What do you think?
Rate this book
Book of Mormon Book of Lies
The Book of Mormon is one of the boldest hoaxes of all time. And millions of people have fallen for it. Co-author, Kendal M. Sheets: Joseph Smith Jr. claimed that an angel gifted him-an uneducated farm boy-with ancient golden plates and the ability to translate their hieroglyphics. From that improbable premise sprang The Book of Mormon and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, with its millions of followers, known as Mormons. In Book of Mormon, Book of Lies, authors Meredith Ray Sheets and Kendal M. Sheets expose The Book of Mormon and the story surrounding its creation as one of the greatest deceptions in the history of America, if not the entire world. The result of twenty-five years of research, Book of Mormon, Book of Lies will alter the course of global religion, finance, and politics. Book of Lies proves that Smith's manuscript, which he published in 1830, is nothing more than cleverly disguised plagiarism of The Travels of Marco Polo, the voyage of Christopher Columbus to the New World as recorded by his son, histories of the Spanish conquest of Mexico, and travel journals . . . all readily available to Smith. In Book of Lies, Meredith Sheets, a retired petroleum executive, and Kendal M. Sheets, an experienced intellectual property attorney, compare content from historic books with the content of The Book of Mormon. The results are astonishing. For the first time ever, the authors show exactly how the American-born religion of Mormonism and its religious scriptures were created by man and not by God.
600 pages, Paperback
First published October 16, 2012
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
January 24, 2024
One of the best and most thorough exposes of the Book of Mormon. From an ex LDS Missionary
June 10, 2013
This book had the potential to be great, but it wasn't.
I was raised in the LDS church, it wasn't a bad life, there were a lot of great things to it! I read this book quite a long while after personally coming to terms with the fact I no longer literally believed in the LDS church.
The good:
There's a size-able collection of fascinating parallels (mostly towards the front of the book); in particular, the connections between the Book of Marco Polo and the Book of Mormon are quite stunning. The book puts forth additional theory which seems to put together additional pieces of the puzzle of "where did it come from?" (when approaching from the human angle).
Also, the theory of Joseph Smith Sr. being the mastermind of the Book of Mormon was novel to me, and after reading the sources, it seems quite plausible. I found the notes on Lucy Smith quite fascinating, particularly Joseph Smith reciting the stories of the Nephites and the Lamanites with vivid imagination supposedly before the first vision occurred (whenever that occurred, since the accounts differ in age and the data about religious revivals disagrees with the commonly accepted account).
It was an engaging read, I found it easy to turn pages and mostly enjoyed the book. As someone going through the grief of losing a life-long belief system, it brought a degree of closure.
The bad:
For every strong parallel, there were about 1-2 weaker-to-very-weak parallels; this wouldn't be so bad if they were treated like theory and not like arrogant fact. It gave me the impression that the authors have the debilitating habit of manufacturing certainty on too little data (definitely a bad method of getting to the truth of a matter). I think they undermined their own work to a degree by so doing and would like to see them publish a revised, less certain (and less inflammatory) version, as it would allow the book to be reckoned with more seriously. Even still, I think the more solid data in the book stands on its own and can still be considered on it's own merits.
The inflammatory title. Why, oh why? I think it does the book a great disservice. If I carry this around my LDS friends, I'm simultaneously insulting them. Even though many consider it to be true, it's certainly not a very nice way to put it. I can't help but picture Will Ferrel shouting it out in his comic/dramatic voice. Quite frankly, because of the title I hesitated as even marking it as something I've read. It kills conversation around the book. I think it was really unnecessary, "in your face", and haughty.
I was raised in the LDS church, it wasn't a bad life, there were a lot of great things to it! I read this book quite a long while after personally coming to terms with the fact I no longer literally believed in the LDS church.
The good:
There's a size-able collection of fascinating parallels (mostly towards the front of the book); in particular, the connections between the Book of Marco Polo and the Book of Mormon are quite stunning. The book puts forth additional theory which seems to put together additional pieces of the puzzle of "where did it come from?" (when approaching from the human angle).
Also, the theory of Joseph Smith Sr. being the mastermind of the Book of Mormon was novel to me, and after reading the sources, it seems quite plausible. I found the notes on Lucy Smith quite fascinating, particularly Joseph Smith reciting the stories of the Nephites and the Lamanites with vivid imagination supposedly before the first vision occurred (whenever that occurred, since the accounts differ in age and the data about religious revivals disagrees with the commonly accepted account).
It was an engaging read, I found it easy to turn pages and mostly enjoyed the book. As someone going through the grief of losing a life-long belief system, it brought a degree of closure.
The bad:
For every strong parallel, there were about 1-2 weaker-to-very-weak parallels; this wouldn't be so bad if they were treated like theory and not like arrogant fact. It gave me the impression that the authors have the debilitating habit of manufacturing certainty on too little data (definitely a bad method of getting to the truth of a matter). I think they undermined their own work to a degree by so doing and would like to see them publish a revised, less certain (and less inflammatory) version, as it would allow the book to be reckoned with more seriously. Even still, I think the more solid data in the book stands on its own and can still be considered on it's own merits.
The inflammatory title. Why, oh why? I think it does the book a great disservice. If I carry this around my LDS friends, I'm simultaneously insulting them. Even though many consider it to be true, it's certainly not a very nice way to put it. I can't help but picture Will Ferrel shouting it out in his comic/dramatic voice. Quite frankly, because of the title I hesitated as even marking it as something I've read. It kills conversation around the book. I think it was really unnecessary, "in your face", and haughty.
November 1, 2013
This book was really interesting and there were some amazing points - however the text was a little 'wordy'. some sections dragged on a bit when really i just wanted to know what evidence or story was being discussed.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews