The Most Remarkable Thing in the Book of Mormon?

[Anijen]

Yes, I am familiar with it. When I was an LDS missionary, I tried to implement it every time I met with an investigator, asking him/her to read and pray about the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. So yes, I am quite familiar with it.

Not really. If I can offer my opinion, it would be that such a promise is just the kind of thing one would expect to find in a book of purported scripture. Common Evangelical tracts end with an invitation to commit, to make a spiritual effort. The Book of Mormon's invitation to read, study and pray is functionally similar to asking someone to pray and accept Jesus as his savior.

I would just point out that Evangelical tracts have the same confidence in their invitations, if we take them at face value. It's all rather commonplace IMO.

I would go on but I would just be repeating parts of Mighty Curelom's fine post about other evangelical sects, Mohammed, L Ron Hubbard, etc.

According to auditors of the church of scientology there is only about 50,000 members far less than the 8 million they claim.

[mpschmitt]

I don't believe JS was a hypnotist either. But he was a persuasive, enthusiastic, charismatic individual living in a time and place where magical thinking was the norm. I don't find it difficult to believe a person like that could get a group of highly suggestible, superstitious, magical thinking country bumpkins to think they saw something they didn't. And memory being what it is, they may have even manufactured memories of angelic visitations years after the initial event took place. It's not really THAT big of a jump from "I saw it in my mind's eye" to "I saw it with my own eyes." I've read a lot about the nature of memory and the psychology of belief, and I know for a fact stranger things have happened. The likelihood that a few highly suggestible religious zealots could work themselves into a visionary state is, to me, much more likely than actual angels. Obviously you disagree.

This raises another question for me...What is your view of the Biblical prophets? It seems this sort of reasoning might just as easily be applied to Moses or Peter or any number of other Biblical contributors...Do you regard them in the same light as Joseph Smith (and do you view their followers as equally suggestible religious zealots? I'm just curious. Not trying to criticize or corner you, but wondering where you stand on that...

This is a disingenuous challenge, since anything I name will necessarily be different in some respect. If I say that Mohammed wrote a book and founded a religion with over 1 billion believers, you'll say that Mohammed was older than Joseph when he wrote the Koran, and that, besides, the Koran isn't as impressive as the BoM. If I name L. Ron Hubbard, whose religion has grown larger than the LDS church in less than 50 years, you'll dismiss him out of hand. There are the founders of the Seventh Day Adventist religion, and the Watchtower. There are thousands of sects, Christian and otherwise, and most of them can be traced to charismatic leader. Mormonism is not unique--or, at least, it is no more unique than every other religion. And Joseph Smith was not unique either--just one of the more successful charismatic zealots to found a religion. And no miracle in LDS mythology/history is any more impressive or unexplainable than the collections of supposed miracles that every religion accumulates, and which you, no doubt, dismiss as easily as I dismiss those relating to Mormonism.

True, I've got a counter argument for everything

[jo1952]

Okay - I will re-state my post and clarify WHY I posted it.

The OP is "The Most Remarkable Thing in the Book of Mormon".

My post is about someone who is a stead-fast, die-hard Christian who is studying all of our scriptures. He is trying to ignore the years of anti-LDS literature, sermons, etc., which he has learned as a "Christian".

He has concluded the Book of Mormon IS SOUND DOCTRINE. He is able to see this from his own perspective of understanding Christianity. He no longer believes we are not Christian.

I think this is quite remarkable!! In other words, "everything in the Book of Mormon", is the answer I present to the OP's question.

This seems like an appropriate place to make this post.

I have a very close friend who is extremely intelligent, well read, and a God fearing Christian. He participates on many websites debating the Bible. He is a faithful church goer - a decent human being; loving, caring.....knows his scriptures AND has a fine understanding of what he reads. In fact, he is a stickler for accuracy and has not only satisfied his own spiritual search for truth, he has done extensive research into the background of the books in the Bible, etc. He is a reasonable man.

I asked him to read the Book of Mormon which he did. He then wanted to read the D&C and the PofGP; which he has. His conclusion is this. He wants to do more research. For years he has read about and been taught we are a cult - the usual anti-LDS arguments. As a result of actually reading all of our scriptures - and praying for the power of discernment before he read any of them (those were his words for prayer), he believes we ARE Christians. He believes the Book of Mormon is doctrinely sound. He believes JS was an inspired individual who loved God and was trying to do the right thing. He does not believe JS was trying to dupe anybody. He thinks all of the anti-JS arguments are refutable and have nothing to do with the accomplishments achieved by JS. He also thinks JS just got carried away with things by the time he started writing the D&C.

