This is a very short summary of what I view as the 5 most important facts in understanding alternative models for LDS truth claims. To the best of my knowledge, every point made in this document is accepted as factual by both LDS and non-LDS scholars (please correct me if I am mistaken and I will alter the document).1

1. The 3rd facsimile is incorrectly translated

Joseph Smith mis-translated the characters above the heads of the figures in the third facsimile.

Joseph refers to Egyptian characters in specific locations on facsimile 3 and he gives a translation. This translation does not match the translation made by BYU scholars. The Book of Abraham lds.org essay generally admits “the characters on the fragments do not match the translation given in the book of Abraham.”

More:

2. The Book of Mormon is packed with 19th century ideas

The well-known Mormon historian Richard Bushman recently observed:

The Book of Mormon has a lot of nineteenth-century Protestant material in it, both in terms of theology and of wording. I am looking for an explanation of how and why it is there.

The Book of Mormon is similar to books of its time, and it addresses concerns specific to 1830 Protestant America. By any measure it contains an immense number ideas, phrases, and theology common to the early nineteenth century. Here are two examples of many:

More:

3. Spiritual confirmations are common to members of many religions

Members interpret spiritual experiences as a confirmation that their faith is true. But these confirmations are common to members of many faiths (e.g., Judaism, Catholicism, Seventh Day Adventist, Scientology, Islam, and Divine Truth), many of which hold central tenets that flatly contradict core LDS doctrines.

More:

4. LDS leaders taught that the Priesthood/Temple ban was divine

A 1949 First Presidency statement declared:

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord…

And a 1969 First Presidency letter stated:

Our living prophet, President David O. McKay, has said, “The seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God…Revelation assures us that this plan antedates man’s mortal existence, extending back to man’s preexistent state.”

The Lowry Nelson letters and the Stewart Udall letters demonstrate the unwavering confidence Church leaders of that time had in the divinity of the Black Priesthood/Temple ban and the doctrines and teachings supporting it as well as the manner in which dissent may be treated in the Church.

More:

5. Joseph Smith’s polygamy is ethically problematic

The manner in which Joseph Smith practiced and spoke about polygamy was deceptive and at least some of his proposals involved undue influence.

In a recent interview, the most faithful LDS apologists on polygamy recounted the feelings of reviewers of their recent book on the topic: “At the end of the book [the book reviewer] didn’t get a warm fuzzy feeling and that’s not really something we think we can deliver with this topic.”

  • Joseph frequently misled others about practicing polygamy.
  • Joseph was sealed twice to the Partridge sisters in order to hide the first sealing from Emma.
  • Joseph promised a 14 year old girl—one who said “I hated polygamy with my heart”—that, in her own words, “If you will take this step, it will ensure your eternal salvation and exaltation & that of your father’s household & all of your kindred.”
  • After other failed proposals to Zina Huntington, Joseph wrote to the seven month pregnant mother—happily newlywed to Jacob Huntington—the he (Joseph) had “put it off and put it off until an angel with a drawn sword has stood before me and told me if I did not establish that principle [plurality of wives] and live it, I would lose my position and my life and the Church could progress no further.” (source)

More:

More Complete Analyses

See Problem Summaries: resources discussing LDS-truth claims


  1. Brian Hales very cursorily responded to this document; Here is my response to his cursory thoughts. I have altered the presentation of a few points based on this and other exchanges and appreciate his feedback.

There are 3 comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *