This article is chapter two from my book Refuting the Critics (Horizon Publishers, 1993). All cited references can be found in the book.
DIVINE JUSTICE IN THE BOOK OF MORMON:
A REPLY TO ANTI-MORMON CRITICISMS OF THE GREAT DESTRUCTION AND OF THE SAVIOR'S NEW WORLD MINISTRY RECORDED IN 3 NEPHI
Michael T. Griffith
According to 3 Nephi 8-10 in the Book of Mormon, a great destruction was
heaped upon the Nephites and Lamanites
just prior to the resurrected Savior's appearance to them in the
Just after this devastation had occurred, the Savior spoke to the survivors: ". . . many great destructions have I caused to come upon this land, and upon this people, because of their wickedness and their abominations. O all ye that are spared because ye were more righteous than they, will ye not now return unto me, and repent of your sins, and be converted, that I may heal you?" (3 Nephi 9:12-13).
A number of anti-Mormon critics have questioned the morality of this great destruction and have pointed to it as substantiation for their allegation that "the Book of Mormon Jesus is not the Biblical Jesus."
One such critic is Ed Decker, a former Mormon of 19 years and the founder of Saints Alive/Ex-Mormons for Jesus. He voiced the anti-Mormon position on this matter in an article entitled "The Book of Mormon: A Testament of ANOTHER Jesus Christ?" The article was printed in the Spring 1989 edition of SAINTS ALIVE JOURNAL. Decker summed up the anti-Mormon objections to the great destruction as follows:
In the Book of Mormon, Jesus brought death and destruction with him to the Cross. In 3 Nephi, Chapters 8 and 9, it details the events testifying of Christ's crucifixion.
It describes the desolation of the great city of
3 Nephi Chapter 9 tells of further wrath the cities and inhabitants of Gigal, Onihah, Mocum, Jerusalem, Gadiandi, Gadiomnah, Jacob, Gimgimmo, Jacobugath, Laman, Josh, Gad, and Kishkumen annihilated (a total of 16 major cities).
Who did all this killing to testify of our Lord's
I guess the easiest way for the Book of Mormon Jesus to "bring redemption" was to kill almost every human being; at least the vast majority of that portion of his "other sheep have I." This Jesus was a god of wrath, exercising some form of Old Testament judgement by the one who was supposed to be the end of the law.
The Biblical Jesus cried out to His Father behalf
of those who nailed him to a cross with cruel spikes, "Father, forgive
them, for they do not know what they are doing." The Book of Mormon Jesus
wipes out millions of people who knew nothing of
This chapter will show that the great destruction recorded in 3 Nephi was morally justified and in harmony with the biblical pattern of divine justice.
The Judgments Of Yahweh In The Old Testament
When considering Decker's arguments, one of the first questions that comes to mind is, What about those instances in Old Testament times when Yahweh (Jehovah) destroyed the wicked for many of the same reasons the wicked were killed in the great destruction?
For example, Moses was commanded by Yahweh to kill three thousand Israelite
idolaters (Exodus 32:26-28). Through Joshua the Lord told the Israelites to
kill every man, woman, and child of the pagan inhabitants of
A number of Bible scholars have questioned the morality of Yahweh's command to destroy the Canaanites. Some of the objections raised by these scholars resemble Decker's attacks on the great destruction recorded in the Book of Mormon.
Conservative Protestant scholar Merrill Unger responded to those who have questioned the morality of Jehovah's devastation of the Canaanites. Note the way Unger's reply answers some of Decker's criticisms of the great destruction:
Was the command to exterminate the Canaanites a justifiable act on the part of God, who ordered it, or on the part of man, who partially, at least, obeyed it? Was the episode at variance with the character of God and His people? That it was inconsistent and unjustified both on God's side and man's has been so often asserted, that a consideration of the moral and religious character of the Canaanites is a question of utmost importance in solving the supposed theological difficulties that are commonly adduced.
Professor H. H. Rowley, for example, claims that the divine command to destroy the Canaanites in general, or Jericho and its inhabitants in particular, and similar episodes in the Old Testament, are contrary to the New Testament revelation of God in Christ, and involve merely the erroneous thoughts of the writers or characters in question about God, which we can now no longer accept as true. Moreover, Rowley claims that such incidents of wholesale destruction contain that which is "spiritually unsatisfying" and involve "dishonoring God ...."
