For some critics, the story of the lost 116 pages in the coming forth of the Book of Mormon is utterly ridiculous. Some say it shows Joseph was just making things up on the fly and would have all sorts of accidental changes as he went through the fabrication process a second time, so for safety, he just punted with the first part of the record and concocted the story of the small plates. This is the “Joseph was an idiot with bad memory” theory. The story of the 116 pages from that perspective directly challenges the popular theory of “Joseph got help from Sidney Rigdon or some other very smart person” to create the impressive and remarkably self-consistent text of the Book of Mormon. These theories based on plagiarism and texts from the likes of Solomon Spaulding or Sidney Rigdon or both assume that there was some text that had been prepared and carefully edited over many months or even years in preparation for the grand Book of Mormon scheme. When Joseph was dictating the Book of Mormon to his scribes, he must have been reading from the pre-written manuscript. If such a manuscript existed, then it would have been no trouble reading it again exactly as read before.
[Read more…] about A New Twist on the Spalding Theory–And Sidney’s Amazing Voice Trick
Anti-Mormon critics
Critical Evidences of the Restoration
Critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are often quick to jump forward with any and all criticisms that they believe might prove the undoing of the testimony of our members. It is not uncommon to see the proverbial “shotgun” approach of bombarding individuals who are young in the gospel with a barrage of information that all seems damning on the surface.
Just as with birdshot that only requires a single pellet to bring down a flying bird, such an approach relies upon the notion that with so many things being claimed, that if only a few – or even one – were proven true, then the Church cannot be true!
Such tactics, also referred to as the “spaghetti” method of “throw it and see what sticks,” do not require depth of thought, or for that matter, even truth or context. It relies exclusively on the notion that if you throw enough at someone, they may just give up under the burden of fending off the attacks.
[Read more…] about Critical Evidences of the Restoration
Is Defending the Church Against Church Doctrine?
I was speaking today with a woman who is not a member of the Church who was asking me about apologetics and the work I do with FAIR. She said that recently she discussed Mormon apologetics with a former LDS bishop and was surprised to hear him say that doing apologetics is contrary to the doctrine of the Church. I certainly don’t want to act in any way that is contrary to Church doctrine, and if anyone can convince me that it is contrary to God’s will that I defend the Church, I’ll stop right now.
However, as I read the scriptures, it seems to me that apologetics (defense of the faith) is not only permissible, but required of all believing members. We should “be ready always to give an answer [apologia] to every man that asketh . . . a reason of the hope that is in [us] with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of [us], as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse [our] good conversation in Christ.” (1 Pet. 3:15-16.) Likewise, Joseph Fielding Smith once said, “Every member of the Church ought to know that [the Book of Mormon] …is true, and we ought to be prepared with an answer to all those critics who condemn it” (“The Book of Mormon, A Divine Record,” Improvement Era [December 1961], 925.) And Harold B. Lee wrote, “The term ‘elder,’ which is applied to all holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood, means a defender of the faith. That is our prime responsibility and calling. Every holder of the Melchizedek Priesthood is to be a defender of the faith. (Conference Report, April 1970, 54-57).
Rather than wait for a specific calling by a bishop, or for the Church Public Affairs office to issue a statement, or wait for apostles to tell us to defend the Church on the internet (which, incidentally, they have done here and here), all Church members have been told to “be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness; For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves.” (D&C 58:27-28.) In addition to simply bearing my testimony to others, it is my understanding that I should “reason with them.” (D&C 49:4. See also D&C 66:7 & 68:1.)
[Read more…] about Is Defending the Church Against Church Doctrine?
Are Mormons Christians? Witherington says no.
There he gives six reasons why he believes Mormons are not Christians. While I have enjoyed Professor Witherington’s biblical scholarship, I’m afraid his understanding of Mormonism is inadequate. I’ll examine each of his six claims. [Read more…] about Are Mormons Christians? Witherington says no.
Mormon FAIR-Cast 101: Dan Peterson takes questions
Podcast: Download (38.3MB)
Subscribe: RSS
Dan Peterson takes questions from callers who both support and oppose the Church on this live interview with Mills Crenshaw that appeared on K-Talk radio on July 31, 2012, in Salt Lake City, Utah. Brother Peterson answers questions about the Book of Abraham and a variety of questions about the Book of Mormon, including ones pertaining to DNA studies, Mesoamerican and Near-Eastern archaeology, and Joseph Smith’s production of the Book of Mormon.
