Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ANSWERS TO 50 ANTI-MORMON QUESTIONS (LDS SITE FAIR)
FAIR (Foundation for Apologetics Information & Research) ^ | modified December 22, 2007 | FAIR Staff

Posted on 12/29/2007 8:34:35 AM PST by greyfoxx39

 

With the Romney candidacy spurring threads questioning the beliefs of Mormonism on FR, this site will provide the LDS-APPROVED ANSWERS for those who are interested in the debate.

Here are the first fifteen answers. The rest can be found at http://en.fairmormon.org/50_Answers

Two hundred graduating students at Brigham Young University-Hawaii have been urged to use the Internet - including blogs and other forms of "new media" - to contribute to a national conversation about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions

Anti-Mormon literature tends to recycle the same themes. Some ministries are using a series of fifty questions, which they believe will help "cultists" like the Mormons. One ministry seems to suggest that such questions are a good way to deceive Latter-day Saints, since the questions "give...them hope that you are genuinely interested in learning more about their religion."

This ministry tells its readers what their real intent should be with their Mormon friend: "to get them thinking about things they may have never thought about and researching into the false teachings of their church." Thus, the questions are not sincere attempts to understand what the Latter-day Saints believe, but are a smokescreen or diversionary tactic to introduce anti-Mormon material.[1]

The questions are not difficult to answer, nor are they new. This page provides links to answers to the questions. It should be noted that the questions virtually all do at least one of the following:

  1. misunderstand or misread LDS doctrine or scripture;
  2. give unofficial material the status of official belief;
  3. assume that Mormons must have inerrantist ideas about scripture or prophets like conservative evangelical Protestants do;
  4. apply a strict standard to LDS ideas, but use a double standard to avoid condemning the Bible or their own beliefs if the standard was applied fairly to both.
 


Questions About LDS Prophets


1. Why does the Mormon church still teach that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God after he made a false prophecy about a temple built in Missouri in his generation (D&C 84:1-5)

This was not a prophecy, but a command from God to build the temple. There's a difference. Jesus said people should repent; just because many didn't doesn't make Him a false messenger, simply a messenger that fallible people didn't heed.

Learn more here: Independence temple to be built "in this generation"


2. Since the time when Brigham Young taught that both the moon and the sun were inhabited by people, has the Mormon church ever found scientific evidence of that to be true? (Journal of Discourses (1870), 13:271)

In Brigham (and Joseph's) day, there had been newspaper articles reporting that a famous astronomer had reported that there were men on the moon and elsewhere. This was published in LDS areas; the retraction of this famous hoax never was publicized, and so they may not have even heard about it.

Brigham and others were most likely repeating what had been told them by the science of the day. (Lots of Biblical prophets talked about the earth being flat, the sky being a dome, etc.—it is inconsistent for conservative Protestants to complain that a false belief about the physical world shared by others in their culture condemns Brigham and Joseph, but does not condemn Bible prophets.)

In any case, Brigham made it clear that he was expressing his opinion: "Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is." Prophets are entitled to their opinions; in fact, the point of Brigham's discourse is that the only fanatic is one who insists upon clinging to a false idea.


3. Why did Brigham Young teach that Adam is "our Father and our God" when both the Bible and the Book of Mormon (Mor. 9:12) say that Adam is a creation of God? (Journal of Discourses (1852) 1:50))

The problem with "Adam-God" is that we don't understand what Brigham meant. All of his statements cannot be reconciled with each other. In any case, Latter-day Saints are not inerrantists—they believe prophets can have their own opinions. Only the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve can establish official LDS doctrine. That never happened with any variety of "Adam-God" doctrine. Since Brigham seemed to also agree with statements like Mormon 9:12, and the Biblical record, it seems likely that we do not entirely understand how he fit all of these ideas together.


4. If Brigham Young was a true prophet, how come one of your later prophets overturned his declaration which stated that the black man could never hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until after the resurrection of all other races (Journal of Discourses (1854) 2:142-143)

Peter and the other apostles likewise misunderstood the timing of gospel blessings to non-Israelites. Even following a revelation to Peter, many members of the early Christian Church continued to fight about this point and how to implement it—even Peter and Paul had disagreements. Yet, Bible-believing Christians, such as the Latter-day Saints, continue to consider both as prophets. Critics should be careful that they do not have a double standard, or they will condemn Bible prophets as well.

The Latter-day Saints are not scriptural or prophetic inerrantists. They are not troubled when prophets have personal opinions which turn out to be incorrect. In the case of the priesthood ban, members of the modern Church accepted the change with more joy and obedience than many first century members accepted the extension of the gospel to the Gentiles without the need for keeping the Mosaic Law.


5. Since the Bible's test of determine whether someone is a true prophet of God is 100% accuracy in all his prophecies (Deut. 18:20-22), has the LDS Church ever reconsidered its teaching that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were true prophets?

Believing Christians should be careful. Unless they want to be guilty of a double standard, they will end up condemning many Biblical prophets by this standard.


6. Since the current LDS prophets sometimes contradict the former ones, how do you decide which one is correct?

Most "contradictions" are actually misunderstandings or misrepresentations of LDS doctrine and teachings by critics. The LDS standard for doctrine is the scriptures, and united statements of the First Presidency and the Twelve.

The Saints believe they must be led by revelation, adapted to the circumstances in which they now find themselves. Noah was told to build an ark, but not all people required that message. Moses told them to put the Passover lamb’s blood on their door; that was changed with the coming of Christ, etc.

No member is expected to follow prophetic advice "just because the prophet said so." Each member is to receive his or her own revelatory witness from the Holy Ghost. We cannot be led astray in matters of importance if we always appeal to God for His direction.


7. Since there are several different contradictory accounts of Joseph Smith's first vision, how did the LDS Church choose the correct one?

The First Vision accounts are not contradictory. No early member of the Church claimed that Joseph changed his story, or contradicted himself. Critics of the Church have not been familiar with the data on this point.

The shortest answer is that the Saints believe the First Vision not because of textual evidence, but because of personal revelation.

The Church didn't really "choose" one of many accounts; many of the accounts we have today were in diaries, some of which were not known till recently (1832; 1835 (2); Richards, Neibaur). The 1840 (Orson Pratt) and 1842 (Orson Hyde) accounts were secondary recitals of what happened to the Prophet; the Wentworth letter and interview for the Pittsburgh paper were synopsis accounts (at best). The account which the Church uses in the Pearl of Great Price (written in 1838) was published in 1842 by Joseph Smith as part of his personal history. As new accounts were discovered they were widely published in places like BYU Studies.


8. Can you show me in the Bible the LDS teaching that we must all stand before Joseph Smith on the Day of Judgment?

This is a misunderstanding and caricature of LDS doctrine. There is, however, the Biblical doctrine that the apostles will help judge Israel:

Ye [the apostles] are they which have continued with me in my temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Luke 22:28-30; see also Matt. 19:28)

Since the saints believe in modern apostles, they believe that those modern apostles (including Joseph) will have a role in judgment appointed to them by Jesus.

Those who condemn Joseph on these grounds must also condemn Peter and the rest of the Twelve.

Questions About LDS Scripture (excluding the Bible)


9. Can you show me archeological and historical proof from non-Mormon sources that prove that the peoples and places named in the Book of Mormon are true?

This question is based on the mistaken assumption that the Bible message that Jesus is Christ and Lord is somehow "proved" by archeology, which is not true. It also ignores differences between Old and New World archeology. For example, since we don't know how to pronounce the names of ANY Nephite-era city in the American archeological record, how would we know if we had found a Nephite city or not?


10. If the words "familiar spirit" in Is. 29:4 refer to the Book of Mormon, why does "familiar spirit" always refer to occult practices such as channeling and necromancy everywhere else in the Old Testament?

The term "familiar spirit," quoted in the often-poetic Isaiah (and used by Nephi to prophesy about the modern publication of the Book of Mormon) is a metaphor, not a description of any text or its origin.