The character of the Canaanite cults completely
justifies the divine command to destroy their devotees. It is without sound
theological basis to question God's justice in ordering the extermination of
such a depraved people or to deny
Other conservative Bible scholars have expressed similar sentiments on the subject (Harrison 1970:174-175; Archer 157-159).
Jesus Is Yahweh: A Serious Theological Problem for Anti-Mormons
In light of the Old Testament judgments of Yahweh discussed above, the fact that Christ was Yahweh come to earth. Decker's claim that the destruction of the wicked Nephites and Lamanites is at variance with "the Biblical Jesus" runs into serious theological problems. No informed orthodox Christian would deny that Jesus and Jehovah were and are one and the same deity. In fact, the principal objection raised by Catholic and Protestant writers against the Jehovah's Witnesses is that the Witnesses do not believe Christ and Yahweh are the same deity. The Savior expressly presented Himself as such and the epistles of the New Testament confirm this understanding.
That Jesus Christ of the New Testament is Jehovah of the Old Testament is clearly established by comparing passages from the two testaments of the Bible. Qualities and titles attributed to Jehovah in the Old Testament are attributed to Christ in the New Testament in numerous passages and situations.
It should be recalled that throughout the Old Testament the tetragrammaton (the sacred name of God consisting, in the Hebrew consonantal script, of the four letters Y-H-W-H) is written LORD, in all-capital letters. The word LORD stands for the name of the God of the Old Testament which is referred to today as Jehovah.
The Lord told Abram, in Genesis 17:1: "I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect." In the Book of Revelation, Christ told the apostle John, "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the almighty" (Revelation 1:8; see 1:1).
When Moses asked God what his name was, "God said unto Moses, I AM that
I AM: Thus shalt thou say unto the children of
The Old Testament says that the LORD accompanied the children of
The Old Testament prophet Isaiah recorded Jehovah's pronouncement that "I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Savior" (Isaiah 43:3) . In the New Testament, Jesus Christ is closely identified as the Savior of all mankind. For instance, the angels told the shepherds about Christ's birth with the joyful message, "For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord" (Luke 2:11).
The Old Testament cites the LORD as saying, "there is no Savior beside me" (Hosea 13:4). The New Testament says of Jesus Christ, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:10-12).
In the Old Testament, the LORD says, "I am the first, and I am the last" (Isaiah 44:6). In the New Testament, Jesus Christ says "I am the first and the last" (Revelation 1:17).
In the Old Testament the LORD asserts, "I have made the earth, and created man upon it; I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded" (Isaiah 45:11-12). The New Testament depicts Christ as "the Word," and says that "all things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made" (John 1:3; see 1:1-14).
In the Old Testament the LORD says that "I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear" (Isaiah 45:23). In the New Testament Paul proclaims that "At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth" (Philippians 2:10) .
A future coming of the LORD is prophesied in the Old Testament: "The LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee" (Zechariah 14:5). The same future coming, Christ's second coming at the beginning of his millennial reign, is prophesied in the New Testament, and Jesus is identified as he who will come: " . . . at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, with all his saints" (1 Thessalonians 3:13).
The Old Testament describes the millennial kingship of the LORD: "And the LORD shall be king over all the earth; in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one" (Zechariah 14:9). In the New Testament an angel from heaven announces that "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Revelation 11:15).
These and many other comparisons clearly indicate that Jesus Christ of the New Testament and Jehovah, the LORD of the Old Testament, is the same individual. The message of the scriptures is abundantly clear on this doctrinal principle, and it is generally accepted by orthodox Christians throughout the world.
Therefore, if Christ was and is Yahweh, and is the same yesterday, today, and forever" (Hebrews 13:8; Malachi 3:6), then how can it be said that the destruction of the wicked Nephites and Lamanites is justification for Decker's ill-founded assertion that "the Biblical Jesus" and "the Book of Mormon Jesus" are different individuals? How can one separate the acts of "the Biblical Jesus" from those of Yahweh? Quite simply, one can't.
