I loved this video that’s what me and my brother are trying to do with this Chanel to strive to not miss the mark while holding collective thoughts from multiple backgrounds creating peace instead of creating battle grounds Good job at the hard work
"It is the author’s opinion that all the scriptures, including the Book of Mormon, will remain in the realm of faith. Science will not be able to prove or disprove holy writ. However, enough plausible evidence will come forth to prevent scoffers from having a field day, but not enough to remove the requirement of faith. Believers must be patient during such unfolding." - Neal A. Maxwell
The background setting of the New Testament is established physical fact. Irrefutably so. Did Jesus walk on water / heal the sick / raise the dead? That's a matter faith, but it has an ACTUAL underpinning to reality. Not so with The Book of Mormon, unfortunately. And Neal's attempt at cop-out on that is very weak indeed.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire I'm not entirely certain you've read the Book of Mormon based on your comment. Additionally, any religion outside of Christianity can claim archaeological evidence as a substantiation to relative faith. There is no evidence the Moses parted the Red Sea nor that Jesus Christ rose on the third day. What we do have are testimonies from people who were there. We have other testimonies from others that saw Him, too. They didn't all live in the Old World, either. No. What the Book of Mormon verifies is that Jesus Christ is the God of the whole earth, not just the "Hebrew God" or a regional faith. There is no other known testament to the Savior's divinity outside of Israel, save for the Book of Mormon.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire You're going to find out one day that both are true. But like the Jews with the New Testament, mainstream sectarian Christianity rejected further light and knowledge with their rejection of the Book of Mormon and the Restored Gospel. Making the same mistake all over again.
@rodneyjamesmcguire The Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Quran, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tripitaka (Pali Canon), the Avesta, the Guru Granth Sahib, the Tao Te Ching, and the Kojiki are among some of the most revered religious texts in human history. Each of these texts is deeply cherished by its adherents, and apologetics for each religious tradition ardently defend the teachings and narratives found within them. However, from an anthropological or historical perspective, concrete evidence supporting the supernatural claims made in these texts is scant. These are not merely books of divine miracles or supernatural feats; they are narratives imbued with principles, lessons, and values. They serve a crucial role in human societies, offering a foundation upon which tribes, chieftains, societies, and entire cultures can build common values and shared goals. The power of these texts lies not necessarily in their factual accuracy, but in their ability to unite people under a shared ethos and purpose.
@IIIJT There's some limited truth to what you say but ultimately falls woefully short. For example, it's absolutely crucial that Christ was who He said He was - the Son of God - and not just another great moral teacher. That He really did atone for the sins of the world and really was resurrected. The idea that many secularist non-believers take, where they see certain ideological and social benefits but reject the overall historical truth and reality of it just isn't going to cut it.
My heart stopped when at the beginning you seemed to say you were stopping your videos. I said “NOOOOOO!!” Out loud! 😂 I love your channel so much! It’s Soooo refreshing how you always tie in personal experience and testimony with your posts!💕☀️ Top class guys! 🔥🔥💪🏻💪🏻
Joseph Smith wrote to Emma that he "rejoiced" when he and his traveling companions saw the physical evidences of the Nephites, and he discussed them with the Saints. Clearly it's okay then to discuss and rejoice in the evidences pointing to its authenticity.
It's also okay to be soberly reminded your religion is false when you look at the evidence that proves this religion is a sham. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are both adulterers and false prophets who slept with kids, stole other men's wives, and did so much egregious stuff. Mormons teach native Americans came from Jerusalem, when common sense and DNA studies prove they are asiatic. So much nonsense in this cult, and so much cult abuse. Mormons follow Stephen Hassan's BITE model perfectly. Cult, cult, cult, demon religion
@@shawnbradford2243 If I’m reading your comment right, you’re saying that history is a matter of facts not faith, and that the BOM is factually wrong? That’s a very simplistic view. Let’s say I’m in a carriage tumbling down a hill, and can’t see outside the carriage. Is the better decision to stay in the carriage or jump out? Now there certainly is factually better choice, the reality of what’s going on outside the carriage is a matter of fact, not faith. But we don’t know enough about what’s going on outside to make a factually objective opinion. Maybe it’s even the case that we have a couple indicators that jumping out is safer, but not enough to make us confident that we’ll be okay if we jump out of a speeding vehicle, that’s a pretty big leap of faith. Then again, staying in the carriage is a leap of faith in its own right. Maybe it’s the same with the Book of Mormon, we have some historical indicators both ways, but ultimately it’s upto us which leap of faith we’re going to take.
@@gordianknot9595 The evidence that it’s not historical is that everyone (including the author) universally agrees that it’s a work of fiction, and we could very easily disprove things in it, such as there being a court case as described. Compared to the Book of Mormon, there is very little positive evidence against its historicity, and some very good positive evidence for it. For example, all the evidence shown by the Stick of Joseph, such as Nahom. That’s a wild coincidence, that kind of thing doesn’t just happen by chance.
@@gordianknot9595 Your to kill a mockingbird analogy really doesn’t work. We can examine and disprove every possibility for where it could have taken place. Court documents are very specific, it would include the full names of all parties involved. It’s not one dude with the last name Robinson. We know the full names of the lawyer, witnesses, victim, judge, and defendant. We know the details of the case and important qualifiers like the defendant is missing an arm. We could check every single court case that took place in Alabama during those years and comprehensively prove it’s fictional. The Book of Mormon details a lost civilization from a thousand years ago in a part of the world known for lost civilizations. And yes, we don’t know exactly where it took place, but that’s because there are just too many viable options, despite all the specific geographic criteria the Book of Mormon puts forth. We have professionally surveyed less than 1% of Mesoamerica, and of the few sites we’ve designated within that 1%, less than 10% have been excavated. Not to mention that we barely know anything of their language and history. What kind of evidence are you even looking for? A signpost in English that says “welcome to Zarahemla?” Well according to the Book of Mormon itself, Zarahemla was wiped off the face of the earth. And that’s just a few of the issues with finding proof in Mesoamerica, which does not even mention all the other viable models and their obstacles. However, despite all of this, we have found very good positive evidence supporting the claims of the Book of Mormon.
@@gordianknot9595 That assumes 99.99% of everyone in the world has even heard of the Book of Mormon, they certainly haven’t all read it and looked into the evidence surrounding it. Not only that, but you don’t acknowledge their faulty motive. Most people don’t disbelieve the Book of Mormon because of its content, they disbelieve is because their worldview presupposes there can’t be modern prophets like Joseph Smith. If they are familiar with the Book of Mormon’s content, they brush it off as being ridiculous and rely on the popular consensus that Native Americans only came from the bearing strait, which has long since been disproven. This is the exact same rationale used to dismiss heliocentrism: it goes against the popular religion, and just sounds ridiculous anyway.
It is so refreshing to me at 73, to see young men testify of what is true! I love your interactions and impressions regarding the history of the Book of Mormon... keep it up!
I've always thought it was interesting that the Church openly declares where they believe the empty Tomb in Jerusalem to be, and walking where Jesus walked to be a sacred experience, and all the work they've put into restoring historical Church sites and encouraging visitors, so it's built into our DNA to WANT to visit these sacred lands, and therefore natural to want to know the locations of the Book of Mormon lands. So for those reasons, I think it's important to seek, and if found, it would be no more of a distraction than us wanting to visit any other sacred places. That said, I can still be right in line with the Church's statement about why they don't make a definitive statement about locations as it is still unknown. I believe evidences are to be found, just as many are found for the Bible, and will be revealed in time. Thanks for the work you are doing!
In addition, there were a lot of events in the BoM that seem to have shown up in present day. Not just the gadianton robbers though. How about the conversion of Alma the Younger? The sons of Mosiah? Enos? etc. I happen to know, personally, the power of those transformations because I have had them. Having that experience granted me the ability to give the greatest number of people the greatest amount of forgiveness. The pandemic taught me a lot about that. But the BoM isn't true just because of historical date, but because I can testify that the experiences of those who lived in that time are real and powerful. I love the Book of Mormon AND the Bible. They connect in very real ways because the real test of each of their teachings is, "Did Stephen rise from the dead? Did Paul really change? Did Peter really raise someone from the dead?" The answer to those are all "YES" but only to those who have actually done it. To the rest of society, it remains a mystery. These, I believe, are the miracles that will overcome much of our corrupt society, if we can seek it out.
I think one of the most intriguing things you said on this video was that we have narrowed the historical questions down from 205-34. I wonder if you could find someone who, instead of doubting the gospel truth because of the 34, has looked at the other 34 from the standpoint of "well, there are 171 that have been borne out. I wonder what I can do to see the other 34 from a different perspective?" What an interview that would be. LOL
Being afraid to look at evidence around the Book of Mormon is like being afraid to look at evidence for the Bible. Don't be afraid. The book is true. God has not given us a heart of fear. Who knows exactly what you'll find but God likes effort, faith and humble inquiring minds.
Since both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are simply records of the people and Gods dealings with the people living either in the middle east or the Americans, why would there be any logical or rational reason to disbelieve either? Both contain the gospel of Jesus Christ! It makes sooo much sense to me that a single translation (Book of Mormon) will have less errors, less opportunity for the mistakes of men than several translations (Bible) It makes absolutely zero sense to me that God would provide His love & guidance ONLY to those dwelling in the middle east & not provide His love & guidance to His children living elsewhere! One prophet at a time only makes sense in a world like we have today, a global world where all corners are easily accessible! It makes no sense in an ancient world where those in the land first give by God do not know & have no idea of the existence of His children in/on another continent! IT REALLY IS SIMPLE, ONLY THE NATURAL MAN, WHO IS AN ENEMY TO GOD & HAS BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING MAKE SIMPLE THINGS SEEM COMPLEX!! 🤷🏽♂️🤔🙄 😆😅😂🤣
If the Book of Mormon were true, we’d be able to find these massive civilizations. Because even small civilizations leave a small trace. They leave languages and they leave places that can be seen and they leave civilization markers. There’s nothing for the Book of Mormon.
I read the Book of Mormon last year. If any of that stuff happened there’d be literally TONS of evidence. Swords, chariots, machines, money, art, transaction records….. You’d be able to drill into the dirt and lake beds and find pollen from wheat that predates the Europeans bringing it here. I’d like to see the two of you discuss this with legitimate archaeologists.
Man, you guys are such brothers! Always interrupting, correcting, and razzing each other. I can tell which one is the "big" brother. You crack me up. Yet you make a great team. Keep up your good and important work. Message well received on not getting too wrapped up in the where instead of the why the Book of Mormon was given to us. I hope that didn't sound "dumb" or "stupid."
Neal A Maxwell said it best. The lord will never take the Book of Mormon or Bible out of the realm of faith but there will be enough evidence to make certain the critics cannot have a a one-sided argument. The Bible places being historical in the end does not prove Jesus Christ was resurrected and the savior. That comes strictly as Peter discovered by revelation. Hugh Nibley(and Tad Callister) both have shown quite well that time vindicates the prophets and the Book Of Mormon.
Nibley and Callister have done no such thing. The physical setting of the NT is proven fact. If there were no physical evidence for it, we'd rightly ascribe it to mythology, in its' entirety. This is not the case with The Book of Mormon, despite the best protestations of LDS Apologists to the contrary.
The Book of Mormon is another powerful witness of The Holy Bible, that Jesus Christ condescends, lives, ministers, heals, suffered for our sins, is crucified, and rose again. The Book of Mormon backs up those wonderful claims about the Son of God… it is glorious and makes my soul long to be like Him. To trust Him and trust in His goodness and delight in delivering those who love and trust Him. ☀️💕
@@rodneyjamesmcguireI get that you believe you are doing God a service. John 16:2. Do you understand are repeating the words of an accuser? Revelation 12 :10. By that we thank you for making our point. Matthew 5: 10-12 Nevertheless, we are a joyful Acts 2: 46, peaceful Phillipians 4:7 people, we forgive you Collosions 3:13, love you 1st Corinthians 13:4,5 and invite you to join us on the Holy Highway or Covenant Path of Isaiah 35!
@@rconger24 I didn't say anything about God. The Bible is interesting but quoting scripture to try to demonstrate something is like saying I should be nice so Santa will bring presents.....
Hello guys, I used to live in Utah, off and on for about 12 years, and I have respect for the church and it's followers. However, you have some problems here. For instance at 7:15 in this video, you say God would have left "a lot more" physical evidence here if he wanted us to know a 100%. Saying "a lot more" implies there is some. But is there any physical evidence that's been found anywhere in the Americas that is still here, in a museum or in the church's possession, that is positively linked to Jaredite or Nephite or Lamanite culture? Any coins, swords, tools, weapons, structures, reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics, or other physical artifacts that are definitively linked to any group from the BOM? Something that even non member researchers agree on? I don't think so. Also, is there any location from the BOM in the Americas that is confirmed to be a BOM site? (except for maybe Hill Cumorah). Where was Zarahemla, or the River Sidon? What is the narrow neck of land? Your own researchers can't seem to agree themselves. Until you have some of these things you don't really have "evidence" per se. You can get the anachronisms dowe to zero, but that's not evidence. Just like the plural of anecdote is not evidence, a lack of anachronisms is not evidence either. It's amazing that if the BOM is true, and all that happened therein is real, that after nearly 200 years you have no physical evidence. And it's not like people haven't looked. Do you know the story of Thomas Stuart Ferguson? I assume you do but if not it's quite interesting. Your church membership would grow tremendously if you had real, convincing, physical proof. Anyway, good luck with your work here, you seem like nice and sincere people, like most Mormons I have known.
“…left them on Earth.” (Speaking of the plates) already sounds fantasy land to me; but I nevertheless am intrigued by the Book because of the substance I’ve found in it so far…it just makes me ask questions; like: if it wasn’t written or translated by Joseph Smith in 3 months, then where did it come from?
I couldn’t care less where the BOM happened, but still cool to have a space for those who do in the church culture. Just love the BOM for what it does: bring people to Christ and inspire changing of hearts.
Ok I’m not lds, I did go for several months to try and understand. I have read up until a little into 3 Nephi. In first Nephi when they’re in the desert before they come to Americas, I swear the meat is ceviche. I read it and it sounded exactly like that. A member of the bishop rig was impressed and the missionaries thought I was crazy. I really don’t think Joseph Smith would’ve known what ceviche was. I’ve seen what I think are contradictions but then I’ve seen things like that that do sound “God inspired.” What do you think?
I love your content and the work you are doing but I have to disagree with you guys. In my mind it matters IMMENSELY where the book of mormon took place. All you have to do is go back to the source. Joseph and Oliver. Read letter VII from Oliver Cowdery. Read the Zelph account. Read the D&C accounts where the first missions to the Lamanites took place. We know where Cumorah is. We know where Joseph got the plates. That does not mean that the Lamanites did not eventually go South after 400 AD and mix with other Asian migrations to make up the Mayans, Inca's etc after those final battles at Cumorah.
The truth is the truth. Deal with it. Doesn't fit into the popular paradigm? I'm sorry, but that bad tooth needs to go! When did we decide we needed to pussy-foot around with the facts? Let's wholeheartedly embrace the Truth. It takes less effort. Onwards, young men!
Apologies upfront for my long-winded response that most will not read through. LOL 😴 Whether the Book of Mormon is a translation or a revelation, or a combination of the two, we find ourselves pondering why God would permit it to contain so many anachronisms. This list, which is not comprehensive, presented without specific ranking, raises questions about the books' historical authenticity over its alignment with pre-Columbian anthropology, archaeology, and all other related pre-columbian studies. It's as though these anachronisms were intentionally placed by God, challenging the entire body of research to reconcile with the Book of Mormon's narrative. The narrative of the BOM stands in opposition to all pre-columbian anthropology. There is no historian or anthropologist outside of BYU and even many within BYU to support the Book of Mormon as historical. Note: I still think it's worth recognizing that the Book of Mormon may still offer value to many individuals, serving as a unifying force that helps foster shared ideals, dreams, goals, and rituals. We can see within Jewish culture and practice there are many, many of those who do not hold a literalist view of the Old Testament and yet find meaning connection and value within the Traditions customs and rituals centered around the Old Testament and modern Jewish cultural community. Will Mormonism survive the same way? Hard to say, though, I think there is still something worth saving and keeping here. 1. Horses: The Book of Mormon mentions horses, but there is no evidence of horses in the pre-Columbian Americas during the time periods described. 2. Elephants: Similar to horses, elephants are mentioned but did not exist in the Americas during the relevant time periods. 3. Wheat and Barley: These crops are mentioned but were not present in pre-Columbian Americas. 4. Silk: Mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not known to have been present in the Americas before European contact. 5. Steel: References to steel weapons and tools, when steel-making was not practiced in the Americas during that time. 6. Chariots: Chariots are mentioned but were not used in the pre-Columbian Americas. 7. Cattle, Pigs, and Goats: These animals are referred to but were not present in pre-Columbian Americas. 8. Bees: Honeybees are mentioned, but the type of beekeeping described did not exist in the Americas before the arrival of Europeans. 9. Coins: The Book of Mormon describes a system of coins, which were not used in ancient America. 10. Compass: The "Liahona" is described as a type of compass, but this technology would have been anachronistic. 11. Windows: Windows, as described in the Book of Mormon, were not used in the construction of the time. 12. Revolving Doors: Mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not consistent with ancient American architecture. 13. Scimitars: These specific swords were not used in the Americas during the Book of Mormon times. 14. Glass: Mentioned but not produced in pre-Columbian America. 15. Bellows: Used for stoking fires, mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not used in the time described. 16. Cimeters: A type of sword that is mentioned but did not exist in pre-Columbian America. 17. Advanced Metalwork: The book describes techniques that were not known in the ancient Americas. 18. Seven-day week: Mention of a seven-day week, which was not used in the pre-Columbian Americas. 19. Language: Some critics point to the use of linguistic features, including proper names and phrases, that they believe to be anachronistic. 20. Biblical Quotations: Certain passages closely resemble sections of the King James Bible, leading some to argue that this reflects 19th-century influences rather than ancient ones. 21. Iron Working: The Book mentions extensive iron working, which did not exist in pre-Columbian America. 22. Domesticated Sheep: Mentioned in the Book but were not present in pre-Columbian America. 23. Brass: Described in the Book of Mormon, but evidence of widespread brass working in pre-Columbian America is lacking. 24. Figs and Olives: Both of these are mentioned in the text but were not cultivated in the ancient Americas. 25. Synagogues: The Book of Mormon mentions synagogues, which were not present in pre-Columbian America. 26. Harvesting with Sickle: The use of sickles for harvesting is described, but sickles were not used in the Americas at that time. 27. Cement Houses: While cement was known to ancient Mesoamerica, the specific technology described in the Book of Mormon is seen as inconsistent with what was used at that time. 28. Greek Words: Some critics argue that certain words used in the Book of Mormon have Greek origins, which would be anachronistic for the time and place described. Like the word Christ. 29. Breastplates and Helmets: The type and technology of armor described are seen as inconsistent with what was used in ancient America. 30. Crossbows: Descriptions in the Book of Mormon seem to refer to crossbows, a weapon not known in pre-Columbian America. 31. Wine and Vineyards: The Book of Mormon mentions the cultivation of vineyards and the consumption of wine, but there's limited evidence of viticulture in pre-Columbian America. 32. Swords and Cimeters: While earlier points touched on scimitars, the widespread use of swords in battles as described in the Book of Mormon is seen as inconsistent with pre-Columbian warfare. 33. Faith in Christ: Critics argue that the Book of Mormon presents a fully developed Christian theology hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus, which they consider anachronistic. 34. Seer Stones: While seer stones and similar objects were used in various cultures, the specific use described in the Book of Mormon has been viewed as more reflective of 19th-century folk beliefs. 35. Gold Plates: The concept of religious records being kept on metal plates, while not entirely foreign to ancient cultures, is not supported by archeological finds from pre-Columbian America. 36. Secret Combinations: Critics suggest that the portrayal of secret societies or combinations in the Book of Mormon seems to reflect concerns of Joseph Smith's era, particularly anti-Masonic sentiments, more than ancient societies. 37. Plows: The Book of Mormon references plowing, which is inconsistent with the agricultural practices of ancient Americans who used different methods of cultivation. 38. Flocks and Herds: The frequent mention of managing large flocks and herds is inconsistent with known practices in pre-Columbian America. 39. Raising Grain: The Book of Mormon mentions the raising of vast amounts of grain, but the specifics are seen as inconsistent with pre-Columbian agricultural practices. Also, the claim that the Book of Mormon contains words and phrases specific to the King James Version (KJV) is quite significant in the debate over the text's authenticity. 1. Italics in the KJV: The KJV translators used italicized words to indicate words that were added to the English text to make the meaning clearer but were not present in the original Hebrew or Greek. Some critics claim that these italicized words also appear in the Book of Mormon's quotations from the Bible, suggesting a direct dependency on the KJV. 2. Specific Translation Choices: Critics point to specific words and phrases in the Book of Mormon that match the KJV but differ from other translations. For example, the use of the word "charity" to translate the Greek word "agape" is distinctive to the KJV and is also found in the Book of Mormon. 3. Matching Errors and Inconsistencies: Some critics argue that the Book of Mormon reproduces not only the distinctive wording of the KJV but also some of its inconsistencies and perceived errors. They claim that these similarities are too specific to be coincidental and demonstrate that the Book of Mormon is drawing directly from the KJV. 4. Phrases Not Applicable to the Book of Mormon Context: Critics also point to phrases that are carried over from the KJV even when they don't make sense in the context of the Book of Mormon. These include some idiomatic expressions and figures of speech that are specific to the Jacobean English of the KJV.
Empirical science is Observable. When something isn't observable nothing is proven one way or the other, so all your non-observations by your speculating archeologists and anthropologists mean nothing at all. Perhaps you can explain all the museums in the mid-west showing artifacts from the Hopewell culture which archeologists and anthropologists from mid-western universities have put together. They claim this culture appeared on the scene around 500 BC in northern Florida, migrated north through the Ohio valley, and ended up in the Great Lakes area then disappeared around 400 AD.
@bobrussell8339 Thank you for replying and holding good faith-discussion. I will look up some of the information you provided . Thank you. The idea that the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is a common principle in logic and science. However, in certain contexts, the lack of evidence can indeed be evidence against a claim, especially when evidence would be expected if the claim were true. Here's a brief explanation: 1. Expected Evidence: If a claim predicts that we should find certain evidence under specific conditions, and we don't find that evidence after thorough investigation, then the lack of evidence can be taken as evidence against the claim. 2. Example: Imagine someone claims there's a full-grown elephant in a small room. If you look inside and see no elephant, the absence of evidence (not seeing the elephant) is solid evidence of the absence of the elephant. 3. Bayesian Reasoning: In Bayesian probability, one updates their beliefs based on new evidence. If you expect evidence for a hypothesis and don't find it, the probability of that hypothesis being true decreases. 4. High-Quality Search: The strength of "absence of evidence" as evidence against a claim increases with the quality and thoroughness of the search. If a cursory look finds no evidence, it might not be compelling. But if a comprehensive, well-conducted search turns up nothing, the absence becomes more significant. 5. Background Knowledge: Whether absence of evidence counts as evidence of absence often depends on what we already know. For example, we might be more inclined to see a lack of evidence as meaningful if it aligns with our existing understanding of a phenomenon. 6. Null Hypothesis: In scientific testing, researchers often start with a null hypothesis (e.g., "This drug has no effect"). If experiments provide no evidence to refute the null hypothesis, it stands (though it's not proven). 2a. Alternative Explanations: If there are alternative explanations for why the evidence is lacking, those must be considered. If the alternatives are less plausible than the original claim, the lack of evidence may not be very significant. For example, if someone claims that there's an elephant in their garage, and upon looking, you find no evidence of an elephant (no large footprints, no droppings, no elephant sounds), the lack of evidence can be taken as evidence against the claim. The expectation would be that an elephant in a garage would leave some evidence of its presence. In science, this principle is often applied. If a hypothesis predicts certain observations and those observations are not made even under ideal conditions, it's evidence against that hypothesis. In sum, while absence of evidence isn't always evidence of absence, under specific conditions where evidence is expected but not found, it can be evidence against a claim.
@@IIIJT lol I'm very familiar with the scientific method, philosophy and logic. Did you notice, however, that your illustrations don't fit the situation. If there were a claim that the Nephite civilization lived in one specific square mile, and you didn't find any evidence of that, you might have a point, but no one is making such a claim. The Nephite lands could be anywhere in North or South America. Until there's been an archeological dig throughout all of North and South America, where every shovel full of dirt has been sifted, archeologists can't make any broad conclusions about archeology and The Book of Mormon You need to keep in mind that EVERY STEP IN THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS FAITH-BASED. There is nothing more "ify" in the world of science than the writings of archeologists and anthropologists. Every paragraph they write is full of qualified adjectives such as "possibly, maybe, perhaps, might be, if, or, etc." They weren't there to actually see where and what took place so they are just speculating on what happened and where.
@bobrussell8339 I largely concur with the sentiment expressed, though I'm uncertain about the definitive criteria you are suggesting to form your conclusions. For instance, to elaborate on the Book of Abraham (BOA): Aside from a single professor at Brigham Young University (BYU), the global community of Egyptologists, irrespective of religious affiliation or cultural background, unanimously assert that the papyri presented by Joseph Smith don't align with his translation. This solitary BYU professor not only contradicts the broader consensus in Egyptology but also diverges from a multitude of anthropological fields that study Egyptian culture and history. He even acknowledges his inability to validate the translation provided. Moreover, anthropologists from Muslim, Christian, secular, agnostic, atheist, Hindu, and Buddhist backgrounds may have varying perspectives on the nature of existence. Yet, they concur in not endorsing Joseph Smith's interpretation of the papyri found in LDS scripture. Consequently, we are faced with two possibilities: Either the collective wisdom of Egyptology and its associated disciplines has erred regarding Joseph Smith's translation, or Joseph Smith was mistaken. Accepting the Book of Abraham emerges as a matter of faith, not of historical veracity. I must add that none of this is meant to discount the importance of groups of people centered around rituals, customs, and traditions of morals, ethics, and values.
@@IIIJT Thank you for being kind and courteous in your responses. It is a pleasure to have a discussion without acrimony. What "definitive criteria" am I suggesting? How do you make the huge jump from a discussion about The Book of Mormon to the Book of Abraham by saying, "For instance?" I don't see how the Book of Abraham is an example of anything we discussed previously. Please explain. Regarding the Book of Abraham, who is the "single professor at BYU? Kerry Muhlestein perhaps? He is an Egyptologist who has written a book about the Book of Abraham. I have watched videos by him. It is his opinion that the Book of Abraham was a revelatory process directly from God as was The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Book of Moses. It was not an ordinary translation by Joseph Smith who didn't know Egyptian. You must really get around to have encountered every Egyptologist on the planet and to have heard them "unanimously assert that the papyri presented by Joseph Smith don't align with his translation." Since the facts are that members of the church purchased four papyri and several mummies from a traveling showman in the 1830s. The Book of Abraham was translated from the "long scroll" which no longer exists and was believed to be burned in the Chicago fire. Only tiny fragments of some of the other three scrolls exist which have nothing to do with the Book of Abraham. Conclusion: Neither Joseph Smith or anyone else has "presented papyri" to the "global community of Egyptologists for examination."
As one with a PhD in Geography, those who minimize the importance of Geography do not understand geography. Our LDS critiques are asking why are their no maps in the Book of Mormon, which is a very fair questions. Geographers teach that history and religion without geography are fairytales. Those who foolishly believe Geography is not important should maybe tear all the maps out of the back of their Bibles. Notice the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 flew all the way to Israel and went to Jerusalem to testify of the divinity of Jesus Christ. If Geography is not important, why did they not just go to the City of Jerusalem movie set near the south end of Utah Lake to testify or go to Las Vegas if Geography is not important. We need to stop fooling ourselves and establish the location of Book of Mormon events. The ruins in MesoAmerica are Hindu and have nothing to do with the events described in the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith knew and he taught the peoples of the Book of Mormon lived in the US. Stop throwing Joseph Smith under the bus.
But you of course would know, regardless of what Smith claimed, there's nothing about US geography that syncs with the Book of Mormon text. And geography is just the tip of the iceberg of problems. There's no evidence yet discovered from any applicable field of science that supports what the Book of Mormon claims about the ancient Western Hemisphere.
I love archeology and historical artifacts and by taking that love and intertwining it with the Book of Mormon, I’ve completely revitalized my desire to really studying the Book of Mormon. Some people can read the same book over and over and stay content, but after my Nth time reading it became a chore. By layering in the hard evidence god has allowed to be revealed, it has opened up my mind to so many more mysteries of god. It was a little disheartening when the church came out with their statement as I felt it was an overreach of caution, but for others maybe it was necessary.
Rockin it brothers! Hey - CHIASTIC writing! I hope you have that on the docket for an upcoming episode. To me, CHIASTIC writing is one of the most convincing evidences that Joseph didnt just make this book up out of his head. Keep up the good work!
The Book of Mormon contains the greatest example of a chiasmus , ever recored. One of the Earliest and the Longest recorded, Joseph was translating it in a daily rhythm for only like 64 days... Chiasmus aspect is Astonishing alone but the meat of the Book of Mormon, is on many levels higher than a specificly hard form of writting, which is more like the milk of the scriptures.
Sure there are counter arguements regarding chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, but I find the arguements that favor the Book of Mormon being of ancient origin and not simply a work of fiction by Joseph Smith to be far more compelling.
@@michaelbennett7561 So, how do you explain then that an Orthodox Jewish family arrives in the Americas and all of a sudden lives a perfectly Christian life 600BCE? How did Joseph Sr. dream get into the BoM? How did Nephi kill Laban, put on this clothes (which must have been soaked with blood) and nobody notices all the blood, and nobody notices the different voice, face, walk? How can it be that 300,000 soldiers fought in the last big battle around the Hill Cumorah and not a single piece of evidence of a huge battle has been found despite of all the digging? How did Deutero-Isaiah (which was written after Lehi supposedly left Jerusalem) get into the Book of Mormon? How is it that there is no single piece of evidence in the languages that anybody spoke Hebrew in the Americas? Why can nowhere in the Middle East or in the Americans any evidence of reformed Egyptian be found? Why do the reformed Egyptian characters all look like our normal letters but with a bit of ornamentation (dots, circles) added? How did the story of the Tower of Babel get in the BoM? Bible scholars are sure that this event is only a myth that people used to explain why all people speak different languages. It never really happened. Different languages have existed way before. If the BoM is the most correct book and it is complete, why does it not mention celestial marriage? The two priesthoods? Endowment? Why is there no prophecy in the BoM about events that took place after 1825? How did the King James Version of the Bible, which is not the best translation, end up being quoted a lot in the BoM? Shouldn't it be the most correct book?
@@jasontolley4890 In order to have a discussion about the "chiastic content of the Book of Mormon" you'd have to get folks to actually open and read it. Unfortunately this is asking way too much of our antagonistic, non-member friends and won't win many converts. It is however, good reinforcement for those of us who have read it and already have a testimony. An abundance of "chiastic writing" means next-to-nothing to those who have no eyes to see such things.
3:25 The term "watchers" is used in both the Book of Enoch and the Book of the Giants. In the Book of Enoch, the watchers are a group of angels who were sent to Earth to watch over humanity. However, they fell from grace and began to have sexual relations with human women, giving birth to the Nephilim, a race of giants. The watchers' actions angered God, who sent a flood to destroy the Nephilim and punish humanity. In the Book of the Giants, the watchers are also a group of angels who fell from grace. However, they are said to have taught humans forbidden knowledge, such as how to make weapons and jewelry.
If God told everyone what church is His true church, nobody would want to ponder, seek or struggle to find the truth. Many of if us would lose the opportunity to experience hardship, deep conviction, testimony of why this church is true. There would be no testimony, no need to seek, no struggling for truth, if God gave us everything without struggles & doubts... The reason we seek Gods truth is because we are looking for answers, truth, comfort. ..and to get there, we need to have doubts, we need to struggle, we need have pain.... Without these obstacles we wouldnt search intently for Gods truth & comfort.
I have a very different question to answer. Would it be at all possible that I could come onto your show and share with you my testimony of Lord Jesus and his most amazing love for us? Would that be at all possible??
This video reminds me of a talk by Elder Quinton L. Cook entitled "Valiant in the Testimony of Jesus Christ". He reminisced about staying in a cabin on his father's ranch. There was a power pole right outside the window that distracted him from the view of the property. To me, focusing to much on where the Book of Mormon took place can become a distraction to how beautifully the Gospel of Christ is played out in the Book of Mormon.
For me the evidences are not what physically prove the Book of Mormon true, but it helps gives me insight and understanding of it better. Things like why things were done a certain way and help us see things through the lense of when it was written, instead of our Modern eyes. Understanding the Historical part, for me enhances things that I would have missed otherwise.
