Mormon Apostle states arguments against the Book of Mormon are "pathetic"

[Jerusha]

:ehh: You have GOT to be kidding. Paul, you have just completely destroyed any shred of credibility you ever had as an expert in Mormons and Mormonism.

I agree entirely with Paul. If more Mormons were to very carefully read the BoM, there would be fewer Mormons.

 

[Jerusha]

You’re just trying to dance around the issue. JS did kill someone. It is that plain and simple.

I hate to side with a Mormon, but no-one died as a result of JS’s attempt to defend himself at the Carthage jail.

However, he was responsible for the deaths of others. AND, statements from Mormons which say that one or two died as a result of their attack on the Carthage jail were only meant to confirm their belief that anyone who opposes Mormonism will receive god’s just punishment.

Give it up, both of you. What difference does it make?

 

[Catholic20064]

I heard the talk. The Mormons can’t make anything but pathetic arguments in favor of the Book of Mormon so they are trying to go on offense. What they cannot deny is the widely held sentiment during the early 1800s that Native Americans were somehow descended from the tribes of Israel. That was the theme of books by Ethan Smith and Josiah Priest that Joseph Smith had access to. To call that a pathetic theory seems to me to claim way too much. Spalding may be a little bit more far-fetched, but there is some pretty good evidence for that as well. There simply is no credible evidence the Book of Mormon is the translation of an ancient text. It seems to me Holland protests way too much.

 

[ParkerD]

I heard the talk. The Mormons can’t make anything but pathetic arguments in favor of the Book of Mormon so they are trying to go on offense. What they cannot deny is the widely held sentiment during the early 1800s that Native Americans were somehow descended from the tribes of Israel. That was the theme of books by Ethan Smith and Josiah Priest that Joseph Smith had access to. To call that a pathetic theory seems to me to claim way too much. Spalding may be a little bit more far-fetched, but there is some pretty good evidence for that as well. There simply is no credible evidence the Book of Mormon is the translation of an ancient text. It seems to me Holland protests way too much.

Hi, Catholic20064,
Real scholarship would probe deeply, not be satisfied with surface circumstances. For example, any notion that just because Joseph Smith talked about the tribes of Israel and the house of Israel in the Book of Mormon and Ethan Smith did, too, that it was a “copied” idea is just not a scholarly approach to the topic. The Book of Mormon talks about those circumstances in far more detail and with a far closer relationship to the Bible itself than anything Ethan Smith wrote.

A truly honest, sincere scholar approaching the topic would take the entire texts side by side and would have to figure out if the one has a consistent word usage relationship or textual relationship or subject matter relationship or topical relationship throughout the entire body of the works being compared. Any other supposedly “scholarly” approach is not only not credible as to whether it is “scholarly”, but I think can be called “pathetic” because it merely scratches the surface of a subject that is so much deeper and more complex that no scholar has addressed all of the issues in an objective way and they instead resort to the exact sort of generalizations that your post here resorted to. Then they publish their “findings” to the world and pat themselves on the back. That is what is pathetic.

 

[dianaiad]

I suggest that you get over the matter. Or…how about this: Many Catholic Popes have declared scientific ‘facts’ that turned out to be, well…not true. Should you go back in history and change, say, the trial of Galleleo to make him NOT spend so many years under house arrest because it turns out that, well, the church was wrong about punishing him?

Ah, but there’s a difference. We aren’t trying to duck the whole Gallileo thing.

What is it that I’m supposed to be attempting to ‘duck?’

Should the church go back and change what Pope Innocent III did about the Albegensians because, well, she woudn’t do that now, and it was, well, the wrong thing to do? After all, it’s church history, it MUST have been right., Right?

Again, I don’t see anyone trying to duck the issue…

…and what issue is it that I’m supposed to be ducking, again? Do you see me denying that Taylor was informed that two or more men died?

You lost this one.

 

[dianaiad]

I hate to side with a Mormon, but no-one died as a result of JS’s attempt to defend himself at the Carthage jail.

