Answers to Anti's

A Response to the "Catholic Answers" article,

Mormon Stumpers






Last Updated: 5/03/07     

The Catholic website, Catholic Answers, has a section devoted to (quite opinionated) information about non-Catholic groups. In this section, under the heading "non-Christian," is a series of articles devoted to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While it appears that the unnamed author(s) of these articles on Mormonism have done a tad more research than most, the information is still, at best, incomplete. As Joseph Smith stated, "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may (AofF 1:11)." Therefore, we would like to overlook the condescending attitude of the author(s) and direct our attention to the specific LDS beliefs and doctrines that are discussed there.


You may wish to read the original article first.


Introduction


Though brief, the introduction to this section makes a few points worth discussing. First, the author(s) indicate that "Mormons... will most often... direct the topics presented into those areas where they feel most informed and comfortable." Well, duh. That's what all people do when holding a discussion with others. What do you expect them to do, spend time on things they are uninformed about, and which they feel uncomfortable with? What would a Catholic rather discuss - the news story I once read about priests having secret rendezvous with nuns, or how the Holy Eucharist makes them feel closer to Christ?

We are next informed that "Whether they are the young missionaries at your door or friends or colleagues, [Mormons] have all been taught several lines of approach and have been drilled in making their points." What?!? Do you actually believe that Mormons spend their time at church on Sunday discussing "lines of approach" and "making their points?" If the author(s) would have stopped at missionaries, they would have been good. One would only expect that someone who is being sent out into the world to proclaim the Good News of Christ would first get some training. This is correct, we send our missionaries to one of 17 worldwide Missionary Training Centers, also known as MTC's. The general membership sits through your typical Sunday School lessons, which, in 30+ years, I don't recall ever being about how to convince your neighbors that the LDS Church is true. For 2007, the adult Sunday School (known as Gospel Doctrine) class is studying the New Testament.

Further Reading:


"We don't bash your church, why bash ours?"


In this section, we hear that, "Somehow, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have been persuaded by their leaders that they have always been on the receiving end of uncharitable comments and unjust accusations." Well now, I can't imagine where Mormon leaders would ever have gotten such an idea. They probably just invented the following concepts:

Boy howdy! None of that ever happened, did it? So you can see how it must be necessary for Church leaders to "persuade" the members to believe that they "have always been on the receiving end of uncharitable comments and unjust accusations." And with websites like Catholic Answers, it's a wonder any Mormons might feel that such behaviour continues to this day!

Actually, the funny thing is, for all the persuading the Mormon leaders are supposedly doing to convince the members that they are being persecuted, it is nearly impossible to find anything on the Church's official website, www.lds.org, about most of these well-known incidents that I have mentioned above.

Further Reading:

After this, we are told that "Many Mormons, including their hierarchy, look upon any criticism-regardless of how honest and sincere-as perverseness inspired by the Evil One." This is interesting in light of several facts. One is that, obviously, no one has ever said that criticism of the LDS Church is bad or evil. Another is that the First Presidency of the Church has bent over backwards to accomodate authors and journalists who have sought access to church records and buildings, and to interview leaders themselves. PBS has just aired a so-called "documentary" on Mormons that was hell-bent on giving every anti-Mormon you've never heard of their fifteen minutes of fame - BUT, the producer of the film made it clear that the Church was very helpful to her efforts. The Newsroom section of the LDS Church's website states that "While the Church distances itself from political discussions because of its policy of partisan neutrality, it welcomes serious and respectful attempts to explain its history, beliefs and practices ("Media Responds to PBS Documentaries")."

Now, as if this section's title were not clear enough, it should be pointed out that the purpose of this section is to justify attacks on Mormonism by saying, basically, "The Mormons started it!"

The author(s) go into great detail to explain how they feel Mormons have "attacked other churches," so here is a brief response to each one:

  1. Mormons believe God told Joseph Smith the creeds of the existing churches "were an abomination in his sight."

    ---> While this is true (see Joseph Smith-History 1:19), Mormons also believe that other churches are good, because, although they may not have the fulness of the Gospel, they do have some truths that are beneficial to mankind, and most adherents to other faiths are sincere in their efforts to follow God.

  2. B. H. Roberts, an LDS General Authority, said that "Orthodox Christian views of God are pagan."

    ---> Well, while this is not a doctrine of the Mormon Church, there are a good many scholarly publications to support this suggestion [See Conflict in the Churches Between the God of the Bible and the God of the Philosophers, By Hugh W. Nibley]. Note also that this quotation is not from any official publication of the Church. That means that these are the views of B. H. Roberts and not of the Church, itself.

  3. John Taylor, third President of the LDS Church, said that Christians are ignorant.

    ---> Yeah, and LDS leaders have called Mormons ignorant, too. So what? By "ignorant" was not meant "stupid," nor was it intended as an insult as the author(s) would have us believe. Joseph F. Smith, sixth President of the LDS Church, said:

    "From the beginning until now, we have had to face the entire world; and the whole world, comparatively, is or has been arrayed against the work of the Lord, not all on account of hatred, not solely with the intent or desire in their hearts to do evil or to fight the truth, but because they were ignorant of the truth, and because they knew not what they were doing. Many are deceived by the voice of false shepherds, and are misled by false influences. They are deceived; they know not the truth; they understand not what they do and, therefore, they are arrayed, as it were, against the truth, against the work of the Lord ("Chapter 13: Stand by the Truth Lest You Be Deceived," Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith, 1)."

  4. Orson Pratt, an LDS Apostle, said "The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon."

    ---> This was Elder Pratt's own opinion and not an official Church doctrine or teaching. It is also probable that this quotation has much more meaning in context than without.

  5. Joseph Smith is reported to have said, "All the priests who adhere to the sectarian [Christian] religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels" (The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith, ed. Vol. 1, n. 4, 60)."

    ---> Since I am unaware of how to get ahold of this document, I sincerely doubt that the author(s) have it in their possession, and they must be quoting it from another source. Since I am unaware of the context in which this phrase may have been used, or the integrity of its source, I can only speculate on the actual intent: The devil seeks to thwart the mission of the Lord, which is that God's children progress spiritually. For any person to adhere to a doctrine that is not entirely true, they subject themselves to damnation, which means that, like the devil and his angels, they cannot continue to progress since they have rejected a portion of His light.

  6. Bruce R. McConkie, an LDS Apostle, said that the Roman Catholic Church is the "Church of the Devil."

    ---> This opinion was removed after the first edition of this book, and apparently, even though it was not an official publication of the church, this was not the only thing in it that bothered the church leadership. (Please see Great and Abominable Church by Michael R. Ash for an excellent discussion of this topic.)

  7. "Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls."

    ---> Please see numbers 5 and 6, above.

One should also note that Mormons leaders are not the only ones to have held the opinion that Christianity, in general, is/was corrupt:

For instance, I give you a statement from Harry Emerson Fosdick in which he said, "If Jesus should come back to earth now, hear the mythologies built up around him, see the credalisms, the denominationalism, sacramentalism, carried on in his name, he would certainly say, 'If this is Christianity, I am not a Christian.' "

In Smith's Bible Dictionary, written by seventy-three noted divines and Bible students, this statement is made that "one must not expect to find the gospel of Holy Writ upon the earth today. It is not to be found thus perfect in the total fragments of Christianity, and much less in any one fragment."

Roger Williams, pastor of the oldest Baptist Church in America, gave up his ministry with the statement that: "There is no regularly constituted church of Christ on earth, nor any person qualified to administer any church ordinances; nor can there be until new apostles are sent by the Great Head of the Church for whose coming I am seeking." [LeGrand Richards, "Strange Creeds of Christendom," Ensign, Jan 1973, 109]

The author(s) wrap up this section with the following: "Some contemporary Mormons... will respond with, "That's only his opinion." This is disingenuous at best. Keep in mind that McConkie, who died in 1985, was raised to the level of "apostle" in the Mormon church after he had written all these things. And still today, his Mormon Doctrine is published by a church-owned publishing company and remains one of the church's bestsellers." The interesting thing about this is, of course, the trap that the author(s) set for us: They know what Mormons will say about these things, so when the Mormons say it they are only being dishonest. An interesting fact for non-Mormons might be that, unlike some religions, LDS leaders are not viewed as infallible. They are recognized as "human beings." It is also interesting to note that, aside from the scriptures, extremely few books get the official sanction of the Church. All others are required to bear a statement to the effect that "all content is the sole responsibility of the author," because that is what they are! This is also done because the LDS Church does not limit its members' rights to publish their own thoughts and feelings on any given subject. Although Elder McConkie may have been mistaken on some points of doctrine in his book, it was, once again, not an official publication, so there was no reason for the Church to distance itself from its author. The title page even includes the phrase, "For the work itself, I assume sole and full responsibility." It is also not the practice of the Mormon Church to "promote" its leaders based upon achievements of any sort, literary or otherwise, as is common in some other faiths. Rather, callings are extended by existing leaders to members at any "rank or status" in the church, after prayerful consideration.

And yes, the Church does own Deseret Book. That does not mean that the Church approves of the statements of every author that is sold therein. In fact, they even carry books by non-Mormon authors! Imagine that! And yes, Mormon Doctrine is still a very popular book. It has been updated, erroneous material removed or corrected as with later editions of all books, and, as one reader/reviewer on DeseretBook.com points out, "[Elder McConkie] states quite clearly when the information is his opinion; the reader can choose to agree or disagree."

Further Reading:


"We have no revelation on abortion"


This section basically puts forth the accusation that the Church says it is anti-abortion but also allows it at times, and from this the author(s) somehow extract the opinions that 1) LDS leaders are inconsistent, and 2) the Mormon prophet must not be a true prophet because, "he can neither figure out when the unborn child becomes human or if it is God's desire that we protect the unborn unconditionally." Let us answer the opinions first: 1) In 1973, Roe v. Wade was passed. Shortly thereafter, the First Presidency of the Church issued the following statement:

In view of a recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, we feel it necessary to restate the position of the Church on abortion in order that there be no misunderstanding of our attitude.

The Church opposes abortion and counsels its members not to submit to or perform an abortion except in the rare cases where, in the opinion of competent medical counsel, the life or good health of the mother is seriously endangered or where the pregnancy was caused by rape and produces serious emotional trauma in the mother. Even then it should be done only after counseling with the local presiding priesthood authority and after receiving divine confirmation through prayer.

Abortion must be considered one of the most revolting and sinful practices in this day, when we are witnessing the frightening evidence of permissiveness leading to sexual immorality.

Members of the Church guilty of being parties to the sin of abortion must be subjected to the disciplinary action of the councils of the Church as circumstances warrant. In dealing with this serious matter, it would be well to keep in mind the word of the Lord stated in the 59th section of the Doctrine and Covenants, verse 6, "Thou shalt not steal; neither commit adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it." [D&C 59:6]

As to the amenability of the sin of abortion to the laws of repentance and forgiveness, we quote the following statement made by President David O. McKay and his counselors, Stephen L Richards and J. Reuben Clark, Jr., which continues to represent the attitude and position of the Church:

"As the matter stands today, no definite statement has been made by the Lord one way or another regarding the crime of abortion. So far as is known, he has not listed it alongside the crime of the unpardonable sin and shedding of innocent human blood. That he has not done so would suggest that it is not in that class of crime and therefore that it will be amenable to the laws of repentance and forgiveness."

This quoted statement, however, should not, in any sense, be construed to minimize the seriousness of this revolting sin. [Harold B. Lee, N. Eldon Tanner, and Marion G. Romney, "Policies and Procedures: Statement on Abortion," New Era, Apr 1973, 29]

This statement makes it perfectly clear that abortion is unacceptable in 99-percent of situations. The other one-percent is allowable only under specific situations, and even then only after one has asked God whether or not to go through with it. This step is extremely important because Latter-day Saints believe that everyone will face the Lord in judgment, and be required to answer for all their actions. Abortion sits wholly in the realm of other things, such as suicide, on which the Lord has made no specific announcement, and about which mankind has no authority to place judgment. The fact that such matters are always complicated in their causes is reason enough to leave it to the Lord. [See the Topical Guide entry for Jesus Christ - Judge, in the online version of the LDS scriptures.]