EVIDENCE Smith Boys were highly educated: Excerpt from Hyrum Smith: a life of integrity by Jeffrey S. O’Driscoll In 1811, the Smith family moved to West Lebanon, New Hampshire, where Catherine was born on July 28, 1812.[22] By then, things were looking up for the family. Lucy remembered, “We settled ourselves down and began to contemplate, with joy and satisfaction, the prosperity which had attended our recent exertions.” Hyrum and his siblings had received little formal education to this point, but their parents made arrangements for Hyrum to attend the academy at Hanover and for the other children to attend a “common school.”[23] The academy, or Moor’s Charity School, was associated with Dartmouth College in Hanover, a few miles north of the Smith home and on the same side of the Connecticut River. Lucy did not explain why Hyrum was chosen to attend, but it may have been simply because his cousin of about the same age, Stephen Mack, was already a student there. One of the school’s tutors, Andrew Mack, was also a distant relative.[24] Eleazar Wheelcock founded the Moor’s School in Lebanon, Connecticut, in 1754. Its curriculum extended beyond simply educating students; rather, it focused on preparing them to become teachers and preachers. In 1769, the school relocated to Hanover, New Hampshire, and became associated with the newly founded Dartmouth College. With the establishment of a common school in Hanover in 1808, the academy further refined its focus to prepare able students for additional scholarly education. But it maintained its religious influence, and students attended daily chapel services at the White Church on campus. If Hyrum attended in 1811, as Lucy seems to indicate, he joined a class of thirty-one students, which grew to fifty-six by 1814.[25] School records are incomplete, but the “Hiram Smith” listed in the August 1814 record was one of the “charity scholars” studying arithmetic.[26] Charity scholars were not merely students with limited financial means. The designation also implied remarkable intellectual potential. School president John Wheelcock personally followed the progress of these student scholars, who were supported from his limited funds. Hyrum’s designation as a charity scholar in 1814 implies that he performed well academically during his previous years there. The outbreak of “typhus fever” in late 1812 interrupted Hyrum’s education.[27] He came home sick from school, perhaps at the end of the quarter in February 1813. His whole family was eventually infected, but Hyrum, despite his own illness, was determined to do his part to alleviate their suffering. He relieved his mother and sat at Joseph’s side for days or weeks until Nathan Smith-an attending surgeon at Dartmouth College, whose daughter Malvina attended class with Hyrum-operated on Joseph’s leg to eradicate the infection. Whether Hyrum and Malvina’s association was significant or even known to those involved is not recorded. As Joseph’s leg improved, his family sent him to his Uncle Jesse’s home in Salem, Massachusetts, in hopes that “the sea-breezes would be of service to him.” The rest of the family, financially devastated by a year of illness, moved to Norwich, Vermont. Hyrum’s return to the Moor’s School now required him to travel about four miles east of his home and across the Connecticut River. His youngest brother, Don Carlos, was born in Norwich on March 15, 1816.
Thank you! I’m glad you sent this to disprove your original false statement of “Did you know Hyrum attended Dartmouth??”. I love how the argument from people against joseph has shifted from “He was too uneducated, someone else had to have done it!!!” to what it is now,”Joseph was a theological genius! His brother went to a prep school of Dartmouth for 3 years when he was 11!!!” Again, please email me if you want to have an actual conversation rather than spitting out empty tropes from ExmoReddit. thank you. jackson@thestickofjoseph.com
@@thestickofjoseph Hyrum clearly DID attend the Dartmouth educational system, AND DID have access to the Dartmouth theological resources of his relative who was a distinguished Dartmouth professor of theology. Hyrum was acknowledged as having exceptional intellecutal ability. His time there was more than enough to form significant ongoing relationships to Dartmouth educators, some of whom were relatives.. Are YOU saying that the mormon church did not promote a narrative that the Smith's were uneducated? I promise not to engage in empty tropes. I sent you solid historical research (from a pro mormon source), and the references to the historic primary sources are easily available. CAN WE DISCUSS THE PRIMARY HISTORY RESOURCES TOGETHER? (No tropes, including your personal attacks on me for simply wanting to dive into the historical facts)
You guys are fun to listen to ☺️ Ever wonder if one of the reasons we aren’t supposed to know the exact location of the Book of Mormon is because the BOM became a witness that Jesus Christ is God of the whole world? Without a precise location being told, it’s easier for us to resonate with it being a global gospel. I’ve heard/read/seen so many evidences and appearance’s of Christ from all continents. Why wouldn’t there be records such as the Book of Mormon elsewheres? That would be an interesting video if you ask me- exploring other witnesses that align with the Christ we read about in the Book of Mormon. Keep it coming!
@@johnrowley310 sure it is! I hope the whole world reads the Bible along with the Book of Mormon. I do believe that the original audiences differ, however. The Old Testament was written for the Jews; the New Testament was written for local congregations; the Book of Mormon is quite clear it is for the Jews and the gentiles, the whole earth. But that’s not even the point. My point was that Jesus was born on one continent and visited another across oceans. It’s amazing to see accounts of Him from everywhere in the world! Asia, Africa, the Americas… truly a god of all the world. The Book of Mormon is just one of those accounts.
If the point of faith were to teleport us to the end of the road (IE remove the distance we are to walk) we would have the knowledge of only two steps. The journey not only gives us a greater knowledge, but allows us to become travelers. Maybe to metaphorical? Great points guys
Knowing the he location of the Book of Mormon has nothing to do with my salvation. I have my own opinion, and I think it can be backed up, but I could be wrong. I am often wrong. And I'm a big girl. I can handle being wrong. I don't hold it against anyone who disagrees with me. Because frankly, I don't care. But I still think it's cool!
The gospel topics, essay… Is that written by mid level management of the church? Who is the author of the Gospel topics essay In order for it to have any validity in your presentation, don't you think that would be important to identify
The essays are collaborative efforts written by academics and vetted through church departments (history department), which then have an apostle approve its publication. This one was presumably approved by Elder Oaks since he adds a quote that was added into it.
Exactly… Just like the whole thing with the mask in the shot… It comes from the 501 C3 corporate harm of the church… Which is very protective of lawsuits But if you look at quotes from Joseph Smith, and and the doctrine and covenants and additional apostles… It's pretty clear that the non-501(c)(3) opinion is this is the promised land, and the book of Mormon took place in the continental United States
You guys are awesome. Love your content and passion. Seriously… AWESOME. That said, Jackson, it’s “cognitive dissoNance” not “cognitive dissaDence”. If you’re going to wield the big boy words, it’s best to say them properly. Also, you said, “…you have to *disband* all reasonable thinking…” I think you meant “dispense with” or “dispose of.” But you’re STILL awesome. Carry on.
Many people forget that people before the turn of the century knew far less about historical truths just for the Bible but many were so faithful in just its teachings. The teachings and words is what keeps faith in any religious denomination, not historical validation.
When Christ asked his apostles "Whom say ye that I am?" Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God!" Then Jesus explained something more vitally important than all scripture. He said to Peter "Flesh and blood has not main known unto you but my Father which is in Heaven!" Then he explained that this concept and principle of Revelation is the Foundation Rock on which He would build his church.
And without Apostolic leadership, we don't have the Rock of Revelation. So much for Solo Scriptura as the authority-- hence 40,000 different Christian denominations with differing doctrines. That doesn't sync with Paul's "till we all come to a unity of the faith" speech. @@ramsrnja
Please be aware that it isn't the doctrine that has changed. It is people's perceptions that have. I received the endowment in April 1073 without any temple preparation except for a high degree of scripture knowledge. Please remember that the Romany Empire persecuted the saints and tortured them to reveal sacred things. They slit their throats, cut off their heads, sawed people in half. Please remember that the Lord does not threaten us in Temple worship. But people got the wrong ideas about the temple endowment and so it was changed -- the doctrine and our covenants with God have not changed. @@johnrowley310
The Book of Mormon is a veiled autobiography of Joseph Smith and an exposition on his principles. Read it as an allegory in Smith's voice for maximum comprehension, imo
Don't mind the haters who visit here, the devil is strong with them. The devil hates the Book of Mormon, he uses his angels to attack it. Ever notice you don't find people attacking Hinduism and Buddhism all day long? Those religions are not a threat to Satan, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, however, is, it is a HUGE threat to Lucifer.
@@brucejensen3700 LOL! No, they're not. In fact, go all over TH-cam and look around. For every Anti-Muslim page there will be three or four Anti-Mormon pages.
An Atheist says the Bible is a fairy tale. Non Christian will say Jesus is not a God. The Bible recieved many critics about divinity and reality of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon is a witness to the Bible.
You're totally wrong about the idea that the existence of gold plates, would unequivocally prove the Book of Mormon to be true. Nothing could be further from the truth... If the gold plates were sitting on a table for all to see, handle and examine, we would be thoroughly engaged in arguing over their authenticity, the translation and every other conceivable aspect and with absolutely no regard for the words contained therein or the Savior..
@@gordianknot9595 I said "we" meaning members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and those who are not. Do you honestly believe a stack of gold plates would convince anyone of anything?
@@gordianknot9595 Believe me, I'll earnestly look forward to the open hearts and open minds, which you're assuring me awaits the arrival of physical evidence. But in the meantime, how many witnesses is it going to take? How many signed testimonies and death-bed statements would be enough to convince you to take a chance and open a book? Doubting Thomas felt the same way... Not until he had physically felt the wounds in Jesus's hands and side, would he accept the risen Lord. So I choose to believe in my religion based on the Book of Mormon. I could be wrong but then I'm choosing to believe more of Jesus and not less. It's called "faith" and that is something which all Christians should know something about. At the very least I would hope to gain their respect and not their distain. Am I asking too much?
@@gordianknot9595 Communication between God and man has always been predicated upon faith. There are exceptions of course but for most of us, faith is the key. Faithful Catholics have faith in God but not enough for direct communication with Him. They get their's through intercession of some sort. These are their rules and according to their faith and their religion. So this is the way God communicates with them. So if it's Mary they choose to listen to, then it's Mary they're going to get. Far be it from me to place limits on God or the way He chooses to answer their prayers. Surely He speaks with them in the manner in which they are prepared to receive. I'm cautious when it comes to judging Catholics since without them, we'd have no Bible at all. And "Mormons" don't pray to, see, or worship the mother of Jesus and never have.
The book is its own proof...The book of mormon is not on trial...the people of the world is on trial...with what they do with this book prepared by God for the benefit of His children in these last days.
Yes the gaslighting is real! The Hill Cumorah pageant itself declared the hill to be the place of the last battle and the hill where Joseph retrieved the plates. As did Mormon Doctrine.
You guys seem really nice and sincere but there is no way on this earth that the BOM is a historical document, there just isnt. You can argue that it is a special book, you can even argue that it is of God and will bring happiness and direction to those who read it but you cannot argue that it is historical. The best you can do is say that MAYBE someday it will be shown to be historical, you cannot say that it IS historical and stay intellectually honest. As it stands right now, if you look at the evidence as it is right now, the verdict is non historical. I remember wanting it to be something it just couldnt be and hanging onto the hope that one day it would be but in the end I was left wanting.
Who cares if the Book of Mormon can proven true or false? The Bible has been proven 90% true geographically. It hasn't convinced Most Humans of Christ's Divinity.....right? The ONLY thing that matters is that the Holy Ghost testifies that it is true .
False. If there were no evidence for the New Testament setting (physical claims), there would be no reason to consider the supernatural claims as being of eternal value, that supposedly happened there, if "there" isn't real to begin with. If there was no Bethlehem, no indication of its' existence, then Christ couldn't have been born "there". If there was no Golgotha, then Christ couldn't have died "there". "There" matters, as does the physical trappings ascribed to "there". Thus far, there's no "there", from an evidentiary standpoint, for the unique physical claims of The Book of Mormon text.
So true, The journey to Christ is a spiritual one not a physical one the evangelicals are all hell-bent on following physical things that can be proven. They entirely missed the point of the spiritual journey. If they can’t come to know and love the book of Mormon as a testament of Christ through the spirit they will find it extremely difficult to come to know Christ through the spirit.
@@MichaelSaline 1) It's hugely insulting to tell people who are fully believing Christians that they don't know Christ. The same can be said of those who would say that Mormons aren't Christian. 2) The LDS Church, through the Book of Mormon, makes extraordinary physical claims that MUST be valid for the unique faith claims of Mormonism to be true. That is why critics focus on those claims. The Book of Mormon civilization (an entirely physical and extraordinary claim), MUST have existed, or Mormonism fails. All stop. Period. So did that civilization exist?
@@rodneyjamesmcguire I didn’t say that they don’t know Christ I said you can only know Christ through the spirit by the same spirit you can know the truthfulness of the book of Mormon. For example the Jews at the time of Christ had all the evidences Christ could give them and yet they pridefully clung to some miss read prophecies in their Bible so tightly they couldn’t feel the spirit of the Messiah who is standing right in front of them. I didn’t condemn anyone I just made a point that the journey to Christ is a spiritual one no amount of Bible reading or book of Mormon reading for that matter will bring you to Christ. They are just help sent instructions and Testaments of who he was, is, and will be so we can have faith to seek him. It’s also evident in the day of Pentecost but without the spirit Even the disciples or apostles could not truly know the Christ and be converted to him. Hebrews11:1 1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. So did that civilization exist? In a word, yes! There is already an abundance of archaeological evidence of great civilizations in north and South America. The question is why is it kept so quiet? Thank you for your comments and concern. have a good day.
@@MichaelSaline Thanks for your clarification of what you meant regarding knowing Christ. I was once as your are, in a way. Believing LDS, who thought there was evidence of / for the Book of Mormon civilization. I was deeply involved with apologists. I was an early member of FARMS. John Welch was in my Stake Presidency at BYU. From Chiasmus to Cumorah, from the parallelism of Sorenson to the heartland of Wayne May, and everything in between, I devoured it... Unfortunately, and I sure you won't even think it's possible, but unfortunately, there is no evidence, yet uncovered, for the Book of Mormon civilization. Not some, not a bit, not a little. None. That's one reason I am no longer LDS.
I love watching you guys on your journey and totally agree that your spiritual journey is more important than historical. I am 71 and read the Book of Mormon for the first time when I was 21. For the last 50 years the Spiritual experience that I received from the Lord changed my life in every way. Back at the beginning I knew the BOM was true and then decided to do a historical study to find out which church succeeded the church after Joseph Smith was killed in 1844. In my studies I saw the BOM denied polygamy and said there was only one God. Joseph Smith’s family did not follow Brigham Young to Utah where he introduced polygamy, Adam-God, celestial marriage and other teachings not taught in the original church. This was proven, by the way, on February 24th,1880 in a U.S. federal court in Lake County, Ohio. The court ruled the RLDS was the legal successor to the church of 1830. Joseph Smith designated his son Joseph Smith III to be his successor, not Brigham Young. In 1860 Joseph Smith III took his father’s place as the prophet/president of the RLDS. In your videos researching the Stick of Joseph I never hear you guys talk about the church’s successor after Joseph Smith’s death.
Well, there’s a lot that I wish I could say about this, but I think I need to keep it brief. I agree with the brothers here. We need to be reaching out towards each other with an olive branch and making peace and finding things that connect us and unite us, not divide us. The book of Mormon, and all the history that surrounds it, because I do indeed believe it is actually a historical record… Should serve as a beacon, and eventually the Lord made a promise to Joseph that he would cause the earth to reveal the truth of all these things. He has kept his promise, and things are being revealed more and more week by week month by month and year by year. One precept at a time. One fact at a time. One hidden clue at a time is being revealed in my own small way I have also seen these things be revealed, and it has bolstered my faith and made me strong in the lord, even though I know I am still a center and have a long way to go. I believe now more fervently than I ever have in my entire life. I am actually reading the book of Mormon now, and I am understanding it and I can feel the emotions from the people prying out from the pages. For me, this has become a personal thing, and because I am also interested in the archaeology and the history, and I have witnessed things that would otherwise be unexplainable And I have been places that would otherwise have been a mystery because of my faith and my desire to know I have felt the spirit witness to me that some of these things I have seen in these places I have been were important, and there were in fact people who were there and things that happened And those things are within the pages of the different books, compiled by Mormon. Reading his testimony and the testimony of his son Marone I actually made me cry. I’m a masculine man, but I feel like a total wimp compared to people like Marone. The courage and spiritual strength it took for those men to do what they did, and especially at the end to stand alone in an entire vast land is astonishing. How much I wish I was more like them. Speaking of which, I really appreciated having seen both sides of the “debate “with the episode, including Wayne May, and the other episode presenting Keith handy and their different points of view. I’ll tell you something… I think they are both right And when the missing pieces of the puzzle are presented, all of the stories, and both of the Americas will be united through the things that happened both in the book of Mormon, and the things that were not written in the book of Mormon. Remember, there are other records that have not yet been found, or translated and presented to the people. When those records come forth, what an amazing thing it will be. In the meantime, we have to guess, and all the rest is a test of our faith. Do we believe these people lived here and get these things.? I do. For me, there is no debate. I believe this with all my heart, and that’s why I feel things when I read the stories because I know they are real. I’m not a fool and I don’t have cognitive dissonance. I’m educated and I have some training in archaeology, especially in stone tool recognition, and I have seen things that lead me to truly believe that this story is real and these things happened in all of the Americas. Just wait and see. You’re gonna love it.
I heard what you said about being kind to each other and I certainly agree. Too much anger and hate in the world. But I was really disappointed in the main message of your video. It seemed a lot like the usual double speak that often comes from Latter Day Saints. Hard to explain what I mean by that. It seems though, that no one in the church will ever answer questions other than with, 'you need more faith', or 'to study harder', or 'pray more', or 'read more scriptures', etc. A person can be led to believe that because they can't find answers, the answers don't exist and the work is likely fiction.