11. Why did Joseph Smith condone polygamy as an ordinance from God (D. & C. 132) when the Book of Mormon had already condemned the practice (Jacob 1:15, 2:24)

The critics need to read the next verses. The Book of Mormon says that God may command polygamy, just a few verses later. (Jac. 2:30).

Many Biblical prophets had more than one wife, and there is no indication that God condemned them. And, the Law of Moses had laws about plural wives—why not just forbid them if it was evil, instead of telling people how they were to conduct it?

And, many early Christians didn't think polygamy was inherently evil:


12. Why were the words "white and delightsome" in 2 Nephi 30:6 changed to "pure and delightsome" right on the heels of the Civil Rights campaign for blacks?

The critics have their history wrong. The change dates to 1837. The change was made by Joseph Smith in the 1837 edition of the Book of Mormon, though it was not carried through in some other editions, which mistakenly followed the 1830 instead of Joseph’s change. It was restored in the 1981 edition, but that was nearly 150 years after the change was made by Joseph.

This issue has been discussed extensively in the Church's magazines (e.g. the Ensign), and the scholarly publication BYU Studies.


13. If God is an exalted man with a body of flesh and bones, why does Alma 18:26-28 and John 4:24 say that God is a spirit?

In Alma, the reference is to Jesus Christ, who before His birth did not have a physical body.

John 4:24 does not say God is "a" spirit, but says "God is spirit." There is no "a" in the Greek. The Bible also says "God is truth" or "God is light." Those things are true, but we don't presume God is JUST truth, or JUST light—or JUST spirit.

As one non-LDS commentary puts it:

That God is spirit is not meant as a definition of God's being—though this is how the Stoics [a branch of Greek philosophy] would have understood it. It is a metaphor of his mode of operation, as life-giving power, and it is no more to be taken literally than 1John 1:5, "God is light," or Deut. 4:24, "Your God is a devouring fire." It is only those who have received this power through Christ who can offer God a real worship.
- J. N. Sanders, A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John, edited and completed by B. A. Mastin, (New York, Harper & Row, 1968), 147–148.


14. Why did God encourage Abraham & Sarah to lie in Abra. 2:24? Isn't lying a sin according to the 10 commandments? Why did God tell Abraham and Sarah to lie when 2 Nephi condemns liars to hell?

In the Bible, there are accounts of God commanding or approving less than complete disclosure. These examples seem to involve the protection of the innocent from the wicked, which fits the case of Abraham and his wife nicely.


15. Why does the Book of Mormon state that Jesus was born in Jerusalem (Alma 7:10) when history and the Bible state that he was born outside of Jerusalem, in Bethlehem?

The Bible also says that Bethlehem ("the city of David") is at Jerusalem. (2_Kings 14:20) Was the Bible wrong? (Bethlehem is in the direct area of Jerusalem, being only about seven miles apart.)

 


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: elections; lds; magicundies; mormon; mormonism; religion; religionmormon; romney; undies
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 941-960961-980981-1,0001,001-1,018 last
To: SZonian

High five...

Good going

:)


1,001 posted on 05/30/2010 7:36:42 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1000 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Elsie

You get one and a half of the beast ...

and you call ME atupid ???


1,002 posted on 05/30/2010 7:37:14 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 999 | View Replies]

To: restornu

The content of this page may be not copied, published, or redistributed without the prior written consent of FAIR.
___________________________________________

Joey Smith plagurized the book of mormon in the first place ...

ROFLMBO


1,003 posted on 05/30/2010 7:38:04 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana; Elsie

Like LC, I thought I had missed the thread and was pondering my options until I went up a few posts to see what got some knickers tied in knots.


1,004 posted on 05/30/2010 7:41:31 PM PDT by SZonian (We began as a REPUBLIC, a nation of laws. We became a DEMOCRACY, majority rules. Next step is?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1001 | View Replies]

To: SZonian

:)


1,005 posted on 05/30/2010 7:42:19 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1004 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

there you go again stupid is as stupid does what ever flies out of tn piehole!


