Some of the hardest questions come when our belief system is challenged. It can be really uncomfortable. But some of the best learning takes place when we ask those questions. The object of asking the right questions is not necessarily to find answers or to come to a conclusion, but in doing so we tend to grow and to learn about ourselves. I hope to do so here in the most respectful way possible as we discuss The Book of Mormon.
So let’s jump into this: What if The Book of Mormon was true? And by true I’m talking about what if the events described in the book actually happened from conception to translation. For Mormon believers and for those that have left the LDS Church, this question might seem silly. Growing up Mormon in the ’80s, I remember everything Book of Mormon was literally related to the Mayans or the Native Americans. Book of Mormon artwork was also depicted this way, heck even singing the Book of Mormon song we made the signs with our hands that depicted feathers in our heads. There was always this strong tie to anyone with brown skin as a “Lamanite”. Islanders of the Pacific were tied to the explorations of Hagoth. (Alma 63:5-8) There has always been a strong push to make the Book of Mormon a literal historical book. I remember watching LDS films of archeologist in Central America showing the “Great White God” or calling holes in the ground baptismal fonts, etc. There are even several LDS-themed cruises in which instructors take tourists to Mesoamerican sites and introduce them within a Book of Mormon context. Just recently a group of Mormon archeologist headed by Dr.F. Richard Hauck will go on a dig to “Nephi’s Bountiful” at the edge of the Arabian Peninsula. This location is said to be where Nephi built the boat that carried his family across the ocean. I could go on and on about how much time and money the LDS Church and it’s members put into making the Book of Mormon a literal historical read.
Historicity, geography, and methods of authorship continue to be hotly debated among Mormons and Ex-Mormons as a way to prove that the book is true or false.
It has been set up to be an all or nothing campaign, where if the book is true, then Joseph Smith was a prophet and if he was the prophet, then he restored the only true church. If the book is false (or not historical), then everything is supposed to fall down in shambles. I’m not going to spend time on how this line of reasoning is terrible or how this sets members up for failure. This essay is about how proving the Book of Mormon is true or false by historical landmarks or by authorship is a huge waste of time. Historical or not, its value lies in its message. I’m not going to go over certain implications, like why a need for the plates if Joseph didn’t use them during the translation process, or text that may or may not be plagiarized from the Bible, I am going to focus my efforts on the morality of the book. Please don’t comment… “but you don’t have an eternal perspective”. This just dismisses any kind of intelligent discussion and quite frankly is just intellectually lazy. And for the history fans, I’m not saying we should ignore history completely. History gives a story context and deeper richer meanings. History, in my opinion, shouldn’t be used to prove if a book is “true”.
If the events of The Book of Mormon actually took place what are the moral implications? Let’s say it was historically true that there was an actual group called the Nephites and Lamanites—what do the contents of the book say about God and his relationship with his children? I am not going to address every single good or bad thing that one might find in the book, but I will try to balance out with “the greatest hits” of the book. Feel free to add your own in the comments section.
Nephi vs. Laban – Thou shall not kill
Why not just tie Laban up, strip him down and be on your way without killing? OR if God can relate the whole Book of Mormon to Joseph Smith through stones in a hat, why couldn’t he do the same thing for Nephi? Was this just an obedience test? Where was the angel to stop Nephi’s actions once God knew he was committed to killing? Why couldn’t God just cause a deep sleep to come over Laban?
Take Care of The Poor
Throughout the Book of Mormon, there is a very strong, very clear call to take care of the poor. According to The Book of Mormon, if you are not making an effort to take care of the poor you just might be morally bankrupt.
“And now, … for the sake of retaining a remission of your sins from day to day, I would that ye should impart of your substance to the poor, every man according to that which he hath, such as feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and administering to their relief, both spiritually and temporally, according to their wants.” (Mosiah 4:26.)
“And now behold, my beloved brethren… do not suppose that this is all; for after ye have done all these things, if ye turn away the needy, and the naked, and visit not the sick and afflicted, and impart of your substance, if ye have, to those who stand in need—I say unto you, if ye do not any of these things, behold, your prayer is vain, and availeth you nothing, and ye are as hypocrites who do deny the faith.” (Alma 34:28.)
“Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just—
“But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God.” (Mosiah 4:17–18.)
Ammon avoids being killed
We all know the great missionary story of Ammon, it is read over and over again how he chopped off people’s arms. Yes, that Ammon. Did you ever think about that one guy that was mad at Ammon because he chopped off his friends’ arms? When the group is gathered together to see the king, the queen and Ammon passed out on the floor, that guy sees the opportunity to get his revenge on Ammon. But before he gets his chance, God strikes him down dead.
