Is Mormonism Christian? by Late Richard John Neuhaus

That is not the only interesting question, but it is probably the most important. Most non–Mormons have little occasion to think about Mormonism, and those who do tend toward distinctly negative thoughts. Although there is this curious thing of recent years that many conservative Christians warmly welcome Mormons as allies in various cultural tasks.

To cite but one recent instance, it was an alliance of Catholics, evangelicals, and Mormons that was instrumental in persuading the people of Hawaii to reject same–sex marriage. Yet a few issues ago we published an article by a Mormon doctor presenting the case for Natural Family Planning and received blistering letters of protest.

We thought that the fact that the argument was not being advanced by a Catholic might make it more persuasive to some. But at least some readers did not see it that way. Didn’t we know that Mormons are the enemies of Christ and his Church? Such views are stronger in the Northwest and, increasingly, in the Southwest where the Mormon presence is a force to be reckoned with.

Ours is an interreligious enterprise, basically but not exclusively Jewish and Christian. Dr. Bruce Hafen is on our Editorial Advisory Board. He has held prominent positions in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints (LDS), including that of provost and dean of the law school at Brigham Young University. I can’t say that many of my friends are Mormons, but some are.

We are obliged to respect human dignity across the board, and to affirm common discernments of the truth wherever we find them.

Where we disagree we should try to put the best possible construction on the position of the other, while never trimming the truth. That will become more important as Mormons become more of a presence, both in this country and the world. There are about ten million of them now, with about one–half of the membership in the U.S.

Sociologist Rodney Stark—a non–Mormon with strong personal connections to the LDS—predicts that, on the basis of present growth patterns, there will be more than 265 million Mormons by the end of this century, making it the most important new religion in world history since Islam. For reasons I will come to, I think that is improbable.

Put differently, if that happens, Mormonism will be something dramatically different from what it has been over the last century and a half. Some while back we were sent for review the Encyclopedia of Mormonism: The History, Scripture, Doctrine, and Procedures of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter–day Saints.

It’s a big five–volume set, written largely by professors at Brigham Young; we weren’t sure what to do with it, but I’ve been reading in it with great benefit.

Then comes a big new book by Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling, Mormon America: The Power and the Promise, published by HarperSanFrancisco (454 pp., $26). It is a remarkable piece of work and likely to be the best general introduction to Mormonism for years to come.

The Ostlings are evangelical Protestants. Dick was for many years religion editor at Time and now covers religion for the Associated Press. I have had frequent occasion to say that he is one of the two or three best religion reporters in the country. Joan is a freelance writer with a background in the practice and teaching of journalism.

What they have achieved with this assiduously researched and very readable book puts us all in their debt. Apparently the powers that be in Salt Lake City are ambivalent about the book, but it is probably as thorough and fair a treatment of the LDS by outsiders as they are likely to get.

Much to Admire The Ostlings find much to admire. Mormonism gives a whole new meaning to being "pro–family." In Mormon belief, families are, quite literally, forever. Proxies are baptized on behalf of the dead, and families and relatives hope to go on living together and procreating in a celestial eternity. All children are baptized at age eight, and at twelve boys (no girls allowed) take their place of responsibility and status by entering the first level of the priesthood—the priesthood, according to Joseph Smith, having been restored by John the Baptist in upstate New York in 1829.

While bar mitzvah among Jews and confirmation among Christians too often means that young people graduate from their religious responsibilities, Mormon youth at that point in life graduate into intense and clearly defined responsibilities within the community. Also widely and justly admired is the LDS welfare system, whereby the community takes care of its own when they get into economic or other difficulty.

At present, in a time of economic prosperity, only about 5 percent require help from the welfare system. (A figure, interestingly, about parallel with Edward Banfield’s famous claim about the percentage of people in any society who will never be able to make it on their own.)

There is also no denying that the prohibition of alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine has a payoff. Mormons live, on average, eight to eleven years longer than other Americans, and death rates from cancer and cardiovascular diseases are about half those of the general population.

Of course, it is fair to note, they do die of other things, and one may do one’s own calculation about the risk worth taking for a scotch before dinner and a cigar afterward, never mind one’s morning coffee. (The most recent Harvard longitudinal study found that the strongest positive correlation between health and habits is the daily consumption of about three ounces of wine or liquor. Go figure.)

In addition, a strong emphasis on chastity sharply reduces sexually transmitted diseases, while a tightly knit and supportive community makes homicide and suicide rare. Put it all together, and one concludes that Mormonism is good for your physical health. Whether it is good for your spiritual health is a disputed question. (It should also be noted that medical data on the strongly committed in other religious communities are comparable to the Mormon findings.)

There are other things to admire. Brigham Young University, for instance, where, because of church subsidies, young Mormons get the entire package (tuition, room, board, etc.) for less than $10,000 a year. The ticket is slightly more for non–Mormons, but there are very few takers. There is also the Church Educational System, which involves hundreds of thousands in continuing education programs here and around the world.

