Top 5 evidences of the Book of Mormon! | with Stephen
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 чер 2024
- We are grateful to have Stephen from Mormonism with the Murph back on the show to talk about Book of Mormon evidences!!
0:00 - Intro
1:15 - Spiritual experiences helped Stephen through faith crises
2:43 - Disclaimer!
4:07 - There are evidences to the Book of Mormon
5:29 - The miraculous coming forth of the Book of Mormon
7:15 - The stories shared in the Book of Mormon are wildly complex
11:48 - Witnesses of the gold plates show the authenticity of the Book of Mormon
14:06 - The Book of Mormon prophecies of the 3 witnesses
16:55 - Either the witnesses were telling the truth or were tricked
18:40 - The witnesses were respected men
19:05 - Old word geography convergences
24:30 - The circumstances of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon
25:00 - Ancient names and literary elements
27:45 - If/and conditionals in the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon
31:20 - Geography of the Book of Mormon
35:50 - It’s not entirely impossible that the Book of Mormon took place in Mesoamerica
37:50 - Read the Book of Mormon!
39:25 - Trust your personal experiences
FOLLOW STEPHEN!
UA-cam: / @mormonismwiththemurph
Email: stephen.murphy04031996@gmail.com
More on the Book of Mormon: • Book of Mormon (Faith ...
SUBSCRIBE:
saintsunscripted/subscribe
Follow Us:
Facebook: / saintsunscripted
Instagram: / saintsunscripted
Website: saintsunscripted.com/
Follow the Hosts:
David: / davidesnell
Allex: / allex_lennon
Kaitlyn: / kait_fotheringham
Sabrina: / srhymasfuller
Cam: / camcondie
Lauren: / ladylaurencassidy
Wilson: / wilsongustaveson
Brett: / brett.fotheringham
One of my favorite parts of the Arabian geography narrative is that if Joseph was actually researching materials from the time, he would have been wrong.
Did you know the found the Tel Dan Stele in ancient Israel that speaks of King David and wars with Israel? THAT is solid evidence. What you are talking about is vaporous conjecture to support the wild claims of Joseph Smith that have no basis in archaeology or history.
Murph!
To me it is a miracle that the evidence surrounding the Book of Mormon so perfectly balances on the edge of a knife. To me it looks designed to make it plausible to to accept the Book's historicity or reject it as well. There is no smoking gun either way. It really shouldn't be so hard to disprove a book that makes the claims the BoM makes coming out at the time and place it did.
It's like everything is set up just so that accepting or rejecting the Book is a personal thing. I'm inclined to accept its claims, and to me the exact balance that the Book sits in is evidence of its truth. I wouldn't expect it to be proven in such a way that overrides faith.
So you don’t think deutero Isaiah and the NT material in the Book of Mormon are a smoking gun?
@@dr33776 No.
Its funny cuz %99 of the planet would agree that it is not a balanced argument and one side has facts and actual data... but yeah the earth is flat if you say so
@@jacobdevitry1570when 99% of the planet has read the book and considered it as thoroughly as it deserves, that would be a happy day. Luckily truth isn’t based on blind democracy from an uninformed public.
@@-Lindol- what would make it a smoking gun? To me the fact that it came at a time when there was a hypothesis that the Native Americans were connected to Israelites and yet all of the data since then demonstrably shows an Asian origin combined with it coming at time when people in New York were debating all of the theological content that is literally in the book is exactly what you would expect it to look like if someone were making it up in that time period. But since we are 200 years removed, the cultural context is lost on people and propaganda reigns large in believer's minds from birth.
Two of my favorite Latter-day Saint you-tubers in one episode.. How awesome can Saints Unscripted get? Thanks for hosting Stephen Murphy again and nice to see you back, David! Seems like you've been away for a while, unless I've missed an episode here or there :)
Thank you for your support!
Thanks Phil!
Thanks! Looking back I guess it has been a month since I've been in an episode! Don't worry, for better or worse I'm still here!
Love this. Well said 👍
The Book of Mormon deserves serious consideration from everyone for these reasons. The spiritual teachings, symbolism, etc. are even greater and are beyond any 22-24yr old farm boys preaching abilities.
That's a tall claim 🙂 which specific teachings of the Book of Mormon are beyond the mind of a 22 year old man to teach?
@@truth.speaker Guess you’ll have to read it a few times to find out 🤟
@@DrSpreckels I'm starting that right now. I'm in 1 Nephi. What teachings should I look out for which would be impossible for a young man to teach?
@@truth.speaker Impossible to teach is one thing; improbable to the point of being implausible is another. However, there are indicators in the Book of Mormon that do correspond to modern knowledge but not the knowledge available to anyone at Joseph Smith's time, so there are things that were impossible for him to know without revelation. Frankly, though, those aren't the things you should be looking for if studying the Book of Mormon. They're interesting but ultimately non-crucial.
Murph made a good point. If someone came up with a non-religious text that told a story of a group of people going through Arabia anciently. And they found places with distances and directions between them that matched the story as well as the ones that match the Book of Mormon account, then almost everyone would agree they are valid evidences that the text could be authentic.
Thanks!
Righto.
There is no proof or evidence of anything happening within the Book of Mormon, book of Abraham or any other works that would suggest it to be true. Nothing historical exists and the only thing the LdS religion can hang its hat on is the Bible which you only read and take out of context.
This appears to be inconsistent with the lds scholars who have posited that the location of the events must have been South America.
Hey, I hat happened to my previous post?
I'm also gonna write to comment for the algorithm
We love to see it 😅
Stephen Murphy, I am so grateful for your work on these subjects! Keep it up! You stand in the gap for so many people against terribly disingenuous accusations. Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you so much!
@@mormonismwiththemurph
Ezekiel 22:23-31. There are many people who have struggled without the insights that you are providing. Not everyone has the time, energy, or dedication to dismantle the onslaught of accusations that wrest the truth trying to shame the faithful. You respectfully point out that the door is not shut on faith for those who have gone down the wrong rabbit holes. Since the accusers are so prevalent what you are doing is crucial. I have not lost my faith, but I have had to sort through the accusations and many people just can’t. Some try to make it seem that there is no possible way that the restoration is real. They are as dedicated to it as any zealous believer. Your efforts are helping to keep the accusers in check. You are standing in the gap between ashamedly leaving the tree of life, and a hope of faith for many people.
