Yes. See FAIR and FARMS for far more examples than I have time to provide.

You might also read a book called "He Walked the Americas". It is a collection of the legends of a great white god who visited the Americas during the first century AD. At the time that she wrote the book the Author was not LDS. (I have heard rumors that she later joined, but have not been able to confirm this.) The author follows his travels throughout South and North America and paints a picture of someone who sounds an awful lot like Jesus. I believe that these legends are garbled account of the Savior's visit to this continent as recorded in the Book of Mormon. The author came to a somewhat different conclusion which is reasonable considering she may not have heard of the Book of Mormon before she wrote the book. What ever the case, it makes for a very fascinating read. ********************** Alatea There isn't a shred of evidence to support the idea that the Earth was created in six days, that man came from just two parents (Adam and Eve), that there was a world wide flood, that Sodom and Gomorrah ever existed, that the Israelites were ever in captivity in Egypt, that Moses existed, or that Jericho fell through miraculous means. For that matter, there is no evidence to support that any of the miracles mentioned in the Bible ever occurred. Does any of this convince you to stop believing in any aspect portion of the Bible? Then why hold the Book of Mormon to a higher standard? I would also point out that you are dismissing these legends without ever having read them. These legends come from Polynesia and all over the Americas. Considering the diversity of the cultures involved, they are remarkably consistent in their descriptions of the Great White God's physical characteristics, personality, and even the clothes he wore. The description of his physical characteristics are not those of American Indian extraction. They're the characteristics of someone of European or Semitic extraction. This particular deity's teachings were also very similar to those of Jesus. So, maybe you aught read them before you dismiss them out of hand. ********************** "John Pacella: The Bible has numerous manuscript and archeological evidence and has stood the test of time. BoM has NONE" There is a significant problem with your comparison. In the case of the Bible there were Christians were around to keep track of and protect the copies of the Bible manuscripts. Thus we still have them available to us today. However, as the Nephite nation descended into apostasy and ultimate destruction at the hands of the Lamanites, one of the Lamanite practices was to destroy the Nephite records. Indeed, if you were to read the book that I recommended above (rather than just dismissing it out of hand), then you would see that the Great White God it speaks of also predicted this. He predicted that, when the sacrificers (those that practiced human sacrifice) returned, they would seek to destroy the records of his teachings. So, he commanded those people to hide copies of their records in places where the sacrificers would not find them. He also predicted the coming of white men and that they too would seek to destroy their records. This prediction can be verified from history. When the Spaniards arrived in the New World, they discovered that the people of Mesoamerica had many practices that were remarkably Christian-like. Since they didn't think that there had been any Christian missionaries on this continent prior to their arrival, they assumed that what they were seeing was actually a Satan inspired mockery of Christianity and set about to destroy this religion and replace it with Roman Catholicism. As part of this effort, they conducted a purge of their records. Those that were written on plates of precious metal (yes, they did use such plates for record keeping) were melted down and the metal sent back to Europe. Those that weren't kept on such plates were destroyed in other ways. So, when you say that there are no ancient Book of Mormon manuscripts to look at you have to keep in mind all of the attempts over the centuries by those that didn't believe to destroy those records. Ultimately, the only copies that would have survived these purges were the ones that were so well hidden that only the person(s) hiding them knew where they were. Eventually, as apostasy grew more complete the people who knew where the records were hidden would have run out of descendants whom they could trust and would have eventually died without passing on that knowledge. So the records were not only well hidden, but they became lost, their location(s) known only to God. So, when you examine the history of the people of this continent, it is not surprising that we don't find any manuscripts of the Book of Mormon. I would also point out that a lack of evidence to support a proposition does not disprove the proposition. In ancient times, a lack of evidence to support the proposition that Earth moves in an orbit around the Sun did not prove that the Earth is stationary. Likewise, a lack of discovered Book of Mormon manuscripts does not disprove its authenticity. As I have shown above, there is a reasonable explanation for a lack of supporting manuscripts. I have no doubt that at least some of these records are still out there in their hiding places and that in His own due time the Father of us all will bring them back into the light of day where all will be able to examine them. ********************** "Science Geek: Sure Glenn, you claim to be a Geologist? I am beginning to suspect that you may not be one. Probably have never even known one very well! Do you use a dousing rod to find Oil?" Note that rather than actually disputing anything that I have written here, Science Geek simply resorts to personal attacks against me. I think that the ridiculousness of his attack is amply born out by my listing as expert in the Geology and Seismology sections of AB and by the consistently high ratings that my answers in those areas get. Enough written. ********************* "science_geek: Glenn - So Answerbag ratings are your claim to knowledge? Where do you find the time?" No, as I have noted in other answers, I hold both a Bachelors and a Master's degree in Geology. However, I figured that my ratings here were the easiest way for other users to confirm my authority. There are enough other scientist that use this site to keep those that that don't know what they are talking about from being able to get away with anything. However, if you want more concrete credential, then try the following links: http://www.geology.byu.edu/faculty/ehc/ (Scroll to the bottom where his students are listed.) http://www.laredo.cc.tx.us/Catalog/2006-2007/14_faculty.pdf (Scroll to the bottom of the first page.)

No.

Not a shred. It's all made up mumbo jumbo be a crazy teenager. Joseph Smith saw a gold mine and cashed in. He made up the story after dabbling in sorcery and today a few million are trapped in the deceit. Believe it or not people actually believe that he saw and had a chat with God. God told this teenager that all of Christianity was wrong. It's just a made up story......pure fiction. Harry Potter eat your heart out!

