The Inquisitive Christian

Questioning everything since 1984

recent posts

about

I’m a 41-year-old nurse and firefighter/EMT who loves theology and exploring religion.

  • A Chronological Impossibility: Part 2

    Ladies and gents, I stand accused of being biased in my research and not taking the Book of Mormon seriously. These accusations, of course, were made by an unhappy Mormon who read a couple of my entries. Namely, he was upset by my support for the Deutero-Isaiah theory in “A Chronological Impossibility.” He insisted that it is only supported by secular scholars and therefore has no merit. He went further to complain that I presented it as indisputable fact when it isn’t. I will concede to this second point to a degree, as I am perfectly willing to admit that I didn’t make the best argument. It’s true that it is still a debated topic, but it is definitely not as unpopular as this gentleman purports it to be. I will be discussing this theory in a little more depth during this post and demonstrate why it is a reasonable theory, but I will also present arguments against it to be fair. His other grievance involved my entry titled, “Many Fruits. Many Loins,” which covers 2 Nephi 3, a chapter containing 25 verses with 20 mentions of the fruits of other people’s loins. He angrily said that I wasn’t trying to engage with the LDS scriptures seriously, to which I replied that I treated that chapter with the seriousness it deserved. On one hand, while I try to keep the overall tone of this blog calm, level-headed, and fair, it is a challenge to treat writings that contradict known history and the Bible in such outlandish ways with complete seriousness. On the other hand, I am trying to demonstrate the fault in the Book of Mormon in the hope that people will begin to study the Bible and come into a relationship with Christ, which is a very serious matter. It’s a bit of a battle trying to choose the right approach for each entry.

    2 Nephi Chapter 6

    Jacob recounts Jewish history: The Babylonian captivity and return; the ministry and crucifixion of the Holy One of Israel; the help received from the Gentiles; and the Jews’ latter-day restoration when they believe in the Messiah. About 559–545 B.C.

    1: “The words of Jacob, the brother of Nephi, which he spake unto the people of Nephi:”

    2: “Behold, my beloved brethren, I, Jacob, having been called of God, and ordained after the manner of his holy order, and having been consecrated by my brother Nephi, unto whom ye look as a king or a protector, and on whom ye depend for safety, behold ye know that I have spoken unto you exceedingly many things.”

    3: “Nevertheless, I speak unto you again; for I am desirous for the welfare of your souls. Yea, mine anxiety is great for you; and ye yourselves know that it ever has been. For I have exhorted you with all diligence; and I have taught you the words of my father; and I have spoken unto you concerning all things which are written, from the creation of the world.”

    4: “And now, behold, I would speak unto you concerning things which are, and which are to come; wherefore, I will read you the words of Isaiah. And they are the words which my brother has desired that I should speak unto you. And I speak unto you for your sakes, that ye may learn and glorify the name of your God.”

    5: “And now, the words which I shall read are they which Isaiah spake concerning all the house of Israel; wherefore, they may be likened unto you, for ye are of the house of Israel. And there are many things which have been spoken by Isaiah which may be likened unto you, because ye are of the house of Israel.”

    Turn in your Bibles to Isaiah 49. We’re going to do some comparisons.

    6: “And now, these are the words: Thus saith the Lord God: Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people; and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders.”

    7: “And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers; they shall bow down to thee with their faces towards the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord; for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.”

    The KJV of Isaiah 49:22-23 says exactly the same thing. Here’s why this is a problem: Isaiah 40-66 may not have been written yet, and it’s being claimed these words are being read. To do a quick recap, Nephi states that he read Isaiah 48-49 from the brass plates in 1 Nephi 22. That chapter was purported to have taken place around 588-570 BC. In 1 Nephi 4, Nephi took these brass plates from Laban. The heading of that chapter states that took place about 600-592 B.C.

    Historically, it is true that Christians and Jews alike believed that that the entire book of Isaiah was written by the prophet. That view maintains that Isaiah 40-66 were simply future prophecies he wrote that would take place after his death. There are scholars that still hold to this view and explain the evidence for different authors and time periods as his various writings and sermons being compiled over the years by other people, which is also plausible. They point to the oldest copy of Isaiah we have in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which was found as a single scroll. There are also New Testament passages that quote later chapters of Isaiah that attribute these chapters to Isaiah the prophet. The general consensus amongst most modern Biblical scholars, however, is that Isaiah 1-39 was written by Isaiah, and chapters 40-66 were written by other people. They did not arrive at this conclusion without good reason.

    The first reason is that the narration of Isaiah chapters 40-55 strongly suggests an address to Israelites who are currently in captivity in Babylon. This is a jump of about 150 years after Isaiah 39, which prophesies the Babylonian captivity after King Hezekiah foolishly showed off all of his treasures to messengers from Babylon. Starting at chapter 40, the tone shifts from judgment-oriented to a comfort-oriented message. The kings that were alive during Isaiah’s life are not mentioned anymore from 40 on, and neither is Isaiah, unlike chapters 1-39. They Babylonian exile is often purported to have taken place at around 586 BC, with Deutero-Isaiah (or 2nd Isaiah, as some call it) roughly estimated to have been written between 550-538 BC. Another reason is the explicit mention of King Cyrus, who overthrew Babylon around 539 BC, in 44:28-45:6.

    I would like to take the time to point out here that I have no reason to cling desperately to the theory that multiple authors may have composed Isaiah. While this theory seems to make a lot of sense and is believed by many scholars, the chance of it not being correct does not suddenly mean the Book of Mormon is true. There are plenty of reasons to view the Book of Mormon as incredibly inaccurate based upon numerous factors that you will find in my previous posts. Even if Isaiah did write the entire book by himself (which I will admit is definitely possible), the appearance of later chapters in the Book of Mormon is easily explained by plagiarism. The historicity of the Book of Mormon would be taken seriously by myself and many others had ancient manuscripts of it been found, but there aren’t any. All we have is the word of one man that all this was written on gold plates that aren’t around for anyone to examine.

    For more information, see the following sources: Who Wrote the Book of Isaiah? | Zondervan Academic;Isaiah II – Religious Studies – Loras College Library at Loras College; Isaiah – The Society for Old Testament Study; Biblical literature – Isaiah, Prophecy, Poetry | Britannica; The Unity and Authorship of Isaiah: A Needless battle. These are all sources that are definitely worth checking out. If you want to see arguments in favor of a single author, which I recommend doing, see here: When, and by Whom, Was the Book of Isaiah Written? – Bible Authenticity and Authorship of Isaiah

    8: “And now I, Jacob, would speak somewhat concerning these words. For behold, the Lord has shown me that those who were at Jerusalem, from whence we came, have been slain and carried away captive.”

    9: “Nevertheless, the Lord has shown unto me that they should return again. And he also has shown unto me that the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel, should manifest himself unto them in the flesh; and after he should manifest himself they should scourge him and crucify him, according to the words of the angel who spake it unto me.”

    Verse 9 is interesting, because it seems to support the Trinitarian view that Jesus was literally God incarnate. This contrasts with the LDS view of what they call the Godhead. Unlike Christians, who view the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three distinct, coeternal, coequal, coexisting persons that make up one being (God), the LDS describe the Godhead as three separate beings altogether. Where Christians view the Trinity as 3 persons that are one in substance, will, and purpose, the LDS view the Godhead as 3 beings that are one in will and purpose. You can see a summary of their view here: Godhead. The LDS view is, of course, heresy.

    The Trinity is woven throughout all of Scripture, despite what anti-trinitarians claim. It begins in Genesis 1:1 with “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” The word used for God, “Elohim,” is the plural form of the Hebrew word for God. However, the Hebrew verb “created” is singular. Another hint at the Trinity appears in verse 26: “Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…” There are some who argue that God may have been talking to the angels. That doesn’t hold water when you consider that only God is able to create. Why would he address the angels and say, “Let Us make…” when no one helped Him create anything? We also see the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament, though we see the title “Spirit of the Lord” instead of Holy Spirit. There is also a very compelling case to be made that “The Angel of the Lord” in the Old Testament is an early manifestation of Jesus. However, I’m trying to stay mostly on topic, and writing a serious defense of the Trinity would take more space in this post than I want to give it at this time.

    While the Trinity was not fully grasped until the New Testament, it is abundantly clear that the New Testament writers and Christians understood that Jesus was God incarnate and the second person of the Trinity. In their book, “The Incarnate Christ and His Critics,” authors Robert M. Bowman Jr. and Ed Komoszewski point to Biblical evidence of the divinity of Christ, and therefore the Trinity, with the helpful acronym “H.A.N.D.S.” They cite numerous Old Testament and New Testament passages that demonstrate Jesus receives the same honors that are given to God in the Old Testament. He has the same attributes in the New Testament that are ascribed to God in the Old Testament. He has the same names as God. He performs the same deeds as God, and he shares the seat with God. I would love to delve further into this excellent book, but it’s 763 pages. However, there is a dandy appendix in the back with a chart that shows the Bible verses used to support their position. Out of the kindness of my heart, I will take pictures of it and attach it to the end of this post.

    The LDS church claims their idea of the Godhead is biblical, but that teaching was lost in what they call “The Great Apostasy,” which involved a loss of original Christian teachings when the apostles died. That idea has no basis in reality, which becomes more evident when you read the New Testament and see the continuation of those teachings in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers. A favorite claim that I often hear from Mormons and others is that the Trinity is a manmade doctrine that was brought forth with the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and the subsequent Nicene Creed. This is nonsense, of course. The council was convened primarily to decide when to celebrate Easter and address heresies that were cropping up, namely Arianism, which posited that Jesus was created by God, which means Jesus is neither God incarnate nor equal to God the Father (sound familiar?). While we can certainly say the early church fathers grappled with the doctrine of the Trinity and were making attempts to explain it, to act like it was invented out of thin air at a council is absurd. The Nicene Creed was composed as a summary of belief to defend Christianity against heresies regarding who God is. For more information, see First Council of Nicaea | Christianity, Arianism, Ecumenical, History, Significance, & Facts | Britannica.

    10: “And after they have hardened their hearts and stiffened their necks against the Holy One of Israel, behold, the judgments of the Holy One of Israel shall come upon them. And the day cometh that they shall be smitten and afflicted.”

    11: “Wherefore, after they are driven to and fro, for thus saith the angel, many shall be afflicted in the flesh, and shall not be suffered to perish, because of the prayers of the faithful; they shall be scattered, and smitten, and hated; nevertheless, the Lord will be merciful unto them, that when they shall come to the knowledge of their Redeemer, they shall be gathered together again to the lands of their inheritance.”

    These two verses are prophecies concerning the fate of the Israelites after the death and resurrection of Christ. The Old Testament has such prophecies, so this concept is nothing unique. The famous, albeit cryptic, “Seventy Weeks Prophecy” occurs in Daniel 9:24-27. In this prophecy, 1 day represents one year, so one “week” is 7 years. This prophecy, then, covers 490 years into the future. In it, Jerusalem is restored and the temple rebuilt (which took place when Cyrus allowed the Israelites to return and rebuild in 538 BC), Christ comes to earth and is crucified and resurrected, and the temple at Jerusalem is destroyed again. That destruction took place in 70 AD. For a fascinating and informative breakdown of this passage, see What Are the Seventy Weeks of Daniel? (Daniel 9) | Crossway.

    Another interesting passage that discusses Israel’s future is Amos 9:9-15. This foretells the scattering of Isreal and destruction of sinners, then moves to prophesy Isreal’s restoration and the inclusion of the Gentiles in this restoration. There are several different interpretations of the very last verse: “I will also plant them on their land, and they will not again be rooted out from their land which I have given them,’ Says the Lord your God.” Some believe this is a literal promise that was fulfilled when Isreal became a nation in 1948. This seems strange, however, because the prosperity described in previous verses is not currently enjoyed by Isreal. Others think this prophecy hasn’t come to fruition because it’s conditional; Isreal never returned to God, so God did not give them this prosperity or land. However, there’s no indication in the language used in this passage that this is the case. Others view this promise as pertaining to the church or even heaven. No matter what view you hold, however, the point remains that there are clear prophecies regarding the future of the house of Israel after the death and resurrection of Jesus. For a breakdown of these different theories, see » “Never Again Uprooted From the Land” (Amos 9:15) John Mark Hicks. You can also veiw several commentaries on this passage here: Amos 9:15 Commentaries: “I will also plant them on their land, And they will not again be rooted out from their land Which I have given them,” Says the LORD your God.

    12: “And blessed are the Gentiles, they of whom the prophet has written; for behold, if it so be that they shall repent and fight not against Zion, and do not unite themselves to that great and abominable church, they shall be saved; for the Lord God will fulfil his covenants which he has made unto his children; and for this cause the prophet has written these things.”

    I covered this topic more extensively in “The Great and Abominable Church Revisited.” For the sake of space, I will summarize what the LDS church believes is the “great and abominable church”: Hellenized Christianity, as they like to call it. You can read that description here: “Nephi’s “Great and Abominable Church”” by Stephen E. Robinson. Commonly and gleefully declared by Mormons is the idea that the early church fathers were heavily influenced by Greek philosophy and that’s how core doctrines, such as the Trinity and creatio ex nihilo, came into being. In other words, any Bible-believing church is “great and abominable” to them. Also, as I’ve mentioned several times previously, the word “church” didn’t exist during the Old Testament. That is a strictly Christian concept that wasn’t formulated until the New Testament.

    13: “Wherefore, they that fight against Zion and the covenant people of the Lord shall lick up the dust of their feet; and the people of the Lord shall not be ashamed. For the people of the Lord are they who wait for him; for they still wait for the coming of the Messiah.”

    This seems to be more of a reiteration of verse 7.

    14: “And behold, according to the words of the prophet, the Messiah will set himself again the second time to recover them; wherefore, he will manifest himself unto them in power and great glory, unto the destruction of their enemies, when that day cometh when they shall believe in him; and none will he destroy that believe in him.”

