23 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
| Wednesday, June 19, 2013 |
|
- A Bird's Eye View
- A Motley Vision
- Adventures in Mormonism
- Blognitive Dissonance
- Book of Mormon Blog
- By Common Consent
- Ethesis
- Face of the Other
- Faith Promoting Rumor
- Feminist Mormon Housewives
- Flooding the Earth With the Book of Mormon
- Golden Road to Samarqand
- Head Life
- Just Sayin'
- Juvenile Instructor
- Messanger & Advocate
- Millennial Star
- Mormon Matters
- Mormon Mommy Wars
- New Cool Thang
- Nine Moons
- Old Testament Blog
- Our Mother's Keeper
- Proud Daughter of Eve
- Segullah
- Sunstone Blog
- Times & Seasons
- Wheat and Tares
- Zelophehad's Daughters
I normally browse my Reader, star entries and go back later to leave comments but this post called out to me and even though it throws me off schedule, I wanted to respond right away LOL. Of course I would comment on how the Bible is also a story, both old and new testaments, and then I would answer the question with more specifics, like: Mormons go on missions – (Alma 21:16) “And they went forth whithersoever they were led by the Spirit of the Lord, preaching the word of God in every synagogue of the Amalekites, or in every assembly of the Lamanites where they could be admitted.” Mormons attend Church – (Moroni 6:5) “And the church did meet together oft, to fast and to pray, and to speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls.” Mormons baptize – (3 Nephi 11:23) “Verily I say unto you, that whoso repenteth of his sins through your words, and desireth to be baptized in my name, on this wise shall ye baptize them—Behold, ye shall go down and stand in the water, and in my name shall ye baptize them.” Mormons take the sacrament – (Moroni 4:1) “The manner of their elders and priests administering the flesh and blood of Christ unto the church; and they administered it according to the commandments of Christ; wherefore we know the manner to be true; and the elder or priest did minister it—” Mormons build temples – (2 Nephi 5:16) “And I, Nephi, did abuild a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon save it were not built of so many precious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.” Mormons marry – (4 Nephi 1:11) “And they were married, and given in marriage, and were blessed according to the multitude of the promises which the Lord had made unto them.” If things like that don’t help your friend, I would say that because we also believe in revelation given to prophets, the Doctrine & Covenants has many other Mormon “rituals” and “practices”. |
On the archeological evidence question, which is a favorite among anti sites, there is some stuff on FAIR, of course. There are various theories about location, and there clearly is some evidence, but it’s not concrete and is subject to interpretation, just like all the evidence supporting Bible stories (which there isn’t that much of BTW). |
Sorry, one more thought – I was just re-reading Scott’s talk from Oct 07 General Conference (Sunday PM session) titled “Truth: The Foundation of Correct Decisions.” It seems pretty relevant to the search for what is truth in one’s reading of the BOM, esp. if seeking physical proof. |
On FAIR I just read this and thought it would apply just fine here: |
First off, be up front that there isn’t any conclusive archaeological proof. Then mention that most Mormon scholars believe that the events in the book would have had to have taken place over a very limited geographic area (probably in Central America – although we aren’t sure). Mention that there is relatively little written record for ANY of the known civilizations in the Western Hemisphere, so we just don’t know a lot about what did or did not happen here hundreds of years ago. I’d finish by noting that the Book of Mormon’s primary value is in whether it speaks to you personally as a record of how God deals with people. Not it’s value as a historical document. Suggest that he focus on the spiritual message in the book and focus on how God is portrayed as dealing with people and their societies. As for the ritual part, I’d just simply note that a lot of our rituals and Church organization are found in the Doctrine and Covenants, not the Book of Mormon. |
I have to admit that archeology does nothing for me–I am not the least bit interested in having my religious beliefs “proven.” So I would be at a loss in helping this friend. I agree with Seth that the true value of the book is spiritual, but that will not be very satisfying if your friend is not interested in that aspect (which is fair enough). I like Jia’s illustrations of practice, but guess I would likely use religions the friend is familiar with to compare biblical (or other relevant scripture) teachings and the modern practice of that religion. Some religions probably fair better than others in that respect. Man, this has me thinking that we do a whole lot of “fluff.” Important fluff, sure, but not necessarily scriptoral fluff. |