1,006 posted on 05/30/2010 7:43:43 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1003 | View Replies]

To: restornu

mormonic verses placemarker


1,007 posted on 05/30/2010 8:27:45 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1006 | View Replies]

To: Utah Binger; restornu

Awww..thanks Binger.

Resty, there is no male or female in Christ Jesus. We are all equal before Him. Galatians 3:28


1,008 posted on 05/30/2010 11:36:12 PM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 984 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Tennessee Nana
there you go again stupid is as stupid does what ever flies out of tn piehole!

Are you TRYING to aggravate on of the NICEST antis we have?

Shame on your pea-picking MORMON soul!

(And it's no WONDER you grabbed the Upside Down Beast's number!)

1,009 posted on 05/31/2010 4:07:36 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 999 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Tennessee Nana
there you go again stupid is as stupid does what ever flies out of tn piehole!

Yep' you are!

NANA, Ignore Resty until she starts acting like an adult.

1,010 posted on 05/31/2010 4:09:00 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1006 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

LOL...

Very good point...


1,011 posted on 05/31/2010 5:56:47 AM PDT by ejonesie22 (Christians: Stand for Christ or stand aside...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 998 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

You too Elsie Yippy!


1,012 posted on 05/31/2010 6:03:12 AM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1010 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

the NICEST antis we have?
__________________________________

Oh you sweet man...

:)


1,013 posted on 05/31/2010 7:55:17 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1009 | View Replies]

To: mrreaganaut

Ping


1,014 posted on 05/31/2010 9:44:28 AM PDT by reaganaut (Ex-mormon, now Christian - "I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Religion Moderator
United States Code, Title 17, Section 107: Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Please note that criticism or comment is fair use.

1,015 posted on 05/31/2010 10:00:28 AM PDT by mrreaganaut (In practice, the 'social gospel' always violates the commandments against stealing and coveting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Tennessee Nana
there you go again stupid is as stupid does what ever flies out of tn piehole!

It sounds like English, but I can't understand a single word you're saying.

1,016 posted on 06/01/2010 8:32:06 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1006 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

I think it was something of an aggressive affront that could be answered by this Bible scripture...

What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? Romans 8:31

I just happened to be singing this all day...

If God is for us, who can be against us ?
If God is on our side, How can we be denied ?
In all these things we are
More than conquerors through Jesus Christ our Lord
And nothing can separate us from the Love of God


1,017 posted on 06/01/2010 11:26:08 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1016 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I was singing “If” instead of “Since”

Heres the lyrics...I cant find the song...

Since God Is For Us -

Music and words by Morris Chapman & Lanny Wolfe

Beloved now we are, the sons of God
Adopted by His Blood, we’ve been redeemed,
We’ve been made joint heirs with Jesus,
And to reign as priests and kings,
What do we say to these things?

If God is for us, Who can be against us,
If God Is On our side, how can we be denied?
In all these things we are,
More than conquerors thru Jesus Christ our Lord,
And nothing can separate us, from the love of God.

We’re told that God is working Everything for our good
If we love him and we’re called to do His will
Though the enemy tries to harm us,
And steal the song our hearts would sing,
Tell me what do we say to these things?

If God is for us, Who can be against us,
If God Is On our side, how can we be denied?
In all these things we are,
More than conquerors thru Jesus Christ our Lord,
And nothing can separate us, from the love of God.

Rejoice and triumph, even in the time of trouble
For nothing can compare to the Glory that’s in store
Though hated for His sake we stand justified by faith
We’ll be Glorified with Him forever more.

If God is for us, (tell me now) Who can be against us,
If God Is On our side, how can we be denied?
In all these things we are,
More than conquerors thru Jesus Christ our Lord,
And nothing can separate us, from the love of God.

In all these things we are,
More than conquerors thru Jesus Christ our Lord,
And nothing can separate us, from the love of God.
Oh no nothing can separate us, from the love of God.

Woh yes nothing can separate us, from the love of God.


1,018 posted on 06/01/2010 12:00:58 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1016 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 941-960961-980981-1,0001,001-1,018 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson