What's so bad about the Book of Mormon?

Ironhold said:

This tells me that you've not read the Book of Mormon for yourself.

The same passage so often cited as "proof" that the BoM condemns polygamy also contains a caveat a few verses down - God has the right to command it if the situation warrants it.

Click to expand...

The BoM says that the whole reason for sending Israel to the Americas was to get them as far away from the Polygamous David and Solomon who were committing gross abomination by having multiple wives.

BobRyan said:

The BoM says that the whole reason for sending Israel to the Americas was to get them as far away from the Polygamous David and Solomon who were committing gross abomination by having multiple wives.

Click to expand...

Really? Are you certain?

Are you aware that God gave David most of his wives? He got in trouble with Bathsheba who is Solomon's Mom

7 ¶ And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;
8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

(Old Testament | 2 Samuel 12:7 - 8)

BobRyan said:

Until you look into the details.

1. Almost no Mormon doctrine in the BoM - just what you expect from a Baptist fiction such as Spalding claimed to have written.

Click to expand...

You've not read the Book of Mormon then, have you?

If you had, you'd know that this is a dud argument.

2. No Mormon witnesses to the plates continue to maintain their claims to have seen real physical plates with real physical eyes- 5 years after 1844 - the year Smith died.

Click to expand...

This one's also a dud.

The witnesses had personal disputes with Joseph and others, but never lost their testimonies. At least one individual came back after Joseph was dead.

BobRyan said:

The BoM says that the whole reason for sending Israel to the Americas was to get them as far away from the Polygamous David and Solomon who were committing gross abomination by having multiple wives.

Click to expand...

[citation needed]

BobRyan, your comments went off into another area, unsupported by not giving us any sources. You also didn't accept the challenge, ignored it, or don't want to deal with it: The challenge & charge that could be made, that anti-Mormon "Christians" must have borrowed the arguments they now use, from early to later anti-Christians & Atheists, who bring up the same types of "borrowing" charges for the origins of the Bible (that Mormons also believe in too). Sources of this were presented in my earlier post, as also links to Robert & Rosemary Brown's series, vol. 2: They Lie in Wait to Deceive, Volume 2. Learn the truth behind well-known anti-Mormons such as “Dr.” Walter Martin, Wayne Cowdrey, Howard Davis, and Donald Scales. Wayne Cowdrey, while working with others to resurrected the Spalding theory, joined the church under the false guise that he was a true believer. He soon "left" the church after being baptized, & while he continued to write an anti-Mormon book with others. He was exposed as doing so because a tactic often used by such critics, is to build up their claims to being an "expert" or "ex-Mormon," or kin to some past Mormon leaders. Attempting to make themselves sound like they were an "insider" or waving their schooling "degrees" in your face to make it sound like they are "experts" in the area of study in questions. Walter Martin did this, claiming to be kin to Brigham Young, & was exposed by the Browns, that he couldn't be, in the way he was claiming. And exposed of having a Dr. degree from a diploma mill. Wayne Cowdrey did the "I'm kin" tactic too, claiming to be kin to Oliver Cowdery (note last names spelled differently). The Browns exposed their false claims, & how the Spalding theory won't work, & never could.

As for "borrowing," if Christian apologists, (like Mormons), were to agree that Satan inspired the early anti-Christians to reject Christ, then these questions ought to be asked: Who was it that inspires modern critics to bring back the same types of tactics of rejection? Or, to "borrowed" from earlier critics, the same old arguments answered by early to later Christian apologists? Arguments & tactics that are now used to reject the restored gospel, modern prophets & modern revelation, which produces modern scriptures, such as The Book of Mormon. Should some Christians here accept the challenge to answer the Atheists, & early to later anti-Christian charges of "borrowing," will we see the same doctrines being used to so do? The doctrines of the pre-existence, Christ going to other nations, or prophets in other nations preaching about Christ; plus, Christ preaching the gospel in the spirit prison. Or, because some of these sound like what Mormons would use, will they not be used? So how might Christians here answer the same types of charges that the Bible & early Christianity was "borrowed," or "plagiarized" from the bible's environment, or pre-Christian pagan mystery religions, myths & sources?
Or will these answers be ignored here? Like the late 18th century anti-Christian writer, T. W. Doane, in his Bible Myths, did, who knew the answer was given, but didn't accept the late 18th century Christian writer, John P. Lundy's responses to the charge of borrowing. Note here, how Lundy uses what Mormons & early Christian apologists have used: The doctrines of the pre-existence & Christ manifesting himself to other nations, (Book of Mormon themes too).

John P. Lundy: "Infidelity has been accustomed to say, from the time of Dupuis to the present, that Christianity is only a sort of copy of ancient Paganism: that is has no new ideas, and must therefore be rejected. But where did Paganism get its sublime conceptions of God, its notions of immortality and human destiny? Whence did all ancient nations derive them, hold them, and agree so marvellously about them? This universal faith must have an adequate cause; and Christianity is but the more full, clear, true and glorious exponent of it all . . .If Christ was before Abraham, as He claimed to be, then surely He must have manifested Himself to other nations beside the Jews, or other nations, including the Jews, must have derived their religious systems and ideas from some common source." Monumental Christianity, 98, (emphasis added here).

Justin Martyr, 110-165, responding to the borrowing charge too, explained that the reason why there are so many parallels between the early Christians & the heathen mythology of other nations was this: "And these things were said both among the Greeks & among all nations where they [the demons] heard the prophets foretelling that Christ would specially be believed in; but that in hearing what was said by the prophets they did not accurately understand it, but imitated what was said of our Christ, like men who are in error, we will make plain." (Ante-Nicene Fathers, = ANF, 1:181, 1st Apology, chap. 54). Note the use of the belief that other prophets were preaching of Christ in "all nations." Origen, 185-230-254, used this concept too, in response to the early anti-Christian, 2nd cent., Celsus, (ANF, 4:609, book 6, chapters lxxviii—lxxix, Origen Against Celsus; A. S. Garretson, Primitive Christianity and Early Criticisms, (Boston: Sherman, French Company, 1912), 90-91. ANF 3:157-58, Tertullian, An Answer to the Jews).

“Borrowing, theft, adulteration. We have dwelled on the confrontation of comparative chronology since it seems to have weighed heavily on the Christian’s evaluation of the features they shared with classical paganism. From the moment they thought that, by virtue of their connection to the Jewish people, they preceded Greek history, they were able to consider resemblances to their adversaries only as cases of plagiarism committed against them by the latter. The direction of influence seemed beyond all doubt; as Justin unambiguously puts it, “It is not we who think like the others, but all of them who imitate us in what they say” (First Apology 60.10).Tertullian would recall the determining role played by chronology: “That which first existed is necessarily the origin of what followed. And this is why you have things in common with us or things that resemble ours”; so it is, he continues, that our Wisdom (sophia) gave you philosophy, and our prophecy your poetic divination.” (Apologeticus 19.1.5*-6*). This slide from posteriority to dependence, in Judaism as well as in Christianity, has been studied by K. Thraede. (“Erfinder,” part 2, in Reallexikon fur Antike und Christentum (1962), cols. 1242-61).

Tertullian, Apologeticus 47.11-14.

Ad Autolycum 1.14; 2:37, translated by Robert M. Grant, Oxford 1970.

Stromateis 2.1.1.1.

Justin Martyr, First Apology 54.1-4, 54.5-10, 55.1; Dialogue With Trypho, 67.1-2; 69.1-5; 70.1-3, 5; 78.5-6.

Yves Bonnefoy, Mythologies, (A Restructured Translation of Dictionnaire des mythologies et des religions des societes traditionnelles et du monde antique) Prepared under the Direction of Wendy Doniger, (Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press, 1991), 2:659-662, article Christian Judgments on the Analogies Between Christianity and Pagan Mythology, J. P./d.w.

My ex wife was excommunicated from the Mormon church for getting saved and filled with the HS. That was in 1979. They came to the back door to present her with the document.
Because of that, Mormons and their "book" are a cult. They may have some good things, but I for one will not have anything to do with it.
Give me the KJV, concordance, and Greek and Hebrew lexicon and I will know the truth.

filarks said:

My ex wife was excommunicated from the Mormon church for getting saved and filled with the HS. That was in 1979. They came to the back door to present her with the document.
Because of that, Mormons and their "book" are a cult. They may have some good things, but I for one will not have anything to do with it.
Give me the KJV, concordance, and Greek and Hebrew lexicon and I will know the truth.

Click to expand...

Sorry you feel that way. Don't know the circumstances as to why she was exed other than what you said. People who usually feel they are saved are not exed

More on the early anti-Christian charge of borrowing:

Early anti-Christian, 2nd cent., Celsus "...criticizes the books of the Bible. Using an elementary comparative method, he traces Biblical tales to pagan legends, to Platonic theses, or beliefs derived from the Oriental cults of Mithra & Osiris." (Stan-Michel Pellistrandi, Early Christian Civilization, The Catacombs, The Dura-Europos Excavations, The Excavations At Saint Peter’s In Rome, French title: La Civilisation chrétienne primitive, (Geneva: Ferni Publishers, 1978; Editions Ferni), 179-199).

Celsus says that the story of the flood was borrowed, and circumcision came from the Egyptians who practiced the rite with magical results. He claimed that the system & doctrines in early Christianity, were derived from Judaism, thus both are also barbaric in their origin. He also used the polemical writings of the early Jews against the early Christians, & points out that the Jews claimed that the Christians were apostates from the Jewish religions, borrowing from them in order to make this new religion. He used parallels & different methods in attempting to discredit Christ. He compared the miracles wrought by Jesus, with similar miracles & magical tricks done by sorcery & wicked men. Thus charging Christ with sorcery. Origen of course responded these charges & rejected his claims. Celsus is quoted by Origen as claiming that other things were borrowed to make up the Christian religion. For example He said that the different stories in the Scriptures were borrowed from pre-scripture myths, legends etc. Early Christian mysteries, or temple ordinances, Celsus likens to those who in the Bacchic mysteries introduce phantoms & objects of terror. Celsus also used parallels between the Christians & the Persian mysteries of the Mithras, & charges that the Christians had borrowed from them, & others. Other early anti-Christian writers must have noticed the parallels between the early Christians and the Mithra cult. In the Mithra cult, baptism, anointing, handclasps & other similar things are comparable to the early Christians are well known now.
Even some of the early Christian Fathers noted the parallels & responded that satan had set up, in pre-&-post Christian times, counterfeits, in order to attempt to discredit the divine pattern that had been revealed to the founders of early Christianity, & which had been passed on to the later Christians. Thus we have different ones like Clement, Hippolytus, Origen, the Apostle Paul, Tertullian, Justin Martyr, & later Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, & others defending the Christian rites, symbols, doctrines & mysteries, as being divine. While the others were the counterfeits of satan, & that's why they were similar to the early Christians, in some ways. This is the basic response that the different early writers would give.
They also charged that the pagan cults, & off-shoot branches of apostate early Christians had blended the occult with the divine to make some perverted counterfeits. The pagans charged the early Christians with having borrowed from them. Thus the early anti-Christians took advantage of the rival polemical writings, rumors, & charges to make their cases against the early Christians as a whole, as have later anti-Christain writers, like T. W. Doane. So the questions & challenges remain: How might Christians here answer their own types of charges, (made against the Book of Mormon), early anti-Christian types, seemingly inspired by Satan. But, now borrowed by modern anti-Mormon "Christians" from early anti-Christians & Atheists, who charge "borrowing" or "plagiarizing" of pre-Christain sources & myths to explain the origins for the Bible, Christ's teachings & biblical stories, etc?

Robert Louis Wilken, The Christians As The Romans Saw Them, (Yale University Press; New Haven and London, 1984), 99. Early Christian Civilization, by Stan-Michel Pellistrandi, 1978, p.180-199. R. Joseph Hoffmann, (translator) Celsus On The True Doctrine, (A Discourse Against the early Christians), (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), 55-6. Ante-Nicene Fathers = ANF, 4:516-17, Origen Against Celsus, book 4, chap. xli-xlii. ANF 4:405, bk.1 chap.22, & p.564, bk.5, chap. lvii, p.397 bk.1 chap.2, p.431 bk.2 chap.4 & p.557 bk.5 chap.33, p.450-1 bk.2 chap.xlix, p.477 bk.3 chap.33, p.501 bk.4 chap.x, p.583 bk.6 chap.22 & p.584 c.24 & p.622 bk.7 c.28. Forerunners & Rivals of Christianity, Legge, Vol. 1, p. 171-202, Vol.2, p.203-276, etc. Daniel To Paul, Ed. by Gaalyahu Cornfeld, 1962, Part 2, p.203-4. The Birth of the Christian Religion & The Origins of The New Testament, by Alfred Firmin Loisy, Un. bk. 1962, p.206-9, etc. Monumental Christianity, Lundy, 1882, p.26-7, & 68-70, etc. 1 Cor.2:6-16; 2 Thess.2:1-17; 1 John 2:18-29; 3:1-3. Jude 4-6; Acts 8:9-24; Clementine Recognitions, on Simon. (F&ROC), Legge, op. cit., Vol.1, p.172-202. And: The Mythic Image, by Joseph Campbell, Princeton Un, 1974, quotes Hippolytus, Elenchos 5.17.1-2 & 8, etc. see p.298-9, ft.nt.15 on p.298 of Campbell's book, & p.507, etc. Lundy, Monumental Christianity, 66, quoting Tertullian. Doane, Bible Myths, p.124-5, & 129. Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol.I, Eusebius, p.113-4, ft.nt.s to chap.13, of Eusebius. W.H.C. Frend, Martyrdom & Persecution In The Early Church, (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books Doubleday & Company, 1967). Enoch The Prophet, by Dr. Huge Nibley, p.8-12; & The Book of Enoch The Prophet, Trans. by Richard Laurence, 1892, p.84-89. Stolen Lightning, by Daniel Lawrence O'Keefe, 1982, p.44-5, 55, 121-4. Stephen Benko, Pagan Rome And The Early Christians, (Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1984).

filarks said:

My ex wife was excommunicated from the Mormon church for getting saved and filled with the HS. That was in 1979. They came to the back door to present her with the document.
Because of that, Mormons and their "book" are a cult. They may have some good things, but I for one will not have anything to do with it.
Give me the KJV, concordance, and Greek and Hebrew lexicon and I will know the truth.

Click to expand...

Sorry about your wife's situation. You're not alone in your response, which also happens a lot when people from Christian churches join the Mormon church. In some cases they are treated badly by their former Christian friends who also hand them documents, send them anti-Mormon books, etc., & excommunicate them as "fallen from grace."

In early Christainity, out siders looked upon the early Christains as a "cult," for the pagan husband wondered what their Christain wife was doing in the "secret meetings" their wife snuck off to attend. What was this new "cult" up to? Why did they have secret signs, symbols, (the fish), & hand clasping in their greetings? Were the stories true that they took revolutionary oaths & were plotting against the Roman government in their cultic secret meetings? These were some of the things, the prejudices, that outsiders to early Christianity were passing around, as they heard stories, gossip, & came across the human weakness sides of dealing with different types of early Christians, who were charged with attempting to "destroy families," & were "guilty" of all kinds of crimes. (Stan-Michel Pellistrandi, Early Christian Civilization, The Catacombs, The Dura-Europos Excavations, The Excavations At Saint Peter’s In Rome, French title: La Civilisation chrétienne primitive, (Geneva: Ferni Publishers, 1978; Editions Ferni), 179-199. Early Christians as Outsiders Saw Them. Robert Louis Wilken, The Christians As The Romans Saw Them, (Yale University Press; New Haven and London, 1984). W.H.C. Frend, Martyrdom & Persecution In The Early Church, (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books Doubleday & Company, 1967). Stephen Benko, Pagan Rome And The Early Christians, (Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1984).

That experience shouldn't stop you from reading the Book of Mormon. Nor should it prejudice you against Mormons, anymore than other similiar cases are often used by former religionists against others, in keeping them from exploring what others believe too.

BobRyan said:

The BoM says that the whole reason for sending Israel to the Americas was to get them as far away from the Polygamous David and Solomon who were committing gross abomination by having multiple wives.

Click to expand...

Exact quote with chapter and verse, please.

filarks said:

My ex wife was excommunicated from the Mormon church for getting saved and filled with the HS.

Click to expand...

I would think under those circumstances she would have resigned on her own.

BobRyan said: ↑
The BoM says that the whole reason for sending Israel to the Americas was to get them as far away from the Polygamous David and Solomon who were committing gross abomination by having multiple wives.

Click to expand...

RDKatz said:

Really? Are you certain?

Are you aware that God gave David most of his wives? He got in trouble with Bathsheba who is Solomon's Mom

7 ¶ And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;
8 And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

(Old Testament | 2 Samuel 12:7 - 8)

Click to expand...

Book of Mormon says this -


Book of Mormon condemns Polygamy BOM Jacob:

Jacob 1:15

[15] And now it came to pass that the people of Nephi, under the reign of the second king, began to grow hard in their hearts, and indulge themselves somewhat in wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon, his son.

Jacob 2:24-28

[23] But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.
[24] Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
[25] Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
[26] Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
[27] Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
[28] For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
[29] Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

The text goes on to speak of the grief and heart ache this caused even in David's time and how doing likewise causes pain and a curse.