Nor can the most severe critics deny the energy, enthusiasm, and organization of the LDS in its missionary zeal, and in its dramatic presentation of its colorful history, whether through the Mormon Tabernacle Choir or annual pageants reenacting the key episodes of its sacred stories.

In a world that seems to be largely adrift, it is no little thing to be part of an organized crusade in which you and those who are closest to you view your life as crucial to the unfolding of the cosmic drama.

Restoring the Church The LDS is, among other things, a very big business tightly controlled from the top down. If one believes that the entire enterprise is based on revelation that is authoritatively interpreted by divinely appointed officers, it makes sense that control should be from the top down.

The LDS claims that God chose Joseph Smith to reestablish the Church of Jesus Christ after it had disappeared some 1,700 years earlier following the death of the first apostles. To complicate the picture somewhat, God’s biblical work was extended to the Americas somewhere around 2000 b.c. and continued here until a.d. 421. This is according to the Book of Mormon, the scriptures given to Joseph Smith on golden tablets by the Angel Moroni.

American Indians are called Lamanites and are part of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Jesus came to preach to these Indians and for a long time there was a flourishing church here until it fell into apostasy, only to be restored, as the golden tablets foretold, by Joseph Smith. In addition to giving new scriptures, God commissioned Smith to revise the Bible, the text of which had been corrupted over the centuries by Jews and Christians.

Today’s Quorum of the Twelve Apostles is, allegedly, in direct succession to Smith, and the First Presidency claims powers that would have made St. Peter, never mind most of his successors, blush. The top leadership is composed, with few exceptions, of men experienced in business and with no formal training in theology or related disciplines.

The President (who is also prophet, seer, and revelator) is the oldest apostle, which means he is sometimes very old indeed and far beyond his prime. Decisions are made in the tightest secrecy, inevitably giving rise to suspicions and conspiracy theories among outsiders and a substantial number of members.

Revenues from tithes, investments, and Mormon enterprises have built what the Ostlings say "might be the most efficient churchly money machine on earth." They back up with carefully detailed research their "conservative" estimate that LDS assets are in the rage of $25–30 billion.

Protecting the Stories But, of course, the most important control is over the sacred stories, and attendant truth claims, upon which the entire enterprise rests. Of the telling of history, Orwell wrote, "He who controls the past controls the future and he who controls the present controls the past."

The Ostlings devote a great deal of attention to "dissenters and exiles" who have tried to tell the sacred stories honestly, and in a manner that might bring them into conversation with other stories of the world. Some may think the Ostlings devote too much attention to these "troublemakers," but I think not.

In my limited experience with, for instance, people associated with the publication Sunstone, these are devout Mormons who are seized by the correct intuition that truth that must be protected within the circle of true believers, that cannot intelligently engage critical examination by outsiders, is in some fundamental sense doubtfully true.

Some of the "dissenters and exiles" may be dismissable as troublemakers—a species all too familiar in other religious communities as well. I expect, however, that what most of these people are trying to do is much more important to the possible futures of the LDS than all the billions in assets, massive building programs, and ambitiously organized missionary campaigns combined.

To give a credible account of the sacred stories and truth claims is no easy task. Not to put too fine a point on it, the founding stories and doctrines of Mormonism appear to the outsider as a bizarre phantasmagoria of fevered religious imagination not untouched by perverse genius. Germinated in the "burnt–over district" of upstate New York in the early nineteenth century, where new religions and spiritualities produced a veritable rainforest of novel revelations, the claims of Joseph Smith represent a particularly startling twist of the kaleidoscope of religious possibilities.

In 1831, Alexander Campbell, cofounder of the Disciples of Christ, said that Smith pasted together "every error and almost every truth discussed in New York for the last ten years."

Much of the teaching reflects the liberal Protestantism of the time, even the Transcendental and Gnostic fevers that were in the air: e.g., a God in process of becoming, progressive revelation, the denial of original sin, and an unbridled optimism about the perfectibility of man. Mix that in with the discovery of golden tablets written in a mysterious language, the bodily appearance of God the Father and Son, angelic apparitions, and a liberal dose of Masonic ritual and jargon, and the result is, quite simply, fantastic. The question, of course, is whether it is true.

In what sense true? It is true in the sense that it is meaningful for those who believe it uncritically, and even for more critical souls who embrace the community whose fabulous founding, they contend, points to higher truths. In the conventional version controlled by LDS authorities, it is true if you believe it is true. Thus is the back door shut against potentially subversive reason.

One possible response is to say that all religion is finally based on faith and is incapable of rational demonstration. Did not St. Paul say that the gospel of Christ is "foolishness" according to the wisdom of the world? Of course he did. But every part of the traditional Christian story has been and is subjected to critical examination, by believers and nonbelievers alike—and that examination, with its attending disagreements, will go on to the end of time.

Over two thousand years, from Origen and Augustine through Anselm, Aquinas, Newman, Barth, and Balthasar, the truth claims of Christianity have engaged, with utmost intensity and sophistication, alternative and opposing construals of reality. In short, there is a very long Christian intellectual tradition. There is not, or at least not until very recently, such a Mormon tradition.

And those who are interested in encouraging such inquiry typically find themselves in the company of "dissenters and exiles." Keep in mind, however, that Mormonism is not yet two centuries old. A youngish Mormon intellectual today is in relation of time to Joseph Smith roughly comparable to Origen in relation to the apostles.

But his task is ever so much more difficult than that of Irenaeus, Origen, and the many other early Christian thinkers. There is, for instance, the surpassingly awkward fact that not a single person, place, or event that is unique to the Book of Mormon has ever been proven to exist. Outside the fanum of true believers, these tales cannot help but appear to be the product of fantasy and fabrication.

There is, moreover, a corrosive tradition of make–believe in the LDS, such as the claim that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham—a book he said was written by Abraham—from Egyptian papyri that were later proven to be nothing but conventional funerary inscriptions.

The sanitized story of Mormonism promoted by the LDS tries to hide so much that cannot be hidden. The Ostlings are to be commended for resisting sensationalism in relating the sensational history of polygamy in the LDS, including Joseph Smith’s coercive use of threats of eternal damnation in order to procure young women he desired as additional wives. (On this score, the quasi–official Encyclopedia is also considerably more candid than the usual LDS presentations.)

And how, except by a practiced schizophrenia, can LDS biblical scholars engage with other scholars if they are required to give credence to the normative status of Smith’s "translation" (i.e., rewriting) of the King James Bible? There is a long list of particulars in the formidable obstacles to be overcome if anything like a credible intellectual tradition is to be secured, and not least among the obstacles is the history of LDS leadership in backstopping secretiveness with mendacity.

Taking note of these realities is not to deny the frequent moral courage, indeed heroism, of the early leadership, or the continuing devotion and talent of their successors.

Missionary Zeal The LDS is much given to boosterism, and it is no surprise that its leaders relish the projections of almost exponential growth offered by such as Rodney Stark. Nobody can help but be impressed by the thousands of clean–cut Mormon young men who go on mission, two by two, knocking on the doors of the world, but the Ostlings helpfully put this missionary enterprise into perspective by comparing it with the many times larger enterprise of various Christian groups, noting as well that, unlike the Mormons, these missionaries do not limit themselves to winning converts but minister to the illiterate, the poor, and others in need.

Moreover, these Christian efforts result in large and thriving indigenous churches that engage and transform local cultures, whereas the Mormon mission, totally controlled and directed from Salt Lake City, is about as pure an instance of American cultural imperialism as can be imagined, albeit a benevolently intended imperialism.

It appears also that the figures of Mormon growth are considerably inflated, not taking into account the massive defections through the back door, especially in developing countries. The Ostlings observe, "Mormonism succeeds by building on a preexisting Christian culture and by being seen as an add–on, drawing converts through a form of syncretism.

Mormonism flourishes best in settings with some prior Christianization." There is, in this view, a parasitic dynamic in Mormon growth. Yet the Ostlings suggest that, despite doctrinal and demographic problems, Mormonism may continue to thrive. "Ours is a relational era," they write, "not a conceptual one.

Members are more likely to be attracted by networking and community than by truth claims. The adherents appear to be contented or docile in their discontent, except for some thousands of intellectuals."

I am not so sure, and that brings us to the opening question of whether Mormonism is Christian or a new religion tenuously founded on fables and sustained by authoritarian management. Maybe ours is a time in which truth does not matter that much in terms of institutional flourishing, a time in which communities can get along with useful, if not particularly noble, lies.

An Insulting Question Asking whether Mormonism is Christian or Mormons are Christians (a slightly different question) is thought to be insulting. "How can you ask that," protests a Mormon friend, "when we clearly love the Lord Jesus as much as we do?" It is true that St. Paul says that nobody can say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3). But that only indicates that aspects of Mormon faith are touched by the Holy Spirit, as is every element of truth no matter where it is found.

A Mormon academic declares that asking our question "is a bit like asking if African Americans are human." No, it is not even a bit like that. "Christian" in this context is not honorific but descriptive. Nobody questions whether Mormons are human.

To say that Jews, Muslims, or Buddhists are not Christians is no insult. It is a statement of fact, indeed of respect for their difference. The question is whether that is a fact and a difference that applies also to Mormonism.

The question as asked by Mormons is turned around: are non–Mormons who claim to be Christians in fact so? The emphatic and repeated answer of the Mormon scriptures and the official teaching of the LDS is that we are not. We are members of "the great and abominable church" that was built by frauds and impostors after the death of the first apostles.

The true church and true Christianity simply went out of existence, except for its American Indian interlude, until it was rediscovered and reestablished by Joseph Smith in upstate New York, and its claims will be vindicated when Jesus returns, sooner rather than later, at a prophetically specified intersection in Jackson County, Missouri.

The Ostlings, in a manner common among evangelical Protestants, address the question of whether Mormons are Christians exclusively in terms of doctrine. Mormonism claims that God is an exalted man, not different in kind as Creator is different in kind from creature.

The Mormon claim is, "What God was, we are. What God is, we will become." Related to this is the teaching that the world was not created ex nihilo but organized into its present form, and that the trespass in the Garden of Eden, far from being the source of original sin, was a step toward becoming what God is. Further, Mormonism teaches that there is a plurality of gods. Mormons dislike the term "polytheism," preferring "henotheism," meaning that there is a head God who is worshiped as supreme.

If Christian doctrine is summarized in, for instance, the Apostles’ Creed as understood by historic Christianity, official LDS teaching adds to the creed, deviates from it, or starkly opposes it almost article by article.

LDS teaching that believers are on the way to becoming gods has, of course, interesting connections with early church fathers and their teaching on "theosis" or "deification," a teaching traditionally accented more in the Christianity of the East than of the West, but theologically affirmed by both.

Some Mormon thinkers have picked up on those connections and have even recruited, not very convincingly, C. S. Lewis in support of LDS doctrine. (Lewis simply offers rhetorical riffs on classical Christian teaching and in no way suggests an ontological equivalence between Creator and creature.)

Christianity and the History of Christians Beyond these doctrinal matters, as inestimably important as they are, one must ask what it means to be Christian if one rejects the two thousand year history of what in fact is Christianity. Christianity is inescapably doctrinal but it is more than doctrines. Were it only a set of doctrines, Christianity would have become another school of philosophy, much like other philosophical schools of the Greco–Roman world.

Christianity is the past and present reality of the society composed of the Christian people. As is said in the Nicene Creed, "We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church." That reality encompasses doctrine, ministry, liturgy, and a rule of life.

Christians disagree about precisely where that Church is to be located historically and at present, but almost all agree that it is to be identified with the Great Tradition defined by the apostolic era through at least the first four ecumenical councils, and continuing in diverse forms to the present day. That is the Christianity that LDS teaching rejects and condemns as an abomination and fraud.

Yet Mormonism is inexplicable apart from Christianity and the peculiar permutations of Protestant Christianity in nineteenth–century America. It may in this sense be viewed as a Christian derivative. It might be called a Christian heresy, except heresy is typically a deviation within the story of the Great Tradition that Mormonism rejects tout court.

Or Mormonism may be viewed as a Christian apostasy. Before his death in 1844, Joseph Smith was faced with many apostasies within the Mormon ranks, and since then there have been more than a hundred schisms among those who claim to be his true heirs. Still today LDS leaders quote Smith when censuring or excommunicating critics.

For instance, this from Smith: "That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that man is in the high road to apostasy."

With respect to the real existing Christianity that is the Church, the words apply in spades to Joseph Smith. He knew, of course, that he was rejecting the Christianity of normative tradition, and he had an explanation. On the creation ex nihilo question, for instance, he declared only weeks before his death: "If you tell [critics] that God made the world out of something, they will call you a fool.

But I am learned, and know more than all the world put together. The Holy Ghost does, anyhow; and he is within me, and comprehends more than all the world; and I will associate myself with him." By definition, he could not be apostate because he spoke for God. It is an answer, of sorts.

The history of Christianity, notably since the sixteenth–century Reformation, is littered with prophets and seers who have reestablished "the true church," usually in opposition to the allegedly false church of Rome, and then, later, in opposition to their own previously true churches. There are many thousands of such Christian groups today. Most of them claim to represent the true interpretation of the Bible.

A smaller number lay claim to additional revelations by which the biblical witness must be "corrected." One thinks, for instance, of the Unification Church of Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

There are other similarities between Mormonism and the Unification Church, such as the emphasis on the celestial significance of marriage and family. According to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, "Gods and humans are the same species of being, but at different stages of development in a divine continuum, and the heavenly Father and Mother are the heavenly pattern, model, and example of what mortals can become through obedience to the gospel."

Another Religion Some have suggested that the LDS is a Christian derivative much as Christianity is a Jewish derivative, but that is surely wrong. The claim of Christianity is that its gospel of Jesus Christ is in thorough continuity with the Old Testament and historic Israel, that the Church is the New Israel, which means that it is the fulfillment of the promise that Israel would be "a light to the nations."

The Church condemned Marcion’s rejection of the Old Testament, and she never presumed to rewrite or correct the Hebrew Scriptures on the basis of a new revelation. On the contrary, she insisted that the entirety of the old covenant bears witness to the new. While it is a Christian derivative, the LDS is, by way of sharpest contrast, in radical discontinuity with historic Christianity.

The sacred stories and official teachings of the LDS could hardly be clearer about that. For missionary and public relations purposes, the LDS may present Mormonism as an "add–on," a kind of Christianity–plus, but that is not the official narrative and doctrine.

A closer parallel might be with Islam. Islam is a derivative of Judaism and Christianity. Like Joseph Smith, Muhammad in the seventh century claimed new revelations and produced in the Qur’an a "corrected" version of the Jewish and Christian scriptures, presumably by divine dictation.

Few dispute that Islam is a new and another religion, and Muslims do not claim to be Christian, although they profess a deep devotion to Jesus. Like Joseph Smith and his followers, they do claim to be the true children of Abraham. Christians in dialogue with Islam understand it to be an interreligious, not an ecumenical, dialogue. Ecumenical dialogue is dialogue between Christians.

