MORMONS: Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the Book of Mormon?
According to Tanner, Martin, Paulson, ET AL. the Book of Mormon lacks credibility because it plagiarizes early works by Ethan Smith (View of the Hebrews, 1823), Josiah Priest (The Wonders of Nature, 1825), and various passages in the Bible. The Book of Mormon wasn't published until 1830.
Doesn't this affect the credibility of Smith's claim that the Book of Mormon was the product of divine inspiration?
Do any Mormons have anything to say about this? They seem to be strangely silent on this one...
Palmermom3: So faith and plagiarism are corollaries in some instances? The evidence suggests Smith didn't write it from a position of divine revelation, but from lifting other people's work. How do you feel about this as a Mormon?
RD6: By indiscretions find discretion's out. You still didn't answer my question. And yeah, I have read everything I cited. Have you? Or did you just copy-paste everything there?
Guys, this is a valid question. This isn't my research, but the research of a number of people. It is really interesting to see people falling all over themselves defending a practice that people get thrown out of graduate school for or sued over today. Thanks for the debate.
Dr. M: These writers have refereed/peer reviewed works and are recognized by contemporaries in their respective fields. Read the books and get back to me.
I have read the book of Mormon and found many problems with it. For one how and why did they call it the Bible when they didn't speak English in the Mormon days? The Bible is a somewhat recent compilation of History from the Old testament or Torah and then the New Testament of Christ Jesus. It wasn't called the Bible. Also some things look as if they were taken word for word out of the BIBLE
This is a legitimate question. The answer is that we just don't know. We can't accuse one of the gospel writers of plagiarizing the others if they were both told the same things by the same people. This has to be taken into consideration when we consider the passages that match up to the Bible and Book of Mormon. As far as the other two sources you mention, it has been debated for a hundred years. We just don't know if Joseph had access to those writings or not.
The book of Mormon was translated directly. There were 12 others that saw and held the plates. Joseph Smith having only a 3rd grade education probably hadn't read anything by Ethan Smith so he couldn't have plagiarized something he'd never read. Either you believe the Story of the First Vision and the translation of the Book of Mormon or you don't.
*edit* it ca mes right down to what I believe....I believe that Joseph Smith did receive divine revelation from God and that God through His Almighty Power helped Joseph translate it. That book stands as a Second witness of Jesus Christ. I believe in the Bible that God sends his witnesses in 2's and 3's. Could there be one more book of scripture that God hasn't revealed yet...and if He does reveal it will you accuse the person translating it of Plagiarizing?
I certainly think it does affect the credibility of Joseph Smith's claim. It means he had 7 years to prepare the document that became the Book of Mormon.
You can tell by all the thumbs down on the answers that agree with the questioner that this is a significant issue. Yet, if a church states that they are the one and only true church on earth today, thereby determining all other churches are false, then these questions need to be answered.
The Book of Mormon is supposed to be a second testimony of the our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. In fact, Jesus said to the apostles that "There are other sheep that are not of this flock" (John 10:16). We find in Matthew 10:6 Christ?s instruction to His disciples, ?But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.? The apostle James directly addressed the ?lost tribes of Israel? in James 1:1, ??to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad?? The Jews also made the same reference in John 7:35: ??will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles?? The apostles traveled throughout the lands teaching.
The Book of Mormon is purported as being the history of the Lord's visit to the Americas where he ministered and taught the natives. The natives were lost sheep of Israel who left their homeland 600 years before. They were known as the Nephites and the Lamanities -- the Nephites were keeping the laws of righteousness, the Lamanites were not.
That is why the Book of Mormon ends at about 420 AD; after the Lord visited, the people were righteous unto the fourth generation. You will find scripture in the Book of Mormon that states this occurred. It is not verified in the Bible.
I was raised a Mormon; went through all he programs: Primary, Mutual, Sunday School, Sacrament Meetings, and even graduated from Seminary. I attended Brigham Young University for a year, then returned home to complete my education. However, I was sidetracked and was married in the temple, and had been baptized in the temple many times. I was a Sunday School Teacher, Mutual leader for Mia Maids, led music in Jr. Sunday School, was in the Choir, went to all the firesides and church dances. My brother went on a mission to Peru, and in the later years was a bishop. My family is still active in the church; I am the one who left. I state this because I received a message saying that I couldn't really have been a Mormon.
I may offend some Mormons, and I am sorry about that, but I had a lot of questions that Mormonism didn't answer.
In the Doctrine & Covenants (in 1838), the temple in Independence, Missouri was going to be built "in that generation." The Book of Mormon begins about 600 BC and ends 420 AD. So, I gave a lot of leeway to the church for the fulfillment of prophecies;1838 + 105 years = 1943. That temple still does not exist. That, to me, if one of the signs of the false prophecy.
The Bible clearly states if a man prophesies, and the prophecies do not come to pass, then he is a false prophet and should be stoned so he does not lead the children astray.
In addition, the black man was to never receive the priesthood. Politically incorrect, there was a prophecy in 1978 that gave the black man the right to hold the priesthood. Why were they denied? In THE BOOK OF THE COVENANTS by the Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, he said that they were the descendants of Cain, and would not receive the priesthood until all of the sons of Abel had been fulfilled. There is no mention of Abel's sons or progeny in the Bible. That meant that either no more children would be born, or politics dictated the "prophecy."
Shortly after my second marriage, I was ill and had a lot of time to read. After intensely studying the Bible 5-8 hours a day reading and praying, I found nothing in the Bible to support Mormonism. The doctrine they live by today is not in the Book of Mormon, it can be found in other books -- Doctrine & Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, and current literature.
Here's the most significant event that devalues the Mormon temples. This is where they do all the work for the living and the dead. If you are not a Mormon now, don't worry, after you die, someone will turn your name in for baptism. There is a veil in the temple and a worker takes each person from the earthly side to the eternal side.
However, when Christ died, the veil in the temple was rent in half because Christ fulfilled the laws of the OT, and opened the way for mankind to go directly to God without another person intervening for us. That is why we pray, "In the name of Jesus Christ..."
Many Pastors teach right from the Bible, and teach with passion and truth. Since I had been baptized as a child in the Mormon church, I wondered if I should be baptized again since I left it. I waited because the Lord gave me no direction. Then, last Fall, He told me that it was time to be baptized. I'd gone to church with my daughter, and I loved the church. It is a Four Square Church, and teaches Biblical principles including baptism by immersion. So, On Dec. 23, 2007, I was baptized. I wore a grin that was ear to ear.
The Pastor made a comment about how he was raised. He was taught that mankind was saved by grace and works. My brother used the same words to tell me how we are saved.
But, like my Pastor, we quote the Bible: (John 14:6 ) "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comet unto the Father, but by me." This is known as grace.
God knew we would never be able to live perfectly. Never be 100% faithful to the laws. Read Genesis through Deuteronomy for the list of laws -- they go on forever. Christ said he would come to earth, he would be the sacrifice -- one for all -- and that by faith in him each person could be saved. He also wanted the glory to go to God. We who have been born supported Christ and waged a war in heaven -- we are the 2/3 of hosts of heaven who stood with the Lord. Lucifer and 1/3 of the hosts of heaven were cast out; never to have a body. Lucifer said he would force all men to heaven, and he wanted the glory for it. Free Will came at a steep price -- the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior.
Do not take these steps unless you fully understand them and are willing to put your life and soul into God's hands.
Salvation is easy -- but do not take these steps unless you mean them.
1-Open the door to your heart and invite the Lord Jesus Christ in.
2-Ask for forgiveness for your sins.
3-Forgive all those who have hurt you.
4-Our Savior will give you the gift of the Holy Spirit, the comforter to be with you always.
5-That's it. You are saved. I keep a short chain on my sins and pray that the Lord will remind me when I have sinned so that I can correct it immediately.
I don't believe that he was brilliant enough to make such an imaginative tale up all by himself. There had to have been some basis for the book, because we all know that there were no "golden tablets" reveled to him by an angel in the upstate New York woods.
It is difficult to know the heart or mind of another, we can judge there actions. History has shown many have been brought to believe in God through this belief system this goes for all religions which believe in God.
I personally find it hard to make a judgment about something I have not studied and walked a mile in their shoes.
I to agree with the fact that plagiarizing was done with the book of Mormon.
I say this because of believing that God inspired those who wrote "The Bible".
With the sake of argument....the scrolls were not all found and that too is mention in "The Bible".
For now, I'm staying with 2 Timothy3:16
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
*EDIT: No, Joseph Smith didn't plagiarize the Book of Mormon. And no, the two books you mention don't affect the credibility of Joseph Smith's claim regarding the divine origins of the Book of Mormon.