I love your guys' statements about taking the Book of Mormon text seriously. It has so many pearls to offer us if we have a broken heart, contrite spirit, and eyes to see.
I never took the book very seriously after 3 Nephi chapters 8 and 9. But I still read the whole book in 1977. It had some good stuff too. Back then it was considered to be historical. I’ve never been LDS but I’ve had an interest in the restored gospel faiths like JW, LDS, and SDA. I do enjoy your channel.
You clearly haven’t actually read section 87. Read the preface as well. Newspapers were predicting civil war and section 87 still predicted events that never happened. So there’s that!
@@brucejensen3700 That sounds really cool and everything, however, I'm asking about the years 1860 to 1865 only. I'm not interested in whether he believed men were on the moon or anything else. He predicted a Civil War would start, starting in South Carolina. He said the Northern States would go to war with the Southern States, he said the South would call on the aid of Great Britain, and he said the slaves would be free. How did he know this?
@@wes2176 As I explained, Every newspaper in the country was predicting civil war, it just didn’t occur for about 30 years. If I predict a Chinese invasion of Taiwan and it doesn’t occur for 30 years, then my prediction is very weak, since it is all over the news. What happened to all the earth quakes and other destruction discussed in section 87?
Even if people could see the golden plates, the sword of Lehman, the Breastplate, they would still not have to believe. We always believe because we have faith that it is true.
@@thestickofjoseph The plates made a fun story come alive. We all know that the translation came from a rock in a hat. Facts and truth do not matter because a person's testimony is more important than any truth or reality...
The church does not want to convince random people to believe. The church wants people to hear the word of God. The people get to choose what they believe once they hear it.
@@johnrowley310 You, me and the other 45,000 Christian denominations in the world. Apparently the interpretation of the Bible can be twisted many directions. If only there was a second witness of Jesus...
If you are interested, I have some insights on the Book of Mormon that might be interesting to your audience. Let me know if you would like to bring me on your channel.
@@thestickofjosephI don't know what happened. I thought I sent the email to you earlier today. Even sent you a note or reply here letting you know. And either one of them seem to have been sent. I just confirmed that the email was sent. I hope to hear from you soon
There are only two reasons I can think of that would make knowing the geography of the Book of Mormon germane: 1)That is to provide a resource for historical context, that is mostly absent in the Book of Mormon. Just like how understanding Biblical history and context expands and deepens it, as well as correct errors of reading into the text, having something similar would be helpful with the Book of Mormon. If it took place in Mesoamerica, that presents a hugely different sociocultural context than the Heartland. At present, we're grasping to understand the depth of Lamoni's conversion, since that idea and narrative makes sense in both cultural contexts, but vastly alters some of the implications of the story depending on where and with whom it took place. 2) Latter-Day Saint Geographically oriented Eschatology: We have a very location driven eschatology in regards to the events leading up to the Second-Coming. New Jerusalem is to be built in Jackson County, and the statements made about the Nephite Promised Land and it's take-over by the Gentile nations does not match Mexico at present. Mexico, which encompasses the proposed Mesoamerican setting, is not a "land of liberty". Most of it is run by militia like cartels these days, and people have to bribe officials to live. It is a route used by people fleeing poverty and deprivation (sometimes law enforcement) in South America, to get to the USA. Of course, certain readings of the text and words of the prophets can overcome this, but it is still a difficult thing to harmonize. Clarification, or revelation about the specific location of the Book of Mormon events can help in evaluating "signs of the times". Other than this, the geography question shouldn't become a distraction from the overall truth and wonder of the Book of Mormon, and certainly never a question of true or false faith, because you believe in the wrong model.
Great video! Soon we’ll have more evidence, even if it’s Christ that has to show us when he gets back. God bless you on this journey that you can keep your hearts pointed the right way and that you’ll be able to contribute to new discoveries.
I have mormon family, and we had some talks about the book of mormon, but i will had to say that is The bible is first and over the book of Mormon, if you find some discrepancies in the books , will ya follow the book of mormon over the bible? do you make the same investigation over the bible archeology and finding and then make a comparison on the findings on the book of mormon? any way, God bless you.
Very simply, The journey to Christ is a spiritual one not a physical one. That is the message of the New Testament and that is the message of the book of Mormon. If you can’t come to know a thing is true that you can see and read and hold you’ll never truly come to know the Savior Who is not currently available to see and hold.
My testimony of the Book of Mormon comes from reading and pondering it. It is meant for our day to help us grow closer to Christ. The intentions to provide potential evidence (Central America, Heartland, etc.) can be very good. The evidence can serve to strengthen testimony as we try to relate to the Book of Mormon peoples, places and times. I choose to begin where Joseph did. Even though the pyramids of Mexico, the Hindu like structures of Guatemala, and the amazing stone ruins of the Inca of South America witness to great civilizations in ancient America they may not be of the main peoples who are recorded in the Book of Mormon. I do find the evidences found in North America (especially the heartland theory) to be the most compelling (after considering the others first for decades). But whatever the real limited geographical area of the Book of Mormon is I will have no problem accepting it once it is revealed to us by God. But in my opinion God has already revealed it and continues to witness it, we just choose not to accept it, so much easier to accept giant stone structures south than evidence of two ancient peoples around dirt mounds in the free promised land of North America. I have no doubt there was trade via the rivers and Gulf of Mexico at times between some of these various groups of people, etc….
@@GldnClaw if the Tower of Babel story is indeed mythology, then it creates a tricky situation for the BOM at a superficial reading. A response needs to be framed to address this (which there are)
4:40 and not only that, how can we find any information when the gentiles came over and killed the lost tribes of Israel and destroyed all their artifacts…
@@rodneyjamesmcguire cop out? No. That is PART of the data people must consider when weighing these things. Just because something has not definitive proof yet does not mean it is true or not true. Amazing how people just want to close their eyes to what is convenient for them.
@@zionmama150 Actually, for extraordinary physical claims, if there's no proof, the claim is rejected as most very likely false. That's the nature of evidence regarding physical claims.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire so you deny the possibility that there was ever evidence that was not destroyed??? Even though history tells us that there were several artifacts that were destroyed by the Spanish conquistadors, because they were seen as being “idols”? You’re limiting the data, dude.
@@zionmama150 I don't deny possibilities. However, the claim that actual BofM evidence was destroyed by European conquest, is conjecture, since we've no real clue about what exactly was destroyed. There could be evidence out there. Anything is possible. In fact, I am a "Possibilian" (Google it). I'll follow the actual data wherever it leads, so bring on actual evidence, of the extraordinary and unique physical claims of the Book of Mormon.
I like this Chanel but what is the timeline and content of the docuseries? I thought you were going to stay impartial but this Chanel doesn’t demonstrate that. You are clearly biased
ok guys as much as I love the fact you believe in your faith with such a passion you are desperately trying to defend it ... its not the historical problems of the BOM that are the problem ... its a big problem dont get me wrong ... but not the main one ... the problem is lying to the public to save grace ... Elder Holland lied to the BBC about oaths in the temple ceremony to take ones own life rather than divulge the ceremonies ... President Nelson lied about a plane crash he was involved in ... Thomas B Marsh lied about Monson going inactive over milk strippings ... it was nothing of the sort he went inactive because of the horrendous violence of the Danites ... a Joseph Smith approved gang of thugs ... Paul H Dunn lied about every single story he wrote ... not to mention the prophets failed prophecies and the mention of Quakers living on the moon and bloody hundreds more ... who was taught JS translated the BOM with the Urim and Thummim ... nope ... stone in a hat lies lies and more lies ... guys you are covering up for a lying deceiving treasure digging sexual predator ... please stop ... you are actually causing the world damage ... and not good ... sent with love dudes
The Book of Mormon has blessed my life in so many ways. It has brought me closer to Jesus Christ. It causes a desire within me to want to be more like Him; kinder, patient, forgiving, virtueous, gentle, thoughtful to others needs. It helps me see others a little bit more through heavens eyes. I love the Book of Mormon, and the more I study it and try to follow its principles… I’m so much happier, filled with more hope and peace. God be thanked for such an amazing gift. It also is another witness of theHoly Bible…that Jesus is the Beloved Son of God, and the Life and Light of the world. Our Great Redeemer. ☀️ I cannot imagine my life without it. What a gift and blessing from God. 💕☀️
I think you need to be careful when you explicitly say that critics of the Book of Mormon suggest that believers in the Book of Mormon must be, in your words, “stupid”. I’m a returned missionary and have been a member my whole life. Over the the past two years I started diving into truth claims of the church (not just about the bom) and have never heard any respected critic argue that believers are stupid. Most just wanna know the truth. Saying that is counterproductive and can be insulting. I do understand some people who no longer believe may be more angry towards the church and might have that view (which is unfortunate) but definitely not the majority. While I no longer believe in the truth claims of the church I genuinely believe the church can still do a lot of good and I have the utmost respect for people who maintain their beliefs. Id never want to take people out of it either but simply believe people should look at the church with an open perspective and without any preset conclusions. Do you guys look at data and evidence found to support your conclusion that the Book of Mormon is true? Or do you look at the data and the evidence to then come to whatever conclusion that leads you to? I’d argue that the first way is intellectually non credible and makes the info this channel presents less valuable. That being said, I get that faith cannot be proven but when you start to look at real world data and evidence, it becomes a problem for people who respect the scientific method. All that being said I can tell you two are passionate about the Book of Mormon which I respect and wish you the best of luck with your channel!
You quoted the Gospel Topics Essay pointing out that the church does not have a position on the location of the BOM…and that it will mislead people. Well they used to. Lots of prophets seers and revelators insisted that the Hill Cumorah is the hill where Joseph retrieved the plates. The Hill Cumorah pageant itself said as much! The church is gaslighting us, people!
The Hill Cumorah IS THE HILL WHERE JOSEPH RETRIEVED THE PLATES. That has never been in dispute. What is not known is where are the Book of Mormon lands--where did Lehi land, and where did they migrate to over 1000 years.
@@bobrussell8339 And my point is that the Church used to have the official position that the hill was where the last battles took place and where Moroni buried the plates. The church is gaslighting us!
@@bobrussell8339 Because the church no longer claims to know where any of the events occurred. Of coarse they don’t. There is no geographical, archaeological, linguistic or DNA evidence that any of the events in the BOM actually occurred That’s why even Richard Bushman considers the BOM to be 19th century fiction literature.
I plan on publishing enough videos on my channel to prove the Book of Mormon is 100% true. I have 4 so far and plan on publishing 1 per week. I'll probably end up with 30-40 videos. My theory is by far the most plausible, it just didn't take place where you think. This is the only solution. I've debated the Meso-America vs Heartland for almost 4 decades and the Old World Theory is the only theory that answers every question (almost).
Loved the advice. I have found a lot of evidence that aligns with the Book of Mormon but my best evidence is the witnesses of the Holy Ghost. When it comes to location I see the Book of Mormon as a true account and the location evidence has to match the Book of Mormon. If my theory doesn’t match the account of the Book of Mormon then I have to abandon my theory. This seems to keep me on the right track and keeps me from doubting things like swords, horses, or chariots noted in the Book of Mormon.
Where is the written ancient history of north or south America in academia? There is none. There is no written record of ancient north or south America. The book of Mormon is the only written ancient record that even attempts to tell who was in the Americas anciently. Whether it is true or not is up to the reader to decide, and also whether they ask God if it is true or not. The Book of Mormon is the only major written record of the ancient Americas given by spiritual means and not through academia. Academia has begun understanding the writings of ancient Central America which is wonderful to understanding the civilizations of that area. For anyone to argue for or against the Book of Mormon based on archaeology alone is ignorant at best because there is no history to compare it against. If someone wants to know if the Book of Mormon came from God, they will have to ask him like the Book says to do. Not what others say or write about it, but what God says to you personally through direct revelation through the Holy Ghost. Not getting an answer is not a yes or a no.
No. But neither can the Old and New Testaments or any of the other scriptures. There are various items discovered in a variety of scholarly fields that provide evidence that the various scriptures are plausible for the times and places that they all have originated, but that does not constitute irrefutable proof for any scripture, nor does it have to be. There is always an element of faith with all the scriptures as it should be. If there was irrefutable proof, everyone who didn't accept the irrefutably proven items would be damned, period. Our Father is luckily more forgiving than that and gives us the continuing opportunity to learn, grow, and accept more and more knowledge of and from Him or let us stagnate in our development by rejecting all or some of His words.
The physical setting / descriptions of the NT are essentially fact. Did Jesus walk on water on the Sea of Galilee? That's a matter of faith. But we know the Sea existed / exists, and there was water there, with essentially absolute certainty. We also know, with a great degree of historical certainty, the Jesus existed as a person. So, an expression of faith that he walked on water has an underpinning in reality. If faith has no basis in reality, then it is blind, and we are susceptible to believing anything and everything claimed as "faith".
@@rodneyjamesmcguire of course the atheists just say the names of things around the New Testament. Just mean it's more plausible fraud. What you're saying is I accept the certain level of evidence for scriptures that I believe and a much much higher level of evidence for things that I don't believe Rodney
Great work guys. The BoM is always true blue through and through for people who sincerely asked and found that it is true by power of the Holyghost, unless you are scared to find out that you are wrong and the book is indeed not evil. The spirit of God never lie for honest and brave people. Love or hate the book. I love the book just as much as i know the bible is inspired by God for us.
I'm sure God intentionally ensured the Book of Mormon, just as any other aspects of belief in God, cannot be definitively proven true. If God wanted to provide incontrovertible proof of the Book of Mormon, or even His own existence, it would be a trivial matter for Him. It would also totally destroy the requirement for faith and undermine our agency.
You two seem like good people and i can appreciate that. I feel like you really did come across as arrogant, disrespectful, rude and pompous in your interaction with John Dehlin. I was once like you and 20 years later, i now truly regret how i treated others. I sincerely look forward to hearing your deconstruction story in a few years.
I loved this video that’s what me and my brother are trying to do with this Chanel to strive to not miss the mark while holding collective thoughts from multiple backgrounds creating peace instead of creating battle grounds
Good job at the hard work
"It is the author’s opinion that all the scriptures, including the Book of Mormon, will remain in the realm of faith. Science will not be able to prove or disprove holy writ. However, enough plausible evidence will come forth to prevent scoffers from having a field day, but not enough to remove the requirement of faith. Believers must be patient during such unfolding." - Neal A. Maxwell
The background setting of the New Testament is established physical fact. Irrefutably so.
Did Jesus walk on water / heal the sick / raise the dead? That's a matter faith, but it has an ACTUAL underpinning to reality.
Not so with The Book of Mormon, unfortunately.
And Neal's attempt at cop-out on that is very weak indeed.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire I'm not entirely certain you've read the Book of Mormon based on your comment. Additionally, any religion outside of Christianity can claim archaeological evidence as a substantiation to relative faith. There is no evidence the Moses parted the Red Sea nor that Jesus Christ rose on the third day. What we do have are testimonies from people who were there. We have other testimonies from others that saw Him, too. They didn't all live in the Old World, either.
No. What the Book of Mormon verifies is that Jesus Christ is the God of the whole earth, not just the "Hebrew God" or a regional faith.
There is no other known testament to the Savior's divinity outside of Israel, save for the Book of Mormon.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire You're going to find out one day that both are true. But like the Jews with the New Testament, mainstream sectarian Christianity rejected further light and knowledge with their rejection of the Book of Mormon and the Restored Gospel. Making the same mistake all over again.
@rodneyjamesmcguire
The Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Quran, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tripitaka (Pali Canon), the Avesta, the Guru Granth Sahib, the Tao Te Ching, and the Kojiki are among some of the most revered religious texts in human history. Each of these texts is deeply cherished by its adherents, and apologetics for each religious tradition ardently defend the teachings and narratives found within them. However, from an anthropological or historical perspective, concrete evidence supporting the supernatural claims made in these texts is scant. These are not merely books of divine miracles or supernatural feats; they are narratives imbued with principles, lessons, and values. They serve a crucial role in human societies, offering a foundation upon which tribes, chieftains, societies, and entire cultures can build common values and shared goals. The power of these texts lies not necessarily in their factual accuracy, but in their ability to unite people under a shared ethos and purpose.
@IIIJT There's some limited truth to what you say but ultimately falls woefully short. For example, it's absolutely crucial that Christ was who He said He was - the Son of God - and not just another great moral teacher. That He really did atone for the sins of the world and really was resurrected. The idea that many secularist non-believers take, where they see certain ideological and social benefits but reject the overall historical truth and reality of it just isn't going to cut it.
My heart stopped when at the beginning you seemed to say you were stopping your videos. I said “NOOOOOO!!” Out loud! 😂
I love your channel so much! It’s Soooo refreshing how you always tie in personal experience and testimony with your posts!💕☀️
Top class guys! 🔥🔥💪🏻💪🏻
Joseph Smith wrote to Emma that he "rejoiced" when he and his traveling companions saw the physical evidences of the Nephites, and he discussed them with the Saints. Clearly it's okay then to discuss and rejoice in the evidences pointing to its authenticity.
