FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Specific works/Christopher Marc Nemelka"
m (→The Problem of Multiple High Priests) |
(Removed a lot of material about the author) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}} | {{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}} | ||
| − | {{ | + | __NOTOC__ |
| − | {{AuthorsDisclaimer}} | + | {{FAIRAnalysisHeader |
| − | + | |title=''Book of Lehi'' | |
| − | + | |author=Christopher Marc Nemelka | |
| + | |noauthor= | ||
| + | |section= | ||
| + | |previous= | ||
| + | |next= | ||
| + | |notes={{AuthorsDisclaimer}} | ||
| + | }} | ||
| − | = | + | =About this work= |
| − | As part of his 'prophetic call,' | + | The author claims to have been commanded to translate the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon, as well as the lost 116 pages. As part of his 'prophetic call,' the author produced what he claims is a translation of the lost 116 pages, or "Book of Lehi." This portion of Mormon's abridgement (from Lehi to King Benjamin, roughly) was lost by Martin Harris after the manuscript was loaned to him by Joseph Smith (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/3/1#1 D&C 3], [http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/128/10#10 D&C 10]). |
| − | + | Since his release from prison, the ''Salt Lake City Weekly'' reports that the author has resumed his prophetic claims and is again insisting that the "sealed portion" is a true prophetic translation. He insists that his confession for the newspaper interview was all a lie to deceive the judge in charge of his case: | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Since his release from prison, the ''Salt Lake City Weekly'' reports that | ||
:I knew I had to portray something to [Judge] Lindberg that would appease her personal opinion that I thought I was "above her law", and more especially, above the laws of the powerful LDS Church to which she belonged. With her legal power, she could have easily had me confined to a mental institution, if she actual thought I was serious about my calling as the revelator of the sealed portion of the plates of Mormon. I was in her grasp and I wanted out. | :I knew I had to portray something to [Judge] Lindberg that would appease her personal opinion that I thought I was "above her law", and more especially, above the laws of the powerful LDS Church to which she belonged. With her legal power, she could have easily had me confined to a mental institution, if she actual thought I was serious about my calling as the revelator of the sealed portion of the plates of Mormon. I was in her grasp and I wanted out. | ||
:The conclusion I came up with was simple: Lie to Ben Fulton and get him to write something that would impress Lindberg into thinking that I was done with The Sealed Portion and would have nothing further to do with it in the future...Everything I said to [reporter] Ben Fulton of The City Weekly was an attempted manipulation to attempt to ease the mind of Judge Denise Lindberg...{{ref|nemelkaexplain}} | :The conclusion I came up with was simple: Lie to Ben Fulton and get him to write something that would impress Lindberg into thinking that I was done with The Sealed Portion and would have nothing further to do with it in the future...Everything I said to [reporter] Ben Fulton of The City Weekly was an attempted manipulation to attempt to ease the mind of Judge Denise Lindberg...{{ref|nemelkaexplain}} | ||
| − | In 2007, | + | In 2007, the author sued the Church, Jeffrey R. Holland, M. Russell Ballard, and others for "Assault, Libel, and Slander." The suit was dismissed two days later.{{ref|lawsuit1}} |
| − | ==Problems with the text | + | ==Problems with the text== |
| − | In a scholarly or religious vein, | + | In a scholarly or religious vein, the author's claims about the "Book of Lehi" can also be easily checked against what is known about Joseph Smith's translation of the same material. They fail even a cursory analysis. |
===Problems with Length=== | ===Problems with Length=== | ||
| Line 59: | Line 31: | ||
A computerized count of the original 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon yields 270,745 words. Thus, each original manuscript page would have held about 564 words; the printer's manuscript about 583. | A computerized count of the original 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon yields 270,745 words. Thus, each original manuscript page would have held about 564 words; the printer's manuscript about 583. | ||
