I think they landed around Florida and moved north. The narrow neck is Niagara. The Hopewell mound builders fit the description and building of the Book of Mormon. Not to mention the ample writings of Joseph Smith about them being in North America. I do however think the Lamanites - after they split off - probably spread all over and went south. Notice all the horse bones discovered were from North American locations. There is also a 25-50% DNA match with the Ojibwa Indians, around the great lakes, and middle eastern descent. There's isn't a single scripture in the Book of Mormon that says the temples were built out of stone. They all say fine carved wood. Do some research on the Hopewell mound builders and those cultures.
***** No mention of snow in the BOM. No evidence of written languages. Rivers that flow the wrong direction. No evidence for high civilization. And on and on... ...and no Nephites in North America. The Mayan/Olmec/Epi-Olmec landscape simply works so much better.
Man of Israel You are only getting away with that statement by ignoring a lot of things Joseph said. If you look at the fuller context of everything Joseph said about BOM geography, even a North American setting runs into all sorts of problems. I strongly suggest you take time to actually read what Fair Mormon said on this same thread.
ike evans A general authority once said as he stood on Hill Cumorah that the spirit confirmed to him that that was the place where the final struggle between the Nephites and the Lamanites took place. So, as I cannot discount Mesoamerica as a possible BoM location, North America was definitely a part of it. For some reason I still kind of hold on to the belief that BoM geography should include a northern part of S. America.
ike evans "No evidence of written languages." Actually, they've found ancient Hebrew writings in various parts of the U.S. Archaeologists have dismissed them as hoaxes but have offered no explanation as to how they came to such a conclusion. On the other hand, tests have been conducted to prove they were authentic. "No evidence for high civilization." That's false education they fed you with in school.
Samoa Moni "A general authority once said as he stood on Hill Cumorah that the spirit confirmed to him that that was the place where the final struggle between the Nephites and the Lamanites took place." General authority have been all over the place in terms of what God reveals to them, and I think there is danger in holding too much weight in accepting their "revelations" in light of D&C 28 where we are warned against this very idea. You say: "For some reason I still kind of hold on to the belief that BoM geography should include a northern part of S. America." You are talking about the geographical transmission of an entire race of people that spans thousands of miles but doesn't come even close to fitting into the geographical/anthropological context of the ancient Americas. People from a wide variety of theories concerning BOM geographies reject this notion completely. You say: "...they've found ancient Hebrew writings in various parts of the U.S. Archaeologists have dismissed them as hoaxes..." You are correct that the hebrew writings have been dismissed as hoaxes, and for good reason. But even assuming that they are legit examples of ancient writing, they are they wrong kind of hebrew for the Nephite peoples. Most of the examples that I'm aware of (such as the Bat Creek stone) was 1st/2nd century Hebrew - surely something that doesn't fit into the Nephite context.
My one piece of advice to those fascinated by this. Keeep going.When i was growing up my dream was to become an archaeologist. I was raised LDS. I was most fascinated by the intersection of the two. It became my new area of focus around high school age and grew into nothing short of an obsession in college. I was simultaneously taking Book of Mormon in Seminary and then the next class taking Meso American Anthropology the next hour. I was enthralled with finding the correlations. After college i just continued in my own studies, broadening and looking at every ancient culture. What i had discovered by this time was that not only had i found so many “evidences” of the Book of Mormon but also the Bible. In every culture in every time on the planet. I could write a dissertation on this but in short, when you first start looking into this, like this example, only excitement and what seems to be proof. The more you look the more you find. Until you reach a point it starts going into the other direction. Ill let you do your own research. But please, i behoove you, if there truly is nothing to be worried about like the apostles say, then searching will only find truth. If that were true, than there should be no fear in reading non-LDS sources. If its true, it will prove itself. Just do your research. From non-LDS sources as well. Compare everything. A good place to start, The Book of Abraham and the Gospel Topics Essays.