However, he was responsible for the deaths of others.

Yeah? Who, precisely, would that have been?

 

[Catholic20064]

Hi, Catholic20064,
Real scholarship would probe deeply, not be satisfied with surface circumstances. For example, any notion that just because Joseph Smith talked about the tribes of Israel and the house of Israel in the Book of Mormon and Ethan Smith did, too, that it was a “copied” idea is just not a scholarly approach to the topic. The Book of Mormon talks about those circumstances in far more detail and with a far closer relationship to the Bible itself than anything Ethan Smith wrote.

A truly honest, sincere scholar approaching the topic would take the entire texts side by side and would have to figure out if the one has a consistent word usage relationship or textual relationship or subject matter relationship or topical relationship throughout the entire body of the works being compared. Any other supposedly “scholarly” approach is not only not credible as to whether it is “scholarly”, but I think can be called “pathetic” because it merely scratches the surface of a subject that is so much deeper and more complex that no scholar has addressed all of the issues in an objective way and they instead resort to the exact sort of generalizations that your post here resorted to. Then they publish their “findings” to the world and pat themselves on the back. That is what is pathetic.

Scholars don’t waste their time on the obvious so there is no real scholarly attempt to look at the Book of Mormon beyond those who are Mormons or have been Mormons. Mormons make a claim that is bunk on the face of it. You can try to make it complex if you like, but it won’t get you very far. Scholars don’t have to look at the Book of Mormon’s claims because science has debunked the book’s major theme that Israelites settled the Americas. All the evidence says they didn’t. Even Mormons have had to back peddle from the claim of their 19th century prophets that Native Americans are descended from the tribes of Israel. They have invented a limited geographical theory which is at odds with the 19th century Mormon understanding in a lame attempt to save the Book of Mormon from the obvious. Sometimes the obvious explanation is really the best explanation. The Book of Mormon is simply a 19th century document which reflects the ideas of 19th century New Englanders like Priest and Ethan Smith. If there is any spiritual value in it it comes from the ideas plagiarized from the New Testament – how Paul got into the early chapters of the Book of Mormon is something Mormons simply can’t explain well.

 

[Jerusha]

Yeah? Who, precisely, would that have been?

Since you won’t accept non-Mormon sources, particularly Thomas Sharp, it is useless to argue with you.

 

[ParkerD]

Catholic20064,
Your recent post is quite a good example of “pathetic” reasoning. I understand that posting that sort of thing allows the person to enjoy their profound intellectual prowess without being challenged to actually address the real issues. Some people call such an approach “intellectual self-deception.” Go ahead and become a scholar and write a book detailing your thoroughly studied comparisons drawing from the relevant source material you think are relevant texts to prove and demonstrate your points, and you may find a market for such a book. I think you can’t do such a thing, nor would you try. The generalizations work much better rather than real, deep thought.

 

[Jerusha]

If there is any spiritual value in it it comes from the ideas plagiarized from the New Testament – how Paul got into the early chapters of the Book of Mormon is something Mormons simply can’t explain well.

How about Ether 8,

Now the daughter of Jared being exceeding expert, and seeing the sorrows of her father, thought to devise a plan whereby she could redeem the kingdom unto her father. Now the daughter of Jared was exceeding fair. And it came to pass that she did talk with her father, and saith unto him, Whereby hath my father so much sorrow? Hath he not read the record which our fathers brought across the great deep? Behold, is there not an account concerning them of old, that they by their secret plans did obtain kingdoms and great glory? And now therefore, let my father send for Akish, the son of Kimmer; and behold, I am fair, and I will dance before him, and I will please him, that he will desire me to wife; wherefore if he shall desire of thee that ye shall give unto him me to wife, then shall ye say, I will give her if ye will bring unto me the head of my father, the king. And now Omer was a friend to Akish, wherefore when Jared had sent for Akish, the daughter of Jared danced before him, that she pleased him, insomuch that he desired her to wife. And it came to pass that he said unto Jared, Give her unto me to wife. And Jared said unto him, I will give her unto you, if ye will bring unto me the head of my father, the king. …–And it was the daughter of Jared which put it into his heart to search up these things of old; and Jared put it into the heart of Akish; wherefore Akish administered it unto his kindreds and friends, leading them away by fair promises to do whatsoever thing he desired.

with the daughter of Ether playing the part of the daughter of Herod from Matthew 14.

