"If Only 10% of These Charges, Are True, The Church is False" - The Fallacy of Quantity Versus Quality
In one of my first experiences in helping to teach the Gospel out here in Wisconsin, we had a new convert in our home who had been given volumes of anti-Mormon literature by her former pastor. She came in with a stack of books, relying especially upon a thick tome that I think was written by the Tanners. She asked one pointed question after another, all of which had reasonable answers, in my opinion. We dealt with them one at a time, turning to answers from the scriptures, when appropriate, or making points based on logic or other sources of information. After about 40 minutes of this, she grew impatient and said something like, "Look, maybe you've got answers for the questions I've raised, but there are hundreds more arguments in this book. How can the Church be true when there are so many arguments against it?" I said that itÂs easy to make arguments against anything. I reminded her of the days of early Christianity when there were numerous false witnesses against Christ, when there were paid witnesses who said that the tomb had been raided by Christians to fake the Resurrection, when all the elite religious leaders of the Jews spoke against Christ, and when the whole Roman world seemed to speak against Christ and the Christians. There were volumes and volumes of arguments against the Church back then, too. "If you were living them, how could you see past the massive arguments and recognize the divinity of the Son of God and the truth of Christianity?"
Unwilling to acknowledge the importance of a spiritual witness, she returned to her anti-Mormon books. I pointed out that while we had examined only a few of the arguments, the ones she had raised had reasonable answers, and some even demonstrated a lack of integrity on the part of the authors. Her answer surprised me: "I don't care. Even if only 10% of that book is true, that's enough to prove the Church is false."
Ah, the fallacy of quantity versus quality, a key tool in the Adversary's arsenal. Impress them with shear volume, wear them out with endless attacks, and many will succumb, overwhelmed by the image and impression of strength.
I recently received a letter from a former LDS member explaining why he and his wife were leaving the Church. In that letter, he acknowledged that there may be "excuses" to deal with each anti-Mormon argument when taken individually, but that taken together as a whole, the case against the Church is overwhelming. He then lists a barrage of arguments, mentioning DNA and the Book of Mormon, anachronisms, 4,000 changes in the Book of Mormon, racism, polygamy, the Temple and masonry, etc. -- problems that each can be dealt with if one takes the time to understand the issues and examines the assumptions behind them. Even then, one must be willing to recognize that there always will be some gaps in our understanding and that no amount of evidence and study will remove the need for faith or replace the power of a witness from the Holy Ghost. But there are answers, sometimes powerful answers that turn apparent weaknesses in the Book of Mormon, for example, into strong evidence for authenticity. But such insights do not come from a superficial glance at the text and related literature. Sadly, he has become another victim of the fallacy of quantity versus quality.
There are tough arguments, indeed. DNA and the Book of Mormon is a great example of this. And for a meaningful understanding of the issues, one must identify assumptions and evaluate information from a variety of perspectives. In so doing, one can come away with a better understanding of what the Book of Mormon is and what it is not. But the Adversary would have us just fold based upon a superficial examination: "Yikes, a guy with a Ph.D. says the Book of Mormon is phooey. Indians are Jews -- oh my!"
The Gospel is true, and the Book of Mormon is a divine, authentic book of scripture, in spite of whatever mountains of books and brochures against it the enemy can mount. And Jesus is the Son of God, no matter how many false witnesses and Ph.D.s and celebrities take a stand against Him. It's not about who can shout the loudest and longest, but Whose gentle voice we listen for amidst the senseless shouting of men.
posted @ 5:08 AM [Permalink]
68 Comments:
This is pretty interesting to me. Six years ago I got married to my girlfriend of 4 years who was a member of the church. I always figured I would probably join the church.
While dating I had taken the discussions on and off. After we got married I started taking them again. I would go online and read quite a bit of anti-Mormon literature. Then I would always go check your lds faq site for the alternate side to all the attacks.
Eventually I came to look at the problem of the volumes of anti-Mormon literature in the opposite way as this person you are describing. Because once you investigate 10, 20, 30 claims against Mormons and find that they are all wrong you realize that all of the claims are going to be wrong and it is not worth a ton of time and energy to look into each spurious claim.
Thank goodness for the LDS FAQ site you created though. Otherwise it may have been hard for me to realize there is another side to the arguments.
Of course you have identified a logical fallacy. The first comment on this posting shows the flip-side of the coin.
Here's to hoping that you continue to evenly apply your logical analysis not only to the arguments against the Church, but to the arguments for the church as well.
I agree with what you are saying. My parents are in the process of having their names removed from the records of the church. They site areas of church history & what they think is a problem with DNA & the Book of Mormon, as their reasons for desiring to leave the church. I find it very interesting how easy it is for someone to lose the presence of the hold ghost, when your thoughts are dwelling on the supposed problems with the church and the teachings of the church. Everyone has a different perspective on everything, but I've come to learn from personal experinces that those people that write anti materical about the church and the leaders of the church are usally only telling half the story & aren't explaing the whole idea that the person was talking about. I would ask all people that are having problems or issues with the church to reflect upon the personal real expierences that they have had with the priesthood power and in church that their testimonies were built upon.
This morning in my scripture study, my wife and I read the vision of the tree of life in 1st Nephi. The part at the end were Lehi and Nephi saw the people who had partken of the fruit and then falt ashamed and felt their way to the great and spacious building has particular reference to this topic.
How do you suppose the people feel that left the church because of Mark Hoffman’s forged Joseph Smith III patriarchal blessing? Do you think that they came back to the church when it was revealed that the blessing was a forgery? Probably not. They found (or fabricated) another reason.
How was it put in father Lehi’s vision? Some are blinded by mists, others gave up, and still others were ashamed.
What I’ve found is that some people are looking for a reason to leave the church or to never accept the truth. If you run into a really honest person they will admit that they don’t want to live the covenants. But they don’t want to admit to themselves or others that they don’t want to be good people; they want to put the blame on someone or something else. So, they latch onto American Indian DNA or the bishop’s personality as an excuse rather than admit that it’s actually their own choice.
But that’s just my own opinion. Although I seem to remember a quote from the Brothers Karamazov about how some people actually like to be offended.
I'm with Floyd, some people feel important coming into the church, then they feel important leaving. It's all about them for them and they totally miss the point of existence.
I suspect that niether Southerton or any other person has ever left the Church because the were convinced by evidence of any sort. Science simply does not offer surety and finality. If Southerton really lost his testimony because of MtDNA, then he would at the very least be having serious thoughts about reversing that decision Behar found that some Ashkenazi Jews have the Q-P36 lineage deemed to be a founder lineag in Native Americans. He would also have been swayed by Shen who found Q-P36 in 5% of Iraqi Jews. None of this sways Southerton. No scientific finding would ever sway Southerton's current anti-Mormon posture. The DNA issue and his book were all about money.
The most important witness that we need to strive is the witness of the Holy Ghost. I have read some criticisms against the Church, some quite laughable, some a bit more serious. In the end, most of them are patently false. The sheer volume speaks nothing, especially when the commonality lacks credibility or presents half-truths.
I also have benefited from Jeff's FAQ pages. They strike me with the right amount of humour/seriousness. The information is presented with a well researched progression.
Anon at 10:11,
My reasoning was more along the lines of yours. Every claim of the anti's that I researched was debunked, so the "shortcut" I took was that the rest were debunkable.
And the fact that the anti's keep recycling debunked arguments says something about their motives.
*Somewhat irrelevant (and yes, I know this and am posting it anyway.)*
The funniest anti accusation I've ever seen was Decker's claim that the spires on the DC temple are positioned so as to impale the descending Savior at the 2nd coming.
