MDB Member's "I'm an ex-Mormon" Video

[_why me]

could the Book of Mormon be proved untrue?

Many have tried and all have failed. During the life of Joseph Smith, many people tried to prove the Book of Mormon false. They couldn't. When Smith was murdered there were still witnesses to the Book of Mormon but none cracked and said it was a fraud. If one would have cracked, the Mormon faith would fall like a house of cards, especially if it could be proven by the witness. But...lo and behold, they went to their graves with the testimony of the book on their lips even if they left the lds church behind.

And now we just have critics stating it as an opinion but implying fact: the church is not true.

[_Chap]

"The Book of Mormon has not yet been proved false" ....

Excuse me a moment. Consider the following.

A member of the CoJCoLDS comes up to me with a Book of Mormon, and proposes it for my attention, claiming that it is a true ancient record.

Now I do not think any reasonable person would say that the burden is on me to prove that the Book of Mormon is not a true ancient record. Rather, the burden of proof is on the member of the CoJCoLDS who proposes that I should attend to the Book of Mormon.

Further, there is a reasonable presumption against the claim that the Book of Mormon is a true ancient record.

For unlike the Bible, where even the majority of scholars and archaeologists without religious commitments agree that substantial portions (though by no means all) of it do refer to actual historical events, some of which have left archaeological evidence behind, including actual inscriptions, there appears to be no significant body of non-LDS scholars or archaeologists of the ancient Americas who see any reason to suppose that any of the events described in the Book of Mormon took place. Further, the cultural and historical space of the ancient American past seems to be well filled with cultures and events that leave no space for the events of the Book of Mormon as commonly understood to have taken place. That is no doubt why one often sees LDS apologists suggesting that the descendants of Lehi's party never formed more than a small minority amongst the indigenous inhabitants that they found in place when they are said to have arrived.

The appropriate attitude for a reasonable and cautious person confronted with the Book of Mormon is therefore to assume, absent proof to the contrary, that it is false.

(And it is worth pointing out that in order for a reasonable person to continue to hold the view that a document is false on the grounds of mis-match between its contents and reality, it is not necessary for him or her to give any account of how that false document might have been written. A fake dollar bill is a fake dollar bill, even if I have no idea of the kind of printing press that turned it out. )

[_Rambo]

I told my TBM cousin about these video clips last night. I said to him you know the I'm a Mormon videos well there are I'm an exmormon videos on the web. He first asked if they are well done and just like the churches and I was like yeah they are pretty well done but a little different than the churches. Then he is like well what do exmormons say "I like to drink and smoke and swear." I corrected him and said no it is just personal stories why they don't believe in the church anymore.

[_Inspired]

could the Book of Mormon be proved untrue?

Many have tried and all have failed. During the life of Joseph Smith, many people tried to prove the Book of Mormon false. They couldn't. When Smith was murdered there were still witnesses to the Book of Mormon but none cracked and said it was a fraud. If one would have cracked, the Mormon faith would fall like a house of cards, especially if it could be proven by the witness. But...lo and behold, they went to their graves with the testimony of the book on their lips even if they left the lds church behind.

And now we just have critics stating it as an opinion but implying fact: the church is not true.

I disagree, if one of the witnesses denied the Book of Mormon, they would've just dismissed him as a "Judas", tarnished his character, and blamed it on Satan. Although there is no hardcore evidence that Oliver ever denied his testimony, it appears that he might of denied it, even if it was briefly.

The following poem was published in the Church-owned newspaper Times and Seasons in 1841 (vol. 2, p.482):

Or does it prove there is no time,
Because some watches will not go?
............................................................
Or prove that Christ was not the Lord
Because that Peter cursed and swore?
Or Book of Mormon not His word
Because denied, by Oliver?

Even if Oliver denied his testimony, it wouldn't affect the church's stance on the Book of Mormon. Of coarse, if there ever was hardcore evidence that he did deny his testimony, then you would never hear about in sunday school.