I just recently started reading the Book of Mormon. I’m taking notes in my quad as I go along. I made the decision a few days ago to read through the triple combination in the next year, and I decided I would take notes on things I find interesting. I’m doing this for a couple reasons: 1) I love Mormons and want to be prepared to share the truth with them, which means being informed about what they believe, and 2) they won’t be able to ask me how I can be sure the Book of Mormon is false if I haven’t even read it. I don’t believe reading a book is an accurate way of knowing whether or not it’s true, but since Mormons seem to think this is so important, I’ll go ahead and read it. I started a couple nights ago to get ahead (since my schedule doesn’t actually start until 1 January anyway), and we’ll see how well it goes! I will record my thoughts here as I go along. I’m going to do my best to be fair and not criticize something just because it’s what Mormons believe. Hopefully with the Lord’s help, I will accomplish that in a loving and Christ-like manner!
My first night I read the title page of the Book of Mormon through 1 Nephi 2. I made a couple observations.
The first observation was on the title page. On that page, there is a line speaking of the gold plates from which the Book of Mormon supposedly came. It says that it is a record “Written and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed.” I have to admit I’m curious. If the Book of Mormon was written and sealed up unto the Lord so that it might not be destroyed, why didn’t the Lord take the same efforts to protect the Bible? Mormons only believe the Bible “as far as it is translated correctly….” (Eighth Article of Faith) While I disagree that there is any error in the Bible, it begs the question of one who does believe why God would go to such lengths to protect one portion of His scripture, but the other portion He will just sit back and watch as it falls into corruption and its manuscripts deteriorate? Does God care more about the Book of Mormon and its accuracy than that of the Bible? In addition to that, how are we to know the Book of Mormon is more accurate than the Bible? After all, we can’t examine the plates to see if they are translated correctly, so how are we to know that it’s been protected so well?
My second note in the Book of Mormon was simply a point I already knew about, but made sure to note. The second paragraph of the Introduction explains that the Book of Mormon gives an account of three separate civilizations called the Nephites, Lamanites, and Jaredites, all descended from the ancient Israelites. It tells us that they were the ancient inhabitants of the Americas, and the last line informs us that “they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.” If this is true, why did a Doubleday edition of the Book of Mormon, which was printed in 2006 and closely monitored by the LDS Church, change the last line to read “they are among the ancestors of the American Indians?” I’ve also read in news articles that this change is expected in the LDS edition of the Book of Mormon, although when is not known for sure. It seems that the leadership of the LDS Church is acknowledging as quietly as possible the DNA evidence found which shows that the American Indians are primarily descendants of Asia. No drop of Hebrew blood has been found in any of the thousands tested so far! As the Church continues to concede its doctrine to the findings of the day, one must wonder how dependable the prophets and apostles who lead this Church truly are. It seems clear that the prophets spoken of are the false prophets mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:21-22:
21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?
22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
My last thought while looking at the Book of Mormon was in the Testimony of the Three Witnesses. The testimony concludes with the statement: “And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.” This statement sounds very much like Christian doctrine to me, but it leaves one wondering how this testimony can be valid if one is to believe the teachings of Joseph Smith and other Mormon leaders! Joseph Smith said:
“The teachers of the day say that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, and they are all in one body and one God. Jesus prayed that those that the Father had given him out of the world might be made one in them, as they were one [one in spirit, in mind, in purpose]. If I were were to testify that the Christian world were wrong on this point, my testimony would be true.” -Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 322
“I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods. If this is in accordance with the New Testament, lo and behold! we have three Gods anyhow, and they are plural; and who can contradict it?” – Ibid., pp. 383-4
Likewise, Mormon apostle Bruce R. McConkie teaches in his book Mormon Doctrine (pp. 576-7):
“Three separate personages–Father, Son, and Holy Ghost–comprise the Godhead. As each of these persons is a God, it is evident, from this standpoint alone, that a plurality of Gods exists. To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the only Gods we worship.”
It seems to me that Mormonism today doesn’t agree all that much with the doctrine the Three Witnesses believed in when it comes to God!
That an interesting observation that the Book of Mormon was preserved while the Bible wasn’t preserved in the same manner. Then again, both the Bible and the Book of Mormon survived till today. So God’s hand may played a hand in preserving Bible, but in a different, more subtle manner. The Book of Mormon was also in danger of being utterly destroyed by the Lamanites, so a greater measure had to be taken to save those precious words.
I think it should also be noted that the Book of Mormon is said to contain lessons and doctrine that are important and applicable for his children in the last days. That may be why he took such care to preserve their meaning through translation.
The part about DNA is interesting, but I don’t that it confirms that those prophets were false. As you read you’ll find out that the Lamanites were cursed with dark skin for rebelling against their father. At the end of the Book of Mormon all of the fair-skinned Nephites were destroyed by the Lamanites. So after the end the only people left in the Americas were the Lamanites. I don’t know what the curse consisted of for them, but I wouldn’t doubt that their DNA could’ve changed. God could’ve changed them fundamentally so that they didn’t resemble their former ancestry. My point is that DNA evidence doesn’t tell us everything, only what they are now. DNA doesn’t tell us what God did to them.
You’re last statement about the Three Witnesses, Joseph Smith, and Bruce McConkie doesn’t make sense. You quoted the last bit from the Testimony of the Three Witnesses about how God, his son, and the Holy Ghost “which is one God.” Then you gave quotes by Joseph Smith and McConkie that stated that they made up the Godhead, but were individual Gods. What the Three
Witnesses meant by one God was in the sense of the Godhead.
The term “God” is a part of the priesthood. God in Hebrew is Elohim, which has a plural morphological form. That means that it represents multiple beings. When it is used in the Bible it uses singular verbs though. The reason for mixing plural with singular is because they are separate distinct beings, but they act together perfectly and for the same, exact goal. The Trinity is not a pure Christian doctrine, but Pre-Socratic philosophy imposed on Christian theology.
Sorry if I offended you in any way, but I saw flaws in your observations and assertions. I hope you enjoy reading the Book of Mormon and may his spirit be with you. Please take time to pray to God and to listen to the Holy Ghost as you read it. May God be with you and his blessings on your head never cease.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I’m sorry that it’s taken so long for me to respond!
Despite your thoughts on the preservation of the Bible and the Book of Mormon, there’s still an inconsistency between the two. Surely both cannot be from the same God. The fact of the matter is, if the purpose of the Bible is to proclaim the “fulness of the Everlasting Gospel,” (Book of Mormon Introduction, par. 1) and was the only source we had for centuries, it’s completely illogical to believe that the Lord would have allowed any of His word to pass away and fall into corruption (see Isaiah 40:8; Matthew 5:18). How would we be able to discern then what is truth and what is false?
Your comments on DNA are interesting. While certainly the Lord is capable of changing DNA, I see no reason to believe from any scripture, whether Christian or Mormon, to believe that God would completely change directions on how to prove His word. For the Bible we have literally thousands and thousands of manuscripts telling us the original wording of the scripture. It’s confirmed by history, archaeology, linguistics, etc. There’s not a single shred of concrete evidence, however, that should lead us to believe that the Book of Mormon is true. We can’t find a map listing the names or indicating the location of any Book of Mormon cities. Why not? The LDS edition of the Bible certainly points out lots of biblical geography through the maps in the back…why not also in the back of the Book of Mormon? It’s because there is no Book of Mormon geography! Archaeology is greatly lacking too! Just yesterday I was reading Alma 11. Shouldn’t the Church have on display somewhere in its History Museum a senine, seon, shum, or limnah of gold? How about a senum, amnor, ezrom, or onti of silver? Mormon actually gives us a very detailed account of everything that took place at Cumorah in Mormon 6. Surely the Church can just go excavate the Hill Cumorah and find plenty? After all, if such a huge battle ensued there, no doubt there are swords, shields, spears, bones, etc. left over on and around it! If some type of concrete evidence were found for the Book of Mormon, I might at the very least go ahead and believe that it has some value historically, although I would be more reserved to accept it theologically due to its inconsistencies with the Bible in that regard. Just the same, I know of no such evidence for it, so I see no reason to accept it.
I’m surprised that you don’t see right through your own argument, which clearly supports the biblical doctrine of the Triune God! You claim to believe the Bible AND the Mormon doctrine of more than one god, but the two are mutually exclusive. The fact of the matter is, while the Bible teaches that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are all God, it points out very bluntly and clearly that there is ONE God (see Deuteronomy 4:35; 6:4; Isaiah 43:10-11; 44:6, 8; John 10:30). Nowhere in the Bible is there any implication that there is more than one God! The thought you mentioned about Elohiym simply illustrates this fact. He is certainly made up of three Persons, but these three are one God! Your conjecture that this doesn’t make sense shows that you don’t believe God’s own testimony about Himself as found in the Bible. Don’t be so quick to say that something doesn’t make sense just because you don’t understand it. God is far greater than anything we can comprehend…if there’s anything in the universe that I don’t expect to be able to fully wrap my mind around, it should be Him! I personally am terrible at science. Just because I don’t understand how science works, however, does this mean that the concepts being taught in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics classes all around the world today are false? Of course not! I simply don’t understand them! If I can’t grasp science, one of the many ways of studying the things God created simply by speaking (Genesis 1), why should I expect to truly comprehend everything about that Creator? There are certainly things He tells us in His word that I accept because I know His word is true, but certain things my limited human mind just can’t comprehend!
Also, please don’t worry about whether or not you offend me. Although I certainly don’t agree with the doctrines of Mormonism and find it to be unChristian and blasphemous, anyone who claims to believe the Bible should not let the offense of other people stop them from proclaiming God’s word! Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34) Although we should try to be kind and share the truth in “meekness and fear….” (1 Peter 3:15), if it comes down to it, we should NOT allow the fact that others choose to be offended stop us from proclaiming what we believe to be true. Just the same, I was not offended by what you wrote. I believe that you have been misled by false prophets, a false christ, and a false gospel, but I can’t blame you for trying to share it with others, just as I try to share what I believe with others. Please feel free to contact me any time with questions you may have!
Hi Tommy. I wrote about this blog post over on my blog, here: http://lehislibrary.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/tommy-on-mormonism-blog-post-review/