On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther posted 95 theses or propositions against the Roman Catholic Church’s sale of indulgences – – the claim that for the right amount of money you could buy forgiveness of sins. Indulgences were hostile to the very heart of the Christian faith. Martin Luther challenged this practice from the Scriptures and called men back to the Bible and back to Jesus. In the spirit of that challenge, we present 95 theses against the claims of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We implore you to search the Scriptures to know what is true (Acts 17:11) and seek the real Jesus while He may be found.
1. Your god is not the God of the Bible, nor even truly a god. He is not the creator and sustainer of all things (Colossians 1:16-17), but an exalted man or “super-man” who transformed eternal matter. Your god is more akin to the Norse god Thor than the God of the Bible.
2. On dedicating the temple in Jerusalem, King Solomon stated that the “heavens of heavens cannot contain thee, how much less this house that I have builded.” (1 Kings 8:27) Yet, your god could have easily fit inside that temple.
3. The Lord, through the Apostle Paul in Romans 1:22, condemns the pagans, “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man. . .” Yet, you take pride that your god is man with a body of flesh and bone (D&C 130:18).
4. Even if your god existed, he would be pitifully small.
5. Jesus was God before He took a body (John 1:1). There is no similarity between God condescending to become a man, and a man exalting himself to become a god.
6. Your god is one among many gods, but the God of the Bible states, “ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.” (Isaiah 44:8)
7. Your god had a father, who had a father. The Bible states, “Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.” (Isaiah 44:6)
8. Your god had a wife. The Bible states, “I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.” (Isaiah 45:5)
9. You twist Psalm 82 to claim a multitude of gods, yet it does not say, “ye may become gods,” but “ye are gods.” Even your apostle, James Talmage, wrote that these are human judges (Jesus the Christ, p.501) who die like men.
10. Your god has not always been a god. Achieving A Celestial Marriage states, “God was once a man who, by obedience, advanced to his present state of perfection. . .” Psalm 90:2 states, “. . . from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.”
11. This concept of your god having to obey a law external to himself sets something superior to your god. There is nothing higher than the God of the Bible (Hebrews 6:13).
12. Your God is subject to human free agency, but the God of the Bible works all things together for good (Romans 8:28) and according to the counsel of His will (Ephesians 1:11). Those who crucified Christ were guilty, yet Jesus was “delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.” (Acts 2:23)
13. Joseph Smith in his “inspired translation” changed the Bible to remove the statement that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart in Exodus. The Apostle Paul in Romans 9 confirms the reading in Exodus, contrary to Joseph Smith.
14. You claim that the Bible contradicts itself because it says that no man has seen God at any time. You ignore the context and figures of speech. The Lord “spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend” (Exodus 33:11), but it is only nine verses later that God explicitly states, “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” (Exodus 33:20)
15. You confuse seeing Jesus with seeing the Father. To see Jesus is to see the Father (John 14:9), but there is a difference. Jesus, the Word, is God (John 1:1); “and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father. . . (John 1:14). Yet, “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:18)
16. You confuse sentimentality with reverence, since you seek to rob God of His unique glory.
17. Your religion seems to be more focused on God as a means to your own glory, rather than us being the means of revealing His glory.
18. You claim we undergo a mortal probation to become a god, and yet Jesus already was God before his incarnation (John 1:1-14).
19. Because John 1:1 contradicted Joseph Smith, in his “inspired” translation of John 1:1 Smith tried to make the gospel rather than Jesus the focus. Nowhere in any of the thousands of Greek manuscripts of this passage do we find anything resembling Smith’s translation.
20. Jesus was worshiped by angels before His incarnation and was so holy that they had to cover their faces in His presence. (Isaiah 6, John 12:41) Yet you have reduced him to our elder spirit brother, along with Satan.
21. Since you believe that we all began as eternal intelligences, all that really separates us from Elohim and Jesus are time and exaltation.
22. Your god is limited in time, power, justice, holiness, love, and glory.
23. You assert that we existed before this world because God tells Jeremiah, “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee. . .” It is only because your god is too small that you cannot fathom a God who “calleth those things which be not as though they were.” (Romans 4:17) God breathed into Adam the breath of life, and Adam “became a living soul.” (Genesis 2:17)
24. You twist the words of Jesus and the apostles to claim that we can become gods. Christians will become like Jesus, yet God explicitly states, “Before me there was no god formed, neither shall there be after me.” (Isaiah 43:10)
25. Isaiah 43:10 and 44:8 also debunk your idea that Jesus became a god at some later date. In the beginning, Jesus already was God (John 1:1), yet the Bible is also clear that there is one God.
26. You ignore what Christians really say about the Trinity and seek to portray it as modalism: one God playacting in three different roles. Christians believe what the Bible teaches: that there is one God, who exists eternally as three distinct persons. We do not believe Jesus was “talking to Himself” in His prayers, but speaking to the Father.
27. You claim there is only one god for this planet, but don’t you claim that Elohim and Jesus are different gods?
28. You are unclear whether Jesus is to be worshiped, and yet He and the Father are worshiped in the Bible by the people of this world.
29. Your god is not holy; he is the author of sin. He gave Adam two contradictory commands, so that Adam had to rebel against God to obey the command to be fruitful and multiply (2 Nephi 2:25). The God of the Bible does not tempt, much less command men to sin (James 1:13).
30. Your apostle, Bruce McConkie stated, “Properly understood, it becomes apparent that the fall of Adam is one of the greatest blessings ever given of God to mankind.” The Bible presents the Fall of Adam, not as a “fall upward,” but treason against God.
31. Our Creator declared all things good, except for man to be alone. When that was resolved, God declared everything “very good.” Adam, in his rebellion, believed things were not good and substituted his judgment for the revelation of God. Mormons agree with sinful Adam.
32. You trivialize sin. The Fall of Adam was not a blessing, but ushered in this world of rape, lies, murder, cancer, and death. Jesus wept over death, but you would have us believe the Fall that brought it a blessing.
33. Your God is the author of lies. He commanded Abraham to lie to Pharaoh (Abraham 2:24). The God of the Bible does not lie (Titus 1:2). Numbers 23:19 states, “ God is not a man, that he should lie. . .” You believe he is both a man and a liar.
34. You trivialize the effect of sin on us. Rather than working out our free agency, the Bible presents man as dead in his trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1), an enemy of God (Romans 5:10), and insensible to the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14).
35. You see men as seeking after God, but God tells us, “There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.”
36. You characterize all those who disagree with you as presenting a cheap grace that does not involve repentance. This is as unfair as your critics refusing to differentiate between Thomas Monson and Warren Jeffs.
37. You equate regeneration and the new birth with water baptism and ignore the need for a new heart and new life.
38. You make salvation a matter of grace, only after all we can do (2 Nephi 25:23) and ignore that even our best works are only “filthy rags.” (Isaiah 64:6)
39. Since your god is not holy, sin is not that bad, and man is not lost, you do not understand grace as the unmerited love of God. Moroni 10:31 states, “. . .if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you . . .”
40. You ignore that we are not merely sick, but dead in our sins. The things of God are foolishness to us and cannot be understood. The gospel is not about God helping good people save themselves, but raising the spiritually dead to life and justifying the ungodly.
41. Joseph Smith in his “inspired translation” guts the gospel of grace by changing Romans 4:5 to say that God “ justifieth not the ungodly.” None of the thousands of Greek manuscripts of this passage support his reading. It also contradicts everything around it and the rest of the New Testament.
42. You are currently unclear as to what you believe about the cross. Your emphasis in the atonement used to be on Jesus sweating blood in the Garden of Gethsemane. You present a moving target in terms of anything substantive in your teaching. McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine has been allowed to go out of print, and no substitute has been offered.
43. You make salvation to mean only resurrection and ignore the reconciliation between God and man.
44. You claim that we are all spirit children of God by birth, but the Bible says that Christians are creatures who are adopted as children of God. (Ephesians 1:5)
45. Your claim that we all pre-existed as spirit children does not fit with what Jesus told the unbelieving Jews, “If God were your Father, ye would love me. . . Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.”
46. You equate godliness with the Word of Wisdom, not with true love for God as He is.
47. Your Word of Wisdom creates man-made traditions forbidding wine that God gave as a blessing (Psalm 104, Ecclesiastes 9) and part of the Lord’s Supper.
48. You ignore the biblical warnings of legalism, such as Colossians 2:20, “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?”
49. You pride yourself against other groups because of the law of consecration, but do you practice it? Do your apostles and other leaders live the law of consecration?
50. You claim the three heavens are degrees of glory. You ignore the Jewish understanding to which Paul referred: the first heaven as the sky, the second heaven where the stars and planets are, and the third heaven (heaven of heavens) being the abode of God.
51. You think that you have a higher view of heaven, because you get to become gods, but you have to redefine the term god. The reality is that God promises far better to Christians. It is only because you don’t know Him that you think an eternity of His presence would be boring.
52. You promote James 1:5 as grounds to pray to know if the Book of Mormon is true. You ignore that the rest of the Bible contradicts this idea.
53. James 1:5 does not lead us to ignore “the Scriptures . . .[which] are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Timothy 3:15)
54. Trusting in the feelings of our hearts is contrary to God’s Word. Jeremiah 17:9 states, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Proverbs 28:26 states, “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool. . .”
55. You claim to believe the Bible “as far as it is translated correctly,” yet you dismiss arguments from the original languages.
56. You claim the Bible has been corrupted, yet ignore that it is the best authenticated ancient text and was sufficiently preserved for Jesus and the apostles to cite it as authoritative.
57. You claim that God has not preserved His Word in His church, but you believe He preserved it in a hillside and in a traveling Egyptian sideshow.
58. You believe your god preserved records for hundreds of years only to be thwarted when Lucy Harris stole the first 116 pages of translation. Rather than retranslating the same plates, Smith claimed he had to translate others that were similar.
59. You dismiss the Bible as authoritative since people disagree over it, yet there are over 200 groups who claim to follow the Book of Mormon, and they disagree about many, many things.
60. You assert contradictions in the Bible, but will not hear any response to your claims.
61. You are not a religion of any book, but of a man; and your prophets have contradicted themselves and one another.
62. You claim that the church lost its priesthood authority through a great apostasy. Once again, your God is too small. Jesus stated that all authority was given to Him in heaven and in earth (Matthew 28:18) and the gates of Hell would not prevail against His church. (Matthew 16:18)
63. You claim that the church lost its priesthood authority, yet your concepts of priesthood and temples are hostile to the Bible. Solomon’s temple had nothing to do with celestial marriage or baptism for the dead, but offering sacrifices and worship to God.
64. Your temples are more rooted in pagan Freemasonry than in the Bible.
65. Your interpretation of “baptism for the dead” in 1 Corinthians 15:29 is hostile to the rest of the Bible.
66. Celestial marriage is not mentioned in the Bible, nor in the Book of Mormon.
67. You build temples made with hands and do not understand that the temple in Jerusalem was replaced with a temple not made with hands – – the church of which Christians are living stones. (1 Peter 2:5)
68. If your temple ceremonies came from God, why were they changed by men? Why do you no longer refer to Protestant ministers as “hirelings of Satan” and take oath to have your throats slit “from ear to ear”?
69. You argue that a true church has apostles, but ignore that the church did not have apostles in the Old Testament, nor did the apostles appoint new apostles, except one in preparation for Pentecost.
70. Your apostles do not meet the biblical qualifications. They are not witnesses of Christ’s resurrection.
71. Your apostles do not have the gifts of the apostles. They do not have miraculous powers of healing the sick or raising the dead.
