

The names and titles are used by the various Book of Mormon prophets to teach of Jesus' prebirth affiliations with the world, his earthly ministry, his atoning sacrifice (including his sufferings in Gethsemane, his death on the cross, and his resurrection from the garden tomb), his workings among American civilizations, his ministry to other peoples, his future mission with the latter-day church, his judgments upon the world, and his Second Coming to the inhabitants of the earth.

By way of example, a number of names/titles of Jesus deal especially with the Atonement. These include Christ, Christ Jesus, Christ the Son, Creator, Eternal Father, Everlasting Father, Father of Heaven, Holy Messiah, Jesus, Jesus Christ, Lamb, Lamb of God, Lord Jesus Christ, Mediator, Messiah, Only Begotten of the Father, Only Begotten Son, Redeemer, Redeemer of Israel, Savior, Savior of the World, Shepherd, and True Redeemer. Note also that Jesus serves in the capacity of an advocate, a fact that is explicitly mentioned in the Doctrine and Covenants (D&C 29:5; D&C 32:3; D&C 45:3; "D&C 62:1). Several statements imply this idea: the Holy Messiah "shall make intercession for all . . . men" (2 Ne. 2:9), "the Lord and thy God pleadeth the cause of his people" (2 Ne. 8:22), "the Lord standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people" (2 Ne. 13:13), God "will plead your cause" (Jacob 3:1), and Christ "advocateth the cause of the children of men" (Moroni 7:28).

The Book of Mormon contains not only a great variety of names and titles for Jesus, but also many thousands of personal pronouns that refer to him. Book of Mormon pronouns that have reference to Christ include I, me, you, he, him; the possessive (adjective) pronouns my, your, and his; and the relative pronoun who. Note the three appearances of the third-person pronoun in Mosiah 15:12, all of which refer to Jesus. Note also the first-person pronouns found in 3 Nephi 11:11: "And behold, I am the light and the life of the world; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the world, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning." The pronouns that have reference to God are interspersed throughout the Book of Mormon text, mingled with his 101 names and titles.

Beyond the use of deific names, titles, and pronouns in the Nephite record, witnesses of Jesus appear in the form of symbols, presented through such figures of speech as metaphor, simile, synecdoche, metonymy, implication, and personification. Metaphors of Christ, for example, are common in the book and include Moses' brazen serpent (1 Ne. 17:41; Helaman 8:14-15), "keeper of the gate" (2 Nephi 9:41), "Lamb of God" (1 Nephi 10:10), "the light and the life of the world" (3 Nephi 9:18), "Son of Righteousness" (3 Nephi 25:2), foundation stone (Jacob 4:15-16), "the truth of the world" (Ether 4:12), and "rock" and "true vine" (1 Nephi 15:15).

First and foremost, the goal of the Book of Mormon is religious, with an emphasis and encouragement for individuals to come unto Christ (Jacob 1:7; Omni 1:26; Moroni 10:30, Moroni 10:32). Black's study on the frequent occurrence of the names of Christ in the work reveals that the book has a definite focus on Christ. Obviously, if one of his names or titles appears on average once every 1.7 verses (and such a tabulation does not include pronominal references to Christ), then the entire Book of Mormon is built around him, including its sociological, political, economical, theological, and historical parts. Yet if serious readers study the book contextually, they will discover that each occurrence of a deific name or title, personal pronoun, or symbolic reference shows an evenness, integrity, and lack of contradiction with all other parts of the book.

Not once does the book confuse a work or teaching of Jesus that belongs to another personality; never in all the references to Jesus, both explicit and implicit, does the work attach to a human either a power or a quality that belongs to God alone, nor does it attach a worldly, profane, or humanistic quality to the resurrected Jesus. Prophetic descriptions of Jesus Christ do not portray any member of the Godhead as possessing a human frailty, a sinful or fallen nature, an imperfection, or a corruption. Neither is God confused with other supernatural beings, either angels or evil spirits. Rather, the Book of Mormon clearly defines the roles of all three members of the Godhead—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Every single reference to God, whether it be pronoun, name, title, or symbolic reference, is consistent and harmonious with every other reference. If confusion or contradiction appears to exist in the Book of Mormon, it is because of the limitations of the finite reader, who is attempting to understand things pertaining to the infinite.

As noted, by far the most significant personality identified in the book is Jesus Christ, and the weightiest topics pertain to his character, divine mission, and eternal goals. References to Christ serve as an adhesive, binding every verse of the work into a single, integral unit. All other parts of the book serve as appendages to this focus. The topic of Jesus and his mission fits squarely with the stated purpose of the book as listed on the title page and elsewhere in the book. The purpose of the record is, in part, "to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever—And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations" (title page).

From the opening phrase, "I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents," to the concluding expression, "the great Jehovah, the Eternal Judge of both quick and dead. Amen," the Book of Mormon is textually consistent, internally concordant, and written with integrity. If the reader follows the proper prescriptions, the Holy Ghost will bear witness of the book's truthfulness, and the reader will draw closer to God through reading it and applying its principles.
 
I agree. darn it, I wish I could have made it even shorter. But the overall impact comes when its a broad view, so.....well shoot.......take all the time ya need! LOL!
 
Kerry Shirts said:
Just making sure Wild BLue Yonder sees this.....as it appears to me he is avoiding it.
you should have PM'ed me, silly fellow
I found this, by checking on your profile if you had started any threads or where just here to "dog" me,

wow, did you copy this from one of your articles? couldn't you have just given us the link & a few key phrases?
 
Kerry Shirts said:
Donald W. Parry, one of the LDS scholars who is involved with the International Dead Sea Scrolls project, mostly with Emanuel Tov, has noted some astonishing things about the Book of Mormon that I have not seen many critics ever grapple with. I will especially enjoy seeing Wild Blue Yonder's refutation of Parry's detailed analysis of the BofM here.

I shall put his material in quotes, then make a few comments of my own. (this in Susan Easton Black's "Expressions of Faith: Testimonies of Latter Day Saint Scholars," pp. 210-220). The thing that amazes me to no end is to see the internal integrity based on the evidence of the text itself, and how it doesn't get messed up, lost, or forgotten. Of course, it could be just more dumb lick with one or two mere characters, but with *hundreds* and in *hundreds* of different situations, contexts, meanings, times, etc.? And put together in the early 1800's in the manner it was produced, and the time it took and under the strenuous circumstances? Have a look at the evidence..
http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ancients/040707pass.html
While it might not have been the pamphlet Twain suggests, it is obvious to any reader that “and it came to pass” recurs frequently, a total of 999 times in the Book of Mormon. Although the phrase appears in both the Old and New Testaments, it is unquestionably most frequent in the Book of Mormon. In the scriptural texts, the next highest number is in the Old Testament, with 334 occurrences. [2] Is there a legitimate reason this phrase is repeated so many times?
When Orson Pratt restructured our Book of Mormon in 1879, he added verses where the original had paragraphs like any other book. He also recut the chapters, typically breaking them up into smaller sets. The result is our current chapter and verse arrangement that makes the Book of Mormon appear much more similar to the way we are used to seeing the Bible, and makes it much easier to find specific verses. Unfortunately, the process also covered up certain structural arrangements in the text. It doesn’t take long looking through a facsimile of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon [3] to see that “and it came to pass” appears to be even more prevalent in that edition that it does in the modern version. [4]
seems to me, that the BoM has been re-edited too many times to be 'original' & that the LDS scholar here may be a little too biased, seeing that he is LDS, I would have liked Emanuel Tov to have found the so-called evidence spoken here
 
I have a major problem going past the confidence trick of Smith that started LDS to take anything from LDS in the least bit seriously. I am amazed that it continues to survive. But then we should give credit for that to the dedicated apologetics who can rationalize the inherrently irrational into apparently something believable, or at least believable to the gullible. Do these apologetics realize they are simply perpetuating a con trick or are they the most gullible of the lot?
 
Hi Cris.......in other words, I can't refute the BofM, so I shall simply toss it off......... yes that is rather typical of those who realize it is beyond them.......I have seen this myriads of times. And saying apologists are simply perpetuating a con, *without* showing us *why* and *how* all this is a con. A simpleton enough trick to perform without actually engaging in any real work for yourself. My how easy to say.......
 
