The standard works of Mormonism—the largest denomination of which is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church)—have been the subject of various criticisms. Latter-day Saints believe the Book of Mormon is a sacred text with the same divine authority as the Bible; both are considered complementary to each other. Other Mormon sacred texts include the Pearl of Great Price and Doctrine and Covenants, which are also recognized as scripture. Religious and scholarly critics outside Mormonism have disputed Mormonism's unique scriptures, questioning the traditional narrative of how these books came to light and the extent to which they describe actual events. Critics cite research in history, archeology, and other disciplines to support their contentions.

Book of Mormon

Origin

There are several theories as to the origin of the Book of Mormon. Most adherents of Mormonism view the book as a work of inspired scripture. The most common theory accepted by adherents is that promoted by Joseph Smith, who said he translated the work from an ancient set of golden plates inscribed by prophets. Smith said he discovered these near his home in Palmyra, New York, in the 1820s after being told to go there by the angel Moroni and translated them "by the gift and power of God". Besides Smith himself, there were 11 witnesses who said they physically saw the plates in 1829 (three stating they were visited by an angel as well). Several other witnesses, some of them friendly to Smith and some hostile, observed him dictating the text that eventually became the Book of Mormon.

Nevertheless, critics have explored a number of issues, including (1) whether Smith actually had golden plates, or whether the text of the Book of Mormon originated in his mind or through inspiration; (2) whether it was Smith himself who composed the book's text, or whether an associate of Smith's such as Oliver Cowdery or Sidney Rigdon could have composed the text; and (3) whether the book was based on a prior work such as the View of the Hebrews, the Spalding Manuscript, or the Bible.

Existence of golden plates

Two separate sets of witnesses—a set of three and a set of eight—testified as having seen the golden plates, the record from which the Book of Mormon was translated. Critics, including Jerald and Sandra Tanner and the Institute for Religious Research (IRR), note several pieces of evidence that, they argue, call into question the authenticity of the experience. These include letters and affidavits in which Martin Harris stated that the Eight Witnesses never saw the plates, and that his own witness was more spiritual than physical. Additionally, each of the Three Witnesses (Harris, Cowdery, and David Whitmer) left the church during Smith's lifetime and considered Smith to have been a fallen prophet.

Apologists note that the witnesses in most cases affirmed their witness until their death, and claim that the aforementioned affidavits and letters are either fraudulent, or otherwise not reliable. In 1881, Whitmer, the one witness who never returned to the church, issued an affidavit reaffirming his testimony of the experience."An Address," 27, in EMD, 5: 194.

Plagiarism

Richard Abanes, the Tanners, and others state that Smith plagiarized the Book of Mormon, and that it is therefore not divinely inspired. Alleged sources include View of the Hebrews by Ethan Smith (published 1823, seven years before the Book of Mormon); The Wonders of Nature by Josiah Priest (published in 1826, four years before the Book of Mormon); the Bible; and the Apocrypha. LDS Church leaders Bruce R. McConkie and Spencer W. Kimball counter that repetition from previous texts validates the Book of Mormon because it shows God's consistency and equal revelation to all peoples and fulfills prophecy. Moreover, they argue that warnings need to be repeated in the face of ageless problems.McConkie, B.R. (1966). Mormon Doctrine. Deseret Book: Salt Lake City.Kimball, S.W. (Apr., 1976). Ensign, p. 6.Kimball, S.W. (1981). President Kimball Speaks Out, p. 89.

