Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 8 years ago

Dear LDS friends, how do you intellectually cope with the problems associated with Mormon scripture?

There has never been any evidence that these things, which are mentioned in the BoM, ever existed in pre-Colombian America: horses, elephants, cattle, cows, goats, swine, barley, wheat, honey bees, chariots, silk, compasses, windows, steel, iron, or cimiters.

The BoM uses the name Isabel (a medieval name of Spanish origin), uses the Latin word "lucifer" as a proper name (also in D&C), references Greek and Aramaic (alpha, omega, raca, etc), and makes mention of a practice intimately related with the laws and practices of Rome ( forcing a person to go a mile). Why would Israelites living in American use such words?

The Book of Abraham, which was supposedly written by Abraham himself, states that he came from the land of the Chaldeans, even though the Chaldeans did not exist in the days of Abraham. It made since for Moses to mention Chaldeans because they did exist in his time, but Abraham never would have heard of such a people.

There is false prophecy in some of your scripture:

See Doctrine and Covenants section 84 for a prophecy by Joseph Smith about the temple that was supposed to be built in Missouri at the temple lot within the generation but never was. A more specific prophecy was spoken by Brigham Young years later stating essentially the same thing; it also never came to pass.

D&C 84 also claims that New York and Boston would be destroyed if they did not accept the gospel of your church (verse 114). They did not and were not.

D&C 114 claims that David Patton would perform a mission for the church, but he died before he could do so.

D&C 104:78-83 claims that the early church's debt would be forgiven. It was not.

The BoM contains prophecy that indicates that the Jews will accept the Mormon gospel before returning to Israel, yet the Jews have returned to their homeland and have not accepted your gospel. See 2 Nephi 10:7-9, 1 Nephi 19:14-16, and 2 Nephi 6:10-11.

The scrolls from which facsimiles 1-3 (published in the Pearl of Great Price) have been discovered and translated. They have nothing to do with what Joseph Smith said they did. In fact, an image that he claimed represents God sitting on his throne is actually an image of an Egyptian god with an erect penis.

There is no physical evidence that ancient Israelites ever inhabited any part of America. The Native Americans do not show traces of Israelite DNA and there is no remnant of the Hebrew language in any native dialect. There are no artifacts that indicate that great battles involving swords, horses, chariots, and large numbers of people ever happened on the continent before the Spanish arrived.

The BoM has been extensively edited since its original publication in 1830. Most of the changes have had to do with poor grammar, but a few verses were changed that could affect doctrinal interpretations (especially regarding the nature of Christ). What's more, the BoM mirrors language, grammar, and specific translations (including errors) as they relate to the King James Version of the Bible in the homologous portions of Isaiah and Matthew.

This is just a sample of the problems. I could go on for quite a while like this, but I think that it is enough. How do you guys deal with so much evidence that suggests that Joseph Smith was a false prophet?

19 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Best answer

    After Smith "translated" the Book of Abraham, archeologists discovered the Rosetta Stone.

    We know for a fact his translations are fake.

    Relax. No one who has done 5 minutes of research believes in that crap.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    You clearly are ignorant of Pre-Columbus America and come off pretty racist towards Native Americans.

    Book of Mormon is suppose to be a TRANSLATION, thus it would have words and names common of the language and era of the translator.

    Chaldea is what the Greeks called Babylon or modern day Iraq. It's clear Joseph Smith was sticking with the KJV wording for Abraham's self description.

    Doctrine and Covenants section 84 says the Temple Lot will be dedicated in this generation. Joseph Smith Dedicated it. It doesn't say the temple will be built in this generation.

    D&C 84 says New York City, Albany and Boston would be destroyed if they do not accept Mormonism, it doesn't say when it will be destroyed, just that it will be if it doesn't accept Mormonism. There are Mormons all over here in Boston and theres a temple 3 miles away in Belmont off the highway.

    It's David Patten, not Patton. And he served many missions.

    D&C 104:78-83 says debt holders will have their hearts softened and for Mormons to pay their debts.

    Jews have not returned to Eretz Israel, over 50% of the worlds Jews are still in other countries. And those verses are not even talking returning to Eretz Israel.

    This is ridiculous I'm not wasting another minute correcting your stupidity, you havent even read any of the books you are attacking or looked up claims against the works. Before you attack Native Americans and Mormons, do some research in Pre-Colombus America and Mormonism instead of hanging out on Neo-Nazi and anti Mormon sites.

    Source(s): Deist. Studying Mormonism for 16 years.
  • 8 years ago

    The others have answered a lot of the things which you have listed. But, Isabel is of Hebrew origin, it means God's Promise. Elizabeth is the Spanish derivative. And the name Lucifer can be found in the Bible, see Isa. 14: 12. Lucifer is Roman and means Morning Star, which is was what the ancients called Venus.

    A translater coverts a foreign language into the language he/she is familiar with. If he/she comes upon a word that can be converted into some common word, they will translate it that way. Joseph was familiar with the Bible, and it's use of the name Lucifer and Isabel was probably more recognizable to Joseph and his potential readers than the name which had been in the plates.

