DO MORMONS BELIEVE THAT CHRISTIANITY IS A CULT?
Filed under Religions and Cults on October 17th, 2011 by Michael L. BrownIn the midst of the lively and sometimes heated discussion about Mormonism in recent days (Is it a cult? Is it not a cult but still heretical? Is it part of mainstream Christianity?), there is one question that no one seems to be asking: Do Mormons believe that Christianity is a cult?
Let’s remember that Mormonism did not begin as a reformation movement within the 19th century Church but rather as a repudiation of the Church of the day. According to the Book of Mormon itself (1 Nephi 14:10), there are only two churches, “the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.”
For the first Mormons, the devoted followers of Joseph Smith, there was no mistake about what this meant: Those who adhered to their faith, who were part of the Church of Latter Day Saints, belonged to “the Church of the Lamb of God”; everyone else belonged to “that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.”
As explained by early Mormon leader George Q. Cannon (1827-1901), “After the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, there were only two churches upon the earth. They were known respectively as the Church of the Lamb of God and Babylon. The various organizations which are called churches throughout Christiandom [sic], though differing in their creeds and organizations, have one common origin. They belong to Babylon.” (See his Gospel Truth, p. 324.)
To this day, if you are a baptized Christian and you join the Mormon Church, you are told that you need to be baptized again as a Mormon, even if you were already baptized as an adult believer in Jesus. Obviously, your first baptism doesn’t count in the eyes of the LDS Church. What does this imply? And if Mormons accept the validity of another Christian’s faith, why are they proselytizing that person?
According to the Documentary History of the [LDS] Church, “Nothing less than a complete apostasy from the Christian religion would warrant the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” (Introduction, xl) Precisely.
Why else did Joseph Smith allegedly receive his revelations? It was because all the other churches had departed from the faith. As stated in Joseph Smith History 1:19, in response to Smith’s question to the angelic beings about joining a church, “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt . . . .”
That’s why Mormons have additional books they call scripture, grouped together in the Book of Mormon, which claims to be “Another Testament of Jesus Christ.” In contrast, other reformation groups that arose within the Church have simply argued for a reinterpretation of the Bible itself as opposed to claiming to have new, additional books of revelation, equal to the Bible.
According to Brigham Young, “The Christian world, I discovered, was like the captain and crew of a vessel on the ocean without a compass, and tossed to and fro whithersoever the wind listed to blow them. When the light came to me, I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness.” (JD 5:73)
These were clearly the views of the first generations of Mormons. As expressed by Mormon apostle Orson Pratt (1811-1881), “The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon. . .” (Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, “Divine Authenticity,” no.6, p. 84). Yes, “Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the ‘whore of Babylon’ whom the lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness.” (Pratt, The Seer, p. 255)
In recent decades, LDS missionaries have presented themselves as fellow-believers as they reach out to Christians, and in some ways, Mormons seem to be moderating their views. But the question they must answer is this: Do they believe that mainstream, historic Christianity is a cult (or, at the least, a departure from the biblical faith)? If so, let them declare it. If not, why does anyone need to leave their church to join the Mormons?
(My appreciation to Dr. James White of Alpha and Omega Ministries for directing me to the quotes cited here.)
Dr. Michael Brown is the author of A Queer Thing Happened to America and the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network.
Tags: bible, christianity, cult, Dr. Michael Brown, james white, mormans, religion
Possibly Related Posts:
I can attest that I have had Mormons at my university campus tell me quite plainly that I am following a “cult of the devil” and “don’t know the true Christ.” This moderation of the Mormon church is much like the “moderation” of Islam, in that they are civil only when it suits them and are sweet when they need you to listen. The face they show the world is not the same as the one they have behind closed doors.
Now, they HAVE changed their temple ceremony to remove the original Protestant preacher who was serving as the advocate of Satan, and they have removed references to the death penalties for revealing the secrets of the ceremony; however, this was internally stated to be due to not wanting to alienate Christian converts to Mormonism before they are better indoctrinated.
Oh my, I’d never heard this before:
“According to the Book of Mormon itself (1 Nephi 14:10), there are only two churches, “the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.”’
It seems like this to me. The Gospel starts at point “A”, the Mormons claim we moved away and we came to point “B”, but instead of doing an about face and going back to point “A”, they went on to point “C” and proclaimed that as the new and improved point “A”! Yikes.
So true, as are the above comments. As an ex-Mormon I would recommend my book “The Mormon Deception” downloadable for free on my website: candlecrossministry.co.uk
It was about 32 years ago that I first met two Mormans who came to my door and knocked. I let them in.