Dialogue with Mormons who represent official LDS teaching is interreligious dialogue. One must again keep in mind that Mormonism is still very young. It is only now beginning to develop an intellectually serious theological tradition. Over the next century and more, those who are now the "dissidents and exiles" may become the leaders in forging, despite the formidable obstacles, a rapprochement with historic Christianity, at which point the dialogue could become ecumenical.

As noted earlier, there is the interesting phenomenon of Mormon thinkers appealing to the Christian tradition, from Irenaeus through C. S. Lewis, in support of aspects of their doctrine. And there is the poignant and persistent insistence of Mormons, "We really are Christians!" Sometimes that claim means that they really are Christians and the rest of us are not. Increasingly, at least among some Mormons, the claim is that they are Christians in substantively the same way that others are Christians.

It is a claim we should question but not scorn. Such a claim contains, just possibly, the seed of promise that over time, probably a very long time, there could be within Mormonism a development of doctrine that would make it recognizable as a peculiar but definite Christian communion. Such attempted development, however, could produce a major schism between Mormons who are determined to be Christian, on the one hand, and the new religion taught by the LDS on the other.

Meanwhile, Mormonism and the impressive empire of the LDS will likely be with us for a long time. They are no longer an exotic minority that is, by virtue of minority status, exempt from critical examination and challenge. Such examination and challenge, always fair–minded and sympathetic, is exemplified by the Ostlings’ very helpful book, Mormon America. I am skeptical about the more dramatic projections of Mormon growth in the future.

That depends in part on the degree to which the Ostlings are right in thinking our era is "relational" rather than "conceptual." It depends in larger part on developments internal to the LDS and transformations in its self–understanding and self–presentation to the world. The leadership of the LDS will have to decide whether its growth potential is enhanced or hampered by presenting Mormonism as a new religion or as, so to speak, another Christian denomination. Sometimes they seem to want to have it both ways, but that will become increasingly difficult.

And, of course, for Mormons whose controlling concern is spiritual, intellectual, and moral integrity, questions of marketing and growth, as well as questions of institutional vitality and communal belonging, must be clearly subordinated to the question of truth.

As for the rest of us, we owe to Mormon Americans respect for their human dignity, protection of their religious freedom, readiness for friendship, openness to honest dialogue, and an eagerness to join hands in social and cultural tasks that advance the common good. That, perhaps, is work enough, at least for the time being.

from http://cbcblackfoot.com/files/Ask_Your_Bishop.pdf

1. If the principle of “Progression” is unalterable, why has the principle broken down two out of three times right within the Godhead? (See the next two questions).

2. If Gods are individuals who have passed through mortality and have progressed to Godhood, how has one person of the Godhead (the Holy Spirit) attained Godhood
without getting a body? (See Acts 5:3,4).

3. If Gods are individuals who have passed through an earth life to attain Godhood, how is it that one person of the Godhead (Jesus Christ) was God before He received a body or
passed through earth life? (Matthew 1:23 and Hebrews 10:5).

4. If the Book of Mormon really contains the fullness of the gospel, why does it not teach the doctrine of “eternal progression”? (See Doctrine and Covenants 20:8, 9).

5. When God was a man (according to Mormon theology), where did He live before He could create a planet upon which to live?

6. When God number one was a man (before He became God), who created a planet upon which he (man number one) could live? (See Revelation 1:8; 4:11).

7. God said, “Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God; I know not any.” How can there be Gods who are Elohim’s ancestors? (See Isaiah 44:8 and Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, pg. 123).

8. If God the Father was once a man, why is that doctrine not supported by “Latter-day revelation”?

9. How can any men ever become Gods when the Bible says, “Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me”? (See Isaiah 43:10).

10. Since Mormonism teaches that only God the Father had a physical body at the time Adam was created, why did God say, “Let us make man in OUR image”? Why didn’t He
say, “Let us make man in MY image”? (See Genesis 1:26).

11. If Adam is the “only God with whom we have to do”, did Adam create himself? (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, pg. 50, 51).

12. Joseph Smith stated that without the ordinances and authority of the priesthood no man can see the face of God and live (Doctrine and Covenants 84:21, 22). He also said that he saw God in 1820 (Joseph Smith 2:17). Joseph Smith, however, never received any priesthood until 1829 (Doc. & Cov. 13). How did he see God and survive? In which was
he in error: his revelation in Doctrine and Covenants 84:21, 22 or his experience in the grove?

13. If a spirit is a being without a body (See Luke 24:39), why do Mormons teach that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones? (See John 4:24 and Doc. & Cov. 130:22).

14. If the Father is Elohim and Jesus is Jehovah (as Mormons teach), how does a Mormon explain Deuteronomy 6:4, which in the Hebrew says, “Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our
Elohim is one Jehovah”? Also, if the designation LORD God (Jehovah Elohim) is a reference to two individuals, why are singular pronouns used in Deuteronomy 6:13?

15. If the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the gospel, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?

