FAIR

Faithful Study Resources for Come, Follow Me

Apologetics

10 Questions with Dennis B. Horne

by

Cross-posted from From the Desk of Kurt Manwaring

I recently had the privilege to interview Dennis B. Horne.

Horne is the author of many books, including Bruce R. McConkie: Highlights from his Life and Teachings, Latter Leaves in the Life of Lorenzo Snow, I Know He Lives: How 13 Special Witnesses Came to Know Christ, and Determining Doctrine. A Reference Guide For Evaluating Doctrinal Truth.

Dennis B. Horne, Photo provided by Dennis Horne.

Kurt Manwaring: Welcome! Before we begin, could you tell us a little bit about yourself and how you first got interested in writing about religious topics?

I am an independent researcher and author. I grew up in Bountiful, Utah, and served a mission to Independence Missouri. I obtained my bachelors from Weber State University in Communications with an emphasis in broadcasting. I spent some ten years, off and on, working for two local Salt Lake City television stations before I went to work for the LDS Church twenty years ago. I have two wonderful wives (one of them deceased and on the other side of the veil for the last twelve years) and three daughters.

The spark of interest I felt for church history and doctrine when I attended Seminary grew into a roaring fire while I served a mission. That is where I first heard the other missionaries speak so respectfully and reverently of Elder Bruce R. McConkie’s teachings and testimony. He had passed away just a few weeks before I graduated from high school, and I had not had the sense to pay attention to his final famous (April 1985) General Conference address at the time he delivered it. Following my mission, and on the side while pursuing my degree, I voraciously consumed Elder McConkie’s writings and those of the other great doctrinal thinkers and authorities of the Church. I even became a small-time collector of Mormon books when I could afford it. I began assembling my own files, filled with talks and articles related to church history and doctrine. These books and files became my main interest outside of gaining my secular education. Fortunately, I came under the influence of two knowledgeable and wise CES men, who gave me invaluable counsel in how to approach my gospel and historical studies: what to feast on; what to be wary of and why; what to study for proper perspective, and where to find the purest and sweetest doctrine.

These formative years in my twenties helped me avoid a serious crisis of faith, such as what has become something of a fad today. During the decade of the 1990s I felt, rightly or wrongly, that I might become knowledgeable enough to begin considering the possibility of doing some writing. I loved good Mormon books and soon developed the desire to contribute to the field myself. How little I knew how difficult that would be.

Kurt Manwaring: What do you do for work and what is your writing schedule like? [Read more…] about 10 Questions with Dennis B. Horne

The Coming Revolution of Virtual Missionaries: Review of Books by Greg Trimble

by

Available from the FairMormon Bookstore at 15% off

If I remember correctly, I first came across Greg Trimble’s blog by seeing his post “Quit Acting Like Christ Was Accepting of Everyone and Everything” shared by a friend on Facebook, apparently some time in 2014. I liked it enough that I shared it in a few places as well. He has since written a bunch of other posts that have also been shared widely, so most LDS people online are probably familiar with his name.

In the last year, Trimble has started publishing books. His first one, Dads Who Stay and Fight: How to Be a Hero to Your Family, showed up on Audible’s website, so I thought I’d give it a listen. It is a book about being a good father written by a young father, so it does have its weak spots. A lot of the chapters could have used fewer stories and more concrete examples. But there were some really good ones that made the whole thing worthwhile, in particular the ones on marriage, technology, and protecting your family from worldly influences.

A few months ago, I saw that he had published another book, The Coming Revolution Inside of Mormonism. I was curious enough about the title that I wanted to take a look at it, and I requested a review copy. When it arrived, it was accompanied by The Virtual Missionary: The Power of Your Digital Testimony, which had also recently been published. Since then, The Coming Revolution Inside of Mormonism has been retitled to The Cultural Evolution Inside of Mormonism, apparently because the original title had caused a lot of confusion. In order to avoid confusion here, I will refer to the book by its new title (and assume that none of the actual content has changed). [Read more…] about The Coming Revolution of Virtual Missionaries: Review of Books by Greg Trimble

Have There Been Any Latter-Day Parallels to Balaam’s Blessing? (Gospel Doctrine Lesson 16A)

by

Balaam Son of Beor Inscription from Deir ʿAllah. This fragment, dating to several centuries after the events of Numbers, recounts a night vision of Balaam, son of Beor, a “seer of the gods.” Though the content of the vision has nothing to do with the Bible story, the text provides evidence that stories surrounding the figure of Balaam were known anciently outside the Bible among peoples who lived in the area east of the River Jordan.

 

An Old Testament KnoWhy relating to the reading assignment for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 16: “I Cannot Go Beyond the Word of the Lord” (Numbers 22-24; 31:1-16) (JBOTL16A)

 

Question: Have there been any latter-day parallels to Balaam’s blessing?

Summary: In 1898, Dr. John M. Reiner, a Roman Catholic scholar, visited Utah. In a talk given at the Salt Lake Tabernacle at the invitation of President Wilford Woodruff, he described in striking terms the parallels he found between ancient and modern Israel. Throughout his talk, he wove in colorful and informative allusions to the story of Balaam, who had blessed Israel in spite of himself. Reiner also spoke vigorously of the strength of the claims of apostolic authority that, in his view, had been credibly put forth by only two churches: the Roman Catholics and the Mormons. Although not claiming the gift of prophecy, Reiner’s eloquent words of appreciation and friendship for the Latter-day Saints were sincere and generous. His little-known discourse drawing out modern day parallels to the story of Balaam and Israel deserves to be better known.

 

The full article may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL16A — Have There Been Any Latter-Day Parallels to Balaam’s Blessing?

Is There Any Evidence in Egyptian Sources for the Exodus? (Old Testament Gospel Doctrine Lesson 13C)

by

. Smaller Tablet of the Hittite version of a Peace Treaty with Egypt, executed ca. 1259 BCE, sixteen years after the battle of Kadesh. It “is believed to be the earliest example of any written international agreement of any kind.”

An Old Testament KnoWhy relating to the reading assignment for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 13: Bondage, Passover, and Exodus (Exodus 1-3; 5-6; 11-14) (JBOTL013C)

Question:Most of the evidence for the historical Exodus comes indirectly from general archaeological findings and analysis of biblical texts. Is there any specific evidence for the reality and timing of the Exodus that can be corroborated from Egyptian sources?

Summary: Very possibly, but only indirectly. Although the Egyptians, like other ancient (and modern!) peoples, were understandably loathe themselves to truthfully advertise a military defeat, the Israelites had no qualms about publicizing such an event on their behalf. According to Hebrew Bible scholar Joshua Berman, the author of the “Sea Account,” the oldest description of Israel’s final escape in the book of Exodus, may have intentionally imitated the structure and vocabulary of Egyptian propaganda trumpeting a claimed victory at the Battle of Kadesh in order to mock the pharaoh’s failure to stop the flight of the Israelites. Berman makes the case that the Israelite “Sea Account” must have been authored within a reasonable period of time after the battle of Kadesh by someone personally acquainted with the Egyptian inscriptions that reported it.

The full article may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL13C — Is There Any Evidence in Egyptian Sources for the Exodus?

A three-minute synopsis of Joshua Berman’s ideas can be found in “A Passover Story: Archaeology and the Exodus,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOGeusWwI-g

For a video describing the historical context and weapon technology of the battle of Kadesh, see Ancient Discoveries: Egyptian Warfare (History Channel), Ancient Discoveries: Egyptian Warfare (History Channel), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS3eQbQG5mA.

FairMormon Conference Podcast #4 – Daniel Peterson, “What Difference Does It Make?”

by

Podcast: Download (97.2MB)

Subscribe: RSS

This podcast series features a FairMormon Conference presentation each month. If you would prefer to watch the videos, they can still be purchased here for the 2017 conference. Older conference presentation videos are available on our YouTube channel and FairMormon TV for Roku, Amazon Fire TV, and Android TV.

Daniel Peterson, What Difference Does It Make?

Video and transcript available here.

Daniel C. Peterson

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, where he has taught Arabic language and literature at all levels, Islamic philosophy, Islamic culture and civilization, Islamic religion, the Qur’an, the introductory and senior “capstone” courses for Middle Eastern Studies majors, and various other occasional specialized classes. He is the author of several books and numerous articles on Islamic and Latter-day Saint topics–including a biography entitled Muhammad: Prophet of God (Eerdmans, 2007)—and has lectured across the United States, in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, and at various Islamic universities in the Near East and Asia. He served in the Switzerland Zürich Mission (1972-1974), and, for approximately eight years, on the Gospel Doctrine writing committee for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He also presided for a time as the bishop of a singles ward adjacent to Utah Valley University. Dr. Peterson is married to the former Deborah Stephens, of Lakewood, Colorado, and they are the parents of three sons.

