DelphiUser

I seem to keep running into these threads where, as a Mormon, people try to tell me about my religion. They tell me I'm not a Christian (they are wrong) they try to tell me I believe this or that or don't use the Bible, or that I have somehow been deceived and don't really know what my church teaches. Some believe I do know, but that I am an evil person.

These people some well intentioned, are wrong.

I seem to be answering the same questions over and over, so I decided to make an index so I, and other Mormons can just refer people to these questions, and their answers. To get a complete over view, just start reading here and scroll down to the bottom.

This Document was updated on 1/8/2009

Questions

Who are you? Why should I believe you know anything about Mormons?
Why are you called Mormons?
Are Mormons Christian?
Do Mormons Believe God is Eternal?
Do Mormons believe that Mary was a virgin?
The First Vision.
The Trinity (First Council at Nicea).
The Oneness of God.
The Arian Controversy
Hippolytus.
Is the Bible complete?
Canon (and how something becomes Canon).
The Council at Jamnia.
Do people actually try to teach bad things about Mormons?
Do Mormons Believe Jesus and Satan are brothers?
My Testimony.
You can't know that!
Can you prove that the church is true?
Does DNA from Indians prove anything about the Book of Mormon?
Do people actually try to teach bad things about Mormons?
Put our religion to "The Test".
Questions about Polygamy.
Conclusion.
Suggested resources on the web.
How do I link to your page?

Who Are You I was born as the first BIC (or Born In the Covenant) member of my immediate family. When we did research into a our genealogy, we found that we were related to a lot of people in church history, including Bruce R McConkie, and probably Governor Boggs (although my mom has forbidden us to confirm that until after she has passed.) I have held every position in the church you can hold and still be an Elder. My Father was a bishop for most of my teen years, so I got to watch that close up, as well as had access to all the manuals for a Bishop.

I am a high functioning autistic, and have an autistic son among my five children.
I read at approximately 1500 WPM with a measured 92% comprehension rate for things read on the first pass.
I have read a lot of Church material.
I am a computer nerd, if it's out there, generally, I can find it.
My parents had an extensive library of religious books when I was growing up and I had read all of Skousen's works as well as Nibly by the age of 14.

I have read the Bible so many times I lost count, the BOM 9 times, the PGP 4 times and the D&C 4 times

On top of all that, I am going to try to document all my research here, it is my hope that this page will be referenced by more than just myself for use in combating misinformation about my church.

Thank you for your interest.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Why are you called Mormons? "Mormon" is a nickname given to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints because we use a volume of Scripture called the Book of Mormon.

The church is also some times referred to as the LDS church. (We prefer LDS)

The Church has a web site that contains On-Line versions of the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine & Covenants The Pearl of Great Price and lots of other reference materials, teaching manuals and church magazines.

The scriptures and the church magazines going back for decades, sometimes farther are all available for online search. For people who just want to learn a little about the church, there is a site http://www.mormon.org, which has information for those who "just have a question", etc.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Are Mormons Christian The Short answer is Yes.
There are many who will say we are not, the church has addressed this in a talk given by Stephen E Robinson and published in the new Era May of 1998 you can read this talk on-line here.

We believe we are Christian:

A Christian is a person who adheres to Christianity, a monotheistic[1] religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as presented in the New Testament.[2] Christians believe Jesus to be the Son of God and the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament.

The Mormon church (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints) believes in Jesus Christ, Jesus, Son of Mary, Born of the virgin birth in Bethlehem, worked miracles, suffered for the sins of all men in the garden of Gethsemane, and died voluntarily upon the cross at Calvary, that Jesus. We believe we need his grace to be acceptable to God "For all have sinned" (Romans 3:23)

The Mormon Church has an official set of beliefs that can be found here.

Please pay special attention to the first article of Faith.

There are some who would still deny us the title of "Christian".

Oh well, you can't please everyone, so we prefer to focus on pleasing Jesus Christ (The only one who's opinion matters).

Back to the Table Of Contents

Do Mormons Believe God is Eternal?
The short answer is Yes, God is Eternal.

The Question typically runs something like this, Mormons believe they can become Gods, and that God was once a man, so if God is Eternal, how can he have been a man at some time?

The answer to this question, while simple requires an understanding of science beyond that required for "normal" religion discussions. Because of this required knowledge, I am going to give some resources to bring you the reader up to speed (besides they are fun). These resources are not religious in and of themselves, they are scientifically based, and usually vary simply (or even graphically) put.

When we discuss how God Became God, we have to realize we are talking about essentially dimensions we know nothing about, except what we have been told and can deduce. We are two dimensional beings discussing a third dimension. There are those who think that's blasphemy. I'm going to link to a video on you tube which speaks to this (in a totally irreverent way) Dr. Quantum Visits Flatland

Now, lets apply this to time (the fourth dimension). If you free a three dimensional being from Time, and it's already an immortal being, that suddenly adds many properties that we would call "God like".

What are God's Attributes? God is Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Eternal?

Omniscient:

If you have five (5) minutes to take a test, you can go to the Library yesterday, learn the answers and return to today exactly as you were leaving, then didn't leave for you were "always there" and answer the questions, you have become now become... Omniscient to someone who is trapped in time.

Omnipresent:

You can go anywhere, any when, or even every where and every when. and that makes you... Omnipresent (again to someone trapped in time as we are).

Omnipotent:

If you have forever to do something, can go back and forth in time to "get the job done", and can learn whatever you need to know to do it, impossible just takes a little work to do, it's no longer impossible. If you can do that, then you have become... Omnipotent,

Eternal:

What does it mean to be eternal?
If it means X has always existed, and will always exist. IF X is a mortal who is resurrected (which means X becomes immortal. and X is freed from time, X is Eternal. X can not be said not to exist at a place or time for X could go there and then.)
If you define Eternal as a relationship, or perspective To X Then anything created after X Will see X as Eternal.

X has become Eternal by all meaningful definition.

This is all just temporal mechanics (or how time works). For an idea what this kind of thought experiment can teach you, watch Ground hog Day, or better yet, go rent the movie.

You can also read some thought experiments at Temporal Mechanics - as Explained by TV and Film.

I'm going to state something not stated in any of these "Theories", God being the creator of "Time" can mess with it without creating paradoxes (unless he wants to), all these sites talk about time from the perspective of someone inside time (and often in a Science Fiction story as well), and thus they are concerned about messing up their own "time line" , God does not have that "Problem" for he exists outside of time, and can basically edit time. Once you are an Immortal who exists outside of time, what happens "in time" cannot change you thus you have become unchanging, and unchangeable.

(If you disagree with my definitions here, that is your right, however, since we are discussing my beliefs... I get to define the terms I am going to use, if you disagree, feel free to FM me, it might be a fun discussion) OK, now that we have a the Prerequisites, for this discussion.

Mormons believe in the Diefication of Man, just as the early saints Did. (See my section on Hippolytus for an example of what early Christians believed.)

Now If man can become a god, then (and we are entering theory here) God may have once been a man (If so, it's not in Mormon Church Cannon, but this is a logical conclusion). If God was a man who became deified, you might wonder if God had a God, so on Ad infinitum. In theory, he might, or he might be the first God. How exactly this works is not relevant to our salvation, so God has not told us (Mortals) that answer (assuming we could even understand the answer).

Did God always exist to Mormons? Yes, because God is Eternal by the Definition above, to Momrons.

There are some who say we diminish God by trying to understand him. For them, I have two quotes:

A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.

-- C. S. Lewis

Hippolytus in his last book in his series "A refutation of all heresies:

"these God has promised to bestow upon you, because you have been deified, and begotten unto immortality. This constitutes the import of the proverb, "Know yourself; "i.e., discover God within yourself, for He has formed you after His own image.

For the Deity, (by condescension,) does not diminish anything of the divinity of His divine perfection; having made you even God unto His glory!

Let me sum up:

Mormons believe that God the Father may have had a god and have been through exactly the same experience we are going through and that God (our father) is immortal, and Eternal for he is not subject to time, rather time is subject to him.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Do Mormons believe that Mary was a virgin? The short answer is Yes. Momrons also believe that God the Father is the literal father of Jesus Christ.
Some people think these two statements are contradictory, they are not.
We mortals now have the technology to create a virgin birth should we want to.

A virgin (person who has never had sex) female could be artificially inseminated with semen from a man. if done right, she would now be pregnant, and still a virgin. The child born from this female would be the natural child of the male who's semen was inseminated.

There would be super natural action needed to create the pregnancy or birth. Therefore the birth would be a normal and natural birth just like yours and mine and the father would be the father of that child in every way, but the mother would still be a virgin because she had never had sex.

We mere mortals now know enough to do this. God knowing all, undoubtedly knows many ways to create a virgin birth. He did not tell us how he did it, so we don't know, and it's not really important how, just that he did.

Some anti-Mormons, get hung-up on the idea that since Mormons believe God has a body, we must believe he is a sex fiend and he basically raped Mary. This is not our belief, but rather the projection from people with dirty minds, and they infect the rest with the idea, which if you dislike Momrons seems like a pretty good way to get others to dislike them too.

There is just one problem, it's not true. Mormons believe Mary was a virgin. IT's in our scriptures, see: (Luke 1:26-35, 1st Nephi 11:12-20 Alma 7:10)

Some want to quote from Bruce R McConkie about Jesus' literal and natural relationship with God the Father. Here is an article written by Bruce R McConkie called: Come, Know the Lord Jesus

Adam and Eve made all things known to their seed so they might believe in Christ, repent of their sins, be baptized, receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, and work the works of righteousness.

Christ and his laws were revealed to all the holy prophets. As Peter said, “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” (Acts 10:43.)

He was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of Israel, the Holy One, the Lord Omnipotent. He was the promised Messiah, the Savior and Redeemer, the Son of David; and at the appointed time he was born of a virgin in Bethlehem of Judea, according to the promises.

From Mary, his mother, a mortal woman, he inherited the power of mortality, so that he was subject to all the temptations and ills of the flesh, including death itself. From God, his Father, an Immortal Man, he inherited the power of immortality, so that he had power to live forever, or having voluntarily laid down his life, to take it up again in immortal glory.

He came into the world to ransom men from the temporal and spiritual death brought upon them by the fall of Adam. He came to satisfy the demands of divine justice and to bring mercy to the penitent. He came as a Mediator, as an Intercessor, to plead the cause of all those who believe in him.

He came to bring immortality to all men as a free gift. He came to make eternal life available on conditions of obedience to the laws and ordinances of his gospel. He came to bring hope, to bring joy, to bring peace, to bring salvation; and his is the only name given under heaven whereby salvation comes.

Please note the bold sections, and specifically the italicized section, born of a virgin. Why do Mormons talk about God the Father's involvement, because it's important to understand that God works within his own laws. God set up this world and this universe, he does not "cheat" by breaking laws, Jesus was who he was, not just because he was the savior, but because he was genetically God as well, Jesus was the only man who could have performed the atonement because he was both fully man (inherited from his mother) and fully God (inherited from his father).

Momrons always have, and always will believe in the virgin birth, it's in our canonized scriptures, it's taught by our leaders, it's not optional for us.

Back to the Table Of Contents

The First VisionThe First Vision is called that because it was the first vision seen by the prophet Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith was called by God to restore the church to the earth because all other churches had fallen away from the Gospel.

The trinity which is listed by some as the top reason the LDS are not considered Christian by some. The Trinity is not biblical, the word Trinity does not even appear in the KJV of the Bible (some later versions have inserted it, but some also have Jesus using the word "Dude"). I and The LDS church use the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible.

There are several Important things that can be learned from the first vision:

God answers prayers
The Trinity is a false doctrine. (Joseph saw two separate personages.)
God still talks to man and gives mankind his word (revelation is continuing).
The true church did not exist on the earth at that time.

This vision set the stage for God to reveal his gospel once again to the earth.

Prophets are not "New", Visions are not "New" as a way for God to teach a prophet, the Bible contains numerous instances, so this is all according to the plan set forth in the Bible. (Since God does not change, his methods shouldn't either)

There are some who have a "Problem" with the first vision in that Joseph told his story over and over, for years, sometimes with differing details, sometimes with differing phraseology.

The Nagging Nabobs of Nativity that plague anyone doing anything great would have you believe that any difference no matter how small invalidates the whole thing.

Unfortunately for them, this is just not the case. As a story teller myself, I can tell you that I have told the same two stories in dramatically different Ways, there were usually three variable in this.

The people I was telling the story to, for instance a story told to Children might be simpler, and yet more colorful than the same story told to a group of adults for whom I might emphasize more complex or intellectual aspects of the story.
The feed back of the audience. If I am telling a story to a "Tough Room" I might just skip to the end and try something else, like being quiet for a bit...
Last, I might have changed. and therefore my perspective has changed. In fact many of the experiences of my life have become more meaningful over time.

None of these things means that the story is untrue, in fact police who hear exactly the same story told to different detectives from the same suspect, or worse yet multiple suspects assume the story to be false because it has obviously been memorized.

I am not going to go into details on what is available, but here is a link to a site that does.

Joseph Smith’s Testimony of the First Vision

Back to the Table Of Contents

The Trinity (First Council at Nicea) The Trinity is an important part of this discussion because there are many who seek to invalidate our "Christianity" because we are not "Trinitarian", and because it was this creed that the First Vision declared God found abominable. (Note that Jesus Christ and the apostles were not Trinitarians because the doctrine of the Trinity was not created until after the apostles had all been killed, thus that argument would make Jesus Christ and all the apostles non Christians!)

The Trinity is the doctrine of the Nicene creed so called because it was agreed upon at the First council at Nicea in 325 AD

So about 300 years after Jesus, the Catholic Church meets to decide what form God has if any.

Knowing God's nature is important if you are to worship him? ( John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

As Mormon I note with interest that he did not say, "And this is life eternal, that they might know me the only true God". Because Jesus is talking about someone besides himself.

Mormons believe that one of the places that we can most easily see the apostasy happening is the first council at Nicea which was convened to reconcile the Arian controversy So Constantine could use this new "Christian" religion to unify his fractured Roman Empire The Trinity was the creation of a pagan emperor named Constantine, who called the first council at Nicea and with a combination of bribes, and threats got the church to agree on a creed that all of Rome could unite behind. This was his expressed purpose according to records he had kept of the event.

Finally Constantine, having conquered Licinius and become sole emperor, concerned himself with the re-establishment of religious peace as well as of civil order. He addressed letters to St. Alexander and to Arius depreciating these heated controversies regarding questions of no practical importance, and advising the adversaries to agree without delay.

And

The Council was opened by Constantine with the greatest solemnity. The emperor waited until all the bishops had taken their seats before making his entry. He was clad in gold and covered with precious stones in the fashion of an Oriental sovereign. A chair of gold had been made ready for him, and when he had taken his place the bishops seated themselves. After he had been addressed in a hurried allocution, the emperor made an address in Latin, expressing his will that religious peace should be re-established.

And

The emperor began by making the bishops understand that they had a greater and better business in hand than personal quarrels and interminable recriminations.

Lastly

St. Athanasius assures us that the activities of the Council were nowise hampered by Constantine's presence.

Now let's put all this in the context of the day. Constantine had just finally put down the other military leaders of a fractured empire. In spite of Christianity being illegal for two hundred years, it had grown in popularity (or maybe even because it was illegal) Constantine signed the Edict of Milan nine years before convening the council, but such edicts were often short lived in Rome and often ended in those pardoned being sommoned to their deaths. Constantine sends letters to 250 of the Bishops in the east (where Trinitarianisem was strongest) and almost none of the western bishops (where Arianism was it's strongest) were invited. These bishops are invited to a conference, moreover, he puts "Public transportation" at their disposal to get to the conference with. (Public transportation, there was no bus, means military horses and Chariots just like you would travel if arrested)

Now on top of all this he tells them that one of the topics of the conference will be making the Catholic church the sate church of Rome.

Carrot and Stick are now clearly (I hope) visible to all who read this.

The bishops meet and Constantine tells them to come to a consensus on the nature of God (the Arian Controversy) and when they do, he makes them the state church. However, there are a few conditions, he wants a definition of God that everyone can accept, and thus we have the Greek religions influence in to the Nicene Creed.

Mormons believe that this is the single biggest step into apostasy that can be documented as happening at an exact point in time.

Here is a page by a Jewish Scholar studying exactly what I am talking about here. When Jesus Became God: The Epic Fight Over Christ's Divinity In The Last Days Of Rome

Back to the Table Of Contents

The Oneness of God One of the contentions of those who oppose the LDS church is that we are Polytheistic.

Mormons belive in One God, the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob. This one God has three persons inside this Godhead (A term from the Bible) Namely, God the Father (the father of all spirits), Jesus Christ, (God the Father's only Begotten son in the flesh), and the Holy Ghost.

These three sperate and distinct personages as one in heart might mind and strength. To be commanded of one is to be commanded of all.

Now this flies in the face of Trinitarianism which claims that God and Christ and the Holy Ghost share the same substance, but have different manifestations. The Trinitarian view differs from Modalism, and Arianism.

Let's talk about What it means to be "one" in the Bible.

Genesis 2:24

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Romans 15:6

6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Galations 3:28

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Romans 12:5

5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

first Corinthians 12:11-14

11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
14 For the body is not one member, but many.

I could go on and on with scriptures that illustrate the meaning of "One" as used in the bible, but Jesus himself draws an analogy, so I will now quote him.
John 17: 11, 21-22

11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
• • •
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

"That they may be one, even as we are one" Wow! Unless you believe the 12 Apostles joined together in some pre-technological transformer, becoming a giant super apostle, then the Oneness that Jesus was drawing analogy to was not in substance. the oneness that a husband and wife share does not render them the same person, neither does the oneness shared by believers in Jesus Christ cause them to join into one person.

So to believe that when Jesus says I and my Father are one. is the only time in the Bible that He means one substance, not a oneness of heart, might, mind and strength as it means in the rest of the Bible.

Mormons do more then just believe In the Bible, Mormons do more than believe In Jesus Christ. Mormons belive what the Bible says. Mormons believe what Jesus Christ says. The Bible always speaks of God the Father and Jesus Christ as separate personages. Jesus Christ always speaks of God the Father in the third person. They (God the Father, Jesus, the Bible) do not lie. Our God is one God, but it is not a oneness of substance, it is more miraculous and powerful than that.

Back to the Table Of Contents

The Arian ControversyArian controversy (a belief that God and Christ were separate and that Christ was created before time started) and the now prevailing view that God and Christ were "of the same substance". This disagreement with in the church became known as the Arian Controversy

This schism in the church grew over time and eventually Arius became the leader of the movement, but he did not start this belief. Hippolytus who lived earlier and represented the voice of the church was obviously an Arian in his beliefs, if you Read some of his works. Arians believe what they did because of the scriptures they read and the testimonies they contain.

IMHO Hippolytus would have been an Arian had he lived in Arius' day.

Back to the Table Of Contents

HippolytusHippolytus Eusebius called him the most important theologian of the pre-Constantinian era. He was reportedly the great grandson of John the beloved. He wrote a set of ten books called "refutation of all heresies"

One of the Books, Against one Noetus
Specifically refutes the idea that God and Christ are one being and calls it heresy.

This person was greatly puffed up and inflated with pride, being inspired by the conceit of a strange spirit. He alleged that Christ was the Father Himself, and that the Father Himself was born, and suffered, and died. You see what pride of heart and what a strange inflated spirit had insinuated themselves into him. Froth his other actions, then, the proof is already given us that he spoke not with a pure spirit; for he who blasphemes against the Holy Ghost is cast out from the holy inheritance.

Here is a piece from Book X that I like to quote because as a summation, it contains most of the plan of salvation as taught by the LDS church, including the diefication of man.

"Such is the true doctrine in regard of the divine nature, O you men, Greeks and Barbarians, Chaldeans and Assyrians, Egyptians and Libyans, Indians and Ethiopians, Celts, and you Latins, who lead armies, and all you that inhabit Europe, and Asia, and Libya. And to you I am become an adviser, inasmuch as I am a disciple of the benevolent Logos, and hence humane, in order that you may hasten and by us may be taught who the true God is, and what is His well-ordered creation. Do not devote your attention to the fallacies of artificial discourses, nor the vain promises of plagiarizing heretics, but to the venerable simplicity of unassuming truth. And by means of this knowledge you shall escape the approaching threat of the fire of judgment, and the rayless scenery of gloomy Tartarus, where never shines a beam from the irradiating voice of the Word!

You shall escape the boiling flood of hell's eternal lake of fire and the eye ever fixed in menacing glare of fallen angels chained in Tartarus as punishment for their sins; and you shall escape the worm that ceaselessly coils for food around the body whose scum has bred it. Now such (torments) as these shall you avoid by being instructed in a knowledge of the true God. And you shall possess an immortal body, even one placed beyond the possibility of corruption, just like the soul. And you shall receive the kingdom of heaven, you who, while you sojourned in this life, knew the Celestial King. And you shall be a companion of the Deity, and a co-heir with Christ, no longer enslaved by lusts or passions, and never again wasted by disease. For you have become God: for whatever sufferings you underwent while being a man, these He gave to you, because you were of mortal mould, but whatever it is consistent with God to impart, these God has promised to bestow upon you, because you have been deified, and begotten unto immortality. This constitutes the import of the proverb, "Know yourself" i.e., discover God within yourself, for He has formed you after His own image. For with the knowledge of self is conjoined the being an object of God's knowledge, for you are called by the Deity Himself. Be not therefore inflamed, O you men, with enmity one towards another, nor hesitate to retrace with all speed your steps. For Christ is the God above all, and He has arranged to wash away sin from human beings, rendering regenerate the old man. And God called man His likeness from the beginning, and has evinced in a figure His love towards you. And provided you obey His solemn injunctions, and becomest a faithful follower of Him who is good, you shall resemble Him, inasmuch as you shall have honour conferred upon you by Him. For the Deity, (by condescension,) does not diminish anything of the divinity of His divine perfection; having made you even God unto His glory!"