See that's the thing! Not everyone needs this validity but some do, so it is important for this purpose. God speaks to people in a way that is individual to their needs and understanding. Thankyou.
you guys are awesome! thank you for your content and inspiring the rest of us to share the gospel, you guys are great!
Thank you for supporting us!!
Hey, Murph! Great video!
I was just reading A Study in Scarlet the other day which was the first Sherlock Holmes novel and funny enough, it's about the Church. I heard it was written in 3 weeks and people say that's impressive. It's a short book published in 1887 and doing the page and word count, Joseph would've dictated that in half the time...but that's not impressive somehow...haha.
Keep up the good work, guys!
The hypocrisy lol thanks Gustavo!
I love most Sherlock Holmes stuff, but A Study in Scarlet is really weird about the Church and not very good overall. Doyle figured it out after that first novel.
I've had insane peace and happiness and closeness to God while reading the Book of Mormon and Bible. I can't prove wither happened but if God wanted us to prove it then he would. I'm happy with a relationship with Him and Jesus.
Feelings to don equate to facts. By your logic, the Lord of the Rings could be scripture and history if you feel a certain way while reading it.
Read the Gospel of John and then ask THAT Jesus what is true.
@@kenedward4585I did, I was 19 when I was baptized in the church. I only had the Bible prior to that. I got my answer from God through His Holy Spirit. I asked with a willingness to do whatever the Lord asked of me, and I had to know it was of God before I would move forward with anything. My dad had taught me to "beware of a false prophet" as the Bible says, so yes, I did in fact ask the God of the Bible for answers and direction and I was answered. He allowed me to remember when the Lord told of "other sheep" which were not "of that fold". Why do you think there is so much resistance against the Book of Mormon? Satan doesn't want good Christians to have any more light than they already have, otherwise he would lose what little grip he does hold in their lives. (Keep God's people fighting each other over differences and neither group would be truly God's because they lack the pure love of Christ.)
@@rachelaltice5853 If you had really met the risen Lord Jesus, you would have realized that He is enough to save and sustain you with very His presence, as His living temple. You are trusting in bizarre secret temple ceremonies stolen from the masons. Joseph was a treasure digging scammer, who coerced multiple teenagers into marriage under threat of celestial doom. Joseph is the false prophet. You are in grave eternal danger..
@@rachelaltice5853 If you had really met the risen Lord Jesus, you would have realized that He is enough to save and sustain you with very His presence, as His living temple. You are trusting in bizarre secret temple ceremonies stolen from the masons. Joseph was a treasure digging scammer, who coerced multiple teenagers into marriage under threat of celestial doom. Joseph is the false prophet.
I've heard the story second-hand or third-hand, but there was a man on my mission who spent lots of time with native Americans. To the point where he was invited to tour one of their temples (in which he was able to identify a place like the veil in modern LDS temples, and they confirmed such with their reactions). He also told a story about how he read the story of Moroni building forifications around cities, and the native American he had told claimed that they knew the story, passed down from their ancestors.
Your vid's are an awesome way to spend my day on UA-cam instead of watching negative things, thank you for being here
The prophecies about the Mighty nation among the Gentiles is another evidence. The United States was not considered a mighty nation until after the Spanish-American War in 1898. No one could have predicted this happening before this. The words to describe the nation prior to the victory in 1898 where ragtag, backwater, hicks, undisciplined etc.
The scattering of the Indian nations did not occur or complete until 1924. Until this the Indian nation stood their ground rather well. It was most certainly not a settled issue when the Book of Mormon was written in 1830.
I'm not sure how well it was known in the US in the 1820s how large the native populations were before Columbus, and how many people died from the smallpox epidemics that swept the land, in many cases even before the Gentiles arrived in a certain area.
Nephi's vision rewards a lot of careful looking. I don't read it (as I once did) as an omniscient time-travel newscast. He was shown events broadly, in a way that resonated with his worldview and moral sense. The remnant of his and his brothers' descendants (who had plenty of time to mingle with other native populations with all the activity that research has shown) were *scattered and smitten before the Gentiles* - a description of devastating epidemics that fits the understanding of someone of Nephi's time.
Even the parts of Nephi's reaction that people have found racist. A dark and loathsome people: it's easy to write this off as some kind of Manifest Destiny dismissal of the "savages" of the western frontier. But reading about the sophistication and splendor of the Aztec and Incan empires (and their predecessors) gives another dimension to this. I'm not asserting any geographic model. There were densely-populated cultures all over the Americas that reached high levels of sophistication. Nephi is not impressed with how sophisticated any civilization is. He's just escaped from the threat of Babylon, *the* symbol of worldly sophistication, the conceptual model for the Great and Abominable Church. If Nephi saw, from his moralistic Israelite perspective, half of the cruelty that prevailed as various groups in the Americas rose to prominence, of course he would call that dark and loathsome and filthy.
And his portrayal of the Gentiles as white: I have come to believe that is because of their Christianity. Again, he's just escaped from the threat of Gentiles who are definitely not Christian, and earlier in his vision he's seen the Tree and Mary, both of which he describes as white. When he sees a mass colonization by a culture that has been shaped by Christianity, it makes sense that the vision codes this by showing the colonizers as white. He certainly doesn't let the Europeans off the hook: he calls out their spiritual blindness.
Brushing aside a prejudiced and simplistic reading of Nephi's prophecy as a product of 19th century Anglo-American prejudice; even letting go of the popular but also simplistic reading that Church members have given it; and trying with a more rigorous intent to read it from the perspective from which it claims to have been written: this is rewarded.
@@TrebizondMusic-cm6fp Thats a great description and a wonderful story. We can truly read anything into the text that we want
Thank you Stephen for your research and efforts to communicate your findings and for your courage. And thanks to Saints Unscripted! I love the Book of Mormon.
Thanks for being here!!
Thank you!
🙏🏻✨️For me it's the spirit of God that witnesses the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon 📖✨️.From a scientific look at the book, the book is a Miracle! For me it's also about common sense and all the warnings that are in the Book of Mormon!
Thanks for your comment!
I did not see ANY negative comments or replies to this video. Awesome!
I love your Channel Got to comment to help support that algorithm. God Bless!
Haha thanks for the comment! And yes, his channel is so good!
I read the Book of Mormon (BofM) and prayed about it and then amazing spiritual experienced occurred; that is why I am a True Believing Mormon and have loved being one. I’ve never felt the need to verify the BofM in a physical or scholarly way. That being said, I just love hearing Stephen Murphy talk about the BofM and how he has reasoned through various historical facts surrounding its translation. When I listen to Stephen I can tell he has read and faced nearly every BofM criticism and the way he works logically through the pros and cons shows he has an exceptional grasp of his subject matter. BofM critics ,like Lars Nielsen for example, have presented very logically weak analysis that doesn’t hold up to a rigorous examination like Stephen’s presentation of the facts do. A million thanks to Stephen for putting forth the effort to lay all these BofM facts out.
Thank you, I really appreciate those words.
Having a "spiritual experience" does not negate the fact that there is zero evidence for the BoM and an insurmountable amount of evidence against it.
@@3october1993feelings over facts
@@richarner3856 That's a pretty dumb way to live your life. I hope you never get a warm feeling about eating random mushrooms in the woods.
@@3october1993 the loudest boos come from the cheapest seats...the people with the least invested in you always have the most to say about you
Love Steven and his story, the intellectual honesty, his return to the church, faith, brilliance. So grateful for you!!!
37:00 If we DID find a tablet with Hebrew, scholars would absolutely declare it to be inauthentic. They would insist it was planted or at the very least post Columbian, because there's no other scholarly explanation for a Hebrew tablet amid the ruins. What would it take for scholars to actually declare it authentic?
Solid stuff! Very nice interview.
Like you, I'm sure, I hope that these intellectual evidences may entice non- believers to reconsider their stance and receive, as you and I did to start with, spiritual confirmation of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Thank you!
But they are not intellectual evidences. Not one single anthropologist from any university supports even a fragment of BOM historical claims. Even BYU does not support the BOM as history. The real evidence points to the BOM and BOA being frauds. Notice how they never allow any non-mormon scholars on their show to go over the evidence? It is an echo chamber.
Would the Caraters Document translation be 6th? Or would it be considered part of the complexity of The Book Of Mormon or because it was written by Martin Harris, would it be part of the testimonies of the witnesses?
You mean Jerry Grover's translation? That deserves a lot more attention.
Joseph is not the author or writer or originator of the Book of Mormon. He was the translator or interpreter. He used scribes to write the words. There are authors in the Book of Mormon. Nephi, Jacob, Mormon, Moroni talked about his compilation of the Book of Mormon, Joseph did not originate the Book of Mormon.
Why did LDS senior leader B.H. Roberts write a secret report that said there were disturbing similarities between the BOM and View of the Hebrews?
One of the things that I haven't seen brought up in relation to the translation is that 1st Nephi was one of the last things translated .
❤awesome
THE MURPH!
The Murph has great insight.
Thanks
Thanks guys. Loved this discussion.
Love, hearing more from the Murph! I enjoyed his point at the end how the book of Mormon is to bring us to Christ and unto REPENTANCE! I must say, after decades of figuratively wandering the remote hills of Mesoamerica searching for Cumorah, including literally two as a full-time missionary in the late 90s I have now REPENTED of such speculative ventures and am fully convinced of the revelation based model of North America (HaploX DNA), the land of the New Jerusalem (spoken of by the Jaredites & Christ declared to Nephites) Zarahemla (across from Nauvoo), Manti (in Missouri), river Sidon (Mississippi river) a “choice land”, a “land of liberty” a “mighty nation among the gentiles”…by whom the Lamanite “seed shall be scattered” (1 Nephi 22:7) a prophecy by Nephi fulfilled the same year the church was restored (1830) beginning the very next month of May 1830 by then gentile President Andrew Jackson signing into law the infamous Indian relocation act (Not a coincidence) then the Lord commanding Joseph (5 times in D&C) to send Missionaries to the scattered remnant of the “Lamanites” starting in September of 1830. Where do we know they went? Not Mesoamerica. Instead, just beyond the “border between the gentiles and the Jews”, western Missouri! Nah, despite the beauty and awe of those mesoAmerican stone structures, the earthen temples of the mound building civilizations of N. America line up with law of Moses anyhow. (Exodus 20:24-26). Simple: My preference lies in quoting scriptures, words of prophets and apostles (heartland) as opposed to scholars and archaeologists (meso)….besides this minor geographical error, I love hearing the Murph!
Thanks
Great video!
If the Book of Mormon took place in the Andes of South America then almost everyone is looking for evidences in the wrong places. The Three Witnesses told a newspaper in 1830 that the Lehi colony landed on the coast of Chili. And almost everyone in the church believed that until around 1900. Because BoM people went north in Hagoth's ships, then evidences of them in Meso and North America do not contradict the Andes model.
It is an interesting idea, for sure. I remember one book from maybe the 1940s that had a South American model, but it proposed a radical change in the geography that doesn't seem to fit the facts. But it was *all* of South America, not just the Andes.
I know the Inca empire was very late, but it did build on precedent, and it was the culture that the Spanish confronted. And its totalitarianism, regnal incest, inhuman cruelty, megalomania, and obsession with mummified remains certainly would have seemed dark and loathsome and filthy to Nephi's prophetic vision.
Now what if the mesoamerican model and the heartland model are both in part correct? What if after the destruction in 3rd Nephi, there was a migration north? There's large swaths of time that are just "And they were happy" for generations. And it's not exactly unusual to give new places old names.
The Hopewell timeline provided by state archaeologists doesn’t suggest that possibility. Good thought though.
You need to read FAIR's response "The Hopewell culture (in the Great Lakes area) and The Book of Mormon: Do they match?"
What is considered to be the best argument for how Joseph pulled it off? It can’t be that he made it up as he went. At the very least he wrote it then read it while his face was in a hat.
All I hear is “well, it can’t be true because Native Americans came from Asia” or “it can’t be false because it couldn’t be dictated from memory in 2 months”.
Anyway, keep up the great work, brethren! I appreciate you.
Of course, one can't fit much paper inside even a large hat, and inside a hat one can't see anything that isn't illuminated to some degree, and Emma testified that Joseph couldn't have hid any reference material from her. Don't forget those! The reading-from-inside-the-hat idea gets more implausible the more one thinks about it.
@@00Fisher00 Emma also said Joseph didnt practice polygamy. You dont know these people, dont forget that
@adamb7230 From my perspective, believers place more value on witness testimony and the story they are told about how it was developed and non believers place more value on physical evidence. That seems to be why there is a disconnect a lot of time
@@kuriju88 Historians know a lot about Emma and what she said, and she's not without credibility. Even without Emma's report, it's ridiculous to think that Joseph could have fit much inside the hat in the first place and that he could have read something that didn't provide its own illumination inside the hat.
@@00Fisher00 so wait...did she lie about polygamy or not?
For two seconds I thought Stephen was Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul)
Love you guys. ❤. I would suggest you read some Johnathan Neville, and some Rod Meldrom and some Wayne May on the heartland. It makes a lot of sense. One thing we all agree on is that the Book of Mormon is true. May God continue to bless your lives!
Good stuff!
Great interview
Thanks for watching!
Love this!
Excellent video and great summary of some of the better evidences for the Book of Mormon. If this piques your interest, don’t stop here. Dig deeper and do your own research. The totality of the evidence heavily weighs in favor of the Book of Mormon authenticity.
I’m a heartlander and the hopewell civilization timeline - @600BC to @400AD - is pretty compelling. I’m open to the idea that Lamanites, in open rejection of the teachings of the prophets and without scriptures, migrated into not the Central American regions where idolatrous societies emerged. But the Nephites, I am persuaded, stayed in the North American heartland along the Mississippi and into what we know as western New York, where the hopewell were.
Then why haven't they found even a single archaeological artifact to support BOM history from the millions of nephites? Why did Joseph Smith say he saw nephite skulls on the midwest plains, but no one else can find any? And why does every single anthropologist says the hopewell came through Asia???
Even FAIR says that the hopewell having nothing to do with BOM history: "The Hopewell have been shown to fail the test as a qualifying society for The Book of Mormon by lack of population, lack of cities, no large wars, destruction not coming from war, mounds not used for military functions, and no knowledge of weapons of war mentioned in The Book of Mormon. The list could go on, but just one of these points disqualifies the Hopewell culture."
These vids are great!
Love the Murph! Great episode
I like Murph. He's a sincere, down-to-earth kinda guy.
But, I have some notes.
6:45 Orally dictating the text in a few months is impressive. Writing a book is not something the average Joe does anyway, but the time frame is compact. However, it is FAR from miraculous. Elevating that to the level of miracle has some interesting implications for the writings of L. Ron Hubbard, for instance.
7:32 None of this "complexity" is all that complex really. Very few of the 200+ named characters appear in multiple stories. When the same story is told from a different perspective, key named characters are often dropped (like Amaleki's recounting of the Zeniff expedition). The "calendar" systems are just year reference points, not dynamic systems of calculating rotation and revolution cycles such as those found in Mesoamerica. There is a currency system that is brought up but never actually plays a narrative role. And the geography just isn't that complex. Most of the named cities and regions are mentioned once, play no real narrative role, and vanish. Those that do play a role fit into broad, generalized categories and are not that difficult to fit together.
8:10 The allegory of the olive tree is long, highly repetitive, and highly derivative of Paul and Isaiah. The chiasmus of Alma 36 is a very loose chiasmus, fits into common conversion narrative tropes, and is highly derivative of Paul. A really good chapter though. My mission plaque scripture came from Alma 36.
8:45 This must have been recorded before his interview with William Davis. I thought we were dropping this apologetic now that we've shown how someone can memorize these names in forward and reverse order. Also, the discrepancies between "sons" and "descendants" is perfectly consistent with an author operating off a memorized list of names, less so with an author writing from a reference text.
10:10 While the quote from Lucy Mack Smith is important for context, I'm happy with just Joseph's own history to suggest that he had years to work through the ideas and develop the story in his mind before beginning the work of producing the text. If he had an experience which he believed was a visitation of a resurrected ancient white Hebrew American in 1823 (or however else you wish to account for that story), then he had 5 to 6 years to mentally develop the story before beginning the production of the text.
11:28 Nah, Joseph isn't a secret genius. He's just smarter than his peers gave him credit for. Nothing in the text is so complicated as to require a genius level intellect. But it does require the author to be intelligent.
12:14 Hume's razor for the witnesses. Moving on.
17:00 False trilemna. Other possible explanations exist.
19:15 That "plausible candidates" line is key to this. The text of 1 Nephi is VAGUE about where the sites of Lehi's trail are located. Unlike the discovery of Troy, where the text of the Iliad actually provided clues that led to the city's discovery, none of the Lehite sites have been discovered based on clues in the text. Instead, a site is discovered that can serve as a "plausible candidate", and you end up with apologists contending that a continually flowing river in the text is actually this trickling creek in the real world. So Nahom and Bountiful are both argued for on the basis of a whole lot of "plausible candidate" sites that are not directly textually evidenced and that have huge problems when actually examined.
19:49 So, this NHM thing gets overblown or mischaracterized pretty often. Those three characters do appear on the author, as a part of a much larger text, in reference to a person's tribe or community. It is not declaring the name of the site as NHM or any such thing. That said, the altar is located in the tribal region of the Nihmites. That is a rather large region in southwest Arabia. Referring to it under the naming conventions of the Book of Mormon would put it closer to "the land of Nihm" rather than "the place which was called Nihm". There are a whole host of issues with this find as evidence for the Book of Mormon, but I would generally agree that it is one of the best external pieces of evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon.