Decker refers to those who were killed in the great destruction as
"innocent inhabitants" and as "people who knew nothing of
The Book of Mormon records the terrible state of wickedness these people were in just before they suffered divine punishment. Furthermore, prior to the Savior's appearance in the New World, the Nephites and Lamanites were taught about Christ and were warned of the awful calamities that would befall them if they did not repent.
The prophet Mormon reported on the condition of the Book of Mormon peoples shortly before the great destruction occurred:
The more righteous part of the people had nearly all become wicked; yea, there were but few righteous men among them. And thus six years had not passed away since the more part of the people had turned from their righteousness, like the dog to his vomit, or like the sow to her wallowing in the mire. (3 Nephi 7:7-8)
Specifically, the Nephites and Lamanites "were in a state of awful wickedness" (3 Nephi 6:17). They put to death "many of those who testified of the things pertaining to Christ" (3 Nephi 6:23). The wicked "did combine against the people of the Lord" (3 Nephi 6:29) . Most of the inhabitants were "carried about by the temptations of the devil whithersoever he desired to carry them" (3 Nephi 6:17) . They did "all manner of iniquity" (3 Nephi 6:16) . Furthermore, they "did not sin ignorantly, for they knew the will of God concerning them" (3 Nephi 6:18).
This is not surprising, since many prophets were sent among the people to preach of Christ and to cry repentance unto them. There were "men inspired from heaven and sent forth, standing among the people in all the land, preaching and testifying boldly of the sins and iniquities of the people, and testifying unto them concerning the redemption which the Lord would make for his people" (3 Nephi 6:20). The inhabitants were also aware of the prophecies given four decades earlier by Samuel the Lamanite, who had warned that terrible destruction would come upon the wicked if they did not repent (3 Nephi 8:3-4, 23-25; Helaman 14:14-31).
Much more could be said on this matter. Suffice it to say that the Nephites and Lamanites were in an awful state of wickedness prior to the resurrected Savior's visit, and they were given more than a fair warning of what was to come if they did not turn to the Lord (cf. Sperry 1968:384-398).
The question must be asked again, why would Jesus inflict so horrifying a punishment upon his "other sheep" when the folks who nailed Him to the cross only got a tremor and a gloomy afternoon [cf. Matthew 27:50-54; Mark 15:37; Luke 23:44-47]? (14)
This is a key argument of Decker's attack on the morality of the great destruction, i.e., that the Jews "only got a tremor and a gloomy afternoon" while the Nephites and Lamanites were subjected to "so horrifying a punishment."
Unfortunately for Decker, this argument totally collapses upon further
investigation. Although the Jews did not receive their punishment immediately
after the crucifixion, they suffered a terrible fate at the hands of the Romans
about forty years later. This was accomplished by the Roman general Titus'
subjugation of the
The inhabitants of
Titus completely sealed off
The end was inevitable. With battering rams and
portable bridges, the Romans stormed the walls of
Apparently anti-LDS critics like Decker are unaware that Christians down
through the centuries have regarded the destruction of
Here is what the ancient Christian historian Eusebius (ca. A.D. 260-339) had
to say about the fate that befell
He [the Roman emperor Vespasian] at once set out
[The] . . . members of the
The calamities which at that time overwhelmed the
whole [Jewish] nation in every part of the world; the process by which the
inhabitants of Judea were driven to the limits of disaster; the thousands and
thousands of men of every age who together with women and children perished by
the sword, by starvation, and by countless other forms of death; the number of
Jewish cities besieged and the horrors they endured-especially the terrible
sights that met the eyes of those who sought refuge in Jerusalem itself . . .;
the character of the whole war and detailed events at all its stages--all this
anyone who wishes can gather in precise detail from the pages of Josephus's
history. I must draw particular attention to his statement that the people who flocked together from all Judea at the time of the
Passover Feast and-to use his own words-were shut up in
Passing over the details of the successive disasters that befell them [the Jews] from the sword and in other ways, I think it necessary to mention only the miseries they suffered from starvation, so that readers of this book may have some knowledge at least of how their [the Jews’ crime against the Christ of God a very little time later brought on them God's vengeance. (111-112, emphasis added)
The ancient saints saw no inconsistency between "the biblical Jesus" and the divine punishments which were subsequently brought down upon the Jewish people by the Romans.
The Vapor of Darkness
The Book of Mormon records that after the destruction of the wicked Nephites and Lamanites, an impenetrable vapor of darkness hung over the land for three days:
And it came to pass that there was a thick darkness upon all the face of the land, insomuch that the inhabitants thereof who had not fallen could feel the vapor of darkness; And there could be no light, because of the darkness; neither candles, neither torches; neither could there be fire kindled with their fine and exceedingly dry wood, so that there could not be any light at all. . . . [Some people] were overpowered by the vapor of smoke and darkness. (3 Nephi 8:20-21, 23; 10:13)
Decker and other anti-Mormons see all of this as more proof of falsehood. I quote Decker:
Another comparison the Bible offers us is the astronomical occurrence at the death of Jesus . . .. Luke's gospel says that there was a darkness over all the earth (23 :44-45). Matthew 27:45 says, "Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour," and Mark 15 :33 concurs almost exactly. Now the word used in the Greek for "earth" almost always means the earth as a whole, or the entire inhabited earth. (Vine's Expository, pp. 352-353.) Therefore, we can assume that the 3 evangelists meant that the darkness would include the Book of Mormon lands.
However, again we have a substantial difference between the two accounts. It seems clear from the Bible that there is nothing unusual about the darkness. Jesus' disciples and the Romans about the cross got about without difficulty and saw the Lord die. John, an eye-witness, even makes a special point of saying that he SAW Jesus pierced (John 19:34-35)
The Book of Mormon darkness seems to have started at the time the Biblical darkness ended (3 Nephi 8:19).... [Decker then cites the above-quoted verses from 3 Nephi 8.]
Now that's quite a different type of darkness. It seems to be a tangible thing which allowed no light at all. Not only that, but it lasted for 3 days instead of three hours. This is utterly different from the Bible. When the Bible says gloom covered the entire earth during the crucifixion, the Book of Mormon teaches that a mysterious "vapor of darkness" started right after the crucifixion and lasted for three days.
How can both be true, especially when you consider how this darkness would violate the laws of physics? No darkness can stop light, because it is the absence of light. (13, emphasis in original)
I will deal with these arguments in the order in which they are presented.
Decker's assertion that the biblical darkness covered the entire planet is
open to serious debate. Most modern Bible scholars believe the darkness covered
It is interesting to note that the parallel passages from Mark and Matthew in the King James Version (KJV), which is the translation Decker seems to be using here, state that the darkness merely covered "the whole land." The Greek word for "earth" in Luke 23:44-45 is GE, which can mean "region," "soil," "land," "country," or "earth" (Strong 20; Newman 37).
Here is how Luke 23:44 is translated in some of the better modern translations:
THE ANCHOR BIBLE: "It was already about noon, and darkness began to hang over the whole land until three in the afternoon."
THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE: "By now it was midday and there came a darkness over the whole land, which lasted until three in the afternoon."
THE REVISED STANDARD VERSION (RSV): "It was now about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour."
THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (NIV): "It was now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over THE WHOLE LAND until the ninth hour."
TODAY'S ENGLISH VERSION: "It was about twelve o'clock when the sun stopped shining and darkness covered THE WHOLE COUNTRY until three o'clock."
Catholic scholar Joseph A. Fitzmyer has said the following about Luke's statement:
His [Jesus'] death is attended by darkness over
the whole land .... Literally, "and darkness
began to be over the whole land," i.e.
Some might assert that the darkness described by Luke was caused by a solar
eclipse and therefore that it would have covered the entire globe. However, in
addition to the scriptural evidence against Luke's darkness being planetwide, there is also the fact that the crucifixion
took place during the Jewish festival of Passover, which occurs when the moon
is full. An eclipse of the sun, ". . . of course, would be impossible at
full moon" (Eiselen, Lewis, and
The darkness lasted from about noon to 3 p.m.; for it there is no known scientific explanation. That it was not a solar eclipse is shown by the fact that the Passover occurs when the moon is full; indeed, the first full moon after the Spring equinox is what determines the time of the Passover. (B. McConkie 1965:827)
Decker makes much of the fact that the darkness described in 3 Nephi began after the Biblical one and that it lasted for three days instead of three hours. But where is it written that the two periods of darkness had to occur simultaneously and last for the same amount of time? The two periods of darkness were obviously separate and distinct events; therefore, the differences in their times of occurrence and duration prove nothing.