What Was All the Confusion About at the Tower of Babel? (Old Testament Gospel Doctrine Lesson 6C)

by

M. C. Escher, 1898-1972: Tower of Babel, 1928. A confused group of different peoples quarrel and cry out as the work comes to a standstill.

An Old Testament KnoWhy for Gospel Doctrine Lesson 6: “Noah … Prepared an Ark to the Saving of His House” (Moses 8:19-30; Genesis 6-9; 11:1-9) (JBOTL06C).

Question: At the beginning of the Tower of Babel story, we read that “the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.” Later, we are told that “the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth.” But the scientific history of languages tells us that the diverse tongues of the world did not originate from the splitting of a single language. Must we choose between science and scripture?

Summary: To begin with, the Hebrew word eretz used in Genesis 11:1 (and also in the story of Noah’s flood) can mean either “earth” or “land,” and it is impossible to know which except from context. Here, the phrase probably just means that the people in the land where the story took place originally spoke a common language. In addition, despite the chapter’s focus on the confounding (mixing up) of languages, God’s most important concern seems to have been the confounding (mingling) of the covenant people with their unbelieving neighbors. As with other stories in Genesis 1-11, temple themes are woven throughout the account of the confusion at Babel. In this case, the Tower can be seen as a sort of anti-temple wherein its builders attempted to “make … a name” for themselves rather than acknowledging God as the one who gives names to those He has chosen because of their faithfulness. Abraham’s posterity will be separated out from other nations. His great name “will be achieved not in the present through heroic feats and imposing monuments but rather in a divinely promised future through the begetting of numerous offspring.” Though Abraham successfully passed the tests of his day, his latter-day posterity must continue their vigilance, for the project of Babel is making a strong comeback today.

 

The full article may be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: KnoWhy OTL06C — What Was All the Confusion About at the Tower of Babel?

As a video supplement to this lesson, see Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, “A Tower of Literary Beauty: Wordplay and Chiasmus in the Story of Babel” on the Interpreter Foundation website (http://cdn.interpreterfoundation.org/ifvideo/TowerOfLiteraryBeauty.m4v) or on YouTube (https://youtu.be/2enAFPODShs).

For a video that discusses some of society’s current “Babel projects,” see Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, “The future isn’t what it used to be: Artificial Intelligence meets natural stupidity.” Presentation at the Second Interpreter Science and Mormonism Symposium, March 12, 2016 (http://www.templethemes.net/media/videos/Jeff%20Bradshaw-480p.m4v). Links to an expanded, written version of this presentation published in a series of Meridian Magazine articles can be found here (http://www.templethemes.net/publications.php#mm-future).

How a Proper Translation of Genesis 1:1 Underscores the Atonement-like Properties of Creation.

by

 

 

As Latter-day Saints, we believe that the atonement plays a central role across all eternity. And though I don’t understand all the ways in which that is true, I was recently fascinated by commentary on Genesis 1 from “The Jewish Study Bible”. Commentary that suggests something atonement-like was going on at the very beginning of creation.

Genesis 1 is Best Translated as God Ordering the Universe from Pre-existing Chaos

 The Jewish Study Bible translates Genesis 1:1-2 like this:

When God began to create heaven and earth – the earth being unformed and void.

Pay careful attention to the subtle grammar of this sentence. The commentary suggests that the proper translation of these verses is not of a God creating a universe out of nothing, but of a God that “began” creation when the universe was still “unformed” and chaotic.

Furthermore, the footnotes add that Modern readers like to think the opposite of something is nothing, but to the ancients the opposite of something is chaos. A chaos they thought has malevolent power. Thus, the proper translation of these versus portrays a God who creates through taming a malevolent chaos.

The Wikipedia also makes similar observations.

Is This God More Powerful Than the Traditional God Who Creates Something Out of Nothing?

 The Jewish Study Bible then informs us that this idea has generated debates between Rabbis. The Rabbis who prefer the traditional “ex-nihilo” translation of Genesis suggest this “better” translation implies God built his kingdom on a dung hill. Also, they worry that if the universe has an existence independent of God, this undermines basic theology. For one, if God is really battling in chaos, are we certain He is in control? If chaos ruled once, can it rule again?

