Summaries of most trenchant criticisms

[Guest]

Executive Summary:
The canonical Pearl of Great Price provides a clear opportunity to test Joseph Smith's claim that he could miraculously translate ancient languages. In the Explanation to Facsimile 3, Joseph Smith provides translations of some Egyptian characters that appear in the illustration. Egyptologists who have examined these characters have found Smith's translations to be incorrect. LDS apologists do not dispute the Egyptologists' findings. In fact, I am not aware of any apologetic publication that has directly addressed this problem. It seems to be a clear-cut case of the falsification of an inspired, canonical translation.

Detailed Explanation:
Joseph Smith provided inspired "Explanations" for the illustrations on some ancient Egyptian papyri he purchased. The Explanation to Facsimile 3 incorrectly translates the hieratic labels in the image. The Explanation reads in part,

"Fig. 2. King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head."
"Fig. 4. Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand."
"Fig. 5. Shulem, one of the king’s principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand."

Smith's translations may be compared to the Egyptological translations, provided by Dr. Robert K. Ritner:

"Label for Isis (Fig. 2 of Facsimile 3) . . . Isis the great, the god’s mother."
"Label for Maat (Fig. 4 of Facsimile 3) . . . Maat, mistress of the gods."
"Label for Hor (Fig. 5 of Facsimile 3) . . . The Osiris Hor, justified forever."

Source: Ritner, Robert K. "'The Breathing Permit of Hor' among the Joseph Smith Papyri." Journal of Near Eastern Studies 62, no. 3 (2003): 161-80.

[_CaliforniaKid]

Executive Summary:
Parley Pratt prophesied "that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence." He followed the prophecy with a ringing ultimatum: "If they [the Gentiles] are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false." Pratt's prophecy did not come to pass in the allotted time.

Detailed Explanation:
In his 1838 pamphlet Truth Vindicated, Mormon apostle Parley Pratt proffered the following interpretation of the Book of Mormon:

See also, page 526, where a sign is given, and the time clearly set for the restoration and gathering of Israel from their long dispersion, namely, the coming forth the Book of Mormon, should be the sign; and in the day this work should come forth, should this great event commence among all nations. Also, p. 527, where all who will not hearken to the Book of Mormon, shall be cut off from among the people; and that too, in the day it comes forth to the Gentiles and is rejected by them. And not only does this page set the time for the overthrow of our government and all other Gentile governments on the American continent, but the way and means of this utter destruction are clearly foretold; namely, the remnant of Jacob [the Indians] will go through among the Gentiles and tear them in pieces. like a lion among the flocks of sheep. Their hand shall be lifted up upon their adversaries, and all their enemies shall be cut off. This destruction includes an utter overthrow, and desolation of all our Cities, Forts, and Strong Holds -- an entire annihilation of our race, except such as embrace the Covenant, and are numbered with Israel.

To his prediction of the annihilation of America's "Gentiles", Pratt added the following ringing challenge to his anti-Mormon foil, LeRoy Sunderland:

Now, Mr. Sunderland, you have something definite and tangible, the time, the manner, the means, the names, the dates; and I will state as a prophesy, that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence; and if they are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false.

Pratt's prophecy does not appear to have come true, and therefore the outcome of his challenge is unfavorable to the Book of Mormon. It appears that, according to Pratt's criterion, the Book of Mormon has "proved itself false."

[_wenglund]

One of the challenges in creating this list is that there isn't much in the way of unanimity among the critics on specific issues. But, i wish you well in your endevour.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Nightlion]

D&C 124

27 [...] and build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein.
28 For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fulness of the priesthood.

In it the Lord tells his people that they have had the fulness of the priesthood taken from them and that it can only be restored in the completed temple that they need to build.
*This is a problem for the belief that the endowment is part of the fulness of the priesthood because it was introduced prior to the completion of the temple in a regular building. This also indicates that polygamy/spiritual wifery/celestial marriage was not done using the fulness of the priesthood. In fact, the church was being run without the fulness of the priesthood and there is no indication that the fulness was ever restored.

This is something I want to take some time on. Thanks Just Me.

[_Blixa]

Executive Summary:
Parley Pratt prophesied "that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence." He followed the prophecy with a ringing ultimatum: "If they [the Gentiles] are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false." Pratt's prophecy did not come to pass in the allotted time.

Detailed Explanation:
In his 1838 pamphlet Truth Vindicated, Mormon apostle Parley Pratt proffered the following interpretation of the Book of Mormon:

See also, page 526, where a sign is given, and the time clearly set for the restoration and gathering of Israel from their long dispersion, namely, the coming forth the Book of Mormon, should be the sign; and in the day this work should come forth, should this great event commence among all nations. Also, p. 527, where all who will not hearken to the Book of Mormon, shall be cut off from among the people; and that too, in the day it comes forth to the Gentiles and is rejected by them. And not only does this page set the time for the overthrow of our government and all other Gentile governments on the American continent, but the way and means of this utter destruction are clearly foretold; namely, the remnant of Jacob [the Indians] will go through among the Gentiles and tear them in pieces. like a lion among the flocks of sheep. Their hand shall be lifted up upon their adversaries, and all their enemies shall be cut off. This destruction includes an utter overthrow, and desolation of all our Cities, Forts, and Strong Holds -- an entire annihilation of our race, except such as embrace the Covenant, and are numbered with Israel.

To his prediction of the annihilation of America's "Gentiles", Pratt added the following ringing challenge to his anti-Mormon foil, LeRoy Sunderland:

Now, Mr. Sunderland, you have something definite and tangible, the time, the manner, the means, the names, the dates; and I will state as a prophesy, that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence; and if they are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false.

Pratt's prophecy does not appear to have come true, and therefore the outcome of his challenge is unfavorable to the Book of Mormon. It appears that, according to Pratt's criterion, the Book of Mormon has "proved itself false."

Thanks Chris, this is relevant to my interests...

[_Dad of a Mormon]

One of the challenges in creating this list is that there isn't much in the way of unanimity among the critics on specific issues. But, i wish you well in your endevour.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Can you provide details about specific issues where there is significant disagreement among critics? Of course, I would think the big one would be who wrote the Book of Mormon. But I would contend that showing that the Book of Mormon is a 19th century creation does not require agreement concerning the exact authorship. I think even the critics involved in the debate would also agree.

Are there any other areas of disagreement?

[_just me]

This is something I want to take some time on. Thanks Just Me.

You're welcome. I did think you would find my post interesting. :)

[_GR33N]

Tarski,

Evidence that the Book of Mormon is a 19th century invention:

In the Book of Mormon, Mosiah 16 verse 6, we read Abinidi's words as he spoke nearly one hundred and fifty years before Jesus was born. He says:

And now if Christ had not come into the world, speaking of things to come as though they had already come, there could have been no redemption.

When we take into account the numerous attestations that space was limited on the plates and that ore for more plates was hard to come by, and that a special form of writing was used to ensure efficient use of that very limited space, it boggles the mind to think that this phrase would have been inscribed as is.

But when one imagines any person actually saying such a thing, credulity is stretched to the breaking point.

Yet if one can bring themselves to imagine a 19th century charlatan dictating the words of a fictional character, and, in a moment of confusion, losing his place in his invented chronology, this strange phrasing begins to make perfect sense.

Can you provide details about specific issues where there is significant disagreement among critics? Of course, I would think the big one would be who wrote the Book of Mormon. But I would contend that showing that the Book of Mormon is a 19th century creation does not require agreement concerning the exact authorship. I think even the critics involved in the debate would also agree.

Dad, is the scripture quoted the evidence your referring to that shows the Book of Mormon is a 19th century creation? Or are there other evidences that you can provide?

[_Darth J]

One of the challenges in creating this list is that there isn't much in the way of unanimity among the critics on specific issues. But, i wish you well in your endevour.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade:

Thank you for reminding us of the uniformity amongst apologists and believing Latter-day Saints. Clearly, if unbelievers cannot get their stories together, their theories must not hold water.

Just a few follow-up questions on what you are implying:

1. Where did the events described in the Book of Mormon take place?

2. Does the LDS Church officially hold the position that the entire planet was covered with water during Noah's flood?

3. Was the Book of Abraham the translation of a missing part of the scroll, or did the papyri act as a "catalyst"?

4. Was the Book of Mormon the result of a loose translation or a tight translation?

5. Are the teachings of the LDS Church regarding Adam and Eve compatible with scientific theory regarding the evolution of species, including homo sapiens?

6. What was the reason given by the First Presidency as to why men of African American males were denied the priesthood before 1979?

7. What was the reason for Joseph Smith practicing polygamy?

[_Dad of a Mormon]

Dad, is the scripture quoted the evidence your referring to that shows the Book of Mormon is a 19th century creation? Or are there other evidences that you can provide?

That's part of it. But in addition to that, I think there is linguistic evidence that clearly shows that who ever ultimately wrote it was attempting to write King James English and failing because they didn't understand the grammar. That may be too short of an explanation, but that's the gist of it.