Kerry,

Hi Cris.......in other words, I can't refute the BofM, so I shall simply toss it off.........
Well yes it is such an obvious con, why look further?

yes that is rather typical of those who realize it is beyond them.......I have seen this myriads of times.
Beyond them? Now that is disingenuous of you. Lack of understanding isn’t the issue; it is that a crook has created a wonderful con and you’ve fallen for it. Try watching “The Sting” and you’ll see what I mean. As for myriad times – you do indeed have a tremendous struggle if you wish to overcome that shock of incredulity that any rational person endures when told the story of the golden plates.

And saying apologists are simply perpetuating a con, *without* showing us *why* and *how* all this is a con.
A known crook invents a story of magical golden plates, has some cronies take part in the con, then of course claim the plates disappear before anyone truly independent and authoritative see them. It’s a controlled con – deal with it. There is nothing further worth attention.

A simpleton enough trick to perform without actually engaging in any real work for yourself. My how easy to say.......
Been there, done it. Spent ages with many elders discussing their beliefs. It’s a con.
 
I will agree to disagree with you. No biggie. It's nice to know we have our freedoms so we can decide what we believe eh? Thank goodness for that! lol..........
 
Kerry,

Agreed, but enjoy your quest anyway whether you succeed or not.
 
Cris said:
Well yes it is such an obvious con, why look further?
not obvious, if you do not know enough pre-1492 history here or something about the Jewish culture

& the point of this is, that in my opinion, many Americans fall into those categorized by that old song, "Don't know much about history, don't know much about....", so they fall for the BoM, hook, line & sinker.

& those around the world, well who can resist those charming young fresh-faced Americans? why they learn our languages & cultures, how cute!
Beyond them? Now that is disingenuous of you. Lack of understanding isn’t the issue; it is that a crook has created a wonderful con and you’ve fallen for it. Try watching “The Sting” and you’ll see what I mean.
I think he gave several clues, such as "Moroni", & if my understanding of the diff between how 'lies' & 'truth' work, the truth is always the same, lies change, depending on what the liar remembers he said previously, poor Joe Smith, he lived in the age of the recorded word, so his "First Vision" becomes "First Versions" since they are all diff
As for myriad times – you do indeed have a tremendous struggle if you wish to overcome that shock of incredulity that any rational person endures when told the story of the golden plates.
no, we can rationalize almost anything, Germans did a good job of that during Hitler's years
A known crook invents a story of magical golden plates, has some cronies take part in the con, then of course claim the plates disappear before anyone truly independent and authoritative see them. It’s a controlled con – deal with it. There is nothing further worth attention.
If you’re wondering why people still believe LDS, even if kinks are shown in the armor, they live in a system that constantly brainwashes them with meetings, rituals, study, tithing, a persecution-complex (no doubt helped on by people like me, that "dog" any LDS that try to say they are Christian, since I first saw one wearing a faked translation T-shirt with the phrase, "it shall come to pass" under a Maya glyph), tight-knit family & social circles; which to quote the movie "Contact", "that's known in psychiatric circles as a self-reinforcing delusion"
Been there, done it. Spent ages with many elders discussing their beliefs. It’s a con.
the original maybe, now its brainwashing & rationalizing
 
Kerry Shirts said:
Here again, is something most critics will not realize. They think the BofM is only a New World document, but it clearly states it begins in the Old World in Jerusalem around 600 B.C. They originating culture is their Hebraic, Egyptian background. Interestingly enough, via archaeology and scholarship, it is now well understood that Egyptian culture definitely had a strong influence on the Hebraic culture at just this time, and in this place, Israel from 700-550 B.C. The BofM opens on a correct cultural note, contra WildBlue Yonders mere assertions that it doesn't reflect true ancient cultures.
first of all, the idea of a jew with Egyptian roots or a Judaized Egyptian is not far-fetched, there were colonies of jews everywhere,
the problems start here:
how did these wondering hebrites travel so far to get to the new world unscathed by such a long journey, if from Arabia (that’s a long boat ride counter-current, through straights, islands & open ocean) or if by Asia (that’s an awful large land mass, peopled by myriad cultures, none of which are worthy of mention throughout?)
then when they land in the Americas, with its vast virgin land (no Pocahontas to greet them, I guess?), again the "natives" are not worthy of mention for all those years afterwards?
"The book was written by more than twenty authors, edited and redacted by inspired editors, and translated by a prophet some 1,400 years after the final Nephite prophet hid the gold plates. The work contains the words of both prophet and false prophet, Christ and antichrist, hero and villain. Several languages have influenced the final product, including Adamic, Egyptian, Hebrew, reformed Egyptian, and English.
you forgot french, "adieu" :D
Once one looks seriously into the BofM, one sees what it is, an astonishingly fascinating account of ancient peoples and their lives, deaths, hopes, wishes, wars, and peaceful attempts at living. This is not the Oriental fantasy type writing found so often in the writings of travelers tales, and yarns spun in the 1800's, in the days of Joseph Smith. This is a sober, factual, amazing, dreadful, historical, religious view of real lives of real peoples.
to quote the "Twilight Zone", "it a cookbook!", I mean a 'novel',