Likewise, since we are dealing with two different events, the fact that the Book of Mormon darkness was more severe and harmful than the Biblical one is equally meaningless.
The claim that the darkness described in the Nephite record is an impossibility has long been advanced by anti-Mormon writers. However, it has been answered by a number of LDS scholars. There is very good evidence that the Book of Mormon darkness not only could have occurred but that it did in fact take place.
The most knowledgeable LDS scholars on the geography of the Book of Mormon
agree that the book's land area was located in what we now call Mesoamerica,
i.e., northern Central America and southern
Today it is possible to check step-by-step every phenomenon described in the account of the great destruction in 3 Nephi 8-9 and to discover that what passed for many years as the most lurid, extravagant, and . . . impossible part of the Book of Mormon is actually a very sober and factual account of a first-class earthquake. . . .
This [the description of the vapor of darkness in
3 Nephi], like so much else in the account . . . suggests nearby volcanic
activity. And indeed, in many cases "earthquakes are the preparation for
the volcano that follows," as in the Chilean 1960 quake, which triggered
the activity of long-dormant volcanoes in the area [Hodgson 41]. Most of the
victims of the great catastrophes of
According to 3 Nephi 8:20-21 the "vapor of
darkness" was not only tangible to the survivors, but defeated every
attempt to light candles or torches for illumination .
At present, intensive studies are being made of the destruction of the Greek
John Sorenson, a professor emeritus of anthropology at
A description of the eruption of the Conseguina volcano in
These conditions, multiplied in both intensity and territory covered, sound much like 3 Nephi. (1985:321)
Sorenson goes on to point out that there is evidence of this kind of
In chapter 3, citations were made of scientific
literature reporting evidence of volcanism right around the time of Christ.
Probably the most spectacular was in
Bruce Warren has done a great deal of research on this subject. He, too, has
found evidence of the great destruction. Since time only permits me to quote
some of his more summarized statements on the matter, I would urge the reader
to examine all of the detailed evidence
There is particularly clear and abundant
archaeological evidence of widespread destruction in
The very nature of earthquake and volcanic activity typical of the Mesoamerican area is consistent with this whole set of phenomena [earthquakes, volcanism, etc.] ....
The evidences are striking of huge volcanic
eruptions, mud slides, and destructions in several areas of
Ancient Mesoamerican sources actually mention a great destruction which occurred at the same time the Book of Mormon's great destruction took place (Jakeman 1968a:2).
Christ's Appearance to the Nephites
At first I debated whether or not to deal with Decker's statements on Christ's appearance to the Nephites because they are not directly related to the great destruction. However, since his comments do constitute further objections to the "Book of Mormon Jesus" and since they do touch on the events which followed the great destruction, I elected to address them herein. According to Decker:
The LDS Jesus then does another rather un-Biblical thing. After descending to earth, he orders the surviving Nephites to "thrust your hands into my side . . . [and] feel the prints of the nails in my hands and feet . . . "- 3 Nephi 11:14.
Then, what most LDS experts estimate to be about a half-million people troop forward and stick their hands in his wounds! Figuring 30 seconds per person, it would have taken almost 3 DAYS for the LDS Jesus to stand there and let people poke him. (14, emphasis in original)
Why could not the resurrected Savior of the world have shown Himself in such
an awesome and sacred manner to a people who had never seen Him before? After
all, the risen Lord spent forty days
with His apostles in
In addition, it should be noted that there is nothing in the account in 3
Nephi to suggest there were half a million people present at the Savior's
initial visit. If anything, the text seems to indicate that the group in
Decker continues his attack:
Now remember, these are the Nephite "true believers"; the ones who were counted worthy enough to escape having their cities fall on them. These are the cream of the crop!