This is an interesting question, danithew. You are probably aware that, outside of the text of the Old Testament, we have very little (as in NONE whatsoever) evidence of Hebrew slavery in Egypt. There is simply no corroborating evidence. And yet this story of bondage in Egypt and exodus to Canaan is the founding story of the Jewish religion, with it powerful ritual of Passover. Where did any of that come from? |
I think efforts to “prove” the truthfullness of the Book of Mormon or prove where things may have happened hurt us. I think the key is to read and pray about it. I have found most investigators are pretty turned off by trying to prove things. Plus, it seems a lot of the genetic research on North/Central/South American ancestry doesn’t help the case for “proving” the BOM is true/historical. |
You might tell your friend about the Aaronic priesthood and our baptism coming out of Joseph Smith’s experience with the Book of Mormon translation. It comes to mind also what Bushman wrote about Joseph Smith coming to understand his role as prophetic seer by learning of Mosiah. |
Good answers, all, We believe that man can have a relationship with God. We believe that man can communicate with God. We believe that individuals can know for themselves truth from the Source. We believe that prophets are some that have been given a mantle of stewardship that involves their communication with Deity and providing counsel and guidance. We believe that exercising what faith we have is a first step, followed by the repentance that would follow. We believe that baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are our privilege. We believe that the greatest gift here is charity. etc. etc. The fundamental tenets of our belief system are in there. As for evidences, I side with those who say, “does that matter?” To be honest, we don’t even know what we’re looking for somewhere in the Americas, so evidence one way or the other will be interesting at best. If you feel inclined, take him to the maxwell institute website. Your friend’s comments were valid, however. I don’t know what belief system he has, but it reminds me of a conversation that I had with an evangelical friend of mine (who has his own ministry): He said “You Mormons rely so much on [personal revelation].” He asked me, “What about the fact that there is no archeological evidence to support any claims for the Book of Mormon? What about the fact that there were no horses or swords before the Europeans?†I don’t know the belief system of your friend, but that conversation might give you something to think on. |
Guy, |
The short answer is that the Book of Mormon is not the Mormon Bible, in the sense that Protestants assume it is. That is, Protestant doctrine and practice is rooted in the authority of the text of the Bible. We have a different book and some different beliefs and practices, so they assume our differing doctrine/practices must be rooted in that book the same way theirs are in the Bible, but it’s not so. (D&C gets closer in that regard, but it’s still not a great comparison.) The BoM was seen by the early saints as confirming the Bible and being a witness of God and the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith, not as a doctrinal manual. |
I have zero tolerance for Guy Noir comments. Any Guy Noir comments that show up on my posts will be deleted. For those who see Guy Noir show up in comments on my posts, just be patient. There’s no need to even respond to him. |
I want to thank those who have shared their thoughts. The comments here have expressed many of the things I have thought/felt in response to the questions I was asked. My first thought was that there really isn’t any known archealogical or scientific proof of the Book of Mormon account. But we don’t rely on physical proofs for our beliefs in this book. In regards to the basis of Mormon practices in the Book of Mormon, I think Jia provided some excellent thoughts in the very first comment. I also would have to agree (as others said) that Doctrine and Covenants is a major source of inspiration/instruction as well. |
The great thing about Mormonism is that one’s ancestry is purely irrelevant. We all gain our testimonies and strive for exaltation on our own merits. |
No queuno, I’d have to disagree. It’s not purely irrelevant. Rather, everyone’s ancestry is equally relevant. |
Seth, our ancestry *is* important in the sense that we cannot be saved without our ancestors. But we err if we base our Mormonism on our ancestors. We run the risk of relying on their testimony, not our own. |
I would say, there is a book about that very question. It’s called “By the Hand of Mormon” by Terryl L. Givens. That is a must read for anyone interested in the Book of Mormon’s history and influence. Hopefully your freind is a reader. Although I will discuss questions where I feel confident, there is no reason to explain something that has a longer and better answer. If you are given to short answers I would say: As for archeology, honestly there is absolutely none. There are enough hints of some that I can interpret it as personal proof, but nothing a scholar or non-believer would accept. As for Mormon practice, it isn’t meant as a Catechism. The purpose is as a witness and a warning about the last days and coming of Jesus Christ. There are some mentions of practice, particularly in the book of Moroni, but it isn’t meant as a rule book. It is about how to live your life as a person of faith, often with examples from stories about others who lived their lives. |
