Mormon Temple

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajcstr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

ajcstr

Guest
I had the opportunity to tour the new Mormon temple in Phila and in preparation I read some of the BOM out of curiosity.

I have a few questions about the Book or Mormon is anyone can help (from a Mormon perspective please).
  1. Was the BOM written entirely in the US or were parts of of written in the Middle East then brought to the Americas?
  2. Why was it written on metal tablets rather than scrolls?
I realize that there is an absence of archeological evidence so I don’t want to go there.
 
ajcstr said:
I had the opportunity to tour the new Mormon temple in Phila and in preparation I read some of the BOM out of curiosity.

I have a few questions about the Book or Mormon is anyone can help (from a Mormon perspective please).
Click to expand...
I always appreciate honest questions 🙂 My aunt toured the Philly temple a few weeks ago and said it was quite beautiful (all of my mom’s side is from Delaware). I intend to visit Fort Collins next week myself.
ajcstr said:
  1. Was the BOM written entirely in the US or were parts of of written in the Middle East then brought to the Americas?
Click to expand...
The beginning couple of chapters are in the Jerusalem/greater Middle East, and then they relocate to the America. No mention of the USA in particular (it wasn’t founded until a couple of millennia later).
ajcstr said:
  1. Why was it written on metal tablets rather than scrolls?
Click to expand...
Why not? Metal is much more durable.

Some resources which might help you out:
If you have any other questions, feel free to post or PM me.
 
ajcstr said:
I had the opportunity to tour the new Mormon temple in Phila and in preparation I read some of the BOM out of curiosity.

I have a few questions about the Book or Mormon is anyone can help (from a Mormon perspective please).
  1. Was the BOM written entirely in the US or were parts of of written in the Middle East then brought to the Americas?
  2. Why was it written on metal tablets rather than scrolls?
I realize that there is an absence of archeological evidence so I don’t want to go there.
Click to expand...
Since no Mormon has spoken up I’ll take a stab at your first question. It appears the Mormon POV is that it was all written starting after the family of Lehi arrive in the New World. Approximately 30 years after First Nephi chronologically begins in Jerusalem.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Book_of_Nephi
 
I’m a former Mormon. Your question depends largely on whether you believe the BOM was divinely inspired or not. I no longer do.

Mormons believe that parts of the BOM were written in the Middle East and brought over with a family that left the Middle East in a boat with a stone that glowed to provide them light in the boat and they eventually landed in the Americas. As parts of the BOM are nearly word-for-word taken from books such as Isaiah, this would be true if the BOM is divinely inspired. They further believe that the BOM was scribed on gold plates and hidden in NY and revealed by the Angel Moroni to Joseph Smith along with the Urim and Thummim to translate it.

My personal belief is that Joseph Smith was a charlatan and that the BOM is not divinely inspired. Great portions of it were copied from the Bible, the rest is made up. There is no archaeological evidence to back up the BOM (despite their false claims to the contrary), DNA samples explicitly prove that no people in the Americas came from the middle east, and there is no evidence of a great battle fought in NY state.

This is not to say that I don’t find Mormons to be good people. I even believe them to be Christian (which I know places me at odds with the Catholic church). But I believe they are terribly misled. But I think that Mormons are also ripe for a return to the Catholic Church. A Mormon book actually started my curiosity about the Catholic Church back when I was about 15. In the book “A Marvelous Work and a Wonder” there is a part where a Catholic tells a Mormon that Mormons have no idea the strength of their own position. Either Catholics are right, or Mormons are right. Protestants cannot be right, because a living branch does not come from a dead tree. But since the Mormons claim that Christ came back to re-establish His true church on earth, then the Mormon position was stronger than any protestant position. As I later became utterly convinced that Mormonism was a false religion, that quote remained in my head. It wasn’t the only reason I came home to the Catholic faith, but it probably was the original start to my journey. That said, I think that a good apologist could prove to a Mormon Biblically that their faith is incorrect- starting with Jesus’ claim that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church. If He had to come to re-establish His true Church on earth, then he would have been wrong. Since Jesus Christ is God, he cannot be wrong. There’s many other places that disprove Mormon belief.