20:49 Nahom is more likely derived from the biblical name Nahum. Whether the mourning association was intentional or mere coincidence is up for debate. It is notable notable that the book of Nahum does have a melancholic vibe.
22:45 Well, the name doesn't match. The consonants do. So what are the odds that he was would hit the consonants N,H,M in that sequence? Better than 0, for sure. Certainly more likely than a miracle claim (by definition).
23:20 Bible maps at the time would have included the Arabian Peninsula. However, the peninsula was not proportioned properly, being much shorter and much wider on the map than in reality. Given the time span of the Lehite exodus, and how the length of the journey is described, a relatively short southward-ish journey next to a longer eastward-ish journey is consistent with the era's Bible maps in a way that is more consistent with the text than a real world experience with the peninsula'a geography would be. And I'm just not as impressed by the "candidate site" evidence.
25:00 He just needs a Bible and experience with American Protestant Christianity, the Mound Builder myth, and a healthy dose of anti-Masonry.
26:37 Okay, Jershon is a great case study for how apologetics bends things to fit the conclusion they want. Jershon does have similarity to a plausible name for "city of inheritance" in Hebrew. I agree. However, the text makes zero indication that the author intended to associate Jershon with "inheritance". There are more references to "defense" and "protection" with the respect to Jershon. Also, the phrase "land of inheritance" is super common in the Book of Mormon. It is most often associated with the land of Nephi. This all just ends up looking like there is no play on words going on with the name Jershon, despite apologetic efforts to suggest otherwise.
27:15 Yet to see a Hebraism that cannot be just as well or better understood as "biblicizing English". I would expect a quality piece of Hebraic evidence to be 1) intentional by the author, 2) unique to and and actually belonging to Hebrew, and 3) unavailable in Joseph Smith's milieu. Furthermore, the Hebraisms used as evidence of an ancient origin for the Book of Mormon are of the same character of those that Dr. Paulsen-Reed called the weakest evidence for the Hebraic origin of the Apocalypse of Abraham.
27:51 If/and conditionals don't work in Hebrew either. The particle that gets used for "then" in some conditional statements can mean "and" in other contexts. However, only an absolutely incompetent translator would translate those phrases that way. Also, this phenomenon is not unique to Hebrew. Japanese has a form of conditional statements that uses a particle that often can be translated as "and" to denote a necessarily contingent consequence to the conditional event. Perhaps the Book of Mormon is actually an ancient Japanese document and Joseph mistakenly attributed to YHWH what should have gone to Amaterasu. I'm joking, of course, but I don't see the apologetic argument of being of much higher quality. Though this was a fun rabbit hole to dive down.
28:45 It is more probable that Joseph dictated Alma 36 himself.
29:20 False trilemna again.
32:00 I'll tap out from commenting here. "Plausible candidate sites" evidence for New World geography has all the same issues as those for the Old World, just cranked up to 11. That you can fit a super vague geography onto a real-world map just doesn't impress me, especially when it fits into so many competing models.
I appreciate your kind words and being a Critic who engages seriously with the arguments while being respectful.
@@mormonismwiththemurph 😁 Keep up the good work!
Definitely the best conversation I've ever seen in an LDS-related comment section
Alma 18:9
“And they said unto him: Behold, he is feeding thy horses. Now the king had commanded his servants, previous to the time of the watering of their flocks, that they should prepare his horses and chariots, and conduct him forth to the land of Nephi; for there had been a great feast appointed at the land of Nephi, by the father of Lamoni, who was king over all the land.”
Ether 7:9
“Wherefore, he came to the hill Ephraim, and he did molten out of the hill, and made swords out of steel for those whom he had drawn away with him; and after he had armed them with swords he returned to the city Nehor, and gave battle unto his brother Corihor, by which means he obtained the kingdom and restored it unto his father Kib.”
Ether 15:2
“He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.”
-Hebrew and “reformed Egyptian” writing in ancient America
-horses and chariots
-wars where millions die in battle with swords made out of steel
The BoM is remarkably historically accurate! It’s a wonder why critics and scholars don’t take it seriously 🤔
The BoM is so true. The trueness of it is truly truthful.
Amen.
Critics and scholars do not take it serious because it is not a serious pirce of history. Two million people killed and never a grave found. Not a scrap of pottery, a brick from the foundation of a building, an arrowhead, not one strand of DNA....nothing to evidence even the existence of these fake civilizations let alone the wildly outlandish claims made about them. No, the BoM is not true.
Completely agree with the first 4. The 5th is not strong evidence. I have switched to the heartland model after really looking at all the evidence. And people most people open to both models are switching over to the heartland.
Quick question: What are the best anti-LDS resources? I have yet to find too many that deal with the main issues (rather than beating dead horses or picking out smaller issues), or don't dump a lot of info without dealing with it very academically.
Probably Dan Vogels UA-cam channel, the Tanners website Utah Lighthouse Ministry and maybe sites like Mormon Think or LDS Discussions
@@mormonismwiththemurph Cool, thanks! I'm looking forward to studying with an open mind.
The Bible
@@kenedward4585 From what I've read, the BoM and the Bible are very similar, besides the fact that Nephi and his family practice a Christian religion while the Jews on the other side of the world still only had Judaism. If the Bible were so problematic, we'd throw it out rather than assume it's not infallible.
@@spadecrazeruns5703 But mormons basically do throw the bible out, or at least try to override the truth of the Biblical Gospel. Namely, that a person is saved ONLY by coming directly to Jesus and trusting in their *heart* that He atone for ALL their personal sin on the cross and then rose from the dead as their one and ONLY Lord God (John 3, Rom 10:8-10, Rom8). We become the living temple of God when we are born again. No celestial polygamy. No brick temples. No human authority. Joe lied.