Historicity

The Book of Mormon purports to be a record of an ancient Israelite migration to the New World. For most adherents of the movement, Book of Mormon historicity is a matter of faith. For others, its historicity is not accepted, and specific claims made in the Book of Mormon have been questioned from a number of different perspectives. Critics of the historical and scientific claims of the Book of Mormon tend to focus on four main areas: The lack of correlation between locations described in the Book of Mormon and American archaeological sites.Citing the lack of specific New World geographic locations to search, Michael D. Coe, a prominent Mesoamerican archaeologist and Professor Emeritus of Anthropology at Yale University, writes (in a 1973 volume of Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought): "As far as I know there is not one professionally trained archaeologist, who is not a Mormon, who sees any scientific justification for believing [the historicity of The Book of Mormon], and I would like to state that there are quite a few Mormon archaeologists who join this group". Anachronistic references to animals, plants, metals and technologies in the Book of Mormon that archaeological or scientific studies have found no evidence of in post-Pleistocene, pre-Columbian America. Items typically listed include cattle,1 Nephi 18:25LDS scholars think that this may be a product of reassigning familiar labels to unfamiliar items. For example, the Delaware Indians named the cow after the deer, and the Miami Indians labeled sheep, when they were first seen, "looks-like-a cow."John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Co.; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1996 ), 294. http://www.mormonfortress.com/cows1.html horses,1 Nephi 18:25 asses, oxen, sheep, swine, goats, elephants,Ether 9:19 wheat, steel,1 Nephi 4:9 brass, chains, iron, scimitars, and chariots.Alma 18:9 The lack of linguistic connection between any Native American languages and Near Eastern languages.Lyle Campbell. 1979. "Middle American languages," The Languages of Native America: Historical and Comparative Assessment. Ed. Lyle Campbell and Marianne Mithun. Austin: University of Texas Press. Pages 902-1000.Lyle Campbell. 1997. American Indian Languages: The Historical Linguistics of Native America. Oxford University Press.Jorge Súarez. 1983. The Mesoamerican Indian Languages. Cambridge University Press. The lack of current DNA evidence linking any Native American group to the ancient Near East.The traditional view of the Book of Mormon suggests that Native Americans are principally the descendants of an Israelite migration around 600 BC. However, DNA evidence shows no Near Eastern component in the Native American genetic makeup. For example:Simon G. Southerton. 2004. Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church. Signature Books. The entire book is devoted to the specific topic of DNA evidence and the Book of Mormon. "...[T]he DNA lineages of Central America resemble those of other Native American tribes throughout the two continents. Over 99 percent of the lineages found among native groups from this region are clearly of Asian descent. Modern and ancient DNA samples tested from among the Maya generally fall into the major founding lineage classes.... The Mayan Empire has been regarded by Mormons to be the closest to the people of the Book of Mormon because its people were literate and culturally sophisticated. However, leading New World anthropologists, including those specializing in the region, have found the Maya to be similarly related to Asians. Stephen L. Whittington...was not aware of any scientists 'in mainstream anthropology that are trying to prove a Hebrew origin of Native Americans....Archaeologists and physical anthropologists have not found any evidence of Hebrew origins for the people of North, South and Central America.'" (pg 191)Defenders of the book's historicity suggest that the Book of Mormon does not disallow for other people groups to have contributed to the genetic makeup of Native Americans; nevertheless, this is a departure from the traditional view that Israelites are the primary ancestors of Native Americans, and therefore would be expected to present some genetic evidence of Near Eastern origins. A recently announced change in the Book of Mormon's introduction, however, allows for a greater diversity of ancestry of Native Americans. See, for example, the following Deseret News article published on November 9, 2007: Intro Change in Book of Mormon Spurs Discussion

Within the Latter Day Saint movement, there have been many apologetical counter claims attempting to reconcile these apparent discrepancies. Among those apologetic groups, a great deal of research has been done by the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), and Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research (FAIR), in an attempt to either prove the veracity of Book of Mormon claims, or to counter arguments critical to its historicity.

Archaeology Since the introduction of the Book of Mormon in 1830, both Mormon and non-Mormon archaeologists have studied its claims in reference to known archaeological evidence. Latter Day Saints generally believe that the Book of Mormon describes historical events; however, the existence of the civilizations and people described in the Book of Mormon is not accepted by mainstream historians or archaeologists.

The Book of Mormon contains an account of peoples who, in succeeding groups between 2500 BCSacred Sites: Searching for Book of Mormon Lands. by Joseph L. Allen Published: October 2003 p.8 and 600 BC, traveled from the Middle East and settled in the Americas. Evangelical lecturer and journalist Richard Abanes and author David Persuitte argue that aspects of the Book of Mormon narrative (such as the existence of horses, steel, and chariots in pre-Columbian America) are not supported by mainstream archaeology. Apologist Michael R. Ash, of FAIR, counters that obtaining archaeological evidence to prove or disprove specific ancient events is difficult.Ash, Michael R. "Archaeological Evidence and the Book of Mormon". www.fairlds.org. . Accessed 7 December 2007. Joseph Allen, along with other LDS scholars, have found sites in Mesoamerica that they believe may represent ancient Book of Mormon cities.Sacred Sites: Searching for Book of Mormon Lands. by Joseph L. Allen Published: October 2003 John L. Sorenson does not dispute that other peoples may have been present in the Americas concurrent with Book of Mormon peoples (see limited geography model).John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and F.A.R.M.S., 1985).

Genetics A traditional Mormon hypothesis of the origin of Native Americans is that they are descended solely from Hebrews in Jerusalem. Scientist Yaakov Kleiman, Mormon anthropologist Thomas W. Murphy, and ex-Mormon molecular biologist Simon Southerton argue that this hypothesis is inconsistent with recent genetic findings,Murphy, Thomas W. "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics ." In Vogel, Dan and Brent Metcalfe, eds. American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon Salt Lake City: Signature, 2002: 47-77. which show the genetic origins of Native Americans to be in Central Asia, possibly near the Altay Mountains. FARMS counters that testing and drawing generalizations from this hypothesis alone is an overly simplistic approach, and that the resulting conclusions would not stand up under peer review.Whiting, Michael F (2003), DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective , Provo, Utah: Maxwell Institute, at 24–35. In addition, the traditional Mormon hypothesis under test may itself be based on assumptions unsupported by the Book of Mormon narrative (see limited geography model).