by John Lynch on June 29th, 2009
A vision given to Nephi in chapter thirteen of the first book that bears his name contains a statement that has raised the eyebrows of critics. It reads in verse 28:
“Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and aprecious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.”
Critics challenge Latter-day Saints to itemize those plain and precious items that are found missing in the Bible and that are unique to the Book of Mormon. Believing that this challenge will be impossible to meet, these critics seek to undermine the confidence of Mormon’s in this keystone book of scripture. Such an approach becomes a “catch 22″ trap. Whatever doctrine that is mentioned in the Book of Mormon that is unique is used against us to prove that we do not believe in Biblical teachings. Whatever is pointed to as evidence in the Book of Mormon that is also in the Bible is dismissed, because it proves the same plain and precious truths are also in the Bible, undermining this passage.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Book of Mormon | 8 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on March 31st, 2009
Recently, an old friend had given me a copy of Rod Meldrum’s DVD, DNA Evidence for Book of Mormon Geography. This newer edition is, in some ways, radically different from the one perused by FAIR members when the original came out, roughly one year ago. While I haven’t seen the new version in its entirety, I thought the changes were significant enough to put in front of the people.
First, though, I want to make some things clear:
While most FAIR members accept a Mesoamerican setting for the Book of Mormon, there is NO official FAIR position on Book of Mormon geography. Greg Smith’s blog entry should make that abundantly clear. Moreover, I know of no FAIR member who is closed-minded to a Anglo-North American setting of the Book of Mormon. Indeed, FAIR member Larry Poulsen, who is an advocate of the Mesoamerican theory, posts Theodore Brandley’s thesis on his web site (and he has eloquently–if unconvincingly–advocated his position in comments on my earlier blog entry!), and I have speculated about a Florida setting for the Land Southward in those same comments.
Here are some of the parts of the revised DVD that I thought noteworthy:
1. There is an explicit statement by Emeritus General Authority Elder Hartman Rector at the beginning of the DVD, that there is no official Church position on Book of Mormon Geography.
2. Meldrum inserts a similar statement into his presentation–early on.
I hope that those who have read the reviews by FAIR personnel–including Robert White’s blog entry–would realise that the greatest issue that FAIR took with Meldrum’s presentation was the implied Church endorsement of his position–with the accompanying implication of the apostasy of those who didn’t agree. I don’t know if Elder Rector wisely advised him to make the insertions, whether the Brethren put pressure to insert those disclaimers, or if Meldrum himself “saw the light” and made the insertions on his own initiative, the fact is, those changes were made–quietly, and without fanfare. [A more cynical person might argue that the quiet with which Meldrum made those changes was an attempt to give a false impression that FAIR lied about his presentation.]
Whatever the motivation, those changes are quite welcome, and I, for one am quite happy that those who are unpersuaded of Meldrum’s position (not just FAIR and FARMS members–whom Meldrum refers to as “the scholars”!) are now free from any taint of being charged with apostasy. For that, Brother Meldrum deserves credit.
Still, there are problems with Meldrum’s presentation:
Firstly, he claims that a thorough search of what “the scholars” had on the DNA issue revealed nothing. I really don’t know how Rod Meldrum could possibly have missed this list of FAIR articles, including those by David Stewart, D. Jeffrey Meldrum, and Scott Woodward–all of them trained in genetics, and all of them written before his DVD. Moreover, how could he have missed this list of DVDs–one of which, The Book of Mormon and New World DNA, was copyrighted in 2007 (I own a copy!)?
Another problem is with the “scientific method” that Meldrum employs. I am trained as what the business world calls a “quant jock.” Thus, even though I CLEPed out on the sciences as an undergrad–and got some training on counteracting nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) weapons, it would be presumptuous to claim that I am a scientist–and my looking for better counteragents would NOT be “scientific research.” It would be equally presumptuous for Meldrum, who, as I understand, was a technical writer, to claim that HE engaged in “scientific research.”
Though I am incompetent to comment on genetics, others, such as Ugo Perego, are quite competent in the field–and they take issue not only with Simon Southerton, but with Rod Meldrum and their (at best) naive assumtions and faulty conclusions.
However, I AM competent to comment on geographic issues on his claim, because of my undergraduate and graduate training in the social sciences. To be fair to Meldrum and others who accept a Great Lakes setting for the Book of Mormon, I was wrong when I said that I failed to find a “Land Southward” that was “nearly surrounded by water” [See Alma 22:29-30] in the Great Lakes. Honesty compels me to admit that Southwestern Ontario certainly qualifies as a peninsular “Land Southward,” and the land stretching from the southern tip of the Georgian Bay to the northwestern shore of Lake Ontario is undoubtedly narrow enough to be traversed in a day and a half [See Alma 22:32]. However, even considering that the Nephite first month is the same time of year as the crucifixion [III Nephi 8:5], Ontario–even that part, is much too cold for Lamanites to get away with wearing only skins about their loins [Alma 43:4, 19] about that time. As I write, a perusal of the weather forecast for Toronto at this time of year shows that there will be SNOW on the seventh of April[http://www.weather.com/outlook/travel/businesstraveler/tenday/CAXX0504?from=36hr_fcst10DayLink_business].
While Brother Meldrum may have graduated from the FAIR hot-seat, he will have to produce far better evidence for him to get some POSITIVE attention.
Posted in Book of Mormon, General, News from FAIR, News stories | 70 Comments »
by Ugo Perego on February 6th, 2009
On January 28, 2009 Simon Southerton posted the following comments on the discussion board at exmormon.org about my recent scientific publication on Native American origins. He also took the opportunity to criticize Dr. Scott Woodward, former molecular biologist at Brigham Young University and current director of the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF).
Having great familiarity and being personally involved with the subjects mentioned in Southerton’s remarks, I deemed it necessary to provide an alternative and more accurate version of the facts. This is simply a rebuttal to Southerton’s specific posting and it is not meant to be another treatise on the Book of Mormon vs. DNA issue, since there is already a great abundance of LDS scholarship addressing the topic.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon | 98 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on December 14th, 2008
I recently perfunctorily read a new study written by three Stanford University professors, titled “Reassessing authorship of the Book of Mormon using delta and nearest shrunken centroid classification,” and published in the latest issue of the journal, Literary and Linguistic Computing. While I admit to being disturbed by the article, it is not for the reason they would like it to be. I teach statistics at America’s largest privately-owned university, and, frankly, I see so many problems, I’m not sure where to begin.
To start, they were not exhaustive in alleged authors. In this regard, the “study” is not unlike choosing five National Football League (NFL) teams at random (and two Canadian Football League (CFL) teams as a “control”), and stating that the one with the best won-lost percentage won the Super Bowl. Choosing the best of an woefully incomplete list tells the reader nothing about “Who really wrote the Book of Mormon”–the Stanford authors’ clucking agreement with the authors of the book by that name notwithstanding–just as not checking out ALL NFL teams says nothing about the winner of the Super Bowl.
For one thing, Joseph Smith’s writings were missing from this study. I can imagine that even many anti-Mormons would be upset at crowning Solomon Spaulding’s Manuscript Story as the true Book of Mormon, if it were demonstrated that Joseph Smith’s letters or journal was a better match!
Moreover, the authors alleged by Latter-day Saints are VERY conspicuous by their absence. While I admit that there are no other samples of Mormon’s or Alma’s or Nephi’s writing than what is found in the Book of Mormon, the Book does extensively quote Jesus Christ–and not just the rerun of the Sermon on the Mount!
Why is the New Testament missing from this study? Surely, if Solomon Spaulding were the author of III Nephi 9-12; 15-21; 23; 26-30, rather than the Saviour, wouldn’t testing His words in the New Testament put the final nail in the coffin burying Mormonism? However,whether or not Jesus’ New Testament statements are a match with His alleged words in the Book of Mormon, these authors have made sure that the reader would never know it. What are they afraid of–that the Gospels would be a match?
It gets worse. As I read the results, not one of the works studied had more similarities with the Book of Mormon than dissimilarities. Their choice of Spaulding’s manuscript as the true source of the Book of Mormon, then, is like taking the last place team in each division of the NFL and congratulating the best of them for winning the Super Bowl. Just as every last place team is disqualified from the playoffs, let alone winning the Super Bowl, a manuscript with more dissimilarities than likenesses to the the Book of Mormon should also be disqualified from consideration.
In short, this game is rigged, and such a misuse of scholarship offends me as a teacher of statistics, as a Latter-day Saint, as a Christian, and as a fair-minded person. The fact that this pseudo-scholarship is in reality a poorly-reasoned anti-Mormon bromide makes it worse.
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon, LDS History, LDS Scriptures, News stories, Uncategorized | 51 Comments »
by Keller on October 12th, 2008
We here at FAIR Blog are pleased to report on the latest Olivewood Books fireside featuring BYU law professor John Welch. In case you missed it, we have covered past speakers John Sorenson, John Gee, Mark Wright, and Daniel Peterson. If you live in the Utah County area and don’t want to miss out on future events, you may consider bookmarking this informative site and checking often.
Ever the prolific scholar, Welch authored a recent book examining legal cases in the Book of Mormon. Since attending his lecture, I have read the new book, which will inform my recap and commentary. Welch related the story of how Rex E. Lee recruited him to teach at to work at the fledgling BYU law school in 1979. Lee’s pitch was that if Welch taught a designated course he could teach whatever else interested him. Welch half-jokingly suggested Babylonian law as it relates to the scriptures and Lee responded that that was exactly the type of course BYU needed. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Book of Mormon | 8 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on October 11th, 2008
Twenty-eight years ago, I was introduced to Heavenly Father’s Church, through the auspices of ”Uncle Sam.” One thing that those drill sergeants shoved into our heads were the General Orders:
- I will guard everything within the limits of my post and quit my post only when properly relieved.
- I will obey my special orders and perform all of my duties in a military manner.
- I will report violations of my special orders, emergencies, and anything not covered in my instructions to the commander of the relief.
Events of the past few years have me re-reading the Book of Mormon, as Mormon implies that he is writing it for our benefit, because we’re going through the same thing [Mormon 8:35-36].
In California, the Church seems willing to make a “last stand” on the issue of homosexual marriage–which is part of a concerted effort to make the behaviour seem normal, rather than the sin that it is. Sadly, it appears that this is a fight that the Church will lose–if not at the polls, then in the courts, ratified at the polls when people elect those who appoint the anti-Mormon and anti-Evangelical judges. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon, Doctrine, General, LDS History, LDS Scriptures, News stories, Politics, Polygamy | 105 Comments »
by Robert White on October 7th, 2008
Ever since FAIR published an introductory review concerning Rod Meldrum’s presentations and DVD, various members of FAIR have been vilified by him for shining some light on what he was doing. On Rod Meldrum’s blog he wrote this:
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Book of Mormon | 78 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on October 5th, 2008
Recently, much has been made of FAIR taking issue with a DVD and fireside presentation of a theory which claims that the Book of Mormon events were based in the upper Great Lakes region. While that theory may be right, the proponents of the Great Lakes theory bear the burden of showing that it is so.
While I shan’t go deeply into the that theory, let me briefly state why I am unconvinced by the evidence thus far presented, in spite of the fact that an emeritus General Authority is convinced: Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Book of Mormon, Doctrine, General, LDS History, LDS Scriptures, News from FAIR | 38 Comments »
by Larry Poulsen on September 28th, 2008
Upon the loss of the 116 pages containing the Book of Lehi, Joseph Smith turned to the small plates of Nephi for this period of history. This translation concludes with the Book of Omni and his brief description of Mosiah’s move to the land of Zarahemla.
This is followed by the Words of Mormon. This section was apparently written in preparation for his transfer of the plates to Moroni.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Book of Mormon | 1 Comment »
by Greg Smith on September 9th, 2008
In another thread, one poster wrote:
If you don’t agree with me on Cumorah being our best strating point, I would be very open to hearing what you consider to be the best piece of evidence or the best witness to call upon as the most solid to date.
To which I responded:
In my opinion, it is a huge problem to start with ANY physical location. You’re already making assumptions, no matter how hard we try. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Book of Mormon, LDS Scriptures | 106 Comments »