Thanks , this was truly interesting . Am not a Mormon ...yet . However I do find these folk who dislike Mormons rather boring why can't they just go to their own church and sing ?
(1) Joseph Smith was told during the 1st vision that the creeds were an abomination. Echoing the Sermon on the mount... "They draw near to me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. " The Trinity is false doctrine and adopted in a formalized statement in the Nicene Creed in 391ish AD to make it sound like the creed expressed the true doctrine In part to conserve space that creed reads. "We believe in one God, the Father,....one Lord, Jesus Christ,....of one Being with the Father." That's the Christian "Orthodox" statement concerning what God the Father and Jesus Christ are..... But it's easily shown to be false. .................. The fact is that God the Father ,Jesus Christ The Son and The Holy Ghost are not one being. For instance Jesus Christ prayed the Great Intercessory Prayer and prayed ... : John 17: 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:" So Jesus Christ prayed that all of the believers would become "one" just as He and the Father were "One"..... Obviously Jesus wasn't praying that all the believers would become one being with Him and The Father...Yet all the believers are supposed to be "one " just as Jesus Christ and The Father are "One". If you have been taught that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are one being... Then you've been taught false doctrine and that's why the creed are an abomination. (2) Becoming like God?,etc. I'll get back to you with more info.. It's late and it's bedtime and I have to get up early tomorrow. What I've illustrated about the Trinity is enough to blow up the claims about The Church and not believing in the Trinity.
For an interesting proposed translation of the Caractors document a free copy can be accessed at www.bookofmormoncaractorstranslation.com Also available there is a free intro to Brian Stubb's new book involving Egyptian and Semitic found in Uto-Aztecan.
Hey. Why did you exclude the names of your 2 experts "... an expert with advanced qualifications in the ancient Egyptian language and script ..." and "... an expert in Maya with advanced degrees in Mesoamerican studies" in the intro pgs 12-13 of your book called 2019 - TRANSLATION OF THE “CARACTORS” DOCUMENT. Can you pls provide their names? BOM critics will ask. Thanks
For me as a high schooler back in the 80's I determined on my own that the Maya were the most likely candidates for the Lehites, and because I couldn't peg the time of the Jaredites I didn't have a likely candidate for them. For any residual evidence of potential Lehiteish decendants in North America that is easily explained based on the Meso American model by the migrations by land and sea reported in the Book of Mormon northward. Those same migrations also explain the Uto-Aztecan connections as well all over the US south west. This division on where the Book of Mormon took place only gives our detractors amunition against us. As far as I am concerned the events and cities recorded in the Book of Mormon took place in Meso America, but the descendants of those people are scattered all over north and south America and both continents are included in the promised blessings recorded in the Book of Mormon so long as those who inhabit these choice lands live according to the covenant required for this land.
at min 22:15 you claim that Mitla is translated to mean "place desolation" in Nahutatl. do you have a reference? .. i found this: The name Mitla or Mictlan is of Nahuatl origin and means "Place of the Dead" or "Inframundo". In Zapotec it is called "Lyobaa", which means "Burial Place", and in Mexico it became known as Mictlan, "Place of the Dead" which is shortened in Spanish to Mitla. www.delange.org/Mitla/Mitla.htm But it translates differently according to the link
***** thank you for your response. really great video. another question. at min 20:31, you reference Omni 1:20 and say that the word "a very large stone" means something in maya. i dont understand how to spell the word you say as it is not in the slide. "locum tum?" do you have a link or reference to this or at least how to spell it? thanks! awesome points brought up. keep it up!
Ishmael didn't die in Nahom; he was carried there to be buried. It's important to get these details accurate, as it validates the evidence more precisely. Nahom was an anciently known burial ground in Lehi's day. Rather than just bury him out in the wilderness where he had died, his family decided they would carry him to Nahom and give him a proper respected burial in a cemetery that was known and cared for.
