How the LDS Church is different

While out and about seeking new investigators as a missionary, I often heard the question "How is your church different from mine?" As far as I could tell, it was almost always a sincere question. It's also an excellent question. If Mormonism has nothing exceptional to offer then there's probably not a great reason for joining it.

Hearing the question filled me with a mix of joy and anxiety. On the one hand I was thrilled to be given the open door invitation to talk about how awesome the Church is, but on the other hand I knew my major selling points weren't exactly the most impressive.

1. We have a living prophet like Noah and Moses! He tells us all the useful and relevant things God wants us to know for these very times.

Typical responses to this depending on one's religion went something like this: 1) Cool, we have a guy like that too!, 2) We don't need someone like that because we have a book of scripture that's still perfectly relevant or 3) We don't need that sort of thing because we have the Spirit guiding us at all times. At that point you had to then make the case for how much more impressive the LDS prophet was than their figure head, book or ability to listen and understand the will of God via his Holy Spirit. It was never an easy task. I always sought a fine balance of diplomacy and conviction, hoping and praying that the Spirit would fill my mouth with just the right words.

Inevitably discussions would arrive at the point where I have to explain what the prophet has said recently that was so great and so clearly prophetic. That's where all momentum was lost because no LDS prophet since Joseph Smith has done much of anything at all.

2. We have The Book of Mormon (and other new scripture)!

 This comment usually would of course get some people saying the Bible is all you need, but usually people would ask what it said that was so great. At that point I or my companion would share the wonderful tale of Jews settling parts of the Americas in 600 BCE, how they tried killing each other until the resurrected Jesus stopped by to set them straight, at which point they lived happily for 200 years until they eventually decided that killing each other was better. This only ever impressed uneducated people. Everyone else waited patiently until we left them alone.

3. We have the same power and authority held by Jesus Christ himself during his earthly ministry!

This usually got a response similar to "Oh, we've totally got that!" but would also receive challenges like "Great. Go ahead and tell me about the miracles you've performed." In the first case you had to get into the same type of debate mentioned above in number 1. How do you tell someone who believes they have the power of Jesus available to them that they really don't, at least not to the same degree that you do? And how do you prove it? I hadn't performed any miraculous healings, cast devil spirits into swine, fed thousands of people on scraps or kicked thousands of people out of a house of worship for not being reverent enough. All I had to offer were the miracle stories I had grown up with - stories about Joseph Smith, pioneers and the bishop of the brother of the one guy in my ward who maybe healed the child of a family he home taught - and those, I'm telling you, failed to convince. More often than not my miracle stories were met with other miracle stories that sounded just as awesome if not a little bit more grandiose.

4. We know that families can be together forever!

I could never understand how people weren't more impressed by this claim to Mormon exceptionalism. Most people were absolutely unimpressed by this doctrine we hold so dear. I met people who were sincerely confused that we would think our family mattered once we were in heaven. Weren't we all going to be one gigantic family anyway? Other people were annoyed by the idea that they would be stuck with family in heaven. Why should they be happy spending an eternity with people they don't especially care to see now? What's the point of having our earthly family in heaven? What problem does it solve? Will Mom still have meals to cook and dishes to do? Will Dad have to keep the Pearly Gates oiled and our misbehaving hides tanned?

5. We can teach you how to have a direct, personal relationship with God the Father. 

Most religious people we encountered had already heard this from their current religion. Communion with the Divine is an extremely popular and persistent promise of religions across the world. Trying to convince religious people that their previous encounters weren't as personal or frequent or powerful as they were with Mormons was a great way to offend people. Occasionally, however, we would find someone who had been longing to escape the chill of the Universe and make a connection with a loving god they hadn't yet known. These were our moments of elation. They occasionally turned into baptisms. I saw people enthusiastically accept baptism and I LOVED it. It made me feel so good. Unfortunately I saw almost all of those people leave the Church in frustration, the same frustration of others who tried and failed to make the connection as well as those who thought they had succeeded only to find themselves once again cold and alone.

I wondered if God simply didn't have time for his children. I wondered if God was testing how long we could hold our breath underwater. I wondered if God was as good as we say he is. I wondered why God would be so stingy. I wondered why I believed in God at all.

Why believe in this amazing father god if he can't stick with us despite our total loyalty? How is that any better than worshiping an idol? How is my god any better than the those worshiped by people I contacted daily on my mission?