72. You falsely claim to be the fastest growing church in the world and think this proves the truth of your church. The false prophet Mohammed has 1.6 billion followers. Seventh-day Adventists trace their origins to the Great Disappointment in 1844 and the false prophet Ellen G. White; they have over 18 million members. The Assemblies of God traces its roots to the Azusa Street Revival in 1906 and has over 66 million members.
73. According to Deuteronomy 13, Joseph Smith was a false prophet because he declared a god different from the God of the Bible.
74. According to Deuteronomy 18, Joseph Smith was a false prophet, since he predicted things that did not come to pass.
75. Joseph Smith gave false prophecies, declaring the Second Coming of Christ in the generation of those alive in the 1830’s. Apostle Parley Pratt said in 1838, “Now, Mr. Sunderland, you have something definite and tangible, the time, the manner, the means, the names, the dates; and I will state as a prophecy, that there will not be an unbelieving Gentile upon this continent 50 years hence; and if they are not greatly scourged, and in a great measure overthrown, within five or ten years from this date, then the Book of Mormon will have proved itself false.”
76. The accusations of Joseph Smith’s false prophecies are based not merely on our reading of him, but your own general authorities. For decades, your prophets and apostles declared in General Conference that the generation alive in 1832 would see both the building of a temple in Independence, Missouri, and the Second Coming of Jesus.
77. The best claim you have to Smith’s prophetic gifts is Doctrine & Covenants 87. You claim that Joseph Smith predicted the American Civil War in 1832, but you ignore that this prediction was made in the midst of the Nullification Crisis, when the newspapers were speculating about civil war and President Andrew Jackson was threatening to invade South Carolina. The fact that these tensions eventually did lead to war does not undermine the other issues of false prophecies and declaring a false god.
78. Brigham Young taught over and over that Adam was God, but you dismiss this as not being canonized. He stated, “I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture.”
79. Does it concern you that the prophet to whom you trust your souls and the souls of your children could be so wrong on who God is?
80. Your recent statements on the Book of Abraham seek to confuse the issues.
81. Decades before the rediscovery of the papyri, Egyptologists pointed out the errors in Facsimile 1, and these are the places where the papyrus was missing and images clearly drawn in.
82. You hold open the possibility Smith’s “translation” came from lost papyri. Did Smith not claim that Facsimile 1 came at the beginning of the record? Is not all the text connected with that image from the Egyptian Book of the Dead and has nothing to do with Abraham?
83. Doesn’t Joseph Smith’s Egyptian Grammar translate characters from the existing papyri into the Book of Abraham?
84. Your church lied about polygamy before 1852. Joseph Smith publicly denied that he practiced polygamy. (History of the Church, vol 6, p. 411)
85. The original Doctrine and Covenants lied about the practice of polygamy in Section 101. Apostle and future prophet John Taylor publicly cited this to dismiss accusations of polygamy while secretly practicing it.
86. Though the original section 101, can be “spun” to allow polygamy (it does not say “but” one wife), it specifically prohibited a woman from having more than one husband. Neither Joseph Smith, nor Brigham Young obeyed this.
87. Your church lied about polygamy after the Manifesto in 1890. Polygamy was still secretly practiced by general authorities until the Second Manifesto.
88. Brigham Young stated at General Conference, “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110). Yet this and numerous revelations about Blacks have been relegated to the dustbin of LDS history.
89. Christians in the early church chose torture and death rather than compromise their faith, but the LDS church only had to be threatened with jail to give up polygamy. Jimmy Carter only had to threaten the LDS church tax status to spur a new revelation on blacks in the priesthood.
90. You display a double standard when others criticize you. You declare that you are “sharing” when you claim that God said Joseph Smith should join none of the existing churches because all their professors are corrupt and all their creeds are an abomination. When others respond to your claims, you accuse them of being “anti-Mormons,” or “Mormon-bashers.”
91. Your Scriptures state “Presbyterianism is not true,” (Joseph Smith – History 1:20), but you become upset when others state that Mormonism is not true.
92. You portray yourselves as victims, because Governor Boggs issued an extermination order if Mormons did not leave Missouri. Yet Governor Boggs’ took this language from a sermon by Sidney Rigdon, threatening non-LDS in Missouri with extermination.
93. You portray yourselves as victims, but Mormons killed far more non-Mormons in the name of religion in one day at the Mountain Meadows Massacre than non-Mormons have ever killed Mormons in the name of religion.
94. You insist that Brigham Young did not order the massacre, but he was clearly an accessory after the fact, blaming the Indians. After the massacre, the California Militia found the bones of the victims and gathered them together and placed stones over them. They placed a cross with a sign on top that said “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord; I will repay.” According to eyewitnesses, when Brigham Young found the monument, he supervised its destruction. According to your future prophet, Wilford Woodruff, in his journal, Brigham Young stated about the sign, “it should be vengeance is mine and I have taken a little.”
95. You have the wrong god, the wrong Jesus, and the wrong gospel. You have been deceived by false prophets who lie and tell you that you have peace with God by following them.
We say these things out of love for Christ, love for the truth, and love for you. Jesus describes the sincerely deceived in Matthew 7:21: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
We plead with you to search the Scriptures. You will find that God is far greater and more holy than the LDS believe. You will find that sin is far worse than you ever thought, but you will also find that Jesus is far more loving and glorious than you can imagine.
The Elders of Christ Presbyterian Church
A Congregation of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Magna, UT
(801) 969-7948
http://www.gospelutah.org
Beggar's Bread 
I am a follower of Jesus Christ. Does your church really feel the need to be brutal about your stance for the LDS faith? This was not done in love but in a way of provoking hate. Mormons talk the talk and back it with their walk. Can you? Ponder on this and pray about what you have posted.
Brother Stevo-
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Mormon church in the Pearl of Great Price calls what I believe “an abomination” and says the Presbyterian church is not true. Can we not respond? Can we speak the truth in love without being accused of being brutal and provoking hate?
What is the Mormon “walk”? Are they glorifying God as God? I encourage you to read Jesus in Matthew 7.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well the church doesn’t teach that now. Besides what I am talking about is that mormons that I know take care of b people and love one another. I understand your frustrated about what the church first taught. All churches have a dark history .
LikeLike
@Brother Stevo
YOU WROTE
Well the church doesn’t teach that [The Mormon church in the Pearl of Great Price calls what I believe “an abomination” and says the Presbyterian church is not true] now… I understand your frustrated about what the church first taught.
RESPONSE
Brother Stevo, how can you say that “the church doesn’t teach that” when it’s in current LdS Church scripture – just as Daniel Jason Wallace stated. Here it is, with a live link to this scripture on the official church website:
“Some time in the second year after our removal to Manchester, there was in the place where we lived an unusual excitement on the subject of religion. It commenced with the Methodists, but soon became general among all the sects in that region of country. Indeed, the whole district of country seemed affected by it, and great multitudes united themselves to the different religious parties, which created no small stir and division amongst the people, some crying, “Lo, here!” and others, “Lo, there!” Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist…
I was at this time in my fifteenth year. My father’s family was proselyted to the Presbyterian faith, and four of them joined that church, namely, my mother, Lucy; my brothers Hyrum and Samuel Harrison; and my sister Sophronia…
My mind at times was greatly excited, the cry and tumult were so great and incessant. The Presbyterians were most decided against the Baptists and Methodists, and used all the powers of both reason and sophistry to prove their errors, or, at least, to make the people think they were in error. On the other hand, the Baptists and Methodists in their turn were equally zealous in endeavoring to establish their own tenets and disprove all others…
My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.”
“I was answered by God that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” He again forbade me to join with any of them; ; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.” It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me? Why the opposition and persecution that arose against me, almost in my infancy?”
– Prophet Joseph Smith, Joseph Smith History 1:5,7,9, 18-20 (bolding, underlining, and italicizing added for emphasis)
(see https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/js-h/1.27?lang=eng#4 )
YOU WROTE
Besides what I am talking about is that mormons that I know take care of b people and love one another.
MY RESPONSE
And other groups and people don’t? That’s both nonsense and a really silly test for whether a church, or a group is true or not. The Nazis took good care of their people, does that mean that they were “true”?
YOU WROTE
All churches have a dark history.
MY RESPONSE
Such as? What churches and what dark history are you referring to?
LikeLike
@Brother Stevo
You will also find the entire First Vision account – including the emphasized parts from my last post – in the following current official LdS Church Manual entitled, “Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith” in the chapter entitled, “Chapter 1: The First Vision: The Father and the Son Appear to Joseph Smith” or pages 26–35
Again, here’s a live link to it: https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-1
It can also be found in the current official LdS Church Manual entitled, “Our Heritage: A Brief History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” in the chapter entitled, “Chapter One: The First Vision” on pages viii–4
Here’s that live link: https://www.lds.org/manual/our-heritage-a-brief-history-of-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints/chapter-one-the-first-vision
It’s also covered in the current official LdS Church Manual entitled, “Church History In The Fulness Of Times Student Manual” in the chapter entitled, “Chapter Three: The First Vision” on pages 29–36
Here’s that live link: https://www.lds.org/manual/church-history-in-the-fulness-of-times-student-manual/chapter-three-the-first-vision
And so on and so forth, here’s a search string you can use to see where this is currently in official LdS Church manuals: https://www.lds.org/search?q=first+vision&lang=eng&domains=manuals
So what was that you were saying about the Mormon not teaching “what the church first taught” any more?
LikeLike
Do they walk the walk? I was LDS for years on years and I saw it refuse to help the children of a woman who had not been faithful to the Church because they didn’t believe they deserved to be helped because of their mother’s inactivity. I saw the backbiting and gossip in the ward almost destroy a family. I have since see that the LDS church gives less that 1% of their income to caring for the poor. Yes that make a big deal out of helping in times of major disaster but just aren’t to be found in rally making a difference in the lives of the poor.. If you had any knowledge about what mormonism is all about you wouldn’t be here defending them..
LikeLike
I can see your point. I have heard and seen some of this. Every church has their good and bad. As many churches that I have been apart of I have not seen the love that the wards I have been in have had. I cannot speak for Utah. No church is perfect.
LikeLike
@Brother Stevo
YOU WROTE
I can see your point. I have heard and seen some of this. Every church has their good and bad. As many churches that I have been apart of I have not seen the love that the wards I have been in have had. I cannot speak for Utah. No church is perfect.
MY RESPONSE
Which is all well and good except that means that ANY church where one feels groovy about must be “true” right? For example, please consider this post from a Muslim women on a Catholic discussion board:
“For me, I believe that Muhammad was a prophet because of the Qur’an–because I read it, and in my own estimation after reading it, reflecting on it, and praying about it, I found in myself an unwavering belief that the Qur’an is without a doubt revealed by the Lord of the Worlds, by the Almighty God.”
(see http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?s=c37f3f001ea2276b7b74b15a8cf740c6&p=4462691&postcount=3 )
Sound familiar? Just substitute “Joseph Smith” where it says, “Muhammad” and “Book of Mormon” where it says “Qur’an” and you have the archetypical Mormon Testimony which simply mirrors the “stock” Muslim Testimony know as the Shahada:
“I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and I bear witness that Mohammed is the servant and Messenger of Allah.”
(the “Shahada”)
Therefore, I think that the better question that one should ask is, “Does this church worship the only true God?” And the answer is clearly, “No!” Please consider this from Rob Bowman:
The Mormon and evangelical views of the nature of God are radically different.
(1) Mormons believe that the Father has a physical body that he had before becoming a God, that Christ was a God and then got a physical body, and that the Holy Ghost has a body of spirit. Evangelicals believe that the three persons do not possess bodies intrinsic to their divine nature at all, and that only the Son attained a physical body by humbling himself to become a man.