| − | + | The author's "Book of Lehi" contains 26,709 words when the italicized chapter summaries are excluded. Dividing by 116 pages, we get 230 words per page. The "Book of Lehi" seems, therefore, to contain only about 41% (at best) of the material which one would expect. | |
| − | + | The author includes an introduction to his "translation" of the "Book of Lehi", in which he indicates that | |
:It depended on the particular writing style of each individual scribe, but generally, there were about 225 words per page that were translated by the prophet and written down by his scribe…{{ref|fn0}} | :It depended on the particular writing style of each individual scribe, but generally, there were about 225 words per page that were translated by the prophet and written down by his scribe…{{ref|fn0}} | ||
| − | Unfortunately for his plan to produce the 116 pages, | + | Unfortunately for his plan to produce the 116 pages, the author has his details wrong. The paper was folded either lengthwise or widthwise before being written on. Both methods were used during the Book of Mormon translation, though widthwise was more common. |
:'''Count of lengthwise pages''': Page seven of the manuscript (corresponding to {{s|1|Nephi|4|20-37}}) contains 580 words, which matches the estimate of 583 words per page nicely. | :'''Count of lengthwise pages''': Page seven of the manuscript (corresponding to {{s|1|Nephi|4|20-37}}) contains 580 words, which matches the estimate of 583 words per page nicely. | ||
| − | :'''Count of widthwise pages''': {{s||Alma|45|17-24}} through {{s||Alma|46|1-6}}, {{s||Helaman|1|5-17}}, and {{s||Alma|42|29-31}} through {{s||Alma|43|1-10}} are all extant widthwise pages from the original manuscript. Word counts in the 1830 edition give values of 523, 526, and 511 respectively, again much closer to the estimate of 583 from the actual Book of Mormon text than | + | :'''Count of widthwise pages''': {{s||Alma|45|17-24}} through {{s||Alma|46|1-6}}, {{s||Helaman|1|5-17}}, and {{s||Alma|42|29-31}} through {{s||Alma|43|1-10}} are all extant widthwise pages from the original manuscript. Word counts in the 1830 edition give values of 523, 526, and 511 respectively, again much closer to the estimate of 583 from the actual Book of Mormon text than the author's claimed 225. |
| − | This discrepancy demonstrates that | + | This discrepancy demonstrates that the author is missing at least half of the material that should be present. One might not expect his translation to match Joseph Smith's word-for-word, but the Book of Mormon text produced by Joseph is not so wordy that one could simply eliminate over half of it and retain the same meaning. The author has underestimated how much material he needed to produce, and so his work is revealed for what it is—an amateurish forgery. |
===Problems with Missing Material=== | ===Problems with Missing Material=== | ||
| Line 82: | Line 54: | ||
The lack of a colophon for Mosiah is not surprising, since the first two 'chapters' of Mosiah were part of the lost 116 pages. | The lack of a colophon for Mosiah is not surprising, since the first two 'chapters' of Mosiah were part of the lost 116 pages. | ||
| − | + | The author betrays himself here by being almost "too clever." He properly includes a colophon at the beginning of his Book of Lehi (imitating, perhaps, 1 Nephi's beginning). But, by the time he has reached the end of his "translation," he has forgotten (if he ever knew) that he needed a Book of Mosiah division with its own colophon. | |
===Contradictions with the Book of Mormon Text=== | ===Contradictions with the Book of Mormon Text=== | ||
| − | + | The author's offering illustrates the challenge of creating a lengthy, believable forgery. | |
The Book of Lehi was Mormon's abridged account of the material contained on the small plates, i.e. 1 Nephi - Omni. Therefore, the information in the Book of Lehi should agree with what is on the small plates. | The Book of Lehi was Mormon's abridged account of the material contained on the small plates, i.e. 1 Nephi - Omni. Therefore, the information in the Book of Lehi should agree with what is on the small plates. | ||
====Lineage Problems==== | ====Lineage Problems==== | ||
| − | + | The author makes two fatal errors in genealogy (one within the first chapter), in family lines of unquestioned importance for the Nephite record keepers: | |
{| border="1" cellpadding="2" | {| border="1" cellpadding="2" | ||
| − | |''' | + | |'''"Book of Lehi" Claim'''||'''Book of Mormon''' |
|- | |- | ||