"Is there any historical evidence that supports the Book of Mormon?" ... I am not aware of ANY credible historical evidence that supports the Book of Mormon. You see, the Book of Mormon makes MANY claims about the history of North America regarding the origin of the native peoples, ancient civilizations, ancient battles ... etc. One would expect to find DNA evidence that would support the claim that the Native Americans are direct descendants of/from Hebrews (the family of Lehi) that migrated to North America from Israel. THERE IS NONE! One would expect to find archaeological evidence that would support the claim that there were ancient civilizations (Lamanites/Nephites) living in North America ... or that there were ancient battles (battle at Camorah) that took place in North America. THERE IS NONE! Therefore, it can be demonstrated that, considering the lack of credible historical evidence, the Book of Mormon is based upon the FALSE prophecies of Joseph Smith. I have included two VERY interesting videos regarding this subject ... ...

"Is there archeological evidence the Book of Mormon existed as early as 600 BC?" ... NO! There is NO archeological evidence that supports the Book of Mormon AT ALL! One would expect to find TRACES of the ancient civilizations that are described in the Book of Mormon ... there is NONE! One would expect to find TRACES of the ancient battles that are described in the Book of Mormon ... there is NONE! One would expect the genetic research / DNA evidence to support the claim that the Native Americans are direct descendants from Hebrews, as the Book of Mormon claims, ... there is NONE! Therefore, the Book of Mormon was a false prophecy by a false prophet. Attached is a VERY interesting documentary on this subject ... ...

The Book of Mormon is advertized by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints as "another testament of Jesus Christ" and specifically of the account of his supposed visit to the American continent (The Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 11:1-17). Many scholars and laymen have searched known history of the Americas for evidence that The Book of Mormon is true, as has similarly been done with the Bible in the Middle East. While the Bible continues to prove to be accurate through archaeological findings, evidence for claims made in The Book of Mormon continue to be lacking. Before I show you some examples of the lack of archaeological evidence to support The Book of Mormon, let me say this; in the hundreds of hours that I have spent witnessing to my Mormon friends, the conversations usually will end with the Mormon stating this; "It really doesn't matter how many ways you disprove the authenticity of The Book of Mormon, I still believe it is true." I am not saying that it is not important to examine the evidence, because it is. In fact, Scripture says we are to test all things using the Bible as the standard for truth. Show your Mormon friends the inconsistencies in The Book of Mormon and be prepared to test any claim that they make with what the Bible has to say. Finally, pray that what you have shown your friend will take root in his mind and overcome the lie in his heart. Always remember, the Holy Spirit changes peoples hearts -- not what we say or do. According to the Smithsonian Institute of Washington, D.C., USA, the following items (which, according to The Book of Mormon, existed in the Americas between 600 B.C. and 421 A.D.) have absolutely no evidence for existing in the America's during the time in question: Silk - Alma 4:6, Nephi 13:7, Alma 1:29 Horses - Enos 1:21, Alma 18:9, 3 Nephi 3: 1, Nephi 18:25 Steel - Jarom 1:8, 2 Nephi 5:15,16, 1 Nephi 4:9, 16:18 Iron - 2 Nephi 5:15, 20:34, Jarom 1:8, Mosiah 11:8 Coins - Alma 11:5-19 Donkeys - 1 Nephi 18:25, Mosiah 5:14, 12:5 Cattle, Cow, and Oxen - Enos 1:21; 3 Nephi 3:22, 6: 1 Nephi 18:25 Pigs - 3 Nephi 7:8 Grain and Wheat - Mosiah 9:9; Helaman 11:17 If The Book of Mormon is true, certainly some evidence for the items mentioned above should have been unearthed by modern-day archeologists. But where are the objects of steel, iron, and brass that are mentioned throughout The Book of Mormon? Has the Mormon church uncovered even one coin as mentioned in the book of Alma? Mormon 6:9-15 states that many thousands of men fought a great battle armed with swords, bows, arrows and axes, but have archaeologists discovered any of these items dating back to that time period on this continent? According to Ether 15:2, two million Jaredite peoples (men, women and children) were killed in battle, yet there is not a trace of this battle anywhere. Ether 15:15 claims that men, women, and children armed with shields, breastplates, and headplates, fought a great battle with much loss of life -- yet not one article of battle has been found to date. The Smithsonian Institute has issued a statement regarding archaeological evidence and The Book of Mormon. "The Smithsonian Institution has never used The Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archaeologists see no direct connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book." The Book of Mormon is regarded by some to be nothing more than a story that Joseph Smith constructed in his mind as a boy. In fact, the book History of Joseph Smith (p. 85), written by Joseph Smith's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, states: "During our evening conversations, 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 among them." How is it that Joseph Smith told these stories several years before he allegedly found the golden plates and wrote The Book of Mormon? Mormons sometimes claim that South American ruins supposedly contain proof that Jesus visited this continent. This is simply not true and I encourage those confronted with these claims to find any evidence from non-Mormon archaeologists. The Smithsonian Institute has issued a statement regarding archaeological evidence and The Book of Mormon. "The Smithsonian Institution has never used The Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archaeologists see no direct connection between the archaeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book." The Book of Mormon is regarded by some to be nothing more than a story that Joseph Smith constructed in his mind as a boy. In fact, the book History of Joseph Smith (p. 85), written by Joseph Smith's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, states: "During our evening conversations, 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 among them." How is it that Joseph Smith told these stories several years before he allegedly found the golden plates and wrote The Book of Mormon? Mormons sometimes claim that South American ruins supposedly contain proof that Jesus visited this continent. This is simply not true and I encourage those confronted with these claims to find any evidence from non-Mormon archaeologists. http://www.christiananswers.net/q-cc/cc-archaeology.html

I look to: http://www.fairlds.org/ There are other amatuer websites you can check on to... Just check on yahoo.com for LDS Apologetics

Not a scrap. Joeseph Smith told two versions of his revaltions. One was from an angel, the other a flaming salamander. What does that tell you about his sanity? And from the book that is published and handed out like candy they can't find a single shred of evidence for anything in it. The very fact that the Temple won't release the original version to the Smithsonian for verification tells me a lot. It's a fake and the Smithsonian could prove that. That is if it even exists at all because nobody outside of the Temple have seen it. And that's only the highest members. Makes me glad they kicked me out at 9.

No none what so ever.....check out www.mrm.org.

The LDS is basically the Scientology of the 19th century. Historically, Biblically and just in common sense....the underpinnings of the religion are very weak.

No evidence, you ignorant fools keep saying? Or rather, many of you are arrogant, not ignorant. . The evidence can be laid out before you, and you'll turn away from it and ignore it a week later, heck, ten minutes later, be saying that there is no evidence. I pity the fool that gets into that cycle. http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/index.html http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_BMEvidence.shtml http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_cult.shtml http://www.jefflindsay.com/faith_works.html Read all these, and explore this site more, you'll find a thousand pages of evidence if you searched the whole site, I bet. And one more thing I pity, is the goodly persons that buy into your lies and don't join the truth. You should be ashamed. Men and women inquiring about the church could pop in here and believe you, you could do irreparable harm to the soul of another human being. Many of you don't care though, as long as you hurt Mormons, who do more good in the world for the amount of money we get together then any other faith in the world. Then the Tsunami hit in Indonesia, who was the first to arrive? It was the LDS church. While the Red Cross was planning how to put together planes with supplies for those poor people, the church already had planes in the air. The church does gods work, and all you who oppose the church, and use lies to do it, that's bearing false witness. Believe what you like for yourself, but don't testify falsely and so boldly do the devils work.

