Inspired by my previous question on the divine inspiration of the Bible, I would like to ask a similar question on the Book of Mormon:
According to Latter-day Saints, what are the strongest apologetic arguments for the divine inspiration of the Book of Mormon? What evidence do we have to be confident that the Book of Mormon was supernaturally inspired by God?
Note: the counterpart question can be found at What are scholarly objections to the divine inspiration of the Book of Mormon?
Related
1. Authorship-Translator
Joseph Smith had an elementary education and managed to produce a 500 page book in 3 months (obtained plates on 22 September 1827).
Born into a poor farming family, he was the fifth child of 11 — nine of whom survived childhood. Because his family could not afford the luxury of public education, Joseph received only three years of formal schooling
Joseph translated the record in about three months, and the resultant Book of Mormon was first published in New York in 1830. A volume of over 500 pages1
a. Witnesses to the Golden Plates
There are three witnesses who state: (Each of these witness for a time left the church but never denied/recanted their witness2)
That we,... have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us;
There are also eight witnesses who state:
has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken.
b. Content/Evidence
J.S. only 24 years of age
J.S. had little financially and had to support his family (farm work)
J.S. life was threatened, mobs tried to steal the plates
no electronics (no telephone, no dictating equipment, fax, word processor, or copy machine—not even electric light)
J.S. never visited South America or the Middle East
J.S. belonged to no professional societies, performed no extensive research projects, nor did he have learned colleagues with whom to discuss the ancient text
Typically a literary work undergoes extensive revisions and editing before a final, finely tuned draft is completed. For example, Abraham Lincoln rewrote his Gettysburg Address five different times, each version varying slightly from the other (see World Book Encyclopedia, 1992).
I have had the glorious experience of quietly examining several pages of Joseph’s original manuscript of the Book of Mormon, which is safely protected in the Church archives. I was overwhelmed at the purity of the transcription which had only a very few, insignificant corrections, such as a misspelled word. Joseph’s original manuscript is so perfect, it could only have come from one source—divine revelation.
In addition to above (evidence against Book of Mormon just being written and was in fact 'supernaturally inspired')
"...when returning after meals, or after interruptions, he would at once begin where he had left off, without either seeing the manuscript or having any portion of it read to him.”see also link
2. Purpose of the Book of Mormon
The purpose of the Book of Mormon as stated on the title page is:
And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations
From the introduction:
Concerning this record the Prophet Joseph Smith said: “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”
It can be argued that the book itself can stand for itself and its inspiration.
1 Joseph Smith and the Restoration and How Long Did it Take Joseph Smith to Translate the Book of Mormon
2 The Last Witness of the Three Witnesses and Witnesses of the Book of Mormon
3 Mounting Evidence for the Book of Mormon 2nd paragraph specifically
4 Answer about evidence of Jewish descendants in America, Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, Research and Perspectives, The Book of Mormon and Archeology (from main unofficial LDS apologist site)
See also Book of Mormon Translation
J.S. stands for Joseph Smith, so I didn't have to type it out each time
I don't expect this answer to convince anyone, as new arguments against arise frequently. From An Approach to the Book of Mormon
>When a man asks for proof we can be pretty sure that proof is the last thing in the world he really wants. His request is thrown out as a challenge, and the chances are that he has no intention of being shown up. After all these years the Bible itself is still not proven to those who do not choose to believe it, and the eminent Harry Torczyner now declares that the main problem of Bible study today is to determine whether or not “the Biblical speeches, songs and laws are forgeries.” So the Book of Mormon as an “unproven” book and itself in good company.My previous answer addressed negative arguments -- I believe a well-rounded response to the OP's question should also contain positive arguments and a general look at the purpose of the Book of Mormon (BoM). I have separated the answers for readability.
In order to pretend to be concise I'll just focus on 3.
A. Stylometry
(Drawn from Book of Mormon Authorship – New Light on Ancient Origins)
Stylometry studies word-prints and offers a means of determining who wrote an anonymous text. Like a fingerprint, people leave traceable patterns in their writing. Very small samples (e.g. a few verses) are insufficient for statistically-significant stylometric analysis, but longer passages are quite relevant and the scientific apparatus is well-studied. Stylometry has been used to determine authorship of a variety of documents, including some of the Federalist Papers.
An author’s word-print has been shown to survive translation, and authors who try to game the system and mimic another author’s style have been betrayed by their own unconscious writing habits—stylometry can catch the ruse. Even when an author has multiple characters who speak and behave differently, the author’s word-print can be discerned.
The Book of Mormon has been subjected to stylometric analysis which has demonstrated, among other things:
The authors of the aforementioned Book of Mormon Authorship provide an extensive discussion of the statistical data, and they offer rebuttals to counterarguments that have failed to capture the depth of the stylometric analysis that has been performed.
[Editorial insertion - this argument appears to have been misunderstood elsewhere - the stylometry argument doesn't directly prove the inspiration of the Book of Mormon; it approaches the problem indirectly by refuting all of the major alternative theories for the book's origin.
The book exists. Why does it exist? Stylometry provides a quantitative means of rejecting theories that compete with the explanation given by Joseph Smith.
Logically this argument takes the form:
Let A = the Book of Mormon is inspired
P1: A or B or C
P2: ~B
P3: ~C
C: A ]
B. 3 & 8 witnesses
As discussed in other answers, 11 men (besides Joseph Smith) gave testimony of seeing and handling the plates from which the record came—the 3 witnesses said they were given a divine declaration; the 8 witnesses were shown the plates by Joseph Smith. Their testimonies are recorded in the introductory pages of the Book of Mormon (see here & here). 6 of these 11 men later became very hostile to Joseph Smith and left the church (2 would eventually make a major about face and come back). None of the 11 ever denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon.
The following statements of David Whitmer, the last surviving of the 3 witnesses, are worth repeating:
David Whitmer lived outside the Church for 50 years following his excommunication—never to return but never to deny his testimony. As the last surviving Witness, he was often interviewed—and often misquoted. To one man who claimed that David had recanted his testimony, he declared:
“That he may understand me now, if he did not then; and that the world may know the truth, I wish now, standing as it were, in the very sunset of life, and in the fear of God, once for all to make this public statement:
“That I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof, which has so long since been published with that Book, as one of the three witnesses.”
A year before his death in Richmond, Missouri, David responded to two encyclopedias that claimed he and the other Witnesses had denied their testimonies of the Book of Mormon.
He declared: “I will say once more to all mankind, that I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof. I also testify to the world, that neither Oliver Cowdery or Martin Harris ever at any time denied their testimony. They both died affirming the truth of the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon.” (source)
C. Chiasmus
Chiasmus is a poetic structure (especially in Hebrew writing) that was unknown to Joseph Smith. In the last few centuries it has been rediscovered throughout the Bible. Chiasmus is also common in the Book of Mormon, although it wasn’t discovered in the Book of Mormon until the 20th century. It had been sitting there all along—a remarkable demonstration of the Semitic origin of the Book of Mormon—without ever being noticed.
One example: the entire chapter of Alma 36 is a giant chiasmus. An A-B-B-A chiasmus may occur by accident, a massive chiasmus like Alma 36 is no accident. Further reading here.
A. The book’s purpose
I’ll outline 3 purposes stated in the introductory pages of the book itself:
From the Title Page of the Book of Mormon:
to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ
From the Introduction:
It puts forth the doctrines of the gospel, outlines the plan of salvation, and tells men what they must do to gain peace in this life and eternal salvation in the life to come.
And again from the introduction to the Book of Mormon:
We invite all men everywhere to read the Book of Mormon, to ponder in their hearts the message it contains, and then to ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ if the book is true. Those who pursue this course and ask in faith will gain a testimony of its truth and divinity by the power of the Holy Ghost. (See Moroni 10:3–5.)
Those who gain this divine witness from the Holy Spirit will also come to know by the same power that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world, that Joseph Smith is His revelator and prophet in these last days, and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord’s kingdom once again established on the earth, preparatory to the Second Coming of the Messiah.
If the veracity of the Book of Mormon were demonstrated to the degree that there was no possibility of disbelief—if that knowledge were obtained without divine aid and spiritual exertion—the book would fail in all 3 purposes noted above. Among other things, the Book of Mormon is a vehicle for gaining faith and obtaining a testimony of the restoration.
To put it into a context more accessible to other Christians – why doesn’t God just show Himself? if God personally appeared to every person, showed them what eternal life looks like, showed them what damnation looks like, and commanded them with thunder and lightning to obey His commandments—rates of obedience would probably go up, but they would go up for the wrong reason. There would be belief without faith, change without commitment, participation without worship, and obedience without transformation.
I believe God wants more than just people’s actions, He wants their hearts. He doesn’t just want people to walk the strait & narrow; He wants to change people in the process.
If God designed a tool specifically for this day and age to teach the principle of revelation to the most skeptical era of human history—and then compelled everyone on pain of ridicule to believe it was true—the tool would be a failure. I believe God cares enough about people’s spiritual progression that He won’t compel them to believe the Book of Mormon.
BYU Professor Robert Millet wrote an excellent article expanding on many of these points—I’ll cite several quotations he compiled:
Hugh Nibley (a BYU professor) wrote:
The words of the prophets cannot be held to the tentative and defective tests that men have devised for them. Science, philosophy, and common sense all have a right to their day in court. But the last word does not lie with them. Every time men in their wisdom have come forth with the last word, other words have promptly followed. The last word is a testimony of the gospel that comes only by direct revelation. Our Father in heaven speaks it, and if it were in perfect agreement with the science of today, it would surely be out of line with the science of tomorrow. Let us not, therefore, seek to hold God to the learned opinions of the moment when he speaks the language of eternity (The World and the Prophets (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and F.A.R.M..S., 1987), 134).
From Ezra Taft Benson (former president of the church):
It never has been the case, nor is it so now, that the studies of the learned will prove the Book or Mormon true or false. The origin, preparation, translation, and verification of the truth of the Book of Mormon have all been retained in the hands of the Lord
--
B. When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. When the facts are not on your side, pound the table
Again from Robert Millet:
Why is it that so many people throughout the world write scathing books, deliver biting addresses, and prepare vicious videos denouncing the Book of Mormon? What is it about...words...which are uplifting and edifying, that invite men and women to come unto Christ and be perfected in Him, that would arouse such bitter antagonism? Once again, if I did not already know, by the quiet whisperings of the Spirit, that the Book of Mormon is truly heaven-sent and indeed Another Testament of Jesus Christ, I would recognize its significance—its power to settle doctrinal disputes, touch hearts, and transform men and women’s lives—by the loud and hostile reactions people tend to have toward it. (ibid)
The anger, venom, and ad-hominem attacks that are ubiquitously brought up in opposition to the BoM certainly give me pause to ask: if the case were so open and shut against the book, would its critics have to resort to these tactics? If the facts were clearly against the BoM, would ad hominems be necessary?
As the old debate adage says: "if the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the facts are not on your side, pound the table."
Conclusion
I must acknowledge, as one who believes the Book of Mormon, that the apologetics above serve as but “flying buttresses” to my belief in the BoM, which is built upon a distinct foundation: “not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:” (1 Cor. 2:4).
My confidence in the Book of Mormon comes through applying Moroni’s promise with tremendous effort and sincerity (to clarify a discussion from another question—this isn’t a one-time event—I have received the witness of the Holy Ghost many times):
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. (Moroni 10:4-5)
This promise worked for me.
tl;dr Either Joseph Smith had a nearly unrealistically powerful imagination and coincidentally had many completely imaginative story elements line up with reality, or he had some kind of supernatural--maybe divine--help, as shown by the following archeological evidence.
Previous to 2018, there was this argument against the authenticity of the Book of Mormon: there is no corroborating archeological evidence. The argument goes, if there was such a large civilization that spanned 1000 years somewhere in the Americas, why did no known civilization's timeline line up and why didn't objects, cities, etc. from the book appear somewhere in the archeological record?
One thing that exacerbated the criticism was the cultural belief among believers in the Book of Mormon, especially in the 1800s, that the Native Americans of the United States were the principal descendants of the subjects of the Book of Mormon.
Arguments pointing out these inconsistencies and lack of archeological evidence are common among Western researchers and skeptics of the Book of Mormon. (Not only is there a lack of archeological evidence in the United States, but some Native American nations' DNA suggest they came over land bridges between Russia and Alaska, while the Book of Mormon peoples came by sea from the Middle East.)
In recent years, a new eye from the Western world turned to Central America in the form of lidar. From a plane, drone, or helicopter, lidar can reveal archeological structure behind ultra-dense foliage (forests), behind a shallow level of earth, and through water.
Here are some things reported by BBC and National Geographic, among other sources, near Guatemala.
(Book of Mormon descriptions and Central America have often been linked, and one reason is the description of a "narrow neck of land" that a person could journey across in a day.)
(Keep in mind a quote from these reports: "Francisco Estrada-Belli, a Tulane University archaeologist, told National Geographic. 'We'll need 100 years to go through all [the data] and really understand what we're seeing.'" It is conceivable that such discovery is not confined to Guatemala and that things we still don't see will be discovered from already existing data.)
Reminder, modern historians and researchers do not believe and have no evidence that any of these findings that appear in the Book of Mormon and in Guatemala lidar data (e.g. elevated highways, fortified walls, population and timeframe) were known to anyone during the time of Joseph Smith (mid-1800s) and there is no explanation how an uneducated, teenage boy from rural New York would know to copy these ideas. From the lidar researchers: "After decades of combing through the forests, no archaeologists had stumbled across these sites." Either Joseph Smith had a nearly unrealistically powerful imagination and coincidentally had many completely imaginative story elements line up with reality, or he had some kind of supernatural--maybe divine--help.
Anything yet unconfirmed in the Book of Mormon could have an explanation, as it's not disproved, but like the ancient civilizations, hasn't had evidence for or against yet.
In the last 4 years, lidar has uncovered other civilization around the Gulf of Mexico with much more area yet to be thoroughly researched and large amounts of data collected yet to be analyzed.
Screenshot of forest in Guatemala seen by eye and seen with lidar, from BBC
Screenshot of forest in Guatemala seen by eye and seen with lidar, from National Geographic
Much of the conversation often focuses on Joseph Smith's supposed translation and whether or not it was miraculous. I do not discount those arguments, as they are important, but I feel that there is a much more important topic to touch upon: the spiritual testimonies that the Book of Mormon contain.
To me, who wrote and/or translated the Book of Mormon is of little immediate concern. I am more concerned to let the book speak for itself. There have been genius works written by complete nobodies, and there have been complete duds written by alleged geniuses. I care more about what the text has to say about the Divinity of Jesus Christ than where it came from. If it can support itself on that regard, then clearly it comes from God, for as the psalmist says, "I say to the Lord, ‘You are my Lord; apart from you I have no good thing.'" (Psalm 16:2, NIV).
Indeed, Professor Hugh Nibley (who is about as "apologetic" as one can get concerning the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ) states:
Indeed, the Book of Mormon is quite impossible on that ground [the thesis that Joseph Smith wrote it]. The fact that it exists proves that somebody wrote it, but not necessarily that Joseph Smith did.... He is an exceedingly unlikely candidate, but where will you find a more likely candidate? [1]
Similarly, Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, who members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe to be an modern-day Apostle with the same authority as the apostles in the New Testament, makes the argument (albeit quoting his grandfather) that “No wicked man could write such a book as this; and no good man would write it, unless it were true and he were commanded of God to do so.” [2]
Much of his writing and speaking focuses on that idea: prove the Book of Mormon's testimony of Jesus Christ before trying to prove anything about where it came from. If the book testifies of Christ as profoundly as it does, then no evil man could have written it, and a good man would have only if divinely inspired of God.
For the apologist, this provides two main advantages: (1) showing that the book testifies of Christ is easy, and (2) it is much easier to reason about the book's origin having established that somehow it came from God.
Before arguing that the Book of Mormon testifies of Jesus's divinity, one must first prove that the book talks about him at all. Luckily, this is easy. Citing an essay on the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints's website:
The Book of Mormon is another witness of Jesus Christ and confirms the truths found in the Holy Bible. Far from undermining the Bible, the Book of Mormon supports its testimony of Jesus Christ. One passage says that the Book of Mormon “shall establish the truth” of the Bible “and shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world; and that all men must come unto him, or they cannot be saved” (1 Nephi 13:40).
In its more than 6,000 verses, the Book of Mormon refers to Jesus Christ almost 4,000 times and by 100 different names: “Jehovah,” “Immanuel,” “Holy Messiah,” “Lamb of God,” “Redeemer of Israel,” and so on. [3]
Doing a little bit of math shows that the Book of Mormon mentions Jesus Christ (by some title) on average every 1.7 verses. Why would a book reference Him every other verse, if not to testify of his divinity?
Simply mentioning someone that frequently, in and of itself, does not show that the book favors that person. Perhaps, those references attempt to discredit the Savior, as many critics of the Book of Mormon tend to believe. But the Book of Mormon is clear in this regard as to its purpose. Nephi, the first writer in the text, expresses this clear intent multiple times in his chapters.
26 And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. [4]
4 And I know that the Lord God will consecrate my prayers for the gain of my people. And the words which I have written in weakness will be made strong unto them; for it persuadeth them to do good; it maketh known unto them of their fathers; and it speaketh of Jesus, and persuadeth them to believe in him, and to endure to the end, which is life eternal.
5 And it speaketh harshly against sin, according to the plainness of the truth; wherefore, no man will be angry at the words which I have written save he shall be of the spirit of the devil.
6 I glory in plainness; I glory in truth; I glory in my Jesus, for he hath redeemed my soul from hell. [5]
Thus, we clearly see that the intent of the Book of Mormon is to convince men how to love and worship Jesus Christ and seek Him for a remission of their sins. I have omitted many references to powerful, life-changing sermons and allegories that the book contains. There is no way that someone can read this entire book and honestly claim that it does not lift up their testimony of the Savior and persuade them to do good.
Many quickly counter the above by pointing out that there are plenty of men who use Jesus's name for nefarious purpose, ergo simply speaking of Christ is not sufficient evidence of divine inspiration. While true, this counterargument confuses "testifying of Christ" with "speaking of Christ". A testimony necessarily implies an exhortation to repent and follow Jesus Christ. Does following an alleged testimony's counsel lead to happiness and peace in Jesus? Or does their encouragement lead to other paths? If the former, then it is a testimony. If the latter, then one is right to doubt whether it comes of God. Jesus himself warns of this distinction and provides that test in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 7:16-20, KJV):
15 ¶ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Jesus's sets His standard clearly. When determining whether some teaching is good and godly, look to see the fruits that will happen if you live it. Will living it bring one closer to God? Or will living it take one down "the way which leadeth to destruction" (Matthew 7:14)? If it convinces one to follow Jesus, then it did not come from a corrupt tree.
With this in mind, let us see what the fruits of following the doctrines contained in the Book of Mormon yield. For brevity's sake, I include only one exhibit: an excerpt from a sermon from Jesus himself in the Book of Mormon.
19 And no unclean thing can enter into his kingdom; therefore nothing entereth into his rest save it be those who have washed their garments in my blood, because of their faith, and the repentance of all their sins, and their faithfulness unto the end.
20 Now this is the commandment: Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me and be baptized in my name, that ye may be sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost, that ye may stand spotless before me at the last day. [6]
Here, the Master explains the doctrine and the fruits--and ultimately the central message of the Book of Mormon--very plainly. Faith, repentance, and baptism will lead to sanctification and standing spotless before God. If that is not an encouragement to follow Jesus, then I do not know what is.
The doctrines cannot simultaneously convince one to follow Jesus and to follow the Adversary. But clearly, the Book of Mormon expressly encourages its readers to follow Jesus Christ. No evil man, whether for personal gain or otherwise, would write a book so focused on following Jesus. No good man would do it and claim it to be revelation unless he was inspired and commanded of God to do so.
An important piece of theology and a belief crucial to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the concept of "personal revelation". For them, God is not a silent or passive figure in their lives. When they pray, they do not only expect God to listen to and answer prayers, but they expect him to respond and converse with them.
In a demonstration of this faith, Moroni (the final writer in the Book of Mormon) tells those who read the book to pray and ask God if it is divinely inspired. He asserts that physical arguments are incapable of granting a spiritual testimony, just as Jesus taught Peter in Matthew 16-17 ("And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.", KJV). Conversion to true Christianity has to come via revelation from the Father. In this vein, here is Moroni's counsel:
3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.
7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever. [7]
Moroni promises that if you ponder the writing in the Book of Mormon, ask God with faith, and having real intent (i.e. the intent to really repent and change one's life to better follow Christ's teachings in the Bible and the Book of Mormon), then the Holy Ghost will reveal it unto you.
Millions have untaken "Moroni's challenge", so to speak. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints currently has some 16 million members, and although not every one will have prayed about the divinity of the Book of Mormon specifically, my estimate would be you could ask a huge portion of them (likely >50%) about their experience doing so, and they could describe it to you.
God has revealed the divinity of the Book of Mormon to millions, and can do the same for you.
In my life, I have gone from aggressive critic of the Book of Mormon, to hesitant apologetic, and eventually to ardent believer. In the above, I highlight apologetic arguments that have been particularly impactful for me. For years, I was never sold on the historical apologetic arguments in favor of the divinity of the Book of Mormon. For a long time, one of my favorite hobbies was attacking it on those very grounds. But I eventually realized that despite my arguments, the Book still existed. After some time, I finally read it. Despite my furious efforts to find contradictions, by the end of it, I could not shake the fact that it had indeed grown my faith in Jesus Christ and his role as my personal Savior just as much as the Old and New Testaments had. I had to humble myself and ask God if the book had come from him. I immediately received a powerful, strong witness that he had indeed sent it to the Earth for that very purpose. Nothing can take that experience from me. My continued study of the Book of Mormon and Bible have taken me from the hesitant apologetic to believer in Jesus Christ that I am today.
[1] Hugh Nibley. The Book of Mormon as a Record of Military Strategy. https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/hugh-nibley/book-mormon-record-military-strategy/
[2] Elder Jeffrey R. Holland. Safety for the Soul. https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2009/10/safety-for-the-soul?lang=eng
[3] Gospel Topics. The Book of Mormon. https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/book-of-mormon?lang=eng
[4] 2 Nephi 25:23. The Book of Mormon. https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/25.23?lang=eng&clang=eng#p23
[5] 2 Nephi 33:4-6. The Book of Mormon. https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/33?lang=eng
[6] 3 Nephi 27:19-20. The Book of Mormon. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/27?lang=eng
[7] Moroni 10:3-7. The Book of Mormon. https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/moro/10?lang=eng
testifying of Christ a very strong argument at all? I feel like that's a somewhat circular argument, in that someone would have to believe in the divinity of Christ in the first place to take it as axiomatic that a book that testifies of Christ is necessarily a good one, or that a man that believes in Christ must be a good one. And even if you DO believe in the divinity of Christ, there's still a lot of room to acknowledge that not everyone who testifies of Christ is good, or every piece of literature that does so is good or divinely inspired.
If the book testifies of Christ as profoundly as it does, then no evil man could have written it
I initially offered a response in 3 sections:
This response was too long (no but really, even after 3 edits it was too much). I've reduced this post to the negative arguments, and provided a separate answer for positive & general arguments.
Because The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches the principle of gaining a testimony of the Book of Mormon (BoM) through divine inspiration, not through apologetics or academics, a discussion of BoM apologetics would be of no practical value unless it engages with the views of the book’s critics. Point #1 is therefore necessary in order to provide a worthwhile answer to the OP’s question.
As has already been pointed out, it would be impossible in this format to thoroughly address 191 years of denouncement of the BoM. I’ll focus here on the arguments that this community has indicated it believes are the strongest.
I’ll use as the working assumption that the geography of the BoM best matches Mesoamerica. This is not an official position of the church, but is the position of most LDS scholars who study the issue.
A. The absence of the gold plates
Joseph Smith indicated that he returned the gold plates to Moroni, the messenger who directed him to the plates in the first place. Many critics suggest that if we just had the plates we could corroborate Joseph Smith’s story and people would believe.
There are at least two reasons why this wouldn't work:
B. Passages copied from the KJV of the Bible
Why would Joseph Smith, if inspired, usually use the KJV wording when BoM authors quoted Biblical passages? Especially in cases where there are (now) known errors in the KJV? (to be sure, the errors we’re talking about here are in almost all cases remarkably inconsequential variations—kind of like most of the 400,000 variants in the Greek New Testament)
There is a fundamental difference in the understanding of scripture that leads the LDS to see this issue very differently from many of other faiths. We do not have a doctrine of scriptural inerrancy, and as a result, textual criticism & seeking out an Ur-text are less central to our theology, which is rooted in modern revelation. As a result—and I know that this is frustrating to many of other faiths—we aren’t bothered by the possibility that a minor historical detail is misstated, as long as the doctrinal message of the passage is preserved.
I believe a good but imperfect translation can be adequate for God’s purposes—He’s willing to work through His human servants, even if their writing isn’t as good as His.
Given this perspective, I suggest there are several very good reasons why God might inspire Joseph Smith to largely follow the KJV:
There are also examples where the BoM amends the KJV and does so in harmony with older versions of the Biblical text. A well-known example comes from 2 Nephi 12:16 which quotes Isaiah 2:16:
The Greek (Septuagint) has “ships of the sea.” The Hebrew has “ships of Tarshish.” The Book of Mormon has both, showing that the brass plates had lost neither phrase. (See footnote to 2 Nephi 2:16).
We do not believe God intended to reveal a textbook in grammar, Greek, or Hebrew when He provided the BoM. We do believe He provided a text that teaches the doctrines of eternity clearly.
C. Anachronisms
The precise list changes over time (as archeology discovers things previously thought not to exist); I’ll respond to those specifically raised in the twin question.
D. Genetics
The church published this essay on the relevant genetics—it is both scientifically and spiritually rigorous. The TL;DR is actually pretty precise: genetics is unable to prove or disprove a relationship in the last 3,000 years between descendants of first temple-era Jews and native Americans.
It is noteworthy that we have no DNA samples or distributions for first temple era-Jews, Jewish DNA has been mixed through multiple diasporas since that time, and that the overwhelming majority of the native inhabitants of the Americas were killed during the European conquest, destroying much genetic diversity. Neither modern population offers a DNA sample that can provide anything near a complete or pristine record of DNA from several thousand years ago. This had led to widely varying results including many premature claims of both proof and disproof of the relationship between native Americans and first temple-era Jews.
The relevant populations have mixed and dispersed too quickly and too many times for DNA analysis to prove or disprove the Book or Mormon claims. Genetics is unable to precisely determine the number and origin of common ancestors from 26-30 centuries ago.
E. Archeology
This has been discussed at length in other posts on this page. I’ll offer just three comments:
F. Reformed Egyptian
We should expect to find writing (and we do!) in Mesoamerica - but not Egyptian writing. The Book of Mormon itself indicates that Reformed Egyptian was not the preferred form of writing (see Mormon 9:33), and was only used on the plates due to space constraints. The record-keeping discussed in the book implies relatively few were taught the language and regular religious communication neither used plates (impractical) nor Egyptian (unnecessary). A lesser-known language such as this would have no practical value in everyday commerce or in public inscriptions.
The fact that the language is not known from any other civilization is expressly acknowledged by the text in Mormon chapter 9:
32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.
…
34 But the Lord knoweth the things which we have written, and also that none other people knoweth our language;
It is also noteworthy that the existence of writing in Mesoamerica shows up in the archeological record during the time and place covered by the Book of Mormon. The idea that writing was introduced to the Americas by the Old World is extremely consistent with the Book of Mormon. The idea that writing—arguably humanity’s most brilliant invention—was developed independently but along similar lines in both the Old World and the New is not impossible, but it would be a greater miracle than most of the claims in the Bible or the Book of Mormon!
G. Book of Abraham
It is often claimed that the scrolls used by Joseph Smith to derive the book of Abraham have been discovered, and that once translated by modern scholars, they were found to have nothing to do with Abraham. Therefore, it is claimed, Joseph Smith is discredited as a translator.
Strictly speaking, a logical proof that the book of Abraham is a fraud would neither prove nor disprove the Book of Mormon. But I suggest there is much more to be said about the book of Abraham before we write it off.
The statement by the church on the matter is here.
The piece of the puzzle often left out of book of Abraham criticisms is that only a fraction of Joseph Smith’s Egyptian collection has been discovered, much remains lost.
Multiple eyewitnesses saw the scrolls Joseph Smith had at the time he translated the book of Abraham, and none of the fragments that were rediscovered in the 20th century match the description of what they knew as the Abraham scroll. Conclusion: the Abraham scroll is not among the rediscovered fragments.
From scholar John Gee:
according to a…non-Mormon eyewitness account, the Book of Abraham seems to have been on a very long and completely intact roll and therefore not even on the same scroll as the fragments we have. And this in turn means that none of the fragments of the Joseph Smith Papyri that we have is from the same scroll as the Book of Abraham and if none of the fragments that we currently have comes from the same scroll as the Book of Abraham then the fact that none of the texts on them matches the Book of Abraham is not a problem. Critics of the church have presumed that the Book of Abraham must be on the fragments that we currently have. Why they assume that is beyond me. Historical evidence is against such a conclusion.
Quotation and additional details drawn from John Gee’s work here.
The likely fate of the Abraham Scroll is summarized by the RSC:
Emma Smith (Joseph’s widow), her second husband (Lewis C. Bidamon), and her son Joseph Smith III sold the mummies and the papyri to a man named Abel Combs.
Abel Combs split up the papyri. Some he sold to the St. Louis Museum, including at least two of the rolls and at least two of the mummies; some of the mounted fragments he kept. The St. Louis Museum sold the rolls and mummies to Colonel Wood’s Museum in Chicago. Wood’s Museum burned down in the Chicago Fire of 1871, and presumably the papyri and mummies were destroyed with it.
Just offering an analytical opinion—if the collection included really nice scrolls as well as rougher fragments, and the museum only purchased a portion of the papyrus collection, which were they more likely to buy? (keeping in mind the artifacts were for display more than study). I suggest the procurer for the museum took the best and left the rest…meaning the Abraham scroll did end up in Wood’s Museum in Chicago and was lost to history in the Chicago fire of 1871.
H. Only one source
It has been asserted that if Joseph Smith had never been born, we would have no Book of Mormon. This is a circular argument, because it presupposes the conclusion it aims to prove: that God did not inspire the Book of Mormon. Absent this presupposed premise, if God may or may not have inspired the Book of Mormon, no Book of Mormon does not logically follow from no Joseph Smith.
Others have suggested, more cautiously, that although the circular argument does not work, the fact that our knowledge of the Book of Mormon comes through only one individual does leave some corroborating evidence to be desired. I suggest this argument is overplayed for at least two reasons:
Conclusion
Latter-day Saints do not believe in proving the Book of Mormon by an appeal to archeology, but have found ample evidence to make a defensive case for the Book of Mormon from this and other disciplines.
As the question is about apologetics it may be best to address apologetic arguments against the Book of Mormon (please note the evidence is not overwhelming or comprehensive, this is meant to point out that evidences do exist if willing to look). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints strongly encourages spiritual conversion as opposed to relying on physical evidence. Below each number item links to an apologetic argument against in regards to the question mentioned in OP related link, between the numbered items are responses.
Convenient absence of the original 'golden plates':
The scriptures suggest two reasons the Book of Mormon gold plates were not made available to the public: the first is that the Lord refused to allow men to use these sacred plates for commercial or personal benefit; the second, and most important, was so the Lord could test the faith of all who receive the record.