LETTER 7 !
Correct. The church is going soft, and bowing to the secular progs worldwide. I’m over it.
It's also okay to be soberly reminded your religion is false when you look at the evidence that proves this religion is a sham. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young are both adulterers and false prophets who slept with kids, stole other men's wives, and did so much egregious stuff. Mormons teach native Americans came from Jerusalem, when common sense and DNA studies prove they are asiatic. So much nonsense in this cult, and so much cult abuse. Mormons follow Stephen Hassan's BITE model perfectly. Cult, cult, cult, demon religion
13:57
I think it can be 51% proven. Just enough that it'll always inevitably be left up to our faith and agency to accept it or not.
History isn’t faith. It existed and it wasn’t the Bom history claimed. Ignoring that isn’t faith
@@shawnbradford2243 If I’m reading your comment right, you’re saying that history is a matter of facts not faith, and that the BOM is factually wrong?
That’s a very simplistic view. Let’s say I’m in a carriage tumbling down a hill, and can’t see outside the carriage. Is the better decision to stay in the carriage or jump out?
Now there certainly is factually better choice, the reality of what’s going on outside the carriage is a matter of fact, not faith. But we don’t know enough about what’s going on outside to make a factually objective opinion.
Maybe it’s even the case that we have a couple indicators that jumping out is safer, but not enough to make us confident that we’ll be okay if we jump out of a speeding vehicle, that’s a pretty big leap of faith. Then again, staying in the carriage is a leap of faith in its own right.
Maybe it’s the same with the Book of Mormon, we have some historical indicators both ways, but ultimately it’s upto us which leap of faith we’re going to take.
@@gordianknot9595 The evidence that it’s not historical is that everyone (including the author) universally agrees that it’s a work of fiction, and we could very easily disprove things in it, such as there being a court case as described.
Compared to the Book of Mormon, there is very little positive evidence against its historicity, and some very good positive evidence for it. For example, all the evidence shown by the Stick of Joseph, such as Nahom. That’s a wild coincidence, that kind of thing doesn’t just happen by chance.
@@gordianknot9595 Your to kill a mockingbird analogy really doesn’t work. We can examine and disprove every possibility for where it could have taken place. Court documents are very specific, it would include the full names of all parties involved. It’s not one dude with the last name Robinson. We know the full names of the lawyer, witnesses, victim, judge, and defendant. We know the details of the case and important qualifiers like the defendant is missing an arm. We could check every single court case that took place in Alabama during those years and comprehensively prove it’s fictional.
The Book of Mormon details a lost civilization from a thousand years ago in a part of the world known for lost civilizations. And yes, we don’t know exactly where it took place, but that’s because there are just too many viable options, despite all the specific geographic criteria the Book of Mormon puts forth. We have professionally surveyed less than 1% of Mesoamerica, and of the few sites we’ve designated within that 1%, less than 10% have been excavated. Not to mention that we barely know anything of their language and history. What kind of evidence are you even looking for? A signpost in English that says “welcome to Zarahemla?” Well according to the Book of Mormon itself, Zarahemla was wiped off the face of the earth. And that’s just a few of the issues with finding proof in Mesoamerica, which does not even mention all the other viable models and their obstacles. However, despite all of this, we have found very good positive evidence supporting the claims of the Book of Mormon.
@@gordianknot9595 That assumes 99.99% of everyone in the world has even heard of the Book of Mormon, they certainly haven’t all read it and looked into the evidence surrounding it. Not only that, but you don’t acknowledge their faulty motive. Most people don’t disbelieve the Book of Mormon because of its content, they disbelieve is because their worldview presupposes there can’t be modern prophets like Joseph Smith. If they are familiar with the Book of Mormon’s content, they brush it off as being ridiculous and rely on the popular consensus that Native Americans only came from the bearing strait, which has long since been disproven. This is the exact same rationale used to dismiss heliocentrism: it goes against the popular religion, and just sounds ridiculous anyway.
It is so refreshing to me at 73, to see young men testify of what is true! I love your interactions and impressions regarding the history of the Book of Mormon... keep it up!
I've always thought it was interesting that the Church openly declares where they believe the empty Tomb in Jerusalem to be, and walking where Jesus walked to be a sacred experience, and all the work they've put into restoring historical Church sites and encouraging visitors, so it's built into our DNA to WANT to visit these sacred lands, and therefore natural to want to know the locations of the Book of Mormon lands. So for those reasons, I think it's important to seek, and if found, it would be no more of a distraction than us wanting to visit any other sacred places. That said, I can still be right in line with the Church's statement about why they don't make a definitive statement about locations as it is still unknown. I believe evidences are to be found, just as many are found for the Bible, and will be revealed in time. Thanks for the work you are doing!
Thank. you for all your broadcasts. They have been very helpful.
Love what you’re doing and appreciate that great final message!
Field Museum in Chicago had a display saying the most common Mayan hieroglyph is “and it came to pass.”
😂
Source? Citation.
In addition, there were a lot of events in the BoM that seem to have shown up in present day. Not just the gadianton robbers though. How about the conversion of Alma the Younger? The sons of Mosiah? Enos? etc. I happen to know, personally, the power of those transformations because I have had them. Having that experience granted me the ability to give the greatest number of people the greatest amount of forgiveness. The pandemic taught me a lot about that. But the BoM isn't true just because of historical date, but because I can testify that the experiences of those who lived in that time are real and powerful. I love the Book of Mormon AND the Bible. They connect in very real ways because the real test of each of their teachings is, "Did Stephen rise from the dead? Did Paul really change? Did Peter really raise someone from the dead?" The answer to those are all "YES" but only to those who have actually done it. To the rest of society, it remains a mystery. These, I believe, are the miracles that will overcome much of our corrupt society, if we can seek it out.
I think one of the most intriguing things you said on this video was that we have narrowed the historical questions down from 205-34. I wonder if you could find someone who, instead of doubting the gospel truth because of the 34, has looked at the other 34 from the standpoint of "well, there are 171 that have been borne out. I wonder what I can do to see the other 34 from a different perspective?" What an interview that would be. LOL
Being afraid to look at evidence around the Book of Mormon is like being afraid to look at evidence for the Bible. Don't be afraid. The book is true. God has not given us a heart of fear. Who knows exactly what you'll find but God likes effort, faith and humble inquiring minds.
I believe it's true but why is there pictures of a man that isn't really Jesus drawn and hung in churches
You can believe anything you want. I will stick with the Bible.
Since both the Bible and the Book of Mormon are simply records of the people and Gods dealings with the people living either in the middle east or the Americans, why would there be any logical or rational reason to disbelieve either?
Both contain the gospel of Jesus Christ! It makes sooo much sense to me that a single translation (Book of Mormon) will have less errors, less opportunity for the mistakes of men than several translations (Bible)
It makes absolutely zero sense to me that God would provide His love & guidance ONLY to those dwelling in the middle east & not provide His love & guidance to His children living elsewhere!
One prophet at a time only makes sense in a world like we have today, a global world where all corners are easily accessible! It makes no sense in an ancient world where those in the land first give by God do not know & have no idea of the existence of His children in/on another continent!
IT REALLY IS SIMPLE, ONLY THE NATURAL MAN, WHO IS AN ENEMY TO GOD & HAS BEEN FROM THE BEGINNING MAKE SIMPLE THINGS SEEM COMPLEX!!
🤷🏽♂️🤔🙄 😆😅😂🤣
If the Book of Mormon were true, we’d be able to find these massive civilizations. Because even small civilizations leave a small trace. They leave languages and they leave places that can be seen and they leave civilization markers. There’s nothing for the Book of Mormon.
@Sirach144 My personal opinion is that they were the Hopewell civilization.
I read the Book of Mormon last year. If any of that stuff happened there’d be literally TONS of evidence. Swords, chariots, machines, money, art, transaction records…..
You’d be able to drill into the dirt and lake beds and find pollen from wheat that predates the Europeans bringing it here.
I’d like to see the two of you discuss this with legitimate archaeologists.
Stop already, a testimony won't come from facts or reality. Just believe what you are told and leave the evidence behind...
Man, you guys are such brothers! Always interrupting, correcting, and razzing each other. I can tell which one is the "big" brother. You crack me up. Yet you make a great team.
Keep up your good and important work.
Message well received on not getting too wrapped up in the where instead of the why the Book of Mormon was given to us. I hope that didn't sound "dumb" or "stupid."
Neal A Maxwell said it best. The lord will never take the Book of Mormon or Bible out of the realm of faith but there will be enough evidence to make certain the critics cannot have a a one-sided argument. The Bible places being historical in the end does not prove Jesus Christ was resurrected and the savior. That comes strictly as Peter discovered by revelation. Hugh Nibley(and Tad Callister) both have shown quite well that time vindicates the prophets and the Book Of Mormon.
Nibley and Callister have done no such thing.
The physical setting of the NT is proven fact. If there were no physical evidence for it, we'd rightly ascribe it to mythology, in its' entirety.
This is not the case with The Book of Mormon, despite the best protestations of LDS Apologists to the contrary.
The Book of Mormon is another powerful witness of The Holy Bible, that Jesus Christ condescends, lives, ministers, heals, suffered for our sins, is crucified, and rose again. The Book of Mormon backs up those wonderful claims about the Son of God… it is glorious and makes my soul long to be like Him. To trust Him and trust in His goodness and delight in delivering those who love and trust Him. ☀️💕
@@rodneyjamesmcguireI get that you believe you are doing God a service. John 16:2. Do you understand are repeating the words of an accuser? Revelation 12 :10. By that we thank you for making our point. Matthew 5: 10-12
Nevertheless, we are a joyful Acts 2: 46, peaceful Phillipians 4:7 people, we forgive you Collosions 3:13, love you 1st Corinthians 13:4,5 and invite you to join us on the Holy Highway or Covenant Path of Isaiah 35!
@@rconger24 I didn't say anything about God.
The Bible is interesting but quoting scripture to try to demonstrate something is like saying I should be nice so Santa will bring presents.....
"I will try the faith of my people."
Hello guys, I used to live in Utah, off and on for about 12 years, and I have respect for the church and it's followers. However, you have some problems here.
For instance at 7:15 in this video, you say God would have left "a lot more" physical evidence here if he wanted us to know a 100%. Saying "a lot more"
implies there is some. But is there any physical evidence that's been found anywhere in the Americas that is still here, in a museum or in the church's
possession, that is positively linked to Jaredite or Nephite or Lamanite culture? Any coins, swords, tools, weapons, structures, reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics, or other physical artifacts that are
definitively linked to any group from the BOM? Something that even non member researchers agree on? I don't think so. Also, is there any location from the BOM in the Americas that is confirmed to be a BOM site? (except for maybe Hill Cumorah). Where was Zarahemla, or the River Sidon? What is the narrow neck of land? Your own researchers can't seem to agree themselves. Until you have some of these things you don't really have "evidence" per se. You can get the anachronisms dowe to zero, but that's not evidence. Just like the plural of anecdote is not evidence, a lack of anachronisms is not evidence either. It's amazing that if the BOM is true, and all that happened therein is real, that after nearly 200 years you have no physical evidence. And it's not like people haven't looked. Do you know the story of Thomas Stuart Ferguson? I assume you do but if not it's quite interesting. Your church membership would grow tremendously if you had real, convincing, physical proof. Anyway, good luck with your work here, you seem like nice and sincere people, like most Mormons I have known.
“…left them on Earth.” (Speaking of the plates) already sounds fantasy land to me; but I nevertheless am intrigued by the Book because of the substance I’ve found in it so far…it just makes me ask questions; like: if it wasn’t written or translated by Joseph Smith in 3 months, then where did it come from?
6:49 where did you guys buy those gold plates? I want to buy a set myself.
I couldn’t care less where the BOM happened, but still cool to have a space for those who do in the church culture. Just love the BOM for what it does: bring people to Christ and inspire changing of hearts.
You should care because there are certain promises and covenants associated with the promised land.
@@keithbleazard9388 I’m listening
Ok I’m not lds, I did go for several months to try and understand. I have read up until a little into 3 Nephi. In first Nephi when they’re in the desert before they come to Americas, I swear the meat is ceviche. I read it and it sounded exactly like that. A member of the bishop rig was impressed and the missionaries thought I was crazy. I really don’t think Joseph Smith would’ve known what ceviche was. I’ve seen what I think are contradictions but then I’ve seen things like that that do sound “God inspired.” What do you think?
Where can you buy that Good plates box? ❤😊
I love your content and the work you are doing but I have to disagree with you guys. In my mind it matters IMMENSELY where the book of mormon took place. All you have to do is go back to the source. Joseph and Oliver. Read letter VII from Oliver Cowdery. Read the Zelph account. Read the D&C accounts where the first missions to the Lamanites took place. We know where Cumorah is. We know where Joseph got the plates. That does not mean that the Lamanites did not eventually go South after 400 AD and mix with other Asian migrations to make up the Mayans, Inca's etc after those final battles at Cumorah.
The truth is the truth. Deal with it. Doesn't fit into the popular paradigm? I'm sorry, but that bad tooth needs to go! When did we decide we needed to pussy-foot around with the facts? Let's wholeheartedly embrace the Truth. It takes less effort. Onwards, young men!
..thanks guys. Greetings from Auckland. Semper Fi
Welcome!
Apologies upfront for my long-winded response that most will not read through. LOL 😴
Whether the Book of Mormon is a translation or a revelation, or a combination of the two, we find ourselves pondering why God would permit it to contain so many anachronisms. This list, which is not comprehensive, presented without specific ranking, raises questions about the books' historical authenticity over its alignment with pre-Columbian anthropology, archaeology, and all other related pre-columbian studies. It's as though these anachronisms were intentionally placed by God, challenging the entire body of research to reconcile with the Book of Mormon's narrative. The narrative of the BOM stands in opposition to all pre-columbian anthropology. There is no historian or anthropologist outside of BYU and even many within BYU to support the Book of Mormon as historical.
Note:
I still think it's worth recognizing that the Book of Mormon may still offer value to many individuals, serving as a unifying force that helps foster shared ideals, dreams, goals, and rituals. We can see within Jewish culture and practice there are many, many of those who do not hold a literalist view of the Old Testament and yet find meaning connection and value within the Traditions customs and rituals centered around the Old Testament and modern Jewish cultural community. Will Mormonism survive the same way? Hard to say, though, I think there is still something worth saving and keeping here.
1. Horses: The Book of Mormon mentions horses, but there is no evidence of horses in the pre-Columbian Americas during the time periods described.
2. Elephants: Similar to horses, elephants are mentioned but did not exist in the Americas during the relevant time periods.
3. Wheat and Barley: These crops are mentioned but were not present in pre-Columbian Americas.
4. Silk: Mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not known to have been present in the Americas before European contact.
5. Steel: References to steel weapons and tools, when steel-making was not practiced in the Americas during that time.
6. Chariots: Chariots are mentioned but were not used in the pre-Columbian Americas.
7. Cattle, Pigs, and Goats: These animals are referred to but were not present in pre-Columbian Americas.
8. Bees: Honeybees are mentioned, but the type of beekeeping described did not exist in the Americas before the arrival of Europeans.
9. Coins: The Book of Mormon describes a system of coins, which were not used in ancient America.
10. Compass: The "Liahona" is described as a type of compass, but this technology would have been anachronistic.
11. Windows: Windows, as described in the Book of Mormon, were not used in the construction of the time.
12. Revolving Doors: Mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not consistent with ancient American architecture.
13. Scimitars: These specific swords were not used in the Americas during the Book of Mormon times.
14. Glass: Mentioned but not produced in pre-Columbian America.
15. Bellows: Used for stoking fires, mentioned in the Book of Mormon but not used in the time described.
16. Cimeters: A type of sword that is mentioned but did not exist in pre-Columbian America.
17. Advanced Metalwork: The book describes techniques that were not known in the ancient Americas.
18. Seven-day week: Mention of a seven-day week, which was not used in the pre-Columbian Americas.
19. Language: Some critics point to the use of linguistic features, including proper names and phrases, that they believe to be anachronistic.
20. Biblical Quotations: Certain passages closely resemble sections of the King James Bible, leading some to argue that this reflects 19th-century influences rather than ancient ones.
21. Iron Working: The Book mentions extensive iron working, which did not exist in pre-Columbian America.
22. Domesticated Sheep: Mentioned in the Book but were not present in pre-Columbian America.
23. Brass: Described in the Book of Mormon, but evidence of widespread brass working in pre-Columbian America is lacking.
24. Figs and Olives: Both of these are mentioned in the text but were not cultivated in the ancient Americas.
25. Synagogues: The Book of Mormon mentions synagogues, which were not present in pre-Columbian America.
26. Harvesting with Sickle: The use of sickles for harvesting is described, but sickles were not used in the Americas at that time.
27. Cement Houses: While cement was known to ancient Mesoamerica, the specific technology described in the Book of Mormon is seen as inconsistent with what was used at that time.
28. Greek Words: Some critics argue that certain words used in the Book of Mormon have Greek origins, which would be anachronistic for the time and place described. Like the word Christ.
29. Breastplates and Helmets: The type and technology of armor described are seen as inconsistent with what was used in ancient America.
30. Crossbows: Descriptions in the Book of Mormon seem to refer to crossbows, a weapon not known in pre-Columbian America.
31. Wine and Vineyards: The Book of Mormon mentions the cultivation of vineyards and the consumption of wine, but there's limited evidence of viticulture in pre-Columbian America.
32. Swords and Cimeters: While earlier points touched on scimitars, the widespread use of swords in battles as described in the Book of Mormon is seen as inconsistent with pre-Columbian warfare.
33. Faith in Christ: Critics argue that the Book of Mormon presents a fully developed Christian theology hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus, which they consider anachronistic.
34. Seer Stones: While seer stones and similar objects were used in various cultures, the specific use described in the Book of Mormon has been viewed as more reflective of 19th-century folk beliefs.
35. Gold Plates: The concept of religious records being kept on metal plates, while not entirely foreign to ancient cultures, is not supported by archeological finds from pre-Columbian America.
36. Secret Combinations: Critics suggest that the portrayal of secret societies or combinations in the Book of Mormon seems to reflect concerns of Joseph Smith's era, particularly anti-Masonic sentiments, more than ancient societies.
37. Plows: The Book of Mormon references plowing, which is inconsistent with the agricultural practices of ancient Americans who used different methods of cultivation.
38. Flocks and Herds: The frequent mention of managing large flocks and herds is inconsistent with known practices in pre-Columbian America.
39. Raising Grain: The Book of Mormon mentions the raising of vast amounts of grain, but the specifics are seen as inconsistent with pre-Columbian agricultural practices.
Also, the claim that the Book of Mormon contains words and phrases specific to the King James Version (KJV) is quite significant in the debate over the text's authenticity.
1. Italics in the KJV: The KJV translators used italicized words to indicate words that were added to the English text to make the meaning clearer but were not present in the original Hebrew or Greek. Some critics claim that these italicized words also appear in the Book of Mormon's quotations from the Bible, suggesting a direct dependency on the KJV.
2. Specific Translation Choices: Critics point to specific words and phrases in the Book of Mormon that match the KJV but differ from other translations. For example, the use of the word "charity" to translate the Greek word "agape" is distinctive to the KJV and is also found in the Book of Mormon.
3. Matching Errors and Inconsistencies: Some critics argue that the Book of Mormon reproduces not only the distinctive wording of the KJV but also some of its inconsistencies and perceived errors. They claim that these similarities are too specific to be coincidental and demonstrate that the Book of Mormon is drawing directly from the KJV.
4. Phrases Not Applicable to the Book of Mormon Context: Critics also point to phrases that are carried over from the KJV even when they don't make sense in the context of the Book of Mormon. These include some idiomatic expressions and figures of speech that are specific to the Jacobean English of the KJV.
Empirical science is Observable. When something isn't observable nothing is proven one way or the other, so all your non-observations by your speculating archeologists and anthropologists mean nothing at all. Perhaps you can explain all the museums in the mid-west showing artifacts from the Hopewell culture which archeologists and anthropologists from mid-western universities have put together. They claim this culture appeared on the scene around 500 BC in northern Florida, migrated north through the Ohio valley, and ended up in the Great Lakes area then disappeared around 400 AD.
@bobrussell8339
Thank you for replying and holding good faith-discussion. I will look up some of the information you provided . Thank you.
The idea that the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is a common principle in logic and science. However, in certain contexts, the lack of evidence can indeed be evidence against a claim, especially when evidence would be expected if the claim were true. Here's a brief explanation:
1. Expected Evidence: If a claim predicts that we should find certain evidence under specific conditions, and we don't find that evidence after thorough investigation, then the lack of evidence can be taken as evidence against the claim.
2. Example: Imagine someone claims there's a full-grown elephant in a small room. If you look inside and see no elephant, the absence of evidence (not seeing the elephant) is solid evidence of the absence of the elephant.
3. Bayesian Reasoning: In Bayesian probability, one updates their beliefs based on new evidence. If you expect evidence for a hypothesis and don't find it, the probability of that hypothesis being true decreases.
4. High-Quality Search: The strength of "absence of evidence" as evidence against a claim increases with the quality and thoroughness of the search. If a cursory look finds no evidence, it might not be compelling. But if a comprehensive, well-conducted search turns up nothing, the absence becomes more significant.
5. Background Knowledge: Whether absence of evidence counts as evidence of absence often depends on what we already know. For example, we might be more inclined to see a lack of evidence as meaningful if it aligns with our existing understanding of a phenomenon.
6. Null Hypothesis: In scientific testing, researchers often start with a null hypothesis (e.g., "This drug has no effect"). If experiments provide no evidence to refute the null hypothesis, it stands (though it's not proven).
2a. Alternative Explanations: If there are alternative explanations for why the evidence is lacking, those must be considered. If the alternatives are less plausible than the original claim, the lack of evidence may not be very significant.
For example, if someone claims that there's an elephant in their garage, and upon looking, you find no evidence of an elephant (no large footprints, no droppings, no elephant sounds), the lack of evidence can be taken as evidence against the claim. The expectation would be that an elephant in a garage would leave some evidence of its presence.
In science, this principle is often applied. If a hypothesis predicts certain observations and those observations are not made even under ideal conditions, it's evidence against that hypothesis.
In sum, while absence of evidence isn't always evidence of absence, under specific conditions where evidence is expected but not found, it can be evidence against a claim.
@@IIIJT lol I'm very familiar with the scientific method, philosophy and logic. Did you notice, however, that your illustrations don't fit the situation. If there were a claim that the Nephite civilization lived in one specific square mile, and you didn't find any evidence of that, you might have a point, but no one is making such a claim. The Nephite lands could be anywhere in North or South America. Until there's been an archeological dig throughout all of North and South America, where every shovel full of dirt has been sifted, archeologists can't make any broad conclusions about archeology and The Book of Mormon You need to keep in mind that EVERY STEP IN THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS FAITH-BASED. There is nothing more "ify" in the world of science than the writings of archeologists and anthropologists. Every paragraph they write is full of qualified adjectives such as "possibly, maybe, perhaps, might be, if, or, etc." They weren't there to actually see where and what took place so they are just speculating on what happened and where.
@bobrussell8339
I largely concur with the sentiment expressed, though I'm uncertain about the definitive criteria you are suggesting to form your conclusions.
For instance, to elaborate on the Book of Abraham (BOA):
Aside from a single professor at Brigham Young University (BYU), the global community of Egyptologists, irrespective of religious affiliation or cultural background, unanimously assert that the papyri presented by Joseph Smith don't align with his translation. This solitary BYU professor not only contradicts the broader consensus in Egyptology but also diverges from a multitude of anthropological fields that study Egyptian culture and history. He even acknowledges his inability to validate the translation provided. Moreover, anthropologists from Muslim, Christian, secular, agnostic, atheist, Hindu, and Buddhist backgrounds may have varying perspectives on the nature of existence. Yet, they concur in not endorsing Joseph Smith's interpretation of the papyri found in LDS scripture.
Consequently, we are faced with two possibilities: Either the collective wisdom of Egyptology and its associated disciplines has erred regarding Joseph Smith's translation, or Joseph Smith was mistaken. Accepting the Book of Abraham emerges as a matter of faith, not of historical veracity.
I must add that none of this is meant to discount the importance of groups of people centered around rituals, customs, and traditions of morals, ethics, and values.
@@IIIJT Thank you for being kind and courteous in your responses. It is a pleasure to have a discussion without acrimony.
What "definitive criteria" am I suggesting? How do you make the huge jump from a discussion about The Book of Mormon to the Book of Abraham by saying, "For instance?" I don't see how the Book of Abraham is an example of anything we discussed previously. Please explain.
Regarding the Book of Abraham, who is the "single professor at BYU? Kerry Muhlestein perhaps? He is an Egyptologist who has written a book about the Book of Abraham. I have watched videos by him. It is his opinion that the Book of Abraham was a revelatory process directly from God as was The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Book of Moses. It was not an ordinary translation by Joseph Smith who didn't know Egyptian.
You must really get around to have encountered every Egyptologist on the planet and to have heard them "unanimously assert that the papyri presented by Joseph Smith don't align with his translation." Since the facts are that members of the church purchased four papyri and several mummies from a traveling showman in the 1830s. The Book of Abraham was translated from the "long scroll" which no longer exists and was believed to be burned in the Chicago fire. Only tiny fragments of some of the other three scrolls exist which have nothing to do with the Book of Abraham. Conclusion: Neither Joseph Smith or anyone else has "presented papyri" to the "global community of Egyptologists for examination."
Appreciate you fellas 👏
As one with a PhD in Geography, those who minimize the importance of Geography do not understand geography. Our LDS critiques are asking why are their no maps in the Book of Mormon, which is a very fair questions. Geographers teach that history and religion without geography are fairytales. Those who foolishly believe Geography is not important should maybe tear all the maps out of the back of their Bibles. Notice the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 flew all the way to Israel and went to Jerusalem to testify of the divinity of Jesus Christ. If Geography is not important, why did they not just go to the City of Jerusalem movie set near the south end of Utah Lake to testify or go to Las Vegas if Geography is not important. We need to stop fooling ourselves and establish the location of Book of Mormon events. The ruins in MesoAmerica are Hindu and have nothing to do with the events described in the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith knew and he taught the peoples of the Book of Mormon lived in the US. Stop throwing Joseph Smith under the bus.
But you of course would know, regardless of what Smith claimed, there's nothing about US geography that syncs with the Book of Mormon text.
And geography is just the tip of the iceberg of problems. There's no evidence yet discovered from any applicable field of science that supports what the Book of Mormon claims about the ancient Western Hemisphere.
I love archeology and historical artifacts and by taking that love and intertwining it with the Book of Mormon, I’ve completely revitalized my desire to really studying the Book of Mormon. Some people can read the same book over and over and stay content, but after my Nth time reading it became a chore. By layering in the hard evidence god has allowed to be revealed, it has opened up my mind to so many more mysteries of god. It was a little disheartening when the church came out with their statement as I felt it was an overreach of caution, but for others maybe it was necessary.
There is no hard evidence, or really any evidence, for that matter, yet discovered.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire It is a fairytale.
What are the 502 anachronisms and the remaining 34?
saintsunscripted.com/faith-and-beliefs/the-restoration-of-christs-church/anachronisms-book-of-mormon/
This is a great article.
Love your show keep it up. 😊
Rockin it brothers! Hey - CHIASTIC writing! I hope you have that on the docket for an upcoming episode. To me, CHIASTIC writing is one of the most convincing evidences that Joseph didnt just make this book up out of his head. Keep up the good work!
There are lots of counter arguments to the chiasmus found in the BoM, which is why the Church hasn’t included it.
The Book of Mormon contains the greatest example of a chiasmus , ever recored. One of the Earliest and the Longest recorded, Joseph was translating it in a daily rhythm for only like 64 days... Chiasmus aspect is Astonishing alone but the meat of the Book of Mormon, is on many levels higher than a specificly hard form of writting, which is more like the milk of the scriptures.
Sure there are counter arguements regarding chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, but I find the arguements that favor the Book of Mormon being of ancient origin and not simply a work of fiction by Joseph Smith to be far more compelling.
@@michaelbennett7561
So, how do you explain then that an Orthodox Jewish family arrives in the Americas and all of a sudden lives a perfectly Christian life 600BCE?
How did Joseph Sr. dream get into the BoM?
How did Nephi kill Laban, put on this clothes (which must have been soaked with blood) and nobody notices all the blood, and nobody notices the different voice, face, walk?
How can it be that 300,000 soldiers fought in the last big battle around the Hill Cumorah and not a single piece of evidence of a huge battle has been found despite of all the digging?
How did Deutero-Isaiah (which was written after Lehi supposedly left Jerusalem) get into the Book of Mormon?
How is it that there is no single piece of evidence in the languages that anybody spoke Hebrew in the Americas? Why can nowhere in the Middle East or in the Americans any evidence of reformed Egyptian be found?
Why do the reformed Egyptian characters all look like our normal letters but with a bit of ornamentation (dots, circles) added?
How did the story of the Tower of Babel get in the BoM? Bible scholars are sure that this event is only a myth that people used to explain why all people speak different languages. It never really happened. Different languages have existed way before.
If the BoM is the most correct book and it is complete, why does it not mention celestial marriage? The two priesthoods? Endowment?
Why is there no prophecy in the BoM about events that took place after 1825?
How did the King James Version of the Bible, which is not the best translation, end up being quoted a lot in the BoM? Shouldn't it be the most correct book?
@@jasontolley4890 In order to have a discussion about the "chiastic content of the Book of Mormon" you'd have to get folks to actually open and read it.
Unfortunately this is asking way too much of our antagonistic, non-member friends and won't win many converts. It is however, good reinforcement for those of us who have read it and already have a testimony.
An abundance of "chiastic writing" means next-to-nothing to those who have no eyes to see such things.
3:25 The term "watchers" is used in both the Book of Enoch and the Book of the Giants.
In the Book of Enoch, the watchers are a group of angels who were sent to Earth to watch over humanity. However, they fell from grace and began to have sexual relations with human women, giving birth to the Nephilim, a race of giants. The watchers' actions angered God, who sent a flood to destroy the Nephilim and punish humanity.
In the Book of the Giants, the watchers are also a group of angels who fell from grace. However, they are said to have taught humans forbidden knowledge, such as how to make weapons and jewelry.
Those books come from Ethiopia. You just took your first step in realizing the Book of Mormon was written in Ethiopia by Ethiopian Jews.
Unembodied spirits having sex? I don't think so.
Thanks for this ❤
Thanks for your work.
Have you guys interviewed the guy that wrote The Burning Book? It gives real meaning to the title page.
If God told everyone what church is His true church, nobody would want to ponder, seek or struggle to find the truth. Many of if us would lose the opportunity to experience hardship, deep conviction, testimony of why this church is true. There would be no testimony, no need to seek, no struggling for truth, if God gave us everything without struggles & doubts...
The reason we seek Gods truth is because we are looking for answers, truth, comfort. ..and to get there, we need to have doubts, we need to struggle, we need have pain.... Without these obstacles we wouldnt search intently for Gods truth & comfort.
So what am I paying tithing for…? If Joseph Smith wasn’t actually who he said he was, why do I need to keep going to church?
I have a very different question to answer. Would it be at all possible that I could come onto your show and share with you my testimony of Lord Jesus and his most amazing love for us? Would that be at all possible??
true, even if the plates are still here or the sword of Laban etc. I am not sure if people will still enter the water of baptism.
I don't doubt the ability of people to reject the evidence of one's eyes.
This video reminds me of a talk by Elder Quinton L. Cook entitled "Valiant in the Testimony of Jesus Christ". He reminisced about staying in a cabin on his father's ranch. There was a power pole right outside the window that distracted him from the view of the property. To me, focusing to much on where the Book of Mormon took place can become a distraction to how beautifully the Gospel of Christ is played out in the Book of Mormon.
For me the evidences are not what physically prove the Book of Mormon true, but it helps gives me insight and understanding of it better. Things like why things were done a certain way and help us see things through the lense of when it was written, instead of our Modern eyes. Understanding the Historical part, for me enhances things that I would have missed otherwise.
It does not matter if it is fiction. I don't mind being deceived if it increases my faith...
EVIDENCE Smith Boys were highly educated:
Excerpt from Hyrum Smith: a life of integrity by Jeffrey S. O’Driscoll
In 1811, the Smith family moved to West Lebanon, New Hampshire, where Catherine was born on July 28, 1812.[22] By then, things were looking up for the family. Lucy remembered, “We settled ourselves down and began to contemplate, with joy and satisfaction, the prosperity which had attended our recent exertions.” Hyrum and his siblings had received little formal education to this point, but their parents made arrangements for Hyrum to attend the academy at Hanover and for the other children to attend a “common school.”[23]
The academy, or Moor’s Charity School, was associated with Dartmouth College in Hanover, a few miles north of the Smith home and on the same side of the Connecticut River. Lucy did not explain why Hyrum was chosen to attend, but it may have been simply because his cousin of about the same age, Stephen Mack, was already a student there.
One of the school’s tutors, Andrew Mack, was also a distant relative.[24]
Eleazar Wheelcock founded the Moor’s School in Lebanon, Connecticut, in 1754. Its curriculum extended beyond simply educating students; rather, it focused on preparing them to become teachers and preachers. In 1769, the school relocated to Hanover, New Hampshire, and became associated with the newly founded Dartmouth College. With the establishment of a common school in Hanover in 1808, the academy further refined its focus to prepare able students for additional scholarly education. But it maintained its religious influence, and students attended daily chapel services at the White Church on campus. If Hyrum attended in 1811, as Lucy seems to indicate, he joined a class of thirty-one students, which grew to fifty-six by 1814.[25]
School records are incomplete, but the “Hiram Smith” listed in the August 1814 record was one of the “charity scholars” studying arithmetic.[26] Charity scholars were not merely students with limited financial means. The designation also implied remarkable intellectual potential. School president John Wheelcock personally followed the progress of these student scholars, who were supported from his limited funds. Hyrum’s designation as a charity scholar in 1814 implies that he performed well academically during his previous years there.