I have given him my copy of the new book defending the BoM with 80 different evidences. He would make a super Mormon.

If you know of any other sources I can refer him to, please let me know. If there is any irrefutable evidence that has been uncovered which JS could not have known about, he will know and accept the BofM is, indeed, what it claims to be. At that point, he will know JS WAS a prophet.....and the issues he has with doctrine in our other scriptures will then be accepted on faith. Meanwhile, he will start investigating the references listed in the new book of 80 evidences as soon as he finishes another book he is reading which is some 1200 pages (not related to the Church).

I will keep you posted on what is happening.

[cinepro]

According to auditors of the church of scientology there is only about 50,000 members far less than the 8 million they claim.

Who would be the more reliable source about Scientology? The Church itself, or the crtics and "anti-Scientologists"? Why would you go to a Chevy dealer to learn about Fords?

(Of course, "auditing" has a different meaning in Scientology, so who knows...?)

[LeSellers]

You think [scientologists] care what you count as scripture? Or lets reverse it and ask you if you care what they count as scripture?

No, why should that?

However, "scripture", like "marriage" means something. When we start manipulating the meanings of words, communication becomes difficult. If we do it often enough, it become impossible.

6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.

8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

[There was nothing supernatural about L. Ron Hubbard's production of Dianetics, a]s far as you know.

If Hubbard had made any such claim, I'm sure we'd have heard of it. As we have not, I assume he never made the claim. Absent a claim, there is no reason to assume there was anything supernatural about the origins of Dianetics.

Let me ask you, have you prayed and pondered about his book and teachings sincerely, or have you just listened to what others say about him?

No, they haven't asked me to.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

If I can offer my opinion, it would be that such a promise is just the kind of thing one would expect to find in a book of purported scripture. Common Evangelical tracts end with an invitation to commit, to make a spiritual effort. The Book of Mormon's invitation to read, study and pray is functionally similar to asking someone to pray and accept Jesus as his savior.

So, if we should expect to find this sort of promise in a book purporting to be scripture, where are the examples of what we should "expect to find"?

Moroni 10: 4~5 aside, I have ne'er heard of any. Have you?

Lehi

[Kyle]

No, they haven't asked me to.

Lehi

I am asking you right now. Listen, I'd like to bear my testimony that I know this church is true. These words are lifechaging, if you allow it.

[LeSellers]

I am asking you [to pray about Diantetics] right now. Listen, I'd like to bear my testimony that I know this church is true. These words are lifechaging, if you allow it.

Are you a Scientologist?

Moroni's Promise is in the Book of Mormon. Is the L. Ron Promise in Dianetics?

BTW, we usually give people a copy of the Book of Mormon. Is my Dianetics in the mail?

And, one final thing, to whom am I supposed to pray?

Lehi

[cinepro]

I am asking you right now. Listen, I'd like to bear my testimony that I know this church is true. These words are lifechaging, if you allow it.

As far as I know, Scientologists appeal to more of a plant-the-seed type test. Hence, all the free IQ and personality tests being proffered on Hollywood Blvd. Just try it, and see if it helps.

For what it's worth, I once took one of their personality tests, and it came up negative.

[Kyle]

Are you a Scientologist?

Moroni's Promise is in the Book of Mormon. Is the L. Ron Promise in Dianetics?

BTW, we usually give people a copy of the Book of Mormon. Is my Dianetics in the mail?

And, one final thing, to whom am I supposed to pray?

Lehi

Oops. Sorry. Wrong religion. Umm your already mormon right? Well then nevermind.

[LeSellers]

ops. Sorry. Wrong religion. Umm your already mormon right? Well then nevermind.

Gee, was it my name, "Lehi", that gave me away?

Lehi

[Kyle]

Gee, was it my name, "Lehi", that gave me away?

Lehi

No. It was your condescending, arrogant attitude that gave it away.

[Tchild2]

I have always thought the promise was a remarkable thing. How many books in the world come with a promise that God will reveal that its true if you ask him? Just one. Ever.

Actually, the concept of "asking" originated with the Bible and was the impetus that compelled Joseph Smith to seek an answer in the sacred grove which started the whole restoration...according to the official LDS version anyway.

"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.", James 1:5 was the verse used in the missionary discussions as the motive to Joseph Smith seeking an answer in the sacred grove. Here is a link to another dozen or so biblical "asking" scriptures. Biblical verses

If you seek a naturalistic explanation for the source of Joseph's doctrinal and scriptural foundation, you need not look any further than the Bible.

[paulpatter]

Write a book, declare it as scripture and have people pray about it. Get enough people to pray and there are sure to be some who fall for it. Genius!

Question #1: Do you really believe the scenario you offer is feasible? You say, "Write a book. . . ." Is it your position that the Book of Mormon is just another book. . .simply a book--one of tens/hundreds of thousands of books published in the U. S. annually?

Question #2: Do you really believe there are many authors--highly accomplished ones--who could compose a book comparable to the Book of Mormon and pass it off as scripture based solely on their declarations that it is scripture? How long would it take those writers to do that using the limited resources/educational background available to Joseph Smith?

Question #3: Honest, thought-through answers to #2 strongly suggest that getting "enough people to pray" . . . and "fall for it" is a s-t-r-e-t-c-h. BTW, how many constitute "enough people"?

Funny nobody else ever thought of it. Or has tried it since.

That's because "nobody" has been capable of producing such a book without the "contract" issued by Deity to Joseph Smith.

[mpschmitt]

And that's why you're a Mormon. Your opinion of the BoM is not universally shared. In fact, it's shared by a minuscule percentage of the general public, and that percentage drops precipitously with increased education levels (excepting, of course, Mormons born into the religion, but that's another topic.)

Two points on this particular statement (in addition to my other reply above). I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

Our numbers are small compared to other movements. That is true. Is that a bad thing in your view? Is Islam billions of times better because of their numbers? Jesus said in Matthew 7:14 "strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." The Book of Mormon also predicts that the numbers of our membership will be small: (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_ne/14/12#12):

And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

I find the second half of your statement to be dubious (and a little insulting to be honest ). Do you have some data to support that? I'd be interested in having a look at that if it came from an article you can reference or something to that effect. The importance of advanced and continual education is highly stressed in the Church and has been since the time of Joseph Smith (see Doctrine and Covenants http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/109/7,14#7 for an example) and in many instances new members feel spurred to pursue more education after their baptism. One example of the Church's commitment to education would be the Perpetual Education Fund (just do a search on LDS.org). I have known many faithful converts with highly advanced degrees in all sorts of disciplines. I have also known Latter-day Saints born into the Church with equally impressive academic credentials who believe wholeheartedly in the Church and all of it's teachings. Many of our most prominent leaders have been exceptionally good scientists, doctors, etc, before they devoted themselves wholeheartedly to the ministry. But all of that means nothing and they would be the first to admit it (in fact Henry B. Eyring recently did in an interview). I have also known members of the Church who are bright and spiritual people, powerful leaders who serve the Lord faithfully and beautifully, who never made it past high school. What matters to God is a broken heart and a contrite spirit. He could care less whether that broken heart and contrite spirit happens in somebody who went to Yale or somebody who never had extra letters added to their name.

[Kyle]

Two points on this particular statement (in addition to my other reply above). I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

Our numbers are small compared to other movements. That is true. Is that a bad thing in your view? Is Islam billions of times better because of their numbers? Jesus said in Matthew 7:14 "strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." The Book of Mormon also predicts that the numbers of our membership will be small:

100 men can be just as wrong as 1.

[Mighty Curelom]

Two points on this particular statement (in addition to my other reply above). I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

Our numbers are small compared to other movements. That is true. Is that a bad thing in your view? Is Islam billions of times better because of their numbers? Jesus said in Matthew 7:14 "strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." The Book of Mormon also predicts that the numbers of our membership will be small: (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_ne/14/12#12):

I was referring to your position that the BoM is an impressive text. (I should have quoted more, to include this:"I've read other Holy books from other religions and have not yet found a book (the bible excepted, of course) whose spiritual depth and principles can measure up to what I find in the Book of Mormon.") The point you're making here is a common one: that the BoM is so impressive--spiritually or however you wish to define it--that Joseph Smith, an uneducated farm boy, couldn't possibly have written it himself.

My point was that for most people the BoM is not as impressive as it is for you--that the spiritual depth and principles allegedly contained within the BoM are no more impressive to the vast majority of the human population than L. Ron Hubbard's book "Dianetics." Of course, there's no way to objectively measure the complexity, profundity, or theological worth of any particular book. But still---the numbers say something. How else would you measure the impressiveness of a book than by how many people it impresses?

I find the second half of your statement to be dubious (and a little insulting to be honest ). Do you have some data to support that? I'd be interested in having a look at that if it came from an article you can reference or something to that effect. The importance of advanced and continual education is highly stressed in the Church and has been since the time of Joseph Smith (see Doctrine and Covenants http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/109/7,14#7 for an example) and in many instances new members feel spurred to pursue more education after their baptism. One example of the Church's commitment to education would be the Perpetual Education Fund (just do a search on LDS.org). I have known many faithful converts with highly advanced degrees in all sorts of disciplines. I have also known Latter-day Saints born into the Church with equally impressive academic credentials who believe wholeheartedly in the Church and all of it's teachings. Many of our most prominent leaders have been exceptionally good scientists, doctors, etc, before they devoted themselves wholeheartedly to the ministry. But all of that means nothing and they would be the first to admit it (in fact Henry B. Eyring recently did in an interview). I have also known members of the Church who are bright and spiritual people, powerful leaders who serve the Lord faithfully and beautifully, who never made it past high school. What matters to God is a broken heart and a contrite spirit. He could care less whether that broken heart and contrite spirit happens in somebody who went to Yale or somebody who never had extra letters added to their name.

I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that religiosity decreased with education. From Phil Zuckerman's "Society Without God":

Sociological studies have consistently shown that the more educated a person is, the less likely he or she is to accept supernatural religious beliefs. For example, a recent Harris poll found that of Americans with no college education, 86 percent believed in the resurrection of Jesus, 77 percent believed in the Virgin Birth, and 74 percent believed in the existence of hell. But belief in such things was noticeably lower among those highly educated Americans possessing postgraduate degrees, of which 64 percent believed in the resurrection of Jesus, 60 percent in the Virgin Birth, and 53 percent in the existence of hell. A recent Gallup poll found that of Americans with no college education, 44 percent consider the Bible to be the actual word of God to be taken literally, but of Americans with graduate degrees, only 11 percent maintained this view of the Bible.

I've come across similar statistics showing that something like 97% of PhD level biologists are atheist or agnostic, which is significant in my opinion. It is telling that those who are the most familiar with the workings of organic machines share the opinion that no gods were involved in the making of such machines.

As for Mormon education levels: yes, education is valued in Mormon culture. There's even a church supported institution of higher learning. I would never claim that Mormons are uneducated. But imagine for a moment, an individual raised on BoM picture books, indoctrinated with weekly religious education classes, followed by daily seminary classes, followed by a two year mission (during which time this individual is immersed in Mormonism 24 hours a day, and is expected to convert others to the religion) followed by 4 years in a Mormon university, where your studies will be supplement by (you guessed it) more classes on Mormonism. And just for good measure, let's say this hypothetical individual was born and raised in Provo, so all his family and friends are Mormon.

Now, is it any wonder Mormons have a higher rate of religious retention even at higher levels of education? The indoctrination process is more thorough and all-inclusive than virtually any other major, mainstream religion.

So, I readily concede that there are many intelligent, highly educated Mormons, and that they most likely share your opinion of the BoM. There are even PhD level Mormon Egyptologists, and professors of Middle Eastern studies. After all, somebody has to teach at BYU. But here's the thing: these people were all born into the church, or were at least indoctrinated at an early age. They didn't get their PhD in, say, Egyptology, and then convert to Mormonism after reading the Pearl of Great Price and being blown away by the accuracy of the facsimile translations. I've asked on this forum if there are ANY prominent LDS apologists who converted after completing their education, and the silence was as deafening as it was expected.

[Anyon]

The most remarkable thing in the book of mormon....

Hebrews who used modern Greek and French words, wrote in reformed Egyptian, and didn't have a clue of Jewish traditions and customs. Not one celebration of the Seder, Purim, or Shavuot.

[LeSellers]

education is valued in Mormon culture. There's even a church supported institution of higher learning. I would never claim that Mormons are uneducated. But imagine for a moment, an individual raised on BoM picture books, indoctrinated with weekly religious education classes, followed by daily seminary classes, followed by a two year mission (during which time this individual is immersed in Mormonism 24 hours a day, and is expected to convert others to the religion) followed by 4 years in a Mormon university, where your studies will be supplement by (you guessed it) more classes on Mormonism. And just for good measure, let's say this hypothetical individual was born and raised in Provo, so all his family and friends are Mormon.

Now, is it any wonder Mormons have a higher rate of religious retention even at higher levels of education? The indoctrination process is more thorough and all-inclusive than virtually any other major, mainstream religion.

So that explains my mother-in-law! She got her PhD in linguistics at BYU MichSU (with a 4.1 GPA, out of 4), after having five children (as did my father-in-law). She was raised in Provo Calgary, Alberta, surrounded by a myriad of one LDS family (into which she married) after they moved there in grade 10, and her father and mother forced her to go to church refused her permission to be baptized and she wasn't, until she married.

It's always good to know the truth. Thank you.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Hebrews who used modern Greek and French words, wrote in reformed Egyptian,

Uh, did you know you speak modern French words, and a host of Greek? That's because you speak the same general kind of English that Joseph Smith did when he translated the book of Mormon into English.

Because of the history of the alphabet, we might say that you write in "reformed Egyptian", too. Egyptian > Phonecian > Hebrew > Greek > Latin/English.

and didn't have a clue of Jewish traditions and customs. Not one celebration of the Seder, Purim, or Shavuot.

Aside from Exodus (the first Seder), how many do we see in the Bible? There are a tiny number of Feasts of the Trumpets, of the Tabernacles, of the First Fruits in the Bible. So are we to reject it on those same grounds?

There are several examples of the mandatory Israelite feasts in the Book of Mormon, in 2 Nephi, in Jacob, In Mosiah, in 3 Nephi.

Lehi

[Anyon]

Uh, did you know you speak modern French words, and a host of Greek? That's because you speak the same general kind of English that Joseph Smith did when he translated the book of Mormon into English.

Because of the history of the alphabet, we might say that you write in "reformed Egyptian", too. Egyptian > Phonecian > Hebrew > Greek > Latin/English.

Aside from Exodus (the first Seder), how many do we see in the Bible? There are a tiny number of Feasts of the Trumpets, of the Tabernacles, of the First Fruits in the Bible. So are we to reject it on those same grounds?

There are several examples of the mandatory Israelite feasts in the Book of Mormon, in 2 Nephi, in Jacob, In Mosiah, in 3 Nephi.

Lehi

I'm much aware that English is a creole. However, the errs in the fiction that is the BoM is in fact due to Smith's poor use of English, and lack of knowledge of Jewish traditions and customs. And using citations from this fiction to buttress wishful thinking is to be rejected. Your rebuttal is nothing more then sloppy negationism to shoehorn pap into the 900's DDS.

[Kevin Christensen]

The most remarkable thing in the book of mormon....

Hebrews who used modern Greek and French words, wrote in reformed Egyptian, and didn't have a clue of Jewish traditions and customs. Not one celebration of the Seder, Purim, or Shavuot.

I take it that you have not read this:

"King Benjamin's Speech in the Context of Ancient Israelite Festivals"

http://www.farms.byu.edu/publications/book...&chapid=119

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[LeSellers]

I'm much aware that English is a creole.

Then you ought to recognize that the language into which Joseph translated the Book of Mormon contains French, Greek, Latin, German, and a host of other linguistic borrowings. So, when Jacob said, "Until we see each other before God" (or something similar), Joseph was perfectly correct in using the "French" word "Adieu". "Adieu" is English, and had been for centuries. Given that Joseph (and more importantly his mother) lived within a hundred miles of French Canada, "adieu" was almost certainly part of his mother tongue, and he translated the Book of Mormon into his own scriptural vernacular.

However, the errs [sic] in the fiction that is the BoM is [sic] in fact [sic] due to Smith's poor use of English, [sic] and lack of knowledge of Jewish traditions and customs.

The irony is mindboggling.

No one denies that Joseph was unfamiliar with many aspects of Jewry. Given that, it is amazing that there were so many examples of good Jewishness, the feast I noted being prime examples, the frequent references to the Law of Moses, being yet another.

And using citations from this fiction to buttress wishful thinking is to be rejected. Your rebuttal is nothing more then sloppy negationism to shoehorn pap into the 900's DDS.

And yet you did not address my points refuting your major issue: the lack of Jewishness in the Book of Mormon.

Lehi

[cinepro]

I take it that you have not read this:

"King Benjamin's Speech in the Context of Ancient Israelite Festivals"

http://www.farms.byu.edu/publications/book...&chapid=119

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

I've just got to say that the second most remarkable thing in the Book of Mormon has to be that the Lehites landed in the New World, integrated with the locals, and were somehow able to maintain a tradition of Israelite Festivals for over 475 years.

[Luigi]

I think the least that can be said is that, "Whoever wrote the Book of Mormon seemed confident that God would corroborate its authenticity."

As long as I get to guide you on how and when God talks to you I can get God to corroborate anything.