This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
About two-thirds were sealed up, and Joseph was commanded not to break the seal; that part of the record was hid up. The plates which were sealed contained an account of those things shewn unto the brother of Jared.3
proposes as one scenario that, instead of Joseph or Oliver looking at a Bible ... that God was simply able to provide the page of text from the King James Bible to Joseph's mind and then Joseph was free to alter the text as would be more comprehensible/comfortable to his 19th century, Northeastern, frontier audience....If Joseph or anyone else actually tried to plagiarize the Book of Mormon, critics have failed to show the source of the remaining 93% (when all ['copied'] texts are removed). A 100% non-biblical book of scripture wouldn't have been much more difficult to produce... Joseph could choose to render similar (or identical) material using King James Bible language if that adequately represented the text's intent.
Huge numbers of historical anachronisms
Linen and silk are textiles mentioned in the Book of Mormon (Alma 4:6). Neither fabric as we now know them was found in Mesoamerica at the coming of the Spaniards. The problem might be no more than linguistic. The redoubtable Bernal Diaz, who served with Cortez in the initial wave of conquest, described native Mexican garments made of "henequen which is like linen." The fiber of the maguey plant, from which henequen was manufactured, closely resembles the flax fiber used to make European linen. Several kinds of "silk," too, were reported by the conquerors. One kind was of thread spun from the fine hair on the bellies of rabbits. Padre Motolinia also reported the presence of a wild silkworm, although he thought the Indians did not make use of the cocoons. But other reports indicate that wild silk was spun and woven in certain areas of Mesoamerica. Another type came from the pod of the ceiba tree.
Lack of genetic and linguistic connections between pre-Columbian America and ancient Israel:
Almost total absence of corroborating archaeological evidence:
As the LDS doesn't have an official stance on where the Book of Mormon primarily took place, providing evidence for or against is difficult. The prevailing theory is the setting took place in the central America region.1 Most archaeologic evidence then is intended to show ancient civilizations with technology similar to those mentioned in the Book of Mormon.
SE Questions/Answers about this:
Inaccuracy of Smith's other 'translations':
Only small fragments of the long papyrus scrolls once in Joseph Smith’s possession exist today. The relationship between those fragments and the text we have today is largely a matter of conjecture....The papyri were divided up and sold to various parties; historians believe that most were destroyed in the Great Chicago Fire of 1871.
Mormon and non-Mormon Egyptologists agree that the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham, though there is not unanimity, even among non-Mormon scholars, about the proper interpretation of the vignettes on these fragments.
Stuart Ferguson-Mormon 'archaeologist', couldn't find evidence
Stuart Ferguson was a lawyer and never studied archaeology. On his trip there are two cases that might happen:
Found evidence
Didn't find evidence (case presented/what happened)
His associates with scientific training and thus more sophistication in the pitfalls involving intellectual matters could never draw him away from his narrow view of "research."2
April 1953, when [Stuart] and [John Sorenson] did the first archaeological reconnaissance of central Chiapas, which defined the Foundation's work for the next twenty years, [Stuart's] concern was to ask if local people had found any figurines of "horses," rather than to document the scores of sites we discovered and put on record for the first time.2
1 Book of Mormon Geography and an apologist article Where Did Book of Mormon Events Take Place
2 Stuart Ferguson apologist response
3 What Did the Golden Plates Look Like?
4 2 Nephi 27:10-11 and Ether 4:4-5
I offer this answer as a supplement to the other answers. I do not present a complete accounting of apologetic arguments here; the other answers (especially put together) do a much better job of that. Instead, I wanted to add one more thought on the subject.
Whatever else the Book of Mormon is or isn't, the fact is that it exists, and its origin must be accounted for. This may be less an apologetic argument of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon and more of a "challenge for the opposing side," but if one does not accept the account of divine origin that Joseph Smith provided for the Book of Mormon, then any successful argument against it should account for its origin. I'm not terribly familiar with the non-divine origin theories that exist, so I can't comment on them specifically. However, other answers posted here present a compelling case that Joseph Smith lacked the knowledge and capability of authoring the book, and any non-divine origin theory must also account for the stylometry findings (also presented in other answers) demonstrating multiple authorship of the book and lack of compelling stylometry attribution of the book to Joseph Smith's associates and contemporaries.
As pointed out in other answers, the Book of Mormon is a very complex book, with a good deal of "world-building" to use a modern term.
(I will acknowledge one study I have seen that used stylometry to attribute the Book of Mormon's authorship to Sidney Rigdon, a close associate of Joseph Smith. If I remember right, this 2008 study assumed that the Book of Mormon was authored by one of a limited list of people and attributed authorship to whomever came closest in style. It did not allow for authors outside of that list of people. A rebuttal study used the same methodology of that study to show Sidney Rigdon as the probably author of the Federalist Papers, despite not being born when they were written.)