2) Since the Lord has made no pronouncement on when a child "has become human," it would be inappropriate for anyone to make such a statement, particularly if they were to set such a statement forth as being from God. On "[protecting] the unborn unconditionally," one must also remember that every soul, the mother as well as the babe, is a child of God. Most of those instances where an abortion might be allowable are those instances where the welfare of the mother must be taken into consideration, either mentally or physically. To me, the statement above makes it abundantly clear that what the Lord opposes most of all in abortion is when it is carried out, for reasons of selfishness and cold-heartedness, as a means to avoid the responsibilities of parenthood, or to avoid the consequences of one's sinful actions.

Our gracious author(s) next point out that, while abortion is sometimes allowable to Mormons, other things, such as gambling, pornography, and practicing homosexuality, are never allowable. Any conscientious Christian, particularly a Catholic one, is aware of the so-called "Seven Deadly Sins." The ones that come to mind in response to this accusation are Greed, Gluttony, and Slothfulness, which generally accompany the practice of gambling, and Lust (and probably also Gluttony), which accompanies pornography. As for homosexuality, it has been singled out as a sin by the Lord, so its practice is therefore unacceptable. [See the Topical Guide entry for Homosexuality, in the online version of the LDS scriptures.] This once again makes clear the above-stated position of abortion as a sin, when committed for sinful reasons, and as allowable, in extreme circumstances, due to the fact that God loves the mother equal to the child, so He therefore has not issued any definitive proclamation on the subject.


Something's wrong here


The final section of this article consists, generally, of many of the author(s) favorite harp-strings, gathered loosely under the guise of addressing the claim that "Only Mormons teach the true nature of God."

"No Christian disputes the absolute necessity of knowing the nature of God," we are informed, though only "(to the extent our reason, aided by grace, can apprehend this great mystery)." So, basically, the author(s) say that it is "absolutely [necessary]" to know something that is a "mystery." Mormons believe that God is knowable, that He is not a total mystery.

"Mormons have not been favored by similar clarity from their self-described "prophets," " our author(s) tells us, and they begin yet another numerical listing of supposed contradictory declarations by Mormon prophets, which the reader is supposed to "ask [their] Mormon friend to consider," as though they do not know their own religion. As with other accusations by the author(s), some of these things are merely quotations taken out of context, which are the sort of things that always take a little while to explain. That's why it's so easy to bring them up as "strange doctrines," or whatever: because everything requires some sort of context that is not provided. When the quotations are things that were presented by a Mormon to other Mormons, they didn't always give the background during their speech - they knew their audience already had at least a rudimentary understanding of the topic. And so we begin:

  1. The Book of Moses refers to God in the singular.

    ---> This is correct (see Moses 1). This is understandable when you consider that this is an account of Moses being spoken to by Jehovah, who is the pre-mortal Jesus. [For scriptural evidence of Jesus as Jehovah, please see Footnote 1, from Section 10 of "NOT ON SCURRILOUS TALES, BUT ON FACTS: A response to the Nov. 8th, 1995 Awake! articles on "Mormonism" " by Rod Klingler, 2001.] Jehovah speaks of his future self, as Christ, in the third person "by what has aptly been termed divine investiture of authority. That is, since he is one with the Father in all of the attributes of perfection, and since he exercises the power and authority of the Father, it follows that everything he says or does is and would be exactly and precisely what the Father would say and do under the same circumstances. "Accordingly, the Father puts his own name on the Son and authorizes him to speak in the first person as though he were the Father" (Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, Chapter 4: Jesus Christ, the Son of God, LDS Church, 2004)."

  2. In The Book of Mormon, "there is a confusion, at times, between the Father and the Son... also makes a strong point for God's spiritual and eternal unity (see Alma 11:44 and 22:10-11, which proclaims that God is the "Great Spirit")."

    ---> Jesus Christ declared several times in the Bible that he spoke not for Himself, but for His Father (John 8: 18, 28, 42, 54; John 10:18; John 12: 49; John 14: 10, 21). They are one in this manner. When Jesus speaks, it is the same as God the Father speaking. If the reader keeps in mind that Christ stated this, there is no confusion. As for the "Great Spirit," if one reads the verses immediately prior to, and after, the ones being quoted out of context, one immediately sees that Aaron, a missionary, is establishing a common ground with the man that he is preaching to, so that he can then build on it with a correct understanding of God (See Alma 22:5-14).

  3. "[T]he Father and the Son are separate gods. The Holy Spirit is merely the "mind" of the two."

    ---> This accusation has been previously addressed in my response to the author(s) article, "The Gods of the Mormon Church."

  4. "[The] Book of Abraham records in chapters four and five that "the gods called . . . the gods ordered . . . the gods prepared" some 45 times. Smith thus introduces the notion of a plurality of gods."

    ---> The Bible itself, in the very same manner, introduced this "plurality of gods" long before Joseph Smith did (See Is There More Than One God?, One-Minute Answers by Stephen R. Gibson). It should also be noted that Joseph reported from the very beginning that he saw both God and Christ in the very vision that began his history and that of the Church, so if he had, indeed, introduced the concept of a "plurality of gods," it would have been many years before the Book of Abraham was ever brought forth.

  5. Joseph Smith made up his account of being visited by both God and Jesus only after he had "paved the way for polytheism."

    ---> This comment, when considered alongside others by the author(s), proves undoubtedly that much of their information about Mormons has come from not just non-Mormon, but anti-Mormon sources. This seems a dubious way to gather information about ANYthing, especially religion. However, in response to the accusation, please see "Some critics of the LDS faith have taken the position that Joseph Smith never claimed to see God, the Father and Jesus Christ in his First Vision, until the end of his life," (Ask the Apologist, www.fairlds.org).

  6. Once again, the origins of God, and the deification of man.

    ---> These things have been addressed by me in my responses to the author(s) articles, "The Gods of the Mormon Church," and "Distinctive Beliefs of the Mormon Church." For further insights, please see "Deification, Early Christian" (LDSFAQ), and Gerald N. Lund, "Is President Lorenzo Snow's oft-repeated statement 'As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be' accepted as official doctrine by the Church?," Ensign (February 1982): 38.

  7. One MORE time, the origins of God, and the deification of man. PLUS: "Orson Pratt said the Holy Ghost was a spiritual fluid that filled the universe; Brigham Young taught that Adam is the god of this world... God the Father is a perfected man with a physical body and parts... Right-living Mormon men may also progress, as did the Father, and eventually become gods themselves."

    ---> On the origins of God and the deification of man: if you didn't already read the articles linked to in #6, above, please do so now. You may also wish to view the many articles on this subject at the FAIR website.

    ---> Orson Pratt knew full well the individuality and personage of the Holy Ghost. To understand a comment such as this, it is important to note that, like God, the name of the Holy Ghost is often used both in reference to himself, and to his influence. "[T]he Holy Ghost as a personage can be in only one place at one time, but his influence and power can and do fill the immensity of space ("Lesson 17: The Holy Ghost," Aaronic Priesthood Manual 3, 63)."

    ---> Brigham Young made some comments that have been taken out of context.
    [A]s the Lord made Moses a god to Pharaoh (Exodus 7:1) and as Paul was "as Christ Jesus" to the Galatians (4:14), Adam, our great progenitor, will preside over the human family as "father and God." This was the interpretation of Brigham Young's statement advocated in 1853 by Samuel W. Richards, who, as editor of the Millennial Star and President of the Church in the British Isles, first published President Young's initial sermon on the subject... Richards' successor, Apostle Franklin D. Richards, also advanced this interpretation... as have most of Brigham Young's successors...

    Of thousands of printed pages by [Brigham Young] there are less than a dozen on the subject, and most of these argue that Adam, as patriarch, will be our God in a certain sense, not that God the Father became Adam. (Van Hale's "WHAT ABOUT THE ADAM-GOD THEORY?" Sandy, Utah: Mormon Miscellaneous, July 1983