At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the reputation of Jesus and said to his servants, “This man is John the Baptist. He has been raised from the dead; that is why mighty powers are at work in him.” Now Herod had arrested John, bound (him), and put him in prison on account of Herodias, 3 the wife of his brother Philip, for John had said to him, “It is not lawful for you to have her.” Although he wanted to kill him, he feared the people, for they regarded him as a prophet.But at a birthday celebration for Herod, the daughter of Herodias performed a dance before the guests and delighted Herod so much that he swore to give her whatever she might ask for. Prompted by her mother, she said, “Give me here on a platter the head of John the Baptist.” The king was distressed, but because of his oaths and the guests who were present, he ordered that it be given, and he had John beheaded in the prison. His head was brought in on a platter and given to the girl, who took it to her mother. His disciples came and took away the corpse and buried him; and they went and told Jesus.

Now this happened in BC times, didn’t it?

 

[Catholic20064]

Catholic20064,
Your recent post is quite a good example of “pathetic” reasoning. I understand that posting that sort of thing allows the person to enjoy their profound intellectual prowess without being challenged to actually address the real issues. Some people call such an approach “intellectual self-deception.” Go ahead and become a scholar and write a book detailing your thoroughly studied comparisons drawing from the relevant source material you think are relevant texts to prove and demonstrate your points, and you may find a market for such a book. I think you can’t do such a thing, nor would you try. The generalizations work much better rather than real, deep thought.

I wouldn’t waste my time on that – I don’t consider myself a scholar, just someone with common sense. A person with a little common sense can see right through the Book of Mormon claims to truthfulness if they aren’t wedded to their tradition. I wasn’t raised in any specific Christian church and accepted the Book of Mormon as a naive 19 year old. In my 30s I could no longer deny the problems with Book of Mormon historicity because the obvious is hard to ignore unless you have a vested interest in ignoring it. Holland has a vested interest in ignoring the problems of Book of Mormon authorship. A lot of Mormons do, but I was not among them.

 

[jake23]

This weekend was the semi annual conference of the LDS (Mormon church). Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland (a member of the Quorum of Twelve) defended the Book of Mormon. The transcripts will not be out for a couple of days yet.

However, he stated that the arguments against the divinity of the Book of Mormon were “pathetic”.

Generally a very fine speaker Brother Holland today seemed very angry and blew off the arguments against the Book with frustration and anger. Normally the Mormon hierarchy today do all their best to court good relations with other religions. Perhaps it was directed against apostates within.

Did anyone hear the talk and would like to comment ?

As usual a false argument was set up to play to the faithful LDS members. Apparently Hyrum Smith (Joseph Smith’s brother) quoted comforting words from the Book of Ether (one of the books in the Book of Mormon) as they went to their deaths (I agree this was murder).

He then asked the congregation whether they thought that he would quote from a false book that claimed to be divine on his way to meet his Maker. Therefore it must be a true book - scripture, divinely sent.

It will have pleased the people and these words will be quoted for months and years hence.

I will post the link when the transcript arrives, unless someone does it before hand.

There’s a lesson to be learned here I think. You cannot defeat spin. The battle to bring truth to our Mormon brothers and sisters must come through the spirit and prayer. Perhaps sometimes we seek to guide God’s ship too eagerly.

So my plea is to remember the 14 million LDS members in the world in our prayer for their ability to shake off the shackles of error.

God bless you,

Hal.

LOL! they are going to admit that they are wrong though they are! Yes there is more than enough out there to show that Joseph Smiths claims where a hoax! I who was once Mormon left the belief after deep research that ended up pulling me away rather than strengthening my belief. These 12 along with the rest of the LDS leaders are cons! Wolves in sheeps clothing! for him to say the arguments are pathetic shows he is dishonest and uneducated!

 

[Catholic20064]

How about Ether 8,

with the daughter of Ether playing the part of the daughter of Herod from Matthew 14.

Now this happened in BC times, didn’t it?

I’m more inclined to dismiss the quotations from Paul scattered through 1 Nephi and 2 Nephi. And many of the prophecies in 1 Nephi had already been fulfilled like Columbus and the Gentiles coming to America and forming a free nation. Of course it is obvious to the LGT fans that the free nation was formed in Guatemala, but that’s a whole different can of beans.

 

[Jerusha]

There are problems throughout the book. I just picked out that one because it also illustrates the following. It sucked in so many people just because of the King James English, the quotations from the bible, and the naive belief that religious fraud is impossible. It is, for people of conscience, but sociopaths have no conscience.

 

[why_me]

Holland has a vested interest in ignoring the problems of Book of Mormon authorship. A lot of Mormons do, but I was not among them.

No one has a vested interest in ignoring any problems at all, including Holland. The truth is Holland is just like any other mormon: he believes in the book of mormon. Nothing more. If the book was proven to be a fraud, he and other mormons may go through a shock but in the end, all would land on their feet. Certainly no one in the lds church has a vested interest in living a fraud.

Perhaps you can give me your theory about how the book of mormon came to be.

 

[Catholic20064]

There are problems throughout the book. I just picked out that one because it also illustrates the following. It sucked in so many people just because of the King James English, the quotations from the bible, and the naive belief that religious fraud is impossible. It is, for people of conscience, but sociopaths have no conscience.

I think a man with the education of Elder Holland could see through it if he wasn’t so entrenched in the LDS system – I believe he’s always been employed in the LDS Church’s Educational System and sees the LDS through rose-colored glasses. I suppose the same could be said for Catholic clergy, but it is easier for the Catholic clergy because the Catholic Church doesn’t make the same extraordinary claims that Mormonism makes. Catholic clergy simply accept the Church’s teaching on Christ’s life, death and resurrection and the founding of the Catholic Church and then are free to teach the moral law as it has been handed down through the centuries. Mormon leaders have tied themselves to the extraordinary claims of Joseph Smith which are easily refuted, but then for societal reasons are caught in the web of deceit handed down to them. By the time one gets into a Mormon leadership position it becomes almost impossible to turn back – no doubt the screws are tightened every time they agree to climb up the ladder. So in a way we can feel a sense of pity for an Elder Holland whose entire life has been devoted to Joseph Smith’s unsubstantiated stories. Utah society would not treat kindly an LDS leader who apostatized.

 

[why_me]

I think a man with the education of Elder Holland could see through it if he wasn’t so entrenched in the LDS system – I believe he’s always been employed in the LDS Church’s Educational System and sees the LDS through rose-colored glasses.

Holland made his position very clear: Joseph Smith gave his life for what he believed. Also, we have the book of mormon and according to Holland, no way could JS have written it. JS gave his life for what he believed as did his brother. And certainly his brother saw the plates which became the book of mormon. For Holland, both Hyrum and Joseph would not have sacrificed their lives for such a fraud, if it were such a fraud. For Holland, this sealing their testimony of the book of mormon with their blood is proof of its truthfulness.

 

[why_me]

By the time one gets into a Mormon leadership position it becomes almost impossible to turn back – no doubt the screws are tightened every time they agree to climb up the ladder. So in a way we can feel a sense of pity for an Elder Holland whose entire life has been devoted to Joseph Smith’s unsubstantiated stories. Utah society would not treat kindly an LDS leader who apostatized.

This is far from the truth. In fact just the opposite would be true. Many general authorities started out just like everyone else. And after important callings in the lds church some found themselves called to be a general authority. Certainly at that moment as a general authority if they began to believe that it was all a fraud, leaving would be easy. But for some reason, they must know something the average member does not because so few leave the lds church. In fact, I only know one who was excommunicated and this was years ago. They all believe strongly in the truthfulness of the lds church.

Who cares about Utah society. If any lds leader would fall away, the exmormon sites would have a field day in trying to recruit him or her to the cause.

 

[why_me]

LOL! they are going to admit that they are wrong though they are! Yes there is more than enough out there to show that Joseph Smiths claims where a hoax! I who was once Mormon left the belief after deep research that ended up pulling me away rather than strengthening my belief. These 12 along with the rest of the LDS leaders are cons! Wolves in sheeps clothing! for him to say the arguments are pathetic shows he is dishonest and uneducated!

Really? There is more than enough out there to show that JS’s claims were a hoax? I don’t see that at all. The 11 witnesses plus Emma all seemed to believe the book of mormon story. The 11 witnesses saw the plates and Emma had said that there is no way the Joseph Smith, her husband could have written the book of mormon without her knowing it. And in fact, Emma continued to teach her children from the book of mormon after her husband, Joseph Smith was murdered. The witnesses to the book of mormon gave powerful deathbed testimonies about what they saw and expeienced. By that time, they had no vested interest in the book itself. Here is one example:

“I was closely connected with Hiram Page in business transactions and other matters, he being married to my aunt. I knew him at all times and under all circumstances to be true to his testimony concerning the divinity of the Book of Mormon. I was also at the death bed of Oliver Cowdery in 1850, and I heard him speak to my Uncle David (Whitmer) and say: ‘Brother David, be faithful to our testimony to the Book of Mormon, for we know that it is of God and that it is verily true.’ He then closed his eyes in death. My father, Jacob Whitmer, was always faithful and true to his testimony to the Book of Mormon, and confirmed it on his death bed. Of my uncle John (Whitmer) I will say that I was with him a short time before he died at Far West, Missouri, when he confirmed to me, what he had done so many times previously, the he knew the Book of Mormon was true. I was also with Uncle David (Whitmer), who died here in January last, and herd him bear his last testimony in the presence of many witnesses whom he called together for the occasion. He solemnly declared that the record of the Nephites, as he al- [page 165] ways called the Book of Mormon, was of God, and his testimony concerning it true.”

farwesthi…om/richmond.asp

The amount of testimonies given by the witnesses on their deathbed would be quite unusual for fraudsters. They all obviously believed strongely in what they saw. Now can we believe this person who wrote the above? But if the book is ever proven to be a fraud, Joseph and whoever wrote the book should be considered the greatest conartists in history and not to mention the greatest psychopaths too.

Now the current 12 apostles are far from being conartists. There is absolutely no reason for them to be. If they believed the book was a fraud, they would leave the church in an instant. All must give a lot of time to the church and I am sure that many would prefer to spend that time with their families, if they believe that the whole lds story was a con.

 

[why_me]

In my 30s I could no longer deny the problems with Book of Mormon historicity because the obvious is hard to ignore unless you have a vested interest in ignoring it.

So if the book of mormon was conclusively proven historically, you would still be a mormon? You do know that if this ever happened it would also prove the existence of god. And most catholics on this forum would jump ship and join the mormons. And atheism would be a thing of the past because god was proven.

I am afraid that this is not how god works at this morment. All depends on faith and not evidence. I see no proof for the bible. Many novels can have historical facts woven in them. But they are still novels. What is your proof for the bible? Now it would be nice to have a second hand account at the time of christ’s ministry confirming the gospels. But we do not have such a document. And it would be nice to have something in Christ’s hand. I am sure that he used writing utensils at times. And it would have been nice if Paul would have went to where Christ was preaching and obtained written testimonies from those who witnessed the miracles of christ. But the only thing that we have is the bible, and that doesn’t include much of what christ said at all. I am sure that he said much more than what is now in the bible…

The bible takes faith, not evidence.