Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Contradictions Between the Book of Mormon and the Bible
Institute for Religious Research ^ | 1999 | Luke P. Wilson

Posted on 01/10/2006 4:14:51 AM PST by Quester

Contradictions Between the Book of Mormon and the Bible

Copyright © 1999 Institute for Religious Research. All rights reserved.

There are many serious objections to the claim of Joseph Smith and the LDS church that the Book of Mormon is divinely inspired latter-day scripture supplemental to the Bible. However, none are more significant than the numerous contradictions between Book of Mormon teaching and the Bible. This list is illustrative only, not exhaustive.

1. The Book of Mormon teaches that little children are not capable of sin because they do not have a sinful nature (Moroni 8:8). In contrast, the Bible in Psalm 51:5 clearly teaches that we have sinful nature from birth: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (NIV). (This does not mean that those who die in infancy are lost.*)

2. The Book of Mormon teaches that the disobedience of Adam and Eve in eating the forbidden fruit was necessary so that they could have children and bring joy to mankind (2 Nephi 2:23-25). In contrast, the Bible specifically declares that Adam’s transgression was a sinful act of rebellion that unleashed the power of sin and death in the human heart and throughout God’s perfect world (Genesis 3:16-19; Romans 5:12; 8:20-21). There is no Biblical support for the view that Adam and Eve could only fulfill the command to "be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28) by disobeying God’s command regarding the forbidden fruit (Genesis 2:17). The Book of Mormon teaching that these divine commands are contradictory, and that God expected Adam and Eve to figure out that in reality He wanted them to break the latter command ("of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it") in order to keep the former ("be fruitful and multiply"), has no basis in logic or the Biblical text, and attributes equivocation to God.

3. The Book of Mormon teaches that black skin is a sign of God’s curse, so that white-skinned people are considered morally and spiritually superior to black skinned people (2 Nephi 5:21). In contrast, the Bible teaches that God "made of one blood all nations of men" (Acts 17:26, KJV), that in Christ distinctions of ethnicity, gender and social class are erased (Galatians 3:28), and that God condemns favoritism (James 2:1).

4. The Book of Mormon teaches that, "it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do" (2 Nephi 25:23; see also Moroni 10:32). In contrast, the Bible teaches that apart from Christ we are dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1,5) and unable to do anything to merit forgiveness and eternal life. Salvation is wholly of grace (Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 11:6; Titus 3:5-6), not by grace plus works. Good works are a result, not the basis, of a right relationship with God (Ephesians 2:10).

5. According to the Book of Mormon, about 600 years before Christ, a Nephite prophet predicted that "many plain and precious parts" (1 Nephi 13:26-28) would be removed from the Bible. In contrast, from the Bible it is clear that during His earthly ministry, Jesus himself constantly quoted from the Old Testament Scriptures, and showed full confidence in their completeness and accurate transmission as they had survived down to His time. Jesus declared that "heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away" (Mark 13:31; see also Matthew 5:18), and promised His disciples who were to pen the New Testament that the Holy Ghost "shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you" (John 14:26); Jesus further promised the apostles that they would "bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain" (John 15:16). These promises clearly imply that the fruit of the apostles — the New Testament Scriptures and the Christian church — would endure.

6. According to a Book of Mormon prophecy (Helaman 14:27), at the time of Christ’s crucifixion "darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days." In contrast, the New Testament gospel accounts declare repeatedly that there was darkness for only three hours while Jesus was on the cross (Matthew 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44).

An earlier prophecy in 1 Nephi 19:10 implies the three days of darkness will be more than regional in scope for it says this sign will be "unto those who inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Israel." The darkness then would extend over the ocean to the islands and reach as far as Israel in the Middle East.

Book of Mormon references to the fulfillment of this prophecy, however, use wording that could be understood to mean the three days of darkness was only in the Americas, stating that the three days of darkness would be "over the face of the land." (3 Nephi 8:3ff; 10:9). This appears to be the position of the late Mormon General Authority B.H. Roberts in his book Studies of the Book of Mormon, p. 292). If this is the case, then this would resolve the apparent contradiction between the Bible and the Book of Mormon regarding what happened at the time of Christ's death, for we would have 3 hours of darkness in Israel and 3 days of darkness on the American continents. However, this would make the earlier prophecies of 1 Nephi and Helaman internally contradictory with later BOM references, since their phrasing of "the isles of the sea ... those who are of the house of Israel" and "the whole face of the whole earth" is difficult to understand as merely a localized time of darkness.

7. The Book of Mormon people are said to have observed "all things according to the law of Moses (2 Nephi 5:10; 25:24). However, although they are supposed to have been Hebrews, they were descendents of the tribe of Joseph (1 Nephi 5:17) or Manasseh (Alma 10:3), not the tribe of Levi and family line of Aaron, as the Law of Moses dictates (Numbers 3:10; Exodus 29:9; Numbers 18:1-7), so they would not have had a legitimate priesthood.

8. According to the Book of Mormon, there were many high priests serving at the same time (Mosiah 11:11; Alma 13:9-10; 46:6,38; Helaman 3:25) in the New World, among those it describes as Jewish immigrants from ancient Israel who "kept the law of Moses" (e.g., 2 Nephi 25:10; Jacob 4:5; Jarom 1:5). In contrast, it is clear from the Bible that only one individual at a time occupied the office of high priest under the Old Testament dispensation (see, for example Leviticus 21:10; Matthew 26:3; Hebrews 8:6-7). (The mention in Luke 3:2 of "Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests" is not a real exception -- in Christ’s time Israel was under the domination of the Romans, who intervened to change the high priest at will. That is, this office became a kind of "political football," rather than following the appointment process dictated in the Law of Moses. See John 18:13, which describes Annas as "father-in-law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.")

9. The people described in the Book of Mormon operated multiple temples (Alma 16:13; 23:2; 26:29). This violates the dictates of the Old Testament Scriptures on two counts: First, God commanded Israel to build only one temple to reflect that fact that there is only one true God (Deuteronomy 12:5,13-14; 16:5-6). Second, the one legitimate temple was to be built in Jerusalem (Zion), the location designated by God (The Old Testament is filled with explicit references to God choosing Jerusalem [Zion] as the place where "His name would dwell" in the temple: for example, 1 Kings 8:44,48; 11:13,32,36; 14:21; 2 Kings 21:7; 23:27; 1 Chronicles 28:4; 2 Chronicles 6:6; 7:12,16; Psalm 78:68-69; Isaiah 18:7.

10. The most common biblical terms used to describe the Old Testament priesthood, temple and appointed feasts, are entirely missing from the Book of Mormon. Here are 10 examples of such biblical terms with their frequencies, that never appear once in the Book of Mormon:

"laver" (13 times in Bible)

"incense" (121 times in Bible)

"ark of the covenant" (48 times in Bible)

"sons of Aaron" (97 times in Bible)

"mercy seat" (23 in Bible)

"day of atonement" (21 times in Bible)

"feast of tabernacles" (17 times in Bible)

"passover" (59 times in Bible)

"house of the LORD" (627 in Bible)

"Aaron" – this name appears 48 times in the Book of Mormon, but never in reference to the biblical Aaron or the Aaronic priesthood

Conclusion: The contradictions between the Book of Mormon and the Bible constitute a most serious obstacle to accepting the Book of Mormon as Latter-day scripture that is supplemental to the Bible. The Bible came first, not the Book of Mormon. And whereas the Bible is organically linked to the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ by extensive surviving manuscript evidence going back as far as A.D. 125-30, the Book of Mormon is wholly lacking in any such evidences of ancient origin.

Is it not reasonable, therefore, to make the Bible the standard for judging the Book of Mormon, and not the other way around? If we accept the Bible as our "measuring stick" for spiritual truth, the Book of Mormon must be rejected.

— Luke P. Wilson


TOPICS: Other Christian; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: bible; book; ldschurch; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 421-435 next last

1 posted on 01/10/2006 4:14:54 AM PST by Quester
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Quester

Hm, your second long post since yesterday denigrating the Book of Mormon; are we seeing a trend here?


2 posted on 01/10/2006 4:43:58 AM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grut; Quester

I think he's sucking up to the Calvinists. lol.


3 posted on 01/10/2006 5:00:56 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Grut; Quester

I think he's sucking up to the Calvinists. lol.


4 posted on 01/10/2006 5:01:21 AM PST by Invincibly Ignorant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Quester

I suggest you read them both and pray and ask for yourself.


5 posted on 01/10/2006 5:30:30 AM PST by Unfrozen Caveman Engineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quester

If Mormonism is the only true religion, then I have to wonder why God would have waited over 1800 years after the birth of Christ to reveal it to this man. How could God let all those people spread all that false teaching that would have resulted in people going to hell for all that time without correcting it much earlier? If Mormonism was true, it should have been taught from the very beginning by Jesus himself and there is no recorded evidence that Jesus referred to this. It would have been pretty irresponsible of God to make such a *slip*.


6 posted on 01/10/2006 6:32:17 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Californiajones; P-Marlowe; colorcountry

ping a more appropriate thread for discussion, if you wish


7 posted on 01/10/2006 6:40:10 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quester

I'd worry more about ethical monotheism, and less about sewing dissent among those who practice it.


8 posted on 01/10/2006 6:47:20 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grut

Searching for truth should denigrate no book. When this is done with the Koran or Book of Mormon it is a good thing.


9 posted on 01/10/2006 6:49:40 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Quester

The article is nonsense. In his eagerness to find contradictions, the author misquotes both the Bible and the Book of Mormon. He ignores passages that would invalidate his conclusions. He commits errors of logic as well as fact. Some of his "contradictions" are downright silly.


10 posted on 01/10/2006 7:26:12 AM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logophile; Quester

So what are they? You have more than accusations?


11 posted on 01/10/2006 7:49:08 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
This is a topic of honest discussion. We're not trying to sew (sp?) dissent, so much as show that Mormons contend it is Christian on the one hand...yet clearly believes in a different Christ than that of mainstream Christianity.

How can you be Christian - yet profess to be the only "true" religion. This totally discounts other or mainstreams Christianity.

12 posted on 01/10/2006 7:50:42 AM PST by colorcountry (I have a BS in B.S.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Grut
Hm, your second long post since yesterday denigrating the Book of Mormon; are we seeing a trend here?

There is no denigration of the Book of Mormon here, ... but rather a very straight-forward presentation of how the Bible and the Book of Mormon contradict at points.

13 posted on 01/10/2006 8:24:03 AM PST by Quester (If you can't trust Jesus, ... who can you trust ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: metmom
You have more than accusations?

Of course I do. Let’s take the author’s first point:

1. The Book of Mormon teaches that little children are not capable of sin because they do not have a sinful nature (Moroni 8:8). In contrast, the Bible in Psalm 51:5 clearly teaches that we have sinful nature from birth: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (NIV). (This does not mean that those who die in infancy are lost.*)

The author cites Moroni 8:8. Here is that verse in its entirety:

8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.

Note that this verse says nothing about whether children have a “sinful nature” or not. It says that children cannot sin. I take that to mean that they cannot sin because they lack the capacity to tell right from wrong. They are redeemed from the effects of the Fall through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

The first part of Moroni 8:8 obviously parallels Mark 2:17:

When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Judging from Mark 10:13–17, Jesus did not consider little children to be in need of repentance. Rather than call them to repentance, Jesus blessed them and said that we must emulate them if we are to enter into the kingdom of God:

13 ¶ And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them.

14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.

16 And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.

So where is the contradiction?