(2) Mormons believe that the three personages became Gods, and even did so at different times (and maybe in different ways). Evangelicals believe that the three persons have always been God.
(3) Mormons believe that each of the three persons became a God by personal choice; their being God is not something that necessarily must be, but something that is because of the choices they made. Evangelicals believe that God is necessarily God; he could not be otherwise.
(4) Mormons believe that the three personages are three separate beings and three separate Gods. Evangelicals believe that the three persons are one Being, one God.
(5) Mormons believe that Godhood is an open category into which the three personages entered and into which we may also enter by the same law of eternal progression. Evangelicals believe that God is a closed category; only the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are God. If you haven’t been God eternally, you never will be God.
The differences between the two doctrines are far greater than any similarities. We are looking not just at two different doctrines but at two different worldviews.
(source = https://www.facebook.com/groups/306252152864389/permalink/310101082479496/?comment_id=310583235764614&offset=0&total_comments=37 )
And, yes, Stevo I agree, as long as one toes in the line in the Mormon Church then everything is groovy, cool, and cozy. However, as soon as you don’t it’s another matter entirely as this Beggar’s Bread article from a transitioning Shadow Mormon demonstrates: “The Death of Reason and Freedom” by Enigma.
LikeLike
How sad that non-LDS Christians cannot deal with LDS Christians in a Christian way. I do not expect Christians to be perfect just yet but how hard can it be for critics of Mormonism to actually tell the truth?
Apparently, it is impossible. That being so, according to the Holy Bible, they cannot be Christians because Christians do not lie.
Therefore, if they speak untruths they shuck off their Christianity, their Christian discipleship and abandon even the pretence of imitating the behaviour of their professed Exemplar.
Who then can wonder that Jesus, on looking upon them, weeps?
LikeLike
@Ronnie Bray, you wrote, “How sad that non-LDS Christians cannot deal with LDS Christians in a Christian way.”
RESPONSE
The “Christian way” Mr. Bray is to contend for the faith as the Apostles told us:
“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly CONTEND for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”
— Jude 1:3 (JST)
“…we were bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God WITH MUCH CONTENTION.
For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile:
But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts.”
— I Thessalonians 2:2-4 (JST)
YOU WROTE
“I do not expect Christians to be perfect just yet but how hard can it be for critics of Mormonism to actually tell the truth?”
RESPONSE
Rather than stating EXPLICITLY what isn’t true in the article you just threw out vague generalities. Now please tell us WHAT isn’t true supported by countering evidence. Until then you have proven nothing and done nothing but made meaningless accusations.
YOU WROTE
Apparently, it is impossible. That being so, according to the Holy Bible, they cannot be Christians because Christians do not lie.
RESPONSE
Again, we don’t know that they are in fact lying because you haven’t provided any evidence that they have.
However, I agree with you that Christians shouldn’t lie. That said, could you please explain to us why the LdS Church lies so frequently and without any sign of remorse? As LDS Thesis #43 (see https://mormonreformationday2013.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/the-95-lds-theses/ ) states:
[Official LDS Church cirricullum] Gospel Principles explains, “Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.” (see Chapter 31) yet LDS Church leaders mandate that Mormon History must always be presented to members (even privately) in a manner that’s uplifting and only presents the LDS Church in a favorable light – even if the resulting narrative is not true.
Case in point, Ken Clark worked full time for the LDS Church Education System (CES) for 27 years where in his role as a manager he was missioned with being a defender of the faith through church materials. As he explains in his article, “Lying For the Lord” (http://www.mormonthink.com/lying.htm ):
“In my effort to defend the church from detractors I learned that members get excommunicated precisely because they publish the truth, and refuse to adopt lying, deception, or suppression of facts as an ethical standard. Loyalty is more important in the LDS church than honesty. I found this out the hard way while teaching for the Church Education System. Honesty was referred to as undermining the testimonies of the youth, or undermining the authority of the prophets.”
In other words Mr. Bray he was missioned and paid to lie by the LdS Church.
And I cited the following examples of this type of CES lying in a recent Beggar’s Bread article:
– The “Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young” manual (circa 1997) only mentions his first two monogamous legal wives (he remarried after being widowed), never mentions his illegal plural wives (fifty-three that we know of), and never uses the word “polygamy”, “plural wives”, or any derivation thereof anywhere therein. Further, the biggest scandal of his presidency, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, is never mentioned despite it’s profound historical and social significance.
– In a similar manner the “Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith” manual (circa 2011) limits the subject of plural marriage in the introductory notes to the teacher. Throughout the rest of the manual only his marriage to Emma Hale Smith is mentioned and polygamy is conveniently (and as explained in the introduction, deliberately) avoided. Consider for example, this: “Although their marriage would be tested by the deaths of children, financial difficulties, and Joseph’s frequent absences from home in fulfillment of his duties, Joseph and Emma always loved one another deeply.” The biggest test of their marriage was, no doubt, Joseph Smith’s polygamy yet it isn’t mentioned at all.
– Finally, the manual, “Church History in the Fulness of Times” (circa 2014) is a cornucopia of skewed, white washed, historical revisionism. For example, the section entitled, “Missouri Persecutions and Expulsion” goes into great detail about the atrocities and horrors inflicted on Mormons by their Missouri neighbors but fails to mentions the atrocities and horrors inflicted on the Missourians by Mormons during the 1838 Mormon War in Missouri. And the section on the the Kirtland Safety Society absolves Joseph Smith of all culpability…
(see https://beggarsbread.org/2015/02/08/weak-arguments-13-i-will-never-ever-use-official-mormon-church-sources/ )
YOU WROTE
Therefore, if they speak untruths they shuck off their Christianity, their Christian discipleship and abandon even the pretence of imitating the behaviour of their professed Exemplar.
RESPONSE
I agree. However, you didn’t DEMONSTRATE that such lying exists in the article. Therefore, your claims and protests ring hollow.
YOU WROTE
Who then can wonder that Jesus, on looking upon them, weeps?
RESPONSE
Jesus weeping over Christians who “contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints”? I seriously doubt it Mr. Bray.
Thank you.
LikeLike
Ronnie Bray, please enumerate the supposed lies.
LikeLike
For those interested, Brother Stevo after leaving the conversation here, on November 4, 2014 published a protest blog both against this article and against those of us who engaged him in the comment section. It was entitled, “My 21 Theses Against Dunderheads”. You can read that article here: https://bookofstevo.wordpress.com/2014/11/04/my-21-theses-against-dunderheads
I commented on Brother Stevo’s protest blog but my comment appears to be in “Awaiting Moderator Approval” purgatory. Here’s what I said:
October 25, 2015 at 12:35 am
Well speaking as the ‘Someone posted it here on Word Press” I encourage the readers to read the comments on the blog page for themselves and decide for themselves if those who responded to Brother Stevo’s comments last year really are the “Dunderheads” that he claims that we are. Here’s the link: https://beggarsbread.org/2014/10/31/95-theses-against-the-claims-of-the-mormon-church/#comments
Thanks.
I encourage others interested to show Brother Stevo the courtesy of expressing your opinion on his article as well.
LikeLike
Um, Stevo, what do you mean? Are you LDS? Talk the talk and back it with their walk? Could you be more specific about what has impressed you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Barb, if you’ll click on Brother Stevo’s profile you will see that he is indeed a Latter-day Saint.
@Brother Stevo, I found this modern 95 Theses no more or less “brutal” than Martin Luther’s 1517 edition (click here) was toward the Roman Catholic Church. So was Martin Luther a brutal, hypocritical hater too? Your Church doesn’t seem to think so:
Luther was an Augustinian monk and a professor at Germany’s University of Wittenberg. After a monk came to Saxony in 1517 selling indulgences—essentially permission to commit sin—to raise money for Saint Peter’s Basilica in Rome, Luther protested such corruption and worldliness by nailing his historic 95 theses—statements urging reform—to the door of the Wittenberg Castle Church. Antagonism between Luther and the church grew, and in 1521 he was summoned by Emperor Charles V to appear before the Diet (Council) of Worms, where he made this courageous statement: “Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason—I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other—my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. … Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise.”
Luther was officially banned from the empire, but several German princes protected him. He translated the Bible into German for the masses, and Lutheranism spread throughout northern Europe and caused an ecclesiastical revolution. Elder McConkie said, “Luther’s break with Catholicism was part of the divine program; it came as an Elias preparing the way for the Restoration.”
(see “Preparing for the Restoration”, Ensign, June 1999)
As for Mormons “talking the talking and backing it with their walk”, this current 2014 set of 95 Theses (which I had nothing to do with) was directed for the most part at theological issues and didn’t touch on the profound hypocrisy of the LdS Church in a number of areas like last year’s 95 LDS Theses (which I did have something to do with) did. Here are a few examples:
52. It hypocritically claims that polygamy has no place in the contemporary LDS Church even though Joseph Smith’s revelation on polygamy (Doctrine & Covenants 132) is still canonized scripture and “Celestial Polygamy” (being eternally married to at least one more woman after being widowed or divorced) is practiced. Currently, three widowed Mormon Apostles (Dallin H. Oaks, L. Tom Perry, and Russell M. Nelson) are Celestial Polygamists. [click here for supplemental evidence]
66. D&C 42:71-73 commands paid clergy: Saying in part, “they are to receive a just remuneration for all their services”. And while in actual fact the LDS Church compensates leaders via employment in church owned businesses, generous honoraria, stipends, grants, scholarships, gifts, company cars, free travel and lodging, housing and other non-cash contributions, in public it deceptively claims that “The LDS Church has no paid clergy”.
67. It hypocritically denounces those who claim to bring forth new scripture and revelations using the same methods and means that Joseph Smith did because they fail to conform to established LDS Church orthodoxy. This, while simultaneously criticizing the mainstream Christian Church for rejecting Mormonism because the revelations and scripture of its founder and subsequent “prophets” fail to conform to established Christian orthodoxy. One such example of this is Christopher Nemelka’s “The Sealed Portion”.
70. It publicly (and loudly) trumpets its philanthropic work when compared to other churches its per capita outlay is less than what smaller, less wealthy, less organized religious organizations spend: “A study co-written by Cragun and recently published in Free Inquiry estimates that the Mormon Church donates only about 0.7 percent of its annual income to charity; the United Methodist Church gives about 29 percent.”
(Caroline Winter, “How The Mormons Make Money”, Business Week; July 18, 2012) [click here for supplemental evidence]
71. It has allowed LDS Church leaders to obfuscate, spin-doctor, and blatantly lie to the media rather than standing with integrity and bolding telling the world what the LDS Church really believes, teaches, and practices. Such behavior should be denounced and condemned not tolerated, justified, or praised. One example of this Gordon B. Hinckley lying to journalists about the role and function of the Lorenzo Snow couplet within LDS Theology.
72. It fails to recognize the over sixty (60) active Latter Day Saint movement denominations (aka “splinter groups”) while hypocritically condemning the denominationalism of Christianity as a proof of apostasy and lack of divine legitimacy. This hypocrisy is even more pronounced when one considers that over the 180+ year history of the LDS movement there have been over 200 Latter Day Saint denominations in total with new ones forming at a rate will be eventually far exceed and outpace the total number of Christian denominations. [click here for supplemental evidence]
77. It erroneously asserts that former members didn’t leave the LDS Church for any thoughtful or legitimate reasons but rather that they were thin skinned reactive, malcontents who left the LDS Church because they wanted to sin with impunity, or because of a perceived offense. Stated plainly, this is a hypocritical double standard: It’s OK to be troubled by, doubt, criticize, and even leave other churches, but this one can’t be questioned or left.