I don't mean to hijack the thread, but can anyone trump that one?
Did you hear that we worship Italian angels?
Would you like-a some-a Moroni noodles for dinner?
My favorite:
The reason Mormons have so many kids is so that we'll have plenty of people to seed new planets when the Church commands us to begin interplanetary colonization.
(I always wondered what they use all those floors of the Church Office building for -- its a secret space program).
Ah, that explains food storage! Why a one-year supply? Because Mormon space ships will need lots of food for the interstellar voyage. Any good planets to populate within one light-year? As for me and my house, we're sticking with Mars.
Ha ha ha!! That is funny. I have heard those things too. On a more serious note, someone real close to me was "antied". It hurt that they believed nonsense rather than just simply reading the scriptures. After two years of watching me faithfully attend church, he no longer thinks we are some weird cult. He has decided we are good people who are confused about theology. Hey, it is a step up!
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Floyd, do I have to be a member of the Church in order to be a good person?
For my whole life, except for the last five, I've felt like I was being a good person in spite of the Church.
I say that with all due respect, but with no less weight.
What's funny is that the anti's don't realize that barely .01% of their charges are even true. They ALL use various levels of truth to tell various levels of lie.
If the anti only knew that there is in fact SO MUCH evidence showing that the Church is literally True, that it is FAR beyond a shadow of a doubt. In truth, the only "shadows" are those created by the anti-mind and spirit.
They think the evidence swings on their side, we know it swings on ours. However, not simply swings, it's the Fullness. Likely the only religion on the planet in which it's members as a whole unequivically proclaim every aspect of it Gods.
Anyway, an objective study of both sides will alway's result in the Church as the winner. All who say otherwise, aren't in fact objective when they do their study for their minds and hearts are already set elsewhere, not fully humble, meek, and teachable as a little child. I know this from experience and my own observation of human behavior, attitudes and thinking patterns. It's a clear fact, but of course only seeable by those who have the eyes to see. Telling an anti this would be talking to a wall, like telling a liberal that Bush is actually a good guy and doing almost the best that can be done in the circumstance as a leader of a Republic rather than a dictator. If he was a dictator, I'm sure he would have done more that is needed to be done to solve Americas problems. But, when you live in the real world, there has to sometimes be compromise.
i find it hard to believe that this would be a discussion on lds faith if the auther removes comments... could you please summarize or paraphrase what 'that one guy' said that was removed? I am curious
The author of the comment removed it, not me. What's so hard to believe? People write things, then change their mind. When I remove something, it can either vanish completely or say "removed by administrator" as I recall. I remove comments that use profanity, that provide links to sites I feel are inappropriate, that are just spam, that are attempts to hijack the thread to a completely unrelated topic like politics, or that are especially nasty. That shouldn't be unbelievable, either. Discussion of a post does not entitle people to say anything at all without bounds or propriety. As the proprietor, I can impose some rules here, and I do.
I keep a list of reasons why I should go inactive. The list is quite long and at any time I can pick a reason to give up on the church. Almost any reason will work, I have seen most of them in other people. Having converted from protestantism, where would I go once I have give up on the endurance thing. The church offers the only system of answers to life's questions and the only one that bestows the spirit almost every week saying it is true.
The DNA argument is senseless to me, too, because:
The Book of Mormon is only an abridgement of a hundreth of the writings of some of what was written by a few people over a relativley short span of time in a (probably) small geographical area, etc etc, and the anti's know that.
For all we know others were here before or since (lost tribes, anyone?); anyone with Jewish DNA could have been hopelessly out-bred or killed off.
We also know God can apparently change the color of your skin to suit his covenant keeping, and I'll bet he'd do it with a logical physical changing of the body's chemistry, like (gasp) alter one's DNA.
And of course, man's science could be, dare I say it, less than perfect.
It's kind of like the dinosaur argument. Maybe they're millions of years old, maybe not. Maybe they originated here (creation practice Earth?), maybe from an "old earth", maybe they came from somewhere else completely.
"Here is matter unorganized, Michael. Don't worry about a few bones in the dirt. Let's go make a world for us"
Love this blog, BTW
I would just like to point out that the Q gene (and it's decendants eg Q-p36)came from the Altay mountains. True it is a Preamerican gene, it is still an ASIAN gene. I would put the occasional popping up of the gene in a few Jews (and quite likely a few other ethnicities) down to them being neighbors to the area of origin for this gene.
Hi Jeff, you said "The Gospel is true, and the Book of Mormon is a divine, authentic book of scripture,". The thing i dont understand, why so many people are questioning it. How come? You are calling them anti-mormon. I think these people are not members of satan clan. Probably they are telling something, maybe they are angels of God. A divine Book that is like a big 747 plane that engineers or people are questioning it. After reading your sites, it tells me something, a Book that is leading to nowhere or a plane that has no place to land. Note: I am not from USA, I am not a member, I try to find a BoM which i could not find nor buy.
Wow...a divine book which you cannot find nor buy. Amazing, God made a divine book that is not available to a very poor, a very ordinary person not from USA. Does God really want a divine book not to be available. One more thing, why Joseph is selling a divine book? So this book is only for affleunt person the time Joseph was selling it. A divine book that is not for everybody.
I imagine that God himself could come to Jeff and tell him that he was wrong and Jeff wouldn't accept it.
are there any strawmen left here for me to throw on the fire?
So what are these solid arguments that we have against the anti's? I've been doing a lot of reading at the FARMS site and am having great difficulty finding specific evidence to combat the anti's. Could someone please share their ideas on this, specific, not general. I need help so I can intelligently discuss the issues with those who attack.
At 7:13 PM, May 09, 2006, Doug Forbes said...
I suspect that niether Southerton or any other person has ever left the Church because the were convinced by evidence of any sort. Science simply does not offer surety and finality. If Southerton really lost his testimony because of MtDNA, then he would at the very least be having serious thoughts about reversing that decision Behar found that some Ashkenazi Jews have the Q-P36 lineage deemed to be a founder lineag in Native Americans. He would also have been swayed by Shen who found Q-P36 in 5% of Iraqi Jews. None of this sways Southerton. No scientific finding would ever sway Southerton's current anti-Mormon posture. The DNA issue and his book were all about money.
His book was all about money? Must we stoop to such menial assumptions? I would also like to see the projected time for divergence on these Q-P36 alleles. I am not the expert on DNA. But I'm savvy enough to realize that the simple fact of finding these alleles doesn't mean much without further understanding. Take for example a recent argument that X haplogroups show evidence of other influences in native american genetics. The most recent estimate I have seen for this divergence is 12,000 years.
I am just simply trying to defend the heritage and history of the Native American people.
People migrate. Genetics is an exact science in some ways, very imprecise in others. Tracing of a particular gene to a place on earth is iffy at best. People migrate, intermarry, become extinct, etc. All that genetics can affirm is that there is a common gene, and that they think (give what they DO know about migrations, etc.) that it might have originated in a particular place.
As has been said before: science, like religion, requires faith at its foundation. In the case of religion, it is a faith in God or Jesus Christ; in the case of science, it is faith in method, and in a handful of axioms, but it is faith none the less.
If 10 % of the anti-morman charges are true then that raises serious concerns about the veracity of joseph smith and the BOM. That's really the answer to the question. As a catholic married to a mormon, the fundamental truth that faces me daily is which of us is right. Me the catholic, or her the mormon. The answer to that is that we are both right.
To preface some of my response, let me first say that I have taken the discussions on three occasions. Twice with my wife, once on my own. I have prayed at length about which direction is right for me. The answer has always been to stay catholic.
I've read some of the anti-mormon stuff, I've read some of the pro-mormon stuff. I've tried to read the BOM but have always felt I was reading a poorly re-written version of the old testament everytime I've picked the book up.