Have you actually read those two books? They hardly resemble the Book of Mormon at all (the third link below is a link to "View of the Hebrews" itself...go ahead and compare it to the Book of Mormon yourself). The Book of Mormon almost completely contradicts the claims of "View of the Hebrews", including as to who were the Indians, how did they get to the New World, when did they arrive, what names did they use, how did they live, etc.
*EDIT: In fact, the whole premise of "View of the Hebrews" (i.e., that Indians are descended from the lost 10 tribes) is not support or suggested by the Book of Mormon. In the Book of Mormon, the group that came to the Americas left Jerusalem AFTER the 10 tribes had already been carried away. The group in the Book of Mormon was NOT part of the lost 10 tribes. So the Book of Mormon doesn't even go along with Ethan Smith's basic premise!
Here are a few of the differences between "View of the Hebrews" and the Book of Mormon:
1. View of the Hebrews begins with a chapter on the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. It has nothing to say, however, about the destruction in Lehi's day by the Babylonians.
2. View of the Hebrews tells of specific heavenly signs that marked the Roman destruction of Jerusalem. Joseph Smith ignores these singular and memorable details.
3. Chapter 2 lists many prophecies about the restoration of Israel, including Deuteronomy 30; Isaiah 11, 18, 60, 65; Jeremiah 16, 23, 30-31, 35-37; Zephaniah 3; Amos 9; Hosea and Joel. These scriptures are essential to the logic and fabric of View of the Hebrews, yet, with the sole exception of Isaiah 11, none of them appear in the Book of Mormon.
4. Chapter 3 is the longest chapter in View of the Hebrews. It produces numerous "distinguished Hebraisms" as "proof" that the American Indians are Israelites. Hardly any of these points are found in the Book of Mormon, as one would expect if Joseph Smith were using View of the Hebrews or trying to make his book persuasive. For example, View of the Hebrews asserts repeatedly that the Ten Tribes came to America via the Bering Strait, which they crossed on "dry land." According to View of the Hebrews, this opinion is unquestionable, supported by all the authorities.
From there View of the Hebrews claims that the Israelites spread from north to east and then to the south at a very late date. These are critical points for View of the Hebrews, since Amos 8:11-12 prophesies that the tribes would go from the north to the east. Population migrations in the Book of Mormon, however, always move from the south to the north.
5. View of the Hebrews reports that the Indians are Israelites because they use the word "Hallelujah." Here is one of the favorite proofs of View of the Hebrews, a dead giveaway that the Indians are Israelites. Yet the word is never used in the Book of Mormon.
Furthermore, a table showing thirty-four Indian words or sentence fragments with Hebrew equivalents appears in View of the Hebrews. No reader of the book could have missed this chart. If Joseph Smith had wanted to make up names to use in the Book of Mormon that would substantiate his claim that he had found some authentic western hemisphere Hebrew words, he would have jumped at such a ready-made list! Yet not one of these thirty-four Hebrew/Indian words (e.g., Keah, Lani, Uwoh, Phale, Kurbet, etc.) has even the remotest resemblance to any of the 175 words that appear for the first time in the Book of Mormon. [Webmaster's note: Likewise none of the names created by Spaulding, or given by James Adair or other modern sources, are found in the Book of Mormon.]
6. View of the Hebrews says the Indians are Israelites because they carry small boxes with them into battle. These are to protect them against injury. They are sure signs that the Indians' ancestors knew of the Ark of the Covenant! How could Joseph Smith pass up such a distinguished and oft-attested Hebraism as this?! Yet in all Book of Mormon battle scenes, there is not one hint of any such ark, box, or bag serving as a military fetish.
7. The Indians are Israelites because the Mohawk tribe was a tribe held in great reverence by all the others, to whom tribute was paid. Obviously, to Ethan Smith, this makes the Mohawks the vestiges of the tribe of Levi, Israel's tribe of priests. If Joseph Smith believed that such a tribe or priestly remnant had survived down to his day, he forgot to provide for anything to that effect in the Book of Mormon.
8. The Indians are Israelites because they had a daily sacrifice of fat in the fire and passed their venison through the flame, cutting it into twelve pieces. This great clue of "Israelitishness" is also absent from the Book of Mormon.
9. View of the Hebrews maintains that the Indians knew "a distinguished Hebraism," namely "laying the hand on the mouth, and the mouth in the dust." Had Joseph Smith believed this, why is the Book of Mormon silent on this "sure sign of Hebraism" and dozens of others like it?