At present there is nothing Archaeological that proves the Book Of Mormon. The antis put out that the only things that Archaeology verifies are horses, steel, city names, et. al.; however, it also studies the culture. There are evidences of things Joseph Smith couldn’t possibly have known, or guessed. I saved the following on March 15, 2008, and in my sloppiness failed to cite the source and author. I “remember†that it was from an article in FAIR, or FARMS (something like that–I feel like a real dummy): The Book of Mormon is full of ancient Near Eastern and Mesoamerican cultural details. I will mention one more item in closing because it impressed on me how hard it is to pay attention to subtleties in the book. Recall the incredible story of Ammon teaching King Lamoni. Ammon’s deeds in defending Lamoni’s property gained him audience before this dumbfounded monarch, and Ammon had to break the protracted silence of this meeting by voicing the King’s thoughts, which only deepened the King’s wonderment, and perhaps his fear, all of which led to the following dialog in Alma 18: 24. And Ammon began to speak unto him with boldness, and said unto him: Believest thou that there is a God? 25. And he answered, and said unto him: I do not know what that meaneth. 26. And then Ammon said: Believest thou that there is a Great Spirit? 27. And he said, Yea. 28. And Ammon said: This is God. And Ammon said unto him again: Believest thou that this Great Spirit, who is God, created all things which are in heaven and in the earth? 29. And he said: Yea, I believe that he created all things which are in the earth; but I do not know the heavens. 30. And Ammon said unto to him: The heavens is a place where God dwells and all his holy angels. 31. And king Lamoni said: Is it above the earth? 32. And Ammon said: Yea, and he looketh down upon all the children of men …. We’ve all read or heard this dozens of times. Have you ever thought that this was an incredibly bone-headed question for Lamoni to ask? That thought finally penetrated my thick skull a decade ago. Can you imagine asking a preacher whether the heavens are above the earth? I can’t. This dialog is beyond my cultural understanding. What is going on? I submit to you that the question makes sense in a Mesoamerican setting in which most of the gods resided under the earth. In this brief dialog between a Nephite Prince and a Lamanite King, we are given a precious glimpse into Lamanite beliefs. A small thing, perhaps, but in terms of correspondences, it surpasses Nibley’s famous bulls-eyes in The Book of Mormon and is a lunar landing – a 240,000 mile long-shot that hit the spot perfectly, succinctly, silently, and effortlessly. The Book of Mormon has hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of such gems tucked away in its narrative. We wish you happy hunting for other gems and invite you all to read and enjoy the book. It is an ancient book, its history is intriguing, and its message of Christ is true and redeeming. |
M#10, your response is better to the question about horses in the Book of Mormon. But another thing to ask is, “Is there any archaeological evidence for camels in the Old Testament when Rachel was supposed to have lighted from her camel?” Most scholars believe there weren’t camels around during the time of the Patriarchs, though that is contested. (Just as horses can be in the Book of Mormon.) This is an apologetic text, but it is very helpful because many Evangelicals never hear about the multitude of archaeological problems that the Bible has. You could read this text very helpfully by substituting “Book of Mormon” just about everywhere it says “Bible”. Op cit:
…And yet we hear Evangelicals proclaiming that because no Mayan glyphs spelling “Zarahemla” have turned up, the Book of Mormon must be false. |
Archaeology doesn’t prove the Book of Mormon, but it certainly supports it. My book, Decoding Ancient America: a Guide to the Archaeology of the Book of Mormon, Cedar Fort, Inc., 2007, has much to say about religion, beliefs and traditions of the Mesoamerican Indians that coincide with LDS doctrine. |
Jeff (#20) |
I feel like the above responses are all good points, but who knows if danithew’s friend is an evangelical, etc, etc? Maybe say something along the lines of, this book tells us about a few things like baptism by immersion and no infant baptism, but if this book is what it claims to be, then Joseph Smith was a prophet and would have the right/power to shape many other rituals and practices. Then tell him about the Doctrine and Covenants. |
