My atheist friend, Richard Packham, has an excellent online article that shows the shallowness of LDS arguments to support the Book of Mormon.
Below, mostly in Packham's words, are some of the arguments he makes in his article:
- Most Mormon defenses of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon suffer from several severe logical flaws.
- The authors of Mormon apologetics are inadequately informed about ancient history and science. Or, perhaps they are informed about it, but dismiss it or ignore it.
- Mormon apologists frequently must distort what the Book of Mormon plainly says (disregarding, apparently, that their own scriptures contain God's assertion that its words are “true” (D&C 17:6)).
- They gloss over the wide variety (confusion? contradictions?) in Latter-day Saint interpretations of the text. If the Mormons themselves cannot agree on what the text says, that would seem to invite questions as to the reliability, validity and accuracy of the text.
- The apologists ignore the statements of their own prophets and supposedly inspired leaders about the text, dismissing them as the mere opinions of ignorant men who have not read the text as carefully as themselves, who are apparently much more inspired than their own prophets.
- They frequently argue solely from the authority of selected authors or scholars, rather than providing evidence, analysis, and argumentation to support their case.
- They seldom advance the discussion by dealing with current scientific scholarship on the matter, being content instead to realy on an ad nauseam repetition of Mormon arguments, many of which have been around for over a century, and have had adequate responses. . . If the responses are so adequate, why has the wider academic and religious community rejected them?
For more information, see The Mormon Mirage 3rd Edition: A Former Member Looks at the Mormon Church Today (Zondervan, 2009). Also available as an audiobook and as an expanded-text E-book for Nook, Kindle and other reading devices.
