Book of Mormon Exposed

An abridgment of articles

Appearing in the Independence Examiner

November 1973 to April 1982

Introduction

From November 1973 to April 1982, a series of articles appeared in the Independence Examiner regarding problems related to the Book of Mormon. Many chose to ignore this information while others received a new hope and a new birth inspired by this work. One lady saved a certain article while moving from Independence to a state hundreds of miles west, and years later sought out the address at the bottom of the clipping for more information. The result was another miracle salvation testimony.

The boldness and patience of authors, Gene and Olive Wilcox and their little Church of Christ in Independence touched many lives and brought a soul-healing ministry to many searching, seeking RLDS. They had both been born into the RLDS church but had grown out of it through regular Bible studies during the 1940’s. The ministry slowed down following Gene’s death in 1982, but Olive’s desire was ever strong as she continued to witness to anyone who would contact her with questions.

When a group of former RLDS organized in March 1986, Olive was there with support, answering the many questions of the newcomers to this ministry outreach. She was a virtual “walking library” of historical information, as well as a loving sister in Christ to all who knew her. Olive joined her husband in the Lord in July of 1986, and is still greatly missed as we continue this mission to the RLDS.

Among the many things Olive shared with our group before her death is this series of articles printed over a nine-year period. No one can fully appreciate the time which she and Gene spent laboring over books, clippings, etc., to be able to document the information contained herein, information which when read objectively, proves that the Book of Mormon is not divinely inspired scripture, but rather a confusing, contradictory creation of man.

We feel blessed to be able to compile and abridge these articles for the students of RLDSism who are searching for the truth. Our prayer is that those who read these informative articles will be blessed with a knowledge of the truth.

Permission to reprint the articles herein, in part or in whole, is gladly granted to all.

Joseph Smith Could Have Written the Book of Mormon

It has always been claimed that Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon. For years we believed this to be true. But with the discovery of the 1826 Chenango, County, New York court bills in July 1971, by Mr. Wesley P. Walters and Mr. Fred Poffarl, we realized the need to re-examine our beliefs to see if they were based on facts or falsehoods. The above claim is one we re-examined.

Do you realize that poems, visions, hymns and a book were written by members of Joseph Smith’s family previous to the Book of Mormon? In reading these we noticed many similarities between them and the things contained in the Book of Mormon. We would like to bring some of them to your attention.

According to Lucy Smith (Joseph Smith’s mother), sometime around 1811, her husband, Joseph Smith Sr., had a vision. She relates that his vision is almost exactly like the one Lehi is supposed to have had in the Book of Mormon. Both Joseph Smith’s father and Lehi were TRAVELING, one in a desolate, the other in a dreary FIELD. Both had a GUIDE. Both visions had A TREE whose FRUIT was WHITE. The whiteness of one was “white as snow, or if possible whiter,” while the other was “to exceed all the whiteness that I had ever seen.” Both were to PARTAKE of the fruit which was “delicious beyond description” in the one vision, while in the other it was “desirable above all other fruit.” One had a “stream of water,” the other a “river of water.” One had “a rope running along the bank,” while the other had “a rod of iron...extended along the bank.” Both had “A SPACIOUS BUILDING.” In one “it appeared to reach to the very heavens,” while the other “it stood as it were in the air, high above the earth.” Both were FILLED WITH PEOPLE,” … DRESSED FINELY. Both say THEY POINTED THE FINGER OF SCORN AT US. One says “we utterly disregarded,” while the other says “we heeded them not.” Both interpret the tree and its fruit as the LOVE OF GOD, WHICH SHEDDETH ITSELF ABROAD IN THE HEARTS.  Both involve the desire for the family to partake also. (Lucy Smith’s History, 1853, pages 56-59 and Book of Mormon, Pages 19-22 and 28.) These similarities point very plainly to Joseph Smith as the author of the Book of Mormon. But let us consider further.

Do you know that Joseph Smith’s aunt Lovina, who died about 1794, composed a hymn a few days previous to her death. Some of the words were, “now farewell…I bid you all adieu.” (Lucy Smith’s History, Page 29.) Do you know a similar phrase appears in the Book of Mormon on page 193, at the end of verse 48? “I bid farewell…Brethren, Adieu.” This statement has always been a problem for Book of Mormon believers to explain. How could a French word show up in a purported divine translation of reformed Egyptian written by an Israelite approximately 2500 years ago? The answer could be that this was a Smith family expression and that is why it appeared in the Book of Mormon.

Do you know that Joseph Smith’s grandfather, Solomon Mack, wrote an autobiography and had it published in 1811? It was entitled, “A Narrative of the Life of Solomon Mack.” Do you realize that some of the expressions used by Solomon Mack appear in the Book of Mormon? Some examples are, A WATERY GRAVE (Book of Mormon, Page 62:204); THE DEVIL HAS GREAT HOLD (Page 568:17); SET AT NAUGHT HIS (GOD’S) COUNCILS (Page 584:56); WATERED MY PILLOW (Page 165:4); MASTER THE DEVIL (Page 221:26); and AN ENEMY TO GOD (Page 218:119.)

Do you know that Joseph Smith’s mother tells us that even before Joseph received the plates (from which the Book of Mormon supposedly was translated) that, “Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of traveling and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life with them.” (Lucy Smith’s History, page 85.) It certainly appears that Joseph Smith had the means and the ability to author the Book of Mormon!

These are only a few of many things which clearly show the finger prints of Joseph Smith in the creation of the Book of Mormon. May God use these evidences to enlighten the understandings of each reader. May we all be led to rejoice in the goodness and mercy of God, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16)

How could a record written in the Egyptian language, help Jewish people preserve the language of their fathers?

The Book of Mormon claims that the official records of the Jews were “engraven upon plates of brass” so that they would “never perish or be dimmed by time” (7:61, 15:170.) These brass plates were in the custody of Jews living in Jerusalem in the year 600 B.C. The Book of Mormon further claims that these records were “engraven in the language of the Egyptians” (p. 207:4-6.) Nephi declared that it was needful to obtain these brass plates written in Egyptian so “that we may preserve unto our children the language of our fathers” (p. 7:82.)  How could a record written in the Egyptian language preserve the Jewish language?

What happened to the two stones that were to be sealed up with the Jaredite record for its translation?

The Book of Mormon claims that God told the brother of Jared to write his record in a language that no one could interpret. The Book of Mormon goes on to say that God provided the Brother of Jared with two stones which would be a means of interpreting this unknown language, “and behold these two stones will I give unto thee and ye shall seal them up … with the things which ye shall write (pp.722:87-89). Yet, when these records were found the stones were not with them. The records were finally translated by a man named Mosiah who had a gift from God, “wherewith that he can look, and translate all records that are of ancient date” (p. 232:72). So the records of Jared’s brother are finally translated - not with the two stones provided by God for that purpose, but by Mosiah, a man who had a gift for translating.

God does not make mistakes. We at one time believed in the Book of Mormon, but when presented with the facts, we had to admit that the book did not have the fingerprints of God’s hand on it – neither could it have been written by Jews leaving Jerusalem around 600 BC, as they would have written in Hebrew, not an unknown language. Our prayer and hope is that others may see that “God who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his son…” (Heb. 1:1-2). The record of that message is in our Bible. And in Jesus Christ, “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” “…He died for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.” (Col. 2:3 and 2 Cor. 5:15).

The Book of Mormon teaches that dark skin is a curse from God!

According to the Book of Mormon the dark skin of the Indian people is a curse put upon them by God for their rebellions against Him. The book states, “Wherefore, as they were WHITE, AND EXCEEDING FAIR AND DELIGHTSOME…the Lord God did cause a SKIN OF BLACKNESS to come upon them” (pp. 97:35 and 173:54.)

The Book of Mormon explains the purpose of the curse upon the skin was “…that they might not be enticing unto my people (the white righteous group)” and “…that thereby the Lord God might preserve his people, that they might not mix and believe in incorrect traditions which would prove their destruction” (pp. 97:35 and 308:106.) The curse took place immediately and extended even to those who would marry them, “And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed: for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing (black skin).” “…whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites (the unrighteous, dark skinned people), did bring the same curse upon his seed.” (pp. 97:37 and 308:107.)

The curse was to be “from this time henceforth and FOR EVER, except they repent of their wickedness and turn to me, that I may have mercy upon them.” (p. 308:113.)

When any portion of them repented and turned to God, “the curse of God did no more follow them,” “…their curse was taken from them, and their SKIN BECAME WHITE…And their young men and their daughters became EXCEEDING FAIR…” (pp. 391:20, 605:52-53.)

IF THE BOOK OF MORMON IS TRUE –

2.  WHY DOESN’T THE SKIN OF THOSE WHO MARRY INDIANS TURN DARK?

3.  WHY DO THE CHILDREN OF MIXED MARRIAGES NOT ALL HAVE DARK SKINS AS THE BOOK PROMISED?

These things are only published for the purpose of helping the Book of Mormon believers understand the falseness of the book, not because we believe or support the idea of dark skins being a curse.

Archaeology for the Book of Mormon is non-existent

Dr. Michael D. Coe, who is chairman of the Department of Anthropology at Yale University and one of America’s foremost archaeologists, writes concerning archaeology and the Book of Mormon, “Mormon archaeologists over the years have almost unanimously accepted the Book of Mormon as an accurate, historical account of the New World between about 2,000 B.C. and A.D. 42l…  “Let me now state uncategorically that as far as I know THERE IS NOT ONE PROFESSIONALLY TRAINED ARCHAEOLOGIST, WHO IS NOT A MORMON, WHO SEES ANY SCIENTIFIC JUSTIFICATION FOR BELIEVING THE FOREGOING (Book of Mormon) TO BE TRUE… The bare facts of the matter are that NOTHING, ABSOLUELY NOTHING, HAS EVER SHOWN UP IN ANY NEW WORLD EXCAVATION WHICH WOULD SUGGEST to a dispassionate observer THAT THE BOOK OF MORMON, as claimed by Joseph Smith, IS A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT RELATING TO THE HISTORY OF EARLY MIGRANTS TO OUR HEMISPHERE…In conclusion…forget the so-called fruitless quest for the Jaredites, Nephites, Mulekites, and the lands of Zarahemla and Bountiful, there is no more chance of finding them than of discovering the ruins of the bottomless pit described in the book of Revelations.” Dr. Coe has spent a large part of his time for the past several years in archaeological expeditions in Mexico, Guatemala, and Costa Rica. His article, from which the material quoted above was taken, appeared in “Dialogue, A Journal of Mormon Thought,” Vol. 8, No. 2, 1973, pp. 40-48.

Dee F. Green, Assistant Professor of Anthropology at Weber State College, who studied archaeology at Brigham Young University, and is a Book of Mormon believer writes, “In assessing the future relationship of the Book of Mormon to archaeology, one must first consider how long it will take us to rid ourselves of the unfortunate myths we have built up around the relationship…THE FIRST MYTH WE NEED TO ELIMINATE IS THAT BOOK OF MORMON ARCHAEOLOGY EXISTS”… he concludes with a statement that, “THOSE WHO DESIRE TO UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE BOOK OF MORMON WILL HAVE TO TAKE IT BY FAITH, NOT PROOF AND NOT ARCHAEOLOGY…” (Dialogue, “Vol. 4, No. 2 pp. 71-80.)

Could this be the reason the RLDS church in their study paper prepared for the curriculum consultation committee in December 1967 suggested it would, “BE PRUDENT TO AVOID ANY SPECIFIC DOGMATIC PRONOUNCEMENT AS TO THE ULTIMATE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF THE BOOK [OF MORMON]?” This study further explains, “Extravagant claims about ancient American archaeology supporting the Book of Mormon have been made…Indian vocabulary lists have been compiled…sponsoring archaeological exploration…for several years in the hopes of turning up some evidence…all to no avail.” The study concludes by expressing the need to “be saved from having to tackle some of the extremely thorny issues involved” and suggests that sometimes it might be wise for,  “A DISCREET SILENCE IN AREAS WHERE HITHERTO BOOK OF MORMON TEACHINGS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED.”

Is it right for Book of Mormon believing churches, who have this knowledge about the Book and its origin, to avoid the issue? IS IT CHRISTIAN TO BE DISCREETLY SILENT – seeking to be saved from having to tackle the issues? May God help these who know the truth to have the courage to face the issue and tell the people that their dilemmas are caused by delusions which were taught the Latter Day Saints from 1827 to the present. The time is long past to stop covering-up and let the truth about the Book of Mormon be known.

Eye-witnesses never actually saw the gold plates

Do you realize that WILLIAM SMITH, THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH’S YOUNGER BROTHER, REVEALED THAT JOSEPH SMITH, SR., HYRUM SMITH AND SAMUEL H. SMITH ONLY SAW THE BOOK OF MORMON PLATES WHEN THEY WERE COVERED BY A CLOTH. In an interview, published Jan. 13, 1894, E.C. Briggs asked Bro. [Willian] Smith if he ever saw the plates his brother had had, from which the Book of Mormon was translated. William replied, “I did not see them uncovered, but I HANDLED THEM AND HEFTED THEM WHILE WRAPPED IN A TOW FROCK…I COULD TELL THEY WERE PLATES OF SOME KIND AND THAT THEY WERE FASTENED TOGETHER BY RINGS RUNNING THROUGH THE BACK.” Brother Briggs then asked William if any others of the family saw them. “Yes…father and my brother Samuel saw them as I did while in the frock; so did Hyrum and others of the family …” “Didn’t you want to remove the cloth and see the bare plates?” said Bro. Briggs. William replied, “no…for father had just asked if he might not be permitted to do so, and Joseph putting his hand on them said, ‘no, I am instructed not to show them to anyone. If I do, I will transgress and lose them again.’ Besides we did not care to have him break the commandment and suffer as he did before.” (Zion’s Ensign, Page 6, Jan. 13, 1894.)

Martin Harris’s testimony agrees with that of William Smith. A memorandum made by John H. Gilbert, Esq., (the printer that set the type for the Palmyra edition of the Book of Mormon), read,  “Martin was in the office when I finished setting up the testimony of the three witnesses - (Harris, Cowdery and Whitmer), I said to him – ‘Martin, did you see those plates with your naked eyes?’ Martin looked down for an instant, raised his eyes up, and said, ‘No, I saw them with a spiritual eye.’” (Wilford C. Wood, Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 1, 1958, Preface.)

This statement of Martin Harris is explained by details which he gave to some of the church members in public in Ohio. Stephen Burnett, in a letter dated April 15, 1838, to Lyman E. Johnson, one of the first twelve apostles, lamenting over the deplorable conditions in the church, wrote, “I have reflected long and deliberately upon the history of this church & weighed the evidence for & against it – loth to give it up – but when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver nor David & also that the eight witnesses never saw them & hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way, in my view our foundations was sapped & the entire superstructure fell a heap of ruins. "I therefore…in the Stone Chapel, gave a full history of the church since I became acquainted with it….together with the reasons why I took the course which I was resolved to do, and renounced the Book of Mormon with the whole scene of lying and deception. I was followed by W. Perish, Luke Johnson & John Boynton all of who concurred with me. After we were done speaking M Harris arose & said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or a handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city through a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight was false, if it had not been picked out of him, but should have let it passed as it was….” (The original letter of Stephen Burnett to Lyman E. Johnson dated April 15, 1838, was copied on May 24, 1838, onto pages 64-66 of a Letter Book which contained copies of Joseph Smith’s letters and others from April 20, 1837 to Feb. 9, 1843 with a few for other years. This Letter Book is among the Joseph Smith Collection in the L.D.S. Church Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah, Box 2, folder 2. A microfilm copy is in the R.L.D.S. Church Archives. Letter copied with spelling and punctuation as it is in the original.)

