Posted on 12/29/2007 8:34:35 AM PST by greyfoxx39
Anti-Mormon literature tends to recycle the same themes. Some ministries are using a series of fifty questions, which they believe will help "cultists" like the Mormons. One ministry seems to suggest that such questions are a good way to deceive Latter-day Saints, since the questions "give...them hope that you are genuinely interested in learning more about their religion."
This ministry tells its readers what their real intent should be with their Mormon friend: "to get them thinking about things they may have never thought about and researching into the false teachings of their church." Thus, the questions are not sincere attempts to understand what the Latter-day Saints believe, but are a smokescreen or diversionary tactic to introduce anti-Mormon material.[1]
The questions are not difficult to answer, nor are they new. This page provides links to answers to the questions. It should be noted that the questions virtually all do at least one of the following:
|
|
This was not a prophecy, but a command from God to build the temple. There's a difference. Jesus said people should repent; just because many didn't doesn't make Him a false messenger, simply a messenger that fallible people didn't heed.
Learn more here: Independence temple to be built "in this generation"
In Brigham (and Joseph's) day, there had been newspaper articles reporting that a famous astronomer had reported that there were men on the moon and elsewhere. This was published in LDS areas; the retraction of this famous hoax never was publicized, and so they may not have even heard about it.
Brigham and others were most likely repeating what had been told them by the science of the day. (Lots of Biblical prophets talked about the earth being flat, the sky being a dome, etc.—it is inconsistent for conservative Protestants to complain that a false belief about the physical world shared by others in their culture condemns Brigham and Joseph, but does not condemn Bible prophets.)
In any case, Brigham made it clear that he was expressing his opinion: "Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is." Prophets are entitled to their opinions; in fact, the point of Brigham's discourse is that the only fanatic is one who insists upon clinging to a false idea.
The problem with "Adam-God" is that we don't understand what Brigham meant. All of his statements cannot be reconciled with each other. In any case, Latter-day Saints are not inerrantists—they believe prophets can have their own opinions. Only the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve can establish official LDS doctrine. That never happened with any variety of "Adam-God" doctrine. Since Brigham seemed to also agree with statements like Mormon 9:12, and the Biblical record, it seems likely that we do not entirely understand how he fit all of these ideas together.
Peter and the other apostles likewise misunderstood the timing of gospel blessings to non-Israelites. Even following a revelation to Peter, many members of the early Christian Church continued to fight about this point and how to implement it—even Peter and Paul had disagreements. Yet, Bible-believing Christians, such as the Latter-day Saints, continue to consider both as prophets. Critics should be careful that they do not have a double standard, or they will condemn Bible prophets as well.
The Latter-day Saints are not scriptural or prophetic inerrantists. They are not troubled when prophets have personal opinions which turn out to be incorrect. In the case of the priesthood ban, members of the modern Church accepted the change with more joy and obedience than many first century members accepted the extension of the gospel to the Gentiles without the need for keeping the Mosaic Law.
Believing Christians should be careful. Unless they want to be guilty of a double standard, they will end up condemning many Biblical prophets by this standard.
Most "contradictions" are actually misunderstandings or misrepresentations of LDS doctrine and teachings by critics. The LDS standard for doctrine is the scriptures, and united statements of the First Presidency and the Twelve.
The Saints believe they must be led by revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which they now find themselves. Noah was told to build an ark, but not all people required that message. Moses told them to put the Passover lamb’s blood on their door; that was changed with the coming of Christ, etc.
No member is expected to follow prophetic advice "just because the prophet said so." Each member is to receive his or her own revelatory witness from the Holy Ghost. We cannot be led astray in matters of importance if we always appeal to God for His direction.
The First Vision accounts are not contradictory. No early member of the Church claimed that Joseph changed his story, or contradicted himself. Critics of the Church have not been familiar with the data on this point.
The shortest answer is that the Saints believe the First Vision not because of textual evidence, but because of personal revelation.