    This is a loose retelling of Isaiah 11:11. Isaiah chapter 11 is an end-times prophecy that involves Christ’s reign on earth and the bringing back of all of Isreal to their original promised land. Obviously, this hasn’t taken place yet. It speaks of a time of peace on all the earth. Verse 9 promises “… For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord.” Verse 11 states, “Then it will happen on that day that the Lord will again recover the second time with His hand the remnant of His people, who will remain, from Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.” Verses 15-16 even detail how God will make paths from Assyria for Israel to return. For a great breakdown of Isaiah 11, see What does Isaiah chapter 11 mean? | BibleRef.com

    15: “And they that believe not in him shall be destroyed, both by fire, and by tempest, and by earthquakes, and by bloodshed, and by pestilence, and by famine. And they shall know that the Lord is God, the Holy One of Israel.”

    There are numerous Old Testament prophecies regarding the end times that describe the absolute destruction that will take place. There’s a handy chart of some of these here: Old Testament Endtimes Prophecy Chart | Dwell Community Church | Dwell Community Church.

    16: “For shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful captive delivered?”

    Isaiah 49:24 “Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful captive delivered?” (KJV)

    17: “But thus saith the Lord: Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered; for the Mighty God shall deliver his covenant people. For thus saith the Lord: I will contend with them that contendeth with thee—”

    Isaiah 49:25: “ But thus saith the Lord, Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered: for I will contend with him that contendeth with thee, and I will save thy children.” (KJV). I’ve noticed that the LDS church has a fixation on God’s “covenant people,” which is how they view themselves. This is evidenced by the adding of that phrase to this verse in Isaiah.

    18: “And I will feed them that oppress thee, with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood as with sweet wine; and all flesh shall know that I the Lord am thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.”

    Isaiah 49:25: “And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the Lord am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.” (KJV).

    I feel like I covered a lot of topics in this post. Then again, I seem to do that a lot. That’s because each chapter, for the most part, presents multiple problems. It’s like a theological game of whack-a-mole. I smack down one issue, and another one pops up in the next verse. I’m sure I will be continuing this pattern as I press on with this journey through the Book of Mormon.

    As promised, here are the pictures of the chart from “The Incarnate Christ and His Critics”:

  • Pardon Me, Sir, Do You Have Any Racism?

    Based upon the chapter I’m reviewing, Joseph Smith had plenty of racism. He also had animals and metals that didn’t exist in the Americas when these events were purported to have taken place, plus a big temple like Solomon’s even though Nephi had nowhere near enough people to build such a thing. I have decided to bypass 2 Nephi chapter 4 simply because it contained issues I’ve already covered in previous posts, such as the impossibility of brass plates and the impracticality of engraving extensive histories on metal plates in general. I’ve expressed my befuddlement regarding the needless and bizarre repetition in the Book of Mormon, and I don’t want to be guilty of the same thing. My parents didn’t raise a hypocrite.

    2 Nephi Chapter 5

    The Nephites separate themselves from the Lamanites, keep the law of Moses, and build a temple—Because of their unbelief, the Lamanites are cut off from the presence of the Lord, are cursed, and become a scourge unto the Nephites. About 588–559 B.C.

    1: “Behold, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cry much unto the Lord my God, because of the anger of my brethren.”

    2: “But behold, their anger did increase against me, insomuch that they did seek to take away my life.”

    3: “Yea, they did murmur against me, saying: Our younger brother thinks to rule over us; and we have had much trial because of him; wherefore, now let us slay him, that we may not be afflicted more because of his words. For behold, we will not have him to be our ruler; for it belongs unto us, who are the elder brethren, to rule over this people.”

    4: “Now I do not write upon these plates all the words which they murmured against me. But it sufficeth me to say, that they did seek to take away my life.”

    This is an incredibly common theme throughout 1 and 2 Nephi. His brothers are always getting mad at him for whatever reason, they murmur, and then they try to kill him. Due to their repeated mentions of their younger brother ruling over them, I have previously likened the conflict to that between Joseph and his brothers. You can read more about that in Genesis 37.

    5: “And it came to pass that the Lord did warn me, that I, Nephi, should depart from them and flee into the wilderness, and all those who would go with me.”

    6: “Wherefore, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did take my family, and also Zoram and his family, and Sam, mine elder brother and his family, and Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren, and also my sisters, and all those who would go with me. And all those who would go with me were those who believed in the warnings and the revelations of God; wherefore, they did hearken unto my words.”

    7: “And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents.”

    8: “And my people would that we should call the name of the place Nephi; wherefore, we did call it Nephi.”

    9: “And all those who were with me did take upon them to call themselves the people of Nephi.”

    10: “And we did observe to keep the judgments, and the statutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things, according to the law of Moses.”

    11: “And the Lord was with us; and we did prosper exceedingly; for we did sow seed, and we did reap again in abundance. And we began to raise flocks, and herds, and animals of every kind.”

    It is not possible that they raised “flocks, and herds, and animals of every kind” because animals of every kind did not exist in the Americas. I go into detail about horses, cattle, and oxen here: More Things That Didn’t Exist Back Then – The Inquisitive Christian.

    12: “And I, Nephi, had also brought the records which were engraven upon the plates of brass; and also the ball, or compass, which was prepared for my father by the hand of the Lord, according to that which is written.”

    This is yet another anachronism I have previously discussed. The compass was not invented until several centuries later by the Chinese, and it was originally intended for divination, not navigation. You can read more about that in the post I cited above. The brass ball, which was another fictional navigational tool, is discussed in 1 Nephi chapter 16. You can read my post on that topic here: The Magic 8-Ball of Brass and Other Tales – The Inquisitive Christian.

    14: “And I, Nephi, did take the sword of Laban, and after the manner of it did make many swords, lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their hatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people.”

    How were these swords made, and out of what material? Ancient sword making was an incredibly involved process that required a high level of skill. Blacksmithing was a respected trade and not some hobby one could take up at a moment’s notice. Making swords, especially “many swords,” would have required a mining and smelting operation with specialized tools, and there’s no indication Nephi or anyone with him would have had the knowledge or skills necessary for any of this. You can read more about swordsmithing here: The Origins of the Forge: Blacksmithing in the Ancient World – Old West Iron. There’s also another glaring issue here, however: no evidence of swords as we know them in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica exists. The only other weapon I could find any information on was something called a macuahuitl, which resembled a wooden paddle with obsidian blades lining the sides. You can read more on this weapon here: Macuahuitl: Complete Guide to the Aztec Obsidian Sword | Noblie. Most sources, like the one I just cited, would refer to this weapon as a type of sword, but it’s obviously not what’s being described here. LDS apologists have latched onto this description and try to use it as evidence that the swords mentioned here in this chapter have been found in ancient Mesoamerica. They are, of course, playing semantics. What’s being described here is obviously not a macuahuitl. This is evidenced by the mention of Laban’s sword and the phrase “after the manner of it did make many swords.” He is clearly describing replicas of a sword he brought from the homeland.

    15: “And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.”

    I’ve already established several times that brass did not exist during the Old Testament era. We know that gold was present and was used in Mesoamerica during this era, as evidenced by archeological findings of ornaments and ritualistic objects: Golden Kingdoms: Luxury and Legacy in the Ancient Americas. I’ve looked at multiple sources, and the earliest date I can find for the presence of silver mining in Mesoamerica is around 600 AD: When was Silver Discovered? – APMEX, so Nephi and his people couldn’t have been working with silver at this time. Copper metallurgy was also not developed until the same period: Preindustrial Copper Production at the Archaeological Zone of Itziparátzico, a Tarascan Location in Michoacán, México – Blacklight. There is no credible evidence at all for the use or production of steel in the Americas during this time period. Even IF all of these metals were present during this time, are we to believe that Nephi had all the skills and knowledge necessary to not only work with all of these but to teach others to as well, even though there is no indication that he learned any of this before his arrival?

    16: “And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.”

    No. This absolutely did not happen. Let’s open our Bibles to 1 Kings 5:13-16. According to this passage, King Solomon had 30,000 manual laborers that were sent to Lebanon in companies of 10,000 for one month at a time. There were 70,000 transporters, or men who hauled building materials and equipment. Then, there were 80,000 men tasked with quarrying and carving the stone used in the temple. He had 3,300 men who were overseeing all this labor. So there were over 180,000 men for this massive undertaking. In 1 Kings 6:38, we find this project took seven years to complete. Nephi and however many dozens of people who accompanied him absolutely did not build a replica of Solomon’s temple. We are expected to believe that the only difference is that different materials were used. We have no reason to believe this happened and every reason not to believe it.

    17: “And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cause my people to be industrious, and to labor with their hands.”

    18: “And it came to pass that they would that I should be their king. But I, Nephi, was desirous that they should have no king; nevertheless, I did for them according to that which was in my power.”

    This is reminiscent of the Israelites demanding a king. God, of course, was very displeased with this request, because their reason was so they could be like the surrounding pagan nations. God gave them a king, but He did so with great displeasure. You can read more about this in 1 Samuel 8.

    20: “Wherefore, the word of the Lord was fulfilled which he spake unto me, saying that: Inasmuch as they will not hearken unto thy words they shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord. And behold, they were cut off from his presence.”

    21: “And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.”

    That’s right, everyone. Nephi’s brothers and their groups were so evil that God turned them into Native Americans. Just to get the obvious out of the way first, no one who came from the middle east was “white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome.” This should not need to be explained. I have seen LDS apologists dance around this and try desperately to convince everyone that we aren’t reading exactly what we’re reading. I’ve witnessed some who attempt to paint this as a symbolic, spiritual darkness. That makes absolutely zero sense, because their skin color is clearly being described. Others have insisted that the curse was being separated from God, and the dark skin is just the mark that they were cursed, as if that’s somehow better. Another disturbing aspect, too, is God reportedly made them dark so “they might not be enticing to my people.” The strong implication here, is that Godly, “white and delightsome” folks can’t be attracted to darker-skinned people. The modern LDS church, of course, insists they aren’t a bunch of racists and they disavow racism. They’re simply scrambling to try to paint their history and their sacred text in a better light.

    However, there is no hiding their past. Regarding black people, Brigham Young famously enacted a priesthood ban on blacks that persisted until 1978, when the church faced mounting pressure from civil rights activists and potential threats to their tax-exempt status. Young’s position was based on his belief that black people were descendants of Cain and black skin was the mark that God placed upon him, which he passed down. In his completely bizarre speech, he also refers to Eve as “Mama,” Adam as “Daddy,” and God as “Grandfather.” He also makes up other things about Cain’s curse, such as God telling him he can’t have the blessings of the priesthood. You can read his wild-eyed, disgustingly racist speech in its entirety, including his views on interracial couples, here: 4.2 Brigham Young articulates a racial priesthood restriction, February 5, 1852 · This Abominable Slavery · J. Willard Marriott Library Exhibits. You can also read more information here: Unexplaining the Mormon Priesthood Ban on Blacks | Christian Research Institute.

    The LDS Church’s historical relationship with Native Americans has been complex and often brutal. On one hand, they believed it was their duty to minister to them. On the other hand, those ministries were fueled by the idea that they were savages in need of civilizing and redemption. To muddy the waters more, these beliefs also led to atrocious acts of violence against Native populations. This history is extensive, and I can’t possibly delve into every aspect of it, so I will do my best to provide an adequate summary.

    Since LDS scripture taught that the dark skin was the mark of their curse, for over 100 years, members believed that by converting them, their skin would become white again. This comes from 2 Nephi 30:6, which originally stated, “And then shall they rejoice; for they shall know that it is a blessing unto them from the hand of God; and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and a delightsome people.” In 1840, Joseph Smith swapped out “white” for the word, “pure.” However, all editions until 1981 still contained “white” instead of “pure.” This attitude is reflected in quotes from former LDS leaders, including Spencer Kimball, who insisted that the children in their home placement program (a sickening practice that I will expound upon in a bit) were becoming “white and delightsome” and these children appeared lighter than children still on the reservation. You can read more on that here: Question: Did some Church leaders believe that the skin of the Lamanites would turn white? – FAIR.

    The Mormons’ relationships with Native American tribes began with Brigham Young and their settling of Utah. Young’s policies on them varied from a paternalistic view in which he wanted to convert them to violent confrontations. Young famously once said, “It is cheaper to feed than to fight the Indians.” On the surface, it appears he believed providing good and welfare to them was more economical and would foster peaceful relations. You can read that quote and other Young policies here: We Must Keep One Another. Be advised, however, that any history contained in this source is written through an LDS lens and needs to be compared with documented historical facts.

    Despite these supposed policies of peace, however, Brigham Young cared very little for Indigenous people when it came to valuable resources for his settlers. As Mormons quickly settled the Utah Valley, many Timpanogos people were displaced, leading to disputes. In 1849, tensions flared and stoked the flames of conflict when Mormon settlers brutally murdered a Timpanogos man known as “Old Bishop” based upon the accusation that he stole a shirt from settlers. The Timpanogos people demanded the Mormons turn over the killers, which was refused. They then demanded goods to compensate for the loss of their tribe member, which was also refused. This led to months of the Timpanogos stealing crops and shooting at livestock that came onto their property. In January of 1850, the settlers demanded that Brigham Young take action, which he did by approving orders known as ” Special Orders No. 1 and 2.” These were extermination orders against the tribe, which is incredibly ironic and hypocritical, considering the extermination order issued by Governor Boggs against the Mormons in Missouri in 1838. This ghastly order led to a two-day battle in a nearby Timpanogos village in February of 1850. It was estimated that between 40 and 100 tribe members were killed, while the Mormon settlers lost one person. You can read more on this conflict here: An LDS pioneer-era extermination order still weighs on the Timpanogos Nation | KUER. The church has yet to rescind this order and formally apologize.

    The Mormon settlers made enemies out of other tribes as well. Their settling of lands that the Ute tribe used for hunting and gathering eventually led to The Walker War (1853-1854). In July of 1853, some Utes were trading at the home of a settler named James Ivie when a dispute broke out between a Ute man and his wife over her inability to strike a good deal. Ivie intervened and ended up killing one of the men in the group, which happened to be a relative of their Chief Walkara. The Ute tribe demanded a settler be put to death as retribution, which the Mormons obviously refused. This led to more violence between the two groups, which finally ended in May of 1854 with a peace settlement between Chief Walkara and Brigham Young. For more information, see: The Walker War | History to Go.