The outbreak of “typhus fever” in late 1812 interrupted Hyrum’s education.[27] He came home sick from school, perhaps at the end of the quarter in February 1813. His whole family was eventually infected, but Hyrum, despite his own illness, was determined to do his part to alleviate their suffering. He relieved his mother and sat at Joseph’s side for days or weeks until Nathan Smith-an attending surgeon at Dartmouth College, whose daughter Malvina attended class with Hyrum-operated on Joseph’s leg to eradicate the infection. Whether Hyrum and Malvina’s association was significant or even known to those involved is not recorded.
As Joseph’s leg improved, his family sent him to his Uncle Jesse’s home in Salem, Massachusetts, in hopes that “the sea-breezes would be of service to him.” The rest of the family, financially devastated by a year of illness, moved to Norwich, Vermont. Hyrum’s return to the Moor’s School now required him to travel about four miles east of his home and across the Connecticut River. His youngest brother, Don Carlos, was born in Norwich on March 15, 1816.
Thank you! I’m glad you sent this to disprove your original false statement of “Did you know Hyrum attended Dartmouth??”. I love how the argument from people against joseph has shifted from “He was too uneducated, someone else had to have done it!!!” to what it is now,”Joseph was a theological genius! His brother went to a prep school of Dartmouth for 3 years when he was 11!!!” Again, please email me if you want to have an actual conversation rather than spitting out empty tropes from ExmoReddit. thank you. jackson@thestickofjoseph.com
@@thestickofjoseph Hyrum clearly DID attend the Dartmouth educational system, AND DID have access to the Dartmouth theological resources of his relative who was a distinguished Dartmouth professor of theology. Hyrum was acknowledged as having exceptional intellecutal ability. His time there was more than enough to form significant ongoing relationships to Dartmouth educators, some of whom were relatives..
Are YOU saying that the mormon church did not promote a narrative that the Smith's were uneducated?
I promise not to engage in empty tropes. I sent you solid historical research (from a pro mormon source), and the references to the historic primary sources are easily available. CAN WE DISCUSS THE PRIMARY HISTORY RESOURCES TOGETHER? (No tropes, including your personal attacks on me for simply wanting to dive into the historical facts)
Yes let’s discuss!!! EMAIL ME AND WE’LL SET IT UP jackson@thestickofjoseph.com
You guys are fun to listen to ☺️
Ever wonder if one of the reasons we aren’t supposed to know the exact location of the Book of Mormon is because the BOM became a witness that Jesus Christ is God of the whole world? Without a precise location being told, it’s easier for us to resonate with it being a global gospel. I’ve heard/read/seen so many evidences and appearance’s of Christ from all continents. Why wouldn’t there be records such as the Book of Mormon elsewheres? That would be an interesting video if you ask me- exploring other witnesses that align with the Christ we read about in the Book of Mormon.
Keep it coming!
I guess the Bible is not for the whole world...
@@johnrowley310 sure it is! I hope the whole world reads the Bible along with the Book of Mormon. I do believe that the original audiences differ, however. The Old Testament was written for the Jews; the New Testament was written for local congregations; the Book of Mormon is quite clear it is for the Jews and the gentiles, the whole earth.
But that’s not even the point. My point was that Jesus was born on one continent and visited another across oceans. It’s amazing to see accounts of Him from everywhere in the world! Asia, Africa, the Americas… truly a god of all the world. The Book of Mormon is just one of those accounts.
Love the “off the cuff” approach.
If the point of faith were to teleport us to the end of the road (IE remove the distance we are to walk) we would have the knowledge of only two steps. The journey not only gives us a greater knowledge, but allows us to become travelers.
Maybe to metaphorical?
Great points guys
Knowing the he location of the Book of Mormon has nothing to do with my salvation. I have my own opinion, and I think it can be backed up, but I could be wrong. I am often wrong. And I'm a big girl. I can handle being wrong. I don't hold it against anyone who disagrees with me. Because frankly, I don't care. But I still think it's cool!
Betty, you go girl... Your belief in Mormonism is provable false but you can handle being deceived, you are one tough cookie.
Having no location is a problem for the foundational claims of Mormonism. The civilization had to exist or Mormonism is false.
I loved this video. You are right: maybe loosey Goosey might be the most rightly tighty. Kidding aside, congratulations!
The gospel topics, essay… Is that written by mid level management of the church?
Who is the author of the Gospel topics essay
In order for it to have any validity in your presentation, don't you think that would be important to identify
The essays are collaborative efforts written by academics and vetted through church departments (history department), which then have an apostle approve its publication. This one was presumably approved by Elder Oaks since he adds a quote that was added into it.
Exactly… Just like the whole thing with the mask in the shot… It comes from the 501 C3 corporate harm of the church… Which is very protective of lawsuits
But if you look at quotes from Joseph Smith, and and the doctrine and covenants and additional apostles… It's pretty clear that the non-501(c)(3) opinion is this is the promised land, and the book of Mormon took place in the continental United States
I love faithful comments so much.
You guys are awesome. Love your content and passion. Seriously… AWESOME.
That said, Jackson, it’s “cognitive dissoNance” not “cognitive dissaDence”. If you’re going to wield the big boy words, it’s best to say them properly.
Also, you said, “…you have to *disband* all reasonable thinking…” I think you meant “dispense with” or “dispose of.”
But you’re STILL awesome.
Carry on.
This is the kind of feedback we need!!!! God bless you!!
Many people forget that people before the turn of the century knew far less about historical truths just for the Bible but many were so faithful in just its teachings.
The teachings and words is what keeps faith in any religious denomination, not historical validation.
WE all know the Book of Mormon is made up like The Book of Abraham. But even though it is a lie it builds faith.
Keep up the great work guys!
When Christ asked his apostles "Whom say ye that I am?" Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God!" Then Jesus explained something more vitally important than all scripture. He said to Peter "Flesh and blood has not main known unto you but my Father which is in Heaven!" Then he explained that this concept and principle of Revelation is the Foundation Rock on which He would build his church.
Great point
And without Apostolic leadership, we don't have the Rock of Revelation. So much for Solo Scriptura as the authority-- hence 40,000 different Christian denominations with differing doctrines. That doesn't sync with Paul's "till we all come to a unity of the faith" speech.
@@ramsrnja
@@bobwilkinson1217 Hence, every time I go to the temple the doctrine has changed, Glad I Didn't have to ever slit my throat....
Please be aware that it isn't the doctrine that has changed. It is people's perceptions that have. I received the endowment in April 1073 without any temple preparation except for a high degree of scripture knowledge. Please remember that the Romany Empire persecuted the saints and tortured them to reveal sacred things. They slit their throats, cut off their heads, sawed people in half. Please remember that the Lord does not threaten us in Temple worship. But people got the wrong ideas about the temple endowment and so it was changed -- the doctrine and our covenants with God have not changed. @@johnrowley310
NO PLEASE DON'T STOP THIS CHANNEL! WE LOVE IT!
Glad to hear that!
What about the rest of the books d and c pearls of great price
All I heard is this church is a cult so heart broken
The Book of Mormon is a veiled autobiography of Joseph Smith and an exposition on his principles. Read it as an allegory in Smith's voice for maximum comprehension, imo
Don't mind the haters who visit here, the devil is strong with them. The devil hates the Book of Mormon, he uses his angels to attack it. Ever notice you don't find people attacking Hinduism and Buddhism all day long? Those religions are not a threat to Satan, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, however, is, it is a HUGE threat to Lucifer.
Neither Hinduism nor Buddhism claim to be the one true church. BIG difference!
@@brucejensen3700 Islam does. How about them?
@@wes2176 Islam might be the most persecuted religion on the planet!
@@brucejensen3700 LOL! No, they're not. In fact, go all over TH-cam and look around. For every Anti-Muslim page there will be three or four Anti-Mormon pages.
I guess facts are hate.
An Atheist says the Bible is a fairy tale. Non Christian will say Jesus is not a God. The Bible recieved many critics about divinity and reality of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon is a witness to the Bible.
the Bible does not need a fake witness.
great eppisode, Looking forward to the descussion on anacronisms. Good to keep in mind not letting differences of opinion harm friendships.
You're totally wrong about the idea that the existence of gold plates, would unequivocally prove the Book of Mormon to be true. Nothing could be further from the truth... If the gold plates were sitting on a table for all to see, handle and examine, we would be thoroughly engaged in arguing over their authenticity, the translation and every other conceivable aspect and with absolutely no regard for the words contained therein or the Savior..
@@gordianknot9595 I said "we" meaning members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and those who are not. Do you honestly believe a stack of gold plates would convince anyone of anything?
@@gordianknot9595 Believe me, I'll earnestly look forward to the open hearts and open minds, which you're assuring me awaits the arrival of physical evidence. But in the meantime, how many witnesses is it going to take? How many signed testimonies and death-bed statements would be enough to convince you to take a chance and open a book?
Doubting Thomas felt the same way... Not until he had physically felt the wounds in Jesus's hands and side, would he accept the risen Lord.
So I choose to believe in my religion based on the Book of Mormon. I could be wrong but then I'm choosing to believe more of Jesus and not less. It's called "faith" and that is something which all Christians should know something about. At the very least I would hope to gain their respect and not their distain.
Am I asking too much?
@@gordianknot9595 Communication between God and man has always been predicated upon faith. There are exceptions of course but for most of us, faith is the key. Faithful Catholics have faith in God but not enough for direct communication with Him. They get their's through intercession of some sort. These are their rules and according to their faith and their religion. So this is the way God communicates with them. So if it's Mary they choose to listen to, then it's Mary they're going to get.
Far be it from me to place limits on God or the way He chooses to answer their prayers. Surely He speaks with them in the manner in which they are prepared to receive.
I'm cautious when it comes to judging Catholics since without them, we'd have no Bible at all.
And "Mormons" don't pray to, see, or worship the mother of Jesus and never have.
@@jamesbaldwin7676 Would me.
Hey guys I know you both. I encourage you to keep reporting and let us decide as wayne may says
The book is its own proof...The book of mormon is not on trial...the people of the world is on trial...with what they do with this book prepared by God for the benefit of His children in these last days.
Fairytales should never be on trial. Read them for fun...
Even though Joseph Smith and other Prophets of the Church have as much as said that it takes place in North America?!
Yes the gaslighting is real!
The Hill Cumorah pageant itself declared the hill to be the place of the last battle and the hill where Joseph retrieved the plates. As did Mormon Doctrine.
You guys seem really nice and sincere but there is no way on this earth that the BOM is a historical document, there just isnt. You can argue that it is a special book, you can even argue that it is of God and will bring happiness and direction to those who read it but you cannot argue that it is historical. The best you can do is say that MAYBE someday it will be shown to be historical, you cannot say that it IS historical and stay intellectually honest. As it stands right now, if you look at the evidence as it is right now, the verdict is non historical. I remember wanting it to be something it just couldnt be and hanging onto the hope that one day it would be but in the end I was left wanting.
STOP it already. Facts hurt faith.........
Who cares if the Book of Mormon can proven true or false? The Bible has been proven 90% true geographically. It hasn't convinced Most Humans of Christ's Divinity.....right? The ONLY thing that matters is that the Holy Ghost testifies that it is true .
False. If there were no evidence for the New Testament setting (physical claims), there would be no reason to consider the supernatural claims as being of eternal value, that supposedly happened there, if "there" isn't real to begin with.
If there was no Bethlehem, no indication of its' existence, then Christ couldn't have been born "there". If there was no Golgotha, then Christ couldn't have died "there".
"There" matters, as does the physical trappings ascribed to "there".
Thus far, there's no "there", from an evidentiary standpoint, for the unique physical claims of The Book of Mormon text.
So true, The journey to Christ is a spiritual one not a physical one the evangelicals are all hell-bent on following physical things that can be proven. They entirely missed the point of the spiritual journey. If they can’t come to know and love the book of Mormon as a testament of Christ through the spirit they will find it extremely difficult to come to know Christ through the spirit.
@@MichaelSaline 1) It's hugely insulting to tell people who are fully believing Christians that they don't know Christ. The same can be said of those who would say that Mormons aren't Christian.
2) The LDS Church, through the Book of Mormon, makes extraordinary physical claims that MUST be valid for the unique faith claims of Mormonism to be true. That is why critics focus on those claims. The Book of Mormon civilization (an entirely physical and extraordinary claim), MUST have existed, or Mormonism fails. All stop. Period.
So did that civilization exist?
@@rodneyjamesmcguire I didn’t say that they don’t know Christ I said you can only know Christ through the spirit by the same spirit you can know the truthfulness of the book of Mormon. For example the Jews at the time of Christ had all the evidences Christ could give them and yet they pridefully clung to some miss read prophecies in their Bible so tightly they couldn’t feel the spirit of the Messiah who is standing right in front of them. I didn’t condemn anyone I just made a point that the journey to Christ is a spiritual one no amount of Bible reading or book of Mormon reading for that matter will bring you to Christ. They are just help sent instructions and Testaments of who he was, is, and will be so we can have faith to seek him. It’s also evident in the day of Pentecost but without the spirit Even the disciples or apostles could not truly know the Christ and be converted to him.
Hebrews11:1 1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. So did that civilization exist? In a word, yes! There is already an abundance of archaeological evidence of great civilizations in north and South America. The question is why is it kept so quiet? Thank you for your comments and concern. have a good day.
@@MichaelSaline Thanks for your clarification of what you meant regarding knowing Christ.
I was once as your are, in a way. Believing LDS, who thought there was evidence of / for the Book of Mormon civilization. I was deeply involved with apologists. I was an early member of FARMS. John Welch was in my Stake Presidency at BYU. From Chiasmus to Cumorah, from the parallelism of Sorenson to the heartland of Wayne May, and everything in between, I devoured it...
Unfortunately, and I sure you won't even think it's possible, but unfortunately, there is no evidence, yet uncovered, for the Book of Mormon civilization. Not some, not a bit, not a little. None.
That's one reason I am no longer LDS.
I love watching you guys on your journey and totally agree that your spiritual journey is more important than historical. I am 71 and read the Book of Mormon for the first time when I was 21. For the last 50 years the Spiritual experience that I received from the Lord changed my life in every way. Back at the beginning I knew the BOM was true and then decided to do a historical study to find out which church succeeded the church after Joseph Smith was killed in 1844. In my studies I saw the BOM denied polygamy and said there was only one God. Joseph Smith’s family did not follow Brigham Young to Utah where he introduced polygamy, Adam-God, celestial marriage and other teachings not taught in the original church. This was proven, by the way, on February 24th,1880 in a U.S. federal court in Lake County, Ohio. The court ruled the RLDS was the legal successor to the church of 1830. Joseph Smith designated his son Joseph Smith III to be his successor, not Brigham Young. In 1860 Joseph Smith III took his father’s place as the prophet/president of the RLDS. In your videos researching the Stick of Joseph I never hear you guys talk about the church’s successor after Joseph Smith’s death.
i love this!
Amen Brothers
Well, there’s a lot that I wish I could say about this, but I think I need to keep it brief. I agree with the brothers here. We need to be reaching out towards each other with an olive branch and making peace and finding things that connect us and unite us, not divide us. The book of Mormon, and all the history that surrounds it, because I do indeed believe it is actually a historical record… Should serve as a beacon, and eventually the Lord made a promise to Joseph that he would cause the earth to reveal the truth of all these things. He has kept his promise, and things are being revealed more and more week by week month by month and year by year. One precept at a time. One fact at a time. One hidden clue at a time is being revealed in my own small way I have also seen these things be revealed, and it has bolstered my faith and made me strong in the lord, even though I know I am still a center and have a long way to go. I believe now more fervently than I ever have in my entire life. I am actually reading the book of Mormon now, and I am understanding it and I can feel the emotions from the people prying out from the pages. For me, this has become a personal thing, and because I am also interested in the archaeology and the history, and I have witnessed things that would otherwise be unexplainable And I have been places that would otherwise have been a mystery because of my faith and my desire to know I have felt the spirit witness to me that some of these things I have seen in these places I have been were important, and there were in fact people who were there and things that happened And those things are within the pages of the different books, compiled by Mormon. Reading his testimony and the testimony of his son Marone I actually made me cry. I’m a masculine man, but I feel like a total wimp compared to people like Marone. The courage and spiritual strength it took for those men to do what they did, and especially at the end to stand alone in an entire vast land is astonishing. How much I wish I was more like them. Speaking of which, I really appreciated having seen both sides of the “debate “with the episode, including Wayne May, and the other episode presenting Keith handy and their different points of view. I’ll tell you something… I think they are both right And when the missing pieces of the puzzle are presented, all of the stories, and both of the Americas will be united through the things that happened both in the book of Mormon, and the things that were not written in the book of Mormon. Remember, there are other records that have not yet been found, or translated and presented to the people. When those records come forth, what an amazing thing it will be. In the meantime, we have to guess, and all the rest is a test of our faith. Do we believe these people lived here and get these things.? I do. For me, there is no debate. I believe this with all my heart, and that’s why I feel things when I read the stories because I know they are real. I’m not a fool and I don’t have cognitive dissonance. I’m educated and I have some training in archaeology, especially in stone tool recognition, and I have seen things that lead me to truly believe that this story is real and these things happened in all of the Americas. Just wait and see. You’re gonna love it.