The Church didn't really "choose" one of many accounts; many of the accounts we have today were in diaries, some of which were not known till recently (1832; 1835 (2); Richards, Neibaur). The 1840 (Orson Pratt) and 1842 (Orson Hyde) accounts were secondary recitals of what happened to the Prophet; the Wentworth letter and interview for the Pittsburgh paper were synopsis accounts (at best). The account which the Church uses in the Pearl of Great Price (written in 1838) was published in 1842 by Joseph Smith as part of his personal history. As new accounts were discovered they were widely published in places like BYU Studies.
This is a misunderstanding and caricature of LDS doctrine. There is, however, the Biblical doctrine that the apostles will help judge Israel:
Since the saints believe in modern apostles, they believe that those modern apostles (including Joseph) will have a role in judgment appointed to them by Jesus.
Those who condemn Joseph on these grounds must also condemn Peter and the rest of the Twelve.
This question is based on the mistaken assumption that the Bible message that Jesus is Christ and Lord is somehow "proved" by archeology, which is not true. It also ignores differences between Old and New World archeology. For example, since we don't know how to pronounce the names of ANY Nephite-era city in the American archeological record, how would we know if we had found a Nephite city or not?
The term "familiar spirit," quoted in the often-poetic Isaiah (and used by Nephi to prophesy about the modern publication of the Book of Mormon) is a metaphor, not a description of any text or its origin.
The critics need to read the next verses. The Book of Mormon says that God may command polygamy, just a few verses later. (Jac. 2:30).
Many Biblical prophets had more than one wife, and there is no indication that God condemned them. And, the Law of Moses had laws about plural wives—why not just forbid them if it was evil, instead of telling people how they were to conduct it?
And, many early Christians didn't think polygamy was inherently evil:
The critics have their history wrong. The change dates to 1837. The change was made by Joseph Smith in the 1837 edition of the Book of Mormon, though it was not carried through in some other editions, which mistakenly followed the 1830 instead of Joseph’s change. It was restored in the 1981 edition, but that was nearly 150 years after the change was made by Joseph.
This issue has been discussed extensively in the Church's magazines (e.g. the Ensign), and the scholarly publication BYU Studies.
In Alma, the reference is to Jesus Christ, who before His birth did not have a physical body.
John 4:24 does not say God is "a" spirit, but says "God is spirit." There is no "a" in the Greek. The Bible also says "God is truth" or "God is light." Those things are true, but we don't presume God is JUST truth, or JUST light—or JUST spirit.
As one non-LDS commentary puts it:
In the Bible, there are accounts of God commanding or approving less than complete disclosure. These examples seem to involve the protection of the innocent from the wicked, which fits the case of Abraham and his wife nicely.
The Bible also says that Bethlehem ("the city of David") is at Jerusalem. (2_Kings 14:20) Was the Bible wrong? (Bethlehem is in the direct area of Jerusalem, being only about seven miles apart.)
These may be discussion boards but no one other than the leadership of the church gives "approved answers" for the church =
This is nothing more than what was alluded: a phony plan to trash the church under the guise of it being church members and church sanctioned.
Individual members have the right to speak for themselves and to receive guidance from the Holy Spirit for themselves - but cannot speak for the Church. They can testify as to their beliefs, but only the leadership can speak for the church itself.
This "Answers to 50..." is a red herring.
All one has to do to find out what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believes is to go to their official website:
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=e419fb40e21cef00VgnVCM1000001f5e340aRCRD
or to the leaders of a branch of the church or the missionaries...They are they ones with the authority to speak for the church. No one else. Nor should people take as 'gospel' hearsay from questionable sources on ANY subject. Go to the horses mouth.
Lets bring in all the 'christian' hypocrits to attack the Mormons : )
A “horse” is a “tapir.”
In a “pig’s” eye!
That’s the kind of foolishness that makes you realize how ignorant this stuff is.
"Libertarian who thinks what we need is more Honor and Accountability"
: )
Condemning innocent little children to hell is pathetic. And you attack Mormons because they think little children are innocent. That is what this is all about.