    Another horrifying act of violence is known as the Bear River Massacre of 1863. As Mormon settlements grew, more and more Shoshone Indians were pushed further and further out of their lands in Northern Utah. Some Shoshone reacted to this by leading raids on settlers. On January 29th, Colonel Patrick E. Connor led a group of volunteer soldiers from Fort Douglas in Salt Lake City to hunt down Shoshone tribe members who were responsible for those raids (Bear River Massacre Site in the Bear River Heritage Area). What followed next was the deadliest slaughter of Indigenous people in the history of the American West. Catching the tribe, who were largely defenseless, by surprise in their camp by the Bear River, these soldiers killed around 400 men, women, and children (Telling the stories of the Bear River Massacre – @theU).

    In addition to these violent conflicts, Brigham Young also legalized slavery in the Utah Territory in 1852. The result was indentured servitude of Native American children in Mormon households in an attempt to “civilize” them. Under the Act in Relation to Service law, children could be “apprenticed” in Mormon families for up to 20 years. In his address during the legislative session on January 5th, 1852, Young decried the practice of slavery but advocated for “servitude” and made it clear that “the seed of Canaan” was inferior to white people. It is important to note, however, that this attitude wasn’t necessarily unique to Mormons.

    Young believed removing them from their families and culture could aid in their conversion and recovery from their curse. Now, in the interest of fairness and proper historical context, I’d be remiss if I didn’t add the detail that some Ute slave traders would threaten to kill children in front of potential buyers if they weren’t purchased. As terribly racist as Young’s ideology was, I can’t honestly say I could fault some families for buying children under these circumstances ( The Trial of Don Pedro León Luján – BYU Studies). It would also be disingenuous of me if I also failed to recognize that the Native American slave trade was by no means instigated by the Mormons. It was widespread in the American West, and I’m willing to concede to the notion that many Mormons, perhaps even including Young, may have believed they were rescuing some of these children from traffickers, some of whom were Indigenous themselves. At the same time, however, Young viewed this “rescue” as a debt to be repaid by indentured servitude. You can read more on this here: 1.3 Excerpt from Governor’s Message, January 5, 1852 · This Abominable Slavery · J. Willard Marriott Library Exhibits. This is indeed a subject with some nuance. While we should not act as if Young and the Mormon settlers were the only villains in this story, we also shouldn’t view their cause as noble or good, either.

    Unfortunately, the belief that Native American children were better off with Mormon families did not disappear with the slave trade. From about 1947 to 2000, the LDS church operated what was known as the Indian Placement Program. Spencer W. Kimball was the president of the church when this program first began unofficially. Native American children from the ages of 8 to 18 were baptized into the Mormon Church, despite not fully grasping what was to come. From there, these children and teens were placed with Mormon families during the school year and returned to the reservations during the summer. While the church painted this program as a noble endeavor that would give these children better opportunities, I think we can gather what the real motivation was given Kimball’s earlier referenced quote. In a letter to the first presidency, Golden Buchanan, who worked on this placement program, wrote, “The Indian people are ready. They are looking to us for leadership as they have never looked before… I feel strongly that the Church cannot neglect its responsibilities further. Today the children are pliable and can be molded.” While some program participants did have positive experiences, many did not, and the program was widely viewed as an attempt to erase a distinct culture and replace it with whiteness and Mormon beliefs. Around 50,000 children were placed in this program. You can read more on this here: The Indian Placement Program with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints – Lamanite Truth.

    The LDS Church has yet to issue any formal apology for any of this to Indigenous people or even acknowledge any wrongdoing in these matters.

    22: “And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities.”

    23: “And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done.”

    So, interracial marriages were also a no-go. As Mayor of Nauvoo, Joseph Smith fined black men for attempting to marry white women. He stated in 1843: “Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them to their own species.” Charming. Brigham Young took a more extreme approach, with his insistence that interracial couples, namely white and black ones, needed to be put to death, a concept made famous in the “blood atonement” doctrine (Brigham says those in mixed-race marriages should have their blood shed as an atonement. | B. H. Roberts). While later church presidents did not advocate for the death penalty, interracial marriages were still, at the very least, strongly discouraged (What has been taught regarding interracial marriage?). Ironically enough, marriages between white men and Native American women were encouraged (Mormonism and Interracial Marriage – C. Randall Nicholson).

    While we can’t say that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young had unique attitudes towards interracial marriage (though, Young’s was extreme even for that time), I can’t help but wonder, if this was God’s one true church, then why were they so much like the world? Why, if they had a living “prophet, seer, and revelator,” would they be borrowing such terrible and unholy views from their non-Mormon neighbors? While there were professing Christians at the time who advocated for terribly racist policies, we can safely say those were based on a deliberate misrepresentation of Scripture to conform to their sinful wants. We can’t say that about the Mormons of that time. Their racism was based upon their own scriptures that reflected the attitudes of that time.

    24: “And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey.”

    Oh.

    25: “And the Lord God said unto me: They shall be a scourge unto thy seed, to stir them up in remembrance of me; and inasmuch as they will not remember me, and hearken unto my words, they shall scourge them even unto destruction.”

    26: “And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did consecrate Jacob and Joseph, that they should be priests and teachers over the land of my people.”

    This didn’t happen. Even IF Nephi and his family existed, this would have been a completely inappropriate action because only Levites were permitted to be priests. See my post No. You’re Not a Levite. – The Inquisitive Christian for a more in-depth discussion of this.

    27: “And it came to pass that we lived after the manner of happiness.”

    And it came to pass that I started to question my decision to undertake reading the Book of Mormon.

    Verses 28-34 discuss Nephi making more plates and writing more things on them.

    Given the prominent discussion of racism in this post, I think it best to end with Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

  • Many Fruits. Many Loins.

    This morning, I had one Mormon tell me, online, that he could see the hate in my eyes and another one, who refused to read this blog, label it as “the words of Satan.” I found those criticisms quite funny, because they simply demonstrated what way too many LDS followers are conditioned to do from an early age: label anything even remotely critical as “hate” and “from Satan.” Those accusations are often lobbed at people with no qualifying data to back them up. It’s the height of intellectual laziness and dishonesty. If you can simply label something right out of the gate as “hate,” “anti-Mormon,” or “a lie from Satan,” then it absolves you of the responsibility of looking into what someone is claiming. I’m going to keep writing this blog as I see fit, and I’m not sorry. Now, onto the topic of today.

    Anyone who has read this blog for any length of time has probably noticed that I’ll summarize some repetitive verses rather than type them out. I’m not doing that this time. Why? Because the fruits of people’s loins are mentioned 20 times in a chapter with 25 verses, and if I had to read all of them, then so do all of you. Out of the kindness of my heart, I have italicized these phrases so you can also count them and wonder if this was written by a 6th grader with Tourette’s.

    2 Nephi Chapter 3

    Joseph in Egypt saw the Nephites in vision—He prophesied of Joseph Smith, the latter-day seer; of Moses, who would deliver Israel; and of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. About 588–570 B.C.

    1: “And now I speak unto you, Joseph, my last-born. Thou wast born in the wilderness of mine afflictions; yea, in the days of my greatest sorrow did thy mother bear thee.”

    2: “And may the Lord consecrate also unto thee this land, which is a most precious land, for thine inheritance and the inheritance of thy seed with thy brethren, for thy security forever, if it so be that ye shall keep the commandments of the Holy One of Israel.”

    The Americas were not consecrated to ancient Hebrews. This should go without saying. I have already demonstrated and cited research in previous posts that indigenous tribes were in the Americas thousands of years before Nephi and his family supposedly arrived. In “An Implausible Discovery,” I also go into more detail about how the ancient Hebrews only had one promised land. There were no additional ones.

    3: “And now, Joseph, my last-born, whom I have brought out of the wilderness of mine afflictions, may the Lord bless thee forever, for thy seed shall not utterly be destroyed.”

    4: “For behold, thou art the fruit of my loins; and I am a descendant of Joseph who was carried captive into Egypt. And great were the covenants of the Lord which he made unto Joseph.”

    These covenants can be found in Genesis 41:52, 48:21, and 50:24-25.

    5: “Wherefore, Joseph truly saw our day. And he obtained a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit of his loins the Lord God would raise up a righteous branch unto the house of Israel; not the Messiah, but a branch which was to be broken off, nevertheless, to be remembered in the covenants of the Lord that the Messiah should be made manifest unto them in the latter days, in the spirit of power, unto the bringing of them out of darkness unto light—yea, out of hidden darkness and out of captivity unto freedom.”

    No, absolutely none of this took place. Joseph did not see any visions of any of the people in the Book of Mormon. If this were true, it would have been in in ancient manuscripts of the Old Testament. No such passages exist.

    6: “For Joseph truly testified, saying: A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins.”

    7: “Yea, Joseph truly said: Thus saith the Lord unto me: A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins. And unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren, which shall be of great worth unto them, even to the bringing of them to the knowledge of the covenants which I have made with thy fathers.”

    That’s right, folks. Not only did Joseph Smith have an unhealthy obsession with other people’s loins, but he uncovered quite the grand prophecy of himself. Written on plates no one ever saw. That only he was able to translate. That an angel conveniently took back to heaven. That have never been seen since.

    8: “And I will give unto him a commandment that he shall do none other work, save the work which I shall command him. And I will make him great in mine eyes; for he shall do my work.”

    What work might that be? Fleecing people out of their money (A History of Joseph Smith’s Financial Malfeasance (Pt. 1) – BOOK OF MORMONISM)? Marrying teenage girls and other men’s wives (Joseph Smith’s Polygamy – Yale University Press)? Or would it be burning down a printing press because he didn’t like what they were printing (Joseph Smith’s Order to Destroy the Nauvoo Expositor (June 10, 1844)?

    9 “And he shall be great like unto Moses, whom I have said I would raise up unto you, to deliver my people, O house of Israel.”

    Only an egomaniac of the highest order would write a prophesy about himself and compare himself to Moses.

    10: “And Moses will I raise up, to deliver thy people out of the land of Egypt.”

    Oh, yeah. That guy. But back to the real star:

    11: “But a seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give power to bring forth my word unto the seed of thy loins—and not to the bringing forth my word only, saith the Lord, but to the convincing them of my word, which shall have already gone forth among them.

    12: “Wherefore, the fruit of thy loins shall write; and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah, shall grow together, unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins, and bringing them to the knowledge of their fathers in the latter days, and also to the knowledge of my covenants, saith the Lord.”

    Sir, this is a Wendy’s.

    13: “And out of weakness he shall be made strong, in that day when my work shall commence among all my people, unto the restoring thee, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.”

    14: “And thus prophesied Joseph, saying: Behold, that seer will the Lord bless; and they that seek to destroy him shall be confounded; for this promise, which I have obtained of the Lord, of the fruit of my loins, shall be fulfilled. Behold, I am sure of the fulfilling of this promise;”

    Nobody was confounded in the angry mob that killed Joseph Smith when he was in the Carthage Jail. And no, he wasn’t a martyr, as Mormon apologists insist. He was not jailed or killed for being Mormon. He was jailed for burning down the Nauvoo Expositor newspaper and for treason, and he was killed because his morally bankrupt practices had come to light. For more information, see: American Prophet: The Story of Joseph Smith and Final Moments at Carthage Jail and the Death of Joseph Smith – Mormonism Research Ministry.

    15: “And his name shall be called after me; and it shall be after the name of his father. And he shall be like unto me; for the thing, which the Lord shall bring forth by his hand, by the power of the Lord shall bring my people unto salvation.”

    Salvation can never be found in a religion that contains so many lies, especially lies about God (see my previous post “Thanks, I Hate it” for more details on that).

    16: “Yea, thus prophesied Joseph: I am sure of this thing, even as I am sure of the promise of Moses; for the Lord hath said unto me, I will preserve thy seed forever.”

    The Lord said no such thing.

    17: “And the Lord hath said: I will raise up a Moses; and I will give power unto him in a rod; and I will give judgment unto him in writing. Yet I will not loose his tongue, that he shall speak much, for I will not make him mighty in speaking. But I will write unto him my law, by the finger of mine own hand; and I will make a spokesman for him.”

    18: “And the Lord said unto me also: I will raise up unto the fruit of thy loins; and I will make for him a spokesman. And I, behold, I will give unto him that he shall write the writing of the fruit of thy loins, unto the fruit of thy loins; and the spokesman of thy loins shall declare it.”

    Smith wanted to be Moses so badly that he also wrote a prophecy about his very own Aaron. Most Mormons interpret this to mean Oliver Cowdery, who served as one of Smith’s scribes while writing the Book of Mormon. See Exodus 6:28-7:2 to see what I mean.

    19: “And the words which he shall write shall be the words which are expedient in my wisdom should go forth unto the fruit of thy loins. And it shall be as if the fruit of thy loins had cried unto them from the dust; for I know their faith.”

    20: “And they shall cry from the dust; yea, even repentance unto their brethren, even after many generations have gone by them. And it shall come to pass that their cry shall go, even according to the simpleness of their words.”

    So, this is a prophecy about the Book of Mormon. Written in the Book of Mormon… and nowhere else in history.

    21: “Because of their faith their words shall proceed forth out of my mouth unto their brethren who are the fruit of thy loins; and the weakness of their words will I make strong in their faith, unto the remembering of my covenant which I made unto thy fathers.”

    22: “And now, behold, my son Joseph, after this manner did my father of old prophesy.”

    No one prophesied any of this.

    23: “Wherefore, because of this covenant thou art blessed; for thy seed shall not be destroyed, for they shall hearken unto the words of the book.”

    24: “And there shall rise up one mighty among them, who shall do much good, both in word and in deed, being an instrument in the hands of God, with exceeding faith, to work mighty wonders, and do that thing which is great in the sight of God, unto the bringing to pass much restoration unto the house of Israel, and unto the seed of thy brethren.”

    Someone certainly had high opinions of himself. See Delusional Disorder for more information.

    25: “And now, blessed art thou, Joseph. Behold, thou art little; wherefore hearken unto the words of thy brother, Nephi, and it shall be done unto thee even according to the words which I have spoken. Remember the words of thy dying father. Amen.”