    If there is a word that does not translate completely into the language that it is being translated into, but there is a word, in that language, which is very close to it, the translater has the option of using that more commonly used word. It does not make the translation innaccurate, just means that the translater found a way ro make his point.

    In the Bible, Eccl. 11: 1, we have the very nice phrase of 'cast thy bread upon the water', One translater felt that the Bible should be translated exactly as written. That phrase is literally translated to 'put wet bread on your face'. I prefer the translator who paraphrased the phrase into what we find in the Bible today. But, that is an example of how a translator works.

  • Neerp
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    You, my friend, have been going to anti-Mormon websites for your information. This is unfortunate, because they almost always get it wrong. Most of your "evidence" is nothing more than the ill-formed opinion of some disgruntled ex-Mormon who never did, and still does not, have a good understanding of Mormon doctrines and beliefs.

    The Bible says Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees. There is no historical record of the kings mentioned around that time, the Arameans did not exist,, the Phillistines had not yet arrived, etc. By your logic, Abraham did not exist. I suppose the Bible is false and the "prophets" mentioned there are all false prophets. Yet I don't hear anyone whining about these problems.

    Consider DNA. Have you actually read the studies and reports done on DNA? Of course not - all you have done here is parrot what some anti-Mormon website reported. If you had actually read the studies and reports, you would have realized that they actually found Caucasian DNA that could be the "long lost" Israelites DNA that the anti/ex-Mormons insist does not exist. Yes, that is right, the DNA studies found DNA that could have come from Jerusalam 2600 years ago. And if you had read the studies and reports, you would have also realized that they conclude that there is no real way to tell, and they don't prove anything. But instead of doing your own research, it appears all you have done is listened do some Pastor somewhere bash Mormons, and/or gone to some anti-Mormon website and read what they have to say.

    *THAT* is how we deal with this so-called "evidence"....

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 8 years ago

    To All of the things you've said, do you see how they can't truly prove any of them correct but offer unprovable hypothesis to try and worm their way around the answers. These Y/A Mormons are wannabe apologists.

    Then there are the ones that are rational enough to know the evidences are astounding against the religion but just concede and say I believe because I do, and that's all the proof I need. Crazy right? None of their explanations will stand in a debate.

    They always expect that Christians are the ones calling out their lies. And true, when a christian asks a Mormon why they believe the Christian doesn't really have leg to stand on. As some of the answers above me stated that the Bible is just as crazy as the Book of Mormon.

    But A Mormon vs. Atheist in a debate.. Doesn't happen. You know why? The Mormons would be laughed off the podium.

    Source(s): EX-Mormon.
  • phrog
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    so do you just take whatever as "truth" and never look past that on everything?....or just the LDS religion?

    ~evidence for BoM exists

    ~when one translates, they generally translate into language they are most familiar with.

    ~"the plain of Olishem" is not found in the bible, but does, appropriately timed and located, in an inscription of the akkadian ruler naram sin, dating to about 2250 BC...in reference to the chaldeans.

    ~there is no false prophecy. I could answer any such claim individually.

    ~this may appear on the surface to be a failed prophecy, but a more careful reading reveals that

    1) it may not have been a prophecy, and

    2) if it is, its fulfillment is still in the future.

    ~prophecy is NOT bound to the span of mortal life.

    ~D&C 144 is not a prophecy....it is a mission call. and one w/the specific instruction to set his affairs in order....something we do when we know life is short. perhaps his "mission" was not a mortal one.

    ~this says the Lord will "soften the hearts" of those they owe...that doesn't mean the debt would be completely ignored or forgiven in whole. it means it will be made doable. AND it provided a lesson in debt to the early LDS - so that now, everything the church does is paid for in advance...and members are counseled to stay out of debt as much as possible. we have been made self-reliant.

    ~they may "be" there, but they have not "returned". they can not claim their land yet. they still fight over that. they have not been restored. there is much more to these scriptures than some people living in an area.

    ~the scrolls possessed by JS were long and many. what has been recovered was a mere 11 fragments consisting of about 13% of what he had. you're really going to claim that 13% of the whole is enough to determine what the other 87% held? the scrolls from the facs have NOT been discovered and translated....pieces of them have been found, and although there are distinct differences between them and others known...they have been shoved into "this" specific way of looking @things only....w/no consideration given to the obvious differences and inconsistencies. that's bad science.

    ~DNA cannot even be provided...all we can do is test what jewish DNA from today looks like w/AI DNA of today....never mind that some genetic markers disappear in as little as 4 generations.... we don't know what lehi's DNA looked like - so we cannot possibly say whether it is represented or not.

    ~there is evidence of hebrew in some american languages....specifically in the uto-aztecan.

    ~the few verses changed were changed by JS to clarify.....

    I also could go on answering your claimed "problems"....point is that if the BoM were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt tomorrow....there would still be some who would not accept it. only those whose mind is open enough to allow the possibility of something different than what they are told might find evidence indicating something other than what they believe. we all interpret evidence in accordance with our beliefs.