If God can do this, why not do the same thing today? Here would have been some good opportunities:
Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61, 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,000 killed
Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) 12,000,000 plus 3,000,000 Russian POWs left to die
Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908) 8,000,000 killed
Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) 6,000,000 killed, including Ukraine’s famine
Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44) 5,000,000 killed (civilians in WWII)
Pol Pot (Cambodia 1975-79) 1,700,000
Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94) 1,600,000 killed (purges and concentration camps)
Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78) 1,500,000 killed
Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970) 1,000,000 killed
…just to name a few. How can God single out just one person, in one instance and yet leave millions to their death?
Anti-Priestcraft
Mega Churches beware!
Priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the Welfare of Zion… But the laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor for money they shall perish” (2 Ne. 26:29, 31)
Racism
“And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.” (2 Nephi 5:21)
“And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.” (Alma 3:6)
Therefore, all the Lamanites who had become converted unto the Lord did unite with their brethren, the Nephites.
And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites;
And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites; (3 Nephi 2:12,14-15)
White good, Brown bad. Now—some may dismiss these verses and say they are talking really about their spiritual countenance, but it does specifically say in multiple verses “skin”.
What percentage of Mormons think their skin actually changed? That’s speculation, but I bet you are thinking lots of Mormons think the Lamanite skin changed. Probably because they are taking their notes from President Spencer W. Kimball’s statements about Native American children adopted into LDS families:
“I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today as against that of only fifteen years ago. Truly the scales of darkness are falling from their eyes, and they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people….
The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as Anglos;…The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.
At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl…was several shades lighter than her parents…There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.
The day of the Lamanites has come….today the dark clouds are dissipating.” (Improvement Era, December 1960. pages 922-23)
White good. Brown bad.
Anti-Polygamy
“Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.” (Jacob 2:24) Whether you think polygamy is immoral or moral, concubines and polygamy, according to Jacob 2:24 is an abomination.
Women
Aside from references to Biblical figures like Mary, the Book of Mormon refers to a total of three women by name: Abish, the servant of Lamoni’s unnamed wife, Isabel the harlot and Sariah, Nephi’s mom who is most famous for complaining in the wilderness. Compare this to the endless throng of named men (no matter their importance to the story). The Book of Mormon nearly completely dismisses women’s importance as individuals and solely refers to the female gender in sweeping statements of “faith of women” or being producers of offspring for the men. And I almost forgot about the seductive dancing Lamanite daughters!
Anti-Arrogance, Pride
“Seek not after the riches of this world nor the vain things of this world; for behold, you cannot carry them with you.” (Alma 39:14) This idea is also a strong theme throughout the book.
The Gospel of Prosperity
Simply described like this: if you obey the commandments you will be blessed, and most of that time those blessings come in the form of riches. You have probably heard “The Book of Mormon Pride Cycle” where a certain group is poor, repents, obeys, becomes wealthy, then becomes prideful, forgets God and then God strips away everything away from them in the form of a natural calamity or another group taking it in order for that group to become humble again. Rich = obedient and good, (until their pride sets in of course) and Poor = Result of being humbled by God after being sinful.
This also brings up an interesting question on how God punishes a group. Is God in cahoots with the evil group so that God can punish the good people when necessary?
Alma and Amulek
“For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.” (John 3:17) In this verse from the Bible it sounds as if Jesus is in the business of saving folks. But Alma and Amulek have a different experience that is recorded in Alma 14. In this chapter, all the woman and children that they taught and believed are being burned alive by the non-believers.
9 And it came to pass that they took Alma and Amulek, and carried them forth to the place of martyrdom, that they might witness the destruction of those who were consumed by fire.
10 And when Amulek saw the pains of the women and children who were consuming in the fire, he also was pained; and he said unto Alma: How can we witness this awful scene? Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us, and save them from the flames.
11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day.
A brutal scene, indeed. So is God in the business of condemning? And if he is, exactly how many people does he need to do that? 1? 2? 100? “Remember the worth of souls is great in the sight of God” (Doctrine & Covenants 18:10) If we take this scripture on what it says, you would think that God would have just needed one soul to condemn these people, if he/she is actually in the business of condemning.
Jesus gets all Old Testament
Remember right before Jesus comes to the Americas – the pinnacle of the Book of Mormon, there are a lot of earthquakes, floods, and destruction. Could it be just natural causes? Nope—Jesus personally takes direct credit for this one in 3 Nephi 9.