83. It hypocritically rails against sound logic and reason as “the hollow and vain philosophies of men, not God” and then hypocritically attempts to (albeit poorly and inconsistently) employ logic and reason in its arguments and rhetoric. [click here for supplemental evidence]
94. It hypocritically defines polemic arguments as “persecution” and then engages in polemics with its critics and those of other faiths. For example, consider how it trains its missionaries to speak of other churches:
“Without the Apostles, over time the doctrines were corrupted, and unauthorized changes were made in Church organization and priesthood ordinances, such as baptism and conferring the gift of the Holy Ghost. Without revelation and priesthood authority, people relied on human wisdom to interpret the scriptures and the principles and ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
False ideas were taught as truth. Much of the knowledge of the true character and nature of God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost was lost. The doctrines of faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost became distorted or forgotten. The priesthood authority given to Christ’s Apostles was no longer present on the earth. This apostasy eventually led to the emergence of many churches.”
(“Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service”; Official LDS Church Missionary Training curriculum, p.35)
[click here for supplemental evidence]
And, finally, as a self-proclaimed Gay Mormon I think that you may find this one of particular interest:
69. It engages in political action via direct and indirect cash flows and privately exhorts members to organize and engage in particular causes and then publicly denies any involvement. California’s Propositions 22 (circa 2000) and 8 (circa 2008) are two cases in point.
So, “Mormons talk the talk and back it with their walk?” Sorry Stevo, just not seeing it buddy, the evidence strongly suggests otherwise.
LikeLike
Very judgmental and hateful speech of another church. I’m in awe.
LikeLike
Do you also accuse the LDS church of being judgmental and hateful when they call the Westminster Confession of Faith an “abomination”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t call your church that. In fact I’ve never heard of your church. Are you referring to God calling your church an abomination? You’ll have to hash that out with him my friend.
LikeLike
@Matt Lemmon
YOU WROTE
I didn’t call your church that. In fact I’ve never heard of your church. Are you referring to God calling your church an abomination? You’ll have to hash that out with him my friend.
MY RESPONSE
You’ve never heard of the Presbyterian church Matt? I find that very hard to believe since it’s mentioned several times in the First Vision (I won’t bother citing from it again since I’ve already done so several times now).
As for the Mormon god calling the Presbyterian church and it’s creed an abomination, which he does in the First Vision by implication (Joseph Smith — History 1:19) and Joseph Smith does explicitly (“Presbyterianism is not true,” Joseph Smith – History 1:20) the begging question is this: Did God really say it?
There is no compelling evidence that the First Vision actually happened and mountains of evidence that compels one to the conclusion that it didn’t (see “A Documented History of Joseph Smith’s First Vision”)
And as Gordon B. Hinckley said well:
“…this is the pivotal thing of our story. Every claim that we make concerning divine authority, every truth that we offer concerning the validity of this work, all finds its roots in the First Vision of the boy prophet. Without it we would not have anything much to say…
This becomes the hinge pin on which the whole cause turns. If the First Vision was true, if it actually happened, then the Book of Mormon is true. Then we have the priesthood. Then we have the Church organization and all of the other keys and blessings of authority which we say we have. If the First Vision did not occur, then we are involved in a great sham. It is that simple.” (bolding added)
(“Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley“, p.227)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would like to thank the Mormons who have commented so far for both proving and demonstrating theses #90 and #91 of this set of 95 Theses…
90. You display a double standard when others criticize you. You declare that you are “sharing” when you claim that God said Joseph Smith should join none of the existing churches because all their professors are corrupt and all their creeds are an abomination. When others respond to your claims, you accuse them of being “anti-Mormons,” or “Mormon-bashers.”
91. Your Scriptures state “Presbyterianism is not true,” (Joseph Smith – History 1:20), but you become upset when others state that Mormonism is not true.
… as well as thesis #94 from the 95 LDS Theses which another group did last year:
94. It hypocritically defines polemic arguments as “persecution” and then engages in polemics with its critics and those of other faiths. For example, consider how it trains its missionaries to speak of other churches:
“Without the Apostles, over time the doctrines were corrupted, and unauthorized changes were made in Church organization and priesthood ordinances, such as baptism and conferring the gift of the Holy Ghost. Without revelation and priesthood authority, people relied on human wisdom to interpret the scriptures and the principles and ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
False ideas were taught as truth. Much of the knowledge of the true character and nature of God the Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost was lost. The doctrines of faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost became distorted or forgotten. The priesthood authority given to Christ’s Apostles was no longer present on the earth. This apostasy eventually led to the emergence of many churches.”
(“Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service”; Official LDS Church Missionary Training curriculum, p.35)
(source = http://mormonreformationday2013.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/the-95-lds-theses/ )
LikeLike
this a little unfair because it’s a humanly response to defend what you believe in hence this whole article is defending what they believe in and we all have that right.
LikeLike
@Samantha Renee Perry
YOU WROTE
“this a little unfair because it’s a humanly response to defend what you believe in hence this whole article is defending what they believe in and we all have that right.”
MY RESPONSE
I’m confused. Who and what are you addressing with this comment?
LikeLike
@Matt Lemmon
And, of course there’s nothing judgmental or any hateful speech in any of the following from Joseph Smith and other Mormon Leaders, right?
“My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.”
“I was answered by God that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” He again forbade me to join with any of them;…”
– Prophet Joseph Smith, Joseph Smith History 1:18-20
“What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world”
– Prophet Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.270
“…all the priests who adhere to the sectarian religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels.”
– Prophet Joseph Smith , The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith Jr., editor, vol.1, no.4, p.60
“For centuries men gathered and argued concerning the nature of Deity. Constantine assembled scholars of various factions at Nicaea in the year 325. After two months of bitter debate, they compromised on a definition which for generations has been the doctrinal statement among Christians concerning the Godhead.”
“I invite you to read that definition and compare it with the statement of the boy Joseph. He simply says that God stood before him and spoke to him. Joseph could see Him and could hear Him. He was in form like a man, a being of substance. Beside Him was the resurrected Lord, a separate being, whom He introduced as His Beloved Son and with whom Joseph also spoke.”
“I submit that in the short time of that remarkable vision Joseph learned more concerning Deity than all of the scholars and clerics of the past.”
“This knowledge of Deity, hidden from the world for centuries, was the first and great thing which God revealed to His chosen servant. And upon the reality and truth of this vision rests the validity of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
– Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Great Things Which God Has Revealed” Spring Church Confernece 2005
“Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the ‘whore of Babylon’ whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent”
– Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 255
“And the angel of God said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.”
– Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10-11
“After the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, there were only two churches upon the earth. They were known respectively as the Church of the Lamb of God and Babylon. The various organizations which are called churches throughout Christendom, though differing in their creeds and organizations, have one common origin. They all belong to Babylon”
– Apostle George Q. Cannon said, Gospel Truth, p.324
“When the light came to me I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness.”
– Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 5:73
“With a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world.”
– Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 8:199
“The Christian world, so-called, are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God”
– Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 8:171
“Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell. The eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and then kicked on to the earth.”
– Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 6:176
“Christians—those poor, miserable priests brother Brigham was speaking about—some of them are the biggest whoremasters there are on the earth, and at the same time preaching righteousness to the children of men. The poor devils, they could not get up here and preach an oral discourse, to save themselves from hell; they are preaching their fathers’ sermons —preaching sermons that were written a hundred years before they were born. …You may get a Methodist priest to pour water on you, or sprinkle it on you, and baptize you face foremost, or lay you down the other way, and whatever mode you please, and you will be damned with your priest.”
– Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, 5:89
“The Gospel of modern Christendom shuts up the Lord, and stops all communication with Him. I want nothing to do with such a Gospel, I would rather prefer the Gospel of the dark ages, so called”
– Prophet Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p.196
“But as there has been no Christian Church on the earth for a great many centuries past, until the present century, the people have lost sight of the pattern that God has given according to which the Christian Church should be established, and they have denominated a great variety of Christian Churches … But there has been a long apostasy, during which the nations have been cursed with apostate churches in great abundance”
– Apostle Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, 18:172
“Christianity…is a perfect pack of nonsense…the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century.”
– Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p.167
“Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom.”
– Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, 10:127
“What! Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beast.”
– Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 13:225
“What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing… Why so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest fools; they know neither God nor the things of God.”
– Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 13:225
“Doctrines were corrupted, authority lost, and a false order of religion took the place of the gospel of Jesus Christ, just as it had been the case in former dispensations, and the people were left in spiritual darkness.”
– Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 3, p. 266).
“For hundreds of years the world was wrapped in a veil of spiritual darkness, until there was not one fundamental truth belonging to the place of salvation …Joseph Smith declared that in the year 1820 the Lord revealed to him that all the ‘Christian’ churches were in error, teaching for commandments the doctrines of men.”
– Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 3, p.282
“Instead of having apostles, prophets, and other inspired men in the church now, receiving visions, dreams, revelations, ministry of angels and prophesies for the calling of officers, and for the government of the church – they have a wicked, corrupt, uninspired pope, or uninspired archbishops, bishops, clergymen, etc., who have a great variety of corrupt forms of godliness, but utterly deny the gift of revelation, and every other miraculous power which always characterized Christ’s Church.”
“These manmade, powerless, hypocritical, false teachers, make merchandise of the people, by preaching for large salaries, amounting in many instances to tens of thousands of dollars annually. They and their deluded followers are reprobate, denouncing the faith once delivered to the Saints.”
– Apostle Orson Pratt, “Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon,” page 20
“…the Book of Mormon remains secure, unchanged and unchangeable, …But with the Bible it was not and is not so….it was once in the sole and exclusive care and custody of an abominable organization (Christianity), founded by the devil himself, likened prophetically unto a great whore, whose great aim and purpose was to destroy the souls of men in the name of religion. In these hands it ceased to be the book it once was.”
– Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, The Joseph Smith Translation, pp. 12, 13
“Must we, under the broad folds of the American Constitution, be compelled to bow down to the narrow contracted notions of Apostate Christianity? Must we shut up our consciences in a nut shell, and be compelled to submit to the bigoted notions, and whims, and customs of the dark ages of popery, transferred to us through the superstitious of our fathers? Must we be slaves to custom and render homage to the soul-destroying, sickening influences of modern Christianity? No!”
– Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, Vol.1, No.7, p.111
“And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this (Mormon) church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth…”
– Supposedly Jesus Christ Himself, Doctrine and Covenants 1:30
“This is not just another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches. This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face of the earth…”
– Prophet Ezra Taft Benson, Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p.164-165
“In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ.’ ‘No, I don’t. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times. He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages.'”
– Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, LDS Church News, June 20, 1998, p.7
LikeLike
That’s it? Did you post to discuss, or just to diss? In the free marketplace of ideas (where freedom of religion lives), it’s ok to question and raise issues. What issues raised here bother you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints also known as a “Mormon” but would prefer to be known as a Latter Day Saint. As i read this article it made me angry at first and then sad because i got to see how wrongly my beliefs were being portrayed. A lot of things were being taken out of context and i can see how they could make others angry but that was not our intention. It’s been said in many different places that Christ only has one church and so by default every other church would be incorrect if you believe your church is that one and only church of Christ. I find it a little unfair that you are bagging on us when every other christian based religion believes the same thing. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised because we have been judged harshly since the beginning when this church was first organized so of course stuff like this is all over the internet. Most of the things that have been said sadly are incorrect and hurtful. I couldn’t even read through all of it. I would like to give a little insight on what we believe. We do not just study from The Book of Mormon we also study from the Bible, specifically the King James version. In History the Bible was translated time and time again and a lot of leaders would rewrite things to manipulate the people. Many versions of the bible came up due to this and it’s hard to tell which one is true. This is simply an historical fact. Which is why we have The Book of Mormon. It’s not to replace the bible it’s to help complete it. The Book of Mormon talks about the America’s where Christ visited after his resurrection. Many will not believe this and you have the right to that belief and i will not judge or put you down for believing that but I ask you to read and ask god yourself because in James 1:5 “If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of god”.
LikeLike
@ Samantha Renee Perry
YOU WROTE
I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints also known as a “Mormon” but would prefer to be known as a Latter Day Saint. As i read this article it made me angry at first and then sad because i got to see how wrongly my beliefs were being portrayed. A lot of things were being taken out of context and i can see how they could make others angry but that was not our intention.
RESPONSE
Such as? Exactly WHAT wrongly portrayed your beliefs and was taken out of context? Specifics please.
YOU WROTE
It’s been said in many different places that Christ only has one church and so by default every other church would be incorrect if you believe your church is that one and only church of Christ.
RESPONSE
Respectfully, this statement displays tremendous ignorance rooted in insularity. While it’s clear that Christ only has one UNIVERSAL Church that universal Church (big C) is comprised of many churches (small c). One need go no further than the Bible to see this. Epistles were written to churches that were part of Christ’s Church. Some epistles were written to people group groups (Hebrews in particular) who were sub-sets of those churches that were part of the Church. Nowhere is this more evident than in the opening chapters of the book of Revelation in which Christ (yes, read that again Christ) speaks to seven (7) different churches who were all part of His Church. Please see this article for a fuller explanation on this: http://www.gotquestions.org/universal-local-church.html
The Bible is also clear that the Church is timeless and includes the entire community of saints throughout history (see Hebrews chapters 11 and 12)
YOU WROTE
I find it a little unfair that you are bagging on us when every other christian based religion believes the same thing.
RESPONSE
The only churches that claim to be “the only true church” are cults.
Mainstream orthodox churches recognize any and all churches that are aligned with the essential doctrines of the Christian faith (please click here) as true churches that are part of the Church universal.
That’s why you can get 70,000 men of various and different Christian denominations together for a Promise Keepers event in the L.A. Colosseum – as I saw with my own eyes TWICE – and they recognize each other as part of the Church. That’s why you can get hundreds, even thousands of different, diverse churches to come together as The Church in that area to help support a Billy Graham crusade in their area.
This statement is Latter-day nonsense rooted in a false assumption. Again, and with all due respect, this is yet more ignorance rooted in insularity IMO.
YOU WROTE
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised because we have been judged harshly since the beginning when this church was first organized so of course stuff like this is all over the internet.
RESPONSE
If you will read the full corpus of 19th Century literature you will see that the reason why why Mormonism has been judged harshly since the beginning is because Joseph Smith was clearly a False Prophet. And the reasons why Joseph Smith, Jr. is demonstrably a false prophet is a LONG topic but a cryptic list includes (but is not limited to) the following:
1) Fulfilling every Old and New Testament test for a false Prophet.
Deu 13:1-11
Seducing God’s people into following a God other than the one that they’ve known:
Deu 18:18-22
Giving predictions of the future that fail to come to pass:
(also see #2 below)
Mat 7:15-20
Living a life that doesn’t produce good fruit:
1 John 4:1-3
Denying that God eternal was incarnated as Jesus Christ:
2) Numerous unfulfilled prophecies.
http://carm.org/false-prophecies-of-joseph-smith
http://hismin.com/content/53-false-prophecies-joseph-smith
3) Use of Occult practices like scrying and Shamanism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrying#Latter_Day_Saint_movement
http://www.i4m.com/think/history/holy-ghost.htm
http://bethanymagdalene.blogspot.com/2008/09/emma-smith-as-shaman.html
4) Incorporating Freemasonry into the LDS Temple ceremonies.
(Freemasonry is rooted in Kabbalah which is occultic)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_and_Freemasonry
http://www.ldsendowment.org/masonry.html
The following Videos go into further detail on each of these points – here are links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBT0WSjcOKs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1mFdO1wB08
YOU WROTE
Most of the things that have been said sadly are incorrect and hurtful.
RESPONSE
Such as? I don’t know the entire board of elders at the church that produced this but I do know the Pastor and I know that he strives to be fair and precise in what he says. And I would never describe his as “hurtful” – quite the opposite.
If anything in these 95 Theses is incorrect or hurtful I’m sure that he would like to know about it. So, what are they?
YOU WROTE
I would like to give a little insight on what we believe. We do not just study from The Book of Mormon we also study from the Bible, specifically the King James version.
RESPONSE
This is a half truth – an obfuscation IMO. You ALSO study from Doctrine & Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. In fact, very little Mormon Doctrine can be found in the Book of Mormon (please click here to see my article on this) AND what’s in the Book of Mormon discredits much modern Mormon Doctrine (please click here to see my article on that)
Finally, Mormonism uses Article #8 of the Articles of Faith to undermine the authority of the Bible. I wrote about that in my article which published yesterday:
Joseph Smith’s Article Eight of the canonized Articles of Faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is as follows:
We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
Taken at face value, I agree with the first part of Article Eight – the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. However, what Joseph Smith’s words actually say and how they’re understood and applied by Mormons are often two different things. As Robert N. Hullinger observed in his award winning book, “Mormon Answer to Skepticism: Why Joseph Smith Wrote the Book of Mormon”, Joseph Smith’s real agenda from the beginning was to undermine the absolute authority of the Bible and replace it with his own:
“In defense of God, Joseph Smith assailed the natural revelation of deism, which excluded the supernatural, and the static revelation of traditional Christianity contained in a closed canon. But to enable revealed religion to overcome natural religion, Smith supported the deistic attack on the Bible’s being complete and errorless. Rejection of the traditional view left him free to pursue special revelation specific to his own cause.”
YOU WROTE
In History the Bible was translated time and time again and a lot of leaders would rewrite things to manipulate the people. Many versions of the bible came up due to this and it’s hard to tell which one is true. This is simply an historical fact.
RESPONSE
No, this is historical myth. The historical record doesn’t bear this out. There were far too many manuscripts of the Bible spread across too many diverse places for this type of conspiracy to have happened. I would encourage you to watch the following James White presentation if you have any doubts on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuiayuxWwuI
However, we DO have evidence of this happening with the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible – what you’re describing is EXACTLY what Joseph Smith did in his “translation” of the Bible:
If there was a “problem” with the New Testament of Joseph’s day it was that it had just a bit more material than was original to those New Testament books. (Scribes almost never deleted anything from the manuscripts they copied, but they sometimes added words or phrases, often in the margins as explanations that later scribes copied as if they were part of the book.) The additional material is insignificant except in two places: the ending of Mark (16:9-20) and the story of the woman caught in adultery (John 7:53-8:11). The consensus of New Testament scholars is that these two passages of a dozen verses each were later additions to the Gospels. And here is something worth noting: in his revisions to the Bible, Joseph did not indicate that either of these two passages should be omitted. In fact, Joseph added some words to the passage about the adulterous woman (in John 8:6).
The LDS view of the “corruption” of the text of the Bible, then, has things exactly backwards. The original text of the books of the Bible has survived with no significant omissions. “Many plain and precious things” were not lost. Instead, scribes added words here or there, and in a couple of places short passages, that were not part of the original text. Joseph Smith’s revision to the Bible consists almost entirely of additions, several of them lengthy, that we can say with reasonable certainty were not part of the original books of the Bible. Furthermore, Joseph failed to identify those two major additions to the New Testament that did not belong.
(Rob Bowman, “The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible”)
YOU WROTE
Which is why we have The Book of Mormon. It’s not to replace the bible it’s to help complete it. The Book of Mormon talks about the America’s where Christ visited after his resurrection.
MY RESPONSE
Nonsense, what rubbage! The Book of Mormon doesn’t claim that it completed the Bible – it makes no such claim! Yes, Samantha, not only have I read it, I’ve studied it – I know what the Book of Mormon does and doesn’t say.
In fact, about 1/3 of the Book of Mormon is nothing more than directly plagiarized text from the 1769 edition of the KJV that was available in America during Joseph Smith’s time (see here)
Furthermore, the Book of Mormon has EXACTLY the same type of text variants in it’s source manuscripts that Mormons like to point to as point of the unreliability of the Bible. This too is from my article which posted here on Beggar’s Bread yesterday (click here):
Royal Skousen is the leading expert on on the extant Book of Mormon manuscripts. In regard to Mr. Skousen’s work on the text variants between the original BoM manuscripts and the published 1830 Book of Mormon, the fly leaf of his book, “The Book of Mormon: The Earliest Text” summarizes nicely:
Over the past twenty-one years, editor Royal Skousen has pored over Joseph Smith’s original manuscripts and identified more than 2,000 textual errors in the 1830 edition. Although most of these discrepancies stem from inadvertent errors in copying and typesetting the text, the Yale edition contains about 600 corrections that have never appeared in any standard edition of the Book of Mormon, and about 250 of them affect the text’s meaning.
In other words, the Book of Mormon has exactly the same kind of manuscript text variants that source Biblical manuscripts do – the same variants that Mormons point to regarding our so-called “compromised” Bible. And proportionally there are more of them relative to the size and scope of the manuscript record.
So if you’re done pointing to the moot in the Bible’s eye perhaps you should look at the beam sticking out of the eye of the Book of Mormon.
YOU WROTE
Many will not believe this and you have the right to that belief and i will not judge or put you down for believing that but I ask you to read and ask god yourself because in James 1:5 “If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of god”.
MY RESPONSE
Well James 1:5 when read in the full context of the chapter is about seeking God for wisdom and understanding about why you’re suffering in the midst of trials not discerning whether a church, a book, or an alleged prophet is “true” or not. The Mormon abuse of that passage is rather glaring!
(for a good and accurate exegesis of James 1:5 that doesn’t abuse the Biblical text click here)
Now, that said, Samantha, I have read the Book of Mormon and I have taken the “Moroni 10 Challenge” carefully fulfilling all the requirements given and here was the result:
I would like to bear my testimony . . .
I have diligently sought God regarding whether the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is true or not. To that end, I have studied the Bible as well as the Book of Mormon and I have prayed consistently for over 30-years. I have taken the “Moroni 10 Challenge” and I have felt an intense “burning in my bosom” many, many, many times in my life — in fact, I carry it with me every day of my life.
… and my testimony is this:
I am utterly convinced that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a non-Christian cult, that Joseph Smith was a false prophet, as is Thomas S. Monson. Further, I am utterly convinced that the Book of Mormon is an uninspired, man created work of 19th Century fiction.
Here I stand before God and before men – I can do no other.
In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, amen.
LikeLiked by 2 people
[…] 95 Theses Against the Claims of the Mormon Church […]
LikeLike
[…] [19] At this point you may be wondering, “Sounds interesting but exactly what kind of ’reform’ are we talking about? I gave my answer here: “If I Were Mope [2013 Edition]”. And I wasn’t the first or the last to offer up a suggested reform model for the LdS Church. Here are some others to consider: Mormon Reformation Day 2011 95 LDS Theses Mormon Reformation Day 2012 95 LDS Theses Mormon Reformation 95 LDS Theses Mormon Reformation Day 2013 LDS Theses 95 Theses Against the Claims of the Mormon Church […]
LikeLike
Not enough time or space to respond to all of these, but I’ll answer a few…
2. On dedicating the temple in Jerusalem, King Solomon stated that the “heavens of heavens cannot contain thee, how much less this house that I have builded.” (1 Kings 8:27) Yet, your god could have easily fit inside that temple.
4. Even if your god existed, he would be pitifully small.
Isaiah saw the Lord (an impossibility by your doctrine), inside Solomon’s temple (an impossibility by your doctrine), seated on a throne (an impossibility by your doctrine). This throne is the “mercy seat,” placed within the Holy of Holies, atop the ark of the covenant and underneath the sculpted cherubim. See Exodus 25:10-22 and 1 Kings 8:6-7 to understand this scene.
