The Book of Mormon Challenge

The Book of Mormon is often dismissed as gibberish by those who have never taken the trouble to read it. In fact, its very existence poses a serious puzzle if it is not what it claims to be - an ancient record. Below is the Book of Mormon Challenge, an assignment that Professor Hugh Nibley at BYU sometimes gave to students in a required class on the Book of Mormon. The following text is taken from the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.8, Ch.11, Pg.221 - Pg.222:

Since Joseph Smith was younger than most of you and not nearly so experienced or well-educated as any of you at the time he copyrighted the Book of Mormon, it should not be too much to ask you to hand in by the end of the semester (which will give you more time than he had) a paper of, say, five to six hundred pages in length. Call it a sacred book if you will, and give it the form of a history. Tell of a community of wandering Jews in ancient times; have all sorts of characters in your story, and involve them in all sorts of public and private vicissitudes; give them names--hundreds of them--pretending that they are real Hebrew and Egyptian names of circa 600 b.c.; be lavish with cultural and technical details--manners and customs, arts and industries, political and religious institutions, rites, and traditions, include long and complicated military and economic histories; have your narrative cover a thousand years without any large gaps; keep a number of interrelated local histories going at once; feel free to introduce religious controversy and philosophical discussion, but always in a plausible setting; observe the appropriate literary conventions and explain the derivation and transmission of your varied historical materials.

Above all, do not ever contradict yourself! For now we come to the really hard part of this little assignment. You and I know that you are making this all up--we have our little joke--but just the same you are going to be required to have your paper published when you finish it, not as fiction or romance, but as a true history! After you have handed it in you may make no changes in it (in this class we always use the first edition of the Book of Mormon); what is more, you are to invite any and all scholars to read and criticize your work freely, explaining to them that it is a sacred book on a par with the Bible. If they seem over-skeptical, you might tell them that you translated the book from original records by the aid of the Urim and Thummim--they will love that! Further to allay their misgivings, you might tell them that the original manuscript was on golden plates, and that you got the plates from an angel. Now go to work and good luck!

To date no student has carried out this assignment, which, of course, was not meant seriously. But why not? If anybody could write the Book of Mormon, as we have been so often assured, it is high time that somebody, some devoted and learned minister of the gospel, let us say, performed the invaluable public service of showing the world that it can be done." - Hugh Nibley

Structure and Complexity of the Book of Mormon First Nephi gives us first a clear and vivid look at the world of Lehi, a citizen of Jerusalem but much at home in the general world of the New East of 600 B.C. Then it takes us to the desert, where Lehi and his family wander for eight years, doing all the things that wandering families in the desert should do. The manner of their crossing the ocean is described, as is the first settlement and hard pioneer life in the New World dealt with.... The book of Mosiah describes a coronation rite in all its details and presents extensive religious and political histories mixed in with a complicated background of exploration and colonization. The book of Alma is marked by long eschatological discourses and a remarkably full and circumstantial military history. The main theme of the book of Helaman is the undermining of society by moral decay and criminal conspiracy; the powerful essay on crime is carried into the next book, where the ultimate dissolution of the Nephite government is described.

Then comes the account of the great storm and earthquakes, in which the writer, ignoring a splendid opportunity for exaggeration, has as accurately depicted the typical behavior of the elements on such occasions as if he were copying out of a modern textbook on seismology.... [Soon] after the catastrophe, Jesus Christ appeared to the most pious sectaries who had gathered at the temple.

...Can anyone now imagine the terrifying prospect of confronting the Christian world of 1830 with the very words of Christ? ...

But the boldness of the thing is matched by the directness and nobility with which the preaching of the Savior and the organization of the church are described. After this comes a happy history and then the usual signs of decline and demoralization. The death-struggle of the Nephite civilization is described with due attention to all the complex factors that make up an exceedingly complicated but perfectly consistent picture of decline and fall. Only one who attempts to make a full outline of Book of Mormon history can begin to appreciate its immense complexity; and never once does the author get lost (as the student repeatedly does, picking his way out of one maze after another only with the greatest effort), and never once does he contradict himself. We should be glad to learn of any other like performance in the history of literature. - Hugh Nibley, Collected Works Vol. 8

The four types of biblical experts There are four kinds of biblical experts: At the very top are the professionals who have been doing biblical research all their adult lives. They are usually professors in leading universities in various fields that are related to the Bible such as archaeologists, historians, paleographers, professors of the Bible, and professors of Near Eastern languages and literature.

These people are the most credible of all biblical experts and do not let religious views get in the way of the truth. This is why a lot of them consider themselves to be nonbelievers in the modern Christian and Jewish faiths. Their reputation and standing in the academic community is very important to them. This causes them to be cautious and not rashly declare statements upon any subject without presenting verifiable proof for their claims. It is to them that encyclopedias, journals and universities go to for information. Their community is very small, but extremely influential in the secular world. One distinctive feature of this group is the difficulty outsiders face when reading their writings which causes them to be a fairly closed society.

