This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.
| “Off the eastern coast of Mozambique in Africa is an island country called “Comoros.” Prior to its French occupation in 1841, the islands were known by its Arabic name, “Camora.” There is an 1808 map of Africa that refers to the islands as “Camora.” The largest city and capital of Comoros (formerly “Camora”)? Moroni. |  |
“Camora” and settlement “Moroni” were common names in pirate and treasure hunting stories involving Captain William Kidd (a pirate and treasure hunter) which many 19th century New Englanders – especially treasure hunters – were familiar with. In fact, the uniform spelling for Hill Cumorah in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon is spelled as “Camorah.”…
Hill Cumorah and Moroni have absolutely nothing to do with Camora and Moroni from Captain Kidd stories? Stories that Joseph and his treasure hunting family and buddies were familiar with? The original 1830 Book of Mormon uniform “Camorah” spelling? This is all just a mere coincidence?” (CES Letter)
Comoros was not Camora. The claim that Comoros was named Camora prior to 1841 is not true. A 1644 map names it Comoro. So does a 1884 map and a 1905 map. The only place where anti-Mormons can find the name Camora is in the 1808 edition of the Irish book “The General Gazetteer,” in a tiny corner on one of the pages. You have to use a magnifying glass. But look closer. Does it actually say Camora? 
The last letter looks like an “a” but the other vowels look like “o”s. It says Comora.
So where did the Camora hoax get started? You will find this claim on the Wikipedia article for Comoros. Who put it there? A major anti-Mormon Wikipedia editor named Sesmith. When you look up the history of Sesmith, you find that they are a rabid anti-Mormon who is frequently editing Wikipedia articles having to do with the Mormon church. Most recently, they petitioned to prevent a Wikipedia article on “Satanic ritual abuse and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” from being deleted, arguing that it is “notable and well-referenced.”
Moroni Did Not Exist – Moroni only became the capitol in 1876, and until then was named Meroni, not Moroni. It did not show up on any maps and it is unlikely that Joseph Smith would have ever heard about it. There is no way Joseph Smith could have taken the name Moroni from Comoro, as the name didn’t appear anywhere and it was Meroni until after his death.
Not Mentioned In Stories – None of the stories about Captain Kidd mentioned Comoros or Meroni. Furthermore, there is zero evidence that Joseph Smith looked at any maps that had Comoros on them, or was interested in Captain Kidd at all. CES Letter quotes a “contemporary source” named Pomeroy Tucker:
“Joseph … had learned to read comprehensively … [reading] works of fiction and records of criminality, such for instance as would be classed with the ‘dime novels’ of the present day. The stories of Stephen Buroughs and Captain Kidd, and the like, presented the highest charms for his expanding mental perceptions.” – Mormonism: Its Origin, Rise, and Progress
But this does not actually claim that Joseph Smith read any of the Captain Kidd novels. Also, this was written in 1867, long after Joseph Smith died. It is not a contemporary source. Even if Joseph Smith did come across one of the novels, where do they ever mention Comoros?
Why Would Joseph Smith Copy This Name? – The anti-Mormon narrative is that Joseph Smith noticed this tiny name in an Irish book that he somehow came across, thought it was cool, and copied it. CES Letter is correct that the original 1830 printing of the Book of Mormon universally uses the name “Camorah,” which is only a few letters off from Comoro. But the earlier printer’s manuscript, which is what Joseph Smith produced, uses several different spellings: Camorah once, Cumorah six times, and Comorah twice. It was the printer, not Joseph Smith, who settled on Camorah rather than Cumorah. Why would Joseph Smith go back and revise the spellings to universally match some Captain Kidd story that he allegedly read as a little kid?