Isaiah explains that, while the “the whole earth is full of his glory,” the Lord Himself was in a specific location, INSIDE the temple of Solomon, “and the train of his robe filled the temple” (Isaiah 6:1-3, NIV). The LDS view is entirely consistent with Isaiah’s description. Your view is not.
Your argument rests solely on one meaning of the word “contain” in 1 Kings 8:27. But the word “contain” has several meanings, including “to keep (something) within limits” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/contain). Solomon’s statement was effectively that the Lord would not be constrained to remain within the physical boundaries of the temple.
Nevertheless, the temple was still God’s house, as expressed in the next few verses: “That thine eyes may be open toward this house night and day, even toward the place of which thou hast said, My name shall be there” (1 Kings 8:29). This is EXACTLY how Mormons view God’s interaction with His temples.
9. You twist Psalm 82 to claim a multitude of gods, yet it does not say, “ye may become gods,” but “ye are gods.” Even your apostle, James Talmage, wrote that these are human judges (Jesus the Christ, p.501) who die like men.
Jesus invoked Psalm 82 as a defense against charges of blasphemy: “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” (John 10:33-36.)
If Psalm 82 is only about mortal men then Jesus was twisting the scriptures for his own benefit, and his defense was nonsensical. Is this really what you believe?
14. You claim that the Bible contradicts itself because it says that no man has seen God at any time. You ignore the context and figures of speech. The Lord “spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend” (Exodus 33:11), but it is only nine verses later that God explicitly states, “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.” (Exodus 33:20)
So you have shown that the Bible does indeed contradict itself, which is exactly the claim that you are attacking. I don’t see how this advances your position.
This verse, and the next three, state unequivocally that God has a face, hands, and a backside: “I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen” (Exodus 33:21-23). Why do you reject this clear Biblical doctrine?
And I really shouldn’t need to point out that YOU are the one “ignoring the context” here, hoping that no one actually looks up the passage and reads beyond the one verse that you cited.
54. Trusting in the feelings of our hearts is contrary to God’s Word. Jeremiah 17:9 states, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Proverbs 28:26 states, “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool…”
Proverbs also says, “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5). Are you really arguing that we cannot trust the Lord to answer our prayers?
55. You claim to believe the Bible “as far as it is translated correctly,” yet you dismiss arguments from the original languages.
As soon as you start arguing from the original languages, you are demonstrating two facts:
A – The Bible as we have it today is NOT sufficient, and is NOT inerrant. If it were, you would not need to go back to the original languages.
B – The LDS position, that “we believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly,” is the only tenable position on Biblical integrity — and in fact it is the same position that you yourself hold.
If you will concede these two points, then I will be happy to hear your arguments from the original languages.
-Chip Whitmer
LikeLike
Mr. Whitmer’s comment was cross posted both here and on the Facebook wall of Jason Wallace, the Pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church (Magna, Utah) on 2016-01-23. Pastor Wallace responded to this comment there and rather than reinventing the wheel, and after consulting with Pastor Wallace, we felt it expedient to cross post the discussion that occurred there here as well.
Jason Wallace: Chip, other than a handful of fringe folks, no one claims any translation is inspired by God, so inerrancy and sufficiency are always understood to be in the original language of the revelation. We believe we can make faithful translations that are reliable and clear, but on certain nuances the original languages are needed. This is not the LDS position. Joseph Smith added the word “not” to Romans 4:5. The word appears in none of the thousands of manuscripts. It contradicts not only what Paul really said, but everything else that Paul is saying in Romans. Similarly, Smith changed all the passages in Exodus to remove God hardening Pharaoh’s heart. No Jewish text agrees, nor does any translation. Paul’s argument in Romans 9 is based on the actual reading, against Smith. I’ll take Paul over Smith any day.
In terms of the infinity of God, there is also Isaiah 66:1 Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me?
Chip Whitmer: Yes, but the scene Isaiah describes in chapter 6 is clearly inside the temple. Isaiah says he was in the temple, and calls it a “house.” Read the references in Exodus and 1 Kings. There is no question what he is describing.
Jason Wallace: Chip, the VISION in Isaiah 6 is not in the earthly temple, but in the heavenly one
Chip Whitmer: Now you are ignoring context. Isaiah is very clear about where he was and what he saw. He is describing the Holy of Holies in Solomon’s temple. Read the references. He calls it “the temple” and “the house,” with doors, door posts, furniture, cherubim, incense, a throne, and an altar. These are all features of the house Solomon built, and which the Lord accepted and hallowed (1 Kings 9:3). Your mockery of LDS doctrine would apply just as well to Isaiah: “God easily fit inside that temple.”
“Inerrancy and sufficiency are always understood to be in the original language of the revelation.” I have spoken with many Evangelicals, Baptists, and Pentecostals, all of whom believe the Bible is inerrant, and none of whom have any knowledge of the original languages. For them, inerrancy applied to the Bible they held in their hands, which was an English or Spanish translation. And their criticism against the Mormons has always been because we suggest that there may be errors in translation — implying that their Bible has no such errors. So, while your statement is probably accurate from a scholarly perspective, it is not true among the general Christian population.
Read Exodus 25:22. The Lord promises exactly what Isaiah experienced: “I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony.” This is exactly what you say is impossible — God would not “fit” in that specific location. Thus, by your doctrine, Exodus 25:22 must be a false prophecy.
Jason Wallace: Chip, you pick and choose which scriptures you use, while ignoring those that don’t fit your system. You have said nothing about Smith’s rewriting of Romans or Exodus. Please pick one point and let’s discuss it at length rather than jumping from one point to another to another. On many of the issues, I can point you to the discussions I had with Alma Allred. They are now on YouTube. I am currently swamped and don’t have much time to engage you. Are you or anyone you know willing to actually debate these things in person?
Chip Whitmer: Jason, I apologize — I didn’t mean to come in here to your own Facebook page with my six-shooters blazing, and start blasting everything in sight. smile emoticon I just saw this post a couple days ago, and it’s been on my mind, and I put together my response this morning. I will say that your allegation, that I ignore scriptures that don’t fit my system, is simply wrong. We’ve had some good discussions in the past, and I hope you have seen that I try to be honest and sincere in my handling of Scripture. Your original post contained 95 theses; I responded to five or six of them. If that still seems to be “jumping from one point to another to another,” then let’s just focus on the first one: Isaiah saw the Lord in Solomon’s temple, in fulfillment of the Lord’s promise in Exodus 25:22. This fact undermines your entire argument in Thesis #2 (and contradicts several points of your doctrine, as well). As far as a debate goes, I would be happy to have another good discussion with you, in person; I am not interested in a formal debate where we each take turns preaching about a topic for 20 minutes, or anything like that.
Jason Wallace: Not a problem, Chip. These weren’t meant to be conclusive simply because I assert them. They were meant to be “grist for the mill.” We live in a generation that doesn’t like to engage anyone with whom they disagree. It’s too easy to play the victim and demonize those who dare tell us we’re wrong. I know you don’t do that, but the vast majority of LDS seem to (along with the vast majority of every other group). I was trying to “stir the pot” to make them think. I would love to have a real debate on any of these issues, if you do know someone willing. I’m currently buried in work, but I would love to get back together for lunch soon.
Chip Whitmer: Just for clarification: Who runs beggarsbread.org? Did you personally write the 95 theses, or was it a group effort, or were you just linking or reposting something from another source?
Jason Wallace: Beggar’s Bread is run by Fred Anson in California. He’s a good guy. We’ve never met personally, but he asked to repost some things I did on Mormonism and Shawn McCraney. I put the theses together personally. Most of the points had been made by others over the years. I simply was trying to repackage them and put them in some order. We’re in the midst of putting together a video in the next few weeks that should deal with them in a far more engaging way.
Chip Whitmer: OK, thanks for the explanation. I wasn’t sure whether my responses above were really directed to you, or to somebody else as the author.
Jason Wallace: I get the blame (smile emoticon)
(link to source = https://www.facebook.com/daniel.j.wallace.9/posts/10207447948298257?comment_id=10208007402364259&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R1%22%7D)
LikeLike
Mr. Whitmer, I would like to address the following argument from your Facebook exchange with Pastor Wallace. You wrote:
““Inerrancy and sufficiency are always understood to be in the original language of the revelation.” I have spoken with many Evangelicals, Baptists, and Pentecostals, all of whom believe the Bible is inerrant, and none of whom have any knowledge of the original languages. For them, inerrancy applied to the Bible they held in their hands, which was an English or Spanish translation. And their criticism against the Mormons has always been because we suggest that there may be errors in translation — implying that their Bible has no such errors. So, while your statement is probably accurate from a scholarly perspective, it is not true among the general Christian population.”
Finally, I have no doubt that you have had mainstream Christians tell you that the English translation of the Bible that they hold in their hand is inerrant. I’ve heard it too. This just means that you’re dealing with someone who doesn’t really understand what their leaders have said when they use the term “biblical inerrancy” and that they don’t really understand how English Bible translation is done.
Mr. Whitmer, if we’re going to start holding up statements of ignorance by the uninformed masses as the standard by which the other side is judged then we will soon find both of our glass houses in shattered shards.
That said, and to support the already excellent response you received from Pastor Wallace, as I stated in my article entitled, “Weak Arguments #5: “Well at least you use the King James Bible – it’s the only true and inspired translation. It alone IS God’s Word!”:
(and you can blame me for this one not Mr. Wallace)
“The King James Bible isn’t really God’s Word. Neither is the New International Version of the Bible, the English Standard Version, the New American Standard, the New Living Translation, the New King James Version, the Common English Bible, the Holman Christian Standard Bible, or even the Reina Valera (which is the topping selling Spanish Bible in the world).
These are all translations of God’s Word. Therein lies a difference – a big difference!
If one holds to Biblical inerrancy (as the author does) then God’s pure and unadulterated written revelation to mankind is only found in the original handwritten manuscripts that were produced by either the biblical author or their scribes.
These are known as the “autograph” manuscripts (or “autographa”) and none of them have survived. What’s left are imperfect copies (or, more likely, fragments of copies) that, thankfully, we have in such an abundance that we have been able to reconstruct the autographa with a high degree of certainty. Those reconstructed manuscripts are the closest thing we have to “God’s divinely inspired Word”. Therefore, a translation is only as authoritative as it accurately reflects those original language reconstructions and they are only as authoritative as they reflect the autographa.”
And elsewhere in the same article:
“Taken at face value, I agree with the first part of Article Eight – the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. However, what Joseph Smith’s words actually say and how they’re understood and applied by Mormons are often two different things. As Robert N. Hullinger observed in his award winning book, “Mormon Answer to Skepticism: Why Joseph Smith Wrote the Book of Mormon”, Joseph Smith’s real agenda from the beginning was to undermine the absolute authority of the Bible and replace it with his own:
“In defense of God, Joseph Smith assailed the natural revelation of deism, which excluded the supernatural, and the static revelation of traditional Christianity contained in a closed canon. But to enable revealed religion to overcome natural religion, Smith supported the deistic attack on the Bible’s being complete and errorless. Rejection of the traditional view left him free to pursue special revelation specific to his own cause.”
(Robert N. Hullinger, “Mormon Answer to Skepticism: Why Joseph Smith Wrote the Book of Mormon”, Clayton Publishing House, 1980, p. 150)
Article eight reflects this subtle deviation and Mormon orthopraxy confirms it. So while KJV Onlyists may feel like they’ve had a major break through when they see their Mormon friends smiling and nodding in agreement at their attacks on non-King James translations of the Bible, they’re really just helping to dig the grave that those very same Latter-day Saint will later throw both them and the Bible (including their KJV Bible) into down the road.”
