Book of Mormon - Part II


	Book of Mormon

Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames.

Book of Mormon Part II

<< read Part I

Search the Book of Mormon for Terms or Words here >>

Critics' views

Some Mormon and non-Mormon scholars claim to have found archaeological, cultural and linguistic evidence that the book was an ancient record; these conclusions however are not accepted by the majority of scholars. Researchers and LDS apologists point to the available history of the several major civilizations in Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon time period (Olmec, Maya, Mixtec, Zapotec and Aztec) where there is ample archaeological data and some recorded history. Some of these were very advanced in language, writing, mathematics and astronomy. Furthermore, ample evidence has been uncovered of the types of plants, animals and implements available to the early inhabitants. The Book of Mormon makes multiple reference to plants, animals, weapons and technology, many of which do not match current knowledge concerning that time period. For example, multiple references to horses appear throught the Book of Mormon; in actuality, there is no evidence of horses during that period of Pre-Columbian America and indeed were reintroduced by the conquistadores into the habitat. While one can argue there is a possibility of earlier introductions having died off, the propensity for formerly domesticated horses to group together in Wild Horse herds, such as after major regional wars, and subsequently prosper on their own would seem to contradict that. The original North American wild horse which crossed the Bering land bridge during the last Ice Age died out around 8,000 years ago. Interestingly, neither the much earlier proto-Ainu pre-Clovis peoples nor Eurasian-derived Clovis peoples appeared to have domesticated them in the Americas prior to this extinction.

LDS Funded Archaeology

Returning to the arguments concerning archaeological findings, it is incorrect to assume that the LDS has never tried to prove the historicity. On the contrary, there were numerous such attempts (and plenty of research in this direction is currently going on). In 1951 Thomas Ferguson, a devoted LDS member, petitioned Mormon President David O. McKay to financially back the founding of the New World Archeological Foundation (hereafter NWAF). Ferguson requested at first a 5 year funding grant to dig throughout Mesoamerica for evidence of the veracity of the Book of Mormon claims. His persistence paid off and the first five years were funded from 1955 to 1959. At the end of this period, additional funding was granted and continues to this day.

In a 1961 newsletter Ferguson predicted that although nothing had been found, the Book of Mormon cities would be found in 10 years. Eleven years later in 1972 LDS member Hal Hougey wrote Ferguson questioning the progress given the stated timetable in which the cities would be found. Replying to Hougey as well as secular and non-secular requests, Ferguson wrote in a letter dated 5 June 1972: "Ten years have passed... I had sincerely hoped that Book-of-Mormon(sic) cities would be positively identified within 10 years — and time has proved me wrong in my anticipation." To date, the NWAF has been continuously unlucky. However, given the light of the logical fallacy presented earlier, this is not a proper argument that the Book of Mormon is false or true.

During the period of 1959-1961, NWAF colleague Dee Green was editor of the BYU Archeological Society Newsletter and had an article from it published in the summer of 1969 edition of Dialogue: A journal of Mormon Thought, pp76-78 in which he acknowledged that the NWAF findings did not back up the veracity of the Book of Mormon claims. After this article and another six years of fruitless search, Thomas Ferguson published a 29 page paper in 1975 entitled Written Symposium on Book-of-Mormon Geography: Response of Thomas S. Ferguson to the Norman & Sorenson Papers. The full text will be omitted here, but he summed up as thus on page 29: "I'm afraid that up to this point, I must agree with Dee Green, who has told us that to date there is no Book-of-Mormon geography..."

Ferguson wrote a 20 February 1976 letter to Mr & Mrs H.W. Lawrence in which he stated: "...The real implication of the paper is that you can't set the Book-of-Mormon geography down anywhere — because it is fictional and will never meet the requirements of the dirt-archeology" (sic).

While each of the aforementioned quoted sources are easily verifiable, critics think it interesting to note that the LDS Church library does contain copies of each, but they are not part of any LDS curriculum.

This is not to say the NWAF has found nothing. Quite the opposite, the archaeological investigations of NWAF-sponsored projects have contributed towards the documentation and understanding of pre-Columbian societies, particularly in Mesoamerica. Currently BYU maintains 86 documents on the work of the NWAF at the BYU NWAF website and these documents are used outside both BYU and the LDS church by researchers.

