Circle Squared
A Textual Analysis of the Book of Mormon
Chapter 29: "A Cankerous Work and a Blunder"
Chapter Summary:
Many Gentiles will reject the Book of Mormon--They will say, We need no more Bible--The Lord speaks to many nations--He will judge the world out of the books which will be written. About 559–545 B.C.
This chapter contains one of the earliest references to the popular self-important Mormon phrase, "a marvelous work." The idea is that, through the creation of the Mormon Church, god is doing a marvelous, wonderful thing which will be beneficial to all mankind before he destroys everything during Armageddon. Lions and lambs will sleep together without the latter being eaten by the former. World peace will be possible so long as everyone agrees with Mormon teachings. And in this way Mormons are just like every other doomsday cult: "Agree with us, or else!"
If all this peace-giving is as rampant during this "marvelous work" as is often described, how exactly will Armageddon happen?
Regardless of any internal inconsistencies, Mormons love to postulate about how wonderful their works are. But what have they done for us lately?
Mormons claim to be a grand charitable organization. They boast high amounts humanitarian aide worldwide. They have a prominent thrift store in America (Deseret Industries), which provides jobs to low functioning and mentally disabled people who would otherwise have difficulty finding work. These are all good things which the Church does. Granted, people who work for Deseret Industries must meet certain religious standards (active, tithe-paying Mormons).
Still, I am happy to give credit to the Mormon Church for the legitimately good things they do. However, much of the Church's self-reported charity is (surprise!) grossly overstated.
I have mentioned in a few posts already that the Mormon Church has spent more on their most recent for-profit endeavor (a multi-billion dollar shopping mall in Salt Lake City, Utah, called "City Creek") than they have spent on humanitarian aide over the last 25 years combined.
Furthermore, religious people also count tithes and offerings to their own church as charity. Think about this. They give their favorite club large sums of money--regardless of whether or not their church does any charity--and they count this as tax-deductible charitable contributions. They are paying themselves! They are the ones who directly benefit from their own charity!
Religious people will sometimes point to studies which show that they give more to charity than non-believers. But when you take out the "charity" they give themselves through their churches, religious people and non-believers are comparable. Some studies show that non-believers give more, and they give to charities which actually help those in need, not preachers' coffers.
Mormons also report much higher membership than independent sources indicate. But on rare candid occasions church leadership will spill the beans about the "greatest apostasy the church has ever seen." Ya, the internet will do that...
This kind of bloated self-reporting makes me wonder how marvelous the Mormon Church's works actually are.
This chapter also contains a missionary favorite, which attempts to rebut the prominent notion that the New Testament would be the last scripture written:
"3 And because my words shall hiss forth--many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible."
Personally, both arguments are incoherent to me. I don't see any good reason to suppose that John's Book of Revelation would be the last book of scripture, as many Christians contend.
The New Testament is not in chronological order, and many books were added to during the Middle Ages and we do not have original documents to confidently make corrections. From what I understand, the Book of Revelation was put at the end of the New Testament because it speaks of end times and Armageddon. Additionally, the New Testament was compiled by committee centuries after the documents were written, and many similar documents did not make the cut.
On the other hand, suppose the New Testament had been written chronologically and the Book of Revelation was intended to be the last book of the bible from its conception; Nephi writing that god totally wrote another bible does not prove or refute anything. It is simply another unsubstantiated faith-claim rivaling all others.
Nephi supports his bald assertion with the disjointed disclaimer that the Gentiles never really appreciated the Jews to begin with. So, how dare they say that there shouldn't be a plethora of bibles? If this doesn't seem silly to you already, keep in mind that Nephi supposedly wrote this rebuttal to John centuries before John was born! Doesn't it seem more plausible that Joseph Smith knew that this common cultural sentiment would be troublesome for his new bible, so he wrote in a counter to make the Book of Mormon seem prophetic?
Again, almost every prophecy in the Book of Mormon so far can easily be explained away as Joseph retrofitting prophecy to suit him as he sprouted a new "all-American" religion. All other prophecies can be shelved as self-fulfilling or yet-to-happen. Hardly marvelous.
Nephi, speaking for god (as you do), does make one fair point in favor of god inspiring multiple bibles, in that they would compliment and confirm one another:
"8 Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also."
The problem, though, is that we do not have the original documents for the New Testament, nor do we have the gold plates from which Joseph translated the Book of Mormon. We can't compare the texts. We can't verify their authenticity or potentially supernatural origins. We can't demonstrate that Joseph didn't just write a book which he thought would sound like the bible to gullible people.
Keep in mind, Joseph never allowed an expert to examine the book, and he had access to the bible. These two things make it difficult for me to believe the his claim that the Book of Mormon is authentic. To me, it seems painfully contrived.
To be clear, it doesn't matter how many "nations" produce books saying the same thing. Unless the claims can be verified, there is no reason to suppose anything supernatural is at play.
Ah, but what about three books? Four? A dozen?!? Well, it just so happens that god has inspired even more ancient holy books:
"11 For I command all men, both in the east and in the west, and in the north, and in the south, and in the islands of the sea, that they shall write the words which I speak unto them; for out of the books which shall be written I will judge the world, every man according to their works, according to that which is written."
Unfortunately, neither Nephi or god or Joseph seem to understand the argument from popularity fallacy. It doesn't matter how many people believe a proposition. What matters is the evidence in support of it. Until we can verify with demonstrable evidence that a given holy book is truly god-breathed, it doesn't matter how many ancient books people like Joseph Smith produce. Without evidence there is only one conclusion to draw concerning the Book of Mormon: it is a fraud.