It is easy to understand why the eight witnesses were reluctant to sign the statement and had to be persuaded to do so. For the plates that were handled and seen “were all the while in the frock” or covered with something. The engravings thereon which they were supposed to have seen could have been the copy of characters made for Professor Anthon, which had the appearance of ancient work and of curious workmanship.  But on the assurance of what their hands had felt and they had hefted they declared that “Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken.” If the plates were real and could be handled by physical hands, why did they have to be protected from the physical eyes of the eleven witnesses? Why did not the statements signed by the witnesses differentiate between what was physical and what was spiritually perceived? Why would one try to deceive, if the work was true?

May God help all of us to be honest, for it is only the truth that makes men free.

David Whitmer testified that the Book of Mormon was a correct translation on the basis that he was “impressed with the truth and reality of it”

Most believers in the Book of Mormon are only familiar with the prepared joint statements of the witnesses found in the front of the book. It is our desire to make available to believers in the Book of Mormon some of the other statements made by the witnesses of which few have any knowledge.

In this article we are making available an interview from June 1880, between David Whitmer and John Murphy. Mr. Murphy wrote of this interview, “When seated he [David] asked me for the points concerning which I wanted information. [Murphy] ‘First of all, I have heard that you saw an angel: I never saw one: I want your description of its shape, voice and brogue, and the construction of his language. I mean as to his style of speaking. You know we can often determine the class a man belongs to by his language.’ [Whitmer] ‘IT HAD NO APPEARANCE OR SHAPE.’ [Murphy] ‘Then you neither saw nor heard anything?’ [Whitmer] ‘NOTHING IN THE WAY YOU UNDERSTAND IT.’ [Murphy] ‘How then could you bear testimony that you saw and heard an angel?’ [Whitmer] ‘HAVE YOU NEVER HAD IMPRESSIONS?’ [Murphy] ‘Then you had impressions, such as a Quaker has when the spirit moves him, or as a good Methodist in giving a happy experience- a feeling?’ [Whitmer] ‘JUST SO.’ [Murphy] I think I understand you respecting the angel…How did you know…that the Book of Mormon is a correct translation?’ [Whitmer] ‘BEING IMPRESSED WITH THE TRUTH AND REALITY OF IT.’ [Murphy] ‘In the same way in which you were impressed with the presence of the angel which interpreted the writing?’ [Whitmer] ‘YES’”

After this interview was published in “The Hamiltonian” Hamilton, Mo., Jan., 2l 1881, David Whitmer issued in March 1881, a leaflet called “A Proclamation” in which he stated, “It having been represented by one John Murphy, of Polo, Caldwell County, Mo., that I, in a conversation with him last summer, denied my testimony as one of the three witnesses to the Book of Mormon. To the end, therefore, that he may understand me now, if he did not then…I have never at any time denied that testimony or any part thereof…” Of course Mr. Murphy never inferred or accused him of denying his testimony. Murphy closed his article by stating, “He [Whitmer] had an honest, simple look, and my impression, which I think to be as good as his or his angel is, that he ought to reconsider, and admit his former testimony was an illusion, or perhaps cunning scheme…” Yet no place in his proclamation does David reveal where or in what statement he was misquoted; neither does he correct or clarify any of the statements which he made to Mr. Murphy. Instead David uses the larger part of his leaflet to state his opposition to polygamy…the change of the name of the church…the High Priesthood… etc, things about which Mr. Murphy made no mention.

It is possible that David realized what his explanation of the angelic visit did to his testimony. For “no appearance or shape…impressions…feelings” leaves one wondering just what the testimony really means. David was unable to deny the statements he made to Mr. Murphy and realized that to try to clarify or explain them might only make them sound worse. Yet knowing something must be done might be the reason David chose to issue a proclamation reaffirming his testimony. But regardless of David’s reasons for issuing the proclamation we are thankful for Mr. Murphy’s direct questions. They confirm what Martin Harris had revealed some forty three years earlier. Martin explained that the plates were “NEVER SEEN WITH HIS NATURAL EYES ONLY IN VISION OR IMAGINATION.”

If there were actual metal plates that could be lifted by the physical hands while wrapped in a cloth covering – WHY COULD THEY NOT BE SEEN BY THE PHYSICAL EYES? Why did they have to be perceived by an impression? Was it because the plates hidden under the cloth covering were not what Joseph Smith claimed they were and the physical eyes could have detected the fraud?

Joseph Smith contradicts his official first vision account

About 1832 Joseph Smith, Jr., began an account of the origin of the Mormon Church, which was the only account written in his own hand. It contradicts the official First Vision story he dictated some six years later. The account was never finished and has only recently been published (see Brigham Young University Studies, Spring 1969, pp. 278ff)

In his 1832 account Joseph presents himself between the ages of twelve and fifteen as being a committed and perceptive reader of the Bible. He claims that his STUDY OF THE SCRIPTURES led him to understand that all the denominations were wrong. He wrote, “BY SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES I found that mankind did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatized from the true and living faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the Gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Testament.”

Six years later (1838), when he set forth his official First Vision story, he decided that HE NEVER HAD REACHED THE FIRM CONCLUSION THAT ALL CHURCHES WERE WRONG FROM HIS STUDY OF THE BIBLE. Instead, he claimed that it was DURING A VISION OF THE FATHER AND THE SON that he first learned this information. He presented this as coming as a great surprise, for he added parenthetically – “for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all the churches were wrong.”

The 1838 First Vision story not only runs into trouble with Joseph’s earlier 1832 version, it is also contradicted by what we know about the early years in Palmyra. In his official version Joseph claims he was persecuted by all the churches in his area “because I continued to affirm I had seen a vision.” However, Orasmus Turner, an apprentice printer in Palmyra until 1822, was in the same juvenile debating club with Joseph Smith. He recalled that Joseph “after catching a spark of Methodism…became a very passable exhorter in evening meetings” (History of the Pioneer Settlement of Phelps and Gorham’s Purchase, 1851, p. 214.) Thus, instead of being opposed and persecuted, as his 1838 accounts claims, young Joseph was welcomed and allowed to exhort during the Methodist’s evening preaching. Furthermore, no one, either Mormon or non-Mormon, seems ever to have heard of Joseph’s encounter with the two divine Personages and his subsequent persecution, until after 1838 (see this admission in Dialogue, Autumn, 1966, p. 30.)

From all available lines of evidence, therefore, Joseph’s official First Vision story appears clearly to be a fabrication. There was no revival anywhere in the Palmyra area in 1820. Joseph was welcomed, not persecuted by the Methodists. His 1832 account represents him as perceiving from his personal Bible study that all the churches were apostate, while his 1838 account said it “never entered into my heart that all were wrong.” His 1832 version claimed only a vision of Christ, while the 1838 story transformed this into the Father and the Son. No one ever heard such a story until after he dictated it in 1838. In the light of such strong contradictory evidence, the First Vision story must be regarded as only the invention of Joseph Smith’s highly imaginative mind. The facts, and Joseph’s own words, discredit it.

Have you received Christ Jesus as your Lord and Savior? John said, “But as many as received Him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” (John 1:12.)