Joe Smith was a story-teller, the BoM has no connection to any real Native People (if you subscribe to the LGT, why no mention of the Olmec, Maya or Teotihuacanecs?, I guess they didn’t exist in J.S’s world, silly me), its a eurocentric ideal of who would or could have peopled the Americas; the scenarios, tech, flora & fauna are wrong for pre-1492, prove me wrong

can you timeline the BoM people with this?:
http://archaeology.la.asu.edu/teo/intro/intrteo.htm
 
WildBlueYonder said:
Cris said:
Well yes it is such an obvious con, why look further?
not obvious, if you do not know enough pre-1492 history here or something about the Jewish culture
First, I think it's evident that Cris was talking about himself and his own view, and why he rejects Mormonism. Secondly, you are talking about the contents of the Book of Mormon itself. No, indeed, to see that as fallacious and incorrect requires some knowledge of history, of American prehistory, of the ancient Jews, etc. Just like the real Bible. But again, Cris was talking not about the BoM, but the story behind the BoM, the Joseph Smith story. As the classic South Park episode showed, (even without the spoof musical songs about who was "dumb" and who was "smart") it is clear, even to an eight-year-old, that the whole golden plates farrago was a con-trick, one that kept Joseph Smith in clover for the rest of his life. I personally think it's going too far to state that he "tipped the wink" by putting the word "moron" into his religion. But if you come upon the story later on in life (rather than growing up with it) and you are passably acquainted with confidence tricks, then as Cris says, it does seem rather obvious. You don't need to read the Book itself to know that it is bunk. The fact that you have read it and found it to be bunk based on specialist knowledge only reinforces the point.

The con-trick basis for the foundation of Mormonism is obvious on the face of it. Less obvious is the con-trick basis for the foundations of Christianity and Islam. Of Buddhism. Even, ultimately, of Judaism, if the Moses story is to be read as having a basis in fact. But they all began because a single charismatic person promised to reveal new truths and obtained a following; in the case of Moses and Christ (possibly Buddha, but I don't know enough), this was accompanied by "miracles" which are all magical presentations precisely identical to conjuror's illusions.

Obviously it's not easy for members of a particular religion to hear that their faith is based on an overt and obvious con-trick. Those who can see Smith for what he was, but wish to continue to believe the basic tenets of the faith can still claim that in his conniving he unwittingly uncovered "the Truth".

Now, the fact is that the LDS is an existing religious sect that has many devotees (not least a substantial geographical base). As Christian sects go, it certainly appears to me to be one of the more benevolent ones, having seemingly long outgrown its sexist roots, at least for the majority of believers (there are only a few men, I believe, who still take multiple wives, and they are definitely on the extreme fringe - all religions have them). The Mormons by and large appear to be happy and well-adjusted, and belong to the faith by free choice rather than it being an authoritarian overbearing religious tyranny.
 
Silas:
The Mormons by and large appear to be happy and well-adjusted, and belong to the faith by free choice rather than it being an authoritarian overbearing religious tyranny.

Yes, but you miss the whole point. We insipidly stupid and dumb Mormons don't have the wherewith all or the brains to recognize the con. We're so mentally weak, and spiritually dolts, that God cannot even redeem us! We are lost, have the wrong Gospel, have the wrong Jesus, read the wrong books, are such unenlightened pagan heathens that we will never be able to intelligently, nor discriminately decipher truth from falsehood because we are so deceived even God has foresaken us. Our brains are mush, the scholarship sucks, the conclusions all apologetic pablum............... there just ain't no chance fer us idiots in the church............... :p
 
Kerry,

So are you saying that you all know it was a con and don't care? My overwhelming impression from speaking with elders is that they do not believe it was a con?

What is your position?

But while you intend sarcasm with your post I suspect most of what you say is true. Not that a non-existent god has forsaken you but that you have believed the wrong books, cannot tell the difference between truth and fallacy, and you are truly deluded on your basic premise.

As for apologetics: I have found that they are almost entirely unscrupulously political and selective with what they present. How much of what you do is dismissing evidence that does not suit you and emhasizing and exagerating issues that support your case?
 
Last edited:
Who cares about internal consistency? The authors of the bible didn't seem to care that their accounts of Jesus were all different among the apostles, it wasn't the point. The moral lessons and philosophy are more important.
 
Kerry Shirts said:
Donald W. Parry, one of the LDS scholars who is involved with the International Dead Sea Scrolls project, mostly with Emanuel Tov, has noted some astonishing things about the Book of Mormon that I have not seen many critics ever grapple with. I will especially enjoy seeing Wild Blue Yonder's refutation of Parry's detailed analysis of the BofM here.
By being continuously edited, the BoM loses any claim for internal consistency or as being the “most correct book”, or are you going to tell us, that the edition now available is the exact same as the original 1830 edition?

It also has no, what I would like to now call “external consistency”;
1) there is no external evidence that the BoM people ever interacted with the “Natives”,
2) there is no evidence that there was ever any BoM civilization
3) there is no evidence that they ever left any coins, domesticated animals or crops
4) there is no DNA evidence left in the so-called descendants of the Laminite (called Indians by some, Native Peoples by others)
5) there is no oral tradition, linguistic evidence, or lost art to tie the BoM people to the Western Hemisphere

Let’s try these 2 scenarios:
1) Lets say that a small Israelish immigrate group came to a vast new world (sans any other people), & populates it, has at least 3 mighty empires that self-destruct, then leaves only the present Native Peoples & Polynesians as the reminders of those people
or
2) now, let’s change it a little, a vast Native population subjugated by a small band of technically advanced BoM people arrives in a vast continent, founds 3 empires, each self-destructing, then leaves only the present Native Peoples & Polynesians as the reminders

what would you expect under these scenarios, what would you expect to be left as evidence for the scientist that poke around a few thousand years later?

Remember, we need to have internal & external evidence; you Mr. Shirts being a mormon, probably do not have mormon or Laminite DNA do you? I’m guessing it might be English, right? So, if you were tested, what would they find? Mormon or English DNA? My point is that it would be that of your ancestors, same for our Native Peoples here, they have the DNA of their ancestors, & it’s not BoM, why would you think that is true?

To be internally consistent under any scenario that the BoM people would have lived here; they would have had to write about their wars with the Natives, just as in the Bible, the Conquest of the Promised land spoke about the wars, the people, the intrigue, the bloodshed, mighty warriors & kings. The BoM is silent on its wars with the Aztecs (who they would have come in contact on their way to the narrow neck of Mexico, if by land) or the Zapotec & Mixtec people (if by sea). They would have had to trade or fight with the Olmec, Maya or Toltecs, yet no mention of these mighty people, why is that? The Jews had to fight the Assyrians, Babylonians, Jebusites, Canaanites, Perizites, etc…at one time or another, says so in the Bible, yet for the BoM people, well the Natives are strangely silent here. Remember, the BoM itself says that the 3 BoM empires were vast & the armies they fielded were in the thousands, there should be evidence somewhere? They had domesticated animals & crops (alien from these continents), that should have made an impact on the Natives left after the BoM extermination wars? & if I was a typical hunter/gather just roaming past those killing fields then, why I would probably grab some metal swords & shields, then tell my tribe of the bounty left behind & that those pesky BoM people that had subjugated us for so long were now gone & I would be the hero of my tribe & said tribe would now possess what no other Native peoples did until after 1492, thus forming the 4th vast BoM empire, what a story huh?
 
Back
Top