It seems unlikely that someone could fake stylometric evidence for multiple authors within the Book of Mormon text. Stylometric evidence regarding the Book of Mormon has been around for almost four decades now. It made a bit of a splash back in the 80s, but it seems to be plagued by dismissal from critics and ambivalence from the faithful....read more
Estimating the Evidence
It seems unlikely that Joseph or his scribes could fill the Book of Mormon with examples of grammar and word use that fit better in Early Modern English than in the nineteenth century. Stanford Carmack and Royal Skousen have painstakingly documented a strange argument—that much of the language used in the Book of Mormon reflects usage patterns that align with the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, making it unlikely that Joseph or anyone else in the nineteenth century authored the book. ...read more
It seems unlikely that Joseph could guess the name Nahom by chance alone, or that he could've gotten that location from a map. The site of Nahom has been touted as solid archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, but it’s hard to know exactly how strong that evidence actually is. Could Joseph have guessed the name by chance? ...read more
It seems unlikely that the witnesses to the Book of Mormon could give such bold and straightforward testimony to an apparent fraud, particularly if those witnesses proved true to their testimony as time passed....read more
It seems unlikely that Joseph Smith could write the Book of Mormon through the dictation process described by witnesses, or that he could have written it in some other way without leaving a trail of evidence.
Many critics seem convinced that Joseph could dictate the Book of Mormon without much trouble, and those who recognize the difficulty of the dictation process rely on him authoring the manuscript in secret—without leaving any evidence of that process....read more
It seems unlikely that a young man of Joseph Smith’s limited education could produce a book the length of the Book of Mormon as a first-time author.
Joseph Smith is a definite outlier among the nineteenth-century’s great authors, even without considering the extraordinary content of the book itself. The estimated probability that someone of Joseph Smith’s age and education would publish a book the size of the Book of Mormon as their first work is p = .0006....read more
It seems unlikely that an independent translation of Isaiah could be so similar to the King James text, while at the same time different from it in such apparently fraudulent ways. Much has been made of the material shared between the Book of Mormon and the 1769 King James Bible, in the Isaiah chapters and elsewhere, with the implication that the material was plagiarized by Joseph as he was writing the Book of Mormon. ...read more
It seems unlikely that Nephi could have built and sailed a boat from the Arabian Peninsula to the New World. Though some critics have labeled Nephi’s voyage as an impossibility, those perceptions are largely based on the assumption that Nephi had to have built a Renaissance-style sailing vessel, as if the Nina, Pinta, or the Santa Maria were Nephi’s only options....read more
It doesn’t seem likely that a true God could teach things that people find personally and politically disagreeable. Critics find no shortage of ways to be offended by mainstream LDS thought and philosophy, whether it’s in the policies of the church or the content of the Book of Mormon. ...read more
It seems unlikely that the colonization of the American continent described in the Book of Mormon would’ve left no genetic evidence in modern (or ancient) Indigenous populations.
Critics of the Book of Mormon can be relied on to bring up the subject of DNA, even though most on both sides have little expertise with which to grapple with the argument....read more
How can we expect to believe Joseph’s story when his accounts of the First Vision have so many inconsistencies?
In reality, even people who recount true stories will do so differently with each telling, and those stories aren’t much more consistent than for people who are telling lies. Taken as a whole, Joseph does add and omit a lot of material in his first-hand accounts, and there are some contradictions, but even if you stack the deck in favor of the critics, consistency just isn’t a great way to tell truth from error. ...read more
Skepticism can’t be equated with doubt or unbelief. True skepticism is the need to thoroughly investigate all claims, regardless of their source. Our investigation of the Book of Mormon embraces this type of skepticism, allowing us to evaluate the strength of the evidence both for and against....read more