Ancient writings support LDS doctrine and teachings (LDS Caucus)

Ancient writings unearthed in the last century and a half, primarily in Egypt, are lending support to doctrines and teachings of Joseph Smith, founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Brigham Young University professor of antiquities said Sunday.

C. Wilford Griggs, who has written extensively on Egypt and is working on excavating Christian burial grounds in Egypt, said scholars are now admitting that "Joseph Smith got into the antiquities" before experts in the field began their discoveries, but they won't accept his explanation.

Smith, an uneducated farm boy, claimed he translated the Book of Mormon from ancient gold plates using instruments given him by an angel, but scholars are refusing to believe that, Griggs said during a fireside, "Joseph Smith and the Egyptian Connection," at the Pleasant Grove Manila Stake Center. Some of the ancient writings have been found in the past few years.

Many scholars are now admitting that the book accepted as scripture by church members is an ancient book, but as one scholar of antiquities told Griggs, he had no problem with the gold plates and Smith's story would be acceptable "if you'd get rid of that angel."

Anciently, the fountain of Christian knowledge was Egypt and the Mediterranean region and for about 1,000 years 90 percent of the people were in the faith "until they were converted to Islam by the sword," he said.

"We are being flooded with (ancient) writings," Griggs said, describing many as coming from the biblical New Testament period. Many of the writings, now totaling about 8,000, are on papyri, but others are on metal plates. None are exactly alike, which lends historical credence to the finds.

The apostles scattered throughout the known world and established pockets of Christianity after the time of Jesus Christ, including Egypt, he said. Some of the best early Christian records were found in Egypt, where they survived because of the climate.

The traditional concept that the Bible is complete came about 400 A.D., he said. Before then Christians knew that many other writings existed.

Many of the Christian teachings found in Egyptian digs that are shared in common with Smith's teachings have to do with the temple "and how the heavens can be open to us," Griggs said.

Among those findings is the teaching of baptism by proxy for folks who have died without learning of Christ and his gospel, which centers on the resurrection.

Anciently, baptism was known as a "sealing" to go to heaven, he said. The word "sealing" is used today in LDS temples in similar fashion.

Most of the writings which have now been found were secret anciently and held back from the people until they proved their worthiness.

Some speak of the potential of their divinity, also a common theme Smith taught, which the first LDS prophet said was given to him by revelation.

"Several of the gospels ... show that revelation was alive and well in the ancient world. Revelation was a keystone," Griggs said.

Yet centuries later, revelation and temples were denounced by religious leaders, including Augustine, as unnecessary.

The Book of Mormon never claim to be perfect only the Most correct book!

Really? Have you never heard (or heard of) a LDS member calling the Book of Mormon, "the most perfect book"?

And...How could it not be perfect/correct, if it came from God as alleged? See an eyewitness account:

In 1877 David Whitmer wrote,

I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God and not by any power of man."{4}

To be correct...doesn't something have to be perfect on the subject matter that it addresses?

Resty, C'MON...is the act of being misleading inclusive of telestial or terrestrial behavior (and what about your previous name-calling)?

If the Book of Mormon is the most correct, then why these (the evidence shows that it is not the most correct...in fact, just the opposite):

The Smithsonian Institute in a letter to the Mormon Church states, "The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian Archaeologists see no connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the Book."{15}

The National Geographic Society writes, "With regard to the cities mentioned in the Book of Mormon, neither representatives of the National Geographic Society nor archaeologists connected with any other institution of equal prestige have ever used the Book of Mormon in locating historic ruins in Middle America or elsewhere."{16}

Even Mormon archaeologists admit there is no conclusive evidence. Dr. Hugh Nibley, a Mormon apologist, states in his book Since Cumorah that no real archaeological proof for the Nephite civilization exists. He writes regarding the Nephites, "All that we have to go on to date is a written history . . . there is nothing whatever that an anthropologist or archaeologist as such can say about the Book of Mormon."{17}

Dee Green, professor of anthropology at Weber State University and a respected Mormon scholar states, "The first myth we must eliminate is that Book of Mormon archaeology exists . . . no Book of Mormon location is known with reference to modern topography. Biblical archaeology can be studied because we do know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (nor any other location for that matter) were or are. It would seem that a concentration on geography should be the first order of business, but . . . years of such an approach has left us empty-handed."{18}

Another prominent Mormon scholar is B.H. Roberts. He was described as one of the most valiant writers and speakers in defense of the Book of Mormon. However, after years of research he concluded at the end of his life that the Book of Mormon was a fictional work created by Joseph Smith. He wrote, "the evidence I sorrowfully submit, points to Joseph Smith as their creator. It is difficult to believe that they are the product of history, that they come upon the scene separated by long periods of time, and among a race which was the ancestral race of the red man of America."{19}

Another prominent defender of the Book of Mormon was Thomas Ferguson, who was president of the New World Archaeological Foundation, which was funded by Bringham Young University and the Mormon Church. He hoped to discover archaeological support for the Book of Mormon. In 1962 he announced, "Powerful evidences sustaining the book are accumulating."{20}