The Catholic faith could learn some things from the Mormon faith, however. The Mormons do a stunning job of going out and converting people. They also have faith formation that dwarfs anything in the Catholic Church. High School kids go to “seminary” for 1 hour every weekday morning for four years and study their church history, the BOM, the OT, the NT. Can you imagine if every Catholic was that well catechized?
 
ajcstr said:
  1. Why was it written on metal tablets rather than scrolls?
Click to expand...
jane_doe said:
Why not? Metal is much more durable.
Click to expand...
Is there evidence of other documents from around the same time period being written on metal tablets? This is a general question about documentation for any of the cultures/nations/civilizations of the time period in question.
 
oliver927 said:
Is there evidence of other documents from around the same time period being written on metal tablets? This is a general question about documentation for any of the cultures/nations/civilizations of the time period in question.
Click to expand...
(My personal bias here)
As soon as archeology convinces me that Jesus Christ was the Son of God and Savior of the World, then I will quit listening to the Holy Spirit and start listening to archeologists instead. Until then I really don’t care about archeologists when it comes to things of God.

So yeah… I’m admittedly a bad person here to ask that question to.
 
jane_doe said:
The beginning couple of chapters are in the Jerusalem/greater Middle East, and then they relocate to the America. No mention of the USA in particular (it wasn’t founded until a couple of millennia later).
Click to expand...
Yes I realize the events shift from Middle East to the Americas but was not sure if any was believed to be actually written there or if all was recorded in the new continent (US was probably a bad choice of words on my part).
jane_doe said:
Why not? Metal is much more durable.
Click to expand...
Understood but the Hebrews used scrolls for the “Hebrew Scriptures” so it just seemed odd to me.

Again, trying to keep my questions neutral, thank you for the responses.
 
ajcstr said:
Yes I realize the events shift from Middle East to the Americas but was not sure if any was believed to be actually written there or if all was recorded in the new continent (US was probably a bad choice of words on my part).
Click to expand...
So you’re asking when/where the actual recording was done? That’s a more complicated answer, and depends on which part of you the Book you’re asking about.
ajcstr said:
Again, trying to keep my questions neutral, thank you for the responses.
Click to expand...
No worries 🙂
 
jane_doe said:
So you’re asking when/where the actual recording was done? That’s a more complicated answer, and depends on which part of you the Book you’re asking about.
Click to expand...
Specifically 1 Nephi ch 1-17 I got the impression from reading that this was already recorded when he left for the new land. And there were other plates that he did not write containing the Books of Moses that he took with him also. Do I have a correct understanding of this?
 
ajcstr said:
Specifically 1 Nephi ch 1-17 I got the impression from reading that this was already recorded when he left for the new land.
Click to expand...
That is my gut impression to, but I’m not 100% sure. I’ll do a little research and get back to you with a sure answer.
 
ajcstr said:
Understood but the Hebrews used scrolls for the “Hebrew Scriptures” so it just seemed odd to me.
Click to expand...
It seemed odd to me as well which is why I asked if anybody else used metal plates to record things. If others used metal plates that would make the BOM use of metal plates on par with others of the same time period and me just ill-informed about what ancient peoples used to write documents on.
 
Darius is probably the best known example of an instance in which gold and silver were used for writing. There is something called the Pyrgi plates. So, yes, people wrote on what was available, and if the person or people concerned were important, powerful and wealthy enough, they would even write on valuable metals. Much more problematic are the “Brass Plates” which the Book of Mormon prophet Lehi’s family obtained by murdering their owner.
 
Tarquin said:
Darius is probably the best known example of an instance in which gold and silver were used for writing. There is something called the Pyrgi plates.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I have never heard of these before, ill have to go learn more about them.
 
It is not my intention to offend anyone. From what I know of Mormons they are sincere in their faith and to serve Jesus. It is my understanding that there have been 3,913 corrections that have been made to the Book of Mormon. For me personally to have that many corrections goes to the heart of the question if the Book of Mormon was divinely inspired. For me as a Catholic Christian is I was to learn that there had been thousands of corrections made to the Old and New Testament I would question if it was divinely inspired.

