Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Book of Mormon Challenge
Joseph Smith America Prophet ^ | 2006

Posted on 04/27/2006 3:03:34 PM PDT by restornu

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 781-787 next last

1 posted on 04/27/2006 3:03:36 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: restornu

he copyrighted the Book of Mormon,

Didn't know that..............


2 posted on 04/27/2006 3:09:19 PM PDT by PeterPrinciple (Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Thanks be to Sidney Rigdon, the man who had the most behind the scenes in crafting the travesty of "The Book of Mormon".

He was the most linguistically skilled, having gone crazy from playing second-fiddle to Alexander Campbell, the man who ultimately provided the most scathing review of the original "Book of Mormon" in an 1831 issue of the "Millennial Harbinger".
3 posted on 04/27/2006 3:27:00 PM PDT by ConservativeMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I am not aware of anyone in the first group of biblical experts who are anti-Mormon. If anything, real biblical scholars who know Mormon theology have a profound sense of admiration for it and are usually astonished that so many facets of Mormonism reflect authentic biblical teachings.

Amazing what one can do by plagerising whole text! Joseph Smith was probably one of the most genius con artist ever to be born, but not without those peeping stones!

4 posted on 04/27/2006 3:35:54 PM PDT by sirchtruth (Words Mean Things...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Mountain man; Jeff Head; lady lawyer; frgoff; Logophile; Utah Girl; Grig; BlueMoose; ...

5 posted on 04/27/2006 3:36:15 PM PDT by restornu (Earnestly it is impossible for man to walk with God, and also maintain the humor of a reprobate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Yes I heard it all but...

....could you your self write a book between all your chores and incidental in life in such a short of time making no editorial and be unlearned as well!


6 posted on 04/27/2006 3:42:57 PM PDT by restornu (Earnestly it is impossible for man to walk with God, and also maintain the humor of a reprobate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Feelings.....
Nothing more than feelings....


7 posted on 04/27/2006 3:44:26 PM PDT by colorcountry (Don't bother me,.... I'm living happily ever after.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Ever heard of Leo Tolstoy?


8 posted on 04/27/2006 3:51:01 PM PDT by colorcountry (Don't bother me,.... I'm living happily ever after.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: restornu

I am an evangelical Christian who, for the past six years, has worked in a company based in Salt Lake City. The company is primarily comprised of members of the LDS church. I count many of these people among my dearest and closest friends.

However, I wish to respectfully disagree with Dr. Nibley on several points. (And since this is not a devotional thread, I assume that discussion is okay?)

First, the reason why it is not so astonishing that a supposedly inexperienced and uneducated Joseph Smith might have produced such a work as the Book of Mormom is, quite probably, because he did not produce it.

There is a considerable body of evidence that suggests that the text of the Book of Mormon was, in fact, a sort of composite of several books from the same period. Among those books are "A View of the Hebrews" by Ethan Smith, "A View of Nature" by Josiah Priest and an unpublished manuscript entitled "A Manuscript Found" by Solomon Spaulding. Side by side textual comparisons of the first two books with the BOM clearly raise some serious questions to the objective reader.

Consider what might have happened if Dan Brown had come forward with his book the DaVinci Code and claimed that the contents had been delivered to him on golden plates. Given the current cultural desire for anything which would cast doubt on the truth of the real Gospel of Jesus Christ, Brown himself might have wound up as the founder of a new religion. And with 40 million copies sold, plus movie rights he would certainly have the money to finance such a cult.

It is a curiosity to me that much of what is truly inconsistent with orthodox Christian doctrine in Mormonism does not come from the Book of Mormon itself (though a case can be made for its lack of adherence to orthodox principle). Instead those things which are heretical tend to come from later works of Smith (and others). That these writings are inspired by God is demonstrated on the face of it by it's contradiction with the Old and New Testament as well as significant internal contradictions.

Still, the Mormon church clearly inspires incredible loyalty among its adherents, many of whom I have found know very little about the real doctrines of the church. They are taught practically from birth not to question information that comes to them from up the chain of the command. They have a certain peace (naivete?) about that. I on the other hand was taught to test all things and hold fast to that which is good (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

I agree with Dr. Nibley that reading one anti-Mormon book does not make one an expert. However, I would strongly suggest that even Mormons take the time to explore some of the contrarian literature. Most of it (though sadly not all) is written with the utmost respect for Mormon individuals. consider the works of Richard Abanes, Wayne Cowdrey, or Francis J. Beckwith. These are serious works of scholarship and as I said, they are very respectful. They simply conclude that the historical evidence would suggest that Joseph Smith was not a prophet of God.

