You can go straight to the end of this document if you want to get right to the implications of the Book of Mormon. I suggest you read the whole article so that you can know why these implications are valid. Many of you may discount my reasons but you cannot discount the implication themselves.

Now that you've learned a brief but general history about the Book of Mormon in part one, I have a few more factors to implement into the back ground of the implications, these are necessary so that the reader can more fully understand and appreciate the relevancey and truthfulness of their meaning. This part of the article is dedicated to filling in back ground information on Joseph Smith himself. These factors will turn the tables on those who normally accost the saints with batteries of questions and accusations. Perhaps its about time that the accusers come forth to give us their explanations of how Joseph wrote the Book of Mormon. All of the factors within this document deserve much attention, study and a thoughtfull answer. I encourage all to look into them deeply.

few facts about Joseph Smith. 1) He had an elementary school education, he never attended any institutions of higher learning. 2) He had very limited resources to attain needed information from. Palmyra was lucky to have a school let alone a library which would have been of any real benefit to him.. 3) He did everything right concerning the requirements of forming a church : A) He claimed to be a prophet who was commanded to form the church. B) He wrote scriptures like a prophet would. C) He disallowed the sharing of ecclesiastical authority (priesthood), claiming that this church alone was the one true church. Neither the early church created by Christ nor the congregation of Israel ever shared authority with any other separate church organizations.

note: I find it interesting that few churches other than the Catholic church (now debatable) will lay claim to being the one true church. I often hear evasive answers such as "there is no such thing as a one true church" or "all the churches together make up the one true church" or even worse, when asked who formed their church (organization) some will say that Jesus himself did it and that his spirit preaches through their pastor,church members or some other manifestation every week. Also, a church building is not a church organization , anyone who knows anything about Church history or the Reformation should understand that Jesus did not form any church except the early church and if there had been any uncorrupted remnant of Jesus' church left by the 4th century (not likely),it was then wholly defiled by Constantine and his predecessors long before the Protestant theologies were ever thought of. Also, while I do realize that a church is not the building that it meets in, it is all too easy to see in the Bible that the church was visible not invisible like some would lead others to believe.