|1. Lehi is descended from Ephraim, son of Joseph (1:11-12)||Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh ({{s||Alma|10|3}}). | |1. Lehi is descended from Ephraim, son of Joseph (1:11-12)||Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh ({{s||Alma|10|3}}). | ||
| Line 102: | Line 74: | ||
Is the reader to believe that the Israelite Nephites, who put so much stock in genealogy and descent, really don't know the difference between two tribes of Israel? Would they really insist one needed to be a descendant of Nephi to rule, when Mosiah—from whom all subsequent kings and rulers derived their legitimacy, including the judges established by his grandson—wasn't even descended from Lehi, much less Nephi? | Is the reader to believe that the Israelite Nephites, who put so much stock in genealogy and descent, really don't know the difference between two tribes of Israel? Would they really insist one needed to be a descendant of Nephi to rule, when Mosiah—from whom all subsequent kings and rulers derived their legitimacy, including the judges established by his grandson—wasn't even descended from Lehi, much less Nephi? | ||
| − | When this error was pointed out to him, | + | When this error was pointed out to him, the author responded by claiming that the Book of Mormon produced by Joseph Smith is in error on this point, and that this is a "stumblingblock" to "fools" who would challenge the authenticity of his work. (He even concludes with the helpful admonition to "get over ''yourselves!''"){{ref|fn3}} |
| − | Unfortunately for | + | Unfortunately for the author's scramble to save his forgery, he also has the "Book of Lehi" say this: "Behold, no revelation that cometh forth from the mouth of God by the power of His Spirit shall contradict or add to the words that Jesus spoke both to the Jews at Jerusalem, and also to the Nephites and Lamanites that were spared in the land of Bountiful." (TSP, “Book of Lehi,” 5:73) |
| − | So, | + | So, the author's "Book of Lehi" claims that it won't contradict anything in the Bible or Book of Mormon. But, when he ''does'' contradict the Book of Mormon a crucial point, he claims the Book of Mormon is in error. So, he doesn't contradict—but if he contradicts, it isn't a contradiction! |
====How was the ship built?==== | ====How was the ship built?==== | ||
{| border="1" cellpadding="2" | {| border="1" cellpadding="2" | ||
| − | |''' | + | |'''"Book of Lehi" Claim'''||'''Book of Mormon''' |
|- | |- | ||
|1. Nephi built the ship "according to the promptings of the spirit." (6:11)||Lord ''shows'' Nephi in revelation at the mountain how to build the ship. ({{s|1|Nephi|18|1-3}}) | |1. Nephi built the ship "according to the promptings of the spirit." (6:11)||Lord ''shows'' Nephi in revelation at the mountain how to build the ship. ({{s|1|Nephi|18|1-3}}) | ||
| Line 122: | Line 94: | ||
====The Problem of Multiple High Priests==== | ====The Problem of Multiple High Priests==== | ||
| − | In the "Book of Lehi," Lehi is identified as a High Priest after the order of Aaron. He is not the only contemporaneous High Priest, either, as | + | In the "Book of Lehi," Lehi is identified as a High Priest after the order of Aaron. He is not the only contemporaneous High Priest, either, as the author mentions how there were an unspecified number of them present in Jerusalem at the time, in chapter 1, verse 15: "And many of these prophets were bound by the Jews and carried forth unto the High Priests to see what should be done with them." According to the author, these High Priests were called to serve by their lineage and "also by the laying on of hands by those who were in authority." Laban, who was later slain by Nephi, is identified as the chief High Priest. |
| − | From the time of Aaron until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, there was always only one High Priest, who held that office due only to his status as a Levite and to his descent from Aaron, the first High Priest. Lehi was a Mannasehite, as was Laban, and was thus ineligible. Tellingly, | + | From the time of Aaron until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, there was always only one High Priest, who held that office due only to his status as a Levite and to his descent from Aaron, the first High Priest. Lehi was a Mannasehite, as was Laban, and was thus ineligible. Tellingly, the author's words "...also by the laying on of hands by those who were in authority..." make clear the source for his apparent Quorum of High Priests: his knowledge of modern-day priesthood government. The author's "High Priests" are a clear anachronism. |
