Jump to content

Skeptics' Annotated Book Of Mormon And The Three Days Darkness


ficino
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sure the Mormons have refutations spun for this, but the Skeptics' Annotated Book of Mormon points out a lot of contradictions in that book.

 

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/bom/pr/long.html

 

About the darkness that is supposed to have happened when Jesus was crucified, Helaman 14:27 says this:

 

"And he said unto me that while the thunder and the lightning lasted, and the tempest, that these things should be, and that darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days."

 

 

14:20 also talks about three days' darkness.

 

I have heard that some Mormons say the darkness was only observed in the New World.  But the above verse says "the face of the whole earth".  Unless Skeptics adulterated the text.

 

So we can't have an inerrant NT and an inerrant Book of Mormon.

 

It's all BS, of course.  But anyway, the Mormon stuff does not confirm the NT.  It's pretty clearly cribbed from it and other sources, with a heavy dose of the imagination of Joseph Smith.

 

Lots of other interesting contradictions and problems in the BoM pointed out on that site.  But I have a life (not much of one, I admit, but still... )

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure the Mormons have refutations spun for this, but the Skeptics' Annotated Book of Mormon points out a lot of contradictions in that book.

 

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/bom/pr/long.html

 

About the darkness that is supposed to have happened when Jesus was crucified, Helaman 14:27 says this:

 

"And he said unto me that while the thunder and the lightning lasted, and the tempest, that these things should be, and that darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days."[/size]

 

 

 

14:20 also talks about three days' darkness.

 

I have heard that some Mormons say the darkness was only observed in the New World.  But the above verse says "the face of the whole earth".  Unless Skeptics adulterated the text.

 

So we can't have an inerrant NT and an inerrant Book of Mormon.

 

It's all BS, of course.  But anyway, the Mormon stuff does not confirm the NT.  It's pretty clearly cribbed from it and other sources, with a heavy dose of the imagination of Joseph Smith.

 

Lots of other interesting contradictions and problems in the BoM pointed out on that site.  But I have a life (not much of one, I admit, but still... )

It's ALL BS. All religions. It's like they all rob a little from the other, and spin a new web. I appreciate you posting this, though. Great points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.