[31] For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
[32] And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
[33] For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
[34] And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.
[35] Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

Ironhold said:

[citation needed]

Click to expand...

I am going with the above quote as the citation.

And where did ignoring the Book of Mormon on the subject of Polygamy -- get Smith??


http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Plural_wives#Elvira_Annie_Cowles_Holmes

============================== quote

Elvira Annie Cowles Holmes

Elvira was married to Joseph at age twenty-nine. Her husband, Jonathan Holmes, was a pall-bearer at Joseph Smith's funeral. As Todd Compton remarks

Though it is impossible to know for certain, the fact that Holmes was so close to Joseph Smith suggests that he knew of Smith’s marriage to his wife and permitted it…He later stood as proxy for Smith as Elvira married the prophet for eternity in the Nauvoo temple…This ‘first husband’ never wavered in his loyalty to the Mormon leader….[42]

Question: Did Joseph Smith send men on missions in order to "steal" their wives while they were gone?
This claim is contradicted by historical data: ten of the husbands of the twelve "polyandrous" wives were not on missions at the time

then what spec of a verse do they hang their hat on from BoM to support what the BoM calls "abomination" practiced by Smith?

Jacob 2:30

V 30 – Smith inserts in the BoM an “open door” for what he has just claimed to be wicked, abomination and whoredom. Note the parenthetical text is my insert.

Jacob 2:30
[30] For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people (to what?? Abomination?? -- nothing said here); otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

Ironhold said:

This one's also a dud.

The witnesses had personal disputes with Joseph and others, but never lost their testimonies. At least one individual came back after Joseph was dead.

Click to expand...

That is a dud - the big "three" witnesses were either called liars by the Mormon church in official publication or they claimed that they "did not actual see the physical plates with their real eyes" --

What is "odd" about the plate story is that the story claims that for years the plates were physically in a box in the house carried here or there and seen daily by family members with a cloth over it -- nobody but Joseph was allowed to actually see the plates during those years they were in the house physically - . Then when time to "show the plates" to the special three family members (After the text was supposedly completed -- translated) -- there was no going to the room with the supposedly golden plates and lifting the cloth to see the ancient text -- oh no! Rather there was going out in the woods and praying as a tiny group of 2 or 3 -- asking for an angel to appear in the sky so that they could see the plates up in the sky held by said angel. (And of course read by no one).

It is at this point the "witnesses" claim to see something with their "spiritual eye" but not their real physical eyes.

That is the sort of story that tells the reader exactly what is really going on.

BobRyan. You claim that the Book of Mormon contains no Mormon doctrine, is like saying that the Bible contains no Christian doctrine, it's either made out of ignorance from not reading the Book of Mormon. Or you must be joking. You didn't give any examples as cases in point too.

As to your 2nd claim, "No Mormon witnesses to the plates continue to maintain their claims to have seen real physical plates with real physical eyes- 5 years after 1844 - the year Smith died." Again, it shows either you're a deceiver, or an ignorant one, as you drop one liners without sources. The historical fact is that the witnesses, even though some left the church, or had disagreements with Jospeh Smith, they still maintained their testimonies about seeing the plates & angel. We can show sources where this is the case, how they maintained their witnesses. Where are the sources that can be verified as historically authentic, that they didn't "continue to maintain their claims" after 1844? If you can't provide them, where did you get this claim from? Your own mind? Some anti-Mormon gossip source?

Sources to show they did maintain their witness statements, after 1844.

Richard Lloyd Anderson, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1981), 74, 88, 137-138.

"History of Thomas Baldwin Marsh," Deseret News (24 March 1858).

Oliver Cowdery to Phineas Young, 23 March 1846, Oliver Cowdery Collection, "Scriptory Book of Joseph Smith Jr." (kept by George W. Robinson), 22, LDS Church Historical Department (published in Scott H. Faulring, ed, An American Prophet's Record.— The Diaries and Journals of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1989), cited in Scott H. Faulring. “The Return of Oliver Cowdery”, FARMS Featured Paper, no date.

Andrew Jenson, LDS Biographical Encyclopedia (Salt Lake City: Andrew Jenson History Company, 1901), 1:246.

Matthew Roper, "Comments on the Book of Mormon Witnesses: A Response to Jerald and Sandra Tanner," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2/2 (1993): 164–193. wiki citing George Mantle to Marietta Walker, 26 December 1888, Saint Catherine, Missouri, cited in Autumn Leaves 2 (1889): 141.