For years I assumed that people couldn't see why Mormonism was so special because they weren't giving it a fair shake. Now I see that Mormonism has nothing different to offer the world. It's the same slop with a different name. I can see no reason why the LDS Church should be considered a "true" church, let alone The One True Church.

Greg Trimble's 11 Book of Mormon evidences

If you have Mormon friends on social media, chances are you've been presented with links to some pretty interesting Mormon logic. One post I've recently seen from a popular blog makes the case for The Book of Mormon in 11 poorly thought out proofs. The proofs are stated as questions and are the typical examples offered by general authorities of why The Book of Mormon is true which means they're the kinds of things you can say in church meetings to make yourself feel important and everyone else feel comfortable, but predictably they are not very convincing.

Here are the eleven questions that will prove the authenticity of The Book of Mormon and my brief responses.

1. Could an uneducated boy come up with 531 pages of ancient scripture on his own that was historically accurate and prophetic in nature?

Answer: Yes, absolutely. Please open your copy of the book to essentially any page that isn't copied almost verbatim from the King James Bible (that might be harder than it sounds). Now tell me how many verses you have to read before you find one that sounds like an uneducated young man (calling someone in his early 20s a "boy" is condescending and inaccurate) er-ing and um-ing a dictation from his head. Not many. Joseph Smith loaded his book so full of place keepers, redundancies, filler and slip ups that I'm amazed when I make it through a single verse without feeling the need to edit.

Keep in mind that this is how it reads even after the Church's editing of all the more egregious frontier farmer speech.

2. Would it be possible for that boy to understand and include ancient Hebrew literary writing styles such as idioms and Chiasmus, some of which weren’t even discovered until long after Joseph Smith was gone ?

Answer: Easily. He read the Bible a lot. He, like every other human being who reads, would absorb and reproduce the style of what he reads to some degree. As for chiasmus, it's an extremely common organizational tool that certainly appears in Jewish literature but is not in any way limited to it. I made a chiasmus on accident once, others are more carefully thought out. You can find chiasmus in children's literature as easily as you find it in adult literature from all over the world, European literature included. This just came to mind, maybe Jews wrote it:

(A) Hickory dickory dock! 
(B)/(C) The mouse went up the clock.
(C) The clock struck one,
(B) The mouse ran down.
(A) Hickory dickory dock!

And quit insisting Joseph was a "boy" when he wrote The Book of Mormon; he was a married man.

3. How would Joseph Smith have been able to know so much about the Middle East, especially the Arabian Peninsula where Lehi and his family traveled? The book includes findings in that region that no one had discovered yet.

Answer: The "knowledge" about the Middle East found in the Book of Mormon could have been derived from having been shown a map. What do you think has been discovered there after the printing of The Book of Mormon that was included in the text? The "NHM" alter? Come on, give us what you've got. Everything apologists have thrown out there has been debunked.

4. How could Joseph Smith come up with roughly 200 new names in the Book of Mormon and then have them turn out to be Semitic in nature?

Answer: He read the Bible a lot. He reused many of those names, modifying them as he saw fit. It wouldn't be hard to throw in a few more made up names that look similar to what's found in the Bible.

5. If you think Joseph Smith couldn’t have written this book, then where did it come from? If one says the devil put him up to it…then why would Satan want to publish another testament of Jesus Christ and a book that does nothing but promote righteousness. Jesus said that a house divided against itself would fall.

Answer: Only a moron would say the devil wrote or inspired the writing of The Book of Mormon. It's origins are clearly early 19th century publications and popular thought.

6. Who were the “other sheep” that would hear Jesus’s voice in John 10:16?

Answer: The "Gentiles", in other words, the non-Jews.

7. Why are there volumes of books written by non-LDS authors stating that Christ came and visited the America’s a couple thousand years ago just like it says in 3rd Nephi? (See Example “He Walked The America’s”) How would Joseph Smith have known this when at the time no one even considered it?

Answer: No one has a monopoly on stupidity, ethnocentrism and wishful thinking. The one book you linked us to is very revealing about yourself as a thinker.

8. If we have the stick of Judah (record of the Jews or the Bible), then where is the stick of Joseph that is referenced in Ezekiel 37:15-20? The Book of Mormon is the only explanation for this scripture. Lehi was a descendant of Joseph. Think Joseph Smith could have gotten that right by sheer chance?

Answer: This is a misinterpretation of the Bible.

9. How could there be so many witnesses of the Book of Mormon and the plates and not one of them deny their testimony even when some of them became bitter toward Joseph Smith? With so many people involved…a hoax of this magnitude could never go uncovered.
 
Answer: People do and say all sorts of things for friendship, family and their reputation. Historian Dan Vogel has some presented some important information for you to consider.

10. How could the Book of Mormon never contradict itself while being an extremely complex book? After all these years…someone would have found something…but no.

Answer: The Book of Mormon is relatively straight forward in its narrative. It basically just tells the same story over and over again. The repetition is numbing, not profound. Despite the simplicity of the repeated narrative, contradictions and errors have in fact been found (you just have to be brave enough to read something other than LDS apologetic literature). It also contradicts known archealogy, natural history, and the history of religious and political thought; it contradicts other Mormon scripture; it contradicts current LDS beliefs (e.g. temporary suffering in hell vs. eternal suffering and the nature of the Godhead).

Even though The Book of Mormon isn't horribly riddled with internal contradictions, why does that somehow make it true? Many authors manage to avoid totally screwing up their stories, does that mean their books are true? Absolutely not.

11. How do I feel while I read the Book of Mormon? Don’t let anyone tell you that you can’t trust your feelings. We are spiritual beings, and if we can’t trust our feelings, then what do we have? Over and over again in the Old and New Testament we’re told that we can trust that “still small voice” to guide us in our decisions. (1 Kings 19:12) I can write evidence after evidence to back up the Book of Mormon but each of those evidences I found were only secondary to the whispering of the Spirit I felt that day before I began waxing up my surf board.

Answer: Epistemology is a tricky thing. You're insisting that emotions are all we have. That's an unfortunate move on your part because we have a lot more than that: we have other senses to work with and we have logic. But if you're going to insist on feelings let's look at your feelings. Let's say you wake up from a dream about your wife cheating on you and you feel hurt and angry. You can't look at her the same for weeks. Did she really cheat on you? Are your feelings reliable? And what about others' feelings? Why do you seem so willing to disregard anyone's feelings and impressions that don't align with your own? What makes you think yours are the only true ones when members of essentially every other religion will use the same evidence as proof of their religion being true?

P.S. I wrote this blog immediately after reading the questions. The answers were too easy. I then went back to the blog to read the comments and saw that several people had written their responses as well. Several were similar to my own but I definitely encourage others to read through them.

Temple prep - New Era "Prepared, Empowered, Transformed"

By Pang Kau Yang. Text found here.

Before I entered the temple for the first time, I always felt a special connection to it from reading and learning about it, studying my patriarchal blessing, and hearing the testimonies of others. Not from all the crazy Primary songs where you say how much you love the temple and are definitely going in some day, or the fact that your parents plastered the walls of your home with pictures of the temple and pointed it out enthusiastically every time you passed one, or all the church talks and lessons that hard sell you on the temple?

I committed myself to prepare so that one day I’d be ready and worthy to enter. Nice job, Pang. The LDS Church is very happy for you. Even before receiving my temple endowment, I’d drive three hours just to sit at the temple grounds to pray, ponder, and write in my journal. You didn't have a nice wood or lake or something closer by? Each time I left, I felt a greater sense of strength and confidence that I could face the challenges and struggles in my life. Feelings feel best when they feel good.

Throughout my youth, I’d do baptisms for the dead. Those experiences contributed to my testimony of temples and the ordinances performed in them. You mean the ordinance of baptism? You had no idea what the other ordinances were if all you were doing is baptisms. I thought that if just being on the temple grounds and doing baptisms for the dead felt so good, then it must feel even more wonderful to receive my own ordinances in the temple. That's definitely the impression the Church wants to impart, friend.

On the day I received my endowment, my family and I ran into a few obstacles before we got to the temple. Satan put those obstacles there. Don't doubt it for a second! But despite the challenges we had getting there, once I was inside I felt that nothing mattered but the sweet and peaceful feeling of joy that comes as we perform temple ordinances. Wait, back up. You're not even going to tell us what the obstacles were?? Are we just supposed to fill in the blank there? What the hell? Now about feeling joy... what if I (or someone else) don't feel that? One of the greatest feelings I had that day was, “I made it! I know this is where I am supposed to be.” Right, and no one had prepped you at all to think like that. Are you a puppet?