    You know what? I’m not even mad at this mess. I can’t take this chapter seriously enough to get upset over it. I think Mark Twain described it best when he declared it to be “chloroform in print.” This delightful description, as well as his other opinions on the Book of Mormon, are found in chapter 16 of his book “Roughing It,” which you can read here: MT on the Mormons.

    If I never read the phrase “fruit of thy loins” or any other variation again, I’ll consider it a win.

  • A Theological Dumpster Fire

    I would highly recommend reading my previous post, “The Devil is in the Details” before proceeding with this one. The concepts of hell and the devil are also used anachronistically in this chapter, and I delved into those issues at length previously. I see no need to repeat myself, especially when there are new issues that will take us on quite a theological roller coaster. We will see Lehi addressing his son, Jacob, and will catch a glimpse of Joseph Smith’s terribly warped views of the Fall.

    2 Nephi, Chapter 2

    Redemption comes through the Holy Messiah. Freedom of choice (agency) is essential to existence and progression. Adam fell that men might be. Men are free to choose liberty and eternal life. About 588-570 B.C.

    1: “And now, Jacob, I speak unto you: Thou art my firstborn in the days of my tribulation in the wilderness. And behold, in thy childhood thou hast suffered afflictions and much sorrow, because of the rudeness of they brethren.”

    2: “Nevertheless, Jacob, my firstborn in the wilderness, thou knowest the greatness of God; and he shall consecrate thine afflictions for thy gain.”

    That strikes me as a strange phrase. To consecrate means to set something apart as holy. We know that God can use things for His greater purposes, as Romans 8:28 states: “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” While we can see that God can word through afflictions and trials of various kinds, it’s quite different to call the afflictions and trials themselves as set apart for holiness. While there are numerous examples of God bringing good out of evil circumstances throughout the Old Testament, this concept is not plainly stated until the New Testament.

    3: “Wherefore, thy soul shall be blessed, and thou shalt dwell safely with thy brother, Nephi; and thy days shall be spent in the service of God. Wherefore, I know that thou art redeemed, because of the righteousness of thy Redeemer; for thou hast beheld that in the fulness of time he cometh to bring salvation unto men.”

    4: “And thou has beheld in thy youth his glory; wherefore, thou art blessed even as they unto whom he shall minister in the flesh; for the Spirit is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. And they way is prepared from the fall of man, and salvation is free.”

    We know salvation in the Old Testament was possible through faith (Gen 15:6, Isaiah 12:2, Hab. 2:4), but the description of salvation as a free gift was not developed until the New Testament. Romans 6:23 states, “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Ephesians 2:8-9 also reinforces this idea: “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast.”

    5: “And men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto men. And by the law no flesh is justified; or, by the law men are cut off. Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever.”

    6: “Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth.”

    The phrase “Holy Messiah” is never used in the Bible. We can conclude after the fact that the Messiah is holy because he is referred to as “the Messiah” in the Old Testament (Daniel 9:25-26) and “the Holy One of God,” or just “Holy One” in the New Testament (Mark 1:24, Acts 3:14). However, the combination of those two words is specific to the Book of Mormon.

    7: “Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be answered.”

    Jesus being our sacrifice to fulfill the law (or, as it is put here, to answer the ends of the law) was another concept not realized until the New Testament. Matthew 5:17-20 states, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets, I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.” In Romans 10:4, we see that “Christ is the end of the law…” See Galations 3:19-26, 1 Peter 2:22, and Hebrews 10:1-10 for more information.

    8: “Wherefore, how great the importance to make these things known unto the inhabitants of the earth, that they may know that there is no flesh that can dwell in the presence of God, save it be through the merits, and mercy, and grace of the Holy Messiah, who layeth down his life according to the flesh, and taketh it again by the power of the Spirit, that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, being the first that should rise.”

    It is true the Christ was “made alive in the Spirit,” per 1 Peter 3:18. Romans 8:11 ties this concept neatly into our salvation, stating, “But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who indwells in you.” The concept of the resurrection of the dead is also mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:52 and 1 Thess. 4:16. Interestingly enough, this concept is also prophesied about in Daniel 12:2: “And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.” See also Isaiah 26:19. This is one of the EXCEPTIONALLY rare times when the Book of Mormon doesn’t contradict the Bible or discuss New Testament concepts in an inappropriate era.

    9: “Wherefore, he is the firstfruits unto God, inasmuch as he shall make intercession for all the children of men; and they that believe in him shall be saved.”

    Jesus is called the “first fruits of those who are asleep” in 1 Corinthians 15:20. Verses 21-22 go on to say, “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive.” The idea of Jesus being the first fruit has its roots in the Old Testament (Leviticus 23:10-12). When the Israelites entered the promised land, they were to bring the first sheaves of the harvest to the priest to wave before God, symbolizing the dedication of the rest of the harvest to God. Along with this, a 1-year-old male lamb with no imperfections or flaws of any kind had to be sacrificed. This was a foreshadowing of Jesus, a perfect and sinless man who was both fully human and fully God, serving as the ultimate sacrifice for sin and being the first to be raised from the dead in order to pave the way for eternal life for everyone who believes in him.

    However, this concept of Jesus as the first fruits wasn’t developed until the New Testament. Jesus as our intercessor is also never mentioned in the Old Testament. See Romans 8:34, Hebrews 7:25, 1 Timothy 2:5, and 1 John 2:1 for more information.

    10: “And because of the intercession for all, all men come unto God; wherefore, they stand in the presence of him, to be judged of him according to the truth and holiness which is in him. Wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One hath given, unto the inflicting of the punishment which is affixed, which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement –“

    Final judgment by God was mentioned once in the Old Testament in Ecclesiastes 12:14: “For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.” All other references of this event are in the New Testament. See Matt 25:46, John 12:48, 2 Cor. 5:10, Heb. 9:27, and Rev. 20:11-15. The rest of verse 10 is a jumbled mess and I’m unable to fully understand what Smith was trying to convey besides punishment of some sort. I’m not even sure he understood what he was trying to convey.

    11: “For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my firstborn of the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.”

    I’m just going to go on ahead and say it: this is insanity; utter, complete insanity. All we have to do is look to the creation narrative in the beginning of Genesis to see there was absolutely goodness and righteousness without the presence of evil in the Garden of Eden. After creating various things, God called them “good.” He did not in turn create things he deemed bad because there needed to be opposition. While it’s true that God created Lucifer, he did NOT create him to be Satan. He did not create His own enemy because He needed opposition or balance. Lucifer chose to become Satan. You can read more about this in Isaiah 14:12-14, Ezekiel 28:12-18, Luke 10:18, and Rev. 12:7-9.

    While the capacity for evil was always present, that doesn’t mean evil itself was. And it doesn’t mean God created evil, because he didn’t. People who believe He did often cite Isaiah 45:7, which, in the KJV says, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” The Hebrew word here, however, is “ra’,”which has various meanings and is translated as “calamity” in modern translations. In contrast, Hab. 1:13, tells us, “Thine eyes are too pure to approve evil, and Thou canst not look on wickedness with favor…” James 1:13 states, “Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.” While I don’t want to get too far off into the woods here, I will say that God is “ruled,” if you will, by His own righteous nature. He cannot act in ways that are outside the realm of logical and natural possibility. Take, for instance, the question, “Can God create a rock so heavy that He can’t lift it?” That is not a valid question, because it is logically absurd. I can say, “God can purple dinosaur triangular silliness.” That sentence, which isn’t actually a sentence at all, does not magically become anything other than illogical gobbledygook just because I affixed the words “God can” in front of it. Thus, a righteous God cannot act against Himself by creating something that He cannot look upon.

    12: “Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.”

    13: “And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment or misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.”

    The only true thing in the midst of that strange verse above is that we wouldn’t be here without a God to create us. The idea that if there is no good or bad in the world then there could be no God is also terribly erroneous. God does not need the world to exist. He does not need opposition, as I stated before. He is completely self-sustaining and doesn’t need anything else in order to exist. Acts 17:24-25 states, “The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heavens and earth, does not dwell in temples made with human hands; neither is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all life and breath and all things…” See also Psalm 50:1-12, Psalm 90:2, John 5:26, and Romans 11:35-36.

    14: “And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and he hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that are in them, both things to act and things to be acted upon.”

    While I’m already appalled at what I’m reading here, I’d also like to point out something else: not capitalizing “Him” or “He” when speaking about God. Give Him the respect He deserves.

    15: “And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man, after he created our first parents, and the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and in fine, all things which are created, it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden fruit in opposition to the tree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.”

    He didn’t create the forbidden fruit because there needed to be an opposite of the tree of life. He simply gave Adam and Eve free will to choose to either obey or disobey Him. Love and obedience are neither of those things unless they are freely chosen. He created humans to have a relationship with Him, as evidenced by Genesis 3:8, when Adam and Eve “heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day.” If they knew what God sounded like in the Garden of Eden, then that means God visiting them was a regular occurrence, giving a glimpse of the deeply close, personal relationship He had with them.

    There is also another troubling implication here. As I stated before, God is self-sustaining and does not need anything else in order to exist, including opposition. In order to believe “it must needs be that there was an opposition,” then you must believe that God is ruled by laws of the universe outside Himself. If that’s the case, then no one who believes this can say they worship an all-powerful God. From where did these intrinsic universal laws come? Who set them in motion? This idea is in direct contradiction of Isaiah 44:6, which states, “Thus says the Lord, the King of Isreal and his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: I am the first and I am the last, and there is no God beside me.”

    The phrase “And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man” hints at where this is going, and I don’t like it one bit.

    16: “Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one or the other.”

    17: “And I, Lehi, according to the things which I have read, must needs suppose that an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven; wherefore, he became a devil, having sought that which was evil before God.”

    Lehi would not have had access to the Old Testament writings concerning Lucifer’s fall. Chapters 13 and 14 in Isaiah were likely written after Babylon had become the main threat to Isreal, near the end of the 7th century B.C. If Lehi and his family left Jerusalem for the wilderness around 600 B.C. as 1 Nephi 2 purports then arrived in the Americas between 591-589 B.C, then it’s incredibly unlikely, even impossible, that Lehi would have read that passage. See here for more details: First Isaiah → Historical Context – Study Guide – Yale Bible Study He definitely wouldn’t have had access to the Book of Ezekiel, which was written around 590-570 B.C. Biblical literature – Prophecy, Poetry, & Parables | Britannica. This is simply another instance of Joseph Smith trying desperately to convince readers that the Book of Mormon was an ancient text.

    18: “And because he had fallen from heaven, and had become miserable forever, he sought also the misery of all mankind. Wherefore, he said unto Eve, yea, even that old serpent, who is the devil, who is the father of all lies, wherefore he said: Partake of the forbidden fruit, and ye shall not die, but ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil.

    See my previous post “The Devil is in the Details” for an in-depth discussion of why these concepts are not appropriate for this time period. He is also not called the “father of all lies” until the New Testament in John 8:44.

    19: “And after Adam and Eve had partaken of the forbidden fruit they were driven out of the garden of Eden, to till the earth.”

    20: “And they have brought forth children; yea, even the family of all the earth.”

    21: “And the days of the children of men were prolonged, according to the will of God, that they might repent while in the flesh; wherefore, their state became a state of probation, and their time lengthened, according to the commandments which the Lord God gave unto the children of men. For he gave commandment that all men must repent; for he showed unto all men that they were lost, because of the transgression of their parents.”

    There is no hint in the Bible that the reason people lived so long in Genesis is because God wanted them to repent. It’s more likely they lived so long because it was so soon after the fall. Sickness, disease, genetic weaknesses, and other physical frailties that lead to death in old age hadn’t taken hold yet. It is also possible that God allowed such long lives so the earth could become more populated. Their long lives also would have solidified the knowledge of the fall and its consequences through oral tradition. There are a lot of different theories discussing these lifespans, none of which make any mention at all of the need for repentance as being a reason. You can read about some of these ideas here: Why Did People in Genesis Live for So Long? | Tabletalk.

    22: “And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.”

    Yes. And that would have been a good thing.

    23: “And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.”

    And there you have it, folks: Joseph Smith is glorifying disobedience to God because of his completely false belief that it was necessary in order for humans to exist and live a fulfilling life. It’s quite interesting that he assumed Adam and Eve didn’t experience joy at getting to walk with God in the garden. While I’ve already addressed why evil wouldn’t have been necessary at all for the world, I’d like to now turn my attention to Smith’s bizarre ideas regarding sex and procreation.

    Let’s start with the basic premise that God created Eve for Adam. We see this in Genesis 2:18, where God says, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” We then see in verse 21 and 22 where God caused Adam to fall asleep and fashioned a woman out of his rib. After this, God “brought her to the man.” We see Adam’s delight when he says, in verse 23: “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.” It is then clarified in verse 24-25: “For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and shall cleave unto his wife; and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.” As we see, a beautiful, perfect, loving union between a man and a woman was God’s original design for us. There was no sexual shame between Adam and Eve in regards to their nakedness. They were made to enjoy one another on a spiritual and physical level.

    We also see how ridiculous Smith’s idea is that they could not have had children without sinning in Genesis 1:28, when God commands Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it…” If the fall was necessary for sex and procreation, God would not have told them to do this until after the fall. Another clear indication of this is in Genesis 3:16 when God lays a curse on Eve, saying, “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you shall bring forth children…” God’s declaration that he would “greatly multiply” the pain of childbirth after she had sinned means that having children was expected before the fall. Insisting otherwise means viewing sex as inherently sinful when it isn’t. God created it. God does not create inherently bad or wicked things, as I demonstrated earlier in this post.

    24: “But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.”

    So, God created Adam and Eve so they would disobey Him and sin? He created them and gave them no way to experience joy unless they rebelled against Him? That’s unhinged. And completely blasphemous.

    25: Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.”

    So Adam took one for the team and rebelled against God so we could all be happy? How noble. This chapter hinges on the completely false premise that evil is necessary for good to exist. The God in the Book of Mormon is absolutely not the God of the Bible. The Book of Mormon God created them with no way to experience joy or to know holiness and righteousness without first sinning then being cursed and banished from His presence. That God is quite the diabolical monster, and not one that I would be remotely interested in serving. I am grateful that that isn’t who He is.