I clarified on this later in the article when I wrote:
“Mormons will play the, “well Article 8 actually means that the Bible wasn’t transmitted correctly!” and start quoting Bart Ehrman in a, “Bart said it! I believe it! That settles it!” fashion in a last ditch effort in order to find an escape hatch.”
I would further add that my experience with Mormons has been that they use the first clause of Article 8 to discard anything in ANY Bible – including the LdS version of the Bible – that would discredit Mormon Doctrine. Mistranslated, mis-transmitted, or whatever, the clear agenda is that anything that doesn’t conform to Mormon dogma must go.
In other words, to us the original language manuscripts are paramount, but to Mormons they’re irrelevant. One need only point to the scripture brought forth by Joseph Smith to see this. To quote again from my article:
“Whenever we’re talking about translated text the source manuscripts are vitally important. In the case of the Bible they’re important for the all reasons outlined above. In the case of the Book of Mormon they’re important because: a) Not only do we not have the original autographs (that is, the Golden Plates) we have no evidence that they existed at all, and; b) In the case of the extant Book of Mormon manuscripts we have exactly the same type of text variants that Latter-day Saints use to create doubt about the integrity of the Bible. In the case of the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible (which we’ll discuss later) there is no manuscript support for his revisions to the KJV text. Further, in the case of the Book of Moses, we have no manuscripts to support Joseph Smith’s “translation” – period. Finally, in the case of the Book of Abraham the autograph manuscripts actually discredit Joseph Smith’s “translation”. When it comes to Mormon Studies, manuscripts are a constant topic of conversation – it never seems to end.
Taking the focus off of the source manuscripts puts the Bible, which has strong manuscript support, on the same level as Mormon scripture which doesn’t.”
I hope that this helps clarify Mr. Whitmer. And thank you for your comment.
LikeLike
[i]”I would further add that my experience with Mormons has been that they use the first clause of Article 8 to discard anything in ANY Bible – including the LdS version of the Bible – that would discredit Mormon Doctrine. Mistranslated, mis-transmitted, or whatever, the clear agenda is that anything that doesn’t conform to Mormon dogma must go.”[/i]
– We have never spoken before. You don’t know me, and that is obvious from this generalization. I have talked several times with Pastor Wallace, and I have never said anything like this to him. I am confident that all of the doctrines taught by the LDS Church today are compatible with and defensible from the Bible. That said, not all of them are expounded upon in detail there — specifically because the authors of the Bible never considered the canon to be closed. (Indeed, John said there are vast amounts of information about Jesus that were never written down. See John 20:30-31 and 21:25.)
I’m not particularly interested in a ‘copy-and-paste battle’ here, which is what you seem to be setting up. I might be up for a conversation, if you would like.
Quick question: Does the Bible contain every word of God?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Chip Whitmer, you wrote, “– We have never spoken before. You don’t know me, and that is obvious from this generalization. I have talked several times with Pastor Wallace, and I have never said anything like this to him.”
RESPONSE
Did I claim that you had? This is a straw man Mr. Whitmer, a non-sequitur.
However, as I stated, in my experience I have had many Mormon who have. My language and method was no different than your statements regarding experiences that you have had with Evangelical Christians – which, BTW, I affirmed in my response.
YOU WROTE
“Quick question: Does the Bible contain every word of God?”
RESPONSE
As you have so ably pointed out, no, it doesn’t. And for the record, the passages in question are as follows:
“And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”
— John 21:25 (NKJV)
“And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.”
— John 20:30-31 (NKJV)
However, Mr. Whitmer, the Bible is also clear that we are to WEIGH and JUDGE what others claim are divine revelations from God and reject what contradicts God’s existing revelation of Himself:
“Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies. Test all things; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil.”
— 1 Thessalonians 5:19-22 (NKJV)
“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.”
— 1 John 4:1 (KJV)
“…if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”
— Galatians 1:8 (KJV)
“…I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him…
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.”
– II Corinthians 3&4,13-15 (KJV)
And the objective, absolute “plumb line” that we are use any truth claim or subjective feeling is the written word of God – the Bible.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
— “2 Timothy 2:1 (KJV)
And the Bible gives us a case study of how this worked in the primitive church:
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
— Acts 17:11 (KJV)
YOU WROTE
“I am confident that all of the doctrines taught by the LDS Church today are compatible with and defensible from the Bible.”
RESPONSE
And I can easily demonstrate that they’re not by pointing to the most important doctrine of them all: The nature of God. The Bible clearly, and repeatedly states that there is ONE and only ONE God:
“Unto thee it was shown, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him. Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.”
— Deuteronomy 4:35,39 (KJV)
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD thy God is one LORD.”
— Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV)
“For I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.”
— Isaiah 46:9 (KJV)
Yet Mormon Doctrine and Latter-day Saint scripture teaches a plurality of Gods:
“And then the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth. And the earth, after it was formed, was empty and desolate, because they had not formed anything but the earth; and darkness reigned upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of the Gods was brooding upon the face of the waters. And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light; and there was light. And they (the Gods) comprehended the light, for it was bright; and they divided the light, or caused it to be divided, from the darkness.”
— Book of Abraham Chapter 4:1-4
“A Council of the Gods. In the beginning, the head of the Gods called a council of the Gods; and they came together and concocted a plan to create the world and people it.”
—- Joseph Smith, “The King Follett Sermon”; Ensign, May 1971, p.13
Mr. Whitmer, the reason WHY the mainstream Christian Church has never accepted Joseph Smith as a true prophet of God and his revelations into the canon isn’t because it’s closed but because they contradict the Bible. It’s just that simple. However, Joseph Smith isn’t being singled out there a myriad of other revelations that have been rejected for exactly the same reason. Mr. Whitmer do you, for example, really think that the revelations of Mary Baker Eddy, Charles Taze Russell, or Ellen G. White should be canonized? How about Jim Jones or David Koresch? All of these people claimed to have divine revelations that were equivalent to existing canonized scripture should we canonize them and declare them all legitimate prophets of God?
YOU WROTE
“We have never spoken before. You don’t know me, and that is obvious from this generalization… I’m not particularly interested in a ‘copy-and-paste battle’ here, which is what you seem to be setting up. I might be up for a conversation, if you would like.”
RESPONSE
Mr. Whitmer, if you didn’t want to be engaged by strangers then why did you comment in a public forum? And I have no idea what you mean by a “copy and paste battle”. Sir, I’m not going to reinvent the wheel and since this is a technology driven forum I’m going to use the available technology to make my case and argue my points. So, yes, if I or another credible source was written on a particular subject or present supporting evidence that I can use to that end then I’m going to cite from it and you can free feel to do the same. If you look through this board, that’s how things are done here.
If that offends you then I’m sorry, but that’s how I will be proceeding in this conversation.
LikeLike
Wow, you have a tendency to go really hostile, really quickly. I have tried to be respectful in everything I have said so far in this brief conversation. Not sure why you’re so sensitive, or what I said to set you off like that.
So you agree that the Bible does not contain every word of God. So what is the status of such a hypothetical word of God, that exists but is not found in the Bible? Is it authoritative? Is it scriptural? Is it interesting at all to you?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Chip Whitmer, you wrote, “Wow, you have a tendency to go really hostile, really quickly. I have tried to be respectful in everything I have said so far in this brief conversation. Not sure why you’re so sensitive, or what I said to set you off like that.”
RESPONSE
Well, I didn’t fire the first shot over the bow. If you accuse someone of wanting to engage in a “copy and paste battle” and if you engage in straw man arguments you can expect some push back Mr. Whitmer, that’s life on the Internet. Now all this aside, may I politely suggest (per board guidelines) that from this point onward you stick to the discussion and depersonalize your arguments and stick to addressing arguments and evidence while leaving personalities out of this? Thanks.
YOU WROTE
“So you agree that the Bible does not contain every word of God. So what is the status of such a hypothetical word of God, that exists but is not found in the Bible? Is it authoritative? Is it scriptural? Is it interesting at all to you?”
RESPONSE
Mr. Whitmer I thought that I explained my stance clearly to you: If an alleged new revelation, or to use your words, “hypothetical word of God”, contradicts God’s existing revelation in scripture then’s not God’s word regardless whatever claims the revelator’s claims about it. And if that’s the case, no, I’m no more interested in it than I am the Gnostic gospels or Dianetics by L. Ron Hubbard. Why should I be? They may be a cultural curiosity but that’s about it.
As I asked in my previous post: “Mr. Whitmer do you, for example, really think that the revelations of Mary Baker Eddy, Charles Taze Russell, or Ellen G. White should be canonized? How about Jim Jones or David Koresch? All of these people claimed to have divine revelations that were equivalent to existing canonized scripture should we canonize them and declare them all legitimate prophets of God?”
So what’s your answer Mr. Whitmer?
LikeLike
You still haven’t answered my question. I’m not asking about a hypothetical word of God that is not really the word of God (such as all the other examples you listed). I’m asking about a hypothetical “real” word of God, which actually was spoken by God and does not contradict God’s existing revelation, but is not found in the Bible.
You agreed that such a thing exists, so I’m asking what would be its status if it were located and identified. Would it be authoritative? Would it be scriptural? Would it be interesting to you at all?
And how might such a thing be located and identified?
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Chip Whitmer, I’m not interested in hypothetical thought exercises. Please produce such a concrete work and then we’ll talk.
It is my contention that NO such new scripture will ever be produced because the canon that we have is sufficient – more than sufficient in fact. And apparently God agrees since He hasn’t produced any new scripture since the canon was closed during the Patristic period. As the saying goes:
“The Biblical canon is open in theory, but closed in practice.”
So your statement, “You agreed that such a thing exists” is in error, I do NOT agree that such a thing exists or do I think that such a thing will EVER exist.
Now, that settled, you have implicitly rejected all the suggested non-canonical works that I named with this statement, “that is not really the word of God (such as all the other examples you listed).” Why did you reject them? What was your criteria for doing so? And can I assume that you also reject their authors as false prophets? If so, why?
LikeLike
When I asked “Does the Bible contain every word of God?” your direct answer was: “As you have so ably pointed out, no, it doesn’t.” This is a clear statement that there exist words of God that are not in the Bible.
Now you say that you “do NOT agree that such a thing exists or do I think that such a thing will EVER exist.”
Are you contradicting yourself? Why is that necessary? If we can’t reach clarity on a simple question like this one, then I don’t think there’s anywhere else for this conversation to go.
And I must say that if you can’t keep your own statements coherent in plain English, then I have very little interest in hearing your arguments from the original languages.
Follow-up questions: Is God alive today? Can he speak today?
(And with that I have to get to bed. I have an early start tomorrow.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Chip Whitmer, “When I asked “Does the Bible contain every word of God?” your direct answer was: “As you have so ably pointed out, no, it doesn’t.” This is a clear statement that there exist words of God that are not in the Bible.”
RESPONSE
Mr. Whitmer, you are conflating two different things. There are TWO types of word of God the written word of God and the spoken word of God. And they are united: The spoken word of God will never contradict the written word of God. If it does it’s NOT God speaking.
Here’s a quick primer that may help you sort this out:
“There are two primary Greek words that describe Scripture which are translated “word” in the New Testament. The first, logos, refers principally to the total inspired Word of God and to Jesus, who is the living Word. Logos is found in John 1:1; Luke 8:11; Philippians 2:16; Hebrews 4:12; and other verses. The second Greek word translated “word” is rhema, which refers to the spoken word. Rhema literally means an utterance (individually, collectively or specifically). Examples are found in Luke 1:38; 3:2; 5:5; and Acts 11:16.