4 And behold, that great city Moroni have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof to be drowned.
5 And behold, that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them.
6 And behold, the city of Gilgal have I caused to be sunk, and the inhabitants thereof to be buried up in the depths of the earth;
7 Yea, and the city of Onihah and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Mocum and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Jerusalem and the inhabitants thereof; and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come up any more unto me against them.
8 And behold, the city of Gadiandi, and the city of Gadiomnah, and the city of Jacob, and the city of Gimgimno, all these have I caused to be sunk, and made hills and valleys in the places thereof; and the inhabitants thereof have I buried up in the depths of the earth, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up any more unto me against them.
9 And behold, that great city Jacobugath, which was inhabited by the people of king Jacob, have I caused to be burned with fire because of their sins and theirwickedness, which was above all the wickedness of the whole earth, because of their secret murders and combinations; for it was they that did destroy the peace of my people and the government of the land; therefore I did cause them to be burned, to destroy them from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up unto me any more against them.
10 And behold, the city of Laman, and the city of Josh, and the city of Gad, and the city of Kishkumen, have I caused to be burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof, because of their wickedness in casting out the prophets, and stoning those whom I did send to declare unto them concerning their wickedness and their abominations.
11 And because they did cast them all out, that there were none righteous among them, I did send down fire and destroy them, that their wickedness and abominations might be hid from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints whom I sent among them might not cry unto me from the ground against them.
12 And many great destructions have I caused to come upon this land, and upon this people, because of their wickedness and their abominations.
I think this is rare in scripture. Most scriptures of destruction could be blamed on the people writing their own story down, many times justifying there own actions of killing—the play the “God told me to do it” card. But here we have Jesus taking direct credit for killing thousands, millions(?) of people, for wickedness (including children). What were these people doing? Anything worse than the list of murders mentioned above? Most of the examples I mentioned could be passed off to the racism or sexism or maybe human error of the author, but with a literal reading, this story belongs to Jesus alone.
Does one have to believe all of it, though? Can one still find value in it? Or is it all or nothing?
I recently read the book “Slumdog Millionaire”. It is a lot different from the movie although I liked both. I liked the book, but it came across as very homophobic. Every child abuser that was portrayed in the book was homosexual. But because it is just a book – I can say the author has some serious homophobic issues and continue to read the book. OR if I am deeply offended by it, I don’t have to read the book at all. I can call out the author for it without any backlash to my spiritual status. I can take the good parts—the serve others, be kind, be thoughtful and throw out the bad parts, just like I can with any other book.
Can we do the same with scripture? Can we allow it to challenge us, without challenging the book back? I say no, you can’t have one without the other. Scripture and religion, in general, is at it’s best when it challenges and pushes us to be better moral human beings. Literal-ism just doesn’t allow for such behavior. Literal-ism is death.
So 0-10 (10 being super moral) where does the Book of Mormon land on your moral compass?
Also, the Book of Mormon does not mention homosexuality. Ever. Seems like a book that supposedly contains the “fullness of the gospel” and was written for our day might have mentioned the one issue that seems to have consumed the LDS Church in these latter days.
It doesn’t contain hardly anything that makes Mormonism unique really.
Good thoughts. Always a good exercise to take the scriptures on their own terms.
I have to throw this out there. Since I have seen Jacob 2:24 used over and over as an anti-polygamy proof text. If you just read 6 verses later (v.30) you read an escape clause.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
To me, this appears to be a provisional condemnation of polygamy and having concubines, but able to be changed at any time when the Lord “commands” his people.
I am not by any means arguing for polygamy, but calling the BOM an anti-polygamy book is not quite accurate from my perspective.
That was probably the weakest argument on my end. I debated whether to leave it or not. “Raising seed” however has never proven the best way to raise up seed, as it doesn’t produce anymore kids than monogamist relationships.
I get it. Perhaps they just weren’t doing polygamy right :).
I just get a little irritated making the BOM out to be an anti-polygamy tract.
That could be the case! Like I said, I’m not really attached to the argument.
But what you can’t ignore in Jacob 2:24 is that God calls David and Solomon having many wives and concubines “abominable before me”, all the while declaring them “justified” and “in nothing did they sin” in D&C 132:1, 38-39. So which is it? Therefore Jacob’s verses you mention as well as D&C 132 all still fall short for me anyway, and 132:8 seems particularly ironic.
Thumbs up. If the basic foundations of our faith do not make us and the rest of the world a better place, than what use is personal salvation?
One of the reasons I became a Quaker…
Well done, Paul. If the BoM were true, it would be a unique historical source unlike anything else historians consider evidence. We can't examine the manuscript, which was translated by magicial means, and we have no physical, linguistic, or genetic evidence to validate its claims. In the third grade at East Millcreek Elementary School I learned that "whatever the Book of Mormon might be, it was not History, or at least anything that would fall under any of the generally and socially accepted definitions of History. It was church."
It's a mixed bag.
http://www.marvelousworkandawonder.com explains it all and includes The Sealed Portion…
Over the past year, as I've struggled with my own faith crisis, it is the power of the Book of Mormon to explain mortality and human nature that's kept me coming back to it, as much as I'd sometimes like to discard it. I like that you ordered this in an alternating list of things you do and don't like.
I think your reservations are well thought out and each deserves a more thorough answer than could be adequately provided here. I do think that if our perspectives are widened (made more "eternal", so to speak) many of those problem areas start to make more sense. Accepting the doctrines of moral agency and the spirit's immortality, for example, makes the Laban and Nephi story easier to accept (after a friend wrote about his problems with the story I blogged about it, and offer it here as a defense of the mortality of the incident: http://myreasonsforhope.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-god-of-experience.html?m=1).
Or, for the possible racism: putting the black skin of the Lamanites into cultural and narrative context is important. A racially homogenous group with symbolic connotations connected to "blackness" and "whiteness" is suddenly struck with dark skin, making them distinct from a part of their tribe that they drove out through seeking to murder them. Later, the Nephites would arrogantly use their white skins as signs of their goodness while some groups of dark-skinned Lamanites are extolled as the most stalwart and true believers. The story is rife with possibilities for driving into understanding human nature that goes far beyond the color of one's skin. I believe that the Church fundamentally misunderstood the lesson of the Book of Mormon regarding race for many years, and when viewed properly the dark skins of the Lamanites isn't racist at all.
This is already too long, so: good article. I think your reservations make sense if you're approaching the story from a post-modern moral paradigm, but I believe God's ways are higher than ours and that we get more mileage out of life if we seek to learn how He thinks about things than if we take a different approach.
Peace.
That is simply a cop out. Putting it in an eternal perspective means that we can procrastinate making things better now. It lets the characters in Scripture off the hook and thus dissolves our own moral responsibility because they are supposed to be role models for our own behavior. I think we must take the teachings at their word. But then actively examine whether they could be moral and right. We can choose to reject those things that we consider immoral and wrong. It doesn't matter if they come from a prophet or a criminal. We cannot afford to defer to some possible eternity, in the hopes that it will all work out in the end.
“That is simply a cop out. Putting it in an eternal perspective means that we can procrastinate making things better now.” I disagree. Appropriately enough, so does one of the principal characters of the Book of Mormon:
“And now, my brethren, I wish from the inmost part of my heart, yea, with great anxiety even unto pain, that ye would hearken unto my words, and cast off your sins, and not procrastinate the day of your repentance…that ye may not bring down his wrath upon you, that ye may not be bound down by the chains of hell, that ye may not suffer the second death.” (Alma 13:27, 30)
In effect, here Alma uses the idea of an eternal life (which requires one to have an “eternal perspective”) to encourage positive change NOW–and, as was mentioned in Paul’s article, that would lead to the removal of economic and social stratification. The basic pattern the Book of Mormon teaches is that a conviction of personal sin, conversion to Christ, and the receipt of the Holy Ghost leads to a change of heart and, therefore, a change of behavior. I’ve seen that pattern multiple times, including in my own life, and it does produce results in this world.
Peace.
Comment
Porter,
May be because it is not meant to be an issue. It just needs to be accepted and the folks loved just like anybody else.
What if, in translating the plates, Joseph’s interpretation didn’t get it all quite right? For example, what if ‘skin of white’ should have really read ‘pure of heart’ or ‘cursed with a skin of blackness’ should have been ‘cursed with a dark heart’. If Joseph Smith invented this book, he certainly could’ve left some of these rather inflammatory themes out, couldn’t he? And one is left to wonder why African Americans became members at the time, some even being ordained into the priesthood. Just maybe there is more to this than is presently understood. The power is not in the history, or even the morality. The power in this book, fiction or not, is how it affects the reader. Are you better or worse off for having read and applied its principles? If worse, then the answer should be obvious. If it has made your life better, then it is probably worth looking into a little further.
“Most of the examples I mentioned could be passed off to the racism or sexism or maybe human error of the author…” Is exactly what I said.
and
“I can take the good parts—the serve others, be kind, be thoughtful and throw out the bad parts, just like I can with any other book.”
As long as you don’t use the book to look down on others, like people that have some skin color, or that don’t have riches because they aren’t “obedient”. Most of all you must dismiss the notion that God can kill without any sort consistency.
But yes, take the good parts that empower you to be a better moral person.
“That is simply a cop out. Putting it in an eternal perspective means that we can procrastinate making things better now.”
I disagree. Appropriately enough, so does one of the principal characters of the Book of Mormon:
“And now, my brethren, I wish from the inmost part of my heart, yea, with great anxiety even unto pain, that ye would hearken unto my words, and cast off your sins, and not procrastinate the day of your repentance…that ye may not bring down his wrath upon you, that ye may not be bound down by the chains of hell, that ye may not suffer the second death.” (Alma 13:27, 30)
In effect, here Alma uses the idea of an eternal life (which requires one to have an “eternal perspective”) to encourage positive change NOW–and, as was mentioned in Paul’s article, that would lead to the removal of economic and social stratification. The basic pattern the Book of Mormon teaches is that a conviction of personal sin, conversion to Christ, and the receipt of the Holy Ghost leads to a change of heart and, therefore, a change of behavior. I’ve seen that pattern multiple times, including in my own life, and it does produce results in this world.
Peace.
The “deep sleep” or “tie Laban up” arguments might not have worked because Laban could have subsequently sent troops out to track down Lehi’s family. Laban may have known more about the whereabouts of the family than was recorded in Nephi’s record.
I think there is value in considering why things were done a certain way as opposed to another, but this sort of thing could be an endless exercise. Why didn’t the Egyptians all fall asleep so the Israelites could escape without the deaths of Egyptian first-borns or soldiers and horses being drowned in the Red Sea? Why does an angel escort Peter out of jail but John the Baptist languishes in prison until being beheaded? Why were even innocent children of the Amorites to be killed?
Why couldn’t God do it himself? Why not a deep sleep until Nephi was safe enough? Why couldn’t God whip a wind to hide the tracks of Nephi so that his troops couldn’t track him down? Why couldn’t he have wiped his memory? It seems there are a ton of different ways to avoid Nephi killing, God it seems in this story lacks creativity.
It seems that the Nephi killing portion and the skin color is the only one that anyone will comment on, which has been a bummer.
It isn’t a fruitless exercise and it should be questioned every time you read these passages.
Laban had succeeded in robbing and attempting to murder Nephi and his brothers. He broke/attempted to break 4 of the 10 foundational commandments their society was founded on, and according to the principles of their law (Deuteronomy 19:16-21) Laban was worthy of death, since he untruthfully accused Nephi of robbery and tried to carry out a death sentence. According to Laban’s own belief system, and the laws of the society in which he lived, death was the appropriate judgment to be passed on Laban–although the society was so corrupt, justice would never come through the proper channels.
With that in mind, the argument that the all-powerful master of life and death doesn’t have the right to carry out the death sentence or was somehow wrong for doing so seems inadequate.
As for why have Nephi be the executioner: experience. Nephi would be the king of a people who would eventually need to defend themselves by going to war. This experience began to prepare Nephi for the kingship role by introducing him to the harsh, terrible reality of taking a life.
Couldn't you make the argument that it is literal but that the men describing these things were themselves imperfect and the book is subject to their own interpretations of events? They are imposing their own meaning on what they experience? For example, the man who was struck dead before he could kill Ammon. . . Maybe he was just freaked out and had a heart attack but they assumed that God had killed him.
“Most of the examples I mentioned could be passed off to the racism or sexism or maybe human error of the author…” Yes I kind of say what you expressing. I have no issue with human error, because we are all humans. The Jesus going Old Testament is a little harder to pass off as human error though. As long as you can dismiss the bad, I think you will be just fine. But as soon as we give god the credit for taking out one single dude or a whole population of men, women and children, then we have some theological issues to deal with.
When Ammon, et al. went to preach to the Lamanites, Mosiah received a promise from God that He would keep them safe (Mosiah 28:7). I think a reasonable interpretation is that, because of Mosiah's faith, God preserved Ammon. It was also the faith and prayers of Alma the Elder that allowed the angel to appear to Alma the Younger (Mosiah 27:14). Faith is the key aspect of these situations, as God "work[s] not among the children of men save it be according to their faith" (2 Nephi 27:23).