Letter of Elder Edward Stevenson to the Millennial Star quoted in William Edwin Berrett, The Restored Church (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1974), 57–58.

George Godfrey, “Testimony of Martin Harris,” from an unpublished manuscript copy in the possession of his daughter, Florence (Godfrey) Munson of Fielding, Utah; quoted in Eldin Ricks, The Case of the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1971), 65–66.

Bruce Richardson, Let No Man Deceive You, (Sandy Utah: Camden Court Pub., 1998), 57-107.

David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ by a Witness to the Divine Authenticity of The Book of Mormon (David Whitmer: Richmond, Virginia, 1887).

McLellin to Cobb, 14 August 1880; cited by Larry C. Porter, "The Odyssey of William Earl McLellin: Man of Diversity, 1806–83," in The Journals of William E. McLellin, 1831–1836, edited by Jan Shipps and John W. Welch (Urbana: Brigham Young University Studies and University of Illinois Press, 1994), 296.

Richmond Conservator Report (26 January 1888); quoted in Lyndon W. Cook ed., David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness (Grandin Book Company, 1993), 226.

Richmond Democrat 16/6 (2 February 1888), quoted in Eldin Ricks, The Case of the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1971), 16.

BobRyan said:

That is a dud - the big "three" witnesses were either called liars by the Mormon church in official publication or they claimed that they "did not actual see the physical plates with their real eyes" --

What is "odd" about the plate story is that the story claims that for years the plates were physically in a box in the house carried here or there and seen daily by family members with a cloth over it -- nobody but Joseph was allowed to actually see the plates during those years they were in the house physically - . Then when time to "show the plates" to the special three family members (After the text was supposedly completed -- translated) -- there was no going to the room with the supposedly golden plates and lifting the cloth to see the ancient text -- oh no! Rather there was going out in the woods and praying as a tiny group of 2 or 3 -- asking for an angel to appear in the sky so that they could see the plates up in the sky held by said angel. (And of course read by no one).

It is at this point the "witnesses" claim to see something with their "spiritual eye" but not their real physical eyes.

That is the sort of story that tells the reader exactly what is really going on.

Click to expand...

What is odd is that ancient writings have been later found, some in stone boxes, & also evidences of the types of reformed Egyptian type characters have also been found too, some also written on gold plates. Plus, many more evidences for the Book of Mormon have been found, after its publication date of 1830.

RestoredGospelEvidences said:

evidences of the types of reformed Egyptian type characters have also been found too, some also written on gold plates.

Click to expand...

Evidence?

RestoredGospelEvidences said:

As for "borrowing," if Christian apologists, (like Mormons), were to agree that Satan inspired the early anti-Christians to reject Christ, then these questions ought to be asked: Who was it that inspires modern critics to bring back the same types of tactics of rejection? Or, to "borrowed" from earlier critics, the same old arguments answered by early to later Christian apologists? Arguments & tactics that are now used to reject the restored gospel, modern prophets & modern revelation, which produces modern scriptures, such as The Book of Mormon. Should some Christians here accept the challenge to answer the Atheists, & early to later anti-Christian charges of "borrowing," will we see the same doctrines being used to so do? The doctrines of the pre-existence, Christ going to other nations, or prophets in other nations preaching about Christ; plus, Christ preaching the gospel in the spirit prison. Or, because some of these sound like what Mormons would use, will they not be used? So how might Christians here answer the same types of charges that the Bible & early Christianity was "borrowed," or "plagiarized" from the bible's environment, or pre-Christian pagan mystery religions, myths & sources?
Or will these answers be ignored here?

Click to expand...

Apples and oranges - there is no case where the Christian church called the Apostles "liars" yet that is what happens with the Mormon church and its own "witnesses".

There is some documentation on the point that Smith took other LDS men's wives as his wife - after HE comes up with an english text that says this is an abomination to have more than one wife - let alone to have that other wife be the wife of another man "as well".

The unethical nature of Smith - raises a red flag, his reluctance to let anyone see the original text, his insistance that not even Mormons should see it, ..... The fact that those connected with Spalding seem to be certain about the match - raises the question.

Nothing of that sort is connected to the Bible -!

So then it is "reasonable" to consider the connection to be a distinct possibility.

==================================== quote

from; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Spalding

Manuscript, Found

Around 1812, Spaulding completed a historical romance entitled Manuscript, Found which "purported to have been a record found buried in the earth".[5] Both the LDS Church and RLDS Church transcripts of Manuscript Story equate Manuscript, Found with Manuscript Story.[6][7]

Spaulding moved to Pittsburgh and reportedly took Manuscript, Found to the publisher Patterson & Lambdin. Spaulding died in 1816,[8] never having published Manuscript, Found.

Evidence of contents

Plot

According to John Spalding, Solomon's brother, the plot of Manuscript, Found told "of the first settlers of America, endeavoring to show that the American Indians are the descendants of the Jews, or the lost tribes. It gave a detailed account of their journey from Jerusalem, by land and sea, till they arrived in America, under the command of Nephi and Lehi. They afterwards had quarrels and contentions, and separated into two distinct nations, one of which he denominated Nephites and the other Lamanites. Cruel and bloody wars ensued, in which great multitudes were slain. They buried their dead in large heaps, which caused the mounds so common in this country." Spalding gave this as an affidavit to be published in Eber D. Howe's anti-Mormon book Mormonism Unvailed.[5]

Phraseology

Manuscript, Found was written "in scripture style of writing". Readers recalled its repetitive usage of phrases like "and it came to pass" or "now it came to pass", as well as the repeated phrase "I Nephi".[9]
...

In 1832, Latter Day Saint missionaries Samuel H. Smith and Orson Hyde visited Conneaut, Ohio, and preached from the Book of Mormon. Nehemiah King, a resident of Conneaut who knew Spalding when he lived there, felt that the Mormon text resembled the story written by Spalding years before. In 1833, Spalding's brother John and seven other residents of Conneaut signed affidavits stating that Spalding had written a manuscript, portions of which were identical to the Book of Mormon. These statements were published in E. D. Howe's 1834 book Mormonism Unvailed, in which the theory was presented that the Book of Mormon was plagiarized from this manuscript. Several years later, Spalding's widow and daughter, other residents of Conneaut, and residents of Amity, Pennsylvania, also signed statements indicating that Spalding had authored a manuscript that was similar to the Book of Mormon.

"I well remember that he wrote in the old style, and commenced about every sentence with 'and it came to pass,' or 'now it came to pass,' the same as in the Book of Mormon, and according to the best of my recollection and belief, it is the same as my brother Solomon wrote, with the exception of the religious matter."[citation needed]

In 1927, however, Professor Azariah S. Root, who had headed the library at Oberlin College, wrote a letter regarding the origins of the Spalding Manuscript and how it relates to the Book of Mormon. In it he states that the Spalding document to which he had access, Manuscript Story, "seems pretty clearly not to have been the manuscript from which the Book of Mormon was written". Root did not have in his possession Spalding's Manuscript, Found; he stated that Manuscript Story "does not seem to throw very much light" on the question of whether Manuscript, Found was used as a basis for the Book of Mormon.[3]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Spalding#cite_note-9

RestoredGospelEvidences said:

BobRyan. You claim that the Book of Mormon contains no Mormon doctrine, is like saying that the Bible contains no Christian doctrine,

Click to expand...

It would be very easy to refute the claim "The Bible contains no Christian doctrine".

That is not so easy to do with "The book of Mormon".

Smith's Doctrines and Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price - clearly contain Mormon doctrine.

Easy to find Mormon doctrine there.

But you are not going to find you and your spirit brothers living in heaven before coming to this earth - in the Book of Mormon. I have looked, and I have asked numerous groups of Mormons that have come to my house if they can find it - no one has found it.

As to your 2nd claim, "No Mormon witnesses to the plates continue to maintain their claims to have seen real physical plates with real physical eyes- 5 years after 1844 - the year Smith died." Again, it shows either you're a deceiver, or an ignorant one, as you drop one liners without sources. The historical fact is that the witnesses, even though some left the church, or had disagreements with Jospeh Smith, they still maintained their testimonies about seeing the plates & angel.

Click to expand...

Seeing "the plates and angel with their spiritual eye ". -- plates up in the sky held by an angel - not the plates in the house where Smith had been supposedly translating.

Did you forget that??

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mo...d_"Spiritual_Eye"_statements_by_Martin_Harris


Martin claimed that the plates and angel were seen by physical eyes that had been enhanced by the power of God to view more objects than a mortal could normally see (cf. DC 76:12; DC 67:10-13).

Click to expand...