Charismatic and non-charismatic Christians have different views regarding rhema and how it should be understood. Some charismatics view rhema as the voice of the Holy Spirit speaking to them at the present moment. They believe they should be guided by the Holy Spirit through inner feelings, impressions and experiences. Some believe that the direct words of God to the individual can also be imparted through the words of others, such as a preacher in a worship service or a friend who counsels them. Through these avenues, the Christian experiences God’s direct leading.”
(see “What is the rhema word?” GotQuestions.org website)
YOU WROTE
“Now you say that you “do NOT agree that such a thing exists or do I think that such a thing will EVER exist.”
RESPONSE
Additional WRITTEN word of God, no. What we have is sufficient. However, God is still speaking through in and through His people, that will never end. HOWEVER, again, that SPOKEN word of God will never contradict the WRITTEN word of God or it’s not God. Period. The SPOKEN word of God is always, without exception, subordinate to the WRITTEN word of God.
YOU WROTE
“Are you contradicting yourself?”
A: No, I’m not. However, I think it appears that way to you because you appear to be imposing a Mormon interpretative grid and some kind of predetermined Latter-day Saint agenda on the proceedings here. In other words, I think that you may be assuming things of me that aren’t true.
YOU WROTE
Why is that necessary? If we can’t reach clarity on a simple question like this one, then I don’t think there’s anywhere else for this conversation to go.
RESPONSE
I’m simply articulating my stance nothing more. I think you’re frustrated because I’m continuationist Charismatic and you’re presuming that I’m a cessationist Presbyterian like Jason Wallace is. I would suspect that you’re not used to dealing someone with my Pentecostal theological stance so it’s frustrating you.
YOU WROTE
“And I must say that if you can’t keep your own statements coherent in plain English”
MY RESPONSE
I am. Again, I think that the problem is that you’re presuming and projecting things on me that aren’t accurate.
YOU WROTE
“then I have very little interest in hearing your arguments from the original languages.”
RESPONSE
Excuse me? Which wall did THAT come zipping off of? How does that relate to anything? The Bible wasn’t written in English Mr. Whitmer, it was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. That’s simply a fact. If you want to know what God’s written word says as God said it to the inspired authors you have to go to the original languages. That’s a fact too. Now how THAT has anything to do with this current line of argumentation is baffling to me.
YOU WROTE
“Follow-up questions: Is God alive today? Can he speak today?”
RESPONSE
Yes, and yes. He spoke His RHEMA word through the sermons of pastors and through the prophetic utterances of spirit filled prophets all over the world today. And He will tomorrow, the next day, and the next after that, ad infinitum until Christ returns and speaks directly to us Himself, just as the Bible says.
Mr. Whitmer, where do you think Joseph Smith got all this stuff from? A: He got it from 19th Century American Second Great Awakening Revivalism – which was Pentecostal. He stole it from we Pentecostals. Here are some articles that I wrote on this:
– Speaking in Tongues and The Mormon Church
– Mormons: Pentecostals Gone Bad!
– Mormons: Pentecostals Gone Bad! (The Sequel)
YOU WROTE
(And with that I have to get to bed. I have an early start tomorrow.)
RESPONSE
And I have to hit the road. Hopefully, we can continue this later. That is, if you can stand the new paradigm of dialoging with a continuationist Charismatic rather than a cessationist Evangelical Christian.
;-)
LikeLike
BTW, when you return Mr. Whitmer, I would appreciate a response to the question of why you reject the revelations of Mary Baker Eddy, Charles Taze Russell, or Ellen G. White, Jim Jones, and David Koresch. What was your criteria for doing so?
And I assume that you’re also rejecting them as true prophets of God. Why? Again, what’s your criteria?
You seem to keep dodging these questions. I would appreciate a response.
LikeLike
Fred Anson – If you knew the history of the Pentecostal Movement and also that of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints you would be aware that your charge that Smith stole his ideas from Pentecostalism is a pure nonsense that betray your ignorance of these two religious movements.
“Pentecostalism emerged in the early 20th century among radical adherents of the Holiness movement who were energized by revivalism and expectation for the imminent Second Coming of Christ. Believing that they were living in the end times, they expected God to spiritually renew the Christian Church thereby bringing to pass the restoration of spiritual gifts and the evangelization of the world. In 1900, Charles Parham, an American evangelist and faith healer, began teaching that speaking in tongues was the Bible evidence of Spirit baptism. The three-year-long Azusa Street Revival, founded and led by William J. Seymour in Los Angeles, California, resulted in the spread of Pentecostalism throughout the United States and the rest of the world as visitors carried the Pentecostal experience back to their home churches or felt called to the mission field. While virtually all Pentecostal denominations trace their origins to Azusa Street, the movement has experienced a variety of divisions and controversies. An early dispute centered on challenges to the doctrine of the Trinity. As a result, the Pentecostal Movement is divided between trinitarian and non-trinitarian branches.
“Comprising over 700 denominations and a large number of independent churches, there is no central authority governing Pentecostalism; however, many denominations are affiliated with the Pentecostal World Fellowship. There are over 279 million Pentecostals worldwide, and the movement is growing in many parts of the world, especially the global South. Since the 1960s, Pentecostalism has increasingly gained acceptance from other Christian traditions, and Pentecostal beliefs concerning Spirit baptism and spiritual gifts have been embraced by non-Pentecostal Christians in Protestant and Catholic churches through the Charismatic Movement. Together, Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity numbers over 500 million adherents.”
The Pentecostal movement is a latecomer to the Christian world, and was initially met with open hostility particularly by those Anglican Churches that frowned on ‘enthusiasm.’ The same tactics that you and your cult member employ against Mormon, including misunderstanding their teachings, were used against Pentecostals in the UK, long before the movement had taken root in the US, but also long after the beginnings of Mormonism.
Therefore, for you to claim that Smith stole your clothes is an arrant nonsense that is positively shown to be so by the flow of historic truths.
However, truth has never been a barrier to those determined to damage those they have designated as their enemies, even where God disapproves of their behaviour. If you were any kind of Christian you would have known what Jesus told his ignorant apostles when they condemned a man that did a miracle in Jesus’ name.
Mark(
9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
9:40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
9:41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
You have obviously, to your shame, missed that part of the Lord’s teaching.
http://www.yorkshiretales.com/allaboutmormonism
LikeLike
@mormoangel
Respectfully, Mr. Bray*, it is not I but you who are ignorant of and misinformed on both Pentecostal and Latter-day Saint history. My language in my comment was deliberately precise. Specifically I said, “He [Joseph Smith] got it [the doctrine of continuationism] from 19th Century American Second Great Awakening Revivalism – which was Pentecostal. He stole it from we Pentecostals.”
The Pentecostalism of the 19th Century American Second Great Awakening Revivalism was directly derived from the 1802 Cane Ridge revival that the Stone-Campbell Restorationist movement came out of (see https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/revival-at-cane-ridge/) And, of course, Mormonism was originally a derivative (actually to be more precise a plagairization) of Stone-Campbell Restorationism as Latter-day Saint scholar Daymon Smith has documented so well in his, “A Cultural History of the Book of Mormon” series – especially the first few volumes. (see http://smile.amazon.com/s/ref=dp_byline_sr_ebooks_1?ie=UTF8&text=Daymon+Smith&search-alias=digital-text&field-author=Daymon+Smith&sort=relevancerank)
And the Wikipedia article (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentecostalism) that you cited from is correct that the MODERN Pentecostal MOVEMENT came out the Azusa Street Revival and Charles Parham. However, Pentecostalism and Pentecostal manifestations runs throughout the entire thread of human history not just the 20th Century onward. For example, since you are in the British Isles we could also talk about the Welsh Revival (1904-1905) which presided the Azusa Street Revival by a year and had NO relationship with Charles Parham at all. We could also talk about the 1812 Island of Skye Revival, The Revival at Beddgelert between 1817-1822. Or how about the The Revivals at Stewarton and Kirk of Shotts between 1625-1630? The list goes on and on and on. I encourage you to use this resource to learn more about them: http://www.revival-library.org/pensketches/hr_menu.php And a good brief overview and summary can be found here: http://www.revival-library.org/pensketches/e_pentecostals/cartwrightglobal.html
(BTW, in the future and going forward, please cite your sources Mr. Bray if you want your posts to be moderator approved)
I’m also assuming Mr. Bray that you failed to click through the links that I proved in regard to the 19th Century Mormon Pentecostalism that I referred to – so let me give you a few excerpts from those articles from first hand Mormon sources of that period:
“….my wife…was waiting for me, and she started to lecture me, saying that I was breaking the Word of Wisdom. She suddenly stopped, and by the gift of tongues she gave me a most remarkable and wonderful blessing and promised me that I should live to pay off all my debts, which I did live to do….Unless the gift of tongues and the interpretation thereof are enjoyed by the Saints in our day, then we are lacking one of the evidences of the true faith.YWJ [Young Woman’s Journal], 16:128″
(Gospel Standards, page 11-12 by President Heber J. Grant)
“About the 8th of November I received a visit from Elders Joseph Young, Brigham Young, and Heber C. Kimball of Mendon, Monroe county, New York. They spent four or five days at Kirtland, during which we had many interesting moments. At one of our interviews, Brother Brigham Young and John P. Greene spoke in tongues, which was the first time I had heard this gift among the brethren; others also spoke, and I [Joseph Smith] received the gift myself.”
(Joseph Smith, History of the Church 1:295-297, November 1832)
“…remember the exhortation which I gave you while I was yet present with you, to beware of delusive spirits. I rejoice that our Heavenly Father hath blessed you greatly, as He also has me, in enabling me to speak the praises of God and the mysteries of the kingdom in other tongues according to promise; and this without throwing me down or wallowing me on the ground, or any thing unbecoming or immoral, also, without any external operation of the system, but it is the internal operation and power of the Spirit of God, so that I know that those odd actions and strange noises are not caused by the Spirit of the Lord as is represented by Brother King. Therefore in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, by the Spirit of the living God, according to the authority of the Holy Priesthood committed to me, I command Brother Thomas King, (as though I were present), to cease from your diabolical acts of enthusiasm, and also from acting as an Elder in this Church of Christ,…”
(John Murdock recorded in History of the Church, 1:325, February 1833)
“A hymn, concerning the travels, toils, troubles, and tribulations of the Nephites, was sung in tongues by Elder W. W. Phelps, interpreted by Elder Lyman Wight,…”
(History of the Church 1:409, September 1833)
“…. I [Joseph Smith] extract from Brother Moses Chapman Nickerson’s letter of December 20, 1833. `Your labors in Canada have been the beginning of a good work; there are thirtyfour members attached to the Church at Mount Pleasant, all of whom appear to live up to their profession, five of whom have spoken in tongues, and three have sung in tongues; and we live at the top of the mountain.’”
(Joseph Smith, History of the Church 2:40, December, 1833)
And so on and so forth. So despite your baseless accusations, insults, and slurs Mr. Bray not only do I have my facts straight, I also have the supporting evidence to back those facts up with.
And finally, and on that note, Mr. Bray, I have tolerated your ad-hominem arguments and derogatory comments on this occasion. However, if you fail to comply with the moderation guidelines of this website from this point onward your posts will not be moderator approved. Therefore, please take a moment to review those policies before you reply. Here’s the link: https://beggarsbread.org/moderation-policy/
Thank you.
* Those who click through the link provided by “mormoangel” at the end of his post (http://www.yorkshiretales.com/allaboutmormonism/) will discovery that “mormoangel” is an alias for Mormon Apologist, Ronnie Bray.
LikeLike