Neal E. Lambert and Richard H. Cracroft, “Through Gentile Eyes: A Hundred Years of the Mormon in Fiction,” New Era, Mar 1972, 14 About this article: It’s a rare Latter-day Saint student who doesn’t sometime run into novels and dime-store fiction that have for their theme something to do with the Church and the “Mormons.” It’s also a rare member of the Church who does not sometime meet someone who has read such novels and dime-store fiction and who says something like, “Well, I’m not interested in hearing anymore. You see, I’ve read all about you.” Why do many nonmembers walk around with folk legends and folktales clouding their minds, causing them to express disinterest in learning about the Church—or prejudicing their minds so that anything learned is seen through a strange set of glasses? Where did such notions develop? To help Latter-day Saint youth better understand how this all came about—and why such images have persisted—the following article has been written. It is obvious that once you understand the situation you are much better prepared to answer your friend’s query—and much better prepared to show patience with persons who have only heard or read the folktales that continue to go from tongue to tongue and from age to age. Humorous or horrifying, but generally false, the image of the Latter-day Saint nevertheless played a significant role in the popular literature of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. We will look in vain for an accurate image of a Latter-day Saint in the fiction of this period in America (or Europe), and like the characters on television shoot-up shows, any relationship between fictional and historical Mormons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. What is found, then, in the works of writers from Mark Twain to Zane Grey is an image that, when examined from our perspective in the twentieth century, evokes chuckles and gasps, often simultaneously, as we laugh at the incongruities and groan at the distortions. Perhaps our greatest discomfort, however, arises from the fact that readers from Berlin to Boston and from St. Louis to London, generally accepted—and continue to accept—such falsehoods, usually to the detriment of missionary work. Indeed, missionaries throughout Europe and the United States are still confronting occasional opposition from laymen and clergymen who have formed their opinions of the Church through reading about that “strange and perverse sect whose members call themselves saints” but who are, as portrayed in fiction, either bloodthirsty seducers or ridiculous bumpkins. The concern of authors in the late nineteenth-early twentieth centuries was not so much with conveying the facts as it was with exciting the audience. Indeed, neither the writer not the reader seemed really concerned about the facts: thrills were the sought-for commodity. And on any market, Mormon villains were a real bargain. In the first place, Latter-day Saints were, to most people, that different bunch of mysterious people who had secreted themselves in the fortress of the vast Rocky Mountains. As with the Abominable Snowman, almost everyone had heard of Salt Lake City and the Latter-day Saints, but no one really knew much about them. They were simply peculiar people, strange objects of considerable curiosity. People were interested in hearing and believing almost anything about them. Furthermore, what people heard about the Mormons as they gossiped over the back fence or sat in the barbershop was often twisted and shaped to appeal to the popular appetite for the lurid and sensational: secret rites, priestly orders, blood atonement, polygamy, and white slavery. It is therefore not surprising that the Latter-day Saint in fiction slipped easily into a stereotype of the popular villain. For the first hundred years or so of our history, most of the magazines and novels that appeared portrayed us either as sly, dark, and seductive missionaries who slinked around the cities of America and Europe, stealing wives and daughters, or as fat, boorish old bishops, plodding around Salt Lake City arranging for a new wife or a raid on a gentile wagon train, or both! In an early story from Harper’s Weekly (1855) called “My Wife’s Tempter,” a suspicious husband overhears his wife talking to a mysterious visitor. The husband eavesdrops enough to learn that the visitor is trying to persuade his wife to leave her husband and family and to go with him to his “chief.” “You have no husband, woman,” the man argues. “The vow was annulled before it was made. Your husband in God yet awaits you. You will yet be blessed with the true spouse.” The wife finally agrees, and then leaves, sobbing. This allows the angry husband to approach the unsuspecting seducer: “I rose and stepped silently into the open space in which he stood. His back was toward me. His arms were lifted high over his head with an exultant gesture, and I could see his profile as it slightly turned toward me, illuminated with a smile of scornful triumph.” The poor husband throws himself at the intruder. They wrestle, and the husband finally gets the upper hand when the villain slips over a precipice and dangles there, his life depending on his grip on a slim root that the husband immediately begins to saw at with his pocketknife. To save his life, the villain promises to confess; he is pulled up to safety where, with bowed head, he finally admits, “I am a Mormon.” The husband is shocked by the revelation that the man who has ruined his home is actually a Latter-day Saint missionary, and the story concludes on a tearful note with the husband putting his wife out of the house: “This is no longer your home. You have deceived me. You are a Mormon. I know all.” And with that the husband sends his wife off to live with her father. He ends his narrative, “I live in the same village with my wife, and yet am a widower. She is very penitent, they say; yet I cannot bring myself to believe that anyone who has allowed the Mormon poison to enter his veins can ever be cured. People say that we will come together again, but I know better.” It is not hard to imagine why, after reading a story like this, a well-read husband might irately slam the door when two young people come to his porch and cheerfully announce that they are missionaries from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Then there is the story of the polygamous Mormon. Literally hundreds of stories and novels recount fantastic tales of abduction, seduction, forced marriages, pursuits, and escapes. The husbands in these stories are seldom attractive. Consider, for instance, Elder Bungrod in the story “American Dead Sea Fruit” from The Overland Monthly of February, 1895. The polygamous Elder Bungrod is “squat-bodied, sluggish, gross. … [He] had a flat toadlike look as he sat lazily dropping forward with elbows on his knees and occasionally turning a pair of small reddish eyes about the landscape.” When he sees that his wives are slowing down in their work, “a dark scowl wrinkled his grizzled animal face, and he got up and made his way toward the house, pouting as he went and crushing the clods and potato vines under his heavily booted feet.” In this story, as in almost all such accounts, there is a Beautiful Young Girl who has been (or is about to be) forced into marriage with the Evil Old Man. In this tale she is already married to him but not won over, so Elder Bungrod begins his nefarious pursuit: “Don’t be skeered, little un; don’t yeh be skeered; and nobody won’t hurt yeh,” said the Elder, advancing, arms extended out with a maudlin expression of countenance. “The young girl flattened herself against the wall with a look of dismay and horror in her eyes, and when his hands touched her she cried out wildly, and, slipping from him flew with swift feet out the door and down into the fields. With a stifled curse, Bungrod kicked the chairs out of his way and tramped after her. His heavy face had a greenish, congested cast, and his small eyes looked red and evil.” The young heroines in these stories are usually saved from the clutches of the Latter-day Saints by fleeing, aided by the Handsome Young Gentile, who is either pursuing a lost sister or just passing through with his wagonload of freight. Or if the Handsome Young Gentile isn’t handy, an author may have his heroine leap from the walls of the temple into the Great Salt Lake and swim to safety (the lake must have been a great deal higher in those days!). Or, perhaps in the more “sophisticated” stories, one of the older but wiser and sympathetic wives helps the Poor Young Thing get away. In the case of Elder Bungrod, for example, one of the older wives steals a rowboat, and the story concludes after a nightlong chase over the whole length of Great Salt Lake, when, at the cost of her own life, the Honest Older Wife delivers the Poor Young Thing into the saving hands of the railroad construction gang at Corinne—that blissful gentile haven in the desert. Of course, no catalogue of Mormon villains would be complete without the fictional Danites—that band of enforcers who see that the wishes of the “holy four,” or the bishop, or Brother Brigham (depending on which piece you are reading) are carried out. Hundreds and hundreds of literary corpses are strewn through the pages of fiction, wayward members who tried to escape from