16. One law of reproduction is that everything reproduces after its kind. How is it then that God and His wives, who according to Mormon teaching, have physical glorified bodies, produce children without physical bodies? (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22; Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, pg. 750).

17. A major emphasis of Mormonism is that the Mormon church is the restored church, with everything practiced as it was in the early church. Why then have the Mormon leaders failed to restore the scriptural practice of using the “fruit of the vine” in the “sacrament” service? Why is water used? (Matthew 26:28, 29 and Doc. and Cov. 89:5, 6).

18. If Mormonism is the restored church which is based upon the Bible, why are Mormon leaders so quick to state that the Bible is “translated wrong” when faced with some conflict between the Bible and Mormonism?

19. If Jesus was conceived as a result of a physical union between God and Mary, how was Jesus born of a virgin? (Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, pg. 50 and Doctrines of Salvation, by Joseph Fielding Smith, compiled by Bruce R. McConkie, Vol. 1, pg. 18).

20. If Mormonism is the restored gospel, why is there no mention of temple marriages in the Bible?

21. If the Bible is not entirely translated correctly and if the Mormon church really has a prophet, seer and revelator, why have they not produced a correct translation of the Bible?

22. Why did Christ not return in 1891 as Joseph Smith predicted? (History of the Church, Vol. 2, pg. 182).

23. If Jesus was being married to Mary and Martha in Cana, why was He invited to His own wedding? (John 2:1, 2; Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, pg. 210).

24. Why do Mormons teach that there is no eternal Hell? (See Book of Mormon, I Nephi 14:3; 15:35; II Nephi 1:13; 9:16; 28:21-25; Mosiah 3:25; Alma 34:32-35; Heleman 6:28.
Compare Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, pg. 61, 34th edition).

25. How can Mormons teach that the repentant thief was not saved when the Book of Mormon states that Paradise is where the righteous go? (Luke 23:43; Alma 40:12,16).

26. How did Nephi with a few men on a new continent build a temple like Solomon’s while Solomon needed 163,300 workmen and seven years to build his temple? (See I Kings 5:13-
18 and II Nephi 5:15-17).

27. If the Book of Mormon is true, why hasn’t a valid geography been established for the book?

28. Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doctrine and Covenants
132 and History of the Church, Vol. 6, pg. 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, by Joseph Fielding Smith, pg. 324).

29. If Lehi left Jerusalem before 600 B.C., how did he learn about synagogues? (See II Nephi 26:26).

30. Why does the Book of Mormon, which claims to be the fullness of the gospel, not mention baptism for the dead? (Book of Mormon, Introduction).

31. If the Book of Mormon is from God, why does it have so little original prophecy?

32. If Indians descended from the Jews, why do they have such sparse beards?

33. If Navajos descended from the Jews, why do Navajo babies have the Mongolian spot?

34. If the Book of Mormon is true, why do Indians fail to turn white when they become Mormons? (See II Nephi 30:6, prior to 1981 revision). Why was this verse changed?

35. Were precious ores, such as Solomon used in his temple available to Nephi or not? (II Nephi 5:15,16).

36. If Lehi was a devout Jew, why did he name a son “Sam” rather than Samuel, thus failing to honor God? (See I Samuel 1:20 and I Nephi 2:5).

37. What kind of chariots did the Nephites have in 90 B.C. some 1500 years before the introduction of the wheel in the Western Hemisphere? (See Alma 18:9).

38. How do Mormons account for the word “church” in the Book of Mormon about 600 B.C. which was centuries before the beginning of the Church on the day of Pentecost?
(See I Nephi 4:26).

39. How do Mormons account for the italicized words in the King James Version (indicating their absence in the Hebrew and Greek) being found in the Book of Mormon? (A comparison of Mosiah 14 and Isaiah 53 will provide at least 13 examples).

40. How did the French word adieu get into the Book of Mormon? (Jacob 7:27).

41. How can the same act be both right and wrong? Was it right or wrong for Solomon to have many wives? (See Jacob 2:24; Doctrine and Covenants 132:38,39).

42. If polygamy was a provision for increasing population rapidly, why did God give Adam only one wife?

43. If the Apostle John is still alive on the earth, how does the Mormon church explain having thirteen living Apostles? (See Doctrine and Covenants 7:1-3).

44. The original Doctrine and Covenants states in part “...Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication and polygamy: we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.” Why has this been omitted from the current Doctrine and Covenants? (See Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 2, pg. 251, last half of the book, which is a reprint of the 1835 edition of Doctrine and Covenants).

45. How can one, using the test in Doctrine and Covenants 129:4, 5, distinguish between an angel of God and a Jehovah’s Witness missionary, or a Mormon Elder?

46. If Joseph Smith was a true prophet, why did he not realize that “Esaias” is the New Testament form of “Isaiah”? (Doctrine and Covenants 76:100; Mark 7:6; Isaiah 29:13).

47. How could Elijah (Elias) have appeared to Joseph Smith in the Kirkland Temple as two different people? (See Doctrine and Covenants 110: 12, 13 and compare I Kings 17:1 and James 5:17).

48. If Joseph Smith was a true prophet, why did he fail to realize that “Elias” is the New Testament form of the name “Elijah”?

49. If children have no sins until they are eight years old, why are they baptized at age eight to wash away non-existent sins? (See Moroni 8:8).

50. Why does Apostle Bruce R. McConkie deny that the doctrine of “blood atonement” was once taught in Utah? (See Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, pg. 92. Compare
Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, pg. 247; Vol. 4, pgs. 219, 220).

51. If Mormonism produces godliness, why has the divorce rate in Utah been above the national average most years since 1960? (Report of Utah Economic and Research Review
in 1973 and 1987 Statistical Abstract of Utah, pg. 34)
.
52. How could the Garden of Eden have been in Missouri when the Pearl of Great Price declares that it was in the vicinity of Assyria and had the Euphrates and Hiddekel Rivers in it? (See Pearl of Great Price, Moses 3:14 and Doctrine and Covenants 116 and 117;
Genesis 2:8-15).

53. Do you know any human being living today who was alive in 1832? (See prophecy in Doctrine and Covenants 84:4).

54. If free agency is man’s great heritage, why will Mormon leaders not readily allow members to leave the Mormon system upon request?

55. Brigham Young said, “The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy” Journal of Discourses, Vol. ll, pg. 269). Why did the
Mormons yield to the pressure of the government and stop practicing polygamy?

56. Heber C. Kimball stated, “We are the people of Deseret, she shall be no more Utah: we will have our own name”. Why did this prophecy fail? (See Journal of Discourses Vol. 5,
pg. 161).

57. How did Joseph Smith carry home the golden plates of the Book of Mormon, and how did the witnesses lift them so easily? (They weighed about 230 pounds. Gold, with a
density of 19.3 weighs 1204.7 lb.. per cubic foot. The plates were 7” x 8” by about 6”. See Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, pg. 262, 34th Edition).

58. If a “Jack Mormon” is not good enough to enter an earthly temple, how can he qualify to enter the Celestial Kingdom even if he has been sealed to his devout parents?

59. If Moroni devoutly practiced the Mormon gospel, why is he an angel now rather than a God? (See Doctrine and Covenants 132:17, 37).

60. Has anyone observed the ministry of the Apostle John upon the earth during the last 100 years? (See Doctrine and Covenants 7:1-3).

61. Why do Mormons emphasize part of the Word of Wisdom and ignore the part forbidding the eating of meat except in winter, cold or famine? (See Doctrine and Covenants 89:12,13).

62. When Christ died, did darkness cover the land for three days or for three hours? (See Luke 23:44 and III Nephi 8:19, 23).

63. If the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, why have the Mormons changed it? (See A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, by Le Grand Richards, pg.
73, revised edition 1971). (Jerald and Sandra Tanner counted 3,913 changes in the Book of Mormon, exclusive of punctuation changes, prior to the revisions made in 1981. One may check the original in Joseph Smith Begins His Work, by Wilford C. Wood, Vol. 1).

64. How can a man be a prophet of God if even one prophecy fails or one revelation is wrong? (See Deuteronomy 18:20-22. Compare Doctrine and Covenants 84:4; 7:1-3).

65. Is a revelation given by a prophet any less authoritative even if not authorized by the Mormon church?

66. If God speaks through a prophet, what are Mormons doing voting on whether or not to receive and authorize it?

67. It has been established that the “Sensen” manuscript was simply a common Egyptian burial papyrus. Why do the Mormons still accept the Book of Abraham which was
translated from that manuscript? (See Why Egyptologists Reject the Book of Abraham, Utah Lighthouse Ministry, P.O. Box 1884, Salt Lake City, Utah 84110).

68. Why is it that no reliable linguist or Egyptologist ever refers to “Reformed Egyptian”?

69. Why is it that no other writings have been found in the language of “Reformed Egyptian”, the supposed language of the Book of Mormon plates? Is there evidence that
such a language really existed?

70. Joseph Smith said that there are men living on the moon who dress like Quakers and live to be nearly 1000 years old. Since he was wrong about the moon, is it safe to trust
him regarding the way to Heaven? (See The Young Woman’s Journal, Vol. 3, pgs. 263, 264. See reprint in Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, pg. 4).

71. Why didn’t Joseph Smith keep the Word of Wisdom? Why did he drink beer? (See Millennial Star, Vol. 23, pg. 720).

72. Why do Mormons not study Hebrew and Greek so that they can intelligently discuss about the accuracy of the translation of the Bible?

73. Joseph Smith prepared fourteen Articles of Faith. Why has the original # ll been omitted? (See Joseph Smith Begins His Work, Vol. 2, three pages after pg. 160, among
the photos).

74. Why have several dozen word changes been made in the Articles of Faith of the Mormon church? (Ibid).

75. According to Hebrews 7:24, the Melchizedek Priesthood is unchangeable (intransferable). Why do Mormons pass it from one to another?

76. If Mormonism came as a revelation from God, why were the Mormon Temple Oaths almost identical to the oaths of the Masonic Lodge? (See Temple Mormonism, by A.J.
Montgomery, pg. 18,20). Does it not bother faithful Mormons to realize that “Divinely given” ceremonies have been changed? (See The Daily Herald, Provo, Utah, April 29,
1990).

77. If in the resurrection, people will be AS the angels in Heaven, why should the Mormons expect there to be marriage union in Heaven? (See Matthew 22:30 and Doctrine and
Covenants 132:15-17).

78. Why did the Nauvoo House not stand forever and ever? (Doctrine and Covenants 124:56-60).

79. If genealogies are important, why does the New Testament tell Christians to avoid “endless genealogies”? (I Timothy 1:4; Titus 3:9).

80. The Bible says, “The blood of Jesus Christ...cleanseth from all sin.” Why did Brigham Young say that there are some sins which can be atoned for only by the shedding of ones own blood? (See Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, pg. 247; Vol. 4, pg. 49, 53, 54).

81. God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made. Why do Mormons memorialize the fall by using fig leaf aprons? (See Genesis 3:21).

82. Jesus said, “In secret have I said nothing.” Why is much of Mormonism secret? (John 18:20).

83. Why do Mormons insist that Ezekiel 37:15-22 is about two books instead of about two kingdoms as God Himself explained in verse 22?

84. If Acts 3:20,21 is a prophecy about the restoration of Mormonism, why didn’t Jesus return in 1830?

85. Revelation 14:6,7 is part of the body of prophecy about the future Great Tribulation. How could that passage have been fulfilled by Moroni in 1830? (Mormon Doctrine, by
Bruce R. McConkie, pg. 514).

86. In the light of Ezekiel 28:13-15 and Hebrews 1:5, how can Satan and Jesus be brothers? (Note: Satan was created). (See Mormon Doctrine page 129, where Jesus is referred to as
the firstborn of the Father, and page 192 where it says that the devil is a spirit son of God).

87. If no person ever receives the Holy Spirit before baptism or without the laying on of hands, how does a Mormon explain the case of Cornelius? (See Acts 10:44-47).

88. If baptism for the dead was a Christian ceremony, why did Paul use the pronoun “they” rather than “we” or “ye”? Why did he exclude himself and other Christians when
referring to it? (I Corinthians 15:29).

89. If Jesus preached the gospel to disobedient spirits during the time His body was entombed, why did He preach only to the ones who had been disobedient in Noah’s
time? Why didn’t He give a second chance to those who had lived later, such as in Isaiah’s time? (See I Peter 3:18-20).

90. Since the Bible says that a Bishop should be the husband of one wife, how can Mormons claim that polygamy is proper for New Testament Christians? (I Timothy 3:2).

91. If the Mormon church is organized according to the pattern of the Bible, why do they have boy deacons? ( I Tim. 3:8-12).

92. If murder is the unpardonable sin, why did Moses appear in glory on the Mount of Transfiguration? (Exodus 2:12; Matthew 17:3; Doctrine and Covenants 42:18 and Alma
24:10).

93. How can a man who is not a descendant of Aaron hold the Aaronic Priesthood? (Numbers 3:10; 16:40; Hebrews 7:13,14).

94. How could God have justly placed Adam and Eve in a predicament which forced them to break either His first or His second commandment? (See Genesis 1:28; 2:16, 17; James
1:13).

95. Since Jesus said that the broad way leads to destruction, why does the Mormon church teach that the broad way leads to the Terrestrial Heaven? (Compare Matthew 7:13,14 with the Free Agency chart No. 30).

96. Ephesians 2:8,9 speaks of salvation by grace through faith. How can this be resurrection which Mormons say that all people will receive automatically? Do all people have faith? (See Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, pg. 87, 34th edition).

97. Ephesians 2:8,9 further states that this salvation is the gift of God and is not of works. How can this be exaltation? (Mormons teach that exaltation is attained by obedience, works and keeping the commandments). (Ibid. pg. 87 and A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, by Le Grand Richards, pg. 276, revised edition 1971).

98. If salvation as taught in the Bible is neither resurrection nor exaltation, how can Mormons hear the Bible way of salvation in a Mormon Church?

99. How does a Mormon explain Romans 10:13? (Neither general salvation nor individual salvation fits this text).

100. Why don’t Mormons ever say, “I was saved on such and such a day?” (See past tense in Titus 3:5).

* * * * * * * * * * *
TWO QUESTIONS FOR YOU
1. Are you sincere enough about your personal salvation and eternal destiny that you will carefully study the following Bible references to discover the Bible way of salvation?
(John 10:9; I Corinthians 1:18; Ephesians 2:8-10; Colossians 1:12-14; Romans 5:8; I Peter 2:24; Acts 16:31; John 1:12; I John 5:12,13; Romans 5:1 and Romans 8:1).

2. Are you courageous enough to personally receive the Lord Jesus Christ into your heart and follow the truth regardless of ridicule, antagonism or persecution? (John 1:12; Colossians 1:27; Revelation 3:20; and Revelation 22:17).

Some more questions for you, Resty.