There are innumerable issues in here but i had to step in at the Anthon manuscript. Anthon said it had no relation to Egyptian and looked like children’s scribbles. That is 1000% not what Anthon’s conclusion was. Also, still to this day there is no such Archaeologically, culturally OR linguistically recognized language such as Reformed Egyptian or Egyptian shorthand.
I think the hardest thing for me to understand out of all the knowledge that has been given unto me for me to learn about anything in my life has been the most hardest thing for me to put into a understanding. Why is it a hard thing for a 40 year old man to still be single and not married yet when a 18 year old female is getting married to someone that she thinks she's in love with. So why is it by fact that because a female has a hole between her legs and her looks makes her empowered to automatically find a male to mate with because of being an attraction to the male so why is a specific person receiveing this blessing more than another person to deplict when the time is given for them specifically for them to find a mate. So why is this gift given to one person but not to another person? Why does a female receive attention because of her looks and for having a hole between her legs and not for a man that is 40 years old to not receive this blessing for the same thing to occur for the male? Where does anything of this nature make any kind of sense??? Why is there a blindness to both sexes that challenge a persons behavior when nor male or female trust each other because of both sexes desireing each other so one is receiveing the gift and another one is or isn't. This horrific differences between the sexes is by far the worst thing that is happening between man and women. Why would one person be blessed by our heavenly father with marriage at a young age while another person waits for a lifetime for the right person to come along simply because of what time 2 people come into each others lives to be that type of person for each other. This act has NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO ME and why a woman cannot figure out the goodness in a man instead of passing him off for a man that's attractive because of his looks. This feeling is above and beyond the worst thought and feeling that I have ever felt before in my life because it is the most painful thing to go through.
Thank you for posting. My what a powerful video... I'm ready to throw away facts and my own personal testimony and join The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Then again, no thanks. Would just like to point out a few things.... Saying that there exists apostasy within the Christian faith does not mean that there was a complete, total and universal apostasy and the church was in need of restoration. The late James E. Talmadge, LDS writer and member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, wrote, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims the restoration of the Gospel, and re-establishment of the Church as of old, in this, the dispensation of the fullness of times. Such restoration and re-establishment, with the modern bestowal of the holy priesthood, would be unnecessary and indeed impossible had the Church of Christ continued among men with unbroken succession of priesthood and power, since the meridian of time [the time of Christ]." "Mormons misconstrue the biblical passages which do refer to a 'great apostasy' from the Christian Church. They read into the text a complete apostasy. Scripture mentions an apostasy in Matthew 24:4-12; Mark 13:21-23; Luke 21:7-8; Acts 20:29-30; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; 2 Timothy 3:1-7, 4:1-4; 2 Peter 2:1-3; and Jude 17-19. Most of these verses say 'many' will fall away, and not one mentions a complete apostasy of the Church. Another complication for Mormons is that these verses say the apostasy will take place at the end times, the 'latter days' as the King James renders it. The second and third centuries were not the 'latter days.'" - Madrid So even though the LDS church is a bit more careful today to suggest a "widespread" apostasy, the fact is that they have not proven a complete and total apostasy needed for such re-establishment (and no, pointing to the Middle Ages is not proof of a universal apostasy). Next topic: When you read the Book of Mormon the belief in God is monotheistic and the nature of God is triune (the BOM does not teach henotheism). The Book of Mormon teaches: there is only one being who is God; God is a spirit; and Jesus is God. This is all inline with the concept of the trinity. It was only after the BOM was written that Smith changed his views to a plurality of gods. Despite whatever evidences Fair Mormon may present there exists a huge problem with the Book of Mormon - that is, the appearance of 1769 King James Version translation errors within it's text. In other words, when creating the BOM Smith quoted extensively from the King James Version of the Bible (particularly the book of Isaiah). When doing so he unknowingly copied KJV translation mistakes into his book. For example, Smith copied Isaiah 4:5 from the 1769 KJV almost verbatim into his Book of Mormon (with the exception of adding the words "of Zion" - see: 2 Nephi 14:5). In this verse the KJV translators opted for the Geneva Bible's rendering. It is in the GNV that one finds the first appearance of the English word "defence" in this verse (before then it was rendered "preserued" as in the Great Bible and Bishops Bible). The problem is that in the Hebrew the word chippah does not mean "defence" but rather a protective curtain or canopy as in the ESV: "Then the Lord will create over the whole site of Mount Zion and over her assemblies a cloud by day, and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for over all the glory there will be a canopy." The appearance of the word "defence" in the Book of Mormon shows Smith's reliance on an English text and that he was not translating (or dictating) from an ancient source. This is not an isolated event as there are many incorrectly translated verses from the KJV that appear within the text of the Book of Mormon. This suggests a couple things: Smith was not telling the truth about the origin of the BOM and the witnesses to the translation process were also not being honest. Are we really to believe that even with the Urim & Thummim, the seer stone, and "the gift and power of God" Smith could still get the translation correct? This should be considered a basic violation of common sense.
My question. Charles Anthon wasn't the only scholar in NYC or the area. Why not just take it to another person to write a certified letter? They didn't...so something doesn't fit. And why not save it...copy more so we can have it today. Angels are not physical. So how does a non physical being take physical plates to heaven. Why...why not keep them here so we can see them. We see the biblical scrolls...why not the plates. Why do we believe that proof is wrong when the Bible talks abt proof of this or that. Who made proof "bad" and why.
I think they landed around Florida and moved north. The narrow neck is Niagara. The Hopewell mound builders fit the description and building of the Book of Mormon. Not to mention the ample writings of Joseph Smith about them being in North America. I do however think the Lamanites - after they split off - probably spread all over and went south. Notice all the horse bones discovered were from North American locations. There is also a 25-50% DNA match with the Ojibwa Indians, around the great lakes, and middle eastern descent. There's isn't a single scripture in the Book of Mormon that says the temples were built out of stone. They all say fine carved wood. Do some research on the Hopewell mound builders and those cultures.
***** No mention of snow in the BOM. No evidence of written languages. Rivers that flow the wrong direction. No evidence for high civilization. And on and on...
...and no Nephites in North America. The Mayan/Olmec/Epi-Olmec landscape simply works so much better.
Man of Israel You are only getting away with that statement by ignoring a lot of things Joseph said. If you look at the fuller context of everything Joseph said about BOM geography, even a North American setting runs into all sorts of problems. I strongly suggest you take time to actually read what Fair Mormon said on this same thread.
ike evans A general authority once said as he stood on Hill Cumorah that the spirit confirmed to him that that was the place where the final struggle between the Nephites and the Lamanites took place. So, as I cannot discount Mesoamerica as a possible BoM location, North America was definitely a part of it. For some reason I still kind of hold on to the belief that BoM geography should include a northern part of S. America.
ike evans "No evidence of written languages." Actually, they've found ancient Hebrew writings in various parts of the U.S. Archaeologists have dismissed them as hoaxes but have offered no explanation as to how they came to such a conclusion. On the other hand, tests have been conducted to prove they were authentic.
"No evidence for high civilization." That's false education they fed you with in school.
Samoa Moni "A general authority once said as he stood on Hill Cumorah that the spirit confirmed to him that that was the place where the final struggle between the Nephites and the Lamanites took place."
General authority have been all over the place in terms of what God reveals to them, and I think there is danger in holding too much weight in accepting their "revelations" in light of D&C 28 where we are warned against this very idea.
You say: "For some reason I still kind of hold on to the belief that BoM geography should include a northern part of S. America."
You are talking about the geographical transmission of an entire race of people that spans thousands of miles but doesn't come even close to fitting into the geographical/anthropological context of the ancient Americas. People from a wide variety of theories concerning BOM geographies reject this notion completely.
You say: "...they've found ancient Hebrew writings in various parts of the U.S. Archaeologists have dismissed them as hoaxes..."
You are correct that the hebrew writings have been dismissed as hoaxes, and for good reason. But even assuming that they are legit examples of ancient writing, they are they wrong kind of hebrew for the Nephite peoples. Most of the examples that I'm aware of (such as the Bat Creek stone) was 1st/2nd century Hebrew - surely something that doesn't fit into the Nephite context.
My one piece of advice to those fascinated by this. Keeep going.When i was growing up my dream was to become an archaeologist. I was raised LDS. I was most fascinated by the intersection of the two. It became my new area of focus around high school age and grew into nothing short of an obsession in college. I was simultaneously taking Book of Mormon in Seminary and then the next class taking Meso American Anthropology the next hour. I was enthralled with finding the correlations. After college i just continued in my own studies, broadening and looking at every ancient culture. What i had discovered by this time was that not only had i found so many “evidences” of the Book of Mormon but also the Bible. In every culture in every time on the planet. I could write a dissertation on this but in short, when you first start looking into this, like this example, only excitement and what seems to be proof. The more you look the more you find. Until you reach a point it starts going into the other direction. Ill let you do your own research. But please, i behoove you, if there truly is nothing to be worried about like the apostles say, then searching will only find truth. If that were true, than there should be no fear in reading non-LDS sources. If its true, it will prove itself. Just do your research. From non-LDS sources as well. Compare everything. A good place to start, The Book of Abraham and the Gospel Topics Essays.
Thanks , this was truly interesting . Am not a Mormon ...yet . However I do find these folk who dislike Mormons rather boring why can't they just go to their own church and sing ?
The world won't listen A very truthful name. I wish they would listen.
(1) Joseph Smith was told during the 1st vision that the creeds were an abomination. Echoing the Sermon on the mount... "They draw near to me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. " The Trinity is false doctrine and adopted in a formalized statement in the Nicene Creed in 391ish AD to make it sound like the creed expressed the true doctrine In part to conserve space that creed reads. "We believe in one God, the Father,....one Lord, Jesus Christ,....of one Being with the Father." That's the Christian "Orthodox" statement concerning what God the Father and Jesus Christ are..... But it's easily shown to be false. ..................
The fact is that God the Father ,Jesus Christ The Son and The Holy Ghost are not one being. For instance Jesus Christ prayed the Great Intercessory Prayer and prayed ... : John 17: 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:" So Jesus Christ prayed that all of the believers would become "one" just as He and the Father were "One"..... Obviously Jesus wasn't praying that all the believers would become one being with Him and The Father...Yet all the believers are supposed to be "one " just as Jesus Christ and The Father are "One". If you have been taught that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are one being... Then you've been taught false doctrine and that's why the creed are an abomination. (2) Becoming like God?,etc. I'll get back to you with more info.. It's late and it's bedtime and I have to get up early tomorrow. What I've illustrated about the Trinity is enough to blow up the claims about The Church and not believing in the Trinity.
Amen.
For an interesting proposed translation of the Caractors document a free copy can be accessed at www.bookofmormoncaractorstranslation.com Also available there is a free intro to Brian Stubb's new book involving Egyptian and Semitic found in Uto-Aztecan.
Hey. Why did you exclude the names of your 2 experts "... an expert with advanced qualifications in the ancient Egyptian language and script ..." and "... an expert in Maya with advanced degrees in Mesoamerican studies" in the intro pgs 12-13 of your book called 2019 - TRANSLATION OF THE “CARACTORS” DOCUMENT. Can you pls provide their names? BOM critics will ask. Thanks
For me as a high schooler back in the 80's I determined on my own that the Maya were the most likely candidates for the Lehites, and because I couldn't peg the time of the Jaredites I didn't have a likely candidate for them.
For any residual evidence of potential Lehiteish decendants in North America that is easily explained based on the Meso American model by the migrations by land and sea reported in the Book of Mormon northward.