10. According to View of the Hebrews, the Indians quickly lost knowledge that they were all from the same family. The Book of Mormon tells that family and tribal affiliations were maintained for almost one thousand years.
11. View of the Hebrews claims that the righteous Indians were active "for a long time," well into recent times, and that their destruction occurred about A.D. 1400, based upon such convincing evidence as tree rings near some of the fortifications of these people. The Book of Mormon implicitly rejects this notion by reporting the destruction of the Nephites in the fourth century A.D.
12. View of the Hebrews argues that the Indians are Israelites because they knew the legends of Quetzalcoatl. But the surprise here is that View of the Hebrews proves beyond doubt that Quetzalcoatl was none other than - not Jesus - but Moses! "Who could this be but Moses, the ancient legislator in Israel?" Quetzalcoatl was white, gave laws, required penance (strict obedience), had a serpent with green plumage (brazen, fiery-flying serpent in the wilderness), pierced ears (like certain slaves under the law of Moses), appeased God's wrath (by sacrifices), was associated with a great famine (in Egypt), spoke from a volcano (Sinai), walked barefoot (removed his shoes), spawned a golden age (seven years of plenty in Egypt - which has nothing to do with Moses, by the way), etc. Besides the fact that the View of the Hebrews's explanation of Quetzalcoatl as Moses is inconsistent with the Book of Mormon, none of these hallmark details associated with Quetzalcoatl are incorporated into the account of Christ's visit to Bountiful in 3 Nephi.
These twelve points could be multiplied literally seven times over. In the face of these differences, the few vague similarities pale.
The "Wonders of Nature and Providence, Displayed" by Josiah Priests just includes a large section of Ethan Smith's book.
Of course it was other people who wrote the BOM. Then Mormon abridged it. Joseph only translated it. He was not the author. He did not get it from the sources you cite.
Try reading Inca Gold (1994) by Clive Cussler and River of Ruin (2002) by Jack Dubrul. If you think Dubrul plagiarized Cussler then you would think the same about View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon. If not, then you don't really have a good argument.
How could an illiterate farm boy write a book that is over 500 pages long, let alone plagiarize it? Who are "Tanner, Martin, Paulson, ET AL." and what creditability do they have?
How could an illiterate kid know how to write out Egyptian characters? BTW, he gave them to a scholarly man (Charles Anton) that confirmed that they are legitimate? What about the other people than saw the plates?
I don't care who Martin, Tanner & Paulson. Witnesses to the translation of the BOM said JS never had a book to use.
He actually couldn't read & needed scribes for the BOM manuscript. He only had a third grade backwoods education.
Does it affect his credibility no..
other an ti's say it's Solomon Spaulding
others say Joseph wrote it all himself
and now you say it's the view of the Hebrews etc
YAWN
The book has nothing in common with scaldings works,
smith's works, or priest works. Any person with common sense can compare the BOM with the other works and nothing in common
No. He didn't. It's as simple as that... but in case you still don't believe me...
If the book is false then take this challenge:
If one scoffs at the missionary's explanation of the Book of Mormon, he is in so many words claiming it to be false: That it is a deceiving fraud formulated through the efforts and talents of a common man. What is produced by one man can always be duplicated by another. The challenge that the Book of Mormon makes to the world is that of duplication. Because the book complies with every one of the following conditions, in order to produce a similar record, one must comply with the same conditions.
Here is the challenge: Can you accept it?
1. Write a history of ancient Tibet covering a period from 600 B.C. to 450 A.D. Why ancient Tibet? Because you know no more about Tibet than Joseph Smith (or anyone else) knew about ancient America.
2. You are 23 years of age.
3. You have had no more than three years of formal school education, and have spent your life in backwoods farming communities.
4. Your history must be written on the basis of what you now know. There was no library that held information for Joseph Smith. You must use none. There is to be no research of any kind.
5. Your history must be 531 pages and over 300,000 words in length.
6. Other than a few grammatical corrections, you must have no changes in the text. The first edition as you dictate it to your secretary must stand forever.
7. This record is to contain the history of two distinct and separate nations, along with histories of different contemporary nations or groups of people.
8. You must describe their religious, economic, political, and social cultures and institutions. Cover every phase of their society, including the names of their coins.
9. Change your style of writing many times. Many ancient authors contributed to the Book of Mormon, each with his own style.