I heard what you said about being kind to each other and I certainly agree. Too much anger and hate in the world. But I was really disappointed in the main message of your video. It seemed a lot like the usual double speak that often comes from Latter Day Saints. Hard to explain what I mean by that. It seems though, that no one in the church will ever answer questions other than with, 'you need more faith', or 'to study harder', or 'pray more', or 'read more scriptures', etc. A person can be led to believe that because they can't find answers, the answers don't exist and the work is likely fiction.
I love your guys' statements about taking the Book of Mormon text seriously. It has so many pearls to offer us if we have a broken heart, contrite spirit, and eyes to see.
I never took the book very seriously after 3 Nephi chapters 8 and 9. But I still read the whole book in 1977. It had some good stuff too. Back then it was considered to be historical. I’ve never been LDS but I’ve had an interest in the restored gospel faiths like JW, LDS, and SDA. I do enjoy your channel.
How did Joseph Smith predict the Civil War 28 years before it started?
You clearly haven’t actually read section 87. Read the preface as well. Newspapers were predicting civil war and section 87 still predicted events that never happened.
So there’s that!
@@brucejensen3700 That sounds really cool and everything, however, I'm asking about the years 1860 to 1865 only. I'm not interested in whether he believed men were on the moon or anything else.
He predicted a Civil War would start, starting in South Carolina. He said the Northern States would go to war with the Southern States, he said the South would call on the aid of Great Britain, and he said the slaves would be free.
How did he know this?
@@wes2176 As I explained, Every newspaper in the country was predicting civil war, it just didn’t occur for about 30 years.
If I predict a Chinese invasion of Taiwan and it doesn’t occur for 30 years, then my prediction is very weak, since it is all over the news.
What happened to all the earth quakes and other destruction discussed in section 87?
@@brucejensen3700 Ok, how about aid from England?
@@brucejensen3700 And the slaves being free?
Bom is kind of bs.
Study the Bible and cling to Christ.
The way people act like Joseph smith is greater than Jesus. Is just weird.
Yes l! Pray about it😊
Even if people could see the golden plates, the sword of Lehman, the Breastplate, they would still not have to believe. We always believe because we have faith that it is true.
I agree!
@@thestickofjoseph The plates made a fun story come alive. We all know that the translation came from a rock in a hat. Facts and truth do not matter because a person's testimony is more important than any truth or reality...
Time is an allay of the BoM very true bros
I love the the relaxed atmosphere
The church does not want to convince random people to believe. The church wants people to hear the word of God. The people get to choose what they believe once they hear it.
I got a Bible for that....
@@johnrowley310 You, me and the other 45,000 Christian denominations in the world. Apparently the interpretation of the Bible can be twisted many directions. If only there was a second witness of Jesus...
In the end, something doesn't have to be true to inspire faith.
It’s mere existence alone is proof. Trying to explain the details of how the Book of Mormon came about without bias leads to miracles.
Same for the Quran?
@@weightelk God is a God of miracles, I believe that Muhammad’s life is miraculous, but I know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
@@FromAgonyToLight Muhammad taught that it's blasphemy to believe that God had a son.
Same for the Nancy Drew mysteries.
@@FromAgonyToLight Do you believe he is God the Son???
If you are interested, I have some insights on the Book of Mormon that might be interesting to your audience. Let me know if you would like to bring me on your channel.
Reach out to us through email! jackson@thestickofjoseph.com
@@thestickofjosephI don't know what happened. I thought I sent the email to you earlier today. Even sent you a note or reply here letting you know. And either one of them seem to have been sent. I just confirmed that the email was sent. I hope to hear from you soon
I look forward to future posts! You’re doing great work!!
There are only two reasons I can think of that would make knowing the geography of the Book of Mormon germane:
1)That is to provide a resource for historical context, that is mostly absent in the Book of Mormon. Just like how understanding Biblical history and context expands and deepens it, as well as correct errors of reading into the text, having something similar would be helpful with the Book of Mormon. If it took place in Mesoamerica, that presents a hugely different sociocultural context than the Heartland. At present, we're grasping to understand the depth of Lamoni's conversion, since that idea and narrative makes sense in both cultural contexts, but vastly alters some of the implications of the story depending on where and with whom it took place.
2) Latter-Day Saint Geographically oriented Eschatology: We have a very location driven eschatology in regards to the events leading up to the Second-Coming. New Jerusalem is to be built in Jackson County, and the statements made about the Nephite Promised Land and it's take-over by the Gentile nations does not match Mexico at present. Mexico, which encompasses the proposed Mesoamerican setting, is not a "land of liberty". Most of it is run by militia like cartels these days, and people have to bribe officials to live. It is a route used by people fleeing poverty and deprivation (sometimes law enforcement) in South America, to get to the USA. Of course, certain readings of the text and words of the prophets can overcome this, but it is still a difficult thing to harmonize. Clarification, or revelation about the specific location of the Book of Mormon events can help in evaluating "signs of the times".
Other than this, the geography question shouldn't become a distraction from the overall truth and wonder of the Book of Mormon, and certainly never a question of true or false faith, because you believe in the wrong model.
Great video! Soon we’ll have more evidence, even if it’s Christ that has to show us when he gets back. God bless you on this journey that you can keep your hearts pointed the right way and that you’ll be able to contribute to new discoveries.
I have mormon family, and we had some talks about the book of mormon, but i will had to say that is The bible is first and over the book of Mormon, if you find some discrepancies in the books , will ya follow the book of mormon over the bible?
do you make the same investigation over the bible archeology and finding and then make a comparison on the findings on the book of mormon? any way, God bless you.
Very simply, The journey to Christ is a spiritual one not a physical one. That is the message of the New Testament and that is the message of the book of Mormon. If you can’t come to know a thing is true that you can see and read and hold you’ll never truly come to know the Savior Who is not currently available to see and hold.
@@MichaelSaline Funny, I know I am a sinner. I need to be forgiven. FACT...
My testimony of the Book of Mormon comes from reading and pondering it. It is meant for our day to help us grow closer to Christ. The intentions to provide potential evidence (Central America, Heartland, etc.) can be very good. The evidence can serve to strengthen testimony as we try to relate to the Book of Mormon peoples, places and times. I choose to begin where Joseph did. Even though the pyramids of Mexico, the Hindu like structures of Guatemala, and the amazing stone ruins of the Inca of South America witness to great civilizations in ancient America they may not be of the main peoples who are recorded in the Book of Mormon. I do find the evidences found in North America (especially the heartland theory) to be the most compelling (after considering the others first for decades). But whatever the real limited geographical area of the Book of Mormon is I will have no problem accepting it once it is revealed to us by God. But in my opinion God has already revealed it and continues to witness it, we just choose not to accept it, so much easier to accept giant stone structures south than evidence of two ancient peoples around dirt mounds in the free promised land of North America. I have no doubt there was trade via the rivers and Gulf of Mexico at times between some of these various groups of people, etc….
I just want to find a chariot.
JS stated that YHWH Elohim commanded him to tell us where it happened and JS stated todays easteren USA
What is you source for that?
The Tower of Babel is the last big issue to resolve within the text of the Book of Mormon.
Why's that?
@@GldnClaw if the Tower of Babel story is indeed mythology, then it creates a tricky situation for the BOM at a superficial reading. A response needs to be framed to address this (which there are)
Joseph said that there would be evidence. That's why he made sure to point out evidence to the early saints.
4:40 and not only that, how can we find any information when the gentiles came over and killed the lost tribes of Israel and destroyed all their artifacts…
Cop-out.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire cop out? No. That is PART of the data people must consider when weighing these things. Just because something has not definitive proof yet does not mean it is true or not true. Amazing how people just want to close their eyes to what is convenient for them.
@@zionmama150 Actually, for extraordinary physical claims, if there's no proof, the claim is rejected as most very likely false.
That's the nature of evidence regarding physical claims.
@@rodneyjamesmcguire so you deny the possibility that there was ever evidence that was not destroyed??? Even though history tells us that there were several artifacts that were destroyed by the Spanish conquistadors, because they were seen as being “idols”? You’re limiting the data, dude.
@@zionmama150 I don't deny possibilities.
However, the claim that actual BofM evidence was destroyed by European conquest, is conjecture, since we've no real clue about what exactly was destroyed.
There could be evidence out there. Anything is possible.
In fact, I am a "Possibilian" (Google it).
I'll follow the actual data wherever it leads, so bring on actual evidence, of the extraordinary and unique physical claims of the Book of Mormon.
If the BOM was a fictional book with fictional characters that came from the imagination of Joseph Smith, then what would that mean to you?
It meant I have already left and embrace the Jesus of the Bible.
I like this Chanel but what is the timeline and content of the docuseries? I thought you were going to stay impartial but this Chanel doesn’t demonstrate that. You are clearly biased
Clearly we believe The Book of Mormon to be scripture. In terms of New world geographic theories, we will remain impartial.
ok guys as much as I love the fact you believe in your faith with such a passion you are desperately trying to defend it ... its not the historical problems of the BOM that are the problem ... its a big problem dont get me wrong ... but not the main one ... the problem is lying to the public to save grace ... Elder Holland lied to the BBC about oaths in the temple ceremony to take ones own life rather than divulge the ceremonies ... President Nelson lied about a plane crash he was involved in ... Thomas B Marsh lied about Monson going inactive over milk strippings ... it was nothing of the sort he went inactive because of the horrendous violence of the Danites ... a Joseph Smith approved gang of thugs ... Paul H Dunn lied about every single story he wrote ... not to mention the prophets failed prophecies and the mention of Quakers living on the moon and bloody hundreds more ... who was taught JS translated the BOM with the Urim and Thummim ... nope ... stone in a hat lies lies and more lies ... guys you are covering up for a lying deceiving treasure digging sexual predator ... please stop ... you are actually causing the world damage ... and not good ... sent with love dudes
The Book of Mormon has blessed my life in so many ways. It has brought me closer to Jesus Christ. It causes a desire within me to want to be more like Him; kinder, patient, forgiving, virtueous, gentle, thoughtful to others needs.
It helps me see others a little bit more through heavens eyes.
I love the Book of Mormon, and the more I study it and try to follow its principles… I’m so much happier, filled with more hope and peace. God be thanked for such an amazing gift.
It also is another witness of theHoly Bible…that Jesus is the Beloved Son of God, and the Life and Light of the world. Our Great Redeemer. ☀️
I cannot imagine my life without it. What a gift and blessing from God. 💕☀️
then there’s nothing wrong with how she feels about it or the other people who follow what they want
@@Whatiftheresmore1314
Trust me you can be a whole lot happier without the book of mormon. The bible is the only book you need.
I think you need to be careful when you explicitly say that critics of the Book of Mormon suggest that believers in the Book of Mormon must be, in your words, “stupid”. I’m a returned missionary and have been a member my whole life. Over the the past two years I started diving into truth claims of the church (not just about the bom) and have never heard any respected critic argue that believers are stupid. Most just wanna know the truth. Saying that is counterproductive and can be insulting. I do understand some people who no longer believe may be more angry towards the church and might have that view (which is unfortunate) but definitely not the majority.
While I no longer believe in the truth claims of the church I genuinely believe the church can still do a lot of good and I have the utmost respect for people who maintain their beliefs. Id never want to take people out of it either but simply believe people should look at the church with an open perspective and without any preset conclusions. Do you guys look at data and evidence found to support your conclusion that the Book of Mormon is true? Or do you look at the data and the evidence to then come to whatever conclusion that leads you to? I’d argue that the first way is intellectually non credible and makes the info this channel presents less valuable. That being said, I get that faith cannot be proven but when you start to look at real world data and evidence, it becomes a problem for people who respect the scientific method.
All that being said I can tell you two are passionate about the Book of Mormon which I respect and wish you the best of luck with your channel!
What is stupid is believing something that has no evidence.
You quoted the Gospel Topics Essay pointing out that the church does not have a position on the location of the BOM…and that it will mislead people. Well they used to. Lots of prophets seers and revelators insisted that the Hill Cumorah is the hill where Joseph retrieved the plates. The Hill Cumorah pageant itself said as much!
The church is gaslighting us, people!
The Hill Cumorah IS THE HILL WHERE JOSEPH RETRIEVED THE PLATES. That has never been in dispute. What is not known is where are the Book of Mormon lands--where did Lehi land, and where did they migrate to over 1000 years.
@@bobrussell8339 And my point is that the Church used to have the official position that the hill was where the last battles took place and where Moroni buried the plates.
The church is gaslighting us!
@@brucejensen3700 That position hasn't changed. How are we being gaslighted?
@@bobrussell8339 Because the church no longer claims to know where any of the events occurred. Of coarse they don’t. There is no geographical, archaeological, linguistic or DNA evidence that any of the events in the BOM actually occurred That’s why even Richard Bushman considers the BOM to be 19th century fiction literature.
I plan on publishing enough videos on my channel to prove the Book of Mormon is 100% true. I have 4 so far and plan on publishing 1 per week. I'll probably end up with 30-40 videos. My theory is by far the most plausible, it just didn't take place where you think. This is the only solution. I've debated the Meso-America vs Heartland for almost 4 decades and the Old World Theory is the only theory that answers every question (almost).
Put your faith in the Bible. Skip the Mormon fairytales.
Loved the advice. I have found a lot of evidence that aligns with the Book of Mormon but my best evidence is the witnesses of the Holy Ghost. When it comes to location I see the Book of Mormon as a true account and the location evidence has to match the Book of Mormon. If my theory doesn’t match the account of the Book of Mormon then I have to abandon my theory. This seems to keep me on the right track and keeps me from doubting things like swords, horses, or chariots noted in the Book of Mormon.
Where is the written ancient history of north or south America in academia? There is none. There is no written record of ancient north or south America. The book of Mormon is the only written ancient record that even attempts to tell who was in the Americas anciently. Whether it is true or not is up to the reader to decide, and also whether they ask God if it is true or not. The Book of Mormon is the only major written record of the ancient Americas given by spiritual means and not through academia. Academia has begun understanding the writings of ancient Central America which is wonderful to understanding the civilizations of that area.
For anyone to argue for or against the Book of Mormon based on archaeology alone is ignorant at best because there is no history to compare it against.
If someone wants to know if the Book of Mormon came from God, they will have to ask him like the Book says to do. Not what others say or write about it, but what God says to you personally through direct revelation through the Holy Ghost. Not getting an answer is not a yes or a no.
No. But neither can the Old and New Testaments or any of the other scriptures. There are various items discovered in a variety of scholarly fields that provide evidence that the various scriptures are plausible for the times and places that they all have originated, but that does not constitute irrefutable proof for any scripture, nor does it have to be. There is always an element of faith with all the scriptures as it should be. If there was irrefutable proof, everyone who didn't accept the irrefutably proven items would be damned, period. Our Father is luckily more forgiving than that and gives us the continuing opportunity to learn, grow, and accept more and more knowledge of and from Him or let us stagnate in our development by rejecting all or some of His words.
The physical setting / descriptions of the NT are essentially fact. Did Jesus walk on water on the Sea of Galilee? That's a matter of faith. But we know the Sea existed / exists, and there was water there, with essentially absolute certainty. We also know, with a great degree of historical certainty, the Jesus existed as a person. So, an expression of faith that he walked on water has an underpinning in reality.
If faith has no basis in reality, then it is blind, and we are susceptible to believing anything and everything claimed as "faith".
@@rodneyjamesmcguire of course the atheists just say the names of things around the New Testament. Just mean it's more plausible fraud. What you're saying is I accept the certain level of evidence for scriptures that I believe and a much much higher level of evidence for things that I don't believe Rodney
Great work guys. The BoM is always true blue through and through for people who sincerely asked and found that it is true by power of the Holyghost, unless you are scared to find out that you are wrong and the book is indeed not evil. The spirit of God never lie for honest and brave people. Love or hate the book. I love the book just as much as i know the bible is inspired by God for us.
I'm sure God intentionally ensured the Book of Mormon, just as any other aspects of belief in God, cannot be definitively proven true. If God wanted to provide incontrovertible proof of the Book of Mormon, or even His own existence, it would be a trivial matter for Him. It would also totally destroy the requirement for faith and undermine our agency.
You two seem like good people and i can appreciate that. I feel like you really did come across as arrogant, disrespectful, rude and pompous in your interaction with John Dehlin. I was once like you and 20 years later, i now truly regret how i treated others. I sincerely look forward to hearing your deconstruction story in a few years.