However, after years of research and many fruitless expeditions, his original hopes were shattered.{21} He eventually wrote, With all these great efforts, it cannot be established factually that anyone, from Joseph smith to the present day, has put his finger on a single point of terrain that was a Book of Mormon geographical place. And the hemisphere has been pretty well checked out by competent people… I must agree with Dee Green, who has told us that to date there is no Book of Mormon geography. I, for one, would be happy if Dee were wrong.{22}

In contrast, biblical archaeology has provided thousands of discoveries that have confirmed biblical references. Hundreds of ancient civilizations, artifacts, historical records and inscriptions have been discovered that prove the historical accuracy of the Bible. Archaeological discoveries confirming biblical accounts have been acknowledged by Christians as well as skeptics. Foremost Middle East archaeologist Dr. William Albright wrote, "Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history."{23}

When asked if archaeology confirms the accuracy of the New Testament, scholar John McCray states, "Oh, there is no question that the credibility of the New Testament is enhanced."{24} A historical faith should have historical proofs. Historical research has led both Christians and skeptics to affirm the historicity of the Bible. However, historical research has proven damaging for the Book of Mormon.

(http://www.probe.org/cults-and-world-religions/cults-and-world-religions/examining-the-book-of-mormon.html)

Okay - so all of the Boof of Mormon geography is incorrect and an imperfection...How do you know where the other imperfections are so that you can discern which parts to believe?

...Or do you just believe the imperfections too?

In due course the plates were delivered to Joseph Smith, who translated them by the gift and power of God. The record is now published in many languages as a new and additional witness that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God and that all who will come unto him and obey the laws and ordinances of his gospel may be saved.

Concerning this record the Prophet Joseph Smith said: “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”

In or about the year A.D. 421, Moroni, the last of the Nephite prophet-historians, sealed the sacred record and hid it up unto the Lord, to be brought forth in the latter days, as predicted by the voice of God through his ancient prophets. In A.D. 1823, this same Moroni, then a resurrected personage, visited the Prophet Joseph Smith and subsequently delivered the engraved plates to him.

About this edition: Some minor errors in the text have been perpetuated in past editions of the Book of Mormon. This edition contains corrections that seem appropriate to bring the material into conformity with prepublication manuscripts and early editions edited by the Prophet Joseph Smith.

***

The Smithsonian is a secular Institute why would you look to a worldly source for spiritual answers, no disrespect but that Intuition has a secular duty

The Book of Mormon never claim to be perfect only the Most correct book!

If your history is an indicator, you won't respond...So, here, I will help (helping is Telestial in nature, correct?):

I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts than any other book. (History of the Church, 4:461) (But, given it's lack of geographical correctness...we know that this is not accurate)

It is to be expected that when the angel restores the gospel it will be restored in fullness and in the most perfect simplicity and plainness so that every point of the doctrine of Christ shall be clearly revealed and expressed in such language that no two persons could understand it differently...nothing else can be an infallible standard of the Christian religion; nothing else can reclaim them from divisions and strifes; nothing else will give certainty and stability so necessary to the happiness and salvation of man; and nothing else could be expected in the revelation of the gospel by an angel. Such a revelation is the Book of Mormon; the most infallible certainty characterizes every ordinance and every doctrinal point revealed in that book. In it there is no ambiguity; no room for controversy; no doctrine so imperfectly expressed that two persons would draw two different conclusions there from... (Orson Pratt's Works, Vol 2, "Important Works in Mormon History", Grandin Book Co, 1990, p. 83; This can also be found in Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, Apostle Orson Pratt, 1851, No. 6, page 83)

Doesn't being infallible mean that it also has to be perfect? And...I just love the part about two persons not drawing different conclusions!

Prophet Ezra T. Benson, quotes Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie as follows:

Men can get nearer to the Lord, can have more of the spirit of conversion and conformity in their hearts...can gain a better understanding of the doctrines of salvation through the Book of Mormon than they can through the Bible...there will be more people saved in the kingdom of God - ten thousand times over - because of the Book of Mormon than there will be because of the Bible. (The Ensign, November 1984, p. 7)

Resty said: God is perfect but man is not so man makes errors that is why humble men will admit if their are any mistakes it is from man not God.

So you are admitting that there are mistakes/imperfections in the Book of Mormon? Good. So...it is not infallible, as your apostle stated.

As demonstrated, we know that geographical imperfections abound throughout the Book of Mormon.

This brings me back to the original question, which you have not, yet, answered: Given that the Book of Mormon contains imperfections/man-made mistakes, how do you know which content of the Book of Mormon is a man-made mistake/perfection and which content is accurate?

Secondly, if Joseph Smith translated, as noted below, how did a "word wrongly written, or even a letter incorrect" get past this God-correcting/editing process?

Did the translation process happen as stated by Joseph Smith and the LDS, with no possible error, or did it not happen as sated by Joseph Smith and the LDS?

The Lord caused each word spelled as it is in the book to appear on the stones in short sentences or words, and when Joseph had uttered the sentence or word before him and the scribe had written it properly, that sentence would disappear and another appear. And if there was a word wrongly written or even a letter incorrect the writing on the stone would remain there. Journal of Oliver B. Huntington, p. 168 of typed copy at the Utah State Historical Society

And what is up with the two different accounts of the translation process? The above account states that the translation appeared on a stone..but another account I have read says that it showed up on a piece of papyrus. Was it a stone or a papyrus? Why the two accounts?

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.