A little detail about the 3 Witnesses that many overlook is that initially one of the 3, I believe was Martin Harris, left the group as they were praying (before the vision) because he felt that he was unworthy. He removed himself and the other 2 had the vision. Then the third came back and the 3 then had the vision together. So if it were some sort of mass hallucination, how would that have worked where 1 left, the other two had a vision, and then the one who left returned to witness the same vision along with the other two (the other 2 then actually had 2 visions.) ? There is no scientific explanation for how a mass hallucination can work like this, not to mention the fact that theories of mass hallucinations period are already specious.
I flirted with the mass hallucination idea, then I thought: what the hell, that's magical, isn't it? If I'm going to give credit to such occult/paranormal phenomena, why not just accept that there's an actual God that can make such things happen?
They made it up to scam people just like you. There. Hope that helps.
@@3october1993 For what purpose? And why hold to the story if it was fake, even after leaving the Church? What you're suggesting doesn't make sense.
@@00Fisher00 They did it for the same reason anybody does it: for money. Do you not know people who leave a particular church for a variety of reasons but still "stick to the story." I know dozens. The consistency with which someone clings to a lie is not evidence of its truth.
@@3october1993 What money? The witnesses of the Book of Mormon didn't benefit financially from their association with Joseph Smith or the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Nor was it popular. Your accusation is baseless. The witnesses had reputations for being men of character.
The feeling I get is that if Joseph Smith was a fraud in producing the Book of Mormon, why are things
written in the record that are beneficial to people? So Joseph was a good person, so consequently, those
helpful things were written by prophets. Thus the Book of Mormon IS the word of God. Thanks.
2:42 Stephen, I disagree a wee, a tiny bit. I think we have no obligation to recognize alleged credence in arguments or theories against the Book of Mormon, because those things are only apparent. They are dung sung from the dark forests of the hinterlands! But thank you for your work and cheers to you, faithful friend and brother! 💛🇮🇪
Haha some solid thoughts here!
Here's what I love. Stephen talks about having a bias, but I think his bias is really what we mean when we talk about an eye of faith. If you are going to have a bias, choosing faith rather than choosing doubt is the kind of bias we should all have. But what I love about it is how he really does try to keep a line of some kind of objectivity and admitting that we don't know everything. We don't, but neither do critics, and they're rarely honest about their presentation of "facts" or their "truth seeking" or admitting when there is actually evidences that support The Book of Mormon.
@@rulonwalker8938 I think you and I agree much. Still, I think knowing everything is not at issue, and Latter-day Saints have something the critics don’t. (I don’t like the term ‘critic,’ because it gives them too much credit and assumes honest intent. Nearly all the word-sewage I’ve seen came from liars.)
I think ‘objectivity’ is a liberal’s worm word. It’s their catchword that provides room for doubt. It is part of Mason-Miller-Arrington-Bushman-Givenspeak. Further, it’s nuts, because there’s no such thing as objectivity in the writing of history; every writer has slant, viewpoint, agenda, _opinion._ I prefer Faithful Perspective. It’s honest because it admits to having viewpoint, yet it doesn’t purport to know all things. It’s the approach taken by those with true discipleship, (vis-à-vis liberals with faux claims to it who may have a church résumé).
Actually this is useful at least for someone like me considering whether LDS is right or not. I’m interested in answering the critics.
@@stormythelowcountrykitty7147 Ah Stormy sister, yah, I see your good point. I too lurch, but when I search, I always find helpful thing! Also huge for me is to have a prayer life, and a scriptures life. Salutes! 🫡 🙏🏽
You're God, and you want someone to translate the Book of Mormon record, and you want to make it as obvious as possible that it's translated by your power and as hard as possible to claim it was translated by anything other than your power. While still requiring faith, at the very precipice of proof. I don't know who would be a better pick than Joseph Smith, Jr.
I think it's much easier to believe the Book of Mormon to be true than it is to believe otherwise.
You talk about names with Hebrew and Egyptian connections, but the most fascinating name in the BoM to me is Hagoth (Alma 63:5-6). For 60 years I've believed that this guy was a visitor from Scandinavia. The earliest archeological evidence place the Vikings in Newfoundland in 1000 AD, but nevertheless this name which is definitely derived from a Nordic source may be giving us a clue that "others" were on the continent. It says that he built a ship and sailed off on the west sea (strange) Northward...well some of that adds up and supports a Nordic origin of the man. But the two verses are so incidental that they are "evidence" to me that Joseph was not trying to prove a point but that Mormon was simply recording this one-off event about a mystery man that nobody talks about. I believe that earlier evidence of Nordic involvement in the western hemisphere simply has yet to be discovered.
I would also say, i love the BoM. The stories, the faith. Joseph was either very smart, very lucky, or it is true. 😊 Members tend to go with it is true and thats it. I think it is a combination. There's super smart and capable people who are in the exact time and moment that can produce miraculous outcome. And the topics in BoM are true because it is light. Definitely Joseph was super smart. Being mexican and with little understanding in prehispanic history i would say BoM is not about mesoamerica. It is sad that Americans have trumped my origins by telling me i come from a novel i.e. BoM. But im glad i know it now after 40 years of believing that. And im not even a lamanite anymore cuz Church has shifted on that as well. They changed the introduction on this issue. I will mention my elderly parents again who were taught by the church they are lamanites in blood. But shame, not anymore. That is the shame and the inconsistencies taught by church leaders. If we only had prophets to look around the corners. Oh well, Still a very smart produced book, inspired BoM.
Stephen, thank you for your comments and defense of Joseph Smith translating the Book of Mormon, not being the author of it. Especially when there are so many out there trying to discredit Joseph Smith and/or the Book of Mormon.
I didn't know you had a channel, I'm going to subscribe, I like your presentations.
Thank you!
It is amazing to me how young mormons tend to easily accept things that for older generations would be apostate issues. You guys talk about the rock in the hat as if it was natural and everybody knew about it. When i mentioned this topic to my parents they almost excommunicated me from our family. They were upset with me because i said something the leaders hid for years. Because that is what they did, they hid it. But it is now very acceptable for you guys. I can only tell you, you will be in the same spot my elderly parents are, and whatever you think you undetstand now, the Church will continue shifting and make you obsolete some day, without acknowledging your effort to believe and your current testimonies. Good luck for both of you when that happens.
That's too bad about your parents and the way you were treated by your family. I am 61 years old and knew about the Urim and Thummim (interpreters) and Joseph having a seer stone since I was a kid. My parents knew about it. In primary class we had a little activity about it. Maybe it was the ward you grew up in. Or perhaps your parents didn't read too much about Church history. I'm not defending the Church here, the organization has made a fair number of mistakes over the years. I just don't think that this was really one of them tbh.
@@jerrygrover8992 thanks for your comment. You are right, it's not the worse mistake. When i learned about it i thought it Made sense, coming from Joseph. My parents are good faithful members and well Educated in Church doctrines and history, as much as they can. I always took the doctrine for what it is, it came from God and These called of Him had to have a life too, one that made sense, just like mine.
@@jerrygrover8992 In this case it was the organization though. There was a period where it was definitely not taught and though you heard about it in 1970 or whatever, there were 150 years of history before that.
Joseph Fielding Smith the church's head historian himself said in 1956 that there was no authentic statement in the history of the church which states that the use of such a stone was made in the translation of the record.
@@kuriju88 Well, he may have been correct in terms of "authentic statement". Most of the sources are not ideal and contradictory (Whitmer contradicts himself). David Whitmer had many contradictory statements, and he made them long after he had left the Church. Same with Emma after she left the Church, again, an interview was recorded by her son long afterwards when she was old and later he said he didn't hold that position. Hard to know what to make of that. At the same time Emma was denying JS practiced polygamy. Some said he placed the interpreters in the hat. Or one of the interpreter stones in the hat. Honestly there is are still a variety of historical possibilities. It seems like statements are consistent that initially he used no hat and the interpreters, later up until the 116 pages were lost he used the interpreters (at least one of the stones), perhaps sometimes in the hat. After that, it seems generally most of the time he used the hat, with either an interpreter stone or his seer stone, which most agree that he had. JS and OC indicated that the interpreters were used for translation of the Book of Mormon. So it would seem that the interpreter stone in the hat is what was used at least for the translation. They both said that they looked into the interpreters for other revelations. So Joseph Fielding Smith wasn't actually inaccurate if he is clarifying his statement with "no authentic statement in the history of the church."
@@jerrygrover8992 To refocus the point, its not that Joseph Fielding Smith was inaccurate its that they didnt teach the seer stone for a large chunk of history.
Excellent overview. However, Mesoamerican geography arguments do not belong on the list.
1) Unlike the other arguments presented here, on which there is a consensus among faithful students, these are highly contested and the Church has explicitly stated that we don't know.
2) Cultural convergences are problematic. For example, yes the Maya had kings, concubines and commerce, but so has every other human society more complex than hunter gatherers. Not only is such strained parallelism weak, but it dilutes the universality of the Book of Mormon's message.
3) So far all Mesoamerican models are founded on a voyage across the Pacific fighting the prevailing winds and current for thousands of miles. Such a voyage is completely implausible, and makes all Mesoamerican models requiring it complete FAILS right from the start.
So no one knows where the BOM historical claims took place?
Building up all the false dilemmas and trilemmas is not a helpful path.
Joseph wasn’t the author, Lucifer was!
How do you know
@@kennyfranklin7260 Anyone can interpret that scripture to be about whatever dogma they disagree with.
@@_Lachoneus For beginners let’s start with Matt 7:15-29, Matt 24, Gal 1:6-10
2 Thes 2, 2 Peter 2, 1 John 4, and Jude.
@@_Lachoneus that doesn’t even make sense, regardless, when you take the verses I put together there is very little room for interpretation.
@@kennyfranklin7260 mormons read the same scriptures and interpret them in their own favor. As do every other Christian sect.
Why couldn’t Book of Mormon geography take place in both Central America and the heartland? Native Americans were quite capable of transversing the continent to trade and hunt.
Because it's all a fabrication.
There simply is no archaeological evidence to support anything regarding the BOM's historical claims. Not one single university in the world supports the BOM as history. The evidence supports the BOM and BOA being frauds. Even the LDS church is quietly acknowledging these things in the Gospel Topic Essays.
HISTORICAL FACTS:
1. The Smith family lived in and around Dartmouth College for around 10 years, and there are many documented interactions with the college.
2. Joseph Smith Senior’s father had a distant cousin named John Smith, who was a professor of ancient languages at Dartmouth University, and wrote about Indian origins, and inhabited planets
3. Professor John Smith’s theological writings bear a strong resemblance to Mormon doctrines.
4. Professor John Smith had 2 famous students: Solomon Spalding, Ethan Smith
5. Ethan Smith wrote View of the Hebrews and was Oliver Cowdery’s family Pastor.
6. Hyrum Smith attended Dartmouth prep school on campus at the same time that his relative was a tutor at Dartmouth.
7. The historical ties between Dartmouth college, Joseph Smith, his Uncle Professor John Smith, Solomon Spalding and Ethan Smith to the Book of Mormon cannot be coincidence.
Point seven is opinion and conjecture--not fact
@@_Lachoneus Even the LDS senior church leader BH Roberts wrote a secret internal report documenting the "strong and disturbing" similarities between the BOM and the VOTH. The fact that the author of VOTH can be traced directly to the network of Smith relationships is FACT.
@@_Lachoneus Sorry, but even senior LDS church official and scholar B.H. Roberts would disagree with you. "Did Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews furnish structural material for Joseph Smith's Book of Mormon? It has been pointed out in these pages that there are many things in the former book that might well have suggested many major things in the other. Not a few things merely, one or two, or a half dozen, but many; and it is this fact of many things of similarity and the cumulative force of them that makes them so serious a menace to Joseph Smith's story of the Book of Mormon's origin. -- B. H. Roberts, Mormon Seventy and Church Historian, Studies of the Book of Mormon, p. 240
@@kenedward4585 disagree with what? He obviously believed in the BoM until his death
@@_Lachoneus You are incorrect. The historical documents from senior LDS church officials clearly show that BH Roberts stated that he no longer believed the BOM was historical, but that he had shifted his belief to Joseph Smith as a prophet who was "inspired" to write the BOM as a kind of allegory.
“True,” proceeds to define a lie.
How so?
NEWS FLASH: It was almost one year between the "loss" of the 116 pages and when Oliver Cowdery became Joseph's scribe. So, we know Joseph had at least this long to formulate and write stories down. We know that Joseph and Hyrum had access to Dartmouth College theology writings of Professor John Smith and his students Ethan Smith (VOTH) and Solomon Spalding (religious fiction author). In fact, we know from the Dartmouth college archives that Hyrum attended theology classes with Indians as part of the Dartmouth college prep/convert school.
Quite possibly the least compelling argument I've ever heard, for anything.
Sounds dramatic.
@@_Lachoneus Accusations of "dramatic" ring pretty hollow when levied by someone who is convinced they're going to own their own planet and be their god someday. You're not, by the way.
@@3october1993 boring tropes.
@@_Lachoneus Yea, ya know sometimes tropes and stereotypes are just a time-saver. This is clearly one of those times.
@@3october1993 then perhaps your whole point is a waste of time if you can boil it down to petty stereotypes
If you bring up chiasmus in 2024 you should not be taken seriously as an LDS apologist
Sore subject, huh?
How can anyone “know” the Book of Mormon is true?
Because you chose to believe Moroni 10:3-4 is true?
Yes, it’s a supernatural book, but supernatural does not equal true because Satan gives a compelling supernatural experience.
Anything from Satan is simply not comparable to what we receive from God. Satan sometimes tries to sell his fakes, but he cannot produce the goodness that comes from the Holy Ghost.
@@00Fisher00 It sounds good, but how do you know "anything from Satan is simply not comparable to what we receive from God"?
The rejected of the Savior in Matthew 7 cast out demons in the name of Jesus Christ! They prophesied and performed MIRACLES all in the name of Jesus Christ. Are you suggesting they thought to themselves "Gee I always suspected it would end this way"?
In fact, I would think they truly believed that what they had was from God, wouldn't you?
@@markandpamtaylor8341 Do you really know God so little that you have to ask such questions? You represent tragedy to me. I remember conversing with you a couple of weeks ago. You stopped responding after I expressed great disappointment in your understanding of the Bible. I still wonder how you let yourself be convinced to ignore the Spirit of God that had already testified to you. The verses in Matthew 7 are pretty simple; there will be some who claim to do things in the name of Christ, and yet who are actually motivated by something else. "Who hath ears to hear, let him hear," the Savior said. Many are within earshot of many things God would tell them, but aren't listening. It is a very sad thing.
@@00Fisher00 The fact is, you don't know the true source of the feelings you feel. Little wonder why members need to tell each other "I know...I know...I KNOW..."
Because the truth is they really don't know. All you have is a feeling in your heart and a passage from the Book of Mormon and D&C that tells you that feeling is the Holy Spirit. Let's face facts; you're testing the Book of Mormon with a test found in the Book of Mormon.
The rejected in Matthew 7 didn't just claim to do the things they did. Unless you're suggesting they are liars? They are standing in front of Jesus Christ Himself and telling Him a lie to His face? Seriously?
Obviously they were motivated by something else. They believed that their eternal life was the result of their good works during mortality, but they didn't realize that the Jesus Christ which they thought they believed said "He that believeth on me HATH everlasting life."
The died never having done the will of the Father which Christ revealed in John 6:40.
"And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."
Are you familiar with Dennis McDonald?
He's a biblical scholar with some fantastic insights into the inception of the Bible, specifically the gospels of the New Testament. The old Testament is Hebrew/Aramaic of course. Basically, he described parallels between the gospels and the Greek poet Homer with his works that predates jesus's time. Much of the mythological figures used in Homer's poems and stories, like Dionysus, Poseidon, describe jesus in very similar ways several ways and it's not by accident. Who ever authored the gospels, they practiced their greek writing from reading and writing the poems of Homer and essentially they recontextualized greek mythology to create new characters like Jesus and the apostles.
[[The Book of Mormon's authorship is done in the exact same way. He took the truths of all competing denominations during his time, each with their own unique core beliefs, then held the KJV Bible, inferred his experience in treasure hunting, along side Native American history speculation, to coalesce what we know as, The Book of Mormon.]]
For someone who believes I an all powerful God, it seems quite amazing that a human being pulled off the Book of Mormon the way you just described. It’s not believable that Joseph Smith did it without divine help to me. On the other hand, if one does not believe in the existance of an all powerful God, maybe your explanation is all that is possible. You have to make some serious stretches of how amazing Joseph Smith was to pull it off, otherwise God exists. To me, Joseph was not that amazing, just a prophet of the actual amazing Being.
@@Kaydubbbb humans have achieved some amazing things already, just marvel at the technology your holding in your hands. It feels normal to us because we live it, we challenged laws that have allowed us to create tiny transistors to switch coded binary, on/off, into a language that could be interpreted together with electricity and light. Humans are amazing! With Joseph Smith in his time lived during a great Protestant Christian revival for America, new faiths left and right appeared, he was an opportunist like everyone else back then. Nothing wrong with that at all! I find it dangerous to believe divine textual objects because it limits our ability to rationalize reality. There was a time we believed that old lady in black cloaks to be witches that should be burned at the stake. Now such thoughts are irrational because that old lady simply needed medical intervention for coughing what we know now is the common cold. Joseph Smith was a genius to the degree that he and others saw the marketability of a religious text for an American audience, in a newly independent nation that lacked identity, so they made one up.
@@jacobhholt miraculously😊. God is in it my friend. Joseph Smith did the impossible. He threaded so many needles at once accusers have to really stretch to believe it wasn’t from God if they study it out. You yourself have developed a zeal for defending your faith that the Book of Mormon isn’t real. Where is that zeal coming from?
Huh!?
@@Kaydubbbb All I'm saying is that "God" is no longer a good enough world view to explain reality. It's a thoughtless easy out to explain the unknown. There are just better explanations out there with better research, better archeology with rational historical context.