(Emphasis added by me)

So between the time that Hippolytus died in 236 and the Council at Nicea in 325 AD the view of the church swung from three entities acting as one God to one God made up of three manifestations. This is really not a HUGE change when you think about it, but it has many important ramifications.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Is the Bible Complete Is the Bible complete?

There are some who would love to tell you that Mormons, since they do not accept the Bible as the only source of the word of God are not Christians. This begs the following questions:

Is The Bible missing any books?
Does the Bible say it is all you need?
Which Bible, there are so many translations out there.

These are important questions, and I will tackle them each in turn.

Is The Bible missing any books?

IMHO The simple answer is yes.

A Google search for "Missing Books of the Bible" as of the time of this writing resulting in almost a million and a half hits.

The Book of Enoch was being used even into the modern day by Ethiopic priests, and was widely quoted by both Jesus Christ and all the apostles in all the Gospels.

IMHO It should have been in the Old Testament.

The Catholic encyclopedia online has the following in a section titled "The Cannon of the Old Testament"

The most striking difference between the Catholic and Protestant Bibles is the presence in the former of a number of writings which are wanting in the latter and also in the Hebrew Bible, which became the Old Testament of Protestantism. These number seven books: Tobias (Tobit), Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I and II Machabees, and three documents added to protocanonical books, viz., the supplement to Esther, from x, 4, to the end, the Canticle of the Three Youths (Song of the Three Children) in Daniel, iii, and the stories of Susanna and the Elders and Bel and the Dragon, forming the closing chapters of the Catholic version of that book. Of these works, Tobias and Judith were written originally in Aramaic, perhaps in Hebrew; Baruch and I Machabees in Hebrew, while Wisdom and II Machabees were certainly composed in Greek. The probabilities favor Hebrew as the original language of the addition to Esther, and Greek for the enlargements of Daniel.

There are by my count 15 books mentioned in the bible which are not "In there"
They are:

Book of the Covenant: (Exodus 24:7)
Book of the Wars of the Lord: (Numbers 21:14)
Book of Jasher: (Joshua 10:13)
Book of the Acts of Solomon: (1st Kings 11:41)
Book of Nathan, AND Book of Gad:(1st Chronicles 29:29)
Prophecy of Ahijah AND Visions of Iddo:(2nd Chronicles 9:29)
Book of Shemaiah: (2nd Chronicles 12:15)
Book of Jehu: (2nd Chronicles 20:34)
Acts of Uzziah, (Written by Isaiah):(2nd Chronicles 26:22)
Sayings of the Seers: (2nd Chronicles 33:19)
An Earlier Epistle of Paul, To The Corinthians: (1st Corinthians 5:9)
An Earlier Epistle of Paul, To The Ephesians:(Ephesians 3:3-5)
The Epistle of Paul, From Laodicea, To The Colossians: (Colossians 4:16)
A Former Epistle of Jude: (Jude 3)
Enoch's Ancient Prophecies of the Coming of Christ: (Jude 14)

If I have missed any, I will be happy to add them.

Does the Bible say it is all you need?

There are again some who say that the revelations of St John the beloved preclude any further additions to the scriptures Here are the scriptures they commonly cite:

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

(Emphasis added by me)

The books of the New Testament were not organized chronologically, and revelations was written(in the AD 60's) before the Gospel of St John (Written in the AD 90's) so obviously John did not mean no one could write revelations anymore, for he did so himself. Deuteronomy 4:2 contains a very similar scripture, which when you understand that these books were originally just that, "books" in and of themselves, it all makes sense:

Bible Dictionary

By the Bible we mean the collection of writings that contain the records of divine revelation. The word itself is of Greek origin, being derived from ta biblia, "the books". In course of time "biblia", a neuter plural, was regarded as a feminine singular, and in that way "the books" came to be spoken of as "the book". By the word Bible therefore we must understand not a single book, but a divine library.

So no, the Bible does not say it is all you need.

Which Bible?

There are many versions of the bible and this is a "Bad" thing in my opinion. The more you translate something the less accurate it is. If you have ever played a game called "Telephone" you know what I mean.

There are some who are Going back to Greek, or Aramayic, or some other "Ancient text". Here is the problem with both of these approaches in my opinion, English has gotten simpler and less specific over time.

That's right, English is getting stupid.

I spent a lot of time learning Chinese, it is a "High Context" language. High context languages are difficult to understand unless you have the correct context or perspective.

Many of the languages used in the bible (I have been told, since I do not speak them) are "High Context" languages, thus the further and further we get from the culture and everyday lives of those who wrote them the less accurate a new translation becomes and we wind up interpreting, more than translating. /opinion

Back to the Table Of Contents

CanonWhat does Canon mean? (See also Canonize)

Basically The Canon of any church is "officially recognized" by that Church. Canon Can and does vary by church which is why the Bible used by Catholics for example has more books than those used by protestant churches. Canonization of Scriptures, saints, processes, and ordinances has no more or less authority than the church canonizing the thing being Canonized, because the Canon is part of the church.

Some churches Canonize people as saints, some do not.

Some churches accept the Canon of another church as binding, some do not

Some churches have no canon of their own and accept canon performed only in one other church, some accept that canon of no church other than themselves.

All of these methods of Canon are valid according to the definition of the word canon. Biblical Canon

Back to the Table Of Contents

Council at Jamnia

The so-called Council of Jamnia (c. A.D. 90) has reasonably been taken as having terminated the disputes between rival rabbinic schools concerning the canonicity of Canticles. So while the intuitive sense and increasingly reverent consciousness of the faithful element of Israel could, and presumably did, give a general impulse and direction to authority, we must conclude that it was the word of official authority which actually fixed the limits of the Hebrew Canon.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Do people actually try to teach bad things about Mormons?

I have a friend, who was looking at my posts here and emailed me a story form his parents' mission, I am using it here with his permission.

While my parents were on their mission in Atlanta Georgia. They met a wonderful member who had a most unique story to tell.

She was a salaried staff member for some one that worked for, I think, the Council of Churches. She was also trained and certified to work with a "Mormon Studies" group that went into investigators and new members homes to reclaim them for Christianity. She did this for a number of years. Later when the Council person moved she was out of work. Shortly afterward her husband left her. She and her children were left with little to live on their own. She went to her friends that worked for the Council and the Mormon Studies group to see if anyone could help. No one would help her.

One day as she was speaking to her Mormon neighbor about her hardships she was offered to use what was needed from her neighbors year supply.

This went on for a while when her neighbor invited her to come to Relief Society. She thought "I know all about the Mormons so they can't entrap me with their teachings" it won't hurt to go.

After attending she found out that there were deaf members in the ward and that a sister missionary would translate during the meetings. She had been signing herself since childhood because her mother was deaf.

She quickly made friends. Later she volunteered to sign in primary for a deaf child. After the signing sister missionary went home she was asked to sign in all the meetings. At this point her neighbor pointed out that she couldn't be affiliated with a group that defamed Mormons and sign for Mormons. It would be like serving two masters.