I've read a great deal of catholic literature and have always felt God in the writings. I've tried to play mormon hymns for my wife on the piano, but always struggle to find the peace in the music, it just isn't there for me. I play catholic music, and there's a peace and calm for me in the playing, the notes always sound right and peaceful.
I spend a great many hours pondering faith and God, and what is truth. I find peace in the writings of the catholic church.
For our home, there's always some discord about religion. To try and keep peace, I go to my wife's service every Sunday but find no comfort or peace in the mormon service. Its empty and lacking for me. I also go to mass on Sundays, and there I find peace and comfort, I hear God speak and feel his presence.
With all these things in mind, I would add to this discussion a few observations I've come to realize about God's truth.
First, God can make all things possible, he's God and nothing is impossible for him.
Second, God does reveal different truths to different people. As a catholic, I hear all kinds of anti-mormon talk the basic gyst of which is that you guys aren't christian and you're polytheists and racist. I have my concerns about those things, but knowing my wife the way that I know her, I highly doubt that she is any less christian than I am just because she's mormon and I'm catholic. She actually is one of the role models I look to in trying to be a good christian. I struggle with christian behaviour as I'm sure we all do, but I don't question my faith. God's truth for me is that the catholic church is the right path.
That brings me to the third truth I've learned. God puts us on the paths he wants us to follow. Free agency is an idea and a concept, but ultimately, God does steer the ship. Look at St. Paul's life. He spent it persecuting christians until one day God knocked him off his horse (literally)and put him back on the path of Christ. St. Paul became one of the strongest advocates of christianity ever as a result of God knocking sense into him.
Jonah is another example, he didn't want to go to Ninevah, God made him go. Jonah ultimately did not have a choice. If we are called by God, he will keep at us until we follow him.
I'm diverging a bit here, but I think you get my point. God has a plan for each of us, he does everything he can to get us to follow that plan, sometimes even knocking us down to get our attention.
In my journey I have found that my truths are not the same as my wife's, but that said, it does not mean either of us are wrong. It just means God is giving us each a different truth. Our role as christians, isn't to criticize each other's faith. As was pointed out to me in another posting I submitted, there's enough dirt to throw around on every church. We really have to work on tolerance.
I rely heavily on St. Paul's teachings in Romans when I think about our roles and tolerance. Incidentally, part of why I don't find truth in the BOM is that there are a great many contradictions to St. Paul's teachings in there. That said, St. Paul really gives great guidance about supporting each other in our development as christians. Read Romans 14, 15, and 16. For some reason, these books and teachings of St. Paul's seem to get over looked by most christian faiths and I've never figured out why. Maybe because tolerance is too hard for most people.
The general synopsis of those books is that it doesn't matter that I don't eat meat on Fridays during lent and you do. St Paul tells us to that if I don't eat meat on Friday as part of my faith, then a true christian will help me to keep true to that part of my faith by their actions. The same holds true to me, meaning if you eat meat on friday as part of your faith, then I as a christian should be helping you keep true to your christian faith.
I'm using the meat as an example because its a pretty well understood custom of catholics during lent. It isn't meant as a literal example. The bigger global picture is that as christians we are called upon to support each other in developing and following the tenents of our faith, not beat each other over the head with the doctrines of our respective churches claiming one is truer than the other.
In the end, if we don't follow Christ's example, and try as hard as we possibly can to live as he did, we won't get back to God regardless of what our respective religion is. The converse of that is true too. If we do try as hard as we possibly can to follow Christ's path, and live as he did, and believe in him, then regardless of what the name of our church is we will return to God. That's the promise made to us by Christ when he says, I am the way the truth and the life, no man can come to the father except my me. Enjoy your spiritual journey and stop bashing each other over the head with doctrine.
please disregard the above typo, that should be "by me" not "my me." :-)
Anon @ 11:17, thanks for your viewpoint. I appreciate your perspective and your faith. Yes, ultimately, it all depends on our willingness to follow Christ. May our paths converge at His feet.
Thanks for dropping by!
Respectfully:
If 10% of a prophet's words are false then you have a false prophet.
All other debate after this is meaningless.
Don't forget, it only takes a very small amount of poison to ruin what would otherwise be a perfectly good meal.
I love your blog and your FAQ site. forgive the vernacular, but it rocks. ^_^.
I'm 19 and preparing to serve a mission, I'm the mission leader in my small branch and I explain to people who have arguements against the church after answering some of their questions. What is faith?
Faith is the EVIDENCE of things not seen.
Faith is the evidence of the truthfullness of this work. You bear a testimony of things you hope to be true, and the spirit confirms this witness to you.
There are some things man can just not teach, the spirit much replace the evidence of men. And just as a sparrow will never understand the intracacies and details of politics on Capitol Hill (though i'm sure many on that hill don't understand either) we will not understand some things in this life.
One question that I've had recently about being a member or leaving the church. Why is a "testimony" of the church's truthfulness a good enough reason to join and stay in the church, but not good enough a reason to leave?
I hear members say all the time that they just KNOW the church is true because the "feel" it, and everyone oohs and ahhs and agrees. But when I say that I left the church, I'm expected to give a million reasons, all of which are refuted and countered?
Why can't my own testimony, my own feeling that the church ISN'T true, be good enough?
anon, I would hope that they ask you why because they care about you and your salvation. I will not ask you why. But wish you luck on your journey to find the truth, I have found mine in The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints.
Dear Anonymous of May 10, 2007,
The fact of the matter is, your testimony that the Book of Mormon isn't true, and that what the LDS church teaches is false, is actually good enough. The reality is, no member of the mormon church who really believes what their church teaches can let you exercise your own testimony or revelation that the LDS church isn't true.
Entrenched in the very teachings of the LDS Church is a directive to convert everyone because only the LDS Church has the truth. Its an arrogant entitlement that runs to the very core of the value system of the LDS Members. The idea, conceptually is, from an LDS perspective, we are the only ones who have the truth, why would anyone leave except that they've done something wrong or lack faith. God doesn't actually work that way, doesn't like that kind of entitlment, has been known to humble the haughty, and does in fact answer everyone's prayers whether they be LDS or a christian faith. God does bestow blessing on us all, regardless of what the LDS church teaches. But the LDS Church from a doctrinal perspective, can't leave you alone to exercise your free will.
Hope that answers your question. In terms of this blog site, if 10% of what the LDS Church teaches isn't true, then the church itself isn't true. In fact, more than 25% of what the LDS Church teaches has actually been proven false.
Here's how I reach that conclusion. The LDS Church recognizes 4 sacred texts: the Bible (King James Version), the BOM, D & C, and the Pearl of Great Price. As a matter of proven fact and history, the Pearl of Great Price has been proven to be false, and nothing more than an Egyptian Burial Scroll from a time frame somewhere in the vicinty of Christ's time. That's one whole sacred text, 25 % of the LDS Churches teachings that have been proven false. Yet people still believe.
Following that reasoning though, the only one of the mormon texts that can actually be verified to be true, is the one the LDS Church claims has been mistranslated and distorted over the years, the Bible. Every place in the bible has been verified to have existed; some of those places still exist even today. There's documentation to show that Peter, Paul, the prophets, King David, and a plethora of other folk in the bible actually existed. There's even documentation to support a conclusion that Jesus existed. Yet the LDS Church says this book is mistranslated. There's not one shred of evidence that any of the people or places in the BOM ever existed. There's is ample evidence that none of those people or places ever existed, yet people still believe.