    26: “And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the commandments which God hath given.”

    Per Genesis 3:22, the knowledge of good an evil was not a positive thing for mankind: “Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever…” God then banishes them from the Garden of Eden, and therefore the tree of life, and places an angel with a flaming sword to guard the entrance, never to allow man to eat of that fruit again. God is the arbiter of what is good and what is bad. If God does not view the fall positively, then neither should we, no matter how much Joseph Smith thought we should.

    27: “Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient to man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.”

    Well, I’m certainly miserable after having read this flaming dumpster fire of a chapter.

    28: “And now, my sons, I would that ye should look to the great Mediator, and hearken unto his great commandments; and be faithful unto his words, and choose eternal life, according to the will of his Holy Spirit;”

    God is never called a mediator in the Old Testament. This is a New Testament concept that conveys Jesus as our mediator. See 1 Timothy 2:5, Galatians 3:19-20, Hebrews 8:6, 9:15, and 12:24 for more information on this.

    29: “And choose not eternal death, according to the will of the flesh and the evil which is therein, which giveth the spirit of the devil power to captivate, to bring you down to hell, that he may reign over you in his own kingdom.”

    Hell is not Satan’s kingdom. He rules absolutely nothing there, nor will he. See my post “Satan Isn’t in Charge of Hell. Obviously” for a more in-depth discussion.

    30: “I have spoken these few words unto you all, my sons, in the last days of my probation; and I have chosen the good part, according to the words of the prophet. And I have none other object save it be the everlasting welfare of your souls. Amen.”

    Theologically speaking, this was probably the worst chapter in the Book of Mormon thus far. I recall a quote by Joseph Smith on the introduction page of this wretched book: “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.” I have repeatedly demonstrated thus far the massive historical, chronological, and theological issues, rendering it a far cry from “the most correct of any book on earth.” Even worse, the Book of Mormon will absolutely not get you “nearer to God by abiding by its precepts.” It will do the opposite. A well-meaning Mormon friend of mine once stated that the Bible and the Book of Mormon were like study guides for a test. The more study guides you have, the better you’ll do on the test, he reasoned. The Book of Mormon is a faulty study guide. If you rely on it in any way, you will fail the test, and that has eternal consequences. This chapter specifically has told horrible lies about the character of God; ones that you cannot believe in order to be a Christian. Joshua 24:15 states, “Choose this day whom you will serve.” I implore you all to choose wisely.

  • The Devil is in the Details

    One interesting thing about working on this blog is that I catch things later on that I missed earlier. Hell and the devil are mentioned in previous chapters of the Book of Mormon, but it wasn’t until this book and chapter that I realized there are issues with these words and concepts in this context. This will be the primary issue addressed in this post. Other problematic themes in this chapter have already been addressed in previous posts. Other sections are simply not particularly noteworthy because they contain conditional prophecies that Joseph Smith easily fabricated, as evidenced by the conditions not being met and the prophecy not coming to fruition. I will give minimal attention to those portions. I will be using my NASB Hebrew-Greek Keyword Study Bible (AMG Publishers) to delve further into the concepts of hell and the devil.

    The Second Book of Nephi

    An account of the death of Lehi. Nephi’s brethren rebel against him. the Lord warns Nephi to depart into the wilderness. his journeyings in the wilderness, and so forth.

    2 Nephi, Chapter 1

    Lehi prophesies of a land of liberty. His seed will be scattered and smitten if they reject the Holy One of Israel. He exhorts his sons to put on the armor of righteousness. About 588-570 B.C.

    1: “And now it came to pass that after I, Nephi, had made an end of teaching my brethren, our father, Lehi, also spake many things unto them, and rehearsed unto them, how great things the Lord had done for them in bringing them out of the land of Jerusalem.”

    2: “And he spake unto them concerning their rebellion upon the waters, and the mercies of God in sparing their lives, that they were not swallowed up in the sea.”

    3: “And he also spake unto them concerning the land of promise, which they had obtained- how merciful the Lord had been in warning us that we should flee out of the land of Jerusalem.”

    In my previous post, “An Implausible Discovery,” I go into more detail about how there was only one promised land for the Israelites, not two. God clearly laid out the boundaries for this promised land, and it absolutely did not include the Americas.

    4: “For behold, said he, I have seen a vision, in which I know that Jerusalem is destroyed; and had we remained in Jerusalem we should have also perished.”

    It is true that the Babylonian captivity and Destruction of Jerusalem took place around 586 B.C. This reported vision would be remarkable if the elusive gold plates were available for examination by scholars and were found to be ancient. As we all know, however, Joseph Smith claimed the plates were taken back to heaven. In light of the fact that no other source on earth records these events and no one else, not even the 11 witnesses, actually physically saw the plates, the only logical conclusion I am left to draw is the Book of Mormon is a fabrication from the mind of someone living in the 19th century. This verse, then, cannot be seen as some sort of divine revelation to Lehi, but as a piece of knowledge known to someone who wrote this book because it had already happened over a couple thousand years prior. For more information on the 11 witnesses, see this: Did the Eleven Witnesses Actually See the Gold Plates? – Mormonism Research Ministry

    Verses 5-12 describe Lehi declaring this promised land has been set aside and consecrated for his descendants. He reports that as long they obey God’s commandments, God will keep it hidden from other nations, so they won’t overrun it. However, should they disobey God and abandon Him, other nations will arrive and overtake his descendants. He prophesies wars and bloodshed. In my previous post “The Great and Abominable Church Revisited,” I cite research that affirms there were indigenous tribes in the Americas thousands of years before the events in the books of Nephi were purported to have taken place. So, the assertion that God was keeping this continent hidden from everyone else because it was the promised land for Lehi and his descendants is quite silly.

    13: “O that ye would awake; awake from a deep sleep, yea, even from the deep sleep of hell, and shake off the awful chains by which ye are bound, which are the chains which bind the children of men, that they are carried away captive down to the eternal gulf of misery and woe.”

    14: “Awake! And arise from the dust, and hear the words of a trembling parent, whose limbs ye 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.”

    15: “But behold, the Lord hath redeemed my soul from hell; I have beheld his glory, and am encircled about eternally in the arms of his love.”

    If the LDS church wishes for us to view the Book of Mormon as an adjunct to the Bible, then it is only proper to compare and contrast the word and concept of hell between the two. This is where we will see the shortcomings of the KJV in comparison with more modern translations. The KJV does use the word “hell” in the Old Testament, but more modern translations, based upon more numerous and better-quality ancient manuscripts, use the word “Sheol,” which carries more nuance. Per the Hebrew dictionary of my study Bible, Sheol is “A noun meaning the world of the dead, Sheol, the grave, death, the depths. The word describes the underworld but is most often translated as grave. Jacob described himself as going to the grave upon Joseph’s supposed death (Gen. 37:35; 42:38); Korah, Dathan, and Abiram went down into the ground, which becomes their grave, when God judges them (Num. 16:30,33)… The word means depths or Sheol. Job called the ways of the Almighty higher than heaven and lower than Sheol or the depths of the earth (Job 11:8). The psalmist could not escape the Lord even in the lowest depths of the earth, in contrast to the high heavens (Ps 139:8).” This dictionary also points out that Sheol can also be a place for the wicked and that the righteous were not left in the grave or Sheol (Ps 16:10) but were rescued from it (Ps 49:15-16). By Contrast, the Hebrew word for a literal grave where someone is buried (such as what appears in Ps 88:11 and many other places) is qeber. So, we can see there are differences between these two words and concepts. I promise I’m getting to my point.

    On the surface, his use of these words doesn’t appear to be that big of a deal. Joseph Smith made a very bad decision, however, when he employed the phrase “eternal gulf of misery and woe.” Notice the definitions of the Hebrew words that I gave above. Pay very close attention to what they’re missing: a definition that includes a place of eternal torment. While the KJV uses the word hell, which is the English translation Smith would have had access to at the time, it goes to follow that he would also use that word. What he did not realize, however, is that he misused it in verses 13 and 15. The concept of hell as a place of eternal torment was not introduced until the New Testament. 

    In the New Testament, the word hell is used in modern translations. You will find its use in numerous verses in the New Testament, such as Matthew 10: 28: “And do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Matthew 5:22 and 25:41,46 describe it as a place of eternal fire and punishment. These are only a few examples. The Greek word geenna means Gehenna, which is hell, a place of eternal torment and punishment for the wicked. This word has a fascinating history. Per my Greek dictionary, it was derived from the Hebrew word “gey hinnom,” or “Valley of Hinnom,” which was a narrow valley skirting Jerusalem on the south, running westward from the valley of Jehoshaphat under Mount Zion. It was in this valley that the Israelites built statues of Molech and engaged in the barbaric practice of infant sacrifice (1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 16:3; Jer. 7:31). King Josiah broke up the statues and desecrated this place, as reported in 2 Kings 23:10, 14. After this, it became a receptacle for not just garbage and filth, but for carcasses of animals and some humans that were not buried. Fires were burned and constantly stoked to consume the filth and rot. I don’t even want to imagine the smell.

    So, there are some things you know now. And now you know why Smith’s use of the word “hell” in this instance doesn’t make much sense. Verses 16 and 17 consist of Lehi telling his sons how much he worries about them not obeying God.

    18: “Or, that a cursing should come upon you for the space of many generations; and ye are visited by the sword, and by famine, and are hated, and are led according to the will and captivity of the devil.”

    Here, we will see another instance of Smith using a New Testament concept during an Old Testament time period. We will also see the difference between the KJV and modern translations. The word “devil” actually doesn’t appear in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament. The KJV uses this word, but not to describe a singular, cosmic foe of God and humanity. An example of this is Leviticus 17:7: “And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, after whom they have gone a whoring. This shall be a statute for ever unto them throughout their generations.” By contrast, the NASB states, “And they shall no longer sacrifice their sacrifices to demons with which they play the harlot…” The Hebrew word used here is “saiyr,” which means, per my dictionary, “a male goat, a buck. Occasionally, the word can be used figuratively to mean a hairy one.” At this point in Scripture, the Israelites were worshipping the goat as an idol. This same word is used in 2 Ch. 11:15. To translate this word as “demons,” then, denotes that the false idols they were worshipping were actually unholy entities.

    The KJV uses the word “devils” again in Deut. 32:17: “They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.” The NASB again uses the word “demons” instead. In this instance, the Hebrew word is “shed,” which means “a demon, a devil. The primary or typical translation of this noun is demon or demons. This noun is used to describe the recipient of a sacrifice that was not given or directed toward God.” So, again, the instances when “devils” are used are not describing a singular foe.

    The Old Testament, however, does use the word “satan,” but not always as a proper noun to describe what we know today as Satan. The Hebrew use of “satan” often appears after the article “the,” so it’s actually “the satan.” In this sense, it means “adversary, accuser,” and can actually include human opponents, as we see in 1 Sa 29:4, 2 Sa 19:22-23, when the Philistines feared David might have acted in opposition to them in battle. A very notable appearance of this word as a proper noun occurs 14 times in the book of Job, when he appears before God and accuses Job of not loving or serving God with integrity (Job 1:6-7, 2:1-7). In this instance, as well as in Zec 3:1-2 and 2 Sam 24:1, we see that a singular, evil, adversarial entity exists who opposes God, but we still don’t know much about him until the New Testament. I will point out that some scholars argue that the proper noun “Satan” never occurs in the Old Testament and English translations have it wrong, while others (including the committee responsible for publishing my study Bible) will support what I have just said here.

    In the New Testament, “Devil” is used as a proper noun to describe a singular, specific evil being. It comes from the Greek word “diabolos,” which means “slanderous or false accuser.” The word Satan is also used as a proper noun to denote the same entity and the two are used interchangeably. He is mentioned so many times in the New Testament that it’s impossible for me to list all the references, but a few are Matt. 4:1, John 8:44, 2 Corinthians 11:14. We learn much more about him in the New Testament, and we also learn in Revelation 12:9 that he is who tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden: “And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.”

    As you can see, while the concept of an adversarial entity was present in the Old Testament, he was not called the devil, and the concept of him as the ultimate evil and foe of God and humanity wasn’t fully developed until the New Testament.

    Verses 19 and 20 repeat the conditional prophecy that if they keep God’s commandments, they’ll prosper; but if they don’t, they’ll be cut off and defeated. Obviously, lots of people came from other places to the Americas and did some pretty egregious things to the native populations, so we’re naturally expected to believe that this was a real prophecy that came true. In verses 21 and 22, Lehi again admonishes his sons to obey God.

    23: “Awake, my sons; put on the armor of righteousness. Shake off the chains with which ye are bound, and come forth out of obscurity, and arise from the dust.”

    “The armor of righteousness” is another phrase that doesn’t appear until the New Testament. The closest Old Testament reference to something similar is found in Isaiah 59:17: “And He put on righteousness like a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on His head; And he put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and wrapped Himself with zeal as a mantle.” This verse, of course, is a prophecy describing Jesus. Putting on the armor of righteousness or the armor of God is specifically a Christian concept described in the New Testament as believers equipping themselves to face the trials of this world. You can read about this concept in more detail in 2 Cor. 6:7 and especially in Eph. 6:13-18.

    Verses 24-30 are basically Lehi demanding his other sons be nice to Nephi and listen to him, or he won’t give them their blessing. 30-32 consists of Lehi specifically addressing Zoram, the former servant of Laban, who came with them to this new land. He tells him that his descendants will also be blessed alongside the descendants of Nephi, as long as they keep God’s commandments.

    I hope you all had as much fun with that little linguistics adventure as I did. I will be continuing this journey another day after my little ADHD brain has a proper rest. Till next time.