The second group of biblical experts are those who have legitimate degrees and may have initially been in the first group but were spurned by the first group for being unreliable because they disregard demonstrable proof simply because their religious convictions teach otherwise. For them, their religion's teaching overrides real biblical research. Very few of them can be considered Fundamentalists.

The third group of biblical experts are the "biblical experts." These people disregard the works and conclusions of the first group, and view the second group as their mentors. Nearly all anti-Mormons who produce anti-Mormon paraphernalia fall into this group. Their views are purely theological and display ignorance of legitimate biblical studies. Their arguments are non-rational and are frequently sensational hype and empty rhetoric. These people are very vocal and constantly parade their "expertise" upon the unknowing masses by giving seminars in various churches and religious schools. Nearly all of them are Fundamentalists.

The fourth group of "biblical experts" are those who have never read the Bible completely and do not even know the history and contents of the Bible. They are completely reliant upon materials produced by the third group and may have five verses in the Bible memorized to quote at people they encounter (in nearly every instance John 3:16 and John 14:6 are included in these five verses) to give the impression they are experts in the Bible. They usually need the Table of Contents to find various biblical books and are extremely vocal in their condemnation of Mormonism. They personify the wise adage:

The remainder of Christians are those who believe in the Bible but never read it. The Bible is a very complex book for most Christians and seems to possess a power that intimidates them. This is why a normal Christian is impressed whenever he or she encounters an individual who can quote scripture. It is this ignorance of the Bible that causes some to proclaim themselves "biblical experts."

I am not aware of anyone in the first group of biblical experts who are anti-Mormon. If anything, real biblical scholars who know Mormon theology have a profound sense of admiration for it and are usually astonished that so many facets of Mormonism reflect authentic biblical teachings.

They are frequently puzzled at how Joseph Smith could find out the real biblical teaching since modern Judaism and Christianity abandoned them thousands of years ago. Uniquely Mormon doctrines such as the anthropomorphic nature of God, the divine nature and deification potential of man, the plurality of deities, the divine sanction of polygamy, the fallacy of sola scriptura, the superiority of the charismatic leaders over the ecclesiastical leaders and their importance, the inconsequence of Original Sin because of the Atonement of Christ, the importance of contemporary revelation, and so forth are all original Jewish and Christian thought before they were abandoned mainly due to Greek philosophical influence.

Mormonism to these scholars is the only faith that preserves the characteristics of the early chosen people. This doesn’t mean these scholars believe Mormonism is the true religion, since their studies are on an intellectual level instead of a spiritual one.

On the other hand, the leaders of the anti-Mormon movement are nearly all in the third category with a couple in the second. Real biblical experts (who aren’t Mormon) and are in the first category normally refer to the “biblical experts” in the third group as the “know-nothings” or the “Fundamentalist know-nothings.” These terms aren’t completely derogatory, but are accurate descriptions of the knowledge of the “biblical experts” in the third group. Ed Watson - Mormonism: Faith of the 21st Century

I will not be held accountable for what God says that offends you.

... or, presumably, ... by what Joseph Smith said that God said.

Because, the truth is ... there is absolutely no other witness ... to confirm that what Joseph Smith said ... was true.

Even Jesus didn't expect His hearers to believe what He said ... without additional witness.
John 5:31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.

32 There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.

33 Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth.

34 But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved.

35 He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.

36 But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

41 I receive not honour from men.

42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

A few guidelines:

Threads which are devotional or church-like in nature (such as daily mass readings) will be protected from challenges to doctrine, etc. Reported challenges will be pulled. The titles of the threads should be clearly designated so other posters and the moderators will know.
Threads which are not clearly designated are open to challenges, like a public square.

Posters should remember they are not “preaching to the choir” on open threads – and take care to be respectful, clear and concise in their arguments. Passers-by will value your demeanor as much – or more than – the actual substance of your post.

This is very important: meet the offensive challenge to your doctrine on the open thread, do not mash the abuse button. I will not remove a challenge simply because it is offensive to your beliefs. If you cannot defend your own confession, then you are better off avoiding the open threads and leaving the reply to someone else of your confession.

Always argue the issues – theology, philosophy, history, etc. – and never make it personal.

If I see the conversation turn personal, I will intervene by pulling posts and/or posting a warning. If the misbehavior continues, posters may find themselves having to log back in – or they may be given a time-out to cool down.

In the extreme, the threads may be banished to the smoky backroom, locked or pulled. And a hot-headed or defiant poster may be banned.