I suspect that part of the problem the LDS Church is having, is they are starting with the proposition that the King James Version of the bible is the most accurately translated. It is probably one of the versions of the bible most used, but that doesn't mean its the most accurately translated. The LDS Church ignores the Douay Reims Bible that was translated at roughly the same time as the King James Bible. The Douay Reims version though was translated directly from the Latin texts, the King James Bible was not. But interestingly enough, when you compare the language and text side by side, there's virtually no difference in the writing style and the context of what is said. In fact, comparitively, the substance of each of the various bibles does not significantly change in a side by side comparison. The LDS Church doesn't let that information get out.
Another problem is that the LDS Church says the bible isn't accurately translated, but the BOM is. Well if that's true, then why use the bible at all. Aren't you just misleading people?
This whole blog spot starts with the proposition that the LDS Church is true, and that if you investigate the anti-mormon claims against the mormons, you'll find that these claims are false. The problem with that reasoning is that some of the claims aren't false. Some of them are true and proven true. But an even bigger problem with mormon teachings and doctrine, is there is just too much explaining that needs to be done.
One must explain away polygamy. Then one must explain away the mark of Cain doctrine. Then you have to explain why Joseph Smith hid hid multiple marriages, yet the LDS Church proudly documents and displays every one of them on its website. One explanation after the other, until there are so many, all one could do is question.
God actually defies explanation, and withstands all scrutiny. The LDS Church does not. That is the biggest problem. Joseph Smith can not withstand scrutiny when his behavior is looked at closely. He was an adulterer, a racist, a fabricator, a master conman, and he has duped millions of people. Yet people still believe in spite of at minimum 1/4 of his teachings being proven false.
Faith is the evidence of the unseen. But faith in a book that has been proven to be false, and a prophet that has been proven to be little more than a liar, is misplaced faith. Jesus has never been proven to be a liar, he is incapable of lying. The bible has never been proven to be false, in fact, much of what is in there has been proven to true. The Book of Mormon, D & C, and the Pearl of Great Price can not make the same claims...much of these have been proven false.
I've rambled for quite sometime now, this is a passionate issue for everyone on all sides, but back to May 10, 2007 anonymous' question. Your testimony about what is true or not true, is in fact good enough. You don't have to explain yourself to anyone, you don't have to say why you've left the LDS Church, they have no right to ask, they aren't the only ones who receive answers to prayers or blessings from God. LDS Church members are just as unworthy of God's love as the rest of us. Its by his grace, and his grace alone that any of us has hope. That is the ultimate truth.
Good Day.
If you dont believe that is fine, it doesnt have to be justified. I have many inactive friends and yet they are still my friends and I do not question their reasons.
Prove BOM isnt true. Dont just stay it is proven not to be true, justify your arguments with facts please.
I do believe the bible is true, why because of faith as I believe the BOM etc are true, why because of faith.
There are many who argue the Bible isnt true and if you read these books alone and watch these programmes alone you would almost feel convinced but there are always two sides and any such issues should be balanced otherwise people can be mislead.
So saying the Bible is proven (and yes I agree as I disagree with your comments that BOM etc is proven as untrue)some would argue isnt so.
Thanks.
Dear Anonymous,
You are absolutely correct, if one looks only at the negative literature on the bible or the BOM, or for that matter, anything, one's viewpoint can easily become slanted. You issue the challenge of proving the Bible true, well I say prove the BOM true. You can no more do that than I can prove the Bible true. But, what can be shown, and its actually the point I was making, is that there is factual support for the bible. The cities in the bible actually exist, some even still exist. The people in the bible, actually existed...Peter, Paul, Moses, Pilate, Barabas, Herod, etc. The fact that there are substantiated facts in the bible is what lends credibility to the bible. Where is your factual evidence with the BOM? I realize its about faith, and trust, but, when there are no facts to show some credibility in the BOM, how could you trust it to be true.
That's even more problematic when you consider that the prophet you follow, Joseph Smith's life was frought with examples of how not to live as a christian. He used seerstones, an occult practise. He told stories, and was charged with frauding people. He claimed he could locate buried treasure. He instituted polygamy claiming it was an edict from God. He instituted racism claiming it was an edict from God. These are facts documented in history books.
You say there are two sides to every story. You are correct, and in fact in many cases there are more than two sides to consider. When I say that 25 percent of your church's teaching have been proven false, its from a consideration of both the good and the bad materials put out there about your church. Its from a careful, and prayerful consideration of the BOM, and from a taking of the missionary discussions, and attending your services as well as my own, and ultimately from listening to the answers I have recieved from the Holy Spirit.
I suggest to you that if you choose to believe the BOM, and put your faith it in, then that is great. You're not going to go too wrong trying to live that lifestyle. But, don't do so without reading and considering all the literature put out from both sides. What you will find if you do that, is that your church slants the literature just as much as those who put out what is considered anti-mormon literature. Ask yourself why that is? Why does your church, if it truly Christ's church, engage in the same practise of slanting, and misrepresenting, and distorting of the facts just as much as those opposed to your church?
catholic defender
Catholic Defender-
Name one piece of evidence for the Book of Exodus.
Shall I start with the Red Sea, I believe its still there. How about the Sinai Peninsula, seems like that's still around. How about Eygpt, ever hear of it? Or better yet, how about the entire population of Jews that are talked about from Exodus on through the New Testatment. Ever see any evidence of Nephites or Lamanites documented throughout history outside your references to them in the Book of Mormon.
Catholic Defender
Catholic defender -- as a freshman college student of philosophy who stumbled across this website, I would like to point out that you are relying on a logical fallacy.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
For hundreds of years no evidence of the planet Pluto existed. Yet, it did exist even though no one realized it was there.
In order to convince me, it is not enough to point out a lack of evidence. You must point out a strong evidence against the existence of Nephites and Lamanites.
One of the simpler atheist arguments is that there is no concrete evidence supporting the existence of God. Since you seem to be a Catholic, you might answer that argument the same way -- "I cannot prove that God exists, but you cannot disprove HIS existence either."
Having an enemy without weapons is very different from having a weapon yourself. If you really want to strike a telling blow, please arm yourself and do so. If you cannot provide a weapon for yourself, then you and your opponent are equally poorly prepared.
Good Day Freshman,
You surmise correctly that I am catholic. That's probably obvious from the psuedonymn I use. What may not be obvious is the point I was making in my last response. I'll try to explain without offending or condescending. If I do, I apologize in advance.
The question as posed to me regarding proving the events in Exodus doesn't hinge on evidence so much as it hinges on credibility. Evidence doesn't prove or disprove a fact, but what it does do is lend credibility to the existence of a fact, therefore allowing one to believe a fact to be true or untrue, depending on what the question is. I don't disagree with your postulation that a lack of evidence does not mean the facts aren't true. As I stated, evidence only lends credibility. So, when the question posed to me is to identify evidence of the events documented in Exodus, then the response is, this is the evidence.
Let me explain further. We can only know the events in Exodus to be true by praying and having faith. But, the existence of evidence, lends credibility to our belief. For example, its much easier to have faith in the events in Exodus having occurred because we have documented, independent evidence outside the bible to draw on. We know that Eygpt existed at the time when Moses was to have walked the earth. We know that the Jewish people existed because the Old Testament, among other things is a history of the Jewish people. We also know the Jewish people existed because we still have Jewish people in this world today. We know that the Red Sea exists, and we know that the Red Sea was around at the time of Moses. There is in fact a Mount Sinai, and a desert in the area. We know that the Phillistines, and the Persians, and the Samaritans existed. These are all facts documented not just by the Jewish Peoples, but by the Arabic peoples as well. Look at the Talman and the Koran. Both are history books as well as religious texts. Look at the records kept by the Romans, the Greeks, the Egyptians, and the Persians. All of these are independent sources of information to draw upon that document evidence of the events that occurred in Exodus. Ultimately it still comes down to faith, but our faith in the events of Exodus is justified by the existence of tangible evidence. Its about credibility.
So lets analyze the same facts as it pertains to the BOM. Outside Joseph Smith saying the Lamanites and Nephites and the Jaredites existed, there's no independent documentation of such peoples ever walking the face of the earth. Only Joseph Smith documents the Hill Cumorough and the cities identified in the BOM. No one independent does. Frankly there should be ruins, or records documented by the Incas, or the Aztecs, or the Mayans. But there's nothing. All we have is Joseph Smith's say so. So in order to believe in the BOM you necessarily have to consider Joseph Smith's credibility and your own experience with faith to draw the conclusion that its true. From my vantage point, its Joseph's lack of credibility that leads to a disbelief in the BOM.
You're talking about a man who is immortalized and martyrized by the Mormon faith, but who history documents was anything but an upstanding member of society known for his veracity. His own mother says Joseph Smith had problems telling the truth. There are court records documenting Joseph's arrests for lying to people. Additionally, the ways in which Joseph Smith is said to have translated the BOM aren't consistent with the ways God has always provided revelation to his prophets. You don't see Isiah or Elijah using seer stones. You do however see Egyptian Mystics using seerstones. None of that proves the BOM to be untrue, but, it sure calls into question the credibility of the document as well as the source.
So just as I can not prove the Bible true, you can not prove the BOM to be true. But, what I can do, that you can not, is point to credible tangible evidence that lends credibility to the truth of the Bible. Ultimately both of us must pray and follow our hearts on the matter since the ultimate answer is a question of faith. But I'll trust my faith and belief in the Bible, a book I know to be true, over any trust in the BOM, a book with dubious and questionable credibility and no tangible evidence to the events contained therein.
Sincerely
Catholic Defender
What is Truth?
Physical Evidence = Credibility? To a very small degree in spiritual matters. Maybe it helps remove doubt. However, the historicity of the Bible does not in any way prove its authenticity, much less its truth. For example, the verification of people or places mentioned in the Bible (from other sources), such as the Red Sea or Egypt or Jerusalem or Moses or Paul, in no way proves the supernatural incidents recorded about them. Existence does not prove truth. Ruins of Egyptian temples don't prove that Egyptian gods are real. Prove the Burning Bush or Paul's visions. It can't be done. Archeological "evidence" is not proof of truth and is certainly not a solid basis for a testimony of the truth. God uses witnesses, not evidence. The only way to know spiritual truth is through the medium that God the Father has appointed, The Holy Ghost. And He will bear witness of His Son and the truth. You hear or read the words of a witness of the truth and then you have to get your own personal witness. You have to exercise some faith. Listening, reading, studying/seeking, pondering, praying/asking, humbling yourself, changing your life to live what you learn, putting the truth to the test by living it (this is "knocking"). Too many people want the Truth but are unwilling to pay the price for it. The Lord said:
Matt 7:7-8
7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.
John 7:16-18
16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or [whether] I speak of myself.
18 He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.
John 16:13
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Belief coupled with spiritual effort, faith, is required. The truth is not relative either. I'm not talking about people's feelings and perspectives about issues. I'm talking about eternal, spiritual realities. True doctrine, not opinion. God is real and lives. He is Our Father in Heaven. Jesus Christ is His Only Begotten Son. God sent Jesus Christ to redeem us. He is the only way to return to the Father. We are free to choose: to follow Him and believe in Him or not. Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God. The Book of Mormon is the word of God. You must be baptized in water and receive the Holy Ghost by God's priesthood authority in order to enter His Kingdom. The Kingdom of God on the earth today is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. The President of this Church is a living prophet of God on the earth today. As of this writing it is Gordon B. Hinckley.
These are simple statements of truth. You can't prove or disprove them. They can only be verified by a spiritual witness, the witness of the Holy Ghost. It is the only sure witness. He will confirm the words of the Lord's servants. But there are many false witnesses too. Can you quote a bunch of people who think Joseph Smith was a charlatan? Sure. You can even find signed affidavits that accuse him of all kinds of terrible things. Some of those signees were members of the mobs who murdered Mormons, trampled on the Constitution, and forced our people to flee to Utah. Explain that. Romans and Jews opposed the Lord Jesus Christ very similarly. They were wrong; they lied; and they killed, too. The spiritual reality is that there is an Enemy, the Devil, Satan, and he stirs up the hearts of men to anger against the truth.
The Book of Mormon contains its own test of truth:
Moro 10:3-7
3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.
7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever.
I paid the price and have received this witness for myself by the power of Holy Ghost. I know it is true. The witness of the Holy Ghost is not just an emotional feeling. It is powerful, unmistakable, undeniable, incontrovertible, cannot be counterfeited - Love, Light, Joy, Peace, Goodness. When you experience it, you will know it.
DNA has not disproven The Book of Mormon. There are ruins in North, Central, and South America that coincide with Book of Mormon timeframes.
Here are some interesting articles on the topic:
http://www.the-book-of-mormon.com/photos-page3.html
http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=1&table=transcripts
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbms&id=25&previous=L3B1YmxpY2F0aW9ucy9ib29rb2Ztb3Jtb252aWV3LnBocA==
Jesef,
You're correct that the fact that there is tangible evidence that the peoples listed in the Bible existed doesn't prove the Supernatural events in the Bible to be true. But, they do make them more likely to be true. Let me use this example.
Does a man holding a smoking gun over a dead body mean that the man killed the dead person? No, not by itself. All you have here in this example is credible, circumstantial evidence that the man committed the murder. To prove he killed the person you need more information. So you must ask the next questions to reach the truth. For example, you need to know how the person died, when did the man with the gun arrive, were there other people there....you need to ask more questions to reach the truth. The same holds true when one is examining the truth of the Bible.
To know the events in the Bible to be true, ultimately requires faith. But that faith has to be founded upon something credible we can believe in. When you're talking about the events in the Bible, the only credible facts you have to work with are those that I've previously mentioned. It still comes down to faith, do you believe it to be true or not? Do you believe in God or don't you? Do you believe Christ died for our sins or don't you? Those questions can only be answered by faith.
Perhaps the Holy Spirit will provide answers regarding the truth however, in order for that to happen, one must first have faith and trust that the Holy Spirit actually exists. Without that faith as a starting point, no one would ask the necessary questions.
I happen to agree with you on some points. I absolutely believe in God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. There's no question that all three exist and are acting in our lives. Of that I have no doubt. I absolutely agree that we can all find our answers through thoughtful prayer and exploration of our faith. Where I whole heartedly disagree with you is in the truth of the Book of Mormon, the prophecy of Joseph Smith, the prophetic nature of Gordon Hinckley, and the various other Book of Mormon teachings and standard works.
None of those things are true. I say that with respect for your faith and the revelations you have recieved. But, before you go suggesting that I read Moroni, and James, and meet with the missionaries and pray with an open heart and mind, you should consider whether or not I have done those things. The truth is, I have. I've taken the discussions on three occasions, I've prayed with an open mind and heart many times over. In my circumstances being married to a mormon, but being catholic myself, the easiest path to adopt would be to simply convert and follow the LDS Faith. The problem with that is that I would be lying to God and myself to say that I believe the BOM to be true, that JS was a prophet, and that this church is true, because I do not believe that it is. I won't lie to God, nor should anyone.
In praying, and seeking my answers, I have reached a few revelations that I know to be true. First, God answers all of our prayers regardless of where we say our prayers. He is part of all of our lives. He is with us at all times in all things. This is a believe I have come to know by experience, not just faith. But, some of that belief is actually in direct contradiction to mormon teachings. Therefore, mormon teachings can not be true.
Second, the Holy Spirit is with us in all things at all times. I believe that to be true because I have always felt his presence both in times of trouble and in times of peace. So, since I know from experience and faith that the Holy Spirit is always with me, and I am not mormon, it stands to reason that the mormon teachings can not be true.
Third, there are too many Saints throughout the history of Christianity who have given their lives in support of Christianity to say that any form of apostacy occurred. Many of those persons died so that the faith could survive. Belief in an apostacy would mean those folks died in vain. Therefore, to me, no apostacy occurred.
Fourth, all of us can return to God if we follow Christ's path regardless of what we call our faith. Mormons I think have this arrogant view that they offer something not found in other christian faiths because the mormon faith offers "us families for time and all eternity." Consider that doctrine as it relates to other faiths. In order for that teaching to come true, there's still a need for our family members to follow Christ's path; if they do not, then we won't spend eternity with them. So what the mormon faith offers with the promise that we are sealed to our families for time and all eternity amounts to little more than an illusory promise. That promise is contingent upon each of us following Christ's, which is essentially something all the other Christian faiths offer. What that means from this perspective is that you're not offering anything I don't already have, except for the BOM and other standard works which have dubious origins.
I could actually go on for many pages about why I find your church to hold false doctrine's and teachings, but to do so would serve little purpose in building up either of our faith. Suffice to say that when I have prayed about the truth, and when I have examined my faith and what I have come to believe from my experiences with God, the answers I have recieved about your faith are that it is not true. Your church holds no truth for me. Its wonderful that it holds truth for you, but my path lies on a different route.
Catholic Defender
Catholic Defender,
Thanks for your response. I believe you are sincere. I hope you took time to follow some of the links I left. At least go check out the first one, which is Photographic Evidence for the Authenticity of The Book of Mormon. You may have to paste them into your browser.
1. Photographic Evidence for the Authenticity of The Book of Mormon (look at the links at the top, there are actually several pages of photos): http://www.the-book-of-mormon.com/photos-page3.html
2. An article from the Maxwell Institute "Evidences of the Book of Mormon": http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=1&table=transcripts
3. Another Maxwell Institute article "Basic Methodological Problems with the Anti-Mormon Approach to the Geography and Archaeology of the Book of Mormon": http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbms&id=25&previous=L3B1YmxpY2F0aW9ucy9ib29rb2Ztb3Jtb252aWV3LnBocA==
The Neal A. Maxwell Institute of Religious Scholarship at BYU (used to be called FARMS) reviews and responds to many Anti-Mormon publications. A lot of their research is on The Book of Mormon and The Pearl of Great Price. I encourage you to browse their research using the "Browse Our Research" link on the left. They have provided much scholarly evidence in favor of these unique books of scripture. I think you will find some credible evidence. Selectively ignoring evidence, as well as witnesses, seems to be a common problem when it comes to seeing and accepting the truth.
I certainly hope I did not give you the impression that I don't believe the Bible (for lack of physical evidence of the spiritual and supernatural events). I know it is true by the same witness of the Holy Ghost. I simply use the Bible as an example because it is common ground for us. As an interesting aside on our conversation about evidence and faith, have you been to Israel, Egypt, the Red Sea, etc.? If you haven't, then you still believe (the witnesses, photographs, etc.) that they exist. If you've been to those places and seen, heard, touched, smelled, and tasted them (I have), then you know that they are real. I still have to believe the witnesses (teachers, locals, etc.) who told me that the places we were visiting/experiencing were actually the places mentioned in the Biblical record. There's no getting around faith. We have to choose which witnesses we are going to believe. Ruins and artifacts, and other archeological evidence, don't prove spiritual truth. Otherwise Greek Mythology or Egyptian Mythology are as credible as the Bible.
I'm thankful that Our Father in Heaven has prepared a way for us to discern truth from error. Otherwise how would we know who to believe when two men's testimonies conflict? As in our case! I testified that these things are true. You testified that "none of these things are true": the Book of Mormon, the prophecy of Joseph Smith, the prophetic nature of Gordon Hinckley, and the various other Book of Mormon teachings and standard works. Both of our witnesses can't be true. I believe God has deliberately withheld physical evidence, for the same reason that he does not unveil Himself for all mankind to see. Because one of the major purposes of this life is to test our faith. Some people scoff at The Book of Mormon because the plates of gold are not available for examination; neither is the Ark of the Covenant.
I assume you base your testimony (on the LDS Church and its teachings) on your not receiving a direct answer to your prayer, a personal revelation, about these things. Or do you actually feel that you received an answer, a personal revelation, that they were not true? The latter, a direct answer in the negative, not just the logic of your next 4 points, would be required to honestly bear such a testimony. To avoid bearing false witness, it would be better to say that you do not know that these things are true, or that you don't believe that they are true, rather than stating things as fact that you don't know for sure.
You said that you have met with the missionaries and prayed with an open mind and heart many times over. It sounds like you've been to LDS Church services with your wife many times too. Let me ask you a few more questions about your investigation. Did you read the entire Book of Mormon ("read these things")? Did you humble yourself before the Lord ("remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men")? Did you ponder it in your heart? After doing this, did you then pray and ask God the Eternal Father in the name of His Son Jesus Christ whether or not these things (The Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, The Restoration, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) are true? Did you ask with a sincere heart? Did you ask with real intent (ready to let go of your own traditions/notions/beliefs, ready to make any necessary changes in your personal life, ready to live the commandments, to commit, to covenant)? Did you ask having faith in Christ? If you answered no to any of these questions, then you did not qualify for the promised answer of "he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." Every person I have ever met who has paid this price has received the answer (had the truth of these things manifested unto them by the power of the Holy Ghost). And, in contrast, every person I have ever met who has complained about not receiving an answer has failed in some way to meet these conditions. If you don't want something to be true, that hardly qualifies as an open mind or heart.
Please don't mistake certainty for arrogance. And please don't mistake cultural Mormons, or other bad examples who claim membership in our Church, for the truth of the Gospel.
You went on to list 4 points that I want to address, at least in part, because they show clearly that you have been misinformed about our Church's doctrine about these things. I don't know how you got these impressions. I speak for myself, obviously, but I have a sound understanding of the Church's doctrine from official publications, General Conferences, etc. I will also quote from Preach My Gospel, which is what the missionaries are authorized to teach with the scriptures.
You first point seemed to assert that you think Mormons believe that God only answers their prayers and anyone outside our Faith must be talking to the ceiling; you know, from your own experience, that He does hear and answer other people's prayers; therefore The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is false. Your premise is false. I don't believe that assertion. I don't know a single Church member personally who beleives that either. The true doctrine of the Church is that "God is Our Heavenly Father. We are His children. He loves us. He wants to communicate with us, and we can communicate with Him through sincere prayer." Why would we be exhorting every person who is not a Mormon to pray if we believed their non-Mormon prayers are not heard or answered?
Your second point seemed to assert that you think Mormons don't believe that anyone outside our Faith can feel the Holy Spirit; your own experience contradicts this; therefore the Church is false. Again, your premise is false. We believe that every person is born with the Light of Christ. Here is an official description: [A person is capable of receiving spiritual guidance before being baptized and confirmed. This spiritual influence begins with the Light of Christ, which “is given to every man, that he may know good from evil” (Moroni 7:16; see also verses 14–19).
“The light of Christ is just what the words imply: enlightenment, knowledge, and an uplifting, ennobling, persevering influence that comes upon mankind because of Jesus Christ. . . .The light of Christ should not be confused with the personage of the Holy Ghost, for the light of Christ is not a personage at all. Its influence is preliminary to and preparatory to one’s receiving the Holy Ghost. The light of Christ will lead the honest soul who ‘hearkeneth to the voice’ to find the true gospel and the true Church and thereby receive the Holy Ghost” (Bible Dictionary, “Light of Christ,” 725; see also D&C 84:46–47). President Boyd K. Packer said, “It is important for a . . . missionary . . . to know that the Holy Ghost can work through the Light of Christ. A teacher of gospel truths is not planting something foreign or even new into an adult or a child. Rather, the missionary or teacher is making contact with the Spirit of Christ already there. The gospel will have a familiar ‘ring’ to them” (“The Light of Christ,” address delivered at the seminar for new mission presidents, 22 June 2004, 2).]
In your third point, you assert that there was no apostasy. But there is a lot of evidence to the contrary, as well as many prophecies about it. I think the deaths of the Apostles, the Biblical record ending with John exiled on the Isle of Patmos, the ensuing confusion and debate at the many councils and the un-Biblical creeds which resulted, as well as the period commonly termed The Dark Ages, are adequate proof in themselves. But here's a few scriptures that foretold it:
Apostasy of the Early Christian Church
Isa. 24:5 changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant
Isa. 29:13 this people draw near me with their mouth
Isa. 60:2 darkness shall cover the earth
Amos 8:11 a famine ... of hearing the words of the Lord
Matt. 13:25 his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat
Matt. 24:5 saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many
Matt. 24:24 shall arise false Christs, and false prophets
John 6:66 his disciples went back, and walked no more with him
Acts 20:29 shall grievous wolves enter in among you
1 Cor. 11:18 there be divisions among you
Gal. 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him
Gal. 3:1 who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey
2 Thes. 2:3 shall not come, except there come a falling away first
1 Tim. 1:6 some having swerved have turned aside
1 Tim. 4:1 giving heed to seducing spirits
2 Tim. 1:15 all they which are in Asia be turned away from me
2 Tim. 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred
2 Tim. 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power
2 Tim. 4:4 turn away their ears from the truth ... unto fables
Titus 1:16 profess that they know God, but in works they deny him
James 4:1 From whence came wars and fightings among you
2 Pet. 2:1 false prophets also among the people
2 Pet. 3:17 being led away with the error of the wicked
1 Jn. 2:18 now are there many antichrists
1 Jn. 4:1 many false prophets are gone out into the world
Jude 1:4 certain men crept in ... denying the only Lord God
Rev. 2:2 which say they are apostles, and are not
Rev. 3:16 thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot
Rev. 13:7 to make war with the saints
1 Ne. 13:26 foundation of a great and abominable church
2 Ne. 26:20 the Gentiles ... have stumbled
2 Ne. 27:1 Gentiles ... will be drunken with iniquity
Morm. 8:33 transfigured the holy word of God
D&C 1:15 strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant
D&C 86:3 Satan ... soweth the tares
D&C 112:23 darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people
JS-H 1:19 they were all wrong, ... their hearts are far from me
See also Matt. 24:9-11; Rom. 11:21; 1 Cor. 1:11; 3:3; Col. 2:22; 1 Tim. 1:19; Titus 1:10; 2 Pet. 2:22; 3 Jn. 1:9; Rev. 2:5; 1 Ne. 11:34.
None of these people lived or died in vain.
Your fourth point doesn't sound like Catholic doctrine at all, more Universalist (many roads lead to the same place). Your third and fourth assertions seem to neglect one our greatest doctrines, which is Salvation for the Dead. "The Savior loves all people and desires their salvation. Yet millions of people have died without having any opportunity to hear the message of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ or receive saving ordinances. Through His loving grace and mercy the Lord makes salvation possible for everyone who did not have the opportunity to receive, understand, and obey the gospel during their mortal lives. The gospel is preached to these deceased people in the spirit world. Members of the Church on earth perform the saving ordinances in behalf of their deceased ancestors and others. Deceased persons living in the spirit world have the opportunity to accept or reject the gospel and the ordinances performed in their behalf."
Salvation for the Dead (see also Baptism; Baptism for the Dead; Genealogy and Temple Work; Salvation)
Isa. 24:22 in the prison, and after many days shall they be visited
Isa. 42:7 bring out the prisoners from the prison
Isa. 49:9 (1 Ne. 21:9) say to the prisoners, Go forth
Isa. 61:1 (Luke 4:18) proclaim liberty to the captives
Obad. 1:21 saviours shall come up on mount Zion
Zech. 9:11 sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit
Mal. 4:6 (Luke 1:17; 3 Ne. 25:6; D&C 2:2; 110:15; JS-H 1:39) turn ... the heart of the children to their fathers
Matt. 16:19 (D&C 128:8) bind on earth shall be bound in heaven
Luke 4:18 preach deliverance to the captives
John 5:25 dead shall hear the voice of the Son
Rom. 14:9 Lord both of the dead and living
1 Cor. 15:19 if in this life only we have hope in Christ
1 Cor. 15:29 why are they then baptized for the dead
Heb. 11:40 (D&C 128:15) that they without us should not be made perfect
1 Pet. 3:19 preached unto the spirits in prison
1 Pet. 4:6 gospel preached also to them that are dead
D&C 2:2 (JS-H 1:39) plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers
D&C 76:73 spirits ... in prison, whom the Son visited
D&C 76:74 received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh
D&C 88:99 redemption of those who ... have received their part in that prison
D&C 124:29 baptized for those who are dead
D&C 127:5 in relation to the baptism for your dead
D&C 128:5 s. of the d. who should die without a knowledge of the gospel
D&C 128:11 s. for the d. as for the living
D&C 128:24 book containing the records of our dead
D&C 137:7 died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it ... shall be heirs
D&C 138:18 Son of God appeared declaring liberty to the captives
D&C 138:54 ordinances therein for the redemption of the dead
Moses 7:38 prison have I prepared for them
Moses 7:57 many of the spirits as were in prison came forth.
We also believe in several degrees of glory in the hereafter, the lowest of which is much like the heaven that most other Christian religions describe.
This response is already too long, but I would be happy to respond to any specific concerns you might have about the doctrine of the Church.
If you're interested, I would like to discuss the need for authority and ordinances in order to obtain salvation.
Dear Jesef
To answer your question, I actually believe that I recieved a direct answer to my question regarding the truthfulness of the BOM. My answer was that it is not true. That was revealed to me after much prayerful consideration, and it is the personal revelation that I have recieved. It is still my answer after several years of attendence at both my wife's LDS services as well as my own Catholic Services. To me the LDS Service is devoid of spirituality. It feels hollow and lacking in substance. You obviously feel very differently; that's actually okay.
I have read much of the BOM, parts of the Pearl of Great Price, and parts of D & C. I have also read parts of the Joseph Smith translation of the Bible. The impression I have been left with from reading the BOM is that it is a poorly rewritten copy of the Old Testament. With regard to D & C, I feel nothing spiritual in the text of that book, the same holds true for the Pearl of Great Price. With regard to the JS Translation of the Bible, it find it very troubling that the parts of the Bible that seem to mistranslated, seem to all be parts that contradict the BOM. That just seems rather convenient to me. Mind you, I've only read portions of some of those texts, but because of the feelings I get from reading them, I feel no compulsion to read further. That to me is the Holy Spirit testifying to the lack of truthfulness in the LDS Texts.
Much of what I have learned I have learned from listening to your members, reading Gospel Doctrines, and sitting in priesthood sessions reviewing your priesthood manuals. So whatever misconceptions I may have reached, I would assure you that I've drawn those conclusions from listening to members of your own church espouse those views. I believe these are generally well intentioned, and well meaning people, albeit misguided.
As for priesthood authority. I'll certainly discuss the topic with you, but who I recognize as being priests and having authority really does differ from your point of view.
I would feel much better about your sources for tangible evidence of the BOM, if they came from objective persons. To be truthful, I don't trust LDS scholars anymore than I'd trust anti-mormon scholars. From what I can tell, both sides have motive to skew the truth, and both sides seem to take the opportunity to do so. What I trust far more is my own faith, and my own experiences with God. I trust the sense of comfort I get from practising my faith. I will admit, I do take a more universal view of salvation than my catholic doctrine might teach. I've come to realize over time that God loves all of us regardless of what we name our church. That is one of the great truths that we both probably share. If that is true, which I believe it is, then God has a plan for all of us to return to him. He isn't going to let my belief in the trinity versus your belief in 3 personages get in the way.
The point is, much of the doctrine you believe in, as well as much of the doctrine I believe in, is man's best interpretation of what God meant. Because we're men (I mean that in the generic pronoun sense) we're fallible. We're all prone to getting what God said wrong. JS was just as prone to that as any Pope. God accounts for that fallibility. He doesn't sweat the details, he looks at the bigger picture of what's in our hearts and souls. So ultimately it really is going to come down to did we follow Christ's commandments to love each other, and treat each other as we'd want to be treated. Where we say our prayers won't be as meaningful as how did we live our lives.
That said though, we still need to pray and decide which faith has the most of the truth. None of the christian faiths, including the Catholics and LDS faiths have the whole truth. But for me, catholicism holds more of the truth than any of the others.
Catholic Defender
I was baptized a Mormon in 1994. I renounced Mormonism in 2005 & joined the Orthodox Church.
Christ himself said, "Upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." To state that Christ is a liar, and that there was a 1st Century apostasy is absurd.
As far as Moroni,
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Honestly, I do believe that Joseph Smith was visited by an angel of light. However . . .
The problem is that so many people have invested so must time, faith, and money in this organization. A person had rather die a member "Just in case."
Also, please take time to compare KJV with JST even just in footnotes. About 75% of the time the passage is not clarified, but turned completely on its head.
One last thing . . . Everyone have a year's supply of food?
"Matthew 6:25 Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?"
A prophet can not directly contradict Christ and be a prophet.
May GOD have mercy.
Elijah, you have quoted out of context and misinterpreted many things to support your points.
Moroni is the angel referenced in Revelations 14:6 and the everlasting gospel which he brought was not any other gospel but the Gospel of: Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, Repentance, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins, and the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, the same Gospel which Jesus Christ established.
As for a falling away or apostasy, there is ample scriptural and historical evidence. Look earlier in this thread and you will see many references under the heading Apostacy of the Early Christian Church, but I'll just highlight one: 2 Thessalonians 2:1-5 which says that before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, there would be a falling away first. The deaths of the Apostles, the Biblical record ending with John exiled on the Isle of Patmos, the ensuing confusion and debate at the many councils and the un-Biblical creeds which resulted, as well as the period commonly termed The Dark Ages, are adequate proof in themselves. The gates of hell have not prevailed against the Lord's Church. He restored it (Acts 3:19-23) and it is thriving. He foresaw and prophesied all this. The gates of hell have never prevailed against Him or his disciples, whether living or being persecuted to death.
You're entitled to your own opinion and interpretation about JST verses as well as anything else, but it doesn't make it true. I totally disagree. They clarify and restore meaning. How about contradictory accounts of Paul's vision as he journeyed to Damascus, which the JST's bring into conformity: Acts 9:3-9 (JST Acts 9:7 corrects that the men with Paul saw a light but heard not the voice, instead of hearing a voice and seeing no man); and Acts 22:6-11 (see verse 9 which says that those that were with Paul saw the light but heard not the voice). The mistranslated Acts 9:7 contradicts Acts 22:9.
Take no thought for the morrow was the Lord's counsel to his disciples, in His time, as they prepared to go out spreading the gospel full time. He did not mean for us, in our time, not to prepare for the future (like saving money for retirement or being prepared for a disaster or sudden unemployment). Are you going to attack our prophet's counsel, in our time, to get out of debt too? You'll be thankful you have a Mormon neighbor willing to share some of his year's supply if you ever get hit by a Hurricane Katrina or the like.
I suggest you reread this whole thread. If you really want to know the truth about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, The Book of Mormon, and the Prophet Joseph Smith, then read The Book of Mormon (in its entirety) and put God's promise in Moroni 10:3-5 to the test. I did. You can't argue with a personal revelation of the truth from our Father in Heaven through the power of the Holy Ghost. And this is the rock (revelation) upon which the Lord Jesus Christ said His Church would be built in Matt. 16:13-20 (verse 17). It is the only way to really know the truth.
One of the reasons that is difficult to dialogue with dedicated members of the Church is because there is an automatic assumption that when someone brought up in the church with an intimate knowledge of its teachings says something opposing the Church, that such a person is deceived and apostate, and needs correction. Listeners tend to not listen, while choosing -- not constructing -- the pre-canned arguments algoritmically determined appropriate for this situation.
I am a sinner. I acknowledge that, and always specifically acknowledged that to the Church authorities I had to. As such, I ended up with a lot of people talking to me who were afraid to talk to their bishops -- which is what I encouraged them to do instead. Those days are past. I just stay away so that they can go on in their own ways.
The Book of Mormon promise never states that you can read it, ask if it's true, and God will tell you it is. It says to ask "if these things are NOT true", which is a self-defeating proposition as it attempts to prove a negative thesis, and therefore no basis for a promise at all. Were it a valid basis for a promise, even then it says God "will reveal the truth of it unto you." This is far from stating God will reveal the book is true. it means he will reveal what part is true.
The Book of Mormon testifies many true things about Christ, so of course the Holy Spirit will testify of its general truth. When I went over it detail by detail, I learned a few things:
There are many parts the testimony of the Holy Spirit does not sustain individually, primarily the overriding structural story. 2) The Church today does not follow many of its important teachings.
The fact is Mormonism teaches that there is nothing inviolably sacred about any scripture. It can all be overridden by later revelation, of which many important things in "the most correct book" already have.
Mormons believe that God can control events so that a perfect scripture can emerge after having been continually maintained for 1,000 years through direct intervention. They do not believe that he has the power to use men as his writing pieces indirectly over a period of 4,000 years to produce a volume of scripture saying exactly what he wants it to say. Isn't there something about "a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof"?
Even then, they believe that anything in it can be overridden by later revelation. Nothing is therefore sacred and dependable.
I began studying the Douay-Rheims and NAB a year ago, and learned more about what is really in the Bible in a year than in 47 years believing Mormonism. The Bible is the direct result of Cathoilic tradition, and you can never understand it unless you learn about the Catholic traditions which produced it. You can't learn about from the Mormon church, because it lies to you about what other churches believe -- I know. I believed what it told me about other faiths for decades. When I learned the truth as opposed to what Mormon curriculum and publications had taught me, I was appaled at how deceptive the teachings I'd received were. The words from the D&C rang in my head, "It is contrary to the law and order of heaven for a just man to deceive."
Every place I've attended Church I could go a whole Sunday without hearing atalk about Jesus. I counted six weeks in a row once when the only actual preaching about Christ was one of the testimonies in testimony meeting. It is not what I would expect from the only Chirch Jesus is supposed to acknowledge as his own.
Members being honest about their sinfulness get ostracized, while those who lie about it become elders quorum presidents and counselors in stake presidencies? (When you tell the truth about tyour own sins, others are honest with you about th