The response other Rabbis have given is that such a God is the more powerful One. Which is more impressive: A God Who can create what He wants in the context of no opposition? Or One that has accomplished similar creative goals in the face of opposition?

To use a horrible analogy, who is the more impressive gamer: one playing Sim City who creates the world he wants because all the cheat codes were up his sleeves, or one who had to fight through the game’s intrinsic opposition?

Furthermore, this latter God may be free from the problem of evil described below.

Why This Translation is Interesting in Light of the Atonement

One way to look at the atonement is that God is trying to turn you into a perfect person. An exalted creation. To use a CS Lewis analogy: you may be perfectly fine with being a little cottage. But God’s plan involves turning you into a palace, as difficult as those renovations may be.

In going about this “exalted creation”, a common question raised is: if God can create whatever He wants, why doesn’t He just create you perfect from the beginning? This is fundamentally the “problem of evil“.

This translation would supply a response to that by changing our perspective on how God must create. If from “the beginning” God’s creative plans have required the overthrow of pre-existent chaos, perhaps for us to become perfect “like Him” similarly requires a battle of that same chaos. It’s as if the “opposition of all things” we must overcome is a continuation of the process that started in Genesis 1.  As if learning to be creative like God is not learning to simply will things into existence, but is learning how to roll up our sleeves and with Him defeat the chaos that confronts us.

This makes Genesis 1:1 even more profound than merely being a verse about creation. It may be a verse that underscores what is at the heart of the entire plan of salvation.

Why Scientists, Strangely Enough, Should Find This Translation Interesting

It has been the hobby horse of recent scientists to suggest that, in the light of quantum mechanics, the opposite of something is not nothing but instead some quantum chaos. See recent books by Stephen Hawking and Lawrence Krauss for example. Now admittedly these books have been blasted for being filled with bad philosophy in their attempt to reduce the entire universe to a few 20th century physics principles the authors coincidentally specialized in. (Not too different from biologists I have met who likewise attempt attribute everything about the known universe to the evolutionary principles they were blessed to study in graduate school) But these philosophically bad reductionist errors are beside the point here.

My larger point is that there is a growing belief among scientists that quantum mechanics suggests that the opposite of something is not nothing, but a “quantum”-like chaos. Remove “everything” in a quantum mechanical system in an attempt to obtain “nothing”, and you are still left with a randomly “fluctuating” zero point energy. An energy with a chaotic structure that I will not speculate too much about as we don’t completely understand it, but one that at least hints that physical systems devoid of organized structure are not “filled” with nothing, but instead something akin to chaos.

Thus, it’s interesting that the “more accurate” translation of a thousands of years old Genesis verse may have been consistent this entire time with physics that we did not know until very recently. That before the “something” that we call our universe was not nothing, but a chaos that had to somehow be “tamed”. And though how that was done remains a mystery to both scientists and theologians, it appears Genesis is correct with the idea that it needed to be done.

Hat Tip to Joseph Smith

As you all know, Joseph said basically the same thing in the King Follett Discourse:

Doesn’t the Bible say he created the world?” And they infer, from the word create, that it must have been made out of nothing. Now, the word create came from the word baurau, which does not mean to create out of nothing; it means to organize; the same as a man would organize materials and build a ship. Hence we infer that God had materials to organize the world out of chaos—chaotic matter, which is element, and in which dwells all the glory.

Thus, despite his flaws, Joseph continues to be a man whose teachings are quite impressive.  Even though Joseph’s understanding of Hebrew pales in comparison to the great Rabbis of history referred to in this commentary, he demonstrates time and again fascinating level of inspiration.

—

Joseph Smidt is a physicist in the X-Theoretical Division (XTD) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) where he currently sits as the cosmology team lead for LANL’s Center for Theoretical Astrophysics (CTA) as well as a point of contact for the US nuclear stockpile. His research is split between cosmology, astrophysics, inertial confinement fusion and nuclear weapon design. He has published over 50 papers in the open literature on a wide range of early universe topics from supersymmetry and cosmic inflation to how the first stars and galaxies formed. Joseph obtained his PhD in physics at the University of California, Irvine, and double majored in physics and mathematics at BYU.  He was married to his wife in the Salt Lake Temple, has five wonderful children, and currently serves as stake clerk in the Santa Fe New Mexico Stake.

FairMormon Conference Podcast – Keith Erekson, “Witnessing the Book of Mormon: The Testimonies of Three, Eight, and Millions”

by

Podcast: Download (93.7MB)

Subscribe: RSS

This is a new podcast series which will feature a FairMormon Conference presentation each month. If you would prefer to watch the videos, they can still be purchased here for the 2017 conference. Older conference presentation videos are available on our YouTube channel and FairMormon TV for Roku, Amazon Fire TV, and Android TV.

Keith Erekson, Witnessing the Book of Mormon: The Testimonies of Three, Eight, and Millions

Transcript available here.

Keith A. Erekson is an internationally acclaimed writer, speaker, and public historian. He currently serves as director of the Church History Library of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Erekson has authored numerous books and articles about public interest in over history, including book-length studies of popular commemoration of Abraham Lincoln and the recent debate over the social studies curriculum in Texas. His work has been published in numerous journals, including the Journal of American History, The History Teacher, the Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association, the Oral History Review, and various Mormon studies journals. Before leading the Church History Library, Erekson was a tenured associate professor of history at The University of Texas at El Paso, where he also served as executive director of UTEP’s Centennial Celebration and founding director of UTEP’s Center for History Teaching & Learning. He possesses more than a decade of international management experience in higher education, scholarly publishing, and automotive manufacturing. He holds a bachelor’s and master’s degree from Brigham Young University, a doctoral degree in history from Indiana University, and a Master’s of Business Administration from the University of Texas at El Paso. Erekson grew up near Baltimore, Maryland, and now lives near Salt Lake City, Utah, with his wife and four daughters.

Book Review: An Introduction to the Book of Abraham

by

10% off at the FairMormon Bookstore

Publisher: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book
Author: John Gee
Number of Pages: 197
Binding: Hardcover
ISBN-13: 978-1-9443-9406-6
Price: $19.99
Click to purchase the book.

The Book of Abraham is my favorite book of scripture. Mostly it is because of chapter 3, which contains information that is not found anywhere else in LDS scripture. I also remember discovering the facsimiles as a child and thinking that they were really neat. Unfortunately, the Book of Abraham has also become a favorite for critics to attack, as it is the only book of scripture that Joseph Smith translated for which there appears to be any extant source material, and that material does not seem to match what is in the Book of Abraham. But it’s really much more complicated than that.

This book explains what is currently known about the Book of Abraham and its associated artifacts and documents, and why the critics are wrong. It is written by John Gee, who is a professor of Egyptology at BYU. He got his PhD in Egyptology at Yale and has written many research publications for professional journals as well as writing for LDS audiences. The book is written to be understandable by any reader (although an LDS background is very helpful) in a straightforward manner that actually makes for a fairly quick read.

The book contains 17 chapters, most of them fairly short, that build on each other. At the end is a series of questions and answers that basically provides a summary of the book. It also has photos of the extant papyri, maps, charts, diagrams, and other helpful or interesting illustrations scattered throughout. At the end of most chapters is a list of “Further Reading” with notes about each item. Unfortunately, there are not many footnotes in the book; they only exist to provide sources for quotes. So you have to refer to the notes in the “Further Reading” section to deduce where some of the information came from. This did lead me to find one inconsistency – on page 97, it says “The Book of Abraham begins much like other autobiographies from Abraham’s time and place.” However, on page 103 in “Further Reading,” there is an entry that says, “This essay is a comparison of the Book of Abraham with the only other autobiographical inscription to survive from the approximate time and place of Abraham.”

After the introduction, the book begins with a historical overview which explains how Joseph Smith got the papyri and then what happened to them after his death, with the church finally receiving surviving fragments in 1967 (most of what Joseph had in his possession ended up burning in the Chicago Fire of 1871). “To the disappointment of many, although these remaining fragments contained the illustration that served as the basis for Facsimile 1, they were not the portion of the papyri that contained the text of the Book of Abraham” (page 9).
The next chapter is about the translation. Some have thought that Joseph may have used a seer stone (see my review of Joseph Smith’s Seer Stones), but Gee says that “Some thirdhand accounts claim he did, but those accounts do not come from anyone who actually observed the translation” and that “By the time that Joseph finished translating the Book of Mormon in 1829, he no longer needed to use the Urim and Thummim to receive revelation” (page 20.) What is known is that much more was translated than what ended up being published (the rest has been lost), and that it was done without using a dictionary or grammar as a conventional translation normally would. It does appear that W. W. Phelps attempted to compile an Egyptian grammar after the translation, but the extent of Joseph’s involvement in that is unknown. [Read more…] about Book Review: An Introduction to the Book of Abraham

The Enlightenment of Neo-Mormons

by

In Greek, the word neos means “new.” In English, the prefix “neo” generally refers to something that is new, revived, or newly refreshed. We have compounds such as neo-classic, neo-Darwinism, neo-Nazis, neo-Hellenism, neo-Platonism, neo-orthodox Mormons, and more.

While Neo-Mormons might refer to Mormons who take a new or modified approach to Mormon matters, for the purpose of this post Neo-Mormons refer to those who compare their exit from Mormonism to the character in the fictional movie, The Matrix.

For those who haven’t seen the movie, Keanu Reeves plays the character of Thomas Anderson, a computer programmer and infamous hacker known as “Neo” (the name by which he is known throughout the movie). Morpheus, another infamous hacker (who is almost as much myth as legend), contacts Neo to warn him that his life in danger.

After meeting face to face, Morpheus explains that the world in which Neo lives is not “real” but offers Neo the opportunity to transition to the real world. Neo can either swallow a red pill which will extract him from the “Matrix” (the computer-generated world in which he lives) or he can choose to swallow the blue pill which will cause Neo to wake up in his bed at home, forgetting the entire conversation and everything about the Matrix. If he takes the red pill, he could never go back to the way things were. If he takes the blue pill, he could be happily ignorant to reality. Neo takes the red pill, wakes up in the “real” world and discovers that the Matrix was a world of little more than digital smoke and mirrors.

Neo’s red pill vs. blue pill dilemma has frequently been commandeered by former Mormons in their attempt to explain their new perspective of reality once they left Mormonism. According to several ex-Mormons, they, like Neo, were confronted at some point with information that caused (or even forced) them to choose between the red pill and blue pill. In every case in which I’ve seen the analogy used, the former (or teetering) member took the red pill. They became “enlightened,” and discovered the “truth,” or “reality” of Mormonism.

This new enlightenment allowed them, like Neo, to see (sometimes for the first time) truth with eyes wide open. That truth, they claim, destroyed the untruths found in Mormonism and exposed it as a man-made institution sitting on a continuum somewhere between an evil enterprise and a well-meaning assembly of honorable but gullible dupes.

While I understand that there is no such thing as a perfect analogy, I think the Neo Mormon/Matrix analogy falls flat. First, the red pill vs blue pill analogy implies that ex-Mormons are not only open to the truth but can see the truth, while believing Mormons stick their heads in the sand (taking the blue pill) and don’t want to see the new information that comes with taking the red pill.

The fact is, however, that myriad of LDS scholars, lay members, and believing students of Mormonism, are equally as informed about the supposedly troubling Mormon information. Despite seeing this same information they still accept the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith and the continuation of modern prophets today. There’s no hiding of heads in the sand, no rejecting the red pill because they don’t want to see allegedly challenging issues. The eyes of informed Latter-day Saints are at least as wide open to all the same information as any critic.

Secondly, the new information doesn’t automatically destroy basic Mormon beliefs. Taking the red pill does not automatically prove that Mormonism is false. While some people may find the critics’ interpretations of the data to be convincing, such interpretations are not the automatic definitive conclusions to understanding the data. To insist that there is only one way to interpret the data is naïve and sophomoric. There are no slam dunks proving nor debunking Mormonism. There is only evidence, and evidence must be weighed.

Thirdly, everyone assumes they are “right.” We have reasons for our beliefs. Those reasons may not be transferrable; they may not, for example, convince others, even when they make sense to us. The fact is—and a growing number of studies bear this out—intellect alone does not impel humans to believe or disbelieve. In other words, despite the ridicule by some critics who claim that believers rely on “feelings” while they (the critics) rely on reason, the simple fact is that all people’s beliefs are influenced, at least to some degree, by “feelings.” No human is a purely rational creature.

Differences in religious opinions and beliefs are not anything like what we might imagine with a fictional Neo-Mormon who takes the red pill and a believing Mormon who takes the blue pill. Instead, the differences are much more akin to what we find among people who embrace divergent political views. If you are a staunch Democrat it doesn’t mean that you’ve taken the red pill—that your eyes are wide open—and that Republicans have swallowed the blue pill. If you are a staunch Republican, you are not seeing reality while your Democrat friends hide their heads in the sand. Some members of each party may like to think that’s the case, but it isn’t.

Lastly, we run into the problem of changing minds. Just as some Democrats become Republicans and some Republicans become Democrats, some members go through periods of disbelief, doubt, and possibly even separation from Mormonism. I have a couple of friends who have been married to the same spouse several times. They get divorced, then remarried, more than once—each time to the same person. Some members or former members seem to have a similar relationship with the Church. They are members (perhaps from birth), then leave the church over “troubling” issues, then return because of spiritual or intellectual resolution, then leave again over spiritual or intellectual quandaries, and so forth.

In which phase of their change can they claim to be the surest of their beliefs? Obviously, it would be the most current phase. They can look back and tell themselves that in their earlier phase they were duped, but this time they got it right. The problem is, however, that we all tell ourselves this same story (it’s a form of confirmation bias). Studies show that our memories of the past are influenced by our present selves—in other words, we can’t accurately remember how we felt about our past situation because we can’t escape our current situation.

As I’ve matured in life, wisdom, and Gospel understanding, I’ve had to modify paradigms many times—rejecting those things that I’ve found to be weak, and embracing those things which I’ve found to be strong. It would be foolish of me to think that I’ve reach a zenith—that I’ve reached a point where I’m right about everything I reject, and never wrong about everything I accept. I’m among those who has seen all the details supposedly hidden in the Matrix. I’ve seen the same data which allegedly is revealed to those Neo-Mormons who swallow the red pill. And yet, I believe.

For me, the same data that causes some members to falter simply illuminates the world I already knew. I absolutely had to modify my worldview by absorbing new facts, rejecting common myths, and by recontextualizing some of the things which didn’t seem to fit my previous world-view (which, by the way, is the same modification process we find in the evolution and revolution of scientific paradigms). From my current perspective, however, I find that most of the data fits comfortably within a framework that I embraced.

While I like to think that my eyes are opened wider with every new bit of data, I’ve found that new discoveries haven’t forced (or enticed) me into rejecting Mormonism as a mirage, a fabrication, or a Matrix of human creation. And just because someone else comes to a different conclusion than my own (based on the same data) doesn’t mean that they are more correct, that they’ve swallowed the red pill while I swallowed the blue pill, hid my head in the sand, and simply ignored conflicting information.

From a Matrix analogy, I don’t think that there are any real Neo-Mormons. There are no red pills and blue pills which ultimately expose or conceal the truth. As both science and religion tells us, we are all related and part of something greater than our individual selves. All humans are very similar—including the fact that we are faced with similar cognitive, physical, psychological, and emotional challenges and strengths— and we are also all unique in interesting and complex ways.

This, to me, is what makes God’s plan—as expressed in the LDS faith—so appealing. It’s impossible for you to fully know me, or me to fully know you. We can’t escape our own heads, or our physiological influences or impediments. We can never fully know when we are the ones who are doing the “acting” or when we are being “acted upon” (2 Ne. 2:14).

We are told not to judge others (outside of specific instances involving ecclesiastical or legislative authority) because we are not only weak ourselves and influenced by too many factors to be good judges, but because we cannot know all the factors involved in someone else’s choices. Only God knows. He knows why we do the things we do, say the things we say, and make the choices we make.

While some of those who have left Mormonism (or who consider leaving Mormonism) believe that they can see reality, the truth is that their eyesight is no better than that of believers. Their logic and reasoning is no better than that of believers. And they certainly are no more open to the “truth” because they decided to reject Mormonism, than those who accept Mormonism. Swallowing the red pill simply means that you consciously chose to reject Mormonism because of how you interpret the data. Swallowing the blue pill means that you consciously chose to accept Mormonism because of how you interpret the data.

If there is an analogy to be made with the movie The Matrix it is this: If we believe that a rejection of Mormonism automatically comes with seeing the ambiguities in Mormon history or the scriptures—that the data automatically compels the intellectually honest to reject the LDS faith and that the data cannot be honestly accepted as consistent with LDS faith claims—then we are believing in an illusion and we are still trapped in the Matrix.

—

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt. He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.