Since her certification in the "Mormon Studies" group had expired she stopped associating with them.

She continued to help at the LDS church. Her neighbor helped her for more than six months with food from her year supply.

Then she met a man and soon remarried. Later they moved to Atlanta.

She soon found that she and her children missed going to the LDS church. She began attending in her new ward. Her new husband said why don't you join it makes no difference in our relationship and you seem to like it. She called the missionaries and said she wanted to be join and what did she have to do? The sister missionaries gave her the discussions. She said that though she had read the Book of Mormon a number of times, before she was always looking to find fault in what had been written. This time she read it and tried to accept it for what it was. She said the message of the stories swept over her by the time she finished reading it she knew it was true. She realized that in the "Mormon Studies" group she / they had taught "true things in a lying way".

She was later baptized after receiving special permission because of her past affiliation with a group that taught against the Church.

Emphasis added by me.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Put our religion to "The Test"

"The Test" is simple, you can't believe what I say, for I may be wrong, you can't believe what Mormon detractors say for again they might be wrong, or lying. So who can we trust? We can trust the Bible, we can trust God, for God is "a God of truth and canst not lie."

The test is contained in First John 4:1-3

1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

We are supposed to look for Gods messages by trying the spirits, and we will know which is of God because it will testify of Jesus. I have tried the Spirits to know if they would testify of Jesus and the Book of Mormon, and I have received an answer, yes the Book of Mormon is of God and Jesus is the Christ, my Savior, my Lord, my God. I wish that everyone could have this experience, thus, I offer to all a Free Book of Mormon and if you don't already have one, a Free Bible Too. I invite you to cut through all the yea and nay arguments with a simple prayer, I invite you to come unto Jesus Christ my master. The formula is simple, Get a Book of Mormon, Get a Bible. Read both, pray about both, ask God to testify of Jesus and ask God to reveal errors for what they are, and truth for what it is and listen for God's response. The response should contain a testimony of Jesus, or it may not be from God.

There may be those who will encourage you not to pray, they will use various methods to do this, I used to list the many scriptures from the Bible that command us to pray, but I am now only going to quote from the Book of Mormon: Second Nephi 32:8

8 And now, my beloved brethren, I perceive that ye ponder still in your hearts; and it grieveth me that I must speak concerning this thing. For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray ye would know that ye must pray; for the evil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray.

The Bible teaches man to Pray, the Book of Mormon teaches men to pray, anyone who teaches something else is not of God.

Friends, brethren, beware of those who teach that God will not answer a sincere prayer from the heart. Seek God. Seek to do good continually, Do good to those who persecute you and despitefully use you. In the end you will in no wise lose your reward for seeking to follow the scriptures.

Amen.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Do Mormons Believe Jesus and Satan are brothers?
That depends on what you mean by brothers, suffice it to say that is not a "Mormon" teaching you will hear stated in sunday school, but we believe the Bible, so consider the following scriptures:

Hebrews 12: 9

9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

God is the Father of Spirits.

2 Peter 2:4

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

Satan was once an angel, and was cast out of heaven.

Hebrews 1:7

7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

Angels have spirits and can call God Father.

1 John 1:34

34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

So Satan was once an angel, Angels have a spirit, and God is the father of Spirits, also Jesus is "The Son of God" therefore, according to the Bible, they are brothers. We believe the Bible, so.... we believe that Jesus and Satan can be called brothers just like everyone who believes the Bible.

What is misleading is that this is presented as a shocking belief when it is just Biblical.

One of the Twists of phraseology is to call Satan "God's Brother" which is a phrase from the occult, and thus phrasing this question this way makes a belief which all who believe the Bible to be the word of God, cannot deny to sound like we are part of the Occult, which is the point of the question.

Questions like this when analyzed sound like "So, when did you stop beating your wife..."

Fair Mormon addresses this same topic here.

Back to the Table Of Contents

My Testimony I know that my redeemer lives. I know that though I will grow old(er) and die, I will in my Flesh stand before him to be judged. I testify that Jesus Christ is my redeemer, My Judge, My God. I know that only through his grace can I be saved. I know this with every fiber of my being. I have put the Promises contained in the Book of Mormon at Moroni 10:4, and in First John 4:1-3 and Prayed to God about the Book of Mormon and was told that it was true and that Jesus was my savior and walked in the flesh on the earth. I am far from perfect. Any errors in my page here, or in my posts or anywhere else, are my mistakes, attribute not to God my faults for mine are many and he is perfect. Blame me if you must blame anyone for the imperfections of my works, but know this, I tried to do a Good work, My failings are my own, and not my masters.

Last of all, I testify to you that Jesus lives! The bonds of death and hell cannot prevail against him nor against any who he calls his in the last day, my hope is to be among them and to have him wash me clean that I may enter in and dwell with him forever.

In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Back to the Table Of Contents

You can't know that There are many who tell me "You can't know", or "You don't know", or "No one can know"...

They are all wrong.

While in Taiwan, I ran into a story from the analects of Confucius, and since I was reading it in chinese, I will have to translate it into english from memory. I apologize in advance for any mistakes that I might make while doing so.

There was an old man (understood to be Mong Dz one of confucius' teachers) who was sitting by a pond, this pond was as clear as crystal, that as he looked into it, he could see a fish near the bottom swimming to and fro.

As he observed the fish, he Thought to himself, fish were made to swim, therefore, this is a happy fish.

His student approached (Understood to be Confucius) and asked him what he was doing. The old man replied that he was watching this happy fish. The student looked at him, in the pond then at him again and said "You don't know that fish is happy, you are not a fish." The old man waited a moment for his student to consider his own words, and said "You don't know that I don't know, you are not me."

The student thought for a moment, then bowed his agreement. The student then sat at his teachers feet while the old man taught his student the nature of obtaining happiness by fulfilling the measure of your creation. Then the student and his teacher spent the rest of the afternoon siting by the pond watching the fish and contemplating the nature of obtaining happiness by fulfilling the measure of your creation.

This may seem an odd story to some, but to me it was a wonderful way to introduce some of the principles of the gospel with a chinese story, not only that, it shows the foolishness of trying to tell someone else what they can and can't know.

I am telling you that I know, I have also told you how I know and that you can know too.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Can you prove that the LDS church is true? That depends on what you mean by Prove. If you mean logically prove? Then No for the things of God are not proved by men, but by God. If you mean can you too know? then Yes, God will testify of his gospel, thus you can know, but it will be spiritually discerned.

Are there" Proofs? (A proof being an indicator of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, which may or may not be under dispute) "Proofs" are not going to convince anyone that the Book of Mormon is true, that is not their purpose, the purpose of Proofs is to disprove those who say "There is no proof..." or "X proves that the Book of Mormon is False" or "What do you say to Y". These "challenges" are meant to shake faith, and are often not even based on knowledge, but rumor. These proofs are simple, I will attempt to refrain from complex proofs even when complex attacks are leveled.

Q. The Book of Mormon says X and that's not in agreement with the Bible, so the book of Mormon is not true.
A. The Bible has many places where it does not agree with itself, Judas's death, Paul's vision, Faith or works only? All these things have conflicting scriptures in the Bible, if a book disagrees with itself, how can anything be in complete agreement with that book?

Q. I prayed about the Book of Mormon and didn't receive an answer so the Book of Mormon is not true.
A. I have never found anyone who followed the instructions in the Book of Mormon, who did not receive an answer. I have found many who didn't read the book, or didn't follow the instructions who also didn't receive an answer. I have also seen people who read and prayed hoping not to receive an answer who received exactly what they were hoping for, nothing. For an example, Read this story.

Sometimes, "Challenges" come as statements.
S. DNA disproves the Book of Mormon.
A. This statement proves a lack of understanding of DNA, please read Does DNA from Indians prove anything about the Book of Mormon?

S. Joseph smith was a (Insert any of several disparaging statements here).
A. Did you know him personally? Is this under debate by anyone? Do you always judge people from hearsay? (Do I want you talking about me to others?)

S. You should read this (web site, paper, document, set of arguments, ...) it will prove (the Book of Mormon, your church, Joseph Smith, ...) is false.
A. God told me the Book of Mormon was true, who was this written by? ... Never heard of them, sorry, I'll stick with a testimony from God over whatever they have to say.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Does DNA from Indians prove anything about the Book of Mormon? Lets look at some claims from DNA "Experts" then we'll talk about why they got what they Got when they did their research: From Take a Stand ministries

The research shows that 96.5% of them show an Asian origin

From When DNA Evidence is Ignored: Systematic Bias Against Non-Asian Origins of Ancient Americans When DNA evidence is ignored

It is wrong to say that there has been no DNA evidence pointing to non-Asian (e.g., European or Middle East) origins of ancient Native Americans. But some of the possible evidence has routinely been discarded and ignored.

There are also lots of people claiming a the Halpotypes from central Siberia prove the indians came from there, why so many "Sources" for indian DNA?

The answer is simple, in a genetically promiscuous group (People who will reproduce with people outside their group) you can find anything you are looking for if you look long enough. A genetically conservative group (People that reproduces exclusively with people of their group) the Jews are a really great example of this, they inter marry so rarely with outsiders that they actually have some genetic diseases that are unique to "their group" (Tay-Sachs disease). When speaking of A genetically Promiscuous group, Americans come to mind, we tend to be open minded genetically speaking, we marry anybody, and everybody into our "melting pot", and historically this is what the American Indians did too.

How does this genetic promiscuity affect DNA studies?

DNA geological studies require three things

A Pure genetic sample starting from a common ancestor group.
A genetically conservative group when living apart.
A genetically conservative group also from the same ancestor group for comparison.

Most genetic researches concerning the Book of Mormon assume the Book of Mormon says the ancestors of the American Indians meet these criteria, lets actually examine what the Book of Mormon says instead of "assuming".

Supposition # 1, A Pure genetic sample starting from a common ancestor group:

Lehi is a descendent of Joseph (Lets ignore to the end the fact that Joseph and Judah were brothers who's mothers while sisters may well have been from different wives (polygamy in the Bible being so common as to be unremarkable and the desire to have the first born married "first" would only matter for inheritance if the daughters were from different mothers)
Zoram a slave of indeterminate genetic ancestry joined the group as it fled Jerusalem.
Ishmael, joins the party by invitation, and we are not told his lineage (probably Jewish, but we can't be sure).
Zoram and Ishmael's genetic code will be passed on as they now have wives and are procreating.

Supposition #2 A genetically conservative group When living apart:

And they discovered a people, who were called the people of Zarahemla
Mulekites who came over to the americas separately married in with the Lamanites
There were Descendants of Ishmael
Mormon makes a point of saying he is "a pure descendant of Lehi" as if this was a rare thing.

Supposition #3 A genetically conservative group also from the same ancestor group for comparison:

The Jews are a well known genetically conservative group.
Central Siberia being remote is somewhat genetically conservative, but not as genetically conservative as Jewish DNA.
Asia is also more genetically conservative, but again not as conservative as Jewish DNA.

So, out of three things that are needed to get a match we have one. What should we find when doing this comparison?

We should get different answers with differing samples, and Gee, that's what we get.

Result? You cannot prove the Book of Mormon True or False with DNA. why? The American Indians were not a genetically conservative group, they would marry in vi kings and spanish and europeans, if they had been genetically conservative, and we could see that their DNA came from say Africa, that would be a blow to the Book of Mormon's credibility, but this is exactly what you would expect from a group that started as a genetically impure sample and diluted itself as it went.

On the other hand, if you could find a group of indians who had halpotypes that did descend from the Middle east, that would be a significant support for the Book of Mormon.

Keith Crandall, a population geneticist who specializes in these kinds of research was asked to confirm the work done by many who were "outside their specialty", after doing the research, he joined the LDS church, and now teaches Genetics at BYU.

These videos are from fairLDS.org, and is a fair representation of what Mormons think about DNA and the Book of Mormon.
part 1 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
part 2 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA
Part 3 The Book of Mormon and New World DNA

To sum up, DNA does not and cannot disprove the Book of Mormon, because the necessary circumstances are not there to support a negative conclusion, however, there is evidence to support the Book of Mormon if you want to look for it.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Questions about polygamy Questions about polygamy typically fall into the following categories:

Isn't polygamy forbidden by the Bible?
Polygamy is icky.
Polygamy is (or was) illegal.
Isn't Polygamy adultery?
Joseph Smith and Polygamy.
Doesn't the Book of Mormon forbid polygamy?
Polygamy is immoral.
Polygamy Leads to other sins.
Only a Mormon would promote polygamy.

Let's take them one at a time:

Isn't polygamy forbidden by the Bible?

Some assume that Adam was given one wife, therefore we all should only have one wife.

While this seems simple, it's just not valid, consider Adam's children with this logic: All of Adam's children married siblings, so this is how it was meant to be...

One makes sense, one does not according to our culture, the Adam only had one wife while true is a projection of our cultures values onto him If we say that is the only valid form of marriage, the Sibling marriage would be an equally valid projection from a culture that practices sibling marriage, and a projection from a polygamous culture would say that God married Adam to all the available women.

Projecting your values is not a valid form of determining what the scriptures say, or what God means by them.

Throughout the Old testament there are people living in polygamous marriages, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses. We only find out about their polygamy when it impacts "the story", never to reprimand them, thus it's valid to assume since these "men of God" were never reprimanded by God or it would be in the record, thus we can conclude that polygamy was not an issue for God, and God does not change...

Some claim that Jesus forbid polygamy, here let me give the Scriptures they use:
27 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
I included the whole paragraph because since the Bible was originally written in paragraph form sometimes context is lost by just quoting a single scripture. Jesus comes out against Lusting and lasciviousness, he talks of removal of temptations, he then talks about Divorce, and how a divorced woman who remarries commits adultery.

This is a condemnation of the Serial polygamy (Multiple divorce and remarriage) that is commonly practiced today, but not a condemnation of the biblical polygamy where the marriage bonds stay intact, children keep their fathers, and the family unit instead of being destroyed is just expanded.

I have challenged theologians online many times and none can show me a scripture that forbids a man to have two, or more wives.

Polygamy is Icky.

This Objection to polygamy is basically one of Culture, eating some food is a delicacy in one culture, is "Icky" in another (Snails for example). Such "programmed" responses are sometimes impossible to overcome. There are instances recorded in history where people who refused to be rude and excuse themselves to go to the bathroom have actually ruptured their bladder and died from it. The idea that polygamy might actually be acceptable to God engenders similar unreasoning and unreasonable reaction from some people, if you are one of those people, don't read any further, it will just raise your blood pressure.

Polygamy Is or was Illegal

Polygamy was legal in most ancient cultures (Greek being an exception), Polygamy was made illegal at the Federal level of the United states by the Edmunds–Tucker Act in 1887, until then there was no federal level law, and only the laws of states must be considered. The Edmunds–Tucker Act was tied up for many years in the courts as the church tried to have it ruled unconstitutional. Illinois where the prophet Joseph lived granted Nauvoo a city charter that allowed it's governing body to decide if states laws applied there therefore Illinois Law cannot be used to determine if Polygamy was illegal in Nauvoo. Nauvoo had no laws against polygamy.

The American frontier has always had polygamy as part of it's history; The Indians had many Squaws (or wives) Mountain men often had Wives and Indian squaws it was not uncommon for white men to live with more than one wife. In modern literature and movies, Mormons are depicted as being the only ones with multiple wives, and that is accurate, we did, as frontier people live that aspect of God's law, but we were not the only ones.

Which brings us to the Law, which Law?

God has laws, and men have a laws. Polygamy is the lawful practice of having more than one wife, but according to who's law. If it's the law of the United states, Does the law make something moral?

Abortion is legal, but it's condemned in the Bible, so I think it's immoral. Polygamy is illegal, but it's approved of in the Bible, therefore I think it's moral. There are many in the US of A who believe that making something legal makes it moral, conservatives are not supposed to believe that. Conversely Conservatives should not believe that making something illegal makes it immoral.

When Joseph Smith and the Mormons were practicing it it was legal federally, locally, and Biblically.. Nauvoo had a charter that allowed the city to decide if such laws would apply to the city and when the Mormons first arrived in the Utah territory, the Edmunds–Tucker Act had not been passed yet, The passage of this law and it's support in the supreme court signaled the end of the church's practice of Polygamy in that the 12th Article of faith requires the church to keep all the laws of the land and so the First official Declaration of the church was issued by the prophet, which contains the following:
Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.
Thus, the church is not now or will it be, while it is against the law of the land, promoting active practice of polygamy.

Isn't Polygamy Adultery?

Polygamy is not Adultery. Polygamy, or in this case more accurately polygyny, is the practice of multiple wives in a marriage, Adultery is sex out side of marriage. Therefore sex in a polygamous marriage is not adultery.

Some anti's will inevitably point out that the marriage has to be "legal", (see Polygamy is (or was) Illegal).

If a marriage (between the persons in question) is in force, Sex between those within that marriage covenant cannot legitimately be called adultery.

Joseph Smith and Polygamy

This topic has a lot of Sub questions:

Q: Didn't Joseph just create polygamy because he was a sex fiend?
A: If you start from "he was a bad man" you will inevitably end up with yes; If you start with he was a prophet of God you will inevitably end up with no; if you start with an open mind you have to find out if he was a prophet, see Putting our religion to "the test".

Q: Didn't Joseph marry other men's wives?
A: The short answer is yes, the long answer is no. Clear? I didn't think so this is why anti Mormons love to bring this up. Communication then was not as good or immediate as it is now, often a woman's husband would be gone for years and she would have assumed he was dead, Joseph or one of the other men in the church would marry these women so they could take care of them (women being unable to own property, enemies of the church would try to seize their land). There were also women who wanted to be sealed for all time and eternity to a worthy male, but their husband was not worthy, they could not, some of these women were also "married" to worthy men in the church, however, these women continued to live with their current husbands for the rest of their lives because the marriage was only for eternity, not for mortality. this makes for a very confusing mess, and for competing claims with some of these women believing that since they were married to Joseph, any child they bore was his (biology was apparently not a frontier strong suit), thus we are left with these competing claims. There is no proof that Joseph fathered a single child from these women. Allegations that he did abound among the anti Momrons, and among some who want to be descended from him. However, Genetic studies performed on all who claim to be his descendants have proven to be negatives for all his wives but Emma.

Q: Did Joseph Smith marry any fourteen year old girls?
A: True, a fourteen year old woman was considered a marriageable age, boys were considered men at the age of twelve and often left home to seek their fortunes by 14. Joseph also married a 57 year old widow.

Q: Didn't Joseph (or the church) teach that you had to practice polygamy in order to be saved?
A: No, less than 1% of the church ever practiced polygamy, the church does teach that marriage is required in order to obtain the Highest degree of glory in heaven, and the principle of polygamy has to be accepted, not the practice. (the principle being that it's valid as it was in the bible).

Q: Didn't Joseph marry women against their will?
A: No, there were women like Helen Mar Kimball who were pressured to marry Joseph by their family, but arranged marriages were also common then and the fact of arrangement by someone else means pressure from outside the individual.

If there is a question which should be added here, Please FM me.

Doesn't the Book of Mormon Forbid polygamy?

Actually this is a very good point, Mormons believe in a Book called the Book of Mormon which has the strongest passage speaking out against polygamy than any other passage of scripture I know of. The Passage is in:
Jacob 2:
23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.
35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.
WOW Pretty strong stuff huh? If that was in the Bible, unrefuted by the Bible elsewhere, well I wouldn't be writing this section I would not be defending polygamy as biblical.

Why does it matter where it's from? Well, if the Book of Mormon is scripture, then Joseph Smith is a prophet, if Joseph Smith is not a prophet then who cares what he wrote?

This is circular logic by Anti Momrons, "Since Joseph Smith speaks for God he violated God's word which he wrote when he said God said something else later, thus he is not a Prophet of God. (God does not change, God does change what he is saying based on the People he is talking to, Nineveh anyone?, Jesus fulfilling the law of Moses? (an eternal covenant) there's more, but I hope you get the point.

You should also ask what is this whoredom Being condemned in Jacob? What is a Whoredom?

Simply put it is lewd and lustful behavior, Polygamy as practiced by Abraham and Jacob and Moses is never described as being lewd. David and Solomon however had lots of "stuff" going on that would fit into the red light districts of some towns. Polygamy is not to be practiced like a whore house.

There is a principle which is if God has to command us not to do something, he will do so in excess so there is no excuse. like the law of Moses was stricter than was needed before Moses, and since Christ. Here are a few examples of this from Mormon Scriptures as well: D&C 58:26
26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.
D&C 89:1-3
1 A Word OF Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—
3 Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.
The Word of Wisdom (section 89 of the D&C) was originally given as a suggestion, not a command, when the "saints" widely ignored it, it became a commandment (as it is for members of the church today).

So if you don't listen to suggestions, God will command and be stricter than the suggestion so everyone will know where the "line" is so people can't say they didn't know.

In the book of Jacob, the men were marrying, having a fling and divorcing the women later. many were doing this to punish their earlier wives and others with lewd intent. This lewd and lascivious behavior is against God's will and so he forbid them to practice polygamy completely.

Joseph told the church this was not the Lord's will for our day. and if he was a prophet, he was speaking for God, if not, he was speaking for himself. What people need to do is find out if Joseph was a prophet or not in oder to know if Jacob 2 matters or not.

Polygamy is Immoral

Morality today for most Americans is determined by the Bible. The Bible has no prohibition on polygamy, indeed, the many important prophets had multiple wives. (Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob) and in at least one instance God says he (God) gave multiple wives as a blessing (to David).

The bible does have specific disapproval of Divorce and remarriage, or serial polygamy which is widely practiced in america today.

Polygamy leads to other sins

This is nothing more than religious guilt by association. The logic is simple: I knew a man who read the bible and he beat his wife... (conclusion reading the Bible makes you beat your wife...)

you may laugh but I had this exact, well it was in chinese, but translated story from a Buddhist man we tried to teach in Taiwan.

Does polygamy practiced they way it was in the bible eliminate all sin? No, but neither does marriage, does a monogamous marriage eliminate all sin? again no. We are all sinners.

To suggest that a behavior which was practiced by many righteous men in the OT and many early Christians as well is unbiblical is just denial of reality.

Only a Mormon would promote polygamy

Really, there are tons of "non Mormon" polygamy sites that are striving to point to reality, here are a few: (2520)

Love that Works FAQ
TheologyWeb - Is polygamy truly unBiblical?
Tertullian - Ante Nicene - Admits that polygamy was commanded by god in the OT, says not anymore though.
FIFTEEN OBJECTIONS TO POLYGAMY ANSWERED
Do I agree with all the reasoning here? No, but it's not just Momrons who are saying Polygamy is Biblical.

Here is a page by Mormons on the early "Church Fathers" and their views on Polygamy

Some Quotes:
Tertullian
As I think, moreover, each pronouncement and arrangement is (the act) of one and the same God; who did then indeed, in the beginning, send forth a sowing of the race by an indulgent laxity granted to the reins of connubial alliances, until the world should be replenished, until the material of the new discipline should attain to forwardness: now, however, at the extreme boundaries of the times, has checked (the command) which He had sent out, and recalled the indulgence which He had granted; not without a reasonable ground for the extension (of that indulgence) in the beginning, and the limitation of it in the end. (Tertullian, " Exhortation to Chastity," (6) Ante-Nicene Fathers 6:53–54)

Tertullian's perspective is strikingly similar to Jac. 2:30, in which monogamy is the norm, but God may command exceptions to "raise up seed."
Justin Martyr
Justin Martyr argued that David's sin was only in the matter of Uriah's wife, and echoed a common early Christian idea that marriage was a "mystery," or sacred rite of the type which Latter-day Saints associate with temple worship:

And this one fall of David, in the matter of Uriah's wife, proves, sirs, " I said, "that the patriarchs had many wives, not to commit fornication, but that a certain dispensation and all mysteries might be accomplished by them; since, if it were allowable to take any wife, or as many wives as one chooses, and how he chooses, which the men of your nation do over all the earth, wherever they sojourn, or wherever they have been sent, taking women under the name of marriage, much more would David have been permitted to do this.Dialogue With Trypho (141) Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:270)

Justin saw the patriarchs' marriages not as corruptions or something which God 'winked at,' but acts with significant ritual and religious power.
Augustine
Even Augustine, a towering figure in Christian theology, held that polygamy was not something that was a crime before God, but rather a matter that depended more upon cultural biases:

Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is charged with having committed a great crime because he had four wives. But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the [secular] laws forbid it. (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series 1 (Augustine and Chrysostome) (Vol. 1–14) (New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886–1889), 4:288)
And one of my favorites from another site: Martin Luther
"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)

The Bible approves of Polygamy. It's a fact one arrived at by any who actuality study it as these great men have.

Here is the formula for anyone who wants to test it:
A) Great men in the Bible were polygamous and they were specifically approved of by God while polygamous. (Abraham, Moses, Isaac, Jacob...)
B) Nowhere in the Bible is anyone reprimanded or commanded not to have more than one wife.
C) God approved of Polygamy then, since he does not change, it's not a big issue for him now.
Serial polygamy with divorce and remarriage is however specifically condemned by Jesus.

My conclusion is that Polygamy is not condemned by the Bible, and I'm in good "Christian" company in that opinion.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Conclusion There seem to be many on Free Republic and in the world who cannot let a good word be said about Mormons without rebutting it. That is their right to speak their mind, however, it is also my right to set straight the misinformation that they may either on purpose, or inadvertently put forth on this forum. Some have asked "Are you allowed to proselyte here?" I am not proselytizing, I am setting forth truth and correcting error, I believe that is in complete alignment with this site, for conservatives need not lie, we are lovers of truth.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day saints is also called Mormon by some, LDS is preferred by us if you feel the full name is too long. however, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day saints" is the name. We are believers in Jesus Christ, We read the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine in covenants. We believe these other scriptures which also testify of Jesus Christ are needed because there are many things on which the Bible just is not clear. Using only the Bible and looking at just the Bible, too much is left open for personal interpretation (in our opinion). Mormons are a people with many beliefs which some have declared to be heresy. That does not make us evil people. A careful study of these "Peculiar" beliefs will reveal that they were held by the early Christians in the pre-Constaniniean era. We believe that the LDS church was restored through the gift and power of God to fulfill prophecies in the Bible, and to prepare for the second coming of Jesus Christ. Any honest person who researches the doctrines of our church with an open mind will accept us as both Christian and sincere. To those who try to say other wise, either they have not studied enough, or they have some other agenda other than truth, and IMHO do not belong on this forum.

This is my opinion and if there are flaws, do not blame God, or my church, for the flaws are mine. If there are things in my post which lead you to come closer to God either through a closer investigation of your church, or mine, give the Glory to God whose servant I am.

Back to the Table Of Contents

Resources There are many resources on the web for those wishing to learn more about Mormons. This is merely my list and is not intended to be a complete list of all things Mormon.

These are some, but not all the resources I use in researching topics of religion. This page will be updated as I find more topics asked here over and over. If you have a topic on the Mormon religion you would like to see researched, FM me. Nagging Nabobs of Negativity is a term I heard Rush use one day, I thought it appropriate to the Nay sayers of Mormonism who offer nothing else but "NO", "NOT", and "Nope", they are not out doing any thing positive anywhere. A Nabob will be characterized by a back trail one to two pages of 80% or more negative posts on Mormon threads, and no positive statements anywhere. ( To see what a poster has been up to, click on their name at the bottom of the post, then choose "InForum" from their home page. This lets you find something they posted a day ago, or just see where they have been posting.) This works for my page too, try it!.

Back to the Table Of Contents

How do I link to your page? HTML is a mystery to many, I have built entire web sites with Note pad, however, I prefer HTML kit because I am lazy and I live by Mark Twain's adage "Anyone who can only spell a word one way is limited." It is safe to say I live an unlimited life (LOL) so I need the spell check that HTML kit supplies without getting caught on HTML tags or adding extra junk.

You can get HTML-Kit Here

I recommend editing your responses there, Spell checking them, previewing them, then Copying the HTML to the editing box on this site, spell checking again, and then previewing again before posting, posts here are forever, so you want them to look good, right?

Now, for the link to my page, it's simple just type the following into your HTML on your post: <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/~delphiuser#html">How to post a link to delphiuser's HTML hints</a>

This will look like this when posted: How to post a link to delphiuser's HTML hints

You can change the Text between the "Tags", and the Stuff between the quotation marks "" to change the destination. of the links.

To jump to a section of my page, just look at the link in the Table of contents by hovering your mouse cursor over it, most browsers have a "Status bar" that will show you the link to that section. you can also Copy a link by right clicking the link on the page in most browsers and selecting that from the drop down menu.

I hope this helped.

Back to the Table Of Contents