Often times I have seen on TV where the Book of Mormon is presented as a companion to the Bible. In the Mormon Church the Book of Mormon takes precedence over the Old and New Testament. In the Mormon Church the Book of Mormon is their primary Scripture. It is disingenuous to present it as a companion to the bible when in reality it is their primary scripture.
 
wllmjoseph said:
Often times I have seen on TV where the Book of Mormon is presented as a companion to the Bible. In the Mormon Church the Book of Mormon takes precedence over the Old and New Testament. In the Mormon Church the Book of Mormon is their primary Scripture. It is disingenuous to present it as a companion to the bible when in reality it is their primary scripture.
Click to expand...
Actually, in Mormon Sunday School and other classes, the Bible is studied twice as long as the Book of Mormon. They are indeed companions, to be read along side each other the way the Gospel of Luke is read alongside Galatians: one does not take precedence over the other.
 
jane_doe said:
Actually, in Mormon Sunday School and other classes, the Bible is studied twice as long as the Book of Mormon. They are indeed companions, to be read along side each other the way the Gospel of Luke is read alongside Galatians: one does not take precedence over the other.
Click to expand...
Technically, that is true. One year for the Old Testament and one year for the New Testament. That makes two years. The Book of Mormon is studied for one year. That’s one year. So technically speaking, the Bible is studied “twice as long” as the Book of Mormon is studied. In that one class. However, those studies are part of a four-year cycle, not a three-year cycle. During the remaining year of the four year circuit, Mormons study the exclusively Mormon “Doctrine and Covenants” and “Pearl of Great Price” and Church History. All in all, for that adult class then, the Bible is studied one half as much as Mormon scriptures (and Mormon history). The weekday morning classes for Mormon high school students focus on the same subjects in much the same proportions.

There are other classes, too, regularly attended by many of the same people who attend that four-year cycle of classes. If we include them, then the Christian Bible is studied less than half as much as Mormon additions. For example, this year in the men’s Melchizedek Priesthood class and the women’s Relief Society class, if the lds org page I read is correct, the subject of study is the teachings of Howard W. Hunter. The young men’s class (Aaronic Priesthood) is studying Mormon doctrines, for which specific Bible passages are occasionally used.

In routine class, the Bible is referred to roughly as much as the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price are referred to usually a bit less than is the Book of Mormon. So although the Bible *is *used, is referred to often, and *is *a subject of specific study for two years out of four in the adult Sunday School class, it is studied less than half as much as uniquely Mormon scriptures, doctrines, and sermons of Mormon leaders.

By virtue of the Mormon Church’s 8th Article of Faith - “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.” - the Book of Mormon takes precedence over the Bible. The Book of Mormon is identified as “the word of God.” The Bible, however, is limited according to the accuracy of the translation used - only “as far as it is translated correctly” and no further. I find this odd, since the Bible is available in the form of ancient writings in original languages, but the Book of Mormon exists only in translation! Nowhere are the original documents to be found to compare the accuracy of the translation. It would make more sense, for Christians and non-Christians alike, were the 8th Article of Faith to read, “We believe the Bible in the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek to be the word of God; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.”

Mormon Prophet Boyd K. Packer taught that one purpose of the Book of Mormon is to explain the Bible, the Bible and apostles themselves apparently being deficient in this task: “I love this Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. Study it and one can understand both the Old Testament and the New Testament in the Bible.” Apparently, he believes that anyone who does not study the Book of Mormon cannot understand either the Old Testament or the New. In the missionary manual, “Preach My Gospel,” Mormons are taught, “Use the Book of Mormon to clarify and explain Bible passages.” From speaking with Mormons, attending Mormon classes, and reading Mormon literature, I understand that most Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is superior to (since it clarifies, explains, and expands on) the Bible in its doctrinal inerrancy, historical accuracy, clarity, persuasiveness, and explanatory power.
 
ajcstr said:
C’mon I’m just asking from a Mormon point of view the answer to those questions. I’m not going to debate the answers.

I want to be respectful
Click to expand...
Lol. I was just interested in the answers myself. I always put the popcorn out there if I don’t have a answer and want to follow the thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top