A native of southern California, Daniel C. Peterson received a bachelor’s degree in Greek and philosophy from Brigham Young University (BYU) and, after several years of study in Jerusalem and Cairo, earned his Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). Dr. Peterson is a professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic at BYU and founder and the editor-in-chief of the University’s Middle Eastern Texts Initiative (METI). He is a past chairman of the board of the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) and, until very recently, served as Director of Advancement for its successor organization, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. From 1988, when he founded it, through mid-June of 2012, he edited the FARMS Review, which was renamed the Mormon Studies Review in late 2011. He is the author of several books and numerous articles on Islamic and Latter-day Saint topics, including a biography of the Prophet Muhammad (Eerdmans, 2007). A former bishop, Dr. Peterson served in the Switzerland Zürich Mission, and, for approximately eight years, on the Gospel Doctrine writing committee for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He currently serves as a Gospel Doctrine teacher in his home ward. He is married to the former Deborah Stephens, of Lakewood, Colorado, and they are the parents of three sons.
This recording is posted here by permission of K-Talk Radio. The opinions expressed in this interview do not necessarily represent the views of FAIR or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
“Are Mormons Closer to Muslims or Christians?” by Ms. Eliza Wood
A certain Ms. Eliza Wood has just posted an extraordinarily inept entry on Huffington Post entitled “Are Mormons Closer to Muslims or Christians?”
Her answer is “No.”
First of all, of course, the question is misconceived. It’s rather like asking whether Fords are closer to automobiles or water buffaloes. Fords are automobiles. And Mormons are Christians.
But perhaps Ms. Wood can’t really be blamed, because, quite plainly, she’s entirely unqualified even to have an opinion on the subject. [Read more…] about “Are Mormons Closer to Muslims or Christians?” by Ms. Eliza Wood
Mormon FAIR-Cast 89: Are Mormons Christians?
Podcast: Download (9.2MB)
Subscribe: RSS
Martin Tanner discuss the reasons why some say that Mormons are not Christian and provides a response to these contentions in this episode of Religion Today that originally aired on February 12, 2012.
This recording was used by permission of KSL Radio and does not necessarily represent the views of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or of FAIR.
Okay, let’s go over this again…
An inquiry came to FAIR’s “Ask the Apologist” service this morning, asking for help with the following claim on the Wikipedia article “Linguistics and the Book of Mormon”:
Richard Packham has pointed out that several Biblical Hebrew names, including Aaron, Ephraim, and Levi are listed as Jaredites in the Book of Ether. He argues that these are anachronisms, since the Jaredites are supposed to have originated from the time of the Tower of Babel, and did not speak Hebrew.
Perennial ex-Mormon gadfly Richard Packham apparently fails to understand that the Book of Mormon is a translation, and translations render ancient words — including names — into modern forms that didn’t exist at the time.
Sally Hemings and the Gods Themselves
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
[Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain]
— Friedrich Schiller, The Maid of Orléans
The vicarious temple ordinances performed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the “Mormons”) are back in the news. This time, it is because someone has reportedly sealed Sally Hemings to Thomas Jefferson. (Hemings was a slave owned by Jefferson. She bore children that have Jefferson DNA. [1])
As usually happens with such things, the media and the blogosphere are a-bubble. Some are well-intentioned expressions of concern, others are ill-informed, and some seem to just want to pile on and make the Church look bad, or use this as an opportunity to push their own reforming agenda on the Church.
The unspoken assumption seems to be that the Church can be “shamed” or at least “public-pressured” into “doing the right thing.” In this case, the right thing would presumably be not performing vicarious sealing of slaves to former masters. (The more hostile want temple work vastly curtailed or stopped altogether, but we’ll leave them to one side—it isn’t going to happen.)
This is not, however, simply one more case of “Mormon institutional insensitivity” to go with performing temple rites for Holocaust victims (despite what some have suggested). LDS policy forbids performing Holocaust victims’ temple rites. The people who did so had to circumvent fairly significant warnings and technological obstacles to do so. (Those obstacles have since been increased even further.)
Likewise, it has never been LDS policy to seek out female slaves and seal them to their former masters and/or rapists.
Now, I wholeheartedly endorse the idea of not sealing slaves to masters. The idea is obscene. I don’t know any sensible person that would endorse it. And that, unfortunately, is precisely the problem—I said sensible person.
Let me explain.