It might be kinda cool to rule over your very own planet, considering we are deemed worthy.
Having read the first 15 questions and answers, I would say:
1. The questions are quite good.
2. The answers suck, big time. Every answer all but admits that the factual bases for the questions are true.
3. Bill Clinton would feel very comfortable in the Mormon church. With all the prevarications, twisting of words, outright lies; he could become a stake president in no time. There is also the polygamy thing.
If the Mormon church really thinks these responses are going to help them or Romney, they are mistaken.
I've no idea what you a talking about.
I certainly hope you are not a homophobe.
While I personally view homosexual acts as sinful, I also view adultery, lying, pride, and sloth as equally sinful acts. None get a pass in God’s eye. We are all sinners. Our Saviour died so that through him we all may be viewed as perfect in the eyes of God.
Any Christian who has truly been washed in Christs blood would certainly try to abstain from sinful behavior. But who are you to throw the first stone? Are you perfect?
I have found Mormon missionaries to be woefully uninformed about many tenets on Mormonism.
One day the Pope was sitting in the Vatican when the phone rang. He answered, “Hello. Who’s calling?”
“It’s God,” said the voice on the other end. “I’ve got some good news, Pope, and I’ve got some bad news.”
The Pope asked, “What’s the good news?”
“I’m starting a new, worldwide religion,” said God. “Everybody will worship in the same church. There won’t be any more arguments, disputes or wars. Peace will reign.”
“Gosh,” the Pope said, “That’s fantastic. What could the bad news be?”
“I’m calling you from Salt Lake City,” said God.
M E R I D I A N M A G A Z I N E
Meridian Magazine : : The Place Where Latter-day Saints Gather
http://www.ldsmag.com/breakingnews/020815lds.html
LDS Conference is a Big Hit: “The Best Apologetics Conference Yet.”
by Cooper Johnson
(Orem, UT) – From scholars, professors, and intellectuals to Sunday School teachers, Bishops and Ward Mission leaders, an international crowd of people from all walks of life gathered for two days in Orem, UT, to learn more about gospel scholarship and how to answer some of those pesky questions from the critics of the Church of Jesus Christ. The fourth annual FAIR (Foundation of Apologetic Information and Research) LDS Apologetic Conference, according to attendees and presenters, was an outstanding success.
The goal? To turn perceived stumbling blocks (the tough questions about the LDS faith, it’s doctrines, history, and leaders) into stepping stones of knowledge, wisdom and truth. From plural marriage to racism, from Book of Mormon studies to the doctrine of deification, attendees of the FAIR Conference walked away well equipped to address the issues used to attack the LDS faith by it’s critics.
“Where else can you go to really learn about these things?” says Sam Katich. “I mean, let’s face it, the enemies of the Church are all over the place, poisoning the Internet, spreading their wings. Never before, has there been such an event that enables members of the church to come and learn of the answers.”
Mike Ash admits, “It’s really amazing to learn that those issues you thought were difficult to talk about actually aren’t difficult at all, once you learn about them. They really are stepping stones.”
Causing Commotion
One of the true highlights of the conference was the presentation of Dr. Royal Skousen. Dr. Skousen has been the editor of the Book of Mormon Critical Text for the last 13 years. He knows more about the manuscripts and linguistics in the Book of Mormon than probably anyone in the world.
Dr. Skousen presented some of his findings (as many as could be presented in an hour) and commented that the most significant were his discoveries that the process of translation was so systematic and consistent. He has concluded that everything he has learned only adds to the fact that the Book of Mormon was the result of a divine translation process.
The biggest splash made at the conference was the presentation by Renee Olson. Renee is a black female and former anti-Mormon. She was certified by the Southern Baptist Convention in “Mormonism,” at one time. She is now a faithful member of the Church and spoke on the issue of blacks and the priesthood, in addition to racism in the church, in general.
“It was, by far, the best thing on the race issue I’ve ever experienced,” according to Kevin Barney. “Renee has a certain credibility that none of us could ever muster.”
