Podcast: Download (61.7MB)
Subscribe: RSS
Please register for the FairMormon Conference that is on August 5-7. It’s a great opportunity to support FairMormon, hear from amazing speakers, and ask questions directly to speakers!
Today, Hanna covers the CES letter in the scope of broader anti-Mormonism. She begins with a brief history of anti-Mormon literature and dives into how the CES letter represents broader methodological problems of critics, who neglect basic warrants of history, religion, and analyzing truth claims. She then offers some thoughts about faith and study in assessing anti-Mormon literature before closing with a brief Come Follow Me study and testimony of Jesus Christ.
Hanna Seariac is a MA student in Greek and Latin at Brigham Young University. She is writing a book on the history of the priesthood and another one that responds systematically to anti-LDS literature. She works as a research assistant on a biblical commentary and as a producer on a news show. She values Jesus Christ, family, friends, hiking, baking, and really good ice cream.
Hanna, what are your thoughts on some of the more significant problems in the Bible, and specifically, their implications for Mormonism? For example, we now know that several forgeries made their way into the New Testament (six of Paul’s letters, the last 12 verses of Mark 16, multiple interpolations have been discovered in the Gospels, etc.)
And yet, the Book of Mormon contains several phrases, word for word, from these forged documents. For example, Enos 1:1 says “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord”, the exact words King James translators used to translate Ephesians 6:4 into English. Ephesians is a forgery, written by someone pretending to be Paul. So in 550 BCE, Enos used a phrase that would be used in 1611 CE to translate a phrase written by a dishonest impersonator of Paul, who would have lived 600 years after Enos, and who would never have heard of Enos.
I’m familiar with the standard apologetic response: ‘Christians in Joseph’s time, who didn’t know Ephesians was a forgery, probably used this catch phrase regularly. Jospeh saw that Enos was saying something similar, so perhaps Joseph added some personal poetic flair, using a phrase he was already familiar with.’
Except that this happens over and over and over throughout the Book of Mormon. And if Joseph was constantly inserting his own 17th, 18th, & 19th century jargon into ancient prophets’ mouths, can you see why outsiders’ red flags would be going up here?
Other phrases from forged documents: Peter 3:10: “and the elements shall melt with fervent heat” makes its way into Mormon 9:2. And Mark 16:17-18 (the verses that say true believers will be able to drink poison unharmed and handle poisonous snakes) also appear, word for word, in Mormon 9:24. Not only is this a forgery, but it’s simply terrible advice that has gotten many people killed over the past two millennia. Yet it made its way into the “most correct book on earth”.
This is excellent.
Hi Hanna,
Thank you for your work and adding your voice to those defending the faith. I appreciate and support your efforts.
That being said, I ask you to please use caution in overstating your rebuttals to anti-Mormon claims. For example, in this episode, you discussed the creation theology presented in the Book of Abraham and said something like, “How could a 14 year old come up with that?” The problem with that response, though, is that Joseph Smith was 29 at the time he translated the Book of Abraham. Still an incredible feat to be sure, especially given Joseph’s educational and socioeconomic background.
Perhaps more subtly, you asserted that we should put more focus on what the Church teaches now than what it has in the past and implied (perhaps unintentionally) that our history is not important. The problem I see with that response is that, unlike most other faith traditions, our history informs our theology. One of the temple recommend questions requires us to affirm that we have a testimony of the Restoration of the Gospel. A testimony of the Restoration of the Gospel is inextricably tied to an understanding the history of the Restoration. So, while it is true that not all Church history is equal, I think we need to be careful of downplaying it too much.
If we overstate our claims, we are playing into the same game the CES Letter and other anti-Mormons play — overstating claims, twisting facts to support our biases, etc. If we give the impression that we have to overstate our claims to refute the claims of the CES Letter, this can frustrate those looking for answers and perhaps unintentionally gives credence to the feeling Jeremy Runnels shared in the CES Letter that apologists weakened his testimony rather than strengthened it.
Anyway, I give my thoughts in support and in the spirit of constructive criticism. Please keep up the good work!