Because the Book of Mormon was written by prophets, acting under the direction of God to address issues of our day. Mormon, the prophet who compiled the record, was not writing it for his people. They had become an apostate people who had utterly rejected the Lord. Instead he compiled the record for us, knowing that it would be hidden until the Lord saw fit to bring it forth. Mormon's son, Moroni (the last of the Book of Mormon prophets), even wrote this: "Behold, the Lord hath shown unto me great and marvelous things concerning that which must shortly come, at that day when these things shall come forth among you. Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing." (Mormon 3:34-35) They knew that we would have the Bible and that it would contain the Law of Moses and the particulars of how it was to be practiced. Furthermore, they knew that we would not be practicing the Law of Moses any more because it had already been fulfilled by their time. So, why include references to things that we didn't need? They had only a limited amount of space in which to right. They needed that space for the things that God deemed that we would need.

I expect because the people in the lands of the book of Mormon didn't share the Jews' overly superstitious obsession with dates, places, and numbers. Per the Book of Mormon, the Law of Moses had become "dead" unto the Nephites, which the author explains to mean that they kept the law of Moses, but having been taught of the coming of Christ and how the Law of Moses was designed to point their minds to his coming, they knew that salvation did not come through the law and that they had transcended it. They were more interested in the more fundamental aspects of their relationship to God. The book of Mormon really only says enough about the Law of Moses and the traditions of the Jews to let you know that.

Just because it was not mentioned in the BoM does not mean it was not observed in the Americas. The Israelites did not always observe passover and the Old Testament documents a couple times when it was re-instituted - meaning the passover was not a regular annual observance as it is today (check out wikipedia). Passover was being observed by the Jews at the time of Christ and because of the relationship of Christ and the passover is the reason the New Testament mentiones it more than the Old Testament - go figure that one. As a matter of fact, the Old Testament doesn't mention ANYTHING for 400 years before Christ. What does that mean? The BofM does mention performances and ordinances of the law of Moses (4 Ne. 1:12) which would include the observance of passover and other things (good discussion is found at www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/ancient.htm) and if BofM was written by a man, such a man as Joseph Smith would not have let such a blatant and obvious thing pass by. I suspect it is not mentioned in the BofM because there was more important things to communicate than things as commonplace as the observance of passover, snow, and oxygen.

There is actually a couple of reasons for this. 1. Lehi and his family left Jerusalem in 600 BC. Long before Moses received the Law of Moses, which included celebrating the Passover. 2. The Nephites were not in bondage in Egypt for 400 years, which resulted in the Passover. So they would have no reason to remember something they never experienced, let alone celebrate the event. There were aspects of the Law of Moses which they did observe, because until Christ came it was not fulfilled. I am sure there are more things I could name, but this should suffice...whew4

Joseph Smith was anti semitic.

SHORT VERSION: "It is difficult to understand why the Book of Mormon continually insists that the Nephites kept the Law of Moses. It seems strange that there is no actual, explicit mention of any of the particulars of the Law. Unless, of course, one asserts that the Book of Mormon is not an ancient history, but was rather made up by someone who had a good imagination, but very little understanding of ancient Jewish culture. Then it makes perfect sense." -- Curt van den Heuvel LONG VERSION: Since an outstanding analysis of this question has already been done I will simply clip it: "an LDS apologist wrote: But the point is that the Book of Mormon does indeed reflect the ancient Old Testament festivals. We already know the New Testament quoted from the Old Testament in many numerous places, but that the Book of Mormon does indeed reflect the ancient Jewish festivals is the point. King Benjamin's speech has been shown to completely be intact and include every single significant element in ancient year rites ceremonies, which are nowhere found in the Bible or any contemporary literature in Smith's day. It is a cohesive and coherent and fully blown and developed ancient year rite that is in the Book of Mormon. This Welch also points out, but you have failed to acknowledge or refute such. The Book of Mormon fits the patterns found in the ancient Hebrew "She-hecheyanu" (Welch, pp. 8-10) The Book of Mormon reflects and includes parts of the ancient "Rosh-Shanah" (Welch, pp. 10-13) as well as "Yom Kippur (pp. 26-36) and "Sukkot" (pp. 37-53) demonstrating very clearly that the Book of Mormon fits comfortably in an ancient Hebrew setting. The Book of Mormon also reflects the ancient Hebrew "Yam Ha-Zikkaron" (Welch pp. 20f) Curt van den Heuvel responds: I would dispute the statement that the Book of Mormon reflects Old Testament festivals. Nor is it 'very clear' that the Book of Mormon fits comfortably into an ancient Hebrew setting. Both Welch and Tvednes have done a lot of work on the issue, and the results are certainly interesting. However, there is one point that they don't address, and it is this: Why is there no *explicit* mention of any Jewish Festival or Feast in the Book of Mormon? Why is it that these incidents must be inferred? Why is it that only 'traces' can be found in the Book of Mormon? To my mind, this supports the view that the Book of Mormon is a nineteenth century production. It could conceivably be argued that *traces* of these festivals remain, but, as I pointed out, there could just as easily be an alternative explanation. Without an explicit mention of these Feasts, Welch and Tvednes' arguments are interesting, but ultimately unproveable. I have done a little work on this issue. This is what I have found. 1) No explicit mention of any Jewish Feast or Festival. What we are looking for is something along the lines of II Chronicles 8:13 Even after a certain rate every day, offering according to the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts, three times in the year, even in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles. Using the two books of Chronicles as a guide, here are the counts of the times that some of the various feasts are explicitly mentioned: Chronicles Book of Mormon Passover 2 0 Tabernacles 1 0 Unleavened Bread 3 0 Weeks 1 0 2) No explicit mention of any regular Jewish sacrifice or offering. (Sacrifices for thanks are recorded three times - I Nephi 2:7, 5:9 and 7:22, and one sacrifice is mentioned in connection with the Mosaic Law (Mosiah 2:3), but the actual name of the festival is not recorded, although Welch infers that it was the festival of the Scapegoat. The 'heavenly voice' recorded in III Nephi 9:19 indicated that the Nephites practiced the Mosaic law of sacrifice, but it could just as easily be a quotation from the Old Testament (Psalm 51:16, especially since Psalm 51:17 is quoted in III Nephi 9:20) inserted by Smith into the Book of Mormon). Again, here are the counts of some regular Jewish sacrifices in both books: Chronicles Book of Mormon New Moon 3 0 Evening & Morning 4 0 Drink Offerings 1 0 3) The relationship between the priests and the temple is obscured. In the Old Testament, the priestly system and the temple could not be separated. Exodus 27:21: In the tabernacle of the congregation without the veil, which is before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall order it from evening to morning before the Lord: it shall be a statute for ever unto their generations on the behalf of the children of Israel. While the Book of Mormon records that the Nephites built a temple, and had a priestly class, the two are never associated with each other. The Old Testament records that the priests were to offer up sacrifices on behalf of the Children of Israel. Never once do we see this function performed by a Nephite priest. In fact, the Nephite priestly class had far more in common with New Testament teachers of the Church, than they did with the Old Testament Levitical priesthood. 4) No mention of the temple items. The Jewish temple had several parts to it that were of importance, such as the court, the altar, and the holy place (also called the Holy of Holies). Furthermore, there were other items present in the temple, such as the Shewbread and incense. None of these items are ever recorded in the Book of Mormon, even though Nephi claims that his temple was built after the manner of Solomon's temple (II Nephi 5:16). Chronicles Book of Mormon Temple Court 6 0 Temple Altar 20+ 1* Holy Place 6 0 Shewbread 7 0 Incense 8 0 (* Alma 15:17. The context, however, is unclear as to whether this altar existed in the temple.) 5) No mention at all of the Jewish dietary laws. The Pentateuch contains scores of laws governing what the Israelites could and could not eat. These restrictions were recorded in the Bible even in New Testament times (Acts 10:14). There is no mention of this practice in the Book of Mormon at all. Given all of the above, it is difficult to understand why the Book of Mormon continually insists that the Nephites kept the Law of Moses. It seems strange that there is no actual, explicit mention of any of the particulars of the Law. Unless, of course, one asserts that the Book of Mormon is not an ancient history, but was rather made up by someone who had a good imagination, but very little understanding of ancient Jewish culture. Then it makes perfect sense." http://www.lds-mormon.com/feast.shtml