CES Letter Logical Fallacies
| Falsehood | Comoros was not Camora prior to 1841. The obscure Irish book that CES Letter cites does not even appear to label it Camora, but Comora. Camora is not an Arabic name. The closest to it is Camorra, which is an Italian word. Comora and Meroni were not common in any pirate and treasure stories. These names don’t appear anywhere except an obscure map in Ireland. |
| Anachronism | Moroni got its name in 1876, long after the Book of Mormon was published. All but one map I’ve ever seen names the island Comoro or Comoros |
| Guilt by Association | Maybe Captain Kidd sailed around Comoros, but there is no evidence that it was mentioned in any New England stories about him, or that Joseph Smith had heard any stories about him or Comoros. This entire argument is a bunch of “what if” scenarios. |
| Cherry-picking | You could pick a name from any book in history about someone that Joseph Smith could have heard about and claim he stole the name because it kinda sounds similar. There is a Land of Moron in Mongolia and other names that kinda sound similar to Book of Mormon names. Did Joseph Smith look at a map of Mongolia? The name Laman sounds similar to Lamanai, a name in Belize. Maybe Joseph Smith read an Irish book that had a map of Belize? You can pick any random region of the world and play this Confirmation Bias exercise. |
| Argument by Repetition | In this and other arguments, CES Letter refers to the original 1830 printing of the Book of Mormon as an “edition” rather than “the first version,” “first printing,” or “original Book of Mormon.” This word “edition” bolsters the frame that there were significant changes from printing to printing, which is untrue. |
Fake Science – In previous arguments, CES Letter demanded that Mormons validate every single thing mentioned in the Book of Mormon with plentiful physical evidence, or our narrative must be false. Ancient horses in America? But suddenly now, CES Letter shifts the goalposts and cherry-picks one name which kinda sounds similar to some random island off Africa as evidence for their narrative. Why shouldn’t CES Letter have to validate every single name in the Book of Mormon as ripped off of Joseph Smith’s home region, if that narrative is true? Wouldn’t that be scientific, wouldn’t that be consistent?
One of the Book of Mormon’s strengths is its consistent originality of themes, stories, theology, and geography. By constraining the context of the argument, swinging back and forth between too much contradiction to too little contradition, CES Letter makes this clownish argument sound almost reasonable, almost scientific.
CES Letter thus begins to set a frame for how Joseph Smith produced the Book of Mormon, which by all appearances is a miracle. How did a 14 year old boy come up with such imaginative geography? Easy. He stole it from an obscure book in Ireland. CES Letter puts on their Indiana Jones hat and deduces where he got his geography from, where he got his stories from, and so forth. They push the frame that physical evidence is necessary for a testimony of any truth–any tiny amount of evidence validates their narrative while only 100% solid physical evidence is permitted for our narrative. So they cherry-pick a few physical bits of evidence, frame it in a way that almost sounds plausible by ignoring tons of inconvenient facts to support their wild and complicated narrative.
Big Lie – The narrative is hokey, but the audience is not supposed to actually believe it. The reader thinks, “Maybe Jospeh Smith read about this island and it influenced him, maybe not. Who knows?” The point of this article is not to convince us that Joseph Smith ripped off names for the Book of Mormon, but to associate him with treasure hunting, dangerous criminal pirates, and cheap dime novels. That is what really makes this argument effective. Even if you walk away shaking your heads at the claim that Joseph Smith stole names, you still associate him now with treasure hunting, criminality, and cheap fiction, which makes CES Letter‘s ensuing arguments much more persuasive. Thus, CES Letter establishes their Big Lie that “Joseph and his treasure hunting family and buddies” were a bunch of conmen.
This is how CES Letter operates: through innuendo. They push the Big Lies, they wrap them in a veneer of science, and this convinces the weak-minded members of their audience that science is a superior alternative truth to Mormonism, and that science proves that Joseph Smith was a treasure hunter, a criminal, and wrote dime novels. This is what is known as superstition. Not science. This is like saying Joseph Smith was visited by an ancient alien in his First Vision at Cumorah, rather than God and angels. It is unscientific, goofy, and erases all faith.
The first Big Lie that CES Letter told was that there is no physical evidence for the Book of Mormon claims. This lie leads to further lies that attack one’s testimony of the gospel. In this argument, it intersects with their next big lie which is that Joseph Smith was a criminal treasure hunter.
Superstition – This lie is built on innuendo, image, and association rather than actual evidence. CES Letter‘s appeal to superstition, image, and popular approval makes it easier to push their unsubstantial narrative as truth, rather than allow us the process of faith to uncover truth. If the popular media portrays Joseph Smith as a conman, then it must be true. Or maybe Joseph Smith was visited by an ancient alien instead of the angel Moroni, regardless of actual tangible evidence.