Does the Biblical Jesus ever do anything like this? Well, of course, there is Thomas. But Thomas is not presented as any kind of paragon! Jesus told him, "Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed; blessed are they who have not seen, and yet have believed ." -John 20:29. The Biblical Jesus valued faith, and gave a special blessing to those who did not need such administrations. Thomas never did actually touch Him!
Earlier, in John 20:17, Jesus discouraged Mary Magdalene from touching Him at all. Yet we are asked to believe that this same Jesus allowed "a multitude" to spend days doing it. It seems like another odd way to celebrate the first Easter! Can this be the same Jesus of the Bible? (14, emphasis in original)
Several points need to be made in response:
1. Taking Decker's interpretation of John 20:29 to its logical conclusion, we should wonder why Jesus even bothered to appear to the disciples at all. Why weren't they simply left to get by on Mary Magdalene's testimony that she had seen the risen Lord? Or, for that matter, why did the Savior even bother to appear to Mary to begin with? Why wasn't she required to rely solely on the angel's assurance that the Messiah had been resurrected?
2. The idea that Jesus discouraged Mary Magdalene from touching Him at all is based on the mistaken KJV translation of the phrase in John 20:17, "Touch me not ...." The correct translation of the Greek here (me mou haptou) should be "do not keep on holding me," or "stop touching me," or even "stop clinging to me" (Skousen 14; Lewis 46; see also the RSV and the NIV). Mary had to let go of the Savior because He needed to ascend to His Father, as Jesus Himself explained: ". . . for I am not yet ascended to my Father ...." (John 20:17).
3. Although Decker seems certain that Thomas did not touch the risen Christ, this is by no means clear from the text in John. It does not seem unreasonable to believe that Thomas did as the Lord had just instructed: " . . . Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side . . . ." (John 20:27). One of the best modern commentaries on the Bible takes the position that Thomas did in fact touch the Savior on this occasion (Laymon 727).
4. Strangely absent from Decker's attack is any mention of Luke 24:3940, wherein the resurrected Christ says to the disciples, "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet." The logical conclusion is that the Savior presented His hands and feet to His apostles so they could do what He had invited them to do, "Handle me and see."
5. Also absent from Decker's attack is any reference to Matthew 28:9, where we read that Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, upon seeing the risen Lord, "Came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him."
6. The Nephites had not seen Jesus before He appeared to them as a resurrected being. On the other hand, Christ's Old World disciples had been fortunate enough to have Him live and preach among them for years, and yet they were still given "many infallible proofs" of His resurrection (Acts 1:1-3). Therefore, is it so hard to believe that the Savior would give to the Nephites dramatic, tangible proof that He was indeed the risen Messiah?
7. Unlike Thomas, the Nephites did not ask to touch the Lord before they would believe in His resurrection. In fact, they said nothing about touching Him. He invited them to do so as a special and sacred witness that He was the risen Christ.
Jesus and Salvation in Mormonism
Decker does not even mention the Book of Mormon for the remainder of his article. Rather, he repeats a number of familiar anti-Mormon criticisms of the role of Jesus in LDS theology (14-15). These attacks, though easily answered, are beyond the scope of this chapter.
However, I would invite the reader to compare Decker's criticisms of the Savior's position in Mormon theology with what has been written on this subject by Bruce R. McConkie, James E. Talmage, and Richard Lloyd Anderson (B. McConkie 1966:60-66; Talmage 74-95; Anderson 177-195 272-276. 355-362).
The great destruction recounted in 3 Nephi was in harmony with the principles and precedents of divine justice. The Jesus of the Bible is the Jesus of the Book of Mormon. They are one and the same person, the Savior of the world. The Book of Mormon is indeed "Another Testament of Jesus Christ."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Michael T. Griffith
holds a Master’s degree in Theology from The Catholic Distance University, a
Graduate Certificate in Ancient and Classical History from American Military
University, a Bachelor’s degree in Liberal Arts from Excelsior College, and two
Associate in Applied Science degrees from the Community College of the Air
Force. He also holds an Advanced
Certificate of Civil War Studies and a Certificate of Civil War Studies from