Those same migrations also explain the Uto-Aztecan connections as well all over the US south west.
This division on where the Book of Mormon took place only gives our detractors amunition against us. As far as I am concerned the events and cities recorded in the Book of Mormon took place in Meso America, but the descendants of those people are scattered all over north and south America and both continents are included in the promised blessings recorded in the Book of Mormon so long as those who inhabit these choice lands live according to the covenant required for this land.
at min 22:15 you claim that Mitla is translated to mean "place desolation" in Nahutatl. do you have a reference? .. i found this: The name Mitla or Mictlan is of Nahuatl origin and means "Place of the Dead" or "Inframundo". In Zapotec it is called "Lyobaa", which means "Burial Place", and in Mexico it became known as Mictlan, "Place of the Dead" which is shortened in Spanish to Mitla.
www.delange.org/Mitla/Mitla.htm But it translates differently according to the link
***** thank you for your response. really great video. another question. at min 20:31, you reference Omni 1:20 and say that the word "a very large stone" means something in maya. i dont understand how to spell the word you say as it is not in the slide. "locum tum?" do you have a link or reference to this or at least how to spell it? thanks!
awesome points brought up. keep it up!
Desolation meaning absence of life, meaning dead. Same thing.
BOM, start at minute 13:00
Can you give us any information like: who is the speaker? when did this take place? where did this take place?
Ishmael didn't die in Nahom; he was carried there to be buried. It's important to get these details accurate, as it validates the evidence more precisely. Nahom was an anciently known burial ground in Lehi's day. Rather than just bury him out in the wilderness where he had died, his family decided they would carry him to Nahom and give him a proper respected burial in a cemetery that was known and cared for.
3:57 but according to mormon doctrine john the beloved is still alive
There are innumerable issues in here but i had to step in at the Anthon manuscript. Anthon said it had no relation to Egyptian and looked like children’s scribbles. That is 1000% not what Anthon’s conclusion was. Also, still to this day there is no such Archaeologically, culturally OR linguistically recognized language such as Reformed Egyptian or Egyptian shorthand.
I think the hardest thing for me to understand out of all the knowledge that has been given unto me for me to learn about anything in my life has been the most hardest thing for me to put into a understanding. Why is it a hard thing for a 40 year old man to still be single and not married yet when a 18 year old female is getting married to someone that she thinks she's in love with. So why is it by fact that because a female has a hole between her legs and her looks makes her empowered to automatically find a male to mate with because of being an attraction to the male so why is a specific person receiveing this blessing more than another person to deplict when the time is given for them specifically for them to find a mate. So why is this gift given to one person but not to another person? Why does a female receive attention because of her looks and for having a hole between her legs and not for a man that is 40 years old to not receive this blessing for the same thing to occur for the male? Where does anything of this nature make any kind of sense??? Why is there a blindness to both sexes that challenge a persons behavior when nor male or female trust each other because of both sexes desireing each other so one is receiveing the gift and another one is or isn't. This horrific differences between the sexes is by far the worst thing that is happening between man and women. Why would one person be blessed by our heavenly father with marriage at a young age while another person waits for a lifetime for the right person to come along simply because of what time 2 people come into each others lives to be that type of person for each other. This act has NEVER MADE ANY SENSE TO ME and why a woman cannot figure out the goodness in a man instead of passing him off for a man that's attractive because of his looks. This feeling is above and beyond the worst thought and feeling that I have ever felt before in my life because it is the most painful thing to go through.
AND How!
they still do this look at the queen of england coronation
Thank you for posting.
My what a powerful video... I'm ready to throw away facts and my own personal testimony and join The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Then again, no thanks.
Would just like to point out a few things....
Saying that there exists apostasy within the Christian faith does not mean that there was a complete, total and universal apostasy and the church was in need of restoration. The late James E. Talmadge, LDS writer and member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, wrote, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints proclaims the restoration of the Gospel, and re-establishment of the Church as of old, in this, the dispensation of the fullness of times. Such restoration and re-establishment, with the modern bestowal of the holy priesthood, would be unnecessary and indeed impossible had the Church of Christ continued among men with unbroken succession of priesthood and power, since the meridian of time [the time of Christ]."
"Mormons misconstrue the biblical passages which do refer to a 'great apostasy' from the Christian Church. They read into the text a complete apostasy. Scripture mentions an apostasy in Matthew 24:4-12; Mark 13:21-23; Luke 21:7-8; Acts 20:29-30; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; 2 Timothy 3:1-7, 4:1-4; 2 Peter 2:1-3; and Jude 17-19. Most of these verses say 'many' will fall away, and not one mentions a complete apostasy of the Church. Another complication for Mormons is that these verses say the apostasy will take place at the end times, the 'latter days' as the King James renders it. The second and third centuries were not the 'latter days.'" - Madrid
So even though the LDS church is a bit more careful today to suggest a "widespread" apostasy, the fact is that they have not proven a complete and total apostasy needed for such re-establishment (and no, pointing to the Middle Ages is not proof of a universal apostasy).
Next topic: When you read the Book of Mormon the belief in God is monotheistic and the nature of God is triune (the BOM does not teach henotheism). The Book of Mormon teaches: there is only one being who is God; God is a spirit; and Jesus is God. This is all inline with the concept of the trinity. It was only after the BOM was written that Smith changed his views to a plurality of gods.
Despite whatever evidences Fair Mormon may present there exists a huge problem with the Book of Mormon - that is, the appearance of 1769 King James Version translation errors within it's text. In other words, when creating the BOM Smith quoted extensively from the King James Version of the Bible (particularly the book of Isaiah). When doing so he unknowingly copied KJV translation mistakes into his book. For example, Smith copied Isaiah 4:5 from the 1769 KJV almost verbatim into his Book of Mormon (with the exception of adding the words "of Zion" - see: 2 Nephi 14:5). In this verse the KJV translators opted for the Geneva Bible's rendering. It is in the GNV that one finds the first appearance of the English word "defence" in this verse (before then it was rendered "preserued" as in the Great Bible and Bishops Bible). The problem is that in the Hebrew the word chippah does not mean "defence" but rather a protective curtain or canopy as in the ESV: "Then the Lord will create over the whole site of Mount Zion and over her assemblies a cloud by day, and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for over all the glory there will be a canopy." The appearance of the word "defence" in the Book of Mormon shows Smith's reliance on an English text and that he was not translating (or dictating) from an ancient source. This is not an isolated event as there are many incorrectly translated verses from the KJV that appear within the text of the Book of Mormon. This suggests a couple things: Smith was not telling the truth about the origin of the BOM and the witnesses to the translation process were also not being honest. Are we really to believe that even with the Urim & Thummim, the seer stone, and "the gift and power of God" Smith could still get the translation correct? This should be considered a basic violation of common sense.
The problem with your theory showing stone structures is the book of mormon primarily talks about wood structures not stone structures.
I must be dreaming!
My question. Charles Anthon wasn't the only scholar in NYC or the area. Why not just take it to another person to write a certified letter? They didn't...so something doesn't fit. And why not save it...copy more so we can have it today. Angels are not physical. So how does a non physical being take physical plates to heaven. Why...why not keep them here so we can see them. We see the biblical scrolls...why not the plates. Why do we believe that proof is wrong when the Bible talks abt proof of this or that. Who made proof "bad" and why.
The biblical scrolls you mention are copies as well, so no different in principle from a modern day printing of an ancient book.
Who is talking? Where was this fireside? Who does the speaker work for? Who What When Where Why?!
Its fireside who I don't know when no idea and why is simple Its about the Book of Mormon dick head Dan .
again no proof just an opinion...lets keep this straight...no proof..