  • 8 years ago

    LOL, the Bible talks about Unicorns, Dragons, talking donkeys, the earth's rotation was stopped (ask a scientist what the ramifications of this would be... we would all literally fly out into space). The star that marked the birth of Jesus just sat there in the sky while all the other stars rotated around with the rotation of the earth? The Bible is filled with the same criticisms you have leveled at the Book of Mormon, are you willing to also flush it down the toilet?

    Ah... you are literally willing to overlook EVERY single criticism of the Bible, but NO criticism of the Book of Mormon. The term "Rose Colored Glasses" comes to mind.

    DNA, is a complete joke. Do you really think we can get a sample of DNA from the company the Book of Mormon talks about coming to America, lol. They talk about Asian DNA mingled with the American Indians, who knows did this little company could have had Asian DNA to begin with?

    See.. we see scripture, and religion for what it really is, not the fairy tale, cloud 9 fantasy's of contemporary Christianity. Scripture is not infallible, Prophets are not infallible, NOTHING is infallible except the Divinity of Jesus Christ. You can criticize and condemn every writer of the Bible, and every modern Prophet for that matter, and you will never understand spiritual things, you have been literally 'weeded out'. The world will never understand things spiritual because that's not the way it works. There are such aspects of a person's character such as humility, patience, kindness, compassion, love and sincerity of which most Anti-Mormons simply do not display.

  • Basically, I find it interesting that people work so very very hard to pick apart the Book of Mormon and find mistakes, historical inconsistencies, and errors in translation when the whole objective of the book is simply to testify of the Savior, Jesus Christ, and it does just this, over and over again.

    This is what matters: To teach and talk of Jesus, and bear testimony of Him. The Book of Mormon does this beautifully, in ways that speak to one's heart.

    If someone, someday, found a manuscript from some naked hut-dwelling spear-chucking pygmies on some lost island that sunk into the sea 1,000 years ago--and this testifies of Christ, and that He lives--would people say "Oh, well, Jesus had nothing to do with these people, this must be a lie and everyone who believes it is crazy."

    Sadly, they probably would.

  • 8 years ago

    Someone has lied to you. Or at the very least given you information that might have been true 40 years ago.

    There are several cases of horses being found that predate columbus. Elephants have also been discovered that became extinct very near Jaredite times. Cattle and cows can refer to bison, of which there were plenty. The Rocky Mountains are full of goats. Texas is full of "swine", although we call them wild boar. Pre-columbian barley was recently discovered at an Arizona grave-site. The Mexican sting-less honey bee certainly qualifies as a honey bee. The Mayans used chariots, although not the Ben-hur type chariots we imagine. Kings and Generals were carried in wheel-less carriages, or chariots. Not only did native americans have silk, they also had fine linen that was smooth like silk. Glass is only mentioned in a old-world context; it is never mentioned as being used in America. Steel use to refer to hardened copper alloys, which the Mayan had. Tons of iron implements have been found. The only doctrinal changes were made by Joseph Smith, and they were simply clarifications - a translators prerogative. Latin, Greek and Aramaic words are also a translators prerogative, if they are commonly used in English. Several unique names follow Hebrew or Mayan naming conventions - something about which Joseph Smith knew nothing at all. Many of the differences between KJV Isaiah and Book of Mormon Isaiah can be found in other translations of Isaiah - translations that were not available to Joseph Smith. Much of the grammar is poor English, but perfect Hebrew. The discovery of chiasms in the Book of Mormon was a major discovery.

    False accusations tend to sound legit if there are enough of them. In truth, there is no limit to the number of false accusations that can be made. This scatter-gun approach - tell a million lies and hope someone believes one of them - is fairly effective, but it isn't based on truth.

  • 8 years ago

    The way I "cope"? Well, first when I want to know something, I ask my Father in Heaven. He is the source of truth. Secondly, when I receive answers, I take them and go with them. I don't read garbage that "man" has to offer. Why should I? I have plenty of "evidence" that the Book of Mormon is true. Is it evidence I can give to you or anyone else? Not really. Because they are spiritual experiences that have happened to me, they are answers I have received, this evidence cannot be refuted, because it has come from Heaven.

    Everything you listed can be easily explained away. But, I have neither the time nor do I want to. There's no point. I'm pretty sure you already believe it all anyway, so nothing I can say will change your mind.

    If you want to know if any of it IS true or false, read the Book of Mormon for yourself then ask your Father in Heaven if it's true. That is the ONLY way you will ever really know.

    Source(s): LDS
  • 8 years ago

    The other Mormon answerers have summed up what I have to say. Your information is lacking. There are actually a lot of proofs the Book of Mormon is truth and I suggest you look into it. It's fascinating. You seem to have a hatred towards Mormonism.

    I hope one day you get past this and learn the truth of the Gospel. Trust me. It is God's word. And stay away from anti-Mormon conspiracy sites. They're the equivalent of Tabloid papers. Full of useless lies.

    Source(s): A person of the LDS faith
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.