New Day for the Book of Mormon

One can find a very well-done documentary on The Book of Mormon entitled, "New Day for the Book of Mormon." It features LDS scholars such as Terryl Givens but also non-LDS scholars, such as Stephen Webb, author of the excellent book, Mormon Christianity. Highly recommended!

One can find the documentary online here.

"Congruence and Concatenation in Jewish Mystical Literature, American Freemasonry, and Mormon Enoch Writings"

I just came across an interesting paper on Enochian traditions within Judaism, "Mormonism," and Freemasonry authored by Cherl Bruno published by the Journal of Religion and Society. One can find it online here.

Incidentally, my friend, Bill Hamblin, has posted his lecture on Enoch, so enjoy both offerings!

G.L. Prestige on the Trinity

One argument those of us who oppose historical (creedal) Trinitarianism make is that it would be incomprehensible to the original followers of Christ and the New Testament apostles, as it requires categories and a worldview absolutely unknown, if not antithetical to, Jewish Christianity. Try as they can to show the alleged biblical and historical basis for this belief, the more honest Trinitarian apologists and scholars are often forced to admit this, and in the process, show the internal contradictions within this man-made dogma. Take, for instance, G.L. Prestige’s comment in his book God in Patristic Thought (1936), p.301:

By a full use of the subtlety of Greek thought and language, [the Trinity] was laid down that God is a single objective Being in three objects of presentation . . . Alternatively, the result of the extended theological process may be summed up, in the language more modern than any used by a Greek Father, but in loyalty to the spirit and meaning of Greek theology, in the formula that in God there are three divine organs of God-consciousness, but one centre o divine self-consciousness. As seen and thought, He is true; as seeing and thinking, He is one. He is one eternal principle of life and light and love.

St. Patrick's Bad Analogies

I am rather fond of this video on the failings of analogies that have been used, both historically and in modern times, of the Trinity. This video (produced by a Trinitarian) shows that, ultimately, all analogies used by apologists do not support the Trinity, but instead, are heretical. Enjoy!

The Jaredites and the Confounding of Languages at the Tower of Babel

In their poorly researched, poorly argued book, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Mormons (1995), Ron Rhodes and Marian Bodine made this criticism against the Book of Mormon:

·         Would you please read aloud from Genesis 11:8-9?
·         Does this passage say that the language of most of the people was confounded, or does it say that the language of all the people of the earth was confounded?
·         Did you know that Joseph Smith’s Inspired Version says “all” the people were confounded in Genesis 11:8?
·         If the language of all the people was confounded, how can the Book of Mormon claim that God made an exception with the Jared and his brother?
·         Please explain. (P. 191)

A similar argument appeared in Bodine’s paper, “The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon (or common sense)”:

38. Ether 1:34-37, the language of the Jaredites not confounded at the Tower of Babel, contradicts Genesis 11:9.

LDS apologist, D. Charles Pyle in his review of Bodine’s paper, cogently answered this “criticism”:

Reply to Bodine's Thirty-eighth (38^th) Reason for Rejecting the Book of Mormon.

Again, there is no real contradiction when other considerations are examined. The purpose of the confounding of tongues at Babel, was to scatter the various peoples over the earth. The texts at Genesis 10:5, 10:20 and 10:31 seem to show that the linguistic lines followed family lineages and national groups. Also implied, is that there may have been, originally, three main language groups that later broke off into many branches within these linguistic families. The fact that there are three main language families (known as Indo-European, Semitic and Hamitic or African), from which all languages seem to derive, according to the Bible, gives support to the possibility that the confusion of tongues was only general.

Apparently, each family grouping had its particular language base. Jared, his brother and their families, being of the same family group, would have had the same language base. Further of interest, is that there are several ancient traditions that state that certain individuals did not have their language confounded.

However, all things considered, even if Jared, his brother, and their families and friends did not have a change occur in their language, it still makes no difference and produces no disparity between the two texts! If all other peoples had a change in their language, and one group still retained the original language with which they were familiar, all of the world would still be in a confounded state, for all others could no longer understand them, anyway!

Glass Windows in the Book of Mormon?

One alleged anachronism in the Book of Mormon is that Ether 2:23 has an anachronistic reference to glass windows. While glass was known in the ancient world, as seen in some archaeological discoveries from Egypt and elsewhere, there are no evidence of glass windows during the time of the Book of Mormon.

Ether 2:23, speaking of the Jaredite barges, reads as follows (emphasis added):

And the Lord said unto the brother of Jared: What will ye that I should do that ye may have light in your vessels? For behold, ye cannot have windows, for they will be dashed in pieces; neither shall ye take fire with you, for ye shall not go by the light of fire.

From the context, “they” does not refer to the windows, but to the barges themselves.

In the Bible, the term "window" referred to an opening through wich the wind could enter in.

As the Lord explains in v. 24, they would go through turbulent conditions at sea, sometimes being buried beneath the waves. "Windows" would result in additional cuts in the wood of the Jaredite barges, weakening their structure and making them more fragile, and thus would be liable to being "dashed in pieces."

Can God be seen? 1 Timothy 6:16 and LDS Theology

I am currently on the move again (will be moving to Cork city for at least six months for a new post in my company), but wanted to plug an article by James Stutz (who runs the Lehi’s Library blog), “Can a man see God? 1 Timothy 6:16 in Light of Ancient and Modern Revelation.” Personally, I think James does a fantastic job refuting the claims of Matt Slick and others who point to this verse as biblical disproof of (1) the Father being embodied and (2) the historicity of the First Vision. The discussion of Sensus Plenior and 1 Tim 6:16 is also very insightful.