They showed me some artwork, some drawings on paper, sketches of people. The first one was of a man and a woman, not wearing much for clothing but not revealing much either. “Who is this?” they asked. “I don’t know.” was my reply.
“Adam and Eve.” they said.
Next was a picture of a man with a beard. I didn’t know that one either. It was Abraham. Next up was a bearded man holding two tables of stone. By now I was catching on. “Moses.” I said.
Then there was a picture of Jesus.
The next was some one else I did not know. “Joseph Smith.” they said. Who’s that? I asked.
They should have stayed with Jesus.
They said there was a way one could know if all they said was right and that was to ask God. I asked one if he had asked God if Joseph Smith was right. He said “Yes”. “And what did God tell you?” I asked. He said that God told him he was right.
After all these years I can still remember the kind of look on his face as he said so. I didn’t believe him.
Sometimes I think it’s seen on the face. Usually I don’t see things like this but this time I believe I could.
They did leave a book of Mormon for me and I tried to read some of it but it didn’t make any sense to me and I didn’t get anything out of it. It seemed to me to be lifeless and dead reading, about as much fun as reading
the rules to living in a Condominium, the kind of reading that will cause a man to get sleepy.
I know now that I can open a Bible to any page, find something good on it, thank God for it and be blessed, having received some kind of impartation of life, and give God praise for what I’ve found.
They should have stayed with Jesus.
ray,
There are two sentences in the Book of Mormon that refer to Jesus, at least as a reference; this should tell us all something. What is the word count on Jesus’ name in the New Testament?
Does not Jesus predict this himself? Matt.24.4- “Take heed that no man deceive you”. This really should not be a surprise to us that centuries later some random guy, “Joseph Smith” gets a little big for his britches and starts making bold, outrageous statements. Smith is just another version of Harold Camping saying my approach to Christianity is the only real one, every one else is false.
Every generation is going to breed a “random guy” that will seduce and deceive many gullible people. My friends, its about Jesus Christ not Joseph Smith. Anyone who draws you away from the true vine and puts the focus and attention of them self is a false prophet. Follow those that lead you to focus of The Messiah. He is the only one we need to be concerned about. As I said, Joseph Smith is like another Harold Camping or Jim Jones.
[focus on The Messiah] (sorry)
When I read this great article I quickly thought of 2 Peter 2. Thank you Dr. Michael Brown for the insightful article.
2 Peter 2
New International Version (NIV)
2 Peter 2
False Teachers and Their Destruction
1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. 3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them in chains of darkness[b] to be held for judgment; 5 if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; 6 if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7 and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the depraved conduct of the lawless 8 (for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)— 9 if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials and to hold the unrighteous for punishment on the day of judgment. 10 This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh[c] and despise authority.
Bold and arrogant, they are not afraid to heap abuse on celestial beings; 11 yet even angels, although they are stronger and more powerful, do not heap abuse on such beings when bringing judgment on them from[d] the Lord. 12 But these people blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like animals they too will perish.
13 They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.[e] 14 With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood! 15 They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Bezer,[f] who loved the wages of wickedness. 16 But he was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey—an animal without speech—who spoke with a human voice and restrained the prophet’s madness.
17 These people are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them. 18 For they mouth empty, boastful words and, by appealing to the lustful desires of the flesh, they entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error. 19 They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for “people are slaves to whatever has mastered them.” 20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,”[g] and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.”
Source: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter%202&version=NIV
Jabez,
The Book of Mormon refers to Christ every 1.7 verses. (there are over 500 pages of scripture in The Book of Mormon so that’s quite a testimony of Christ!)
Dr Brown,
I am a huge fan of your efforts on Marriage and have been using much of your research in studying the topic of Marriage and same sex marriage. Thank you for being such a loving voice of reason in that respect!
I think the way you have approached The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints (Mormons) in this article seems to be equally well researched but misses the major purpose for organized religion as taught by Paul in Eph. 4:11-14 11 And he(JESUS CHRIST) gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; (Why did Jesus organize?)
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
I think you make some valid points, but the point Mormons make is that Christ organized a church, Paul ( lived post Christs mortal ministry) was an apostle of that church and the dead sea scrolls validate Christs church was alive and well after his resurrection.
The key questions I have often asked are:
What happened to the priesthood authority mentioned in Henrews 5:4? (post Christs mortal ministry, meaning it was important after He fulfilled the law of Moses)
What happened to the Prophets and Apostles and Church organization put in place by Christ? (was there a falling away from this organization as mentioned here: 2 thes 2:2-3 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;)
(I hope my message here comes off as I mean it to, as open and honest.)
