The Many Gods of Mormonism

[Heathen_Dawn]

Karl Keating:

Even many pagans, such as many Greek philosophers, already had come to the conclusion that polytheism, in whatever form, was a hopeless theory.

They did?! Any sources available for that? And do you realise that any philosopher who reached that conclusion would no longer be pagan? That’s like pointing at atheist priests like Don Cuppitt and John Shelby Spong and saying, “even many Christians, such as many Christian priests, already had come to the conclusion that theism, in whatever form, was a hopeless theory.”

To me, polytheism makes a lot more sense than monotheism. I left monotheism and became an atheist; I returned to theism as polytheism.

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

Amethyst:

I still don’t see the LDS position as monotheism… maybe henotheism?

Henotheism: The worship of one god as pre-eminent, while not denying the existence of other gods.

From what I read and see that seems the better fit.

Yes. Mormonism is a henotheism or monolatry: many Gods believed in, one God worshipped.

 

[AmandaPS]

Please explain to me then, TOm, how there can only be one God in LDS theology when the church teaches itself that there are three distinct and seperate beings.

36863, True to the Faith, Godhead, 73

The first article of faith states, “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.” These three beings make up the Godhead. They preside over this world and all other creations of our Father in Heaven.

The true doctrine of the Godhead was lost in the apostasy that followed the Savior’s mortal ministry and the deaths of His Apostles. This doctrine began to be restored when 14-year-old Joseph Smith received his First Vision (see Joseph Smith—History 1:17). From the Prophet’s account of the First Vision and from his other teachings, we know that the members of the Godhead are three separate beings. The Father and the Son have tangible bodies of flesh and bones, and the Holy Ghost is a personage of spirit (see D&C 130:22).

Although the members of the Godhead are distinct beings with distinct roles, they are one in purpose and doctrine. They are perfectly united in bringing to pass Heavenly Father’s divine plan of salvation.

Additional references: Matthew 3:13-17; John 14:6-10; John 17:6-23; Acts 7:55-56; 2 Nephi 31:18; Mormon 7:5-7; D&C 76:20-24

 

[Karl_Keating]

TOm seems to be writing about a religion much different from the Mormonism I am familiar with. I don’t think he’s trying to dissemble, so that suggests that either he doesn’t agree with some basic Mormon teaching or that he just doesn’t know what the Mormon church really holds.

I recommend Isaiah Bennett’s books on Mormonism: “When Mormons Call” and “Inside Mormonism,” both published by Catholic Answers.

 

[Katholikos]

TOm,

This attempt to persuade us that Mormon polytheism (or henotheism) is actually monotheism is reminiscent of President Clinton’s statement, “It depends on what the meaning of is, is.”

Heather Dawn,

You aren’t claiming that your polytheism is Christian, are you?

---

Christianity is monotheistic. Organizations or philosophies that teach the existence of multiple gods (i.e., any number greater than one) are therefore not Christian.

Believe what you wish. Just don’t call it Christian.

 

[Heathen_Dawn]

Katholikos:

You aren’t claiming that your polytheism is Christian, are you?

Of course not. I’m a pagan.

Christianity is monotheistic.

Tell that to a Jew or Muslim.

 

[Katholikos]

Thank you, Amethyst, Heather Dawn. More precisely, Mormonism teaches “henotheism.”

 

[TOmNossor]

Karl Keating:

TOm seems to be writing about a religion much different from the Mormonism I am familiar with. I don’t think he’s trying to dissemble, so that suggests that either he doesn’t agree with some basic Mormon teaching or that he just doesn’t know what the Mormon church really holds.

I recommend Isaiah Bennett’s books on Mormonism: “When Mormons Call” and “Inside Mormonism,” both published by Catholic Answers.

TOm:

Now you are recommending that others learn about Mormonism from your opposed to Mormonism organization. I submit to you that it the CoJCoLDS is God’s church you will never hear enough of the truth to find out this fact from those hostile to the church.

Seriously this advice is like recommending the web site, Former Catholics For Christ to those investigating the Catholic Church.