Having said all of that, I think it is important to state one more thing. As I mentioned above, I count many practicing Mormons among my close friends. It is not my place to question their salvation. I am convinced that one is saved by the work of Jesus on the cross and not based on one's correct understanding of doctrine. These people (though clearly not all) Mormons do indeed trust Jesus as their Savior. When he returns, he will sort out the doctrinal problems once and for all.


9 posted on 04/27/2006 4:22:48 PM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Bottom line is that there is no need to explain the BoM nor was there a need for any restoration. The Gospel was never lost. Our Lord established the Catholic Church, built upon Peter the Rock, and promised that the gates of Hell would never prevail. And they haven't!


10 posted on 04/27/2006 4:46:15 PM PDT by Macoraba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorcountry
Feelings....
...Whoa, whoa, whoa....

Feelings.....
...Whoa, whoa, whoa....

Trying to forget my.....(bum bum bum)
feelings of LUUUUUUUUUVVVV...

11 posted on 04/27/2006 5:09:29 PM PDT by Alex Murphy (Colossians 4:5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

That's a diminish 5th


12 posted on 04/27/2006 5:16:33 PM PDT by restornu (Earnestly it is impossible for man to walk with God, and also maintain the humor of a reprobate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: newheart

Thank you for your cordail appoarch but I am familar with all those you have mention and more and more and more and more and.....

There is not one rock I have not turn over!:)


13 posted on 04/27/2006 5:19:32 PM PDT by restornu (Earnestly it is impossible for man to walk with God, and also maintain the humor of a reprobate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: restornu

"there is not one rock I have not turn over! :)

I understand. Just be sure that The Rock does not turn into a stumbling block for you. He has the name above all names and I do not believe the Father intends for him to share his throne with anyone. Every knee shall bow. There is only one God and there will ever be only one. In this universe or any other.

Peace.


14 posted on 04/27/2006 5:38:59 PM PDT by newheart (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth. But He can handle you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: restornu; DouglasKC; kerryusama04
First Nephi gives us first a clear and vivid look at the world of Lehi, a citizen of Jerusalem but much at home in the general world of the New East of 600 B.C. Then it takes us to the desert, where Lehi and his family wander for eight years, doing all the things that wandering families in the desert should do. The manner of their crossing the ocean is described, as is the first settlement and hard pioneer life in the New World dealt with.

From what I understand this is your explanation of John 10:16. Tell me.....why is this not a better Explanation? Book XI, Chapter 5, Paragraph 2, Lines 5,6 &7.

The two remaining tribes in Judea, under the influence of the Romans, of course would be, Judah and Benjamin and a portion of Levi. As Josephus writes.....the Ten tribes are yet beyond the Euphrates....and a number not to be estimated. Sounds to me like that pretty much accounts for most of the Lost Tribes.

The Apostles were given the commission to go to the Lost Tribes and Jesus himself says, He was sent only to the Lost Tribes and Peter also says that's exactly where he is writing from (beyond the Euphrates) and writing to another contingent of Israelites along the shores of the Black Sea. Notice these folks have a "Foreknowledge of God"....they are not just your average Gentile as most folks portray and believe them to be.

15 posted on 04/27/2006 6:34:59 PM PDT by Diego1618
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diego1618

***The Apostles were given the commission to go to the Lost Tribes and Jesus himself says, He was sent only to the Lost Tribes ***


Actually it was to the LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL.

Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles nor enter the houses of the Samaratans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Sending forth the 70)
To the Syro-Phoniecian woman he said, "I am sent to none but ONLY the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

We must also remember that there were quite a few from the other tribes in Israel at that time such as Anna of the tribe of ASHER.

And Paul said Christ was a minister to the circumcision to confirm the promises made unto the Fathers.

Christ did not go to Northern Europe or any other place esxcept Israel.


16 posted on 04/27/2006 7:30:39 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (ISLAM is STILL the religion of the criminally insane!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Mormonism to these scholars is the only faith that preserves the characteristics of the early chosen people.

I grew up in the heavily Mormon Las Vegas, where there is a Mormon Church across the street from nearly every middle and high school. I had a bunch of Mormon friends. And I know nothing about Mormonism. A crying shame since they are a really family values bunch.

What is the Mormon position on the 4th Commandment? I think they are Sunday keepers, which makes the whole "tribe of Israel" thing really hard to take.

Regarding Smith "making it up", just because something doesn't come from God doesn't mean it came from man:

2Co 11:13 For such ones are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 2Co 11:14 Did not even Satan marvelously transform himself into an angel of light? 2Co 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves as ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works.

