Did I consider the possibility Holland might be right?

Someone asked,
Did any of you stop to consider that maybe Jeffery Holland was right and we are among those "who just wished to exit the church" who have to spend the rest of our lives "crawling around, over, or under the Book of Mormon" because it is something that even us apostates can't deny is true?



We're all just being decieved by Satan and we've given up our eternal exaltation and turned our backs on the truth and the faith of our Fathers, for what?


Holland is right that we don't know how the Book of Mormon was written. There is no clear consensus on the most likely scenario as to how the Book of Mormon was likely created. And there are many failed theories.



But, for me it does not matter who or how the book was written. It is enough for me to know that it could not be of ancient American origin. And if it is not ancient American in origin as it claims and as it has to be for the Church to be true, nothing else matters. It doesn't matter if it was written by Spalding and Rigdon or Smith.



I can't answer why Hyrum quoted from the Book of Mormon before his death or why Joseph testified of it to the guards. I have my theories, but I don't know. But, me not knowing the motivations of Joseph and Hyrum should not in itself negate what I already know through hard physical evidence.



The Book of Abraham was the smoking gun for me. It proves Joseph was a fraud and that he was deceitful while producing so-called scripture. The Book of Mormon has so many challenges to its authenticity, there is no question that it was written around the early 1800's in America, not 600BC to 400AD.



In short knowing the mind of Joseph is not necessary in determining whether the Book of Mormon is a fraud.

Comments

Allan said…
Heck, the Mormons can't decide how it was written either. A FARMS paper in a book my parents sent me posited two methods:

1) What the witnesses said: He put a rock in his hat and when he looked in the words appeared which he read. The words stayed there until correctly written down by the scribe.

2) He had to search it out in his mind and the thoughts came to him and he rendered them as best he could based on his own English.

Unfortunately the evidence from the manuscript and the eye witness testimony conflict and basically disprove both theories.

Of course that leaves the 3rd alternative which they didn't consider:

3) Joseph Smith and possibly other co-conspirators plagiarized some material, paraphrased other, and glued it together with their own words.
Thu Jan 21, 03:51:00 PM PST
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I left the LDS Church

[Last edited 1/28/10] I was a very deeply spiritual person and easily moved to tears when thinking of the Savior and the sacrifices I believed he made for me and the rich blessings he bestowed upon me. I was born in the covenant to convert parents who were very active in the Church and true believers. I had a strong testimony of Joseph Smith and the restoration even before turning eight for I had recognized the joy of the Spirit and the love for mankind I felt when reading the Book of Mormon. And after turning eight, I had an experience which I considered to be a visitation of an angel. When I was 14, my mother passed away. I felt very much alone and learned through that experience to lean on the Lord even more. I decided that I would do what was right because it was the path to happiness, not to please my dad or because of fear of punishment. I felt particularly close to Heavenly Father over the next few years, having had countless experiences of answered prayers, premonitions that w
Read more

The Most Influential Factor That Led Me To Leave

The following came from a thread on PostMormon: Hiram: While we may disagree regarding some topics, I am interested to hear what the most influential factor was that led you to leave the church. I'm not interested in changing your belief system or world view or arguing doctrines, I just want to respectfully hear the points of view of anybody willing to share them. Hiram, your post makes me very happy. I rejoice whenever I see a person earnestly inviting others to share things that currently go against what that person believes. It is a hallmark of maturity and wisdom when we invite those kind of dialogues, for that is how we set the stage to learn. We listen and consider. It doesn't mean that we will necessarily give up our beliefs, but we will be better for at least having considered and weighed another's point of view. We might even find that we did not know as much as we thought we knew and in light of the new info must change our thinking
Read more

The 'Good News' is only good if we buy the 'Bad News'

I use this analogy. A salesman comes to your town and tells you that everyone in this town has a terrible, awful disease which no one knew about until this salesman shows up. Although the salesman can offer no proof of this disease he swears we will all suffer and die from it. However, he says the "good news" is he has the cure, and one can only get the cure from him, but he will save you and you will be eternally grateful to him if you but buy his product. Meaning: Christians tell us that we all have sin and that sin will bring us a terrible awful fate. Nevermind that until they came along, no one ever suspected we had this terrible condition and the Christians can't offer one shred of proof that we have 'sin' or that a terrible fate awaits us. But, the 'good news' aka Gospel is they have the only cure and we can only get it from them - one can only be saved from sin and hell through Christ, not by living a good life or practicing peaceful Buddhism, etc.
Read more