I knew in my heart that I’d done everything I could to be worthy and ready to receive what Heavenly Father had prepared for me. But you had no clue what "had been prepared" for you, so you couldn't have known that the Freemasons, not God, had prepared most of it. I could feel His love and His gratitude for my desire to follow Him and make and keep covenants so that I can return to live with Him someday. You mean baptism? Jesus said you need baptism. I don't know why God would require baptism, but that's what Jesus said. If you mean something other than baptism, no one in the New Testament or Book of Mormon would have agreed with you. Jesus included. In other words, you don't need to know the patriarchal grip to return to God. The only thing that handshake's good for is getting you 15 minutes in the Celestial Room.

I’m so grateful for all those who played a role in helping me prepare to enter the temple. Did anyone tell you what covenants you'd be making or how to tie your sash before you went in? No, absolutely not. I’m grateful for the Book of Mormon, which helped me receive spiritual guidance and nourishment to be prepared to make and keep temple covenants. WTF? The Book of Mormon says NOTHING about the current LDS temple rites. My experiences in the temple will always hold a special place in my heart. Those experiences gave me strength when I served my mission, and they continue to give me strength to face challenges with the hope and faith I need to endure. I can still look back and remember the wonderful, peaceful feelings I felt in the temple that first time. That's good. Really, it is. But do you understand that people draw strength and encouragement from all sorts of things? A lock of hair, a movie, the words of a friend, a certain smell, cleaning and organizing stuff, stand up comedians, a pet, reading, sun tanning, buying some new shit, etc.? What happens when someone else says that they don't get peace from attending the temple?

I love the temple. I know that it’s the house of the Lord. Did you see him there or just read "House of the Lord" above the entrance? Why would God live in something as uncomfortable as a temple? I mean, there are no beds and the pool is very, very small. It’s where we can go to perform ordinances and help others who have passed on receive the blessings of eternal life and exaltation. People who have passed on without ever hearing about Jesus don't need those things, The Book of Mormon says so. It’s where I continue to go to receive strength, guidance, and knowledge. It’s where I go to feel close to Heavenly Father and feel of His love. So is it OK with you if the 99.9% of the world who isn't Mormon goes somewhere else? All you've told us here is that the temple works for you. Can you tell us any details about the temple itself for anyone out there who might actually be curious, or do you prefer that we ask Google? Google upbraideth not!

Satan a la mode

The Book of Mormon was profoundly unfashionable for it's time when it comes to considerations of the devil; in the midst of a non-committal vogue, it dives headfirst into making assertions about the unknown. Follow the bracketed links to see how Joseph Smith and the Gold Plates boldly put Percy Bysshe Shelley (and his ilk!) in his place. 

There may be observed in polite society a great deal of coquetting about the Devil, especially among divines. They qualify him as the evil spirit [Mormons too (because God didn't give him body): Mosiah 4:14, Mosiah 2:37]; they consider him as synonymous with the flesh [sometimes, but mostly the Devil uses the flesh as a wicked joystick: 2 Ne. 10:24, Mosiah 16:3, Mosiah 16:5, Helaman 7:15]. They seem to wish to divest him of all personality [whatever! Satan has a personality and it's horrible: 2 Ne. 28:22, Alma 30:60, Moroni 7:12]... Hell is popularly considered as metaphorical of the torments of an evil conscience [No way, Satan's a real dude not our pained psyches: 2 Ne. 2:17, Alma 30:53, Jacob 7:18, 3 Ne. 18:15] and by no means capable of being topographically ascertained [OK, so Mormons don't know where Hell is (maybe Outer Space/Darkness) but they certainly know it's physical: 1 Ne. 14:3, 1 Ne. 15:35]. No one likes to mention the torments of the everlasting fire [um...: 2 Ne. 9:16, 2 Ne. 28:23, Jacob 3:11, Jacob 6:10, Mosiah 3:27, Mosiah 26:27, Alma 12:27] and the poisonous gnawing of the worm [try 'dragon' or 'monster', buddy!] that liveth forever and ever [2 Ne. 9:16, 2 Ne. 9:19, 2 Ne. 9:26, 2 Ne. 26:22].  (From Essay on the Devil and Devils, 1820.)

In other words, if you're doubting the literal existence of Satan, his angels/devils and Hell, YOU HAD BETTER RECONSIDER! THIS SHIT IS REAL!!

"Ouch! Ouch! Ooouch!!"

Don't doubt that this is one doubt you'll be eternally sorry you never doubted! Neither popular opinion nor careful research can save you.

Summer reading - the best of books

Summer's almost here and I know you're all looking for some quality literature to keep the kids' brains afloat. Nothing keeps the mind sharper than reading, so let me suggest the finest of books you could possibly hope for. It's a good long read full of powerful, uplifting stuff like beheadings, theft, the electrocution of threatening siblings, rumors of wars, fort building, city fortification, vigilante justice, dirty prostitutes, deceptions, stratagems, spearing people, dismembering people, rivers of blood, sibling rivalry, family feuds, cousin killing, patricide, fratricide, infanticide, genocide, fear mongering, demonic possession, Satan, devils, magic curses, rape, endless war, cannibalism, torture, threats, coercion, murmuring, conniving, the wrath of God, divine death threats, burning people at the stake, poisoning, conspiracies, government corruption, evil freemasons, guilt mongering, talk of eternal torment, unprecedented amounts of copulation, and more.

What is this fine book, book you ask? The Book of Mormon, dear brothers and sisters!

And for any of you out there who are worried all this might be a little too much for your kids, don't worry! The fact is The Book of Mormon is written so poorly that the boredom of reading such tedious gibberish will certainly have your children zoned completely out while moving through the pages. By the middle of Alma they'll have absolutely no idea of what exactly they're reading or why.

For those of you who aren't concerned about disturbing content but are more concerned about engaging literature, read something else, like Game of Thrones.

Predicting Christ's New World visit

Around 600 BC father Lehi saw a vision of Christ and his apostles. He was even told that Christ would come visit the Lehites in the New World 600 years from their departure for the new promised land.

And yet despite that very explicit prophecy for centuries the following prophets are clueless. Look at how out of touch Alma is.

 

Unless everyone else was as ignorant as Alma, why would anyone be impressed by Samuel the Lamanite's prophecy? 

Why would this be? The answer could be as simple as this: Joseph Smith didn't know how he was going to bring about the advent of Jesus in the Americas during the earlier stages of writing The Book of Mormon, but by the time he finished up Moroni and went back to replace the missing 116 pages of manuscript with what became 1 Nephi through Words of Mormon he had the whole thing figured out and could include all the appropriate prophetic details.

Sound doubtful? Good. Doubt your heart out!

Persauding men to do good

Even though there is zero evidence for the veracity of The Book of Mormon, could it still be true?

"To those in the last days who might reject the Book of Mormon, God through Moroni warns that they shall be 'accursed' (4:8). Conversely, anyone who wants to know the truth of the book is promised that 'because of my Spirit he shall know that these things are true; for it persuadeth men to do good. And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me; for good cometh of none save it be of me. I am the same that leaded men to all good' (4:11-12). In other words, since all good comes from God, and the Book of Mormon tries to persuade humankind to be righteous, it follows that the Book of Mormon is true, independent of its historicity. This statement, together with a similar one in Moroni 7, provides a glimpse into Smith's psyche, particularly the manner by which he might rationalized the use of deception. Although he felt inspired as he dictated the text, he would have known that there weren't any gold plates, and hence, no Nephites and no Jaredites. Still, he was dictating spiritual truths despite the absence of historical authenticity." Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, pg. 348

The Nephites' Book of Mormon

We're lucky to live in a day and age when Heavenly Father has bestowed on us The Book of Mormon. There are so many unbelievable stories in there! One of the most incredible parts is that in this book about the colonization of the Americas by Jews contains within it a book about a previous colonization of the Americas by possible descendents of Ham (Noah's son) following the Tower of Babel. It's basically a Book of Mormon-like record for the people who then wrote the record that became The Book of Mormon. A Book of Mormon within a Book of Mormon, and it's called the Book of Ether! So cool.

Here's Dan Vogel on just how unbelievable the Book of Ether is:

"Moroni tells readers that he has abridged 'the twenty and four plates which were found by the people of Limhi, which is called the Book of Ether' (Ether 1:2; cf. Mosiah 8:9; 28:17-19). The book is named after the last prophet of the Jaredites, Ether, who like Moroni witnesses his people's war of total annihilation. In fact, the parallels between the two stories are so striking, down to the last battle occurring at the same hill, that Mormon writer B. H. Roberts wondered: 'is all this sober history? ... Or is it a wonder-tale of an immature mind, unconscious of what a test he is laying on human credulity?' It is puzzling why Smith would add a repetitive story to the the Book of Mormon, but it does emphasize the overall theme of his work, which is that Americans must repent or be destroyed." Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, pg. 340.

Totally far out prophetic shit! Love it!

Searching online

To whomever made the first search, it seems like you might be struggling with a previous decision to have an abortion. I can only imagine how painful living with that decision could be. I hope you found something online that has helped you.

To whomever made the second search, WTF?

Keep doubting, my friends.

Skylanders and The Book of Mormon

I found some Skylanders Skystones game cards in my cereal the other day and as I read the back of the little box they came in I was amazed at how familiar the story line sounded. I switched out a few nouns and a verb and this is what I got:

"The origins of [The Book of Mormon] go way back to the days of the [Nephites]. While experimenting with early [translation] technology and magic they discovered a form of enchanted stone that would allow anything [read through] it to become real. The Ancients worried that this power might fall into the wrong hands so they turned it into a [treasure hunt], purely for fun and leisure."

"Fuckin' A, dude, you found the magic stone! You win! Fun!!!"

It sounds like fun to me!

Prosperity

If there is one reoccurring lesson in The Book of Mormon it's probably that "inasmuch as ye keep the commandments of God ye shall prosper" (1 Ne. 2:20; 4:14; 13:15, 20; 2 Ne. 1:9, 20; 4:4; Omni 1:6; Mos. 1:7, 17; 2:22, 31, 36; 7:29; 25:24; 26:37; 27:7; Alma 9:13, 22-23; 36:1, 30; 37:13, 43; 38:1; 45:8; 48:15, 25; 50:18-20; Hel. 12:1-2; 3 Ne. 5:22) or, in other words, if you do what God wants you to do he'll bless you with wealth and lots of kids. (Congratulations, God loves you!) In fact, the entire book is about two groups who were both righteous enough to be blessed with life in the Americas only to fall from grace and get wipe out almost completely by the will of God. The Book of Mormon exists to bolster the idea that God gives you health and wealth if you behave.

Take a look at how the Jaredites and Lehites "prosper", "multiply" and "wax" (often "exceedingly") every few chapters (2 Ne. 5:11, 13; Jar. 1:8; Mos. 2:2; 9:9; 10:5; 21:16; 23:19-20; Alma 1:31; 50:18-20; 62:48, 51; Hel. 3:8, 20; 4:13, 15; 6:12; 11:20; 3 Ne. 6:4-5; 4 Ne. 1:4, 10, 18, 23, 28; Eth. 6:18; 7:26; 9:16; 10:16, 28), but they're also always becoming prideful and "waxing in iniquity". That's when God has to smite them down (by the tens of thousands) to make them humble again so they follow the commandments again so God can bless them with riches again so they can get prideful again, etc. (You'd think God would catch on after a while, wouldn't you?) Within the LDS Church this cyclical narrative within The Book of Mormon is known as the Pride Cycle. I would dare say that the majority of believing Mormons are very familiar with the concept though few have probably lived the cycle, but it's supposed to be one of the greatest and clearest warnings in Mormon scripture.

Outside of Mormonism this kind of relationship with God is called the Prosperity Gospel and it was very popular with the Puritans who colonized New England.

Lucy Mack, Joseph Smith's mother, had a strong Puritan leaning, so in addition to growing up surrounded by New England's general culture of discussing and believing in the Prosperity Gospel Joseph had an earful of it at home.

His other ear was full of his father's Universalist tendencies and his grandfather's adherence to Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason. Predictably enough Universalism and rational skepticism are also extremely prominent in The Book of Mormon (though always as opponents of truth).

It's almost as though The Book of Mormon was written specifically for Joseph Smith's father and family members...

Could Joseph Smith have written The Book of Mormon? I mean, it just happens to be full of the very religious education he received at home! Let's hope he didn't, though. It would be extremely inconvenient for our testimony of The Book of Mormon. Maybe we shouldn't think about it too much after all.

A toppled tower

I'm not sure how long I believed in the literal existence of the Tower of Babel and all its linguistic consequences. I'm pretty sure I believed in it as a little kid, probably didn't believe in it as teen (because who's stupid enough to try to find God living in the sky when we all know he's near Kolob?), tried really hard to regain belief in it as a missionary, and gave up entirely after taking a few linguistics courses and an Old Testament one at BYU post-mission.

The story of the Tower is problematic for a number of reasons. First of all, it must have been quite an undertaking to intimidate God enough that he felt he had to stop construction (but not destroy the tower), and yet there is no solid archeological evidence for it. Secondly, it seems this story has more to do with Mesopotamian myth designed to explain where languages come from and teach us not to challenge God. And most importantly, we know damn well that the languages of the world definitely did not all spring into existence circa 2300 BC. The very idea is simply ludicrous.

Even without knowing the first thing about historical linguistics you can see that the oldest texts we've found include more than one language pre-2300 BC.

This is all very bad fucking news for Mormons. Why? Because The Book of Mormon requires a literal belief in the Tower of Babel, that's why. Read for yourself...

the Title Page

 the Introduction

and the story in Ether.

"Dear Heavenly Father, I know this story isn't true, 

but please tell me it's True. Thanks. Amen."

Predictably - because The Book of Mormon must be understood as a literal history - the LDS Church still insists on a literal understanding of the Tower of Babel story. It's totally moronic, but somehow we find a way to doubt. There has to be an explanation. Heavenly Father will explain everything after we've proven ourselves. We'd better keep doubting this doubt.

Mark Twain's review

"The Mormon Bible is rather stupid and tiresome to read, but there is nothing vicious in its teachings. Its code of morals is unobjectionable—it is “smouched” from the New Testament and no credit given."

Read the entire review here.

What is the Book of Mormon?

Breaking news: some returned missionaries have finally found a way to teach the world HIS TRUTH! With this (hopefully) viral video, every inhabitant of the earth will soon know and accept The Book of Mormon for what it really is!

But didn't Brother Jake already make a viral YouTube video explaining The Book of Mormon? I'm sure the LDS Church has been reaping the bounteous fruits as Gentiles flock to convert after watching it.

Christmas confusion: the star

Mormons believe that there really, truly was a star that appeared at Jesus' birth. They believe this partly because the Gospel of Matthew mentions some astrologers reading his sign in the sky but also because The Book of Mormon treats the star as a real thing.

It all starts out with the sun going down and "great lights in heaven" (Helaman 14:3) keeping things as bright as day. Then we get the Star of Bethlehem showing up sometime later.

The story makes wonderful sense until you stop to think about it. Why does the Bible not mention a night as bright as day? Were the "great lights" Samuel the Lamanite spoke of, like, angels acting as nightlights or something? Third Nephi doesn't say. Why would Herod's astrologers be the only assholes able to see and understand the significance of a mega-bright star showing up in the sky? Why should we believe that star-reading, horoscoping assholes had any valuable insight about the future at all, ever? Why would said astronomers need a star to travel ten miles down the road, anyway? Why doesn't Samuel the Lamanite give any instructions on how to read the "many signs and wonders in heaven" (Helaman 14:6)? Is a new savior being born every time a supernova pops or a meteor shower hits? Does God really relay messages of truth through the stars? If so, it would seem that modern-day astronomers and modern-day prophets are both having a hell of a time making heads or tails of what God's trying to tell us via astroscript.

What if it's all just a fun story? What if The Book of Mormon is just another fun story based off of a fun story or two?

The Captain Kidd connection

 
Does The Book of Mormon bear the mark of pirate lore popular among early American settlers? Some say yes, others say no. Mormonthink has looked into the pop culture element and had found some interesting quotes; FAIR's approach favors the narrative that Joseph Smith wasn't a cartographer who would have had access to obscure maps.

What I see is this: 

1. Captain William Kidd did in fact bury treasure off the coast of New England (Gardiners Island and Block Island).
2. Joseph Smith's parents and grandparents came from Connecticut and New Hampshire.
3. Searching for more of his treasure was a popular pastime that spread far beyond the coast of Connecticut.
4. The Smiths were very engaged with treasure digging.

So is it reasonable to believe that Joseph was keyed into Captain Kidd lore, or am I just trying to be a doubter?

Anti-Banking

If Joseph Smith's years of scrying and his story of gold plates that no one can see don't bother you at all, you probably won't be phased by Joseph's illegal creation of an "anti-bank" (sounds inspired by the Anti-Nephi-Lehies). It was a pure con that blew up in his face and cost the saints a pretty penny.

I have no idea how anyone can deny that Joseph was a conman. Doubt it if you can, shelf it if you must.

Slippery treasures

Did Joseph Smith the stone seer write The Book of Mormon? Well the text does share an interest in locking down elusive treasure.

Yea, behold, the anger of the Lord is already kindled against you; behold, he hath cursed the land because of your iniquity. And behold, the time cometh that he curseth your riches, that they become slippery, that ye cannot hold them; and in the days of your poverty ye cannot retain them. And in the days of your poverty ye shall cry unto the Lord; and in vain shall ye cry, for your desolation is already come upon you, and your destruction is made sure; and then shall ye weep and howl in that day, saith the Lord of Hosts. And then shall ye lament, and say: O that I had repented, and had not killed the prophets, and stoned them, and cast them out. Yea, in that day ye shall say: O that we had remembered the Lord our God in the day that he gave us our riches, and then they would not have become slippery that we should lose them; for behold, our riches are gone from us. Behold, we lay a tool here and on the morrow it is gone; and behold, our swords are taken from us in the day we have sought them for battle. Yea, we have hid up our treasures and they have slipped away from us, because of the curse of the land. O that we had repented in the day that the word of the Lord came unto us; for behold the land is cursed, and all things are become slippery, and we cannot hold them. (Helaman 13:30-36, emphasis mine)

And later on there's also this:

And these Gadianton robbers, who were among the Lamanites, did infest the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof began to hide up their treasures in the earth; and they became slippery, because the Lord had cursed the land, that they could not hold them, nor retain them again. (Mormon 1:18, emphasis mine)

Does God really do that kind of tricky shit or are these examples of how Joseph couldn't help but include his typical excuse (slipperiness) for never finding real treasure when out scrying?

Jeff Holland criticized

I'm no fan of Jeffrey R. Holland. I don't like him at all. When he first became an apostle I thought he was the shit, but I've changed my mind. I think he's a big boob. A big mean boob.

Why would I think such a horrible thing of such a wonderful man? Because I've finally seen his dirty, heartless ways.

A couple of excellent examples of Jeff's misbehavior have actually been caught on tape. Take a look at his horrible (but impassioned and blubberly) defense of The Book of Mormon he gave in General Conference a few years ago. He weaves, dodges, deflects, assumes, accuses, and cries. It just doesn't feel right to me.

What's even more obviously ugly is his behavior in this interview:

My favorite part comes at the end when Jeff gets so flustered and defensive he reverts to the logic of "Hey, hey, hey! I'm smart, I went to Yale, therefore I'm smart, therefore my belief is smart! I win!"

The part where he plays dumb about the Strengthening Church Members Committee is also pretty good.

If it seems like he has a hard time being open and honest, you're probably right. He had the same problem when his good friend Tom Phillips sought him out for help regarding the sticky issues of Mormonism.

Is this the type of man we want teaching us about right and wrong and making decisions for us? I doubt it.

Brought forth by the Gentiles

So The Book of Mormon contains a prophesy about how in due time it would come to light via the Gentiles, but we know that Joseph Smith Jr. was a pure Ephraimite. How is someone who is totally an Israelite a Gentile? Bruce McConkie tried to clear things up by pointing out that Joseph wasn't from the tribe of Judah, therefore he qualifies as a Gentile. But the line being drawn in these verses is between the House of Israel and Gentiles, not Jews and Gentiles. The Lehites also qualify as Gentiles if we take Bruce's explanation and the scripture hardly seems to allow for that.

Thankfully there are a lot of other unofficial explanations out there from our more doctrinally-inclined membership. What are we to understand? Whatever the hell we want, except that this prophesy doesn't make much sense. Doubt that doubt. Doubt that Joseph wrote something about himself as a Gentile because it felt good and important, then years later forgot the specifics of what he wrote, and finally came around to telling people we was an Israelite because it felt good and important. You'll straighten things out eventually.