“The worst religious text I have ever read.”

[I Have Questions]

B.H. Roberts again on the worst religious text ever:


“If from all that has gone before in Part 1, the view be taken that the Book of Mormon is merely of human origin... if it be assumed that he is the author of it, then it could be said there is much internal evidence in the book itself to sustain such a view.
“In the first place there is a certain lack of perspective in the things the book relates as history that points quite clearly to an underdeveloped mind as their origin. The narrative proceeds in characteristic disregard of conditions necessary to its reasonableness, as if it were a tale told by a child, with utter disregard for consistency.”

- Studies of the Book of Mormon, by B.H. Roberts, p. 251

This.

The contents of the book itself give the game away. Which is why apologists want you focussed on the unfalsifiable nature of witness hearsay, rather than contemplating things like why parts of a KJV Bible have been plagiarised, verbatim, including errors that were made in the 17th Century. Or the plot hole of the land that was promised to be kept from all nations for the Nephites, being first settled by Jadeites and then Mulekites.

A book with credible contents would not need witnesses. It would stand on its own merit.