What exactly are Isaiah Bennett’s qualifications as an author opposed to the CoJCoLDS.

• Trained and became a Catholic Priest.
• Left the Catholic Church and the Catholic Priesthood to become a LDS (reasons for this would be speculation on my part, perhaps Isaiah Bennett can explain his mindset and perhaps a little on his history around this time of his life).
• After a fairly short period of time returned to the Catholic Church (of course he is no longer a Priest).

The “conversion” of Isaiah Bennett was wanting in one direction or the other we must acknowledge. I left the Catholic Church in ignorance, but have since really dove into what it is to be a LDS and what I think it is to be a Catholic. I have little reservation when I say that I know more about what it is to be an active believing faithful LDS than Isaiah Bennett.

And let me again say that if you feel it is appropriate to tell folks to learn about the CoJCoLDS by buying a book from your Catholic apologetic organization then you are being hypocritical if it is not also equally appropriate to tell folks to learn about the Catholic Church by reading LDS books on it.

Please think about the logic of your position.

Charity, TOm

 

[Andrew_Larkoski]

TOm,

I posted this on the “Discourse with Mormons” thread, and I’ll post it here.

TOm,

On your comment of the passage from Gallatians, how did the LDS receive authority to interpret scripture? Christ cleary gave the apostles (i.e., the Early Church) this authority in the Bible. Do not say to me that this authority (to the LDS) came from the book of Mormon, for it is NOT a historical text. Isn’t it a bit ironic that these “golden tablets” had to be swept off Earth to the safety of Heaven? There has been a plethora of (secular) evidence that the accounts of historical events from both the Old and New Testament actually occurred. This cannot be said about the Book of Mormon. There was no “great battle” in the Americas, for if it did only happen ~1000 years ago, there would be plenty of evidence. Events that happened 3000+ years ago (the pyramids of Egypt, Mesopotamian ruins, Stonehenge, Chinese ruins, and events out of the OT) are still very well preserved and very much so observable, yet something that happened a mere 1000 years ago vanished off the face of the Earth. Eastern animals (elephants, and others) that “appear” in the BOM in the ancient days, did not exist in the Americas until the 1500’s when Spanish conquistadors brought them. Seesh, did Joseph Smith have any history teaching?

Okay, on to the LDS “official” beliefs. I am quoting from the mormon.org website.

-“We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.”

I, as a Catholic, agree that Christ’s Church needs apostles (modern day bishops), pastors (modern day priests), teachers, evangelists, and so forth. However, any Catholic (heck, any Christian for that matter) would STRONGLY disagree that there have been any prophets or prophecy since Jesus Christ. We can both agree that Christ taught the ENTIRE Gospel, and any prophecy to the contrary is heresy. Prophecy is direct revelation from God, introducing MORE teachings in additon to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If, then, there is a need of prophets in the days after Christ, then Christ DID NOT teach the entire Gospel, and therefore was fallible and WAS NOT divine; Jesus WAS NOT GOD if modern prophets do exist. If this is the case, there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that LDS can even begin to call themselves “Christian.”

-"We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. "

Simply put, as I argued earlier, Christianity is a revealed religion. Christ taught the entire Gospel; He told us everything we need to know about God and Life. Saying, or believing, anything to the contrary is heresy.

-“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.”

How can the Bible be translated correctly if not by Christ’s Church that He began and to Her gave this authority alone? How can the Book of Mormon be the Word of God if it contains blatant historical errors?

Finally, I have a feeling that you will say this, so I will cover my bases. You might say that the Catholic Church believes in visions or revalation from God. Not so. The Catholic Church believes that visions (such as Our Lady of Fatima, Lourdes, or Guadalupe) can assist in our understanding of the Scrioture, but IN NO WAY replaces what Jesus taught. Catholics ARE NOT OBLIGED to believe in visions; however, it is difficult to not believe that the Vision at Fatima did not exist, or at Guadalupe, or at Lourdes, or to St. Catherine, or to St. Jeanne D’Arc, etc… Still, Catholics are called to be very skeptical and wary when it comes to visions. By no means does believing a vision did not occur put you on the wrong side with God.

 

[TOmNossor]

AmandaPS:

Please explain to me then, TOm, how there can only be one God in LDS theology when the church teaches itself that there are three distinct and seperate beings.

Amanda,

All Christian Church formulate a oneness and a threeness within the Trinity. God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three distinct divine persons and one God in virtue of oneness of indwelling unity of presence, glory, and oneness of mind purpose, power and intent. Three wills exist, but the Son and the Holy Ghost freely, perfectly, and always choose to submit their will to the Father’s (the Son and Holy Ghost are subordinate to the Father, but they are fully divine).

Catholics say three persons and one being. LDS say three persons/beings, united through indwelling love into one God.

Much of the above grows from Alvin Plantinga’s Social Trinity and is compiled by LDS scholar Blake Ostler.

LDS have for too long emphasized the differences between non-LDS and LDS Christianity. In doing this some have forgotten that the BOM says the following things.

The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one, and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one. (3 Nephi 11:27)

I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me. (3 Nephi 11:32)

The Father and I are one (3 Nephi 20:35)

And now my Father, I pray unto thee for them, also for all those who shall believe on their words, that they may believe in me,that I may be in them as Thou, Father, art in me, that we may be one. (3 Nephi 19:23)

[T]hat I may be in them as Thou Father, art in me, that we may be one,
that I may be glorified in them. (3 Nephi 19:29)

It should also be noted that LDS doctrine is continue in the Bible too. No God before or beside me must be righted with our beliefs too.

The Catholic Church does an excellent job of formalizing and explaining theology. Catholic priest receive much schooling to understand what is Catholic Doctrine. Catholics have records of councils, the CCC, and the Bible. LDS leaders do not have any such training. We are educated by other LDS for 3 hours on Sunday. LDS scholarship is advancing radically in the last 20 years. Blake Ostler, Paulsen, and other scholars are explaining LDS beliefs such that the 4 standard works are consistently read and statements of church leaders are integrated into the whole. This is how the Catholic Church arrived at the CCC. Why would you deny the CoJCoLDS the right to do this?

I assure you, we do not believe in creation ex nihilo. We do not formulate the Trinity exactly as you do. We do believe in continued revelation. We believe the atonement included time in the Garden of Gethsemane. There is much room for us to disagree. But do not demand that I read my religion as you would have me read it. As I said before, I spent 20+ hours thinking, praying, pondering, reading, writing, a week in order that I might understand what I believe as a LDS. If you wish turn to Isaiah Bennet to understand the CoJCoLDS, but you will not be afforded a real opportunity to understand it (if it is true) because he speaks as one who rejects it.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Katholikos:

Thank you, Amethyst, Heather Dawn. More precisely, Mormonism teaches “henotheism.”

While there are certainly LDS who are henotheistic (and I am unaware of any who are polytheistic), I do not think they understand what the LDS scriptures teach. Is there room in the writings of the Old Testament for henotheism? I would say no.

Somehow there is a oneness associated with God. This oneness includes the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, and those who receive the adoption. The concept of a Social Trinity fits this well in my opinion.

Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Andrew Larkoski:

TOm,

I posted this on the “Discourse with Mormons” thread, and I’ll post it here.

TOm,

On your comment of the passage from Gallatians, how did the LDS receive authority to interpret scripture? Christ cleary gave the apostles (i.e., the Early Church) this authority in the Bible. Do not say to me that this authority (to the LDS) came from the book of Mormon, for it is NOT a historical text. Isn’t it a bit ironic that these “golden tablets” had to be swept off Earth to the safety of Heaven? There has been a plethora of (secular) evidence that the accounts of historical events from both the Old and New Testament actually occurred. This cannot be said about the Book of Mormon. There was no “great battle” in the Americas, for if it did only happen ~1000 years ago, there would be plenty of evidence. Events that happened 3000+ years ago (the pyramids of Egypt, Mesopotamian ruins, Stonehenge, Chinese ruins, and events out of the OT) are still very well preserved and very much so observable, yet something that happened a mere 1000 years ago vanished off the face of the Earth. Eastern animals (elephants, and others) that “appear” in the BOM in the ancient days, did not exist in the Americas until the 1500’s when Spanish conquistadors brought them. Seesh, did Joseph Smith have any history teaching?