==={{Conclusion label}}=== | ==={{Conclusion label}}=== | ||
| Line 130: | Line 102: | ||
=={{Endnotes label}}== | =={{Endnotes label}}== | ||
| − | + | ||
#{{note|nemelkaexplain}} The Sealed Portion Website, "Questions," last accessed 5 July 2005. {{link|url=http://qanda.thesealedportion.com/qna_threads//read.php?10,126 }} | #{{note|nemelkaexplain}} The Sealed Portion Website, "Questions," last accessed 5 July 2005. {{link|url=http://qanda.thesealedportion.com/qna_threads//read.php?10,126 }} | ||
#{{note|lawsuit1}} "Nemelka v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. et al," ''news.justia.com'' (last accessed 12 October 2008) {{link|url=http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/utah/utdce/2:2007cv00524/62419/}} | #{{note|lawsuit1}} "Nemelka v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. et al," ''news.justia.com'' (last accessed 12 October 2008) {{link|url=http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/utah/utdce/2:2007cv00524/62419/}} | ||
| Line 145: | Line 117: | ||
==={{External links label}}=== | ==={{External links label}}=== | ||
| − | * Ben Fulton, "True Believer," ''Salt Lake City Weekly'' (27 December 2001) {{link|url=http://www.slweekly.com/index.cfm?do=article.details&id=1CABD745-2BF4-55D0-F1F7A0674E76FE36 on-line}} (Hard copy also in FAIR author's possession.){{NB}}{{an|This article reports that | + | |
| + | * Ben Fulton, "True Believer," ''Salt Lake City Weekly'' (27 December 2001) {{link|url=http://www.slweekly.com/index.cfm?do=article.details&id=1CABD745-2BF4-55D0-F1F7A0674E76FE36 on-line}} (Hard copy also in FAIR author's possession.){{NB}}{{an|This article reports that the author admitted to faking the material he produced as a "translation." Reports of his problems with the legal system, as well as biographical information, are also included.}} | ||
{{SalamanderLinks}} | {{SalamanderLinks}} | ||
| Line 153: | Line 126: | ||
{{SpecificAuthorsAndWorks}} | {{SpecificAuthorsAndWorks}} | ||
{{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}} | {{Articles Footer 1}} {{Articles Footer 2}} {{Articles Footer 3}} {{Articles Footer 4}} {{Articles Footer 5}} {{Articles Footer 6}} {{Articles Footer 7}} {{Articles Footer 8}} {{Articles Footer 9}} {{Articles Footer 10}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Revision as of 19:48, 24 January 2011
- REDIRECTTemplate:Test3
| A FAIR Analysis of: 'Book of Lehi' A work by author: Christopher Marc Nemelka
|
About this work
The author claims to have been commanded to translate the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon, as well as the lost 116 pages. As part of his 'prophetic call,' the author produced what he claims is a translation of the lost 116 pages, or "Book of Lehi." This portion of Mormon's abridgement (from Lehi to King Benjamin, roughly) was lost by Martin Harris after the manuscript was loaned to him by Joseph Smith (See D&C 3, D&C 10).
Since his release from prison, the Salt Lake City Weekly reports that the author has resumed his prophetic claims and is again insisting that the "sealed portion" is a true prophetic translation. He insists that his confession for the newspaper interview was all a lie to deceive the judge in charge of his case:
- I knew I had to portray something to [Judge] Lindberg that would appease her personal opinion that I thought I was "above her law", and more especially, above the laws of the powerful LDS Church to which she belonged. With her legal power, she could have easily had me confined to a mental institution, if she actual thought I was serious about my calling as the revelator of the sealed portion of the plates of Mormon. I was in her grasp and I wanted out.
- The conclusion I came up with was simple: Lie to Ben Fulton and get him to write something that would impress Lindberg into thinking that I was done with The Sealed Portion and would have nothing further to do with it in the future...Everything I said to [reporter] Ben Fulton of The City Weekly was an attempted manipulation to attempt to ease the mind of Judge Denise Lindberg...[1]
In 2007, the author sued the Church, Jeffrey R. Holland, M. Russell Ballard, and others for "Assault, Libel, and Slander." The suit was dismissed two days later.[2]
Problems with the text
In a scholarly or religious vein, the author's claims about the "Book of Lehi" can also be easily checked against what is known about Joseph Smith's translation of the same material. They fail even a cursory analysis.
Problems with Length
There are two extant Book of Mormon manuscripts. The original, dictated by Joseph Smith to his scribes, was probably about 480 pages long; we have fragments from 236 of these pages. A copy was made of the original manuscript—the so-called "printer's manuscript"—and is completely extant save three lines on the first page. This version occupied 464 manuscript pages. Thus, the two manuscript lengths agree within 3-4%.
A computerized count of the original 1830 publication of the Book of Mormon yields 270,745 words. Thus, each original manuscript page would have held about 564 words; the printer's manuscript about 583.
The author's "Book of Lehi" contains 26,709 words when the italicized chapter summaries are excluded. Dividing by 116 pages, we get 230 words per page. The "Book of Lehi" seems, therefore, to contain only about 41% (at best) of the material which one would expect.
The author includes an introduction to his "translation" of the "Book of Lehi", in which he indicates that
- It depended on the particular writing style of each individual scribe, but generally, there were about 225 words per page that were translated by the prophet and written down by his scribe…[3]
Unfortunately for his plan to produce the 116 pages, the author has his details wrong. The paper was folded either lengthwise or widthwise before being written on. Both methods were used during the Book of Mormon translation, though widthwise was more common.
- Count of lengthwise pages: Page seven of the manuscript (corresponding to 1 Nephi 4꞉20-37) contains 580 words, which matches the estimate of 583 words per page nicely.
- Count of widthwise pages: Alma 45꞉17-24 through Alma 46꞉1-6, Helaman 1꞉5-17, and Alma 42꞉29-31 through Alma 43꞉1-10 are all extant widthwise pages from the original manuscript. Word counts in the 1830 edition give values of 523, 526, and 511 respectively, again much closer to the estimate of 583 from the actual Book of Mormon text than the author's claimed 225.
This discrepancy demonstrates that the author is missing at least half of the material that should be present. One might not expect his translation to match Joseph Smith's word-for-word, but the Book of Mormon text produced by Joseph is not so wordy that one could simply eliminate over half of it and retain the same meaning. The author has underestimated how much material he needed to produce, and so his work is revealed for what it is—an amateurish forgery.
Problems with Missing Material
Hugh Nibley was the first to note that the Book of Mormon contains "colophons." As one review explained:
- A colophon--Greek for "summit, top, finishing"--is a title or header, before or after a text, that may identify an author (such as by name, parentage, origin, education, etc.), the title of text, book, or section…[4]
Such colophons can be seen throughout the Book of Mormon—in the English scriptures, they are the italicized portions which precede the chapter heading at the beginning of 1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, Jacob, Alma, Helaman, 3 Nephi, 4 Nephi, and Ether. The Book of Mosiah is the only large book without such an introduction. The books of Mormon and Moroni have no colophons, but they are the editors and authors throughout the abridgement, and so have already "given" their colophons initially, as well as identified themselves throughout the text. It's another subtle but authentic touch that no one of Joseph Smith's day knew anything about, or remarked upon until our century.
The lack of a colophon for Mosiah is not surprising, since the first two 'chapters' of Mosiah were part of the lost 116 pages.
The author betrays himself here by being almost "too clever." He properly includes a colophon at the beginning of his Book of Lehi (imitating, perhaps, 1 Nephi's beginning). But, by the time he has reached the end of his "translation," he has forgotten (if he ever knew) that he needed a Book of Mosiah division with its own colophon.
Contradictions with the Book of Mormon Text
The author's offering illustrates the challenge of creating a lengthy, believable forgery.
The Book of Lehi was Mormon's abridged account of the material contained on the small plates, i.e. 1 Nephi - Omni. Therefore, the information in the Book of Lehi should agree with what is on the small plates.
Lineage Problems
The author makes two fatal errors in genealogy (one within the first chapter), in family lines of unquestioned importance for the Nephite record keepers:
| "Book of Lehi" Claim | Book of Mormon |
| 1. Lehi is descended from Ephraim, son of Joseph (1:11-12) | Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh (Alma 10꞉3). |
| 2. "And Mosiah was a direct descendent of Zoram, the servant of Laban who delivered the brass plates unto Nephi and his brethren." (8:25). | Mosiah is a Nephi descendant, and only Nephi descendants are eligible for the kingship. (Mosiah 25꞉13-14.) |
Is the reader to believe that the Israelite Nephites, who put so much stock in genealogy and descent, really don't know the difference between two tribes of Israel? Would they really insist one needed to be a descendant of Nephi to rule, when Mosiah—from whom all subsequent kings and rulers derived their legitimacy, including the judges established by his grandson—wasn't even descended from Lehi, much less Nephi?