10. Weave into your history the religion of Jesus Christ and the pattern of Christian living.
11. You must claim that your smooth narrative is not fiction with moral value, but true and sacred history.
12. You must include in you book fifty-four chapters dealing with wars, twenty-one historical chapters, fifty-five chapters on visions and prophecies. Remember, when you begin to write visions and prophecies, you must have your record agree meticulously with the Bible. You must write seventy-one chapters on doctrine and exhortation, and you must check every statement with the scriptures or you will be pr oven a fraud. You must write twenty-one chapters on the ministry of Christ, and every thing you claim he said and every testimony you write in your book about Him must agree absolutely with the New Testament.
13. Many of the facts, claims, ideas, and statements given as absolute truth in your writing must be entirely inconsistent with the prevailing beliefs of the world. Some of these worldly beliefs must be the direct opposite of your claims.
14. Included in your narrations will be authentic modes of travel; whether or not those ancient people used fire; description of their clothing, crops, mourning customs, and types of government. You must invent about 280 new names that will stand up under scrutiny through the years as to their proper application and derivation.
15. You will have to properly use figures of speech, similes, metaphors, narrations, exposition, descriptions, oratory, epic lyric, and parables.
16. You must invite the ablest scholars and experts to examine the text with care, and you must strive diligently to see that your book gets into the hands of those eager to prove it a forgery, and who are most competent to expose every flaw in it.
17. Thorough investigation, scientific and historical evidence, and archaeological discovery for the next 125 years must verify its claims and prove detail after detail to be true, for many of the details you put in your history are still buried beneath the soil of Tibet.
18. You must publish it to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people declaring it to be the word of God and another witness for the Lord Jesus Christ.
19. The book must not contain any absurd, impossible, or contradictory statements. Your history must not contain any statement that will contradict any other statement elsewhere in the volume.
20. Many theories and ideas as to its origin must arise, and after discovering and examining the facts, they must fail. You have claimed that your knowledge had come from divine origin, and this claim continues to stand as the only possible explanation. The strength of this explanation must not decrease as time passes, but actually increases to the point where it becomes the only logical explanation.
21. Your record is to fulfill many Bible prophecies, even in the exact manner in which it shall come forth, to whom delivered, its purposes, and its accomplishments.
22. Call down an angel from heaven in the middle of the day and have him bear testimony to four honest, dignified citizens of your community that the record is the word of God. These witnesses must bear the angel's testimony to the world, not for profit or gain, but under great sacrifice and severe persecution, even to their death beds. You must put that testimony to the test by becoming an enemy to these men.
23. Thousands of great men, intellectual giants, national and international personalities, and scholars for 165 years must accept your history and its teachings even to the point of laying down their life rather than deny their testimony of it.
24. You must include with within the record this promise: "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 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."
25. Missionaries must bear record to the world for the next 165 years that they know the record to be true because they put the promise to the test and found it to be true. The truth of it was manifested to them by the power of the Holy Ghost.
26. Over 52,900 plus competent salesman must be so sold on your book that they gladly give up two or more years of their lives to take it to all parts of the world for distribution. They not only pay their own way during these years, but return bearing testimony that the time spent will remain as one of the highlights of their lives. They receive nothing in return for their efforts but the joy of having shared your book with others.
27. Your book must not only raise the standards of millions of people but do it in such a way that they become one of the great moral, ethical, and dynamic marvels of the day. They must become world renowned for this.
28. For the next 20 years you must watch those that follow and you, your family, and the dearest of your loved ones persecuted, driven time after time from their homes, beaten, tortured, starved, frozen and killed. Tens of thousands must undergo the most extreme hardships in your presence just because they believe your claims concerning the origin and content of what you have written on ancient Tibet.
29. You must gain no wealth from your work, but many times lose all that you have. Like those that believe you, you must submit yourself to the most vile persecution. And finally after 20 years of this, give your own life in a very savage and brutal manner, for your testimony concerning your history book. This must be done willingly on your part.
30. Start right now and produce this record which covers 1,000 years of history, doing it, not in the peaceful atmosphere of your community, but under the most trying of circumstances which include being driven from your home several times, and receiving constant threats upon your life. Please have your book completed, talk a friend into mortgaging his farm to raise money to have it printed - all in 60 days.
There is only one answer: The Book of Mormon is a divine record. If not, its origin must be stated and its claims must be explained by the critic. It isn't enough to merely discard it as false and forget about it!
