The Bible says, "However, if we or an angel from heaven should come preaching a different 'good news' from the one we already taught you, let him be accursed!" Galatians 1:8 21st Century NT. The Book of Mormon was given to Joseph Smith via the Angel Moroni. Mr. Alvarez says that the BOM is not a different gospel (good news), but it in fact complements the Bible. But what are the real facts on the BOM?:
The French word "Adieu" closes the book of Jacob (Jacob 7:27). The Book of Mormon dates Jacob between 544 and 421 BC. The French language didn't even exist until around 700 AD!The Book of Mormon sounds Biblical because some 27,000 words are from the King James Bible. Hundreds of verses are copied verbatim. For example, II Nephi, chapters 12-24 are copied from Isaiah 2-14, III Nephi 24 & 25 are copied from Malachi 3 & 4, and I Nephi 20-21 are copied from Isaiah 48-49 except for a few additions in the Book of Mormon. Even the italicized words from the King James Version are copied! The words in the King James Version were NOT in the original text but were added by the translators to give clarity of thought. The King James Version was completed in 1611 AD and the Book of Mormon published in 1830. This proves that Nephi was written after 1611! for more click hereJesus Christ was to be born "at Jerusalem" according to Alma 7:10. However, the Bible says He was born at Bethlehem (Micah 5:2, Luke 2:4).
Helaman 14:20, 27 says that darkness covered the whole earth for 3 DAYS at Jesus' death. Matt. 27:45, Mark 15:33, and Luke 23:44 says it was 3 HOURS.
In Alma 46:15, believers are called Christians in 73 BC. However, Acts 11:26 says that they were FIRST called Christians at Antioch (about 42 AD).
2 Nephi 22:2 quotes Isaiah 12:2 almost verbatim from the King James Bible:
"Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation."
However, this scripture in the BOM is dated at 559 and 545 BCE, the King James Bible was not released until 1611 AD.
Ether speaks of steel (7:8,9) and breakable windows (2:23) back in Abraham's time. Neither had been invented at that time.
According to I Nephi 2:5-8, the River Laman emptied into the Red Sea. However, there are no rivers in Arabia and no river empties into the Red Sea.
Ether 9:19 states that in the Americas before Christ was even born there
were "horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms;
all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms
and cumoms."
Archeology denies this. The Smithsonian Institute has on record that
"none of the principal Old
World domesticated food, plants, or animals (except the dog) occurred in
the New World in pre-Columbian times. American Indians had no wheat,
barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys, camels
before 1492." Elephants came over from Africa many years after that.
And cureloms and cumoms only existed in the mind of Joseph Smith.
We are told in the Book of Mormon that Indians wrote many official records (Hel 3:13), scrolls (Mor 5:23) and other writings (Mor. 9:2; 2 Nephi 9:18). But, every anthropologist will tell you that the American Indians never wrote books but used simple pictures to communicate.
The Book of Mormon also implies that the North American Indians are descended from the Jews. But, it is generally accepted that Indians are "mongoloid", and are descended from east Asia.
Since the KJV uses Elijah and Elias for the same person , Mormon prophet Joseph Smith mistakenly and interestingly had a vision of both (Doctrine and Covenants 110:12-16)!
The Book of Mormon claims that God cursed the Indians with dark skin and
that anyone who marries an Indian shall get dark skin too (2 Nephi 5:21-23;
Jacob 3:3-9; Mormon 5:15-17; Alma 3:6-10). But, if this were true,
there would be no part Indians, only full-blooded Indians.
The statement is obviously false on a genetic level.
The Book of Mormon states that when Indians accept Mormon teachings
they will become, "white and delightsome people" (2 Nephi 30:5-7; 3 Nephi
2:15). Because of this
teaching, Latter-day Saints early in their history did a great deal
of mission work among American Indians, and converted many. Even though
today there are third, fourth and even fifth-generation Indian Mormons, there
is not an instance of even one ever experiencing a lightening of the skin
upon submitting to Mormon doctrine.
The Book of Mormon Contradicts History and Archaeology
1) No Mormon cities have ever been located using Book of Mormon.
But, most cities in the Bible have been located with Bible.
2) No Mormon names have been found in inscriptions as a result of archeological
finds. But, many Bible names have been found in secular inscriptions.
3) Archaeologists have never successfully used the Book of Mormon as a guide
in locating ancient ruins. But, archaeologists have in the past and still
do successfully use the Bible as a guide in locating ancient ruins.
4) The Book of Mormon was supposedly translated from "reformed Egyptian".
Nothing on the western hemisphere has been found that even remotely resembles
Egyptian. Officially "reformed Egyptian" does not even exist. But on
the other hand, the Bible was translated from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.
We know these languages well. These languages are taught in today's
universities.
5) Furthermore, there are no manuscripts or "reformed Egyptian" writings
available. None of the "gold Nephite plates" exist from which the Book
of Mormon was supposedly translated to examine and compare the English translation
of the Book of Mormon. However, the Bible is supported by thousands
of Greek & Hebrew manuscripts along with at least 2 compete copies of
the Bible from 300AD. All manuscripts are available to public at any time.
Even archeological scholars of the Latter Day Saints admit that the Book
of Mormon cannot be supported by archeology. Dee F. Green, who at one
time served as editor of the University Archaeological Society Newsletter,
published at the church's Brigham Young University, made it plain
that archaeological evidence did not prove the Book of Mormon: "The first
myth we need to eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists."
Thomas Smart Ferguson was one of the most noted defenders of Book of Mormon
archaeology. Mr. Ferguson planned the New World Archaeological Foundation
which he hoped would prove the Book of Mormon through archaeological research.
The Mormon Church granted hundreds of thousands of dollars to this organization,
but in the end, Thomas Stuart Ferguson admitted that although the Foundation
made some important contributions to New World archaeology, all his work with
regard to the Book of Mormon was in vain. He admitted, in fact, that he had
wasted twenty-five years of his life trying to prove the Book of Mormon.
Concerning books written by Mormons to support the Book of Mormon through archeology, Dr. Ray T. Matheny, professor of Anthropology at the church's Brigham Young University stated, "While some people choose to make claims for the Book of Mormon through archaeological evidences, to me they are made prematurely, and without sufficient knowledge... I do not support the books written on this subject including The Messiah in Ancient American, or any other. I believe that the authors areConclusion: "'What you have is just plain charlatanry by Joseph Smith, who created Mormonism,' [Bill] Craig replied. 'It's interesting that Smith and his father, when they lived in New York, were obsessed with finding Captain Kidd's buried gold. Then what does Smith later claim he finds? Golden plates from the Angel Moroni, and then they disappear and are supposedly taken to heaven and never seen again.
making cases out of too little evidence and do not adequately address the problems that archaeology and the Book of Mormon present. I would feel terribly embarrassed if anyone sent a copy of any book written on the subject to the National Museum of Natural History - Smithsonian Institution, or other authority, making claims that cannot as yet be substantiated .... Speculation, such as practiced so far by Mormon authors has not given church members credibility." (Letter by Ray T. Matheny, dated Dec. 17, 1987).
More faith than you? I do not think so because LDS have never had a drunker as President like Rutherford."Reply: Well, Jose, start packing. As for Rutherford, I don't know anything about his drinking habits, but then, he is not my prophet.
More faith than you? The society predicted the end of the world for 1914, 1915,1918, 1925, during the II World War, 1975 and before the XX century ends.
More faith than you? When you have change doctrine dozens of times even preaching contradictory statements.
More faith than you? Who allow to their fellow to be killed because you do not accept bloo transfusion when there is nothing in the Bible against it.
More faith than you? When you believe that the witnesses were the real victims in the Nazi Holocaust instead of the Jews.
More faith than you? When the Society used double standard in Mexico and Malawi.
If the LDS church had had this characteristics I would have left it long time ago but Thanks God It is His church."
On the night that Joseph was murdered he drank again. The LDS Church records
describe in
detail that, "The guard immediately sent for a bottle of wine, pipes, and
two small papers of
tobacco; and one of the guards brought them into the jail .... Dr. Richards
uncorked the bottle, and
presented a glass to Joseph [Smith], who tasted, as also Brother Tylor ...."
(History of the
Church, vol. 6, pg. 616)
Was this for sacrament only? Let us look at John Taylor statement:
"Sometime after dinner we sent for some wine. It has been reported that this
was taken as a sacrament. It was no such thing our spirits were generally
dull and heavy, and it was sent to revive us" (History of the Church, vol.
7, pg. 101)
Did you know Joseph Smith had a liquor license to distribute alcohol from
his home. Take a look at *History of the Church*, vol. 6, pg. 111, "Section
1 - Be it ordained by the City Council of
Nauvoo, that the Mayor [Joseph Smith] of the city is hereby authorized to
sell or give spirits of
any quantity as he in his wisdom shall judge to be for the health and comfort,
or convenience of
such travelers or other persons as shall visit his house from time to time."
Changing doctrines dozens of times?
Have JW's changed their mind about the Trinity,
Hellfire, the Immortality of the
Soul, God's Name etc, or is that we have at
time fine-tuned our understanding of certain scriptures, much like everyone
else has (this is true of all Christian groups), but this point is harped
on by anti-JW's as they really are only looking for points to misrepresent
us by.
What of the prophecies mention above?
Most of these dates are embellished by Jose himself, and the rest, like those
of all churches have been dealt at my page at 1975.htm
and by Hal Fleming at http://jehovah.to/exegesis/general/prophetic.htm
and http://jehovah.to/exegesis/translation/vandermeer.htm
But I do find it interesting that you, a Mormon, accuse us of such, when
compared to your own church founder and members, all others pale in comparison.
PROPHECIES OF JOSEPH SMITH:
Sept 21, 1823. Joseph Smith says in the Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith
2:40, that Moroni told him that Isaiah 11 was "about to be fulfilled."
Isaiah 11:6-11 prophesies that the wolf and the lamb, the calf and the lion,
etc. shall dwell in peace together, and that nothing will "hurt or destroy,"
and that the earth shall be "full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters
cover the sea."
None of this has yet come to pass.
Joseph had a revelation that Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery were to
go to Toronto to sell the copyright of the Book of Mormon to raise money.
Winter 1829-1830. Comp Hist 1:165
They were completely unsuccessful.
After this, Joseph Smith "inquired of God" and was told that some "revelations"
are not from God. See David Whitmer's An Address To All Believers
In Christ, Richmond, 1887, photo reprinting by Utah Lighthouse Ministry, pp
30-31.
In his "Prayer and Prophecies," Joseph Smith while he was a prisoner in the
jail at Liberty, Missouri, wrote that:
We allow to their fellow to be killed because you do not accept blood transfusion when there is nothing in the Bible against it.
Do you have documented evidence that we have not saved lives from refusing
blood transfusions? In the age of AIDS, Hepatitis and other blood-borne diseases,
JW's are pioneers in this field and opening the way for a safer alternative
to Blood, this same blood that the Bible is against ingesting.
The prohibition on blood was there before the Jewish system (Gen 9:4), during
it (Le 17:3, 4 etc), and after it, in Christian times (Acts 15:28, 29).
This is acknowledged by probably the smartest man in his history in The Chronology
of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, by Sir Isaac Newton (Dublin, 1728, p. 184) he
says: "This law [of abstaining from blood] was ancienter than the days of
Moses, being given to Noah and his sons, long before the days of Abraham:
and therefore when the Apostles and Elders in the Council at Jerusalem
declared that the Gentiles were not obliged to be circumcised and keep the
law of Moses, they excepted this law of abstaining from blood,
and things strangled, as being an earlier law of God, imposed not on
the sons of Abraham only, but on all nations, while they lived together
in Shinar under the dominion of Noah: and of the same kind
is the law of abstaining from meats offered to Idols or false Gods, and
from fornication."-Italics his.
"It ought to be observed, that this prohibition of eating blood, given to
Noah and all his posterity, and repeated to the Israelites, in a most solemn
manner, under the Mosaic dispensation, has never been revoked, but, on the
contrary, has been confirmed under the New Testament, Acts xv.; and thereby
made of perpetual obligation."-Benson's Notes, 1839, Vol. I, p. 43.
What of early Christians?
In 177 C.E., in Lyons (France), when Christians were falsely accused of eating
children, a woman named Biblis said: "How would such men eat children, when
they are not allowed to eat the blood even of irrational animals?"-The
Ecclesiastical History, by Eusebius, V, I, 26.
Tertullian backed the prohibition of ingesting ANY kind of blood in his work
Apology (IX, 13, 14): "Let your error blush before the Christians, for we
do not include even animals' blood in our natural diet. We abstain
on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that
we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat.
Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full
of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it
is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress."
Minucius Felix made the same point: "For us it is not permissible either to
see or to hear of human slaughter; we have such a shrinking from human
blood that at our meals we avoid the blood of animals used for food."-Octavius,
XXX, 6.
Somebody called Dr Laura and spewed the same kind of rhetoric that you did
about blood transfusions. Here is the response they received from some doctors:
Subject:
Non-Blood Transfusions
Date:
1999-03-04
RE: Your Caller Concerned About Father's Refusal of BloodAs for the Jews, NO JW would belittle the horrors the Jews had to go through in Nazi Germany. We JW's would not follow Hitler of our own accord. Not so for the Mormons. "In the Nazi era, the church authorities in Utah counseled German members to support the Third Reich" says Douglas Tobler, a professor at [Brigham Young University]."
Transfusion"I'm a long-time listener, fan, supporter and defender of all
that you teach, preach (& nag). Today a man called you and voiced
concern over his father, a JW who is facing surgery and will refuse a blood
transfusion. After some personal chat with the man, you said you
understood his feelings: he'd lost his wife and now stood to lose his father.The assumption his father was as good as dead without blood transfusion is a common one, but there's almost no truth to that anymore. At our hospitals, we have a Transfusion-Free Medicine & Surgery Program and the results are phenomenal. Outcomes are better and the hospital stays are shorter. We've eliminated the risks associated with blood transfusions (and there are many, ranging from the best known, AIDS, to Hepatitis C and other infections and complications).
Our Palm Springs-area hospitals, part of the Tenet Healthcare Corp., are part of a network of Southern California facilities with this program. Included among them are our prestigious USC University Hospital and the USC/Norris Cancer Hospital. Hospitals and doctors all over the country are climbing aboard this bandwagon; I could introduce you to surgeons who haven't transfused blood in years.
We're doing open heart, cancer, neuro, ortho (including total hip and knee replacement) neonatal and pediatric, gynecological and urological, transplant, and vascular surgeries successfully without blood transfusions. Much of this is due to advances in equipment and technology, and credit also goes to the JW population for their stand on blood which brought about these changes. Today, about 25% of tranfusion-free procedures are on people who are not Jehovah's Witnesses, but who choose the option for health or personal reasons.
This is emerging medicine. Your caller would have benefited from this
knowledge (his father probably already knows about it). The day may
come when blood transfusions are a thing of the past.So, let's put this canard to rest."
Tom Wixon
Manager, Marketing & Public Relations
Desert Regional Medical Center
John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital
Phone: (760) 323-6690
Fax: (760) 323-6580Or Call:
Bradford Ray
Transfusion Free Medical & Surgery Coordinator
Desert Regional Medical Center
John F. Kennedy Memorial Hospital
Phone: (760) 323-6311
Double Standards?:If you are alluding to
any crimes/indescrepancies, then do you have any criminal charges that you
can refer to, to back yourself up? Or are these allegations based on ONE
individual gloryhound? Are there any public charges brought forth in newspaper
print of any of these (you know, like the Olympic bribery scandal the Mormon
leaders are tied to in Salt Lake City, which is being investigated by the
IOC)?
What about the latest Mormon church cover up:
Sex Case May Pry Open Finances of LDS Church - 7/17/01 - by Elizabeth
Neff
The Salt Lake Tribune "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
is fighting to keep its finances confidential in an Oregon lawsuit seeking
more than $1.5 billion in damages from the church. Plaintiff Jeremiah Scott,
22, of California, sued the church in Oregon state court after an LDS ward
Sunday school teacher was convicted of repeatedly sexually abusing him in
Portland
when he was 11 years old. The suit alleges negligence and intentional infliction
of emotional distress, claiming church officials knew Franklin Richard Curtis
was a pedophile, but did not warn Scott's parents before they took Curtis
into their home. Church attorneys have told Scott the church is able to pay
punitive damages of $162 million, or twice the amount of the largest
punitive damages award in Oregon history. excerpt from http://www.sltrib.com/07172001/utah/114274.htm
Or:
Church fights plaintiff's attempt for force financial disclosure -
AP - 7/17/01 Salt Lake City - "The Mormon church is fighting a sex-abuse victim's
attempt to force it to disclose financial
information." excerpt from
http://www.arizonarepublic.com/arizona/articles/0717az-mormonsuirt-ON.html
Further reading:
God and the Holy Books by Hal Fleming
Did the Book of Mormon Plagiarize the Bible?
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE BOOK OF MORMON
The Kinderhook Plates-The Embarrasment of the Mormon Church
Studies of the Book of Mormon by Brigham D. Madsen
Early Mormon View of Jehovah and Jesus
The Mormon Murders: A True Story of Greed, Forgery, Deceit, and Death by Steven Naifeh
CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN THE
BOOK OF MORMON AND THE BIBLE