When this error was pointed out to him, the author responded by claiming that the Book of Mormon produced by Joseph Smith is in error on this point, and that this is a "stumblingblock" to "fools" who would challenge the authenticity of his work. (He even concludes with the helpful admonition to "get over yourselves!")[5]
Unfortunately for the author's scramble to save his forgery, he also has the "Book of Lehi" say this: "Behold, no revelation that cometh forth from the mouth of God by the power of His Spirit shall contradict or add to the words that Jesus spoke both to the Jews at Jerusalem, and also to the Nephites and Lamanites that were spared in the land of Bountiful." (TSP, “Book of Lehi,” 5:73)
So, the author's "Book of Lehi" claims that it won't contradict anything in the Bible or Book of Mormon. But, when he does contradict the Book of Mormon a crucial point, he claims the Book of Mormon is in error. So, he doesn't contradict—but if he contradicts, it isn't a contradiction!
How was the ship built?
| "Book of Lehi" Claim | Book of Mormon |
| 1. Nephi built the ship "according to the promptings of the spirit." (6:11) | Lord shows Nephi in revelation at the mountain how to build the ship. (1 Nephi 18꞉1-3) |
| 2. Laman and Lemuel abandon plans to thwart Nephi's shipbuilding because they're so impressed by the ship's "curious" form. (6:12) | Laman and Lemuel won't even help begin the ship's construction, and consider Nephi foolish. (1 Nephi 17꞉17-18) This prevents the work from progressing at all, and they then taunt Nephi for being unable to do what he proposed. (1 Nephi 17꞉19) They only start helping when they are shocked by the power of the Lord (1 Nephi 17꞉54-55, 1 Nephi 18꞉1)
There is no impressive ship to motivate them until after they begin helping. |
The Problem of Multiple High Priests
In the "Book of Lehi," Lehi is identified as a High Priest after the order of Aaron. He is not the only contemporaneous High Priest, either, as the author mentions how there were an unspecified number of them present in Jerusalem at the time, in chapter 1, verse 15: "And many of these prophets were bound by the Jews and carried forth unto the High Priests to see what should be done with them." According to the author, these High Priests were called to serve by their lineage and "also by the laying on of hands by those who were in authority." Laban, who was later slain by Nephi, is identified as the chief High Priest.
From the time of Aaron until the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, there was always only one High Priest, who held that office due only to his status as a Levite and to his descent from Aaron, the first High Priest. Lehi was a Mannasehite, as was Laban, and was thus ineligible. Tellingly, the author's words "...also by the laying on of hands by those who were in authority..." make clear the source for his apparent Quorum of High Priests: his knowledge of modern-day priesthood government. The author's "High Priests" are a clear anachronism.
===Answer
=
The "Book of Lehi" is a clumsy forgery that fails even a cursory analysis.
== Notes ==
- [note] The Sealed Portion Website, "Questions," last accessed 5 July 2005. off-site
- [note] "Nemelka v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. et al," news.justia.com (last accessed 12 October 2008) off-site
- [note] The Sealed Portion Website, "Questions," last accessed 5 July 2005.off-site
- [note] Thomas W. Mackay, "'Mormon as Editor: A Study in Colophons, Headers, and Source Indicators'," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 2/2 (1993). [90–109] link
- [note] The Sealed Portion Website, "Questions: Is Lehi A Descendant of Ephraim or Manasseh?," last accessed 21 October 2006. Italics in original.
Further reading
FairMormon Answers articles
FairMormon web site
External links
- Ben Fulton, "True Believer," Salt Lake City Weekly (27 December 2001) on-line off-site (Hard copy also in FAIR author's possession.) (Key source)
This article reports that the author admitted to faking the material he produced as a "translation." Reports of his problems with the legal system, as well as biographical information, are also included.