I do know that there is a different feeling in the way modern church prophets and leaders speak now as compared to the 1800′s. But when you study it in the context of the time and the way the early leaders were received it is similar in some ways to the way Tindale and the early reformists met with opposition. They were essentially renegades with a very unique idea, claiming to be honest seekers of truth wanting to return to the truth taught by the prophets and being inspired of God.
But all of this talk of organized religion doesn’t change the promises of Christ, He is the way, religion does not save. The question for one seeking truth in religion is not, ” which church will save me?” it must be, “Did Christ organize a church? and if so where is it today so I can get to know Christ and be baptized by His authority and take advantage of all He has prepared.
I’m just a normal guy trying to follow Christ the best I can, and I understand that all I do in this life will never be enough to deserve what God has prepared for all who have Faith in Him. I know in the end it’s by his infinite atonement and accompanying grace I am saved.
[Wonderful blog, Dr. Brown! I found this attention-grabbing article on the web and want to share it.]
MORMONISM OKAYS PORN
by Jared Young
Both Mormon and non-Mormon scholars are aware of a hard-core pornographic drawing in the “Book of Abraham” which is Mormon-approved scripture.
The same Book is part of the “Pearl of Great Price” which, along with the “Book of Mormon” and the “Doctrine and Covenants,” make up the LDS church’s “triple combination” in one volume.
The porn is found in Fig. 7 of Facsimile 2 in the “Book of Abraham” which shows two beings facing each other, which were described by Joseph Smith as representing the Holy Ghost and God the Father, the latter clearly showing an aroused male sex organ.
After Smith published this sketch in his newspaper in 1842, which offended Mormon sensibilities, the phallic portion was whited out for more than a century until the “restored” LDS church decided in 1981 to restore what had long been censored!
Equally shocking was the discovery that the “Book of Abraham” had nothing to do with Abraham or his God but was actually based on ancient Egyptian funeral documents depicting occultic obscene practices – and the original sketches showed an erotic phallus on both beings including the one Smith blasphemously claimed was the Holy Ghost!
For further information see “Book of Abraham” (Wikipedia). Also see Jerald and Sandra Tanner’s “Mormonism – Shadow or Reality?” which on 76 pages reproduces the original Egyptian X-rated drawings and shows how Smith altered them and created one of his many frauds. Highlights of the classic Tanner work can be seen by typing “Facts From Mormons” and “What LDS Leaders Say” on Yahoo.
Refering to Christ and referring to Jesus Christ are obsfucated in the Book of Mormon. A testimony of its own consequence, rather than of Jesus Christ is the case of the self declarations of the Book of Mormon. In fact, a reference to Jesus himself is only academically addressed in two sentences of the Book of Mormon. Use the common denominator of meaning indication called paraphrase and figure this out for yourself.
For example, read 1st Book of Nephi chapter one, not a single reference is given to Christ or Jesus, in spite of the false claim as such of posting # 9; continue to read the historical fiction and find a similar regard of non admission of Christ throughout the text. It remains both an interesting fabrication and boring for no allusion to what Jesus did, and commanded in His Commission, other than by means of introduction by the supposed ‘witnesses’ to it. Where is the supposed reference mentioned? That it is a testimony about they themselves is clear enough as to their agenda, where they preach they themselves. This is the first front for every believer of an active discernment (II Cor 4:5). In engagement of they themselves it becomes a bondage unto religiously constructed form and works, per se.
Dr. Brown,
Have you ever read the Book of Mormon? I think you would find it interesting and would love to see your analysis of it in the context of its claims to be a record of ancient Jews their understanding of and prophecy about the coming Messiah and their eventual transition to Christianity after Jesus appears and ministers to them after his ressurrection in a similar way as he did among the Jews in Jerusalem. I would love see an in-depth response to it by you in this regard especially where you specialize in outreach to Jews and answering Jewish objections to Jesus.