Dr. Kathryn Daynes, a BYU Professor of History, and author of the recently released book, More Wives Than One, shared the results of her lengthy study on plural marriage from the arrival of the saints in Utah to the 1890 manifesto. Her findings were absolutely outstanding. “Dr. Daynes shared much light on the issues of who, what, when and why, regarding plural marriage,” Gale Tenney said.
Of course, the scholars from the FARMS/ISPART group are always favorites and played the role of bookends. John Tvedtnes kicked off the conference on the topic of Biblical Inerrancy and the changing position of Evangelical scholars, in addition to other very recent movements and findings at the scholarly level.
Dr. Daniel Peterson took his familiar position as keynote speaker to end the conference and presented an absolute delightful view of the failure of the critics to find a sound, naturalistic explanation for the origins of the Book of Mormon. From the days of the early church, 170 years ago, to today, Dr. Peterson demonstrated the absolute failure, time and time again, of anyone to present an alternative explanation to the divine origins of the Book of Mormon and the prophetic call of Joseph Smith. There is nothing left, but the divine, to explain it.
Other outstanding speakers were Mike Ash, who spoke on the effects of anti-Mormon research on LDS scholarship, Russell Anderson, who spoke on the 1826 Trial of Joseph Smith, Roger Cook, who spoke on the Judeo-Christian roots of the doctrine of Theosis (e.g. deification), Dr. Tim Heaton, who presented the results of his gathering demographic statistics on LDS members, and Brant Gardner, who presented an incredibly unique perspective on the Gaddianton Robbers of the Book of Mormon.
Everyone Happy
Not a soul left the conference disappointed. “The FAIR 2002 Conference was a great success. I enjoyed it from so many perspectives,” shared Craig Ray.
“I thought this was the best apologetics conference yet,” concluded, John Tvedtnes, one of the speakers from FARMS/ISPART. “Even the couple of speakers who didn't deal with apologetics issues gave us some very good information. I learned a lot of new things and in my book, that makes the conference a success.”
This year’s FAIR Conference will be difficult to top. But, I know, from inside sources within FAIR, that the management team is already putting together some surprises, that will definitely raise the bar. Stay tuned to the FAIR website (www.fair-lds.org) or subscribe to the FAIR Monthly Journal, at their home page, to get the latest news on the next conference.
© 2002 Meridian Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
I somehow doubt that you did that.
Even if you had God like powers I doubt that you would do it.
You must have been caught telling the truth to draw that kind of response.
Are you saying that you don't believe that babies are born into sin? If you don't your fellow Cabal members will have to kick you out : )
Hmm...
I'm southern baptist now for 50 years and I have never heard that. It is not taught in my doctrine. Nothing even remotely close to that.
I think Mormonism is fine but it does have a sorta bizarre beginning and has beliefs I find to be self indulgent on the part of their prophets and one could even argue is post Christian at best. I do like their code of conduct in today's world for the most part.
I think it is fine for me as a protestant to question Mormons or any other religion for whatever reason and especially if it's the faith of a POTUS candidate. We are somewhat defined by our faith if we have any.
And if we don't then I am reminded of "an open mind is often an empty one"
(To each his own convictions and opinions...)
PROPOSITION:
If the Book of Mormon, (and the teachings and praxis of the church derived therefrom) -- remains a true, God-given extension of the written revelation of The LORD, God -- and the person Jesus Christ...
Then it was intended for all who acknowledge and fear the LORD, as the Supreme God and King.... and follow Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord; and if proven true -- should be heeded and followed by these believers and disciples.
MY INQUIRY:
As a committed ( not perfect)... and studious follower of Jesus Christ--
I have examined the "Mormon Gospel" --
(Ostensibly given by angelic revelation to Joseph Smith -- and supported by the commitment of his friend Brigham Young...)
AND... IT APPEARS AND SEEMS TO ME, THAT....
The historical transmission of Mormon teaching documents (D&C... etc)
(1)To be self-conflicted.... and...
(2) Often conveniently "revised"
(In such ways that a pure revelation from the LORD would not need to be "revised"...)
AND....
(3) From time-to-time, held secretly and re-transmitted at later dates after these revisions were in place...
AND...
(4) To be in such extraordinary doctrinal/practical tension with the Holy Bible (The 66 books -- non apocryphal)...
AND...
(5) Likewise seriously conflicted with the previous 1800+ years of the faithful central teachings, commentary, and practice of the universal Body of Christ...
***********
MY PERSONAL CONCLUSION:
I personally cannot accept the "Mormon gospel" as an extra-Biblical Holy-Spirit-inspired revelation of the Living God -- which was intended to "update" (...in some cases seems to attempt to-- supplant--)
---The clear instructions and commands of God given to many witnesses throughout the Biblical ages of authorship and the excellent stewardship of the Gospel through the earliest years of church history.
Now, I am sure our Mormon friends here might say I will miss many blessings here & hereafter.... or even miss Heaven...
Yet I will stick with the Biblical faith, as revealed, revered, and practiced before, during, and after the time of the Mormon revelation...
Thanks for considering my personal point of view>
Again: these are my personal thoughts and conclusions.
(To each his own convictions and opinions...)
Have a nice day...
Palmyra October 23d 1830
Dear Sir
Your letter of yesterday is received & I hasten to answer as fully as I can—Joseph Smith Jr first come to my notice in the year 1824 in the summer of that year I contracted with his father to build a fence on my property
in the corse of that work I approach Joseph & ask how it is in a half day you put up what requires your father & 2 brothers a full day working together
he says I have not been with out assistance but can not say more only you better find out
the next day I take the older Smith by the arm & he says Joseph can see any thing he wishes by looking at a stone Joseph often sees Spirits here with great kettles of coin money it was Spirits who brought up rock because Joseph made no attempt on their money
I latter dream I converse with spirits which let me count their money when I awake I have in my hand a dollar coin which I take for a sign Joseph describes what I seen in every particular
says he the spirits are grieved so I through back the dollar in the fall of the year 1827
I hear Joseph found a gold bible I take Joseph aside & he says it is true I found it 4 years ago with my stone but only just got it because of the enchantment
the old spirit come to me 3 times in the same dream & says dig up the gold but when I take it up the next morning the spirit transfigured himself from a white salamander in the bottom of the hole & struck me 3 times & held the treasure & would not let me have it because I lay it down to cover over the hole when the spirit says do not lay it down
Joseph says when can I have it the spirit says one year from to day if you obay me look to the stone after a few days he looks the spirit says bring your brother Alvin
Joseph says he is dead shall I bring what remains but the spirit is gone
Joseph goes to get the gold bible but the spirit says you did not bring your brother you can not have it look to the stone
Joseph looks but can not see who to bring
the spirit says I tricked you again look to the stone
Joseph looks & sees his wife on the 22d day of Sept 1827 they get the gold bible—I give Joseph $50 to move him down to Pa
Joseph says when you visit me I will give you a sign he gives me some hiroglyphics I take then to Utica Albany & New York in the last place Dr Mitchel gives me an introduction to Professor Anthon says he they are short hand Egyption the same what was used in ancient times
bring me the old book & I will translate
says I it is made of precious gold & is sealed from view
says he I can not read a sealed book—Joseph found some giant silver specticles with the plates he puts them in an old hat & in the darkness reads the words & in this way it is all translated & written down—
about the middle of June 1829 Joseph takes me together with Oliver Cowdery & David Whitmer to have a view of the plates
our names are appended to the book of Mormon which I had printed with my own money—space and time both prevent me from writing more at present if there is any thing further you wish to inquire I shall attend to it.
Yours Respectfully
Martin Harris
I don’t have a problem with the thread being posted, but what business does it have on News/Activism? Shouldn’t this thread be in Religion?
Yes please. I like having my religion equated to radical islam.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.