  • The Great and Abominable Church Revisited

    This is the final chapter of 1 Nephi. I’m going to be thankful that it is much shorter than the Bible, because this is a bigger undertaking than I initially realized. Throughout this journey, I am constantly reminded of the old adage, “If It’s true, it’s not new. If it’s new, it’s not true.” This statement, of course, is a warning against new theologies or new ways of interpreting Scripture. As Christians, we know the Bible is the ultimate authority on spiritual and theological truths. We can do one of two things with teachings that contradict it: 1) ignore them completely, or 2) study them for research purposes only in the hope that we can bring truth to those who subscribe to them. Our ultimate goal should always be to point people to the true Christ, who is the second person of the Trinity, which consists of three co-existing, co-eternal, and co-equal persons that make up one God. He is not Satan’s spirit brother. He is not the offspring of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. He is God incarnate. To assign him a status as anything less is heresy.

    1 Nephi Chapter 22

    Israel will be scattered upon all the face of the earth. The Gentiles will nurse and nourish Israel with the gospel in the last days. Israel will be gathered and saved, and the wicked will burn as stubble. The kingdom of the devil will be destroyed, and Satan will be bound. About 588-570 B.C.

    1: “And now it came to pass that I, Nephi, had read these things which were engraven upon the plates of brass, my brethren came unto me and said unto me: What meaneth these things which ye have read? Behold, are they to be understood according to things which are spiritual, which shall come to pass according to the spirit and not the flesh?”

    As I clearly laid out in my previous post, Nephi is claiming he read Isaiah 48 and 49 on the brass plates, which is impossible because Isaiah 40-55 hadn’t been written yet. See the post titled “A Chronological Impossibility” for more information. I have cited my research there.

    2: “And I, Nephi, said unto them: Behold they were manifest unto the prophet by the voice of the Spirit; for by the Spirit are all things made known unto the prophets, which shall come upon the children of men according to the flesh.”

    3: “Wherefore, the things of which I have read are things pertaining to things both temporal and spiritual; for it appears that the house of Israel, sooner or later, will be scattered upon all the face of the earth, and also among the nations.”

    There are numerous prophecies in the Old Testament about the Israelites being scattered throughout the world. These can be found in Deut. 4:25-30, 28:64-67, Hosea 9:1-3, 17, Jeremiah 18:15-17, Amos 9:8-9, and Ezekiel 22:14-15, just to name a few.

    4: “And behold, there are many who are already lost from the knowledge of those who are at Jerusalem. Yea, the more part of all the tribes have been led away; and they are scattered to and fro upon the isles of the sea; and whither they are none of us knoweth, save that we know they have been led away.”

    This doesn’t match what was happening in the Old Testament during this time period. We know that they were being scattered around the middle east, but not “to and fro upon the isles of the sea.” My speculation is that phrase was added to include Nephi and his family in the Americas. The Assyrians conquered and carried away the Northern Kingdom before Nephi’s departure to the Americas. After a lengthy conflict, King Sargon II defeated the capital city of Samaria around 721 B.C. Many Israelites were slaughtered, while thousands were taken captive and resettled. See for more information: The Ten Lost Tribes – Biblical Archaeology Society and Assyrian Deportation and Resettlement: The Story of Samaria – TheTorah.com.

    The remaining tribe of Judah was defeated and taken captive by Babylon around 586 B.C. King Nebuchadnezzar ordered the total destruction of Jerusalem, and the destruction of the temple Solomon had built. He forced King Zedekiah to witness the execution of his sons before having his eyes gouged out. He and thousands of others were marched to Babylon in chains. For more information, see What Was the Babylonian Exile and Why Should I Care? – St. Paul Center. So, this would have happened around the same time Nephi and his family supposedly arrived in the Americas. While the Israelites were certainly scattered, I don’t think we can say it was nearly as widespread across the earth as this passage of Nephi implies.

    5: “And since they have been led away, these things have been prophesied concerning them, and also concerning all those who shall hereafter be scattered and be confounded, because of the Holy One of Israel; for against him will they harden their hearts; wherefore, they shall be scattered among the nations and shall be hated of all men.”

    Nothing particularly noteworthy here. The Old Testament, as mentioned before, has similar prophecies.

    6: “Nevertheless, after they shall be nursed by the Gentiles, and the Lord has lifted up his hand upon the Gentiles and set them up for a standard, and their children have been carried in their arms, and their daughters have been carried upon their shoulders, behold these things of which are spoken are temporal; for thus are the covenants of the Lord with our fathers; and it meaneth us in the days to come, and also all our brethren who are of the house of Israel.”

    There are most definitely Old Testament prophecies concerning the salvation of Gentiles: Genesis 12:3, 22:18, Deut. 32:43, Isaiah, 2:2-3, 49:6, 56:3-7, Psalm 22:27-28, Zechariah 2:11, Malachi 1:11, and Micah 4:1-2. There are also verses that discuss the Gentiles assisting in bringing Jews back to God. The verbiage in verse 6 here resembles Isaiah 49:22-23, which reads: “Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.” If you recall from my previous post, this was plagiarized and put into 1 Nephi 21, which would be why verse 6 uses similar phrasing. Other verses prophesying the Gentiles’ assistance in bringing the Jews back to God are Isaiah 60:3-11, 66:18-21, and Zechariah 8:23.

    7: “And it meaneth that the time cometh that after all the house of Israel have been scattered and confounded, that the Lord God will raise up a mighty nation among the Gentiles, yea, even upon the face of this land; and by them shall our seed be scattered.”

    So, there are conflicting ideas about what this “mighty nation” is. Scripture Central, a very well-known pro-LDS source, insists that it was the Spanish Empire. Their argument is that Spain, at one time, controlled portions of the Americas and enslaved Indigenous peoples and exported them to other regions, such as the Caribbean. The author of that article argues against it being the United States because the US wasn’t a prominent world power in 1830. You can read that article here: What “Mighty Nation among the Gentiles” Would Scatter Lehi’s.

    Another well-known pro-LDS source called Gospel Doctrine argues that the “mighty nation” is the United States. That article’s author points to the phrase “even upon the face of this land” as support for this idea and points to the US government’s treatment of the Native Americans as the scattering of the house of Isreal. You can read that article here: 1 Nephi 22 | Gospel Doctrine. It’s important to note that neither of these websites are run by the official LDS church.

    I could certainly go down a pointless rabbit hole regarding which of these theories is more plausible, but that would be a complete waste of time, because they’re both absurd. Both of these articles presuppose that the Indigenous peoples of the Americas are descendants of ancient Jews. This idea, of course, is ridiculous and is not supported by reality. There is not a single shred of ancient middle eastern or Hebrew DNA in any indigenous populations in America. They were descended from ancient east Asians and North Eurasians that were in the Americas for thousands of years before the events in the Book of Mormon were purported to have taken place. You can read a brief summary of this history here: A Genetic Chronicle of the First Peoples in the Americas – SAPIENS. The lack of middle eastern DNA in Native American populations is not new information, as this article in an LDS publication in 2003 points out: Simply Implausible: DNA and a Mesoamerican Setting for the Book of Mormon – Dialogue Journal. Some Mormon apologists, however, still cling to the delusional hope that ancient Hebrew DNA will be found in Native American populations, despite extensive genetic studies. Others insist the data is somehow skewed. In either case, they demonstrate a profound unwillingness to accept reality.

    Verses 8 through 12 are expounding upon what has already been said here and contain nothing noteworthy.

    13: “And the blood of that great and abominable church, which is the whore of all the earth, shall turn upon their own heads; for they shall war among themselves, and the sword of their own hands shall fall upon their own heads, and they shall be drunk with their own blood.”

    14: “And every nation which shall war against thee, O house of Israel, shall be turned one against another, and they shall fall into the pit which they digged to ensnare the people of the Lord. And all that fight against Zion shall be destroyed, and that great whore, who hath perverted the right ways of the Lord, yea, that great and abominable church, shall tumble to the dust and great shall be the fall of it.”

    My, Joseph Smith really hated Christians. Not only does he make his absolute disdain known in these verses that label any church but his as “the whore of all the earth,” but he has famously called the teachings of Christianity abominable. In one account of his first vision, he reports the God told him every sect of Christianity was wrong, calling all their creeds “an abomination.” He further described all Christian teachers as corrupt. You can read this quote in verse 19 and his account of his first vision here: Joseph Smith—History 1. He preached heavily against the Trinity, a foundational doctrine of Christianity. He also taught that men could become gods themselves. You can read these heretical quotes and others here: Quotations from Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith – Mormonism Research Ministry. It also bears mentioning again that the word “church” didn’t exist in the Old Testament, because it is a Christian concept that did not come into being until the New Testament.

    Out of curiosity and in the interest of fairness, I decided to research what Mormons believe this “great and abominable church” is. In the 1958 edition of his book, “Mormon Doctrine,” Apostle Bruce R. McConkie insisted the church described in these 1 Nephi passages is the Catholic Church, which is what I originally speculated in my post titled “What Have You Got Against Catholics?” McConkie’s teaching, of course, soured relations between Mormons and Catholics, which, let’s be honest, probably weren’t that great to begin with. Rather than apologize, however, he was reportedly rebuked in private, and later editions of “Mormon Doctrine” took a softer approach to defining what constituted the “great and abominable church.” You can view a neat and tidy comparison of the different editions here: Mormon Doctrine: Catholicism – Wheat & Tares.

    In the abstract of a paper titled, “Nephi’s Great and Abominable Church,” authored by Stephen E. Robinson, the more acceptable definition is “avoiding a denominational name, Hellenized Christianity.” You can read that abstract here: “Nephi’s “Great and Abominable Church”” by Stephen E. Robinson. What jumped out to me the most in this paragraph is this church “seeks wealth and luxury.” That is quite rich coming from the wealthiest religious organization in the world, according to multiple sources. Its entire wealth is estimated between at least 265-293 billion dollars (per a basic Google search), with a significant portion in a reserve fund managed by Ensign Peak Advisors, the financial investment arm of the LDS church. However, according to the Widow’s Mite Report, an organization that tries to track LDS finances due to their lack of transparency, their estimated net worth in 2025 could be as high as 321 billion. You can read much finer details here: 2025 Update. That report also contains evidence pointing to tax evasion by Ensign Peak Advisors and documentation related to the church’s SEC violations that resulted in a 5 million dollar fine. They essentially tried to lie about how much money they had and attempted to hide a portion of it in shell LLC’s.

    I also found it quite amusing that “it is characterized by sexual immorality” was also included in the description of the great and abominable church in the aforementioned paper. I would love to delve into that topic, but I can only go down so many rabbit holes in a single blog post. I am certain I will have ample opportunity to discuss the abhorrent practice of polygamy that started with Joseph Smith. There is indeed a “great and abominable church,” and it isn’t the Catholic one.

    Verses 15-28 is more end times prophesy concerning the destruction of the wicked and the protection of those who follow God.

    29: “And now I, Nephi, make an end; for I durst not speak further as yet concerning these things.”

    Thank goodness.

    30: “Wherefore, my brethren, I would that ye should consider that the things which have been written upon the plates of brass are true; and they testify that a man must be obedient to the commandments of God.”

    Yes, that’s right. The passages of Isaiah that weren’t written yet were definitely on the brass plates.

    31: “Wherefore, ye need not suppose that I and my father are the only ones that have testified, and also taught them. Wherefore, if ye shall be obedient to the commandments, and endure to the end, ye shall be saved at the last day. And thus it is. Amen.”

    Well, ladies and gent. One book down. Fourteen more to go.

  • A Chronological Impossibility

    I’ve heard many a Mormon insist that the Book of Mormon absolutely must have divine origins due to Joseph Smith’s lack of education (which they exaggerate), the short time in which it was “translated” (roughly 65 days), and how cohesive it is (even though it really isn’t, as we have seen thus far). If the Book of Mormon didn’t repeatedly contradict the Bible and documented historical facts, I and many others would probably be more willing to take the claim of its divinity a bit more seriously. However, that isn’t reality, and the fact that it was compiled in such a short time isn’t remarkable when you consider the amount of plagiarism in it and how Smith began telling these tales long before his supposed discovery of the golden plates. Over the course of four years, Smith claimed he was visited by the angel Moroni, and he would tell his family “the most amusing recitals” of ancient civilizations in the Americas. You can read more about this here: A Mother’s Testimony.

    1 Nephi Chapter 21

    The Messiah will be a light to the Gentiles and will free the prisoners. Israel will be gathered with power in the last days. Kings will be their nursing fathers. Compare Isaiah 49. About 588-570 BC.

    1: “And again: Hearken, O ye house of Israel, all ye that are broken off and are driven out because of the wickedness of the pastors of my people; yea, all ye that are broken off, that are scattered abroad, who are of my people, O house of Israel. Listen, O isles, unto me, and hearken ye people from far; the Lord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.”

    Actually, this first verse in the KJV reads, “Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.” There are several issues with this first verse in 1 Nephi 21. Everything before “Listen, O isles” is fabricated. Mormons will tell you this simply contains missing words from the original Isaiah 49. The problem is that assertion is based on absolutely nothing. No ancient manuscript contains additional phrases written in the Book of Mormon, not even the Dead Sea Scrolls. I think the phrase “that are scattered abroad, who are of my people” was simply added so these fictional Hebrews in the Americas could be included in this address.

    Another glaring issue is the word “pastors,” which did not exist in the Old Testament. In fact, that word is only used once in the entire Bible, in Ephesians 4:11. Pastors are a Christian concept, not an ancient Hebrew one. Using New Testament concepts and language in an Old Testament era is an extremely common theme in the Book of Mormon, so we will certainly continue to see this issue.

    It’s also interesting to note the timing of these two chapters. As reported in my previous post, most scholars believe Isaiah 40-55 was written during the Babylonian exile, which began around 586 BC (some sources say 597 BC). If Nephi wrote this chapter between 588-570 BC, that would mean he was either already in the Americas, on his way there, getting ready to depart, or was at least in the wilderness when the Babylonians carried the Israelites off into exile. He would not have had access to the writings of Isaiah during this time, even though chapter 22 claims these were written on the plates of brass that he decapitated Laban over. That lovely event took place in 1 Nephi, chapter 4, which, according to the introduction to that chapter, took place between 600-592 BC. According to Biblical scholarship, Isaiah 40-55 hadn’t even been written yet, much less engraved on brass plates. For more information on Isaiah, see this: Who Wrote the Book of Isaiah? | Zondervan Academic

    8: “Thus saith the Lord: In an acceptable time have I heard thee, O isles of the sea, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee; and I will preserve thee, and give thee my servant for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;

    The KJV reads: “Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;”. The phrase “O isles of the sea,” was added, probably to try and emphasize the inclusion of the fictitious Nephi and his descendants. Even if the Book of Mormon was true, that phrase would be redundant. They would naturally already be included in all prophesies by virtue of them being Israelites, and verse 1 in the KJV already addresses the “isles” and “people from far.”

    There were quite a few more differences between these two chapters in the form of adding unnecessary phrases, but none of them altered the basic meaning of these passages. It reads more like a kid in junior high who is adding extra words here and there so his teacher doesn’t catch him plagiarizing someone else’s research.

    The real smoking gun here is the chronological disaster in regard to when Isaiah 49 was written and when Nephi allegedly read it from the brass plates. It simply could not have happened. This is my first time reading through the Book of Mormon, and I’m writing these posts as I go through it. I initially thought it was presenting this chapter as if Nephi wrote it and it was strikingly similar to Isaiah 49 (as I also believed with the previous chapter). However, I skipped ahead briefly and saw the claim that he read all this from brass plates. That takes this chapter from highly unlikely to impossible.

    Edit (5/9/26): I have done more research, and the idea that more than one author contributed to the Book of Isaiah is still a debated topic. While the general consensus amongst modern scholars is that there is more than one author, more conservative and traditional ones hold to the idea that Isaiah wrote all of it. I am willing to admit that I presented the theory as a definite truth when it’s still a somewhat murky issue. You can see “A Chronological Impossibility: Part 2” for a more detailed discussion.

  • It’s Not Plagiarism if I Change a Few Words and Tell You to Compare it With Isaiah 48

    I recently explained to a Mormon online what the purpose of my blog was. Another chimed in with, “So, you already had your mind made up when you started reading it? Scripture is like a map that tells us how to get closer to Christ. Do you type in an address to Google maps and try to debunk it right away?” This man’s comparison of Scripture to a map actually works quite well. To answer his question, I explained that I don’t debunk Google maps unless it gives me a reason to do so. I’m sure plenty of us are old enough to remember when GPS directions were fairly new. There were too many stories involving people refusing to engage any critical thinking skills at all. They were driving down closed roads, into fast-flowing creeks, and into snowbanks. Their answers were always the same: “Well, that’s where GPS said to go.” When a map is clearly leading you to something dangerous, it is objectively insane to keep following said map. The Book of Mormon is a faulty map. It will not lead you to Christ, but in the opposite direction. Insisting someone read it “with an open mind” then “ask Heavenly Father if it’s true,” is to insist that we ignore historical evidence and Biblical scholarship. If you hold fast to using the Book of Mormon as a map to Christ, well, that’s certainly your decision and I’m not going to try to stop you. My question from the very start of this blog has always been, “Is it Biblical?” The Book of Mormon clearly is not. However, all I can do is present evidence. What you, reader, decide to do with that evidence is entirely up to you.

    1 Nephi Chapter 20

    The Lord reveals His purpose to Israel. Israel has been chosen in the furnace of affliction and is to go forth from Babylon. Compare Isaiah 48. About 588-570 B.C.

    1: “Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, who are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, who swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, yet they swear not in truth nor in righteousness.”

    For this particular post, I will be using the KJV of Isaiah 48. It reads as follows: “Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, which swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth, nor in righteousness.” We see here in Nephi that this verse has been altered in several ways, the most prominent being the addition of the phrase “or out of the waters of baptism.” This is significant because the word “baptism” did not exist in the Old Testament. The Christian practice of baptism absolutely has roots in Old Testament cleansing ceremonies, but the word was not used until the New Testament. This is yet another example of Smith’s use of New Testament language during and Old Testament era.

    2: “Nevertheless, they call themselves of the holy city, but they do not stay themselves upon the God of Israel, who is the Lord of Hosts; yea, the Lord of Hosts is his name.”

    This verse actually reads as follows: “For they call themselves of the holy city, and stay themselves upon the God of Israel; The Lord of hosts is his name.” We see more alterations here in Nephi, the most obvious being the needless repetition for which the Book of Mormon is notorious. We don’t need to read “yea, the Lord of Hosts is his name” because we already read “… God of Isreal, who is the Lord of Hosts.” I even looked at the 1611 KJV, and that phrase isn’t in there, either. See for yourself: ISAIAH CHAPTER 48  (ORIGINAL 1611 KJV)

    3: “Behold, I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went forth out of my mouth, and I showed them. I did show them suddenly.”

     “I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went forth out of my mouth, and I shewed them; I did them suddenly, and they came to pass.” I’m not sure why Smith missed the opportunity to put that something else “came to pass,” a phrase that appears way too many times in the Book of Mormon. I’ve read some sources say it occurs around 2,000 times. Others say it’s around 1,400. No matter which one you believe, it still occurs significantly more than it does in the KJV (around 450). We can also see that Smith used the more modern spelling “show” instead of “shew.”

    4: “And I did it because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass;”

    “Because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an iron sinew, and thy brow brass;” is how the KJV reads. No significant difference here.

    5: “And I have even from the beginning declared to thee; before it came to pass I showed them thee; and I showed them for fear lest thou shouldst say– Mine idol hath done them, and my graven image, and my molten image hath commanded them.”

    Notice the change from “I have even from the beginning declared it to thee; before it came to pass I shewed it thee: lest thou shouldest say, Mine idol hath done them, and my graven image, and my molten image, hath commanded them.” It’s strange that the words “for fear” appear before “lest thou.” Psalm 7:11 in the KJV states, “God judgeth the righteous, and God is angry with the wicked every day.” It hardly makes sense that a God who is angry with the wicked everyday does anything “for fear lest…” This passage in Isaiah is God speaking to Israel and declaring that He showed them things before they happened so they wouldn’t have an excuse to give their idols credit for them.

    6: “Thou hast seen and heard all this; and will ye not declare them? And that I have showed thee new things from this time, even hidden things, and thou didst not know them.”

    “Thou hast heard, see all this; and will not ye declare it? I have shewed thee new things from this time, even hidden things, and thou didst not know them.” Again, there are no significant changes to this verse. However, the slight changes are beginning to remind me of a junior high kid plagiarizing an essay and changing words here and there to make it look like he didn’t. The rest of this chapter follows this same pattern. There are subtle changes in phrasing and wording, but nothing that alters the meanings of each verse.

    What’s odd to me, though, is why this chapter is even included in Nephi at all. It doesn’t seem to fit with the rest of it. According the 1 Nephi narrative, He and his family are all in the Americas now. Why would he be writing down prophesies clearly meant for Israelites who are still on the old continent? The prophet Isaiah lived in the 8th century B.C (see for more information: When Was Isaiah Written: A Comprehensive Guide to the Origin of This Biblical Book – Ministry Voice). Now, chapters 40-55 are sometimes called “Deutero- Isaiah” by some scholars, because they believe it may have been written at a different time and maybe even by a different author than Isaiah. In this theory, that would mean Isaiah 48 would have been written around the Babylonian exile, which would be around 586 BC. If 1 Nephi 20 was written around 588 BC, that means this was supposedly authored either 2 years before or around the same time.

    I personally think it looks like Smith simply shoehorned it in in an attempt to legitimize the Book of Mormon. “Look! See? The Book of Mormon MUST be ancient and from God! It has an almost verbatim chapter from Isaiah in it!” The issue here, of course, is that the veracity of the Book of Mormon rests solely on one man who was a known charlatan (see 1826 Trial). There are more than 100 sworn statements, collected by D.P. Hurlbut in 1833, from early friends and neighbors of Smith in the vicinities of Palmyra, New York, and Harmony, Pennsylvania testifying to what scoundrels the Smith family were. You can read some of them in Fawn Brodie’s “No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith” in Appendix A, page 432. You can also view them here: Hurlbut and Isaac Hale Affidavits, Mormonism Unvailed,(Unveiled) Ed Howe, Chapter 17. Mormon apologists dismiss this all as anti-Mormon rhetoric, pointing to the fact that Hurlbut had been excommunicated and openly hostile towards the Smiths before collecting these affidavits at the behest of a committee in Kirtland, OH. You can read an LDS apologist’s thoughts here: The Hurlbut affidavits – FAIR. I have no trouble believing he had an axe to grind with Joseph and his family. I’m not even suggesting that Hurlbut (that’s quite the last name) was a virtuous character. However, the sheer number of statements shouldn’t be so easily discarded. If it were only a handful, then I would suggest taking it with a grain of salt. But over 100? That’s another story. Hurlbut’s personal vendetta does not negate the fact that over 100 people who personally knew the Smith family were willing to attach their names to legal documents testifying to their unsavory character.

    There’s also the matter of the banking scandal that took place in Kirtland, OH. Smith essentially opened an “Anti-Banking Company” and lied about how much money they had to fund it. You can read all about that fun little excursion here: Kirtland Bank. In Nauvoo, he also practiced polygamy in secret while telling everyone else that he wasn’t. See this for more reading: Examining Mormonism’s Founder: The What-Did-Joseph-Smith-Lie-About Approach – Mormonism Research Ministry. Even the LDS Church admits that he practiced it but only introduced the notion to a few close associates and basically told them to keep it to themselves: Joseph Smith and Plural Marriage.

    This is the person the LDS church insists was a prophet of God. This is the person they passionately claim translated gold plates that we don’t have into a book that contradicts the Bible and documented historical facts. It’s a bad map, ladies and gentlemen. And I won’t be following its directions.

  • Uknown Metalworking and Bad Theology

    I’m back at it again, ladies and gentlemen. After a hiatus from blogging about the Book of Mormon, I decided I simply couldn’t stay away. Some have asked me why I care about this so much. I have two simple answers to this. The first is that I care about the truth, especially if it has eternal consequences. There are major deviations in the Book of Mormon and the Bible, which I have demonstrated and will continue to. Even the seemingly small, oddball anachronisms and logistical issues have major implications. If the Book of Mormon cannot get historical details correct, then what else is it getting wrong? The second reason is that I’m a stubborn little contrarian who enjoys poking holes in things that need holes poked in them. However, as I’ve stated before, I’m just here to present the evidence I’ve found. What you do with this evidence is your call. Now, onto today’s reading.

    1 Nephi, chapter 19

    Nephi makes plates of ore and records the history of his people. The God of Israel will come six hundred years from the time Lehi left Jerusalem. Nephi tells of His sufferings and crucifixion. The Jews will be despised and scattered in the later days, when they will return unto the Lord. About 588-570 B.C.

    Before I begin this chapter, I’d like to point out a phrase that jumped out to me: “The God of Israel will come…” This is interesting, because it appears Smith is acknowledging that Jesus is God, which is a Trinitarian (and absolutely Biblical) concept. Joseph Smith started out with seeming Trinitarian views, or, rather, a concept of the Trinity. In his book, “CES Letter: My Search for Answers to My Mormon Doubts,” author Jeremy T. Runnels points out that over 100,000 changes to the Book of Mormon, many of which reflect Smith’s evolving view of the Godhead. Just one example of this 1 Nephi 11:18, which reads, “And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh.” In the original, however, that verse reads “And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of God, after the manner of the flesh.” Looks like they forgot to change the intro to this chapter. Whoops.

    1: “And it came to pass that the Lord commanded me, wherefore I did make plates of ore that I might engraven upon them the record of my people. And upon the plates which I made I did engraven the record of my father, and also our journeyings in the wilderness, and the prophecies of my father; and also many of mine own prophecies have I engraven upon them.”

    These “plates of ore” took me down a fun little rabbit hole. I state previously that it appears no one can actually agree 100% on where Nephi is supposed to have landed. While this is true, based upon the Mormon sources I happened upon, it seems the consensus is that he landed somewhere in Mesoamerica. This is an important piece of information because these “plates of ore” would have been specific to that region. While this chapter doesn’t specifically say what metal he uses, chapter 18:25 does state that he found “all manner of ore, both of gold, and of silver, and of copper.” According to the LDS apologist website Scripture Central, it is believed the plates described here were made of tumbaga, a copper gold alloy. You can read their reasoning for this theory here: What Kind of Ore did Nephi Use to Make the Plates? | Scriptu.

    The issue with this idea, however, is that tumbaga was specific to Mesoamerica. This alloy did not exist in the Middle East. Therefore, it would have been unknown to Nephi. He would not have known of this alloy, let alone the techniques of making it, which you can read about here: Fake Gold? Tumbaga | TORCH | The Oxford Research Centre in the Humanities. There’s no mention in the Book of Mormon (thus far anyway) of Nephi encountering other people in this new promised land that would have been able to teach him how to make tumbaga. It’s also widely known that Mormonism has taught that ancient Hebrews were the ancestors of Native Americans. Given that teaching, I think it’s reasonable to assume at this point that Smith didn’t believe anyone else was in the Americas at that time.

    Another impracticality here is that, according to the Scripture Central article I referenced, these plates he made would have weighed over 50 pounds. These would be incredibly cumbersome to haul around with him wherever he settled. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but it’s improbable, especially considering that other writing materials were available.

    Verses 2-6 simply detail more of God commanding him to make these plates and what he’s supposed to write on them.

    7: “For the things which some men esteem to be of great worth, both to the body and soul, others set at naught and trample under their feet. Yea, even the very God of Israel do men trample under their feet; I say, trample under their feet but I would speak in other words– they set him at naught, and hearken not to the voice of his counsels.”

    8: “And behold he cometh, according to the words of the angel, in six hundred years from the time my father left Jerusalem.”

    9: “And the world, because of their iniquity, shall judge him to be a thing of naught; wherefore they scourge him, and he suffereth it; and they smite him, and he suffereth it Yea, they spit upon him, and he suffereth it, because of his loving kindness and his long-suffering towards the children of men.”

    10: “And the God of our fathers, who were led out of Egypt, out of bondage, and also were preserved in the wilderness by him, yea, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac and the God of Jacob, yieldeth himself, according to the words of the angel, as a man, into the hands of wicked men, to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Isreal.”

    These four verses continue with the seeming Trinitarian theme of this chapter. The Bible teaches that Jesus is God incarnate. The concept of the Trinity is woven throughout all of Scripture. But to give just one example, look at Isaiah 7:14: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel (which means, God with us).” These verses are clearly stating that God will be taking on human form to come to earth.

    Now, time to get nitpicky about other details. Who in the world are Zenock, Neum, and Zenos? We don’t know. I’m not even sure the Mormons actually know. He’s never mentioned in the Bible. An article I stumbled upon makes a very weak case for Zenos being a real figure. In 1967, BYU professor Hugh Nibley attempted to make the case that Zenos was actually someone named Cenez, a prophet mentioned in a book called “Biblical Antiquities” by an unknown author. This book is believed to be written around the time of Christ, and it’s supposed to be a retelling of the Hebrew Bible from Genesis to the end of 1 Samuel. In 1994, another BYU professor by the name of John Welch drew some parallels between Cenez and Zenos but ultimately concluded that a direct identification between the two was unlikely. Instead, he argues there is likely a more ancient source that is responsible for certain imagery that appears in both the Book of Mormon and the Old Testament. What that ancient source may be is anyone’s guess. You can read that article here: Is Anything Known of the Prophet Zenos Outside of the Book o. Here’s a link to read more about “Biblical Antiquities”: Pseudo-Philo.

    Zenock is another unknown prophet who is never mentioned in the Old Testament. Interestingly enough, the official LDS church has very little to say about him. He is only mentioned in the Book of Mormon and is mentioned only 5 times. Here’s the link: Zenock. Verse 10 here is the only time Neum is mentioned.

    What’s peculiar about these supposed prophets is that their writings are not also mentioned. In the Old Testament, there are mentions of other texts outside the Hebrew Bible. To give a few examples, Numbers 21:14 names “The Book of the Wars of the Lord,” which likely detailed Isreal’s military exploits. “The Book of Jashar” is cited in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18. We also see works titled “The Book of Shemaiah the Prophet” and “Iddo the Seer/Visons of Iddo” mentioned in 2 Chronicles 9:29, 12:15, and other places as historical sources for some of the kings during that time. Finally, “The Book of Jehu Son of Hanani” is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 20:34. Notice that texts are named as additional sources for what the Old Testament writers reported on. They didn’t just drop random names out of nowhere.

    I would also like to discuss the three days of darkness prophesied here. This does not match what happened after Jesus’ death. Matthew 27:45 states, “Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour.” So, it was dark for three hours, not three days. The only reference we have to three days of anything is in Matthew 12:40, which reads, “for just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Obviously, that passage is speaking of Jesus being buried for that length of time. I haven’t the slightest idea who “those who should inhabit the isles of the sea” are or why they would need three days of darkness as a sign, but there are plenty of things in this book that make no sense and have no relevance to anything else.

    11: “For thus spake the prophet: The Lord God surely shall visit all the house of Israel at that day, some with his voice, because of their righteousness, unto their great joy and salvation, and others with the thunderings and the lightnings of his power, by tempest, by fire, and by smoke, and vapor of darkness, and by the opening of the earth, and by mountains which shall be carried up.”

    Based upon the previous verse, I’m left to assume this is being prophesied about the day Jesus died. Let’s compare this to Matthew 27:50-53: “And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom, and the earth shook and the rocks were split, and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.” My position is that the Book of Mormon is a 19th-century work of fiction born from the mind of Joseph Smith. So, why would he write a prophesy about something that clearly didn’t happen? Are we to believe this is one of the “plain and precious things” that was removed from the Bible? This is my first time reading through the Book of Mormon, so I can’t say whether this discrepancy is addressed later on. I’ll mentally log it away and keep an eye out for it as I continue this journey.

    12: “And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.”

    Perplexed by these “isles of the sea,” I sought out LDS sources to explain these seemingly cryptic passages. In doing so, I think I got an answer to my previous question I posed. The Mormon position is these people who inhabit the “isles of the sea,” are the descendants of Lehi who are in the Americas. These last several verses are prophesying the signs these people will receive. You can read more on this here: The Islands of the Sea – Book of Mormon Study Notes. This source claims there is a Biblical basis for these prophecies, even though there isn’t. He mentions Isaiah 49:1, which states, “Listen to Me, O islands, and pay attention, you peoples from afar…” The second passage he cites is Isaiah 51:5: “My righteousness is near. My salvation has gone forth, and My arms will judge the peoples; the coastlands will wait for Me. And for My arm they will wait expectantly.” So, what the author of Book of Mormon Study Notes is suggesting is that since Isaiah mentions people on islands and coastlands, it must mean he was also talking about the descendants of Lehi in the Americas. Quite frankly, that’s absurd. He is grasping at straws like a fat kid in a milkshake shop.

    13: “And as for those who are at Jerusalem, saith the prophet, they shall be scourged by all people, because they crucify the God of Israel, and turn their hearts aside, rejecting signs and wonders, and the power and glory of the God of Israel.”

    So, it’s being admitted again that Jesus, who was crucified, is indeed God.

    14: “And because they turn their hearts aside, saith the prophet, and have despised the Holy One of Israel, they shall wander in the flesh, and perish, and become a hiss and a byword, and be hated among all nations.”

    Given the raging antisemitism that’s been present for centuries, I’ll say this one is accurate. Though, it can hardly be counted as a point for the Book of Mormon’s accuracy, since Smith would surely have known of people’s hatred for the Jews.

    Verses 15-17 discusses the redemption of Isreal if they turn away from their rebelliousness. Verses 18-23 concern Nephi’s prophesies and records. He talks about teaching his brethren about the writings on the brass plates and the prophesies he’s making. He also mentions teaching them about Isaiah’s writings.

    24: “Wherefore I spake unto them, saying: Hear ye the words of the prophet, ye who are a remnant of the house of Israel, a branch who have been broken off; hear ye the words of the prophet, which were written unto all the house of Israel, and liken them unto yourselves, that ye may have hope as well as your brethren from whom ye have been broken off; for after this manner has the prophet written.”

    The Old Testament, specifically Jeremiah 11:16, talks about Isreal being like an olive tree whose “branches are worthless” due to their insistence upon worshipping pagan gods. However, the “hope” mentioned in verse 24 is a New Testament concept. You can read about that in Romans 11. You can also read more on this topic here: Broken Branches | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org. Thank you for reading this far, ladies and gents. I’ll be back another day, and I promise I won’t wait an entire month to write my next post.

  • More Things That Didn’t Exist Back Then

    The title here is, I believe, precisely why the Mormon church is steadily losing members, specifically from the Millennial and Gen-Z populations. Recent data from various sources shows a steep decline in church retention of members who have been raised in the church, which you can see here: Jana Riess: Data shows Gen Zers and millennials are leaving Mormonism. I suspect it’s because we live in an age of information. Anyone can do detailed research on any given subject, with access to a plethora of sources at our fingertips. It isn’t just contradictions with the Bible that are driving people away from Mormonism. It’s the illogical, implausible, and downright impossible claims that the Book of Mormon makes. We have thus far seen plenty of examples of the Book of Mormon’s divorce from reality. We will see more of this below.

    1 Nephi, Chapter 18

    The ship is finished. The births of Jacop and Joseph are mentioned. The company embarks for the promised land. The sons of Ishmael and their wives join in revelry and rebellion. Nephi is bound, and the ship is driven back by a terrible tempest. Nephi is freed, and by his prayer the storm ceases. The people arrive in the promised land. About 591-589 B.C.

    1: “And it came to pass that they did worship the Lord, and did go forth with me; and we did work timbers of curious workmanship. And the Lord did show me from time to time after what manner I should work the timbers of the ship.”

    2: “Now I, Nephi, did not work the timbers after the manner which was learned by men, neither did I build the ship after the manner of men; but I did build it after the manner which the Lord had shown unto me; wherefore; it was not after the manner of men.”

    This is yet one more example of the strange and needless repetition in the Book of Mormon. Verse two isn’t even necessary. I have no strong opinions on the claim that God showed him a special way of building the ship. I’m operating under the logical assumption that none of this is true anyway, so examining it isn’t going to change my conclusions. There are far bigger issues to address in this chapter.

    Verses 3-8 describe the ship being finished, the company gathering all their supplies, and setting sail. Verse 7 mentions Lehi had two more sons in the wilderness: Jacob (the older) and Joseph (the younger). Verses 9-11 involve Nephi’s brothers, the sons of Ishmael, and the wives getting rowdy and unruly. Nephi worries about the wrath of God and rebukes their behavior. This angers them (for the umpteenth time), so they tie Nephi up.

    12: “And it came to pass that after they had bound me insomuch that I could not move, the compass, which had been prepared of the Lord, did cease to work.”

    Here is our first major issue with this chapter: compasses didn’t exist back then. Even if God made a compass for Nephi, there wouldn’t have been a word for it. Interestingly enough, the first rudimentary compasses were actually used for divination and came into existence during the Han Dynasty, so around the 2nd century B.C. They used what’s called a lodestone, which is a naturally magnetized form of the mineral magnetite (see Invention of the Compass: History & Origins Explained). It wasn’t until much later that compasses were used for navigation. Somewhere between the 9th and 11th centuries, during the Song Dynasty, China underwent explosive growth in science, discovery, and knowledge. This is when Chinese scholars began to understand that the mechanisms behind the lodestone could be used for navigation. Some also speculate the Vikings’ sunstone coincide with their most prolific raids in the 10th and 11th centuries (Who Invented the Compass? A Brief History of the Compass and Its Evolution | History Cooperative). No matter where it originated, however, it’s blatantly obvious that people living in the time when this chapter in Nephi is purported to take place did not have access to this advanced technology.

    13: “Wherefore, they knew not whither they should steer the ship, insomuch that there was a great storm, yea, a great and terrible tempest, and we were driven back upon the waters for the space of three days; and they began to be frightened exceedingly lest they be drowned in the sea; nevertheless they did not loose me.

    Seems like there’s another story in the Old Testament about God causing a storm because he was mad at someone on a boat. Jonah, is that you? Granted, the reason for God’s wrath in that story was much different, and so was the outcome, but this is one more example of Joseph Smith appearing to take bits here and there from Old Testament stories and trying to pass them off as original to the Book of Mormon.

    14: “And on the fourth day, which we had been driven back, the tempest began to be exceedingly sore.”

    Smith seems to have developed a particular affinity for the word “exceedingly.”

    15: “And it came to pass that we were about to be swallowed up in the depths of the sea. And after we had been driven back upon the waters for the space of four days, my brethren began to see that the judgments of God were upon them, and that they must perish save that they should repent of their iniquities; wherefore, they came unto me, and loosed the bands which were upon my wrists, and behold they had swollen exceedingly; and also mine ankles were much swollen, and great was the soreness thereof.”

    So the tempest, his ankles, and his wrists were all exceedingly sore. Verses 16-20 essentially consist of Nephi using way too many words to describe how old, decrepit, and stressed his parents were because of everyone else’s behavior. He also points out, again in too many words, that Lehi’s two youngest sons, Nephi’s wife, and his kids were also all pretty worked up over Nephi being tied up while a storm raged for four days. He goes on to report that the only thing that softened the hearts of the rest of the hellions on board was the threat of drowning in the storm.

    21: “And it came to pass after they had loosed me, behold, I took the compass, and it did work whither I desired it. And it came to pass that I prayed unto the Lord; and after I had prayed the winds did cease, and the storm did cease, and there was a great calm.”

    22: “And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did guide the ship, that we sailed again towards the promised land.”

    23: “And it came to pass that after we had sailed for the space of many days we did arrive at the promised land; and we went forth upon the land, and did pitch our tents; and we did call it the promised land.”

    24: “And it came to pass that we did begin to till the earth, and we began to plant seeds; yea, we did put all our seeds into the earth, which we had brought from the land of Jerusalem. And it came to pass that they did grow exceedingly (yes, exceedingly!); wherefore, we were blessed in abundance.

    25: “And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the ass and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were of use of men. And we did find all manner of ore, both of gold, and of silver, and of copper.”

    I tried to find out where the Mormon church believes Nephi landed, but it seems there’s no consensus on the location. Some suggest it was South America. Others think it was central America. Still others believe it was North America. Since no one has any idea whatsoever where this may have happened, I’ll show my research on the claims laid forth in verse 25 in respect to all three locations.

    It is well-documented that horses disappeared from the fossil records of the Americas around 10,000 years ago. Horses were not reintroduced into the Americas until the time of the conquistadors. The arrival of domesticated horses came with Cortes in 1519. By 1525, there were enough domesticated horses in Mexico for horse-breeding to thrive and spread to other regions (Equine History – Return to Freedom). More recent research has demonstrated that North American Indigenous tribes came to own horses through northward trading networks. This refutes the common idea that horses spread in North America due to The Pueblo Revolt of 1680, which took place in New Mexico (New Research Rewrites the History of American Horses). Therefore, there is absolutely no way that people coming to the Americas between 591-589 B.C would have seen horses of any kind, no matter where they landed. Donkeys share a similar history and were also brought to the Americas in the 1500’s by Spanish settlers (Celebrating 250: Heritage Donkeys in American History – The Livestock Conservancy).

    Christopher Columbus brought cows to the Island of Hispaniola (now Haiti and the Dominican Republic) in 1493. From there, Spanish settlers brought them to the mainland of Mexico and Central America where they established large herds. From there, cattle spread south and north (When Cows Came to America – The Archaeological Conservancy). Oxen were brought to North America much later by English colonists, with Edward Winslow bringing Devon cattle to Plymouth Colony. Shorthorns were brought over in 1783. Oxen became very popular working animals and played a key role in the settling of America (Working Cattle in Early America | Ox Hill Devons, #variables.PageTitle# | The Colonial Williamsburg Official History & Citizenship Site). You can read about how goats also definitely weren’t in the Americas during this time period here: History of the U.S. Goat Industry.

    I’m not even going to delve into the mining operations described here because the presence of these metals in various regions in the Americas proves nothing in light of the aforementioned issues with the animals. Stay tuned for more, ladies and gents. We’re not even all the way through the first book in the Book of Mormon.