Also, Jabez,
What could be a stronger additional testament of Jesus Christ in a legal sense than to have a seperate record from a distant and entirely seperate people which contains the testimony of thousands of people who both testified of the coming Messiah and later actually saw him descend out of heaven and show them the prints in his hands feet and side and taught and performed the same doctrines and miracles as claimed in the New Testament. In the atheist courtroom of today it would be a strong witness indeed for true validity of the claims of the Bible and Christianity. Of course you’d have to believe its authentic for it to count, but then the atheists have no problem in discounting the Bible as a fabrication of delusional minds either. But one cannot so glibly discount the powerful claims and evidences of the book of Mormon if one is honest and willing to examine them. As to claims of DNA evidence against it; they have not been thorough enough check the brown etal
Brown etal DNA study published in university of Chicago I think. It is a much more thorough and honest study and shows 4 main hablo types three Asian and one Caucasian among the pure native americanpeopls. And by the way the book of Mormon supports the idea of multiple maritime settlers in the Americas which could and probably did intermingle. I persanally believe there were many different groups that came maybe even as many as 50 from different places and the book of Mormon only tells the story of 3; the first and largest of which may well have had Asian type blood as they came from the tower of babble. By the way there have been gold plates with hyrohliphic writing found and are in an American museum and there are at least three different forms of hyrogliphic writing only one of which we can partially read.
Sorry for the poor grammar and spelling. My new phone has a mind of its own…
As to the cult issue, if you read the definition of a cult even Christianity in general qualifies. The reason its so offensive to Mormons is because of the negative connotation it bears. Would you like being equated with the cool aide drinkers or the Herald Caning Guy… and we only want the title Christian in so far as we believe in and are followers of Christ. If the term requires acceptance of the various creeds, then we would be the first to complain. If you’d prefer we would be quite happy with nontraditional Christians and we don’t even mind that you call us heretics although from our standpoint you are and have been for hundreds of years. As to the church of the devil issue. The Christian world agrees with us that those who believe in Christ are of the church of the Lamb and all who don’t or who fight against Him are of the devil.
Sorry Jabez, if I didn’t understand what you were trying to say, however.
By the way, it is our view that the Book of Mormon is among the greatest and most powerful tools of outreach to the Jewish people. In fact, the title page states that it is written to the remnant of the people about which it tells and also to the Jews and Gentiles to show that God has not forgotten his covenants to his people and that Jesus is the Christ:
“…Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel; and also to Jew and Gentile—Written by way of commandment, and also by the spirit of prophecy and of revelation … Which is to show unto the remnant of the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever—And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD, manifesting himself unto all nations…”
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.
Sorry I just checked. The Brown Et al 1998 DNA study of the Native Americans showed 5 haplogroups not 4. Namely: A, B, C, D, X
Here is an excerpt from an article on the subject which uses the brown and other DNA studies. If you are familiar at all with the basic historical claims of the Book of Mormon, this is quite astonishing:
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/malhi/www/MalhiLab/downloads/Smith%20Malhi%20Eshleman%20Kaestle%20Kemp.pdf
Mitochondrial haplogroups A, C, and D are found in populations on both sides of the Bering
Strait that are widely believed to descend from the latest colonizers
of the New World from Asia. While mitochondrial haplogroups
B and X are absent from these populations (Shields et al
1993; Smith et al 1999), it is possible that separate migrations
are responsible for introducing these two haplogroup sets into
the New World …
… Haplogroup X is more common in European populations
(Torroni et al. 1996), whose population some of the earliest prehistoric
Native American remains are also said to resemble more
closely than any other outside North America (Jantz and Owsley
2000). This observation has complemented recent popular publication
(e.g., see Preston 1997) of speculations about cultural
and genetic connections between prehistoric European and Native
American populations, as critiqued by Straus (2000). However,
since members of haplogroup X in both Europe and Asia
lack the transition at CR site np 16213, which is characteristic
of most members of haplogroup X in the Americas (Smith et al.
1999), the common ancestry between members of haplogroup
X in the New and Old Worlds, just as for haplogroup B, must
also be very ancient, probably long predating the colonization of
the Americas. Recent whole-genome sequencing of the mitochondrial
genomes of European and Asian members of haplogroup X
has failed to identify an Old World ancestor of the founding
haplotype of haplogroup X in the New World (Reidla et al. 2003).
The Native American forms of both haplogroups B and X exhibit
uniquely non-Asian mutations and present unimodal mismatch
distributions, suggesting that neither was introduced to
the New World more than once. Thus, the distributions of these
five Native American haplogroups in the Old World suggest that
three independent migrations might have introduced them to
the Americas. However, since the distributions of these
haplogroups do not coincide with the boundaries among
Greenberg’s (1986) three-language macrophylum, these haplogroup
distributions do not support his three-migration hypothesis.
Moreover, the contrasting levels of diversity of the Native
248 Paleoamerican Origins: Beyond Clovis Paleoamerican Prehistory
American haplogoups, if not due to sampling error, might be the
result of the more limited early geographic distribution and later
expansion of haplogroups B and X, due, respectively, to the Clovis
and Algonquian expansions. This interpretation is consistent with
the nonrandom geographic distributions of these haplogroups
in the Americas.