Banned posters who try to sneak back onto the forum using a different handle are nuked. Trolls are nuked.

I have no tolerance for potty language simply because it inflames other posters and results in unnecessary abuse reports that moderators then have to process. It is a waste of everyone’s time and doesn’t help the poster’s image either.

Whenever I see a profanity – or a reference or acronym for a profanity – I will remove the post. If your post was pulled and you remember using such a word, just rephrase and repost and everything will be fine.

As with all threads on the forum – hatred and any suggestion of racism or violence will be pulled. Posts which are just plain tacky may also be pulled.

Calling an author a liar is permitted – calling another poster a liar is not.

Attributing motive to an author is permitted – reading the mind of another poster is not.

Poking fun at a confession is permitted, but be careful when poking fun at another poster. If he doesn’t think it is funny, I won’t either.

Don’t worry, you’ll get the hang of it. It all boils down to being respectful – phrase your challenges as if you were the recipient, i.e. think Golden Rule.
As a final note, try to work your problems out on-thread before resorting to an abuse report. The moderators are already over-worked and do not look kindly on abuse report spammers. More importantly, it is a good witness for your confession to be a peacemaker.

Addendum:

A toxic thread is a post which ridicules a person or deity who is deeply respected by other posters. The discussion is "poisoned" from the beginning.

As long as the posters discuss the issues the thread is useful - but if the discussion turns personal - even slightly - it will not be tolerated.

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me.

So God the Father is the ultimate witness of Christ. The Holy Ghost bears witness of the divinity of Christ.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Mormons claim Joseph Smith is a prophet of Christ.

There are human witnesses for and against whether he was a Prophet or not. The test of whether he was a prophet would be if God really did call him to be one and then witnessed that he was a chosen prophet like Moses was.
I believe God did call Joseph Smith as a Prophet.

Unless I am mistaken, your religion states that I am going to hell. (Hand basket optional) I am not offended, why are you offended if mine says the same thing?

This is a very good question. Listen, if someone says to me, "C, you're hell-bound." I'm not offended [at least not the first time it's uttered!]. If someone says to me, "C, the creed the Holy Spirit inspired and then protected these generations is abominable," ya better believe that not only provokes me, but it provokes the very Spirit who inspired and sustained them.

Slander me all you want. Jesus even said to blaspheme Him, and it could be forgiven. Now blaspheming the Holy Spirit has prompted multiple theological discussions that I'm not meaning to lead into a tangent here, but even the remote possibility that somebody could be militating versus the Holy Spirit's very breath (the literal meaning of inspiration) is tredding on very dangerous grounds.

Either the Holy Spirit can protect what He has inspired, or He can't. And to say that He can't or that He failed for almost two centuries is a form of slander against Him which should prompt repentance on the part of anyone who has engaged in such a broadside against Him!

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the only true church on the face of the earth.

Just like most other religions, we claim to have the truth, and every body else is wrong. Unlike most religions we believe that those who truly believe, but are mistaken in their belief will have the opportunity to join later, and even those who have lived good lives without joining will not end up in “Hell” just because they “Guessed wrong” (that’s why the South park episode is so funny, everyone went to hell just because they were not Mormon, even though that’s not what Mormon’s believe, so if we were the right church … Irony, it so… Ironic)

So, again with the Question from #468

Why is it that those who leave the church can’t leave it alone?

What about all the other religions out there that say we are both going to enjoy warm weather for the eternities? Are you offended by them?

Well, first of all, how many of these "other religions" are going door to door saying all of our creeds are abominable and our professors corrupt?

Who would provoke you more? Somebody who occasionally writes a letter to the editor defaming you, or somebody who mounts a multi-media campaign (Web, TV, print ads) and then sends massive # of folks world-wide to defame your reputation?

We're not just talking about a lot of religions saying the same thing against the Christian church. We're also talking about the zealousness and intensity in which somebody is spreading that message.

And you can't get around what the bottom-line message is. To have a restoration message carries zero weight until you convince folks that the original is a crumbled mass awaiting destruction.

If the original is still the real deal in relatively good shape, then nobody's going to buy into your restoration message. They go in hand in hand. Every pro-restoration message is a claim that Satan prevailed against the Church.

So, tell me, just how many other religions go around and proclaim in the mass media & door to door that Satan completely prevailed against the Church?

You are correct in saying that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints differ over the Post Apostolic Creeds with much of Christendom. I read a good book that explains the Doctrinal differences.

"How Wide the Divide?: A Mormon & An Evangelical in Conversation"

"Description: Mormons and Evangelicals don't often get along very well. They often set about trying to convert one another, considering the faith the other holds as defective in some critical way. Unfortunately, much of what they say about one another simply isn't true. False stereotypes on both sides prevent genuine communication. Having discovered this sad state of affairs, Craig Blomberg, a committed Evangelical scholar, and Stephen Robinson, a commited Mormon scholar, set out to listen to one another and to ferret out the agreements and disagreements between them. In the conversation that develops, you will read what each believes about key theological issues- (1) the nature and bounds of Scripture, (2) the nature of God and Deification, (3) the person of Christ and the Trinity, and (4) the essentials of salvation-and see how they interact with one another. What they agree on may suprise you. In the end, however, you can judge for yourself just how wide the divide between them is."

I don't believe you are going to hell (Jesus' decision not mine anyway)

So what you are saying is that you believe the Holy Spirit preserved and inspired the creeds that much of Christendom follows?

>>God doesn't reveal Himself simply to confirm the 4-point conclusions of a 15-year-old
>>teen-especially when it contradicts what His own Son promised ("the gates of hell will
>>not prevail against the church."...LDS believe the prevail doctrine, and make liars out
>>of Jesus). God has His own agenda beyond the religious wonderings of a 15 yo teen.

So, is it Joseph’s age that bothers you , or that he might have had direction before his first in person meeting?

We are also told that that day will not come save there be falling away first, and that the church would have to be restored.

The gates of hell will never prevail against Christ’s church. That has almost nothing to do with this world.

2 Thes 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me.

So God the Father is the ultimate witness of Christ. The Holy Ghost bears witness of the divinity of Christ.

God the Father is no witness to Joseph Smith's testimony.

There have been no mighty works like those following the ministries of Jesus, Moses, Noah, Isaiah, Elijah, Elisha, John, Peter, Paul, etc.

46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Moses didn't write about Joseph Smith ... nobody did.

Mormons claim Joseph Smith is a prophet of Christ.

There are human witnesses for and against whether he was a Prophet or not. The test of whether he was a prophet would be if God really did call him to be one and then witnessed that he was a chosen prophet like Moses was.

I believe God did call Joseph Smith as a Prophet.

And my point is that Joseph Smith needs to held to the same standard as any Biblical prophet. There were many false prophets in Biblical days too.

The definitve test given in the scriptures is that the prophecies of any so-called prophet must come to pass.

God, Himself, said that if anyone claims to be a prophet, ... and those things that he says don't come to pass, ... do not listen to him ... for he is a false prophet.

For some reason you are unreasonably offended by Mormons. Is it because you were once one? Why did you leave the church? Did somebody step on your toes? (Metaphorical or physical) Did you have a fight with your bishop? These were rhetorical questions. Please honestly answer this one. Why is it that those who leave the church can’t leave it alone?

I was offended once by a certain LDS Institute Director, but I could also speak well of another LDS Institute Director. So, no, alas, no LDS person or persons is/are to "blame" for my salvation.

Why can't I leave LDS alone? I'd like to say that I'd make a bargain--you call all the LDS missionaries home, and then I'd consider staying home. But that would not be true.

Lost sheep are not simply the prodigals who roam away. Lost sheep include the "faithful" brother who stayed home and was slighted that his repenting brother received the full attention of the Father.

Paul's custom when he entered a new city was to visit the religious folks first (the synagogues). And make no mistake. It was not an academic enterprise: "I speak the truth in Christ--I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit--I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel." (Rom 9:1-4).

I agree that the huge Missionary program and Public Relations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints forces many to make a decision for or against the Church.

I think Mormons and Evangelicals are competitive. It’s not a bad thing. Think of it as two world class runners trying to outdo each other. Good Christians like to proselytize and so do Mormons.

I agree that the huge Missionary program and Public Relations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints forces many to make a decision for or against the Church.

I think Mormons and Evangelicals are competitive. It’s not a bad thing. Think of it as two world class runners trying to outdo each other. Evangelicals like to proselytize and so do Mormons.

On my mission I had a missionary companion who liked to debate the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I never fully understood it at first. Then realized he was a Zealous guy and liked to Debate the competition. Jehovah’s Witnesses went door to door like us. So they were the competition.

I find your defense of your Christian beliefs invigorating.

Why can't I leave the Church alone? I'm not so good as Colofornian. There's a part of me that rebels and keeps on rebelling.

http://scriptures.lds.org/moses/5
Moses Chapter 5...
29 And Satan said unto Cain: Swear unto me by thy throat, and if thou
tell it thou shalt die; and swear thy brethren by their heads, and by
the living God, that they tell it not; for if they tell it, they shall
surely die; and this that thy father may not know it; and this day I
will deliver thy brother Abel into thine hands.
30 And Satan sware unto Cain that he would do according to his
acommands•. And all these things were done in secret."

I took a blood oath in the Temple. I'm just daring you all to come and slash my throat. I told all your dirty little secrets and I'm still alive.

Glory Hallalujah

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.