Salt Lake Valley, or antagonistic nonmembers who refused to give their dollars or daughters to the Church. Sometimes it was only a lone Destroying Angel, but more often it was a whole group that would be waiting for the unsuspecting hero or heroine as they attempt to escape their stonehearted captors. Zane Grey, Robert Louis Stevenson, Joaquin Miller, and a host of lesser-known writers have used the Danites, but perhaps the most well-known treatment is that of A. Conan Doyle in A Study of Scarlet: “Its invisibility and the mystery which was attached to it, made this [Danite] organization doubly terrible. It appeared to be omniscient and omnipotent, and yet was neither seen nor heard. The man who held out against the Church vanished away, and none knew whither he had gone or what had befallen him. His wife and his children awaited him at home, but no father ever returned to tell them how he had fared at the hands of his secret judges. A rash word or a hasty act was followed by annihilation, and yet none knew what the nature might be of this terrible power which was suspended over them. No wonder that men went about in fear and trembling, and that even in the heart of the wilderness they dared not whisper the doubts which oppressed them. … At first this vague and terrible power was exercised only upon the recalcitrants who, having embraced the Mormon faith, wished afterwards to pervert or to abandon it. Soon, however, it took a wider range. The supply of adult women was running short, and polygamy without a female population on which to draw was a barren doctrine indeed. Strange rumours began to be bandied about—rumours of murdered immigrants and rifled camps in regions where Indians had never been seen. New women appeared in the harems of the elders—women who pined and wept, and bore upon their faces the traces of unextinguishable horror. Belated wanderers upon the mountains spoke of gangs of armed men, masked, stealthy, and noiseless, who flitted by them in the darkness. These tales and rumours took substance and shape, and were corroborated and recorroborated, until they resolved themselves into a definite name. To this day, in the lonely ranches of the West, the name of the Danite Band, or the Avenging Angels, is a sinister and an ill-omened one.” We quote this long passage because Doyle’s description reads almost like a plot summary of the typical Mormon novel around the turn of the century. Novel after story after novel came from the press, making literary hay by detailing in purple prose and melodramatic style the doings of the imaginary Danites. In fact, if there is a dominant trait in these early popular pieces, it is violence and bloodshed. Poisonings, stranglings, hangings, shootings are a part of almost every chapter, if not every page. Leonard Arrington and Jon Haupt counted the violent deaths in Boadicea, the Mormon Wife: Life Scenes in Utah, a typical novel of the genre, and found that “in the short space of ninety-seven pages, seventeen persons perish. Some are shot, others drowned, some beaten to death, others strangled, one poisoned, one hanged, one beaten with a whip handle, three crushed by a falling rafter, and one succumbs from a broken heart. In addition, there are assorted thrashings, attempted poisonings, successful abductions, and miscellaneous tortures.” (And some call television violent!) One doesn’t have to read very far to find that such books are typical. A few titles are enough to reveal the trend: Saved at Last from among the Mormons; The Mormon Wife: A Life Story of the Sacrifices, Sorrows and Sufferings of Woman; Elder Northfield’s Home; Sacrificed on the Mormon Altar: A Story of the Blighting Curse of Polygamy. The list could go on and on and on and on. And this image of the Mormon as a dastardly villain has spread to other countries as well as Great Britain and the United States. Perhaps the most representative of foreign authors who have exploited the Mormon fascination is Germany’s Karl May (1842–1912). May’s works have sold nearly twenty-six million copies in more than twenty cultural languages, including Volapük and Braille (but not English), and in his many western tales we consistently emerge as cunning, devilish villains (such as Elder Tobias Praisegod Burton). Typically, Karl May’s Mormon is a missionary who smokes cigars, drinks heavily, and is a blasphemer. May was apparently drawing on the popular literature of his time, but whatever the source for his secondhand knowledge of the Saints, he succeeded in placing an image of Mormonism in the mind of nearly every young German who read or reads his works. Missionaries all over Europe still encounter adults and young people who reflect May’s view of the Latter-day Saints as an untrustworthy, often treacherous people, though there are cases where curiosity aroused by the works has led to conversion. One of the difficulties we have as Latter-day Saints in considering the thousands of pages of subliterature is our own defensiveness. That is, we are most likely to accuse these writers of being the most vicious kind of Mormon haters, anxious to thwart the progress of the kingdom. For some that may be true, but for the most part these authors were simply working a well-known formula for fictional popularity. It just happened that Mormons as subject matter fit the formula very well. Knowing little or nothing of the Latter-day Saints themselves, the writers felt relatively free to invent and imagine anything that might catch the public attention. And it did! It is much easier to appreciate this fact if we glance at the other side of this literary coin and consider the comic image of the Saints where humor has replaced the horror. As with the writer of fiction, the success of the popular humorist has always depended on his ability to gauge the mood and attitude of his audience. Artemus Ward, who was really Charles Farrar Browne (1834–1867), was a master at assessing the funny bone tickle point. His writings and lectures, printed in Among the Mormons (1865), reflect the delight that the average citizen in the nineteenth century took in jesting about the eccentricities inherent in “the Mormon problem,” though it must remain a question as to what extent the people shaped the humorists’ attitudes and to what extent the humorists’ lectures and writings shaped the attitudes of the people. In 1863 Artemus Ward was hesitant about going among the Mormons because some years before, in one of his consciously misspelled pieces, he had called Salt Lake City a “2nd Soddum and Germorer, inhabited by as theavin’ & onprincipled a set or retchis as ever drew Breth in eny spot on the Globe.” But the Saints forgave him his trespass, and he enjoyed a visit of several weeks in what his British companion, Edward P. Hingston, called the Latter-day Saint “Mecca—their Jerusalem—their Holy City.” The visit enabled Ward to comment on two favorite Mormon topics: Brigham Young and polygamy. In his visit with President Young, whom he describes as “an active, iron man, with a clear sharp eye. A man of consummate shrewdness—of great executive ability,” Ward notes, as would Twain, that Brigham Young’s power in Utah “is quite as absolute as that of any living sovereign, yet he uses it with such consummate shrewdness that his people are passionately devoted to him.” He then nudges President Young by stating that although Joseph Smith “used to have his little Revelation almost every day—sometimes two before dinner,” President Young “only takes one once in awhile,” a bit of humor that while somewhat distasteful to Latter-day Saints, then and now, clearly indicates the irreverence with which the non-Mormons looked upon the principle of continuing revelation. Polygamy was, of course, that which interested non-Mormon readers most, and Ward comments that in attending the theater, “It is an odd sight to see a jovial old Mormon file down the parquette aisle with ten or twenty robust wives at his heels.” He comments further that on one occasion, when The Lady of Lyons was playing in the Salt Lake Theater, one aged brother, finding offensive the remarks of an impassioned and slobbering leading man to his fair damsel, “arose and went out with his twenty-four wives, angrily stating that he wouldn’t sit and see a play where a man made such a cussed fuss over one woman.” Ward, who was delighted at being called “Brother Ward,” went to a ball and relates that Brother Brigham “is more industrious than graceful as a dancer,” and that Heber C. Kimball, he was told, “is a loose and reckless dancer, and that many a lily-white toe has felt the crushing weight of his cowhide monitors.” Collectively, “these things,” remarks Ward, “make a Mormon ball more spicy than a Gentile one.” It must be kept in mind that many of Ward’s readers and listeners considered dancing a sin, and thus would have found it ludicrous that so-called Saints would indulge in such immorality. Ward lightly probes the problem as to whether Latter-day Saint women were happy or not, but gives it up, concluding with a puzzled “They were like other women as far as my observation extended.” He delighted in recounting such incidents as this: “I had a man pointed out to me who married an entire family. He had originally intended to marry Jane, but Jane did not want to leave her widowed mother. The other three sisters were not in the matrimonial market for the same reason; so this gallant man married the whole crowd, including the girl’s grandmother, who had lost all her teeth, and had to be fed with a spoon. The family were in indigent circumstances, and they could not but congratulate themselves on securing a wealthy husband. It seemed to affect the grandmother deeply, for the first words she said on reaching her new home, were: ‘Now, thank God! I shall have my gruel reg’lar!’ ” Such preposterous stories were commonly passed among nonmembers, who delighted in imagining the situations that could arise when a man was “blessed” with a goodly number of wives. Feeling guilty that he could not report any real iniquities in the system that he had observed, Ward concludes that “I have shown the silver lining of this great social Cloud. That back of this silver lining the Cloud must be thick and black, I feel quite sure.” Later in the book he presents a “condensed novel,” A Mormon Romance—Reginald Gloverson, in four chapters and eight pages. Reginald Gloverson, who has twenty wives, delivers a farewell speech to his family as he departs on a trip across the plains. In the speech he assures them that he will dream of his wives, of “you, Emily, with your mild blue eyes; and you, Henrietta, with your splendid black hair; and you, Nelly, with your hair so brightly, beautifully golden,” and on and on, concluding, less confidently, with Susan, “with your—with your—that is to say, Susan, with your—and the other thirteen of you, each so good and beautiful.” Of course, the wives answer in chorus. Reginald dies and the wives argue about who was his favorite and about which place each will have in the funeral procession. A decent two years later another elder comes to the home and, speaking to all collectively, proposes marriage to the twenty widows, who he will add to his present twenty-five wives. Ward becomes confused with the problem of tenses at the end and concludes that “writing Mormon romances is confusing to the intellect.” Mark Twain (1835–1910), America’s most popular humorist, was heavily influenced by Artemus Ward, and when he published Roughing It (1872), which includes a thoroughly fictionalized account of his two-day stay in Salt Lake City in 1861, he selected the same basic focal points for his humorous exploitation of the Mormons—Brigham Young, polygamy, and, of course, the Destroying Angels or Danites. The Destroying Angels myth had already begun to spread during Artemus Ward’s short career, but with the publicity given the Saints after events surrounding the Utah War of 1857, the myth proliferated, and Twain, his finger ever on America’s pulse, transformed it into humor. Prior to entering Salt Lake City, he remarks that his stage stopped at a station run by a Destroying Angel, whom he defined as a Latter-day Saint “set apart by the Church to conduct permanent disappearances of obnoxious citizens.” Twain wrote that he had “heard a deal about these Mormon Destroying Angels and the dark and bloody deeds they had done,” and he had his shudder ready. But he was unimpressed by the man, who turned out to be “nothing but a loud, profane, offensive old blackguard!” Twain plays on the “angel” aspect of the title and asserts that no one can abide “an Angel in an unclean shirt and no suspenders,” an Angel “with a horse-laugh and a swagger like a buccaneer.” On entering the “stronghold of the prophets,” Twain enjoyed staring at “every creature [he] took to be a Mormon.” He was impressed by the clean, pleasant atmosphere of the city, and reports that he heard Salt Lake was so healthy that “there was only one physician in the place and he was arrested every week regularly and held to answer under the vagrant act for having ‘no visible means of support.’ ” Then Twain describes, with an eye single to humor, his visit to Brigham Young, a man who was “quiet, kindly, easy-mannered, dignified, [and] self-possessed,” who had “a gentle craft in his eye that probably belonged there.” Twain says he kept trying to draw out President Young on government, politics, and Congress, but the President ignored him, and Twain “subsided into an indignant silence.” At the end of the interview, claims Twain, Brigham “put his hand on [Twain’s] head, beamed down on [him] in an admiring way and said to [Twain’s] brother: ‘Ah—your child, I presume? Boy or girl?’ ” An excellent rejoinder—even if it isn’t true. With Twain, as with Ward, polygamy was central to his branch of humor. Not willing to tell the stories as a firsthand account, Twain puts the tales about Brigham Young and polygamy into the mouths of gentile friends, particularly one named Johnson, who tells of the “carnage” of breakfast at the Young home, of calling the roll, and then relates a fantastic story of President Young’s giving a breastpin to his favorite wife, whom he calls “No. 6 … as her other name has escaped me for the moment.” The gift brings, one by one and two by two, all of his wives crowding into his office in jealous frenzy to plea for a similar breastpin. Says Brigham Young, “You see what a life I lead.” The breastpin was “only worth twenty-five dollars … but its ultimate cost was inevitably bound to be a good deal more. … For I have wives all over this territory of Utah. I have dozens of wives whose numbers even I do not know without looking in the family Bible. … And, mark you, every solitary one of them will hear of this wretched breastpin, and every last one of them will have one or die. No. 6’s breastpin will cost me twenty-five hundred dollars before I see the end of it.” President Young then complains of the cost of large families, of papa’s watches to play with, and of washing bills. Concludes Brigham: “My friend, take an old man’s advice and don’t encumber yourself with a large family—mind, I tell you, don’t do it. In a small family, and in a small family only, you will find that comfort and that peace of mind which are the best at last of the blessings this world is able to afford us, and for the lack of which no accumulation of wealth, and no acquisition of fame, power, and greatness can ever compensate us. Take my word for it, ten or eleven wives is all you need—never go over it.” In chapter fourteen of Roughing It, Twain tells of his desire to play the usual role of the eastern visitor and collect facts and statistics for a book that would expose the evils of polygamy. But, Twain continues, that was before he saw the Mormon women: “Then I was touched. My heart was wiser than my head. It warmed toward these poor, ungainly, and pathetically ‘homely’ creatures, and as I turned to hide the generous moisture in my eyes, I said, ‘No—the man that marries one of them has done an act of Christian charity which entitles him to the kindly applause of mankind, not their harsh censure—and the man that marries sixty of them has done a deed of open-handed generosity so sublime that the nations should stand uncovered in his presence and worship in silence.’ ” Such jests at the expense of Latter-day Saints were popular in parlor or saloon. Twain then takes up church theology itself, specifically the Book of Mormon, which he calls “chloroform in print,” and insists that if the phrase “and it came to pass” were omitted from the book, Joseph Smith’s “bible would have been only a pamphlet.” Mark Twain’s analysis of the Book of Mormon, laden with error after error, demonstrates to the knowledgeable Latter-day Saint that Twain probably read the book like a college student reads his university catalogue. But Twain’s analysis, weak and stumbling as it is, gave nineteenth and early twentieth century readers what they wanted—another hook on which to hang their vaguely grounded denunciations of the Latter-day Saints, even though few of them realized Mark Twain would be just as apt to (and would) take similar pokes at the Holy Bible, the United States government, and even, verily verily, at them, for Artemus Ward and Mark Twain were out to entertain and amuse. They knew that the whole human race, regardless of its beliefs and politics, was open to ridicule for shared foibles, but they also knew that their audience was comprised of the fickle majority, a majority that, for a fleeting time, found the Latter-day Saints to be a truly peculiar people. We could go on and on citing instances of buffoonery and villainy at the expense of Latter-day Saints, but it seems clear, we hope, that the Mormon emerged in late nineteenth and early twentieth century fiction as a murderer or a seducer (or an infelicitous blend of the most evil qualities of both). This image, alternating with an image shaped by humorous jabs at polygamy, Brigham Young, and “the Destroying Angels,” made the Mormon a sensational, if seldom very literary, figure. But the sad truth is that the influence of this kind of image was and is perhaps more far-reaching than we might suspect. One can’t help but wonder what effect the reading of such stuff might have had on the presidents and senators and governors and militia men—and their wives—who played a central role in the shaping of Church history—or the effect that such stuff has had, and continues to have, on that factory worker in Detroit and that steel worker in Linz, Austria, who say through tight lips and flinty smile on closing the door on today’s missionaries, “No thanks. You see, I’ve read all about you!”

LDS history, 1966 by Brue r. Mcconkie....I'm not making it up...its right here......flag me if you want, make sure no one else sees it just like it has been for the last 175 years, hide the truth.

1) I don't know if you can prove or disprove something of the content of the Book of Mormon. I find it an interesting reading, anyway. I would compare it to H.P. Blavatsky book "The Secret Doctrine", but that is only my point of view. 2) We have an historical evidence that Joseph Smith, Jr. existed and published the Book. We have also some historical information about him. By the way, we have much less historical information on the people involved in writing the Bible, and even on the people making the choices of which texts should be choosen for the Canon. 3) Here you can find some information of Wikipedia. Wikipedia presents an external view on the movement, and because of this is the information somewhat biased. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith%2C_Jr. 4) I wanted to thank most of the other answerer, who provided a lot of interesting pro and contra information by answering this question.

There is none. The lack of archeological evidence is, I believe, the most damaging testimony against Mormonism.

None at all. The book was written (or translated, or discovered, or invented, or unearthed)in 1827, by Joe Smith's own statement. An "angel" led him to, or gave him a set of plates, then helped him translate them, then took them away. They turned out to be inaccurate renderings of a mix of Hebrew, Egyptian, and Masonic scraps. Can anyone really BELIEVE this? It's just too damned silly.

I heard that a stone was recently found in the dead sea saying that Jesus would die for the sins of man and come back 3 days later. The stone has been examined and is proved to be written decades before Jesus was even born. Here's a site I found www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/07/the-ancient-scr.html

http://www.lds-mormon.com/ferg.shtml A man (Mormon) set out to prove the Book of Mormon, This is his account of his search

You might also read a book called "He Walked the Americas". NOT Hay mormon glen, try reading the bible

Can you show me one piece of irrefutable proof that Moses ever existed or that the Israelites were ever in bondage in Egypt? How about irrefutable proof that Jesus actually existed and/or performed miracles? Can you show me one piece of irrefutable proof that God even exists? When you get right down to it, Lola, NO religion can provide any irrefutable proof of its validity. If there were such proof, then there would not be so many religions. There would just be the irrefutable one.

SHORT ANSWER: Supports it as a historical book? No, none. Supports it as a product of 19th Century Northeast America? Yes, tons. LONG ANSWER: "Since its publication, observers have noted that the Book of Mormon contains numerous parallels to nineteenth-century American life. In chapter one I mentioned Alexander Campbell, a leading American theologian from Joseph Smith's time. In his review of the Book of Mormon, Campbell noted that Smith had written into the book "every error and almost every truth discussed in N. York for the last ten years." He decides all the great controversies - infant baptism, ordination, the trinity, regeneration, repentance, justification, the fall of man, the atonement, transubstantiation, fasting, penance, church government, religious experience, the call to the ministry, the general resurrection, eternal punishment, who may baptize, and even the question of freemasonry, republican government, and the rights of man. All these topics are repeatedly alluded to.[14] As Campbell observed, the Book of Mormon reflects nineteenth century American theological and political themes. It offers guidance on democracy, the practice of capitalism, and various Protestant controversies. Some scholars see parallels between the Book of Mormon's secret societies—the Gadianton robbers—and contemporary concerns about Freemasonry. Many see the warning in 1 Nephi 13 about a "great and abominable church" as a close parallel to anti-Catholic propaganda in the 1830s. Sermons by Nephite prophets echo the form and language of nineteenth century evangelists. The conversion experiences described in the Book of Mormon are similar to spiritual awakenings commonly reported in the American revival movement of the early 1800s.[15] Why are the contents of an ancient work so closely tied to the concerns of one American generation? [14] Alexander Campbell, "Delusions," The Restoration Movement Pages: [link] (January 4, 2008)." ("Understanding the Book of Mormon"; by Ross J. Anderson [a Christian Pastor and Former Mormon]; Zondervan Publishing Corporation; An Excerpt from Chapter Seven) http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no112.htm OTHER RESOURCES: AUDIO/VIDEO: Art Vanick 'The Spalding Enigma' http://www.concernedchristians.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=42&func=view&id=76158&catid=520 AUDIO: Tom Donofrio 'Book of Mormon Tories' http://www.concernedchristians.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=42&func=view&id=75622&catid=520

There is no indisputable scientific evidence for the Book of Mormon. In Hawaii, I encountered local legends and folklore which seem to support the voyage of Hagoth and the visit of Jesus. The native Hawaiians have a legendary homeland east of Hawaii. A great sailor, Hawaii Loa, guided the first settlers to Hawaii. Many stories about Hawaii Loa match with the story of Hagoth. The native Hawaiians have a host of gods and demi-gods, but only one was pale-skinned (Lono); the rest were dark-skinned. Lono was the god of peace. His feast is held near Easter / Passover. The symbol of Lono is an elongated cross. Lono is said to have visited the Hawaiians long time ago and promised to return.

We are discovering the history everyday in S.America and central America, how do we even know the so called 'scholars' are even interperating the ruins and artifacts correctly? What proof do they have, yet we believe them dont we. National Geographic, my new church.....

None whatsoever. There is subsidiary evidence for the existence of Moses and Abraham. If anything else- there is archaelogical evidence for those who believed in them, thousands of years ago. There is no subsidiary evidence for anything in the Book of Mormon. Linguistically, or biological. American Indians ARE NOT descendents of Jews. That and that alone should be enough. Also one has to consider that the Book of Mormon speaks of gold being used as money, no monies have been found in any dig. The list can go on and on. The fact remains- if you want to find something you will. After all, we have Creationists. There will always be those who choose to demonise anyone who disagrees with them.

I would say this says it all. But they always have a spin. http://www.lds-mormon.com/ferg.shtml

No, in fact there's alot of evidence that many of the claims made by J. Smith in regards to the "Ealer Settlers" of America are blantly fales. www.exmormon.com is a good starting point. His claim of people living here even before the Indians and having the ability to work metal (Long before metal working was even done in the world) is kind of worth a chuckle. But yeah, if you want to believe the BOM is real, go ahead I'm not worried.

First of all, please understand that while there is much evidence for the Book of Mormon that you should never use human logic as your foundation for a testimony that the Book of Mormon is true. If you do base it on proof, then it can easily be undone by things like misinterpreting passages in the Bible. The best proof is a witness of the Holy Ghost that comes from sincerely praying to know if it's true (see Moroni 10:4-5). Some may try to persuade you not to read the book because they are relying on their own logic, which in one way is relying on the arm of flesh and thus not relying on the Spirit to confirm that it's true. Now, concerning the evidence, a few examples are: The Hebrew Chiasmus style (which starts with an idea and then goes to a pinnacle and then "descends" back to the beginning idea); in 1 Nephi 4, Zoram (Laban's servant) can be trusted because of his vow--in that day, promises were not taken lightly; many Native Americans tribes (eg: Sioux) believe in a "Great Spirit" as do the Lamanites in the book (Alma 18); there actually are some ancient works of art (ie: engravings) that have some similarity to stories in the Book of Mormon. Many of the names of people and place that don't occur in the Holy Bible today but could be Hebrew or Aramaic such as Abinadi <Av=father>, Hill Cummorah <Cemurah=Priesthood>, Nephi <Nefesh=Soul, possible relation>, and Mulek <Melech=King> (Sorry if the Hebrew words aren't spelled correctly); the book itself goes very well together historically and there are multiple writing styles in the Book that were not used in the 1800s talk; Joseph Smith didn't even know Jerusalem had a wall around it, he only had a third-grade education; and Nephi killing Laban was actually in line with Old Testament Arabic and Jewish law--if one falsely accused another of being a thief, the accuser would be punished as if HE were a thief by death. I invite you to go to Mormon.org and you can ask representatives of the LDS Church questions about what we believe.

there is indeed. a person named hugh nibly is the most highly regarded evidence seeker. he has written many books on historical evidence of the book of mormon. f.a.r.m.s. is the group that specializes in that kind of study and over the years they have accumulated enough evidence to make indiana jones envious. the best evidence is often the evidence under our nose. for example it only takes the second word in the book of mormon to contain significant evidence of the book of mormons authenticity. the first word is i, the second word is nephi. if you notice the names in the book of mormon are not fred or ted... etc. etc. etc. the book is claimed to have been witten in language that has some significant egyption roots. interestingly enouph the english language contains atleast a little reformed egyptian as well. the ph combination is a good example. p, h, or the sound f is the options. normaly the sound f is assumed for the letters ph as in the ever popular word phonetics. the word nephi, if it was an egyptian would be stunning evidence in the sence that joseph smith had at best a third grade frontier education. how would he have been able to track down such a word? pretty hard to say if you are a confirmed skeptic. not only is nephi an ancient egyptian word but it is also a coptic word used in egypt to this very day. significant proof? there is more (as always with the book of mormon proofs). joseph smith could have spelled nephi nefi. instead it is spelled with the ph letter combination. wich is sort of like spelling fat phat. seemingly sort of a frivolous way to spell at best. however a simple lingustic investigation shows that in egypt today there are two ways to to pronunciate this word in present day coptic, ne-fi or nep-hi, depends on wich part of egypt you are in, or what accent you are using. sort of like a southern accent verses a nothern accent in america. thus the word nephi is significant evidence indeed that the book of mormon is true. otherwise how did a kid with limited education and circumstances come up with that spelling? how many farm boys do you know who would accurately spell a tricky ancient egyptian word like that???? and that is just the first of many many names, places etc. that are not common everyday english words that is commonly used. to switch gears a little bit i recently saw a special news program on t.v. about bernie madoff and his billions of dollars ponzi scheme. on this show a man explained how in five minutes using pencil and paper he knew that the ponzi scheme run by madoff was a scam. in three hours he had proven to his own satisfaction how bernie madoff was doing it. pencil and paper and common sence was all it took. anyone could have done it. anyone who was honest with him or herself. but how many did that? about as many as many as passed out flyers against nazism in germany during world war two, that is to say mighty, patheticly few. so it is with the book of mormon. anyone who glances at it for five minutes should be able to see it is a tremendously unusual book, unusually written. after three hours they could have read the whole thing and realized this book is from God. to confirm that they can and should pray about it because God is a God of truth not lies. after that they can repent and strive to be morally perfect as the book of mormon teaches. if you want to learn more about the book of mormon evidence contact f.a.r.m.s. or simply contact lds missionaries who maybe able to help as well.