And another interesting article exerpt:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1226041/
“… A striking example of the presence in American Indians of genotypes not from haplogroups A–D is haplogroup X. This haplogroup represents a minor founding lineage that is restricted in distribution to northern Amerindian groups, including the Ojibwa, the Nuu-Chah-Nulth, the Sioux, and the Yakima, as well as the Na Dene–speaking Navajo (Brown et al. 1998). Unlike haplogroups A–D, haplogroup X is also found at low frequencies of ∼4% in western Eurasian populations. Despite a shared consensus RFLP haplotype, substantial genetic differences exist between the American Indian and European haplogroup X mtDNAs. Phylogenetic analysis and coalescence estimates for American Indian and European haplogroup X mtDNAs exclude the possibility that the occurrence of haplogroup X in American Indians is due to recent European admixture. They also clearly indicate that the two branches/subgroups are distantly related to each other and that considerable genetic substructure exists within both groups (Brown et al. 1998).
Haplogroup X is remarkable in that it has not been found in Asians, including Siberians, suggesting that it may have come to the Americas via a Eurasian migration. The virtual absence of haplogroup X in eastern and northern Asia raises the possibility that some American Indian founders were of European ancestry. In that case, as it has been proposed, haplogroup X was brought to America by the eastward migration of an ancestral white population, of which no trace has so far been found in the mtDNA gene pool of modern Siberian/eastern Asian populations (Brown et al. 1998).”
As far as I can tell there is no Mormon influence on these studies or articles.
Also, read this interesting article which bears in some degree to Dr. Brown’s article: “Are Christians Mormon?” http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/trumang.htm
Ryan asked, yet stated,
“Also, Jabez,
What could be a stronger additional testament of Jesus Christ in a legal sense than to have a seperate record from a distant and entirely seperate people which contains the testimony of thousands of people who both testified of the coming Messiah and later actually saw him descend out of heaven and show them the prints in his hands feet and side and taught and performed the same doctrines and miracles as claimed in the New Testament.”
Here Ryan, in spite of your stated premise, is the rub. There is no archaeological evidence for the Book of Morman being fact, not fiction. In its areas of later claimed as supposed historical occupation and warfare of the supposed characters involved, no linguistic, artifact, nor historical evidence is at hand for Jewish tribal migration and occupation in the Americas it supposes. I suggest you look at the publications on DVD in response to this specific evidence challenge, where, scientists are found comparing and contrasting true Holyland and mid and near eastern archaeological evidence with its lack regarding the claims of the BOM being about a once present massive culture in the Americas. The evidence is not present.
You mention legality tongue and cheek, I hope. No burning gun exists. No artifacts. No lingiusitic record. No textual historically relative records (as exist amply for the Bible’s own contexts of time, place, space, and occupancy). So, these BOM claims you have falsely represented are perhaps indeed as J. Smith has represented: produced by sitting on one side of a curtain, wearing special glasses, by resulting writing recorded from someone’s imagination. God has not appeared in bodily form along side Jesus in a vision to anyone else so claiming a revelation of God, beside Smith, whose accounts of this vary from year to year in his reportage. And, as far as the evidence, your claims of mention of Christ on every page simply are stretched from your assumptions, for, the testimony of Jesus Gospel–as the Apostles of Acts so declare it–are not found in the BOM (even if it were evidence for anything besides historical fiction).
again, Jabez… Having trouble clearly understanding you, but the Book of Mormon does contain the gospel and teachings of Christ. Nearly every page does teach about the Messiah or Christ or Jesus (his coming, his ministry, his teachings, etc.)
As for a lack of evidence… Well it’s sort of hard to prove an extinct culture and people especially when we are not absolutely sure what part of what continent to look in… Nor do we know nor would we recognize Book of Mormon artifacts if we found them.
Also, the climates are very different between the middle eastern deserts and lets say central american jungles. More water and growth make it harder for remains and artifacts to be preserved over long periods of time. Hardly any archeological work has been done in the Americas in comparison to the bible lands, and people even had doubts about some of their authenticity until a hundred years ago or so when things were proved like Jericho, etc. and other things are still being verified.
Perhaps many of the ancient American ruins are artifacts straight from the pages of the Book of Mormon, but we have yet to recognize them.
As to a lack of evidence, I beg to differ. There is quite a large and growing pile of evidence and correlations that could not have been known or fabricated by Joseph Smith or any other person living in the early 1800′s. I could go into them but it seems as though your mind is made up so I won’t bother you with any of the facts.