Not to derail the thread, but I went to East Millcreek Elementary in the early 80's. Good times. But your main point is a good one, if we had any legitimate evidence at all beyond Joseph's dubious claims, maybe the discussion about whether it is true or not would even matter. It cannot be taken seriously as history and only qualifies as a fictional religious text.
I read this article with disappointment and sadness because I was expecting something faith promoting (which many could write in a heartbeat on this very topic) and because most of the answers which establish the truthfulness of the Restorarion to your questions are already in the Book of Mormon itself and the Bible; others can be received through the Holy Ghost. Some answers come ONLY with time, pondering, obedience, study, and living.
I must admit that I spent years in correspondences with people who, from reading hostile material, taught against us, and I understand where they are coming from. It is those who have gained a little knowledge and experience in the church, had the chance to gain a testimony, or gained one but let go of the iron rod, the word of God–or faith in it– too, too soon, that are most disappointing to me.
For a good, logical question to be answered in a satisfying manner, one should seek the (Lord's) answers according to Moroni's instructions in 10:3-5. Short-sighted, misleading or presumptive answers, such as implied in this article, will rush in otherwise.
1.Believe that God is and can answer prayers (Faith). Open one's mind in humility that there could be a legitimate God-given answer.
2. Obey that which you already know is true that God has taught you so the Spirit can be heard. If you're not obeying (seeking, reading, living accordingly), you ask amiss to begin with.
3. Have an honest heart and honest intent, which would mean you will not only receive but act upon His answer when it is received. Pray to recognize it when you see, think, hear, and feel it.
4. Allow God DAILYwiggle room in your heart and mind to penetrate all the noise and distractions that compete for both. (Turn of the iPhone, videos, games, TV, or close the other good and necessary books, and cease seeking answers through other sources for that sacred time each day.) Even college is no excuse to neglect this time no matter how small..
I would like to take each question you ask and write the answers I have received through the years, for there are many, but they would mean nothing to you, and I am too long here already! Satisfying and certain faith is a gift of God to those who seek Him through the sources He has given and to those who "see His hand in all things and obey His word."
"Whether by mine own voice, or the voice of my servants, it is the same."
Paul, I did not say it was a “fruitless” exercise, but could be an “endless” one. Your response to me gives more examples of this. No matter what anyone says, we could always say “well, why not this?” or “How about this?”
The Liahona was found outside Lehi’s tent one morning. Great! But why didn’t the group arrive at Bountiful and find a ship tethered at the end of a pier ready to go? Why all the time and effort to build the ship while having to deal with oppositional family members? For that matter, why wasn’t the ship tethered there at the Red Sea so they wouldn’t have to cross the Arabian Peninsula?
Manna was provided to the Israelites in the wilderness. Some got tired of eating the same old thing after a while. Why didn’t God provide manna one day of the month, and a nice variety of well rounded meals the other days of the month?
With the sons of Mosiah, miracles occurred in, finally, having some success in the missionary efforts to the Lamanites. Matthew Bennett gives a good reason why Ammon was especially protected. If father Mosiah had not received the knowledge his sons would be protected he likely would have never allowed the effort. There was no promise of success, only that they wouldn’t be killed. But consider that the earlier Nephite prophets and writers told us that they had worked with the Lamanites for years, but without success. Why not? Were these early prophets not as righteous as the sons of Mosiah? Is that why they failed? No. Can we learn from their experiences? Yes.
And here’s my best scenario: Laban has an angel come to him the night before telling him that in the morning a group of brothers will come to acquire the brass plates. Laban’s instructions from the angel are that he release the records and send his servant Zoram with the group. In return, the group will bring a large amount of gold, silver, and precious things. Done.
I hope you see why I say asking “why this?, why not that?” could be an “endless exercise” if we engage in it.
But notice I also said “I think there is value in considering why things were done a certain way as opposed to another.” One value is in better understanding that things don’t always happen the way we think would be ideal (in our minds), and we ought to get used to that.
Also, recall that after the broken bow incident, nearly everyone is whining and complaining. But later, as the group nears what would be Bountiful, Nephi comments on how strong everyone is — including the women, who despite bearing and nursing children, are able to handle the traveling as well as the men without complaint. Some growth is happening here, directly for the people involved. We can learn from their experiences too.
And there are principles we can learn when the righteous die at the hands of the wicked or when the righteous are commanded to slay the wicked.