The first thing to do in examining any ancient text is to consider it in the light of the origin and background there is no need to look farther, since historical forgery is virtually impossible.
There ya go. You can also pray about it to know if it is true. That is what I have done and I know without a doubt it was divinely translated.
Academic question:
What establishes tanner, martin, pulsing and Priest's credibility? How do we know they are reliable?
Anyone can argue - but what makes them credible? Arguing and contradiction or even opposing on whatever grounds doesn't make one credible.
(saying Joseph smith isn't credible doesn't make them credible and if Joseph isn't credible anyways, why would you need them to prove it?)
*Edit*
No - I haven't read their works but I've seen their names thrown about - I know the book of Mormon is another testament of Christ and I've done my own research to conclude that so at this point those guys are pushpin in my book - but that's my question.
Whether or not the BOM was plagiarized or came from Smith's own imagination, it definitely wasn't the record of an imaginary early civilization, written on gold plates.
Joesph smith wrote the book of Mormon with the gold plates he had no education he translated it with the help of god it was not written bu him only translated look under lads history he also seen god in a grove in new york which the lads Church owns the property
If you were to compare those two works you would find very few similarities. Even few things to aid Joseph Smith in "writing" the Book of Mormon.
Consider this. Here is a list of things that are believed by scholars to be true today, that are included in the Book of Mormon, yet were 100% against the beliefs of the scholars at the time that the Book of Mormon was published:
The existence of Prue-colombian barley in the Americas.
The existence of Prue-colombian horses in the Americas.
The existence of Prue-colombian elephants in the Americas.
The use of Prue-colombian cement in the Americas.
The existence of Prue-colombian highway systems and civilized cities in the Americas (The records of the Aztec and Inca were in royal libraries in Europe).
Records written on plates or the use of stone boxes to store items.
The use of Prue-colombian iron ore.
In addition to that he included over 300 examples of an ancient form of poetry that are elaborate and perfect. These were not known to exist until after the book was published. Joseph Smith never mentioned these. They were also found in the Bible.
In the Mayan book "The Title of the Lords of Totonicapan" they talk about their ancestors who came across the sea and were descendants of Abraham and were Children of Israel". Recently scholars have come to the conclusion that the "land bridge only" theory just cannot be correct and there must have been multiple maritime crossings.
Until about a fifteen years ago, scholars believed the Maya to be a peaceful people......now we know that they were very blood-thirsty, war like, and practiced widespread human sacrifice.....the exact conditions that described the people in the Book of Mormon at 400 AD in the Americas.
Smith was mocked for his mention of large cities.....until we started digging up the ruins of Tidal, Palenque, Coba, Chichen Itza, Tehotituacan, etc.
The Book of Mormon mentions cities burried in water....things that we only began to discover once we could fly planes and scuba dive.
Only 2% of KNOWN ruins in the Americas have been excavated. We still can't understand Olmec....possibly a civilization discussed in the Book of Mormon.
There are more ANCIENT dwellings in Belize today than there are modern dwellings.
So....how does simple plagiarism explain these things?
It's worth pointing out that Joseph Smith had a 3rd grade education, no access to libraries or universities, and penned the entire book in less than 90 days.
The Book of Mormon is MUCH more in line with modern knowledge than it was with contemporary knowledge when it was published.
This is a short list. We could go on and on with more such supporting evidences.
First, Joseph Smith did not claim to write the Book of Mormon. He translated it. When you translate something you do not claim to be creating an original work.
Now, I guess you believe that Joseph Smith made up the Book of Mormon, so you are looking for literary works that might prove the foundation of the Book of Mormon. I used to wonder about what was in the View of the Hebrews. For a long time I heard that the book had been lost to historians, and some were claiming that the Book of Mormon was really written by Ethan Smith. Then the View of the Hebrews became available. It is nothing like the Book of Mormon. All those false claims of the Book of Mormon critics can now be thrown out because we can actually compare the two books.
There are passages in the Book of Mormon that come from the Bible. No question about it. They are clearly marked as coming from the Bible. There are passages in the New Testament which come from the Old Testament. Does this mean the New Testament writers were plagiarists? Not at all.
The credibility of the New Testament is not diminished by claims of plagiarism. Neither is Joseph Smith's credibility lessened, in my opinion.
MORMONS: Did Joseph Smith plagiarize the Book of Mormon?