Factors necessary to the production of the Book of Mormon. 1) He must write in the manner of the Jews. Jews speak differently than we do. Instead of saying "We went to the Sidon river", they say "We went to the river Sidon" or instead of saying "I don't like this" they would say "this I do not like". This is consistent throughout the Book of Mormon. While it is only a small detail it is something to notice. 2) He must add "chiasmus" to the Book of Mormon. This is a writing style found in the Old Testament which is also found in the Book of Mormon. The writing style called Chiasmus was not discovered until the late 1800's and was not formally introduced to us until the 1930's, the likeness of Joseph Smith knowing of or even producing the complex chiasmus with his limited education is most unlikely.(Please look more into this on your own) 3) Joseph must have had many different writing styles. (information on computer word print analysis concerning Book of Mormon writers is available in "The Book of Mormon Authorship Revisited" by Noel B. Reynolds). This also is extremely unlikely since we generally have only one writing style of our own which can be used to identify us. Consider the Bible with its 66 books and 40 writers. Although there is only one author (the Holy Spirit) there are 40 different writing styles in it (The spirit dictates the message but the man still writes what is said in his own words). This is also consistent with the Book of Mormons multiple writers who also have their own style of writing. Writing styles can survive through translations and still identify an author. Today computer word print analysis tests can be used to distinguish between writers when necessary. While you may not have the time or money to have these (already) performed tests done to your satisfaction, I feel that there is no need for the computers to get involved when you yourself without the aid of a computer should be able to tell with a couple of examples which I believe to be rather obvious. First, compare the Book of Mormon (any book) to the Doctrine and the Covenants. Most of the D&C was originally written by Joseph Smith himself. Anyone should be able to determine easily by reading them out loud that there are atleast two different writing styles. Both the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price clearly contain distinct writing styles. If Joseph were to have used two different writing styles (which is impossible even for the best writers to do undetected) one need only look to the book of Moses(this would imply that Joseph now has to have three different writing styles{1 for the BOM, 1 for Moses & 1 for D&C} which is even more unlikely). The Book of Moses is a work of pure modern revelation by the prophet Joseph Smith himself of Moses's own words, compare the smooth flow of the book of Moses to the clunky flow of the Doctrine & the Covenants. These two books have the same pen man but are yet very different. The book of Moses speaks more powerfully than the books in the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine & the Covenants do, it is clearly different, this is because the words in the Book of Moses are Moses's words being given through modern revelation to Joseph.. I could tell that something was very different about the D&C from the very first time I read it, I knew that this was Joseph himself writing and not the same writer(s) of the Book of Mormon Just as easily as I could tell that the style in which the Book of Moses was written was different than the Book of Mormon or the D&C.. Joseph was not a good writer the Doctrine and the Covenants should be adequate proof of that. Joseph and Oliver (the scribe) were both terrible at spelling and punctuation, when the Book of Mormon was presented to the Printer the punctuation and spelling was added or modified by him. Modifications by the church have been made to correct the corrections made by the printer. This explains for most of the revisions and changes made to the book (over 4000 of them). . 4) Joseph must write 531 pages of script containing several intercoursing stories. The Book of Mormon is woven tightly together with few opportunities for contradiction if any. For Joseph Smith with only his third grade education to write such a book is unthinkable. If the Book of Mormon were to be pure fiction (which it is not) it is still an excellent work of literature that no one could believe an uneducated farm boy could write. Joseph must write it knowing that it will be under intense public scrutiny. The Book of Mormon itself states that it will be an unpopular book which will be rejected by the gentiles. (A Bible, a Bible, we have a Bible...) He must write it knowing that it will greatly disturb the well established Christian community which will bring him much persecution (his name to be had for good and evil). 5) Joseph would have had to have extensive knowledge of military strategy and the art of war. Most of the Book of Mormon (2/3 of it) concerns or mentions contention, fighting and war. The Book of Mormon exposes strategies not mentioned in the Bible. The Bible seldom if ever mentions the details of war (could this be b/c the book of the wars is missing?).{important note: One of the main messages in the Book of Mormon is that war is justified only when provoked by attack} Joseph Smith was not a military man, though he may have read or heard of details involved in war, the writers in the Book of Mormon write to us as if they were right there. The making up of a war story would have been very difficult for a man who never fought in a single battle. Try writing a story like the Book of Mormon sometime, and remember it must involve two warring peoples which noone including yourself is familiar with (you make them up from scratch including details about their strategies & weaponry). {Mark twain wasn't this good} The story must be 500 plus pages of complexly detailed intercoursing information which is not riddled with contradictions or errors that a very scrutinizing public will earnestly be searching for. Don't forget that it must be believable and that you can't have anymore than a elementary school education or have been at anytime engaged in any kind of battle in the armed forces of any country . Also don't forget to sprinkle in some prophecies which will come true that concern the nation you live in. 5) Joseph would have had to insert prophecies within the scripture which would come true such as the A) greatness of this land. B) the deletions of plain and precious truths from the bible brought to the Americas by the gentiles,C) the taking away of the Bible and D)the dwindling into unbelief of the gentiles in America. E) Joseph would have had to have knowledge not yet known to him or others. Explanation: A) (2 Nephi 1:5) When the Book of Mormon was written this nation was weak and not considered a super power by any means. The United States was still a new and very poor country. Chicago Illinois was a military post on the edge of the wide open frontier. To say that this nation would be a great and powerful nation would have to be a prophecy long in waiting to be fulfilled because even by the turn of the century the United States was not considered a super power much less a great nation. It wasn't until the mid twentieth century that the U.S.A. became a leader in military power or a major producer of goods exporting more of our products than any other country. Today we are still powerful but we produce less and less every year. B) The Book of Mormon mentions records brought over by the gentiles (1 Nephi 13:20-28) however though, the book they bring would have plain and precious truths missing, this book is of course the New Testament. This is where the infallibility of the Bible comes into play. You have to ask yourself these questions: Can I trust the Catholic church completely 100% that they did not add or delete anything to or from the Bible (what about those who handled the documents before the formation of the Roman Catholic church). Where are the original epistles? Until 1948, no Catholic or Protestant thought that there could be anymore Bible. Besides the Book of Mormon there wasn't any more scripture until 1948 when two discoveries were made. Within the same year both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag hammadi Library were found. Ever since then, we have known that there is more scripture after all. Many Bible Scholars have recently (not only recently but more so since 48') been doubting or beginning to doubt the truthfulness and the 100% infallibility of the Bible, especially when they find the Bible to be inconsistent with the other works now also regarded as scripture. There is speculation of intentional scripture tampering ( see Hugh Nibley's "Since Cumorah"). The Jews as well as many atheists and non believing Bible scholars have claimed that the New Testament is completely made up lies from the beginning. I myself have seen questionable evidence supporting their beliefs. If they are even partially correct then main stream christianity has some explaining to do. C) The loss of our Bible. (2 Nephi 28:30 also read 2 Nephi 29:3-10) The King James Bible, is the most widely accepted Bible in the United States (among older christains).The Pilgrims and other early settlers brought it with them as well as a few other versions similar to it. The King James and other older Bibles are disappearing slowly but surely as the N.I.V./N.A.S.V. take its place among younger generations. The newer versions are translated into more common English. We know that with every translation something is lost, more or less depending on who interprets it. The KJV vs. The NIV's is very debatable topic these days. I highly recommend "New Age Bible Versions" by G.A. Riplinger she has much to say on the topic. Regardless of the debating, the fact is, the King James version is losing its popularity to the newer versions. It looks as though the King James version will eventually give way and eventually be forgotten. In my view the replacement of the King James version by newer versions is only the beginning or rather a step towards to the fulfillment of the Prophecy that the Bible will be taken away from the gentiles, be on the look out for the "Universal Bible" called for by the U.N.'s Robert Muller, it may just be the Bible of the One world religion.. D) and finally, the dwindling into unbelief of the gentiles. Anyone noticed alot of cars donning those stickers and plastic symbols of the fish with legs& feet lately? Religion is taking a severe beating by the Discovery Channel and the Learning Channel these days. Science in general does not like religion, the two seem to me as arch enemies to each other and there are many who would love to see science completely replace religion. There is no doubt that America is still spiritually attached to God but not nearly as much as it used to be. I still see additions being made to churches as well as a few new ones being built but I have also noticed more and more people leaving traditional churches for churches that are changing to accept the beliefs of the people and even worse many are leaving to join spiritual religions (New Age churches) that don't believe in Christ as their savior. E) Joseph could not have known that the Ancient Americans built buildings and roads with CEMENT. This was one of the things that people dismissed as complete fiction in his day because we could not use cement to build anything in 1830! Joseph was scorned horribly for this assertion as it was seen as a huge blunder.

The Bible also speaks of a _SEALED_ book in Isaiah 29. specifically verses 11-24. This Book is irrefutably _NOT_ the sealed book that is mentioned in Revelation 5:1-9. If the Book of Mormon is not this book then where is it?

Back ground knowledge of the church is also necessary to fully understand the implications of the Book of Mormon. The forming of a church doesn't seem like such a big deal these days. Any man who graduates from seminary school should feel comfortable with preaching and would surely love to start his or her very own church but it doesn't work out that way for most. Most preachers, ministers, pastors, priests or whatever they wish to be called were members of a church of some denomination or other before they decided to become men and women of God. They decided to go to a seminary or other religion oriented schools to learn how to be a man or woman of God. They graduate and usually assist another preacher or minister at a church for a year or more and then they are ordained and can pastor anywhere they want that has an opening and is willing to take them. This method of obtaining the priesthood is not to be found in the Bible anywhere. This is system is clearly of man made origin, there never was such a thing as a theological or seminary school in either the Old Testament church organization of Israel or in the early church of the New Testament. People just did not volunteer for this kind of Job. One must be called by another who has the authority to call another. If anyone would care to trace the lineage of the priesthood of any protestant man/ woman who claims to be a man/woman of God , that lineage will stop everytime at a man who never claimed to be a prophet.(way way way back when in Europe somewhere) Prophets are made by God and can confer the priesthood to men only and never to women under any circumstance (women may be employed as Prophets by God, but never as priests). Men cannot make up priesthood or volunteer for it and expect God to accept it. In the days of Joseph Smith it was easier to start a church than it is today. Anyone who knew enough about the Bible could preach without credentials. If Joseph Smith had cared to ally himself with any of the sects or their creeds he could have started a church with their brand name and there would have been no stopping him. There would have been no difference between him and John smyth the founder the Baptist church if he had chosen to make up a new sect from scratch. Joseph did not choose to do this though (Only Prophets or Jesus himself have the authority to found a church).

According to the Anti-Mormons Joseph decided to go about starting a new religious sect by the hardest means available. He had to make up a book and a doctrine that was contrary to the protestant creeds. He had to make up or interpret Doctrine that made people angry and want to kill him (does this sound familiar from the bible anywhere?). Joseph Smith did things that none of the other founders of the Protestant or the Catholic churches thought of. A) The first thing Joseph did was claim that he was now a Prophet because he had spoken with angels and God. According to an Anti-Mormons this was his first mistake. Claiming to see or speak with God or angels was blasphemous because those things didn't happen anymore. Interesting....It seems to me that Moses, who started the Congregation of the Children of Israel of the Old Testament claimed to be a prophet. Also, Jesus who started the church organization of the New Testament was also a prophet but he also claimed that he was the son of God (thats acutally better). Look anywhere in the bible and you will not find a church organization which is truly formed by Gods command found to be formed by a man who is not atleast _considered_ a prophet. There are only two church organizations of God to be found in the bible with any significant details. (Adam, Enoch, Noah and , Melchezidec are thought to have had churches but no details are found of them and besides they were no doubt men of God, they were mentioned in the bible and with good reference.) B) The second thing Joseph did wrong according to the Protestants/Catholic {especially}, was to claim that none of them were truly of God and that they were not representatives of Him. That still angers them. However, once again let us turn to our Bibles and find even one scripture verse with any reference to multiple church organizations (organizations other than branches of that church) with the priesthood authority of God being shared with other organizations( in your search make sure to note the many verses counciling against divisions {Num. chpt 16,! cor 1:10}). Sharing the priesthood much less taking it to ones self was not allowed. In the Old Testament only the Levites or Lineage of Aaron could possess the priest hood. In the New Testament Christ made it possible for {us}gentiles to have it (Rev. 1:6 "and he hath made {us} kings and Priests"). Note: "us" means members. Which means people who have been baptised into the church and not just anyone who is a believer (A believer does not a member make, unless baptism is not necessary; but it is). People have tried to buy it (Acts 8:18) but apparently now though,hi-jacking it is the way to go. There never has been more than one true church organization of God at one time and I think many people feel that there should be only one church organization {the bible says that there should be no divisions among us 1cor 1:10 among other places}on the earth. Protestants and Catholics keep trying to unify themselves not realizing that as long as thier denominational boundaries stand they will never be truly unified. None of them are willing enough to give up their differences of beliefs) C) One other thing that Joseph Smith did wrong, according to the Anti-Mormons is that he produced scripture. The Book of Mormon (which we know he wasn't capable of writing), the Doctrine and the Covenants or the Pearl of Great Price (Moses) are all scriptures that Joseph has brought forth. The Jews have given us the Old Testament, the early church of God/Christ,gave us the New Testament. What new scriptures have the Catholics (in over 1000 years) or the protestants (500 years) given us? To my knowledge none of them has received any modern revelation from God which they have printed and given to us as scripture. A real church produces scripture which has been recieved by a prophet.

so now that you've been filled in on some background lets look at the IMPLICATIONS OF THE BOOK OF MORMON. 1) If the Book of Mormon is true then Joseph Smith really was the first Prophet in over 1700 years. 2) If the Book of Mormon is true then the church that Joseph was instructed to build is the first and only true church of God in over 1600+/- years. 3) If the Book of Mormon is true and Joseph Smith was truely a Prophet and formed the first true church of God in over 1600+/- years then all other churches not founded by a Prophet are false and have no priesthood authority from God and none of their creeds or teachings are truly correct. 4) If the Book of Mormon be true then Jesus Christ did come to the America's and the Nephites did hear his voice. (John 10:16) 5) If the Book of Mormon be true and Jesus Christ did come and visit with the Nephites then Christianity has a second witness (from an obscure&distant place) testifying for it which no other religion has, making Christianity the worlds one true religion...

The Book of Mormon is solid case closing evidence that Christianity is the worlds one and only true religion that no true Christian should seek to tear down.