Okay, on to the LDS “official” beliefs. I am quoting from the mormon.org website.

-“We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth. We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.”

I, as a Catholic, agree that Christ’s Church needs apostles (modern day bishops), pastors (modern day priests), teachers, evangelists, and so forth. However, any Catholic (heck, any Christian for that matter) would STRONGLY disagree that there have been any prophets or prophecy since Jesus Christ. We can both agree that Christ taught the ENTIRE Gospel, and any prophecy to the contrary is heresy. Prophecy is direct revelation from God, introducing MORE teachings in additon to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If, then, there is a need of prophets in the days after Christ, then Christ DID NOT teach the entire Gospel, and therefore was fallible and WAS NOT divine; Jesus WAS NOT GOD if modern prophets do exist. If this is the case, there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that LDS can even begin to call themselves “Christian.”

-"We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. "

Simply put, as I argued earlier, Christianity is a revealed religion. Christ taught the entire Gospel; He told us everything we need to know about God and Life. Saying, or believing, anything to the contrary is heresy.

-“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.”

How can the Bible be translated correctly if not by Christ’s Church that He began and to Her gave this authority alone? How can the Book of Mormon be the Word of God if it contains blatant historical errors?

Finally, I have a feeling that you will say this, so I will cover my bases. You might say that the Catholic Church believes in visions or revalation from God. Not so. The Catholic Church believes that visions (such as Our Lady of Fatima, Lourdes, or Guadalupe) can assist in our understanding of the Scrioture, but IN NO WAY replaces what Jesus taught. Catholics ARE NOT OBLIGED to believe in visions; however, it is difficult to not believe that the Vision at Fatima did not exist, or at Guadalupe, or at Lourdes, or to St. Catherine, or to St. Jeanne D’Arc, etc… Still, Catholics are called to be very skeptical and wary when it comes to visions. By no means does believing a vision did not occur put you on the wrong side with God.

I will try to respond over there. I can only type so fast.
Charity, TOm

 

[Disillusioned]

Heathen Dawn-I think I can answer your question.It is surmised that philosophy flourished as a discipline almost simultaneously with a type of rejection of the traditional Greek Pantheon.Remember that one of the charges levelled against Socrates before he committed suicide was that as well as corrupting the young, he had tried to introduce strange beliefs.It seems obvious in reading early parts of the Platonic dialogues and The Republic that the philosophers are laughing together over local stories about nymphs’ adventures with Zeus and that they no longer credally hold to a word of them.

The end of myth is the beginning of philosophy.What then did they believe in ? They examined in detail so much that underpinned their society, almost to the point where they enumerated too many questions.God almost in the same way as with the Buddhists was not part of their consideration…Truth and the nature of Justice were.When Plato drew up a societal map, he talked about convincing the people of something that would energize them in the manner of the deposed and devalued mythology.But whether his Form Of The Good was God is not easy to declare-he likened it to sunlight .

Now an aside for you-have you ever read a text that answers the question as to why the Romans adopted gods so similar to those of the Greeks ?

Not much to do woth the Mormons-never mind-post me a personal if you wish.

 

[petra]

“There is a God in heaven who is infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting the same unchangeable God…” (D&C 20:17).

Another Christian and I have spoken with many Mormon missionaries in the past, and we found that the best material to refute Mornonism was the Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price. This is because they clearly contradict themselves doctrinally in a way that cannot be explained. This quote from D&C 20:17 in no way proves that Mormonism’s god is eternal (and therefore the singular God) because there many other references that say he is not.

I was surprised to hear you imply that eternal progression is not a binding doctrine. Eternal progression, in actuality, is central to Mormonism. I know this not by reading anti-Mormon literature, but rather from reading Mormon scriptures and talking to Mormons educated in Mormon theology at the collegiate level. The result of eternal progression is the population of spirit beings with their subsequent birth on another planet. The exhalted Mormon (super-man, not Superman) is the Heavenly Father of that world. You cannot deny this as being official doctrine, central to Mormonism.

 

[TOmNossor]

petra]Another Christian and I have spoken with many Mormon missionaries in the past, and we found that the best material to refute Mornonism was the Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price. This is because they clearly contradict themselves doctrinally in a way that cannot be explained. This quote from D&C 20:17 in no way proves that Mormonism’s god is eternal (and therefore the singular God) because there many other references that say he is not.

I was surprised to hear you imply that eternal progression is not a binding doctrine. Eternal progression, in actuality, is central to Mormonism. I know this not by reading anti-Mormon literature, but rather from reading Mormon scriptures and talking to Mormons educated in Mormon theology at the collegiate level. The result of eternal progression is the population of spirit beings with their subsequent birth on another planet. The exhalted Mormon (super-man, not Superman) is the Heavenly Father of that world. You cannot deny this as being official doctrine, central to Mormonism.

TOm:

I deny that God was ever not God. I state that if there is truth to the Lorenzo Snow couplet associated with God being once a man or if there is truth to this concept as discussed by Joseph Smith; it cannot mean that God was ever not God. Jesus Christ was once a man and is still God. Other ways of understanding the Lorenzo Snow couplet also exist. So all I say is that LDS must integrate D&C 20:17 into their view of God. LDS are not similarly required to integrate Lorenzo Snow’s couplet or the KFD into their view of God, but some (like Blake Ostler) do.

LDS scripture speak of men become gods and experiencing eternal increase. LDS scriptures do not define what eternal increase is. I merely demand that whatever becoming a god means it does not mean being beside, above, in addition to, … God. Whatever eternal increase means it does not mean being beside, above, in addition to, … God.

So no were in LDS scriptures will you find man called the Heavenly Father of his own world. This would be some possible meaning of “eternal increase,” but it is not a binding LDS doctrine and it cannot include being beside, above, in addition to, … God.

President Gordon B. Hinckley said, “we do not know very much about that.” St. Irenaeus said that we should not “fall into the danger of starting the question whether there is another God above God.”

I think it wise to recognize that we do not know much about this. And my personal position does not demand there be a God above God the Father in any way whatsoever in eternities past or forward.

Charity, TOm

 

[petra]

TOmNossor:

I deny that God was ever not God. I state that if there is truth to the Lorenzo Snow couplet associated with God being once a man or if there is truth to this concept as discussed by Joseph Smith; it cannot mean that God was ever not God. Jesus Christ was once a man and is still God. Other ways of understanding the Lorenzo Snow couplet also exist. So all I say is that LDS must integrate D&C 20:17 into their view of God. LDS are not similarly required to integrate Lorenzo Snow’s couplet or the KFD into their view of God, but some (like Blake Ostler) do.

LDS scripture speak of men become gods and experiencing eternal increase. LDS scriptures do not define what eternal increase is. I merely demand that whatever becoming a god means it does not mean being beside, above, in addition to, … God. Whatever eternal increase means it does not mean being beside, above, in addition to, … God.

The D&C clearly defines what celestial heaven entails:

"This full salvation is obtained in and through the continuation of the family unit in eternity and those who obtain it are gods. (D&C 131:1-4;132) (Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 670).

Prophet Brigham Young (allegedy speaking infallably) explains it further:

“He [God] is our Father - the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and is now an exalted being. How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods…” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333)

I realize that D&C 20:17 contradicts this. Such contradictions fill all of the Mormon standard works. They, therefore, cannot be the Word of God.

 

[AmandaPS]

Also written by Joseph Smith himself about the plurality of gods:

Taken from Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1976),

I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods. It has been preached by the Elders for fifteen years.

I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods.

Joseph Smith, Nauvoo, Illinois, 16 June 1844

Now, I understand that the LDS point of view is that the oneness of the Godhead is that they are of the same mind. However, this says that the LDS view of God is a triumverate.

 

[TOmNossor]

petra]The D&C clearly defines what celestial heaven entails:

"This full salvation is obtained in and through the continuation of the family unit in eternity and those who obtain it are gods. (D&C 131:1-4;132) (Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 670).

TOm:

This refers to the continuation of the earthly family unit. It does not refer to begetting of spirit children. This is why we are sealed (welded as Joseph occasionally said) together as families. What eternal increase consists of as gods in heaven is not defined here.

petra]

Prophet Brigham Young (allegedy speaking infallably) explains it further:

“He [God] is our Father - the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and is now an exalted being. How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods…” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333)

I realize that D&C 20:17 contradicts this. Such contradictions fill all of the Mormon standard works. They, therefore, cannot be the Word of God.

TOm:

There is no such thing as infallible statements in the CoJCoLDS.

Some of Brigham Young’s teachings have been refuted by more recent general authorities.

Joseph Smith said a prophet is only a prophet when acting as such. To my knowledge the best indication of the validity of revelation coming from God is its inclusion in the scriptures (I can back this up if you like).

And no, the four standard works do not contradict. Just as Paul and James do not contradict neither does the BOM and the D&C. General Authorities present authoritative interpretations and LDS scholars use scholarship to explain ways to understand James and Paul, BOM and D&C, threeness and oneness, …

This is the way that the Catholic Church does this, but the majority of the authorities are also scholars. The CoJCoLDS does not have scholars as General Authorities, but as we mature we are utilizing scholars and scholarship to better understand our beliefs.

Charity, TOm

 

[Katholikos]

TOmNossor:

LDS have for too long emphasized the differences between non-LDS and LDS Christianity. In doing this some have forgotten that the BOM says the following things.

The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one, and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one. (3 Nephi 11:27)

I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me. (3 Nephi 11:32)

The Father and I are one (3 Nephi 20:35)

And now my Father, I pray unto thee for them, also for all those who shall believe on their words, that they may believe in me,that I may be in them as Thou, Father, art in me, that we may be one. (3 Nephi 19:23)

[T]hat I may be in them as Thou Father, art in me, that we may be one,
that I may be glorified in them. (3 Nephi 19:29)

It should also be noted that LDS doctrine is continue in the Bible too. No God before or beside me must be righted with our beliefs too.

I assure you, we do not believe in creation ex nihilo. We do not formulate the Trinity exactly as you do. We do believe in continued revelation. We believe the atonement included time in the Garden of Gethsemane. There is much room for us to disagree. But do not demand that I read my religion as you would have me read it. As I said before, I spent 20+ hours thinking, praying, pondering, reading, writing, a week in order that I might understand what I believe as a LDS. If you wish turn to Isaiah Bennet to understand the CoJCoLDS, but you will not be afforded a real opportunity to understand it (if it is true) because he speaks as one who rejects it.

Charity, TOm

It is well known and thoroughly documented that the KJV was shamelessly plagiarized – errors and all – by Joseph Smith. The “Reformed Egyptian” (an unknown language) in which the BOM was allegedly written beginning around 600 B.C, somehow mysteriously “translated” into the Elizabethan English of the 17th century A.D., enabled by “magic spectacles,” Urim and Thummin, that were with the “golden plates” when Smith allegedly found them.

The BOM contains words from Shakespeare’s Hamlet: "Awake! and arise from the dust, and hear the words of a trembling parent, whose limbs you must soon lay down in the cold and silent grave, from whence no traveler can return; a few more days and I go the way of all the earth" 2 Nephi 1:14. Mormons deny any similarity.

And a “Hebrew” in America supposedly spoke French c. 544-421 B.C. However, the French language did not develop from Latin until the period between the 9th and the 14th century A.D. In the last verse of Enos, chapter 7, there appears a strange admixture of Archaic English and French – “Brethren, adieu.”

Archaeologists haven’t found a single trace of humans in America before about 30,000 years ago. Certainly they’ve found no evidence of blast furnaces, required for making the steel that the BOM mentions in 1 Nephi 16:18.

Anyway, TOm, the verses you quote and many more from the KJV are there because Smith copied them.

---

Jay

 

[Tom_of_Assisi]

yikes…talk about much ado about nothing…mormonism reads like a science fiction novel…both as it is, and as TOm describes it…