Archaeology

Main arguments against the Book of Mormon are made on an archaeological basis based on the large size and the long time span of Book of Mormon civilizations. The size and the span of Book of Mormon civilizations is comparable to the size and span of other great, ancient civilizations that are archaeologically highly prominent. More arguments arise when considering the statements in the Book of Mormon about animals such as horses, cattle, swine, goats, etc; crops such as wheat; and technology such as steel swords and possibly wheeled chariots that are currently not found in the pre-Columbian archaeological record.

Mormon critics often point to lacking evidence supporting all of Book of Mormon claims. Apologists often counter-argue that Mesoamerican archaeology is a young field and that evidence will eventually surface. One example of lacking evidence is that although horses lived in the ancient Americas, they went extinct by the time of Book of Mormon. Another example of evidence once believed lacking, now found is that the Book of Mormon referred to elephants (Ether 9:19) being brought to America by one of the groups. This claim was refuted by critics as absurd until 1903 when, according to American Antiquarian, 25:395-397, Dr. Nicholas Leon unearthed elephant bones near the town of Paredon, north of the City of Mexico [1]. Currently, some of the book's claims are substantiated, however, a good deal of them are problematic from a dating perspective - some, such as horses (mentioned above), existed in the Americas, but not during the Book of Mormon time period.

Linguistics

An additional criticism concerns linguistics. The Nephites, and possibly the Lamanites, would have spoken a modified Semitic language up to at least AD 400, where the Book of Mormon stops. However, no spoken Semitic language has survived in the Americas to modern times. Critics argue that the 1,000 years after the end of the period covered in the Book of Mormon do not suffice to account for the difference among Native American languages nor for their complete distance from Semitic languages. A common counterargument is that the Book of Mormon mentions contact with other civilizations with their own non-Semitic languages that might have influenced or supplanted any Semitic language being spoken.

DNA

Recent studies have claimed that Native Americans do not have certain genetic markers in common with modern Middle Eastern DNA samples, and genetic research shows that they are more closely related to people in Asia than anywhere else. These studies have come mainly from Thomas Murphy. and Simon Southerton. Critics claim this contradicts the statement found in the introduction of the current edition of the Book of Mormon, which says that the Lamanites, descendants of Hebrews, are the "principal ancestors" of Native Americans, however there is no claim that they are the sole ancestors. There are three different people who are mentioned, of which one may be Asian.

In response to these arguments, David Stewart states that the studies fail to account for the fact that ancient Israelite DNA would be vastly different from their modern DNA. He also said that mtDNA testing, which was the cornerstone in both studies, cannot even link different Jewish groups let alone compare them to American Indians faithfully. He concluded that the studies take a very limited and biased approach in order to control the outcome and that the studies ignore other basic DNA facts in order to come to their biased conclusion. This criticism of the science is not generally accepted outside of Mormonism, because a similar migration of Jewish people to Africa, the Lemba was recently genetically verified (via DNA markers) - see Lemba people. The Lemba also have a large percentage of genes often found in non-Arab Semites. However, it must be stated that this was not done using mtDNA, but rather the Cohen modal haplotype. A Dr. Soodyall notes that "using mtDNA the Lemba were indistinguishable from other Bantu-speaking groups." However, aside from their language the Lemba have distinctly Jewish traditions. It is also still debated as to when exactly this gene pool migrated to Africa, possibly in the modern era after Christ rather than in the same era as Lehi as some have asserted.

Another argument against the DNA analysis is in reference to Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs, and Steel. In his book, Jared stated that over 90% of the Native American population were wiped out by the diseases that the Europeans brought into Americas. Although Jared wasn't even arguing about the Book of Mormon, that statement does implies that DNA analysis isn't reliable since a lot of genetic material maybe even traces of ancient Israelite DNA were wiped out by plagues which the Native Americans had no immunity to.

This ancient DNA research of pre-Columbian DNA (and comparison of it with ancient DNA from Mediterranean excavations) is in excellent agreement with earlier archeological and linguistic facts supporting mongoloid (versus Mediterranean) origin of Native Americans. Study of ancient DNA of food, intestinal bacteria, dogs, pollen, etc in the Americas points to the same conclusion: no traces of large technologically advanced civilization of Mediterranean origin were found in Americas. Critics assert that this is inconsistent with the Book of Mormon descriptions of large long lasting civilizations.

Smithsonian Institution statement on the Book of Mormon

The Smithsonian Institution issues a standard reply [2] to requests for their opinion regarding the Book of Mormon as an archaeological or scientific guide. In 1998, the Smithsonian revised the letter to remove its detailed response and limited its comment to briefly deny any use of the Book of Mormon as an archaeological guide by the institution. [3].

Role of the Book of Mormon in Mormonism

Joseph Smith said, “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book” (History of the Church 4:461). The Book of Mormon is of prime importance to the church as one of the greatest differentiating factors of the church as well as a spiritual foundation. It is held as a tangible evidence of the truthfulness of the church.

Members of the church hold the Book of Mormon as the most important, correct, and basic book of scripture. Not placing enough emphasis on the Book of Mormon or ignoring it all together was decried in a revelation to Joseph Smith that pronounced a condemnation on the "whole church" for treating the it “lightly,” until they should “repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I [the Lord] have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written, that they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:55-58). While this revelation also applies to the early Church’s under-emphasis of the Bible (“the former commandments which [the Lord had] given them”), the importance of studying the Book of Mormon has also been stressed by every church president since Joseph Smith, Jr..

The Book of Mormon’s significance was reiterated in the late 20th century by Ezra Taft Benson, Apostle and 13th President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In an August 2005 Ensign message, current LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley challenged each member of the church to reread the Book of Mormon again before year end. The book’s importance is commonly stressed at the twice-yearly General Conference and at special devotionals by General Authorities in the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and the several Quorums of the Seventy.

Claimed differences between the Book of Mormon and Latter-day Saint doctrine

Critics of Mormonism argue that the teachings of the Book of Mormon are not entirely consistent with Mormon (and/or more specifically, LDS) doctrine. The book's Introduction states that the Book of Mormon "contains, as does the Bible, the fullness of the everlasting gospel," though it does not dictate certain specific doctrines important to Latter-day Saints. These come from other sources, including modern revelation. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that when the church is properly organized, the president of the church is a prophet who receives guidance from God. From his revelations come the doctrines of the church which are treated as God's will, as well as the official interpretation of scripture, even if latter revelation modifies or contradicts earlier revelation. The organization, instructions and even the scriptures may change with the times to meet the current needs of the church, but the basic belief as a whole will remain mostly unchanged. However, it is clear that a few of the doctrinal elements that distinguish Mormonism from other Christian religions are not mentioned in the Book of Mormon. Vital doctrines not found in the Book of Mormon include the origin of God, Baptism for the dead, The Word of Wisdom (the Mormon law of health) and other temple ordinances. It also does not dictate the doctrine of Earthly or celestial plural marriage/polygamy. Nor does it reveal the distinct LDS doctrine that humans may become gods.

To counter the accusation that the Book of Mormon does not contain "the fullness of the everlasting gospel," some LDS members point to a statement made by Joseph Smith to the effect that the basic and essential ordinances of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are Faith in Jesus, Repentance, Baptism, and Confirmation to receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost, which are taught in the Book of Mormon, and all other doctrines and practices are but appendages to those tenets. Another interpretation of the phrase "fullness of the everlasting gospel" is that the 'Book of Mormon' contains, as does the Bible, the true gospel (the message of Christ's Atonement and of the plan of salvation), untarnished by centuries of misinterpretation.

The following passages appear to most observers to conflict with Mormon (and more specifically, LDS) doctrines:

Current members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that the Lord commanded polygamy for a time as permitted by the ending clause, for raising up seed in a time of hardship, but when the 1890 Manifesto revoked that commandment, the Church began to excommunicate members who entered into polygamous relationships. Although polygamy is considered a doctrine essential to salvation (D&C 132 Doctrine and Covenants), current revelation defers to the restrictions of U.S. legal canon in regard to its practice.

Book of Mormon Editions

Herald House Heritage Reprint edition of the 1830 version of the Book of Mormon

One critic has claimed to have documented almost 4,000 changes.^[2] A portion of these changes have been discussed in official Church publications including the Ensign, Improvement Era, Millennial Star and Times and Seasons, and are consistent with early pre- and post-publication edits made by Joseph Smith. Some corrections were made due to earlier print or copy errors, or changes in punctuation. See Linguistics and the Book of Mormon.