I'm not saying Mormonism is Satanic, I'm just saying that something miraculous happening doesn't necessarily mean God did it.

17 posted on 04/27/2006 7:44:41 PM PDT by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kerryusama04

I didn't know you were from Vegas! Any relation to "Harry Reid Kerry"?


18 posted on 04/27/2006 8:36:36 PM PDT by Diego1618
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Diego1618

My Dad used to know Harry Reid. Harry asked him to work on one of his campaigns back in the day and my dad turned him down.


19 posted on 04/27/2006 8:51:28 PM PDT by kerryusama04 (Isa 8:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I have always been amazed, both by Hugh Nibley's challenge and then by the facts surrounding the translation of the Book of Mormon.
An Astonishing Achievement
First, some history--the year 1829. Only recently have I come to appreciate what a staggering achievement it was for Joseph Smith to bring forth the Book of Mormon at all. The mere fact that it exists is more of a miracle than many of us realize. Consider, for example, the simple question of how long it took Joseph to translate the Book of Mormon. Many solid and independent historical documents written by people like Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph Knight, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery, and even public records like the mortgage on Martin Harris' farm, thoroughly corroborate the details and reveal an amazing story. After the setbacks of 1828, the translation of the Book of Mormon finally began on April 7, 1829, two days after Oliver Cowdery arrived in Harmony, Pennsylvania, guided by a personal revelation from the Lord to come and serve as Joseph's scribe. A short five weeks later, by May 15, they had already reached the account of Christ's ministry among the Nephites in 3 Nephi 11. By June 11, we know they had translated the last of the plates of Mormon, for Joseph used the words from the title page as the legal description on the copyright application he filed that day. By June 30, the job was finished at the Whitmer farmhouse in Fayette, New York. From start to finish--no more than eighty-five total days. But even from that must be subtracted some time and disruption when Joseph and Oliver moved the first week in June in a buckboard from Harmony to Fayette, some 120 miles away; time for trips to Colesville for supplies (sixty miles round trip); time to receive and record thirteen sections now contained in the Doctrine and Covenants; time to restore the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods; time to convert and baptize Samuel and Hyrum Smith and several others; time to experience manifestations with the three and the eight witnesses; and I suppose a little time to eat and sleep. (For a full discussion, see John W. Welch and Tim Rathbone, "The Translation of the Book of Mormon: Basic Historical Information," F.A.R.M.S. W&R­86; John W. Welch, "How Long Did It Take Joseph Smith to Translate the Book of Mormon?" Ensign, January 1988, pp. 46­47)

This leaves only about sixty to sixty-five days on which the Prophet could have worked on the translation--that's about the length of this spring term. This works out to a phenomenal average of eight or nine finished pages per day--day in, day out. Only a week to produce 1 Nephi, with all its subtle religious and cultural baggage that Hugh Nibley has taken volumes to unpack! (see Hugh Nibley, Lehi in the Desert, The World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites; An Approach to the Book of Mormon; Since Cumorah [Deseret Book (Salt Lake City, Utah) and F.A.R.M.S. (Provo, Utah), 1988]; volumes 5, 6, and 7 of The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley)

It took a day and a half to translate King Benjamin's speech, one of the most masterful texts anywhere in religious literature. Besides teaching doctrines about the Atonement, service, humility, conversion, and covenants, the speech also reflects ancient Israelite piety infused with the true gospel of Jesus Christ! Yet there was no time for Joseph to consult at libraries (even if there had been a library in Harmony, Pennsylvania--which there was not). There was no time to study the Mishnah to find out how, in fact, Israelite kings delivered covenant renewal speeches, like Benjamin's, from towers to their people, who gathered by families in tents around their temple (see John W. Welch, "King Benjamin's Speech in the Context of Ancient Israelite Festivals," F.A.R.M.S. Wel­85c). There was no time to revise and refine, no time to cross-check entangled dates and interwoven details. Instead, the text came, as Oliver recorded five years later, "day after day . . . , uninterrupted," as the words fell "from his mouth" (see JS--H 1:71n).

Reference for the above excerpt is from BYU Study, Faith, and the Book of Mormon. The same material can be found at the official website of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, it was published in the Ensign in 1988 in the I have a questions section in the Ensign. How long did it take Joseph Smith to translate the Book of Mormon?. It looks like the Ensign answer was fleshed out and presented as a speech at BYU a few months later.

As an aside, I was reading the other questions and answers, and ran across the name of a neighbor, and a colleague of my father's in their work. He is affectionately known as Mr Church History in our family, he is so well versed in early LDS church history and the life of Jesus Christ.

20 posted on 04/27/2006 10:51:20 PM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 781-787 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