14 posted on 01/10/2006 9:52:23 AM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Quester
Two scriptures come to mind:

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Luke 18:10-14

and

13 ¶ And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words.
14 And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?
15 Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it.
16 And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.
17 And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.
18 ¶ Then come unto him the Sadducees, which say there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying,
19 Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
20 Now there were seven brethren: and the first took a wife, and dying left no seed.
21 And the second took her, and died, neither left he any seed: and the third likewise.
22 And the seven had her, and left no seed: last of all the woman died also.
23 In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife.
24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?

Matthew 12: 13-24

Isn't Mr. Wilson playing a rather Pharisical game in his above quote? And isn't the Savior abundantly clear on what he thought of such games?

15 posted on 01/10/2006 10:27:00 AM PST by Reaganesque
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque

Boy that is one Pharisee, calling another Pharisical.

The Mormons (you) believe that you are the only "true," Church. Now who is being Pharisical?

Why should one become a Mormon, then, if we are all Christian and we are saved equally? It is the Mormons that call every other Christian "not good enough."


16 posted on 01/10/2006 11:06:03 AM PST by colorcountry (I have a BS in B.S.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: metmom
If Mormonism is the only true religion, then I have to wonder why God would have waited over 1800 years after the birth of Christ to reveal it to this man. How could God let all those people spread all that false teaching that would have resulted in people going to hell for all that time without correcting it much earlier? If Mormonism was true, it should have been taught from the very beginning by Jesus himself and there is no recorded evidence that Jesus referred to this. It would have been pretty irresponsible of God to make such a *slip*.

The only true religion is Christianity as originally taught by Jesus Christ and his apostles. "Mormonism" is just a nickname for original Christianity, restored by revelation to Joseph Smith. As such, we believe "Mormonism" was taught by Jesus Christ from the very beginning.

God allows people their freedom to believe and to teach false doctrines. One need only look about to realize that this is true.

That does not mean that everyone who believes in false doctrines will go to hell. God will judge each person's behavior according to the light and knowledge he or she possessed. Moreover, those who were denied the opportunity to hear and accept the gospel of Jesus Christ in the flesh will have that opportunity in the hereafter before the Resurrection and Final Judgment.

17 posted on 01/10/2006 12:06:33 PM PST by Logophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Logophile; Quester
Wow. I am still just blown away by all the Mormon pushing on FR.

All I can say is that the New Testament is full of examples of Jesus, Paul and the disciples discussing the problem of the coming spirit of Anti-Christ and the problem of False Teachers and False Teachings declaring a different Jesus.

The test, as John puts it, is that we are to "test the spirits" that tell us anything and to use the Bible as the standard of judgment against all words or doctrines that say they are from God.

Mormonism fails so miserably that it is a joke that anyone takes it seriously, and a despicable one at that.

In plain English, Joe Smith, a 33rd degree Mason, had a revelation that he was to receive the Book of Mormon and translate them through the use of special glasses that would enable him -- and him alone -- to magically translate Egyptian hieroglyphics in the Egyptian tongue that somehow contained the Book of Mormon.

An angel Moroni appeared to Joe Smith in 1840 or whatever exact year that was.

(I am writing extemporaneously in order to make my point)

Smith failed to put this Angel to the Biblical test as he should have as per Paul in Galatians and as per John in 1 John.

The angel Moroni failed the biblical miserably because it denied that Jesus had come in the flesh. In the book of Mormon, Jesus is said to only have appeared "in the spirit" to the disciples. Yet the New Testament said that Jesus held up His hands to his disciples and that Thomas put his finger into the nail hole in Jesus's wrists to prove that Jesus had been nailed on the cross and ressurected in the flesh. So the book of Mormon fails the schoolyard test in 1 John.

Joe Smith then claimed that God the Father Son and Holy Spirit and angels visited him.

This is a supernatural occurrence that not even Moses was allowed to go through -- indeed, God had Moses turn away and Moses was blind for a time period when God swept behind him.

This is because the Bible says "No man can see God and live.: This is because God's holiness will not allow sin in His presence. Our righteousness is not enough to go into God's presence -- we need the propitiation of sin by Jesus' blood -- that takes away the sin of the world.

This is why Isaiah had to have a coal put to his lips when he was taken up to heaven -- because men have sin upon them and we cannot stand before a living and holy God without our sin being taken away.

So, what was the propitiation for Joe Smith's sin that day he claimed to see the Trinity, the holy Godhead?

None that I can recall. In fact, Joe Smith's revelation called for more sin, (polygamy) and for more "works" like wearing holy undergarments marked with Masonic symbols at all times.

Just another logistical point or two against Mormonism.

Also, I am always intrigued that when people get into cults like Mormonism, their focus comes off of fighting the spiritual war against Satan and becomes one of defending their cult.

Satan seeks to kill steal and destroy. His biggest fear is that Christians will take their rightful stand in the Spirit and fight the spiritual battle against his deceptions. Satan's biggest fear is that we will apply the Biblical precepts against his arguments and deceptions. This is why Paul tells us that we are to do battle by "pulling down arguments and anything that resists the knowledge of God"

Finally, love is the nuclear bomb against the deception and lies of the enemy.

Satan does not want Christians to remember that

"HE who is in us, is greater than he who is in the world."

This means that Jesus who is in us, is greater than Satan and Satan's lies.

Satan is the accuser of the brethren. He is the father of all lies. Mormonism teaches that he is just one of Jesus's brothers.

This is nuts.

Jesus is the word made Flesh. Jesus IS the incarnate word. Mormonism declares that word impotent because it tries to trump the word, the Bible, with its "corrected" book of Mormon.

Nuts. Nuts for any Christian.

As Paul says: "The Word is alive and active, and cuts like a two edged sword through the secret thoughts and emotions"

The Book of Mormon is NOT THE INCARNATE WORD MADE FLESH.

That is why Mormons must figure it out and realize they are adding to the word of God and thereby attempting to nullify it with the book of Mormon.

It is an illegal spiritual act against the Lord God Jesus Christ.

And please Mormon people, no name calling this time. I am distinguishing between the sin and the sinner here -- and I am concerned with pointing out the sin of False Doctrine, not the personal problems of those who push False Doctrine and cultish beliefs.
18 posted on 01/10/2006 12:54:37 PM PST by Californiajones ("The apprehension of beauty is the cure for apathy" - Thomas Aquinas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Reaganesque
Isn't Mr. Wilson playing a rather Pharisical game in his above quote?

What quote ?

19 posted on 01/10/2006 1:04:16 PM PST by Quester (If you can't trust Jesus, ... who can you trust ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Grut

Joseph Smith described the sectarian wrangling in 1820:

"[G]reat multitudes united themselves to the different religious parties, which created no small stir and division amongst the people, some crying, "Lo, here!" and other, "Lo, there!" Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist.

"For, notwithstanding the great love which the converts to these different faiths expresed at the time of their converstion . . . yet when the converts began to file off, some to one party and some to another, it was seen that the seemingly good feelings of both the preists and the converts were mor pretended than real; for a scene of great confusion and bad feeling ensued -- priest contending against priest, and convert against convert; so that all their good feelings one for another, if they ever had any, were entirely lost in a strife of words and a contest about opinions.

. . .

"[T]he cry and the tumult were so great and incessant. The Presbyterians were most decided against the Baptists and Methodists, and used all the powers of both reason and sophistry to prove their errors, or at least, to make the people think they were in error. On the other hand, the Baptists and Methodists in their turn were equally zealous in endeavoring to establish their own tenets and disprove all others."

All I can say is: The more things change, the more they remain the same. There is still no shortage of people who see no irony whatsoever in bashing and misrepresenting the beliefs of others in order to prove they are the most "Christian."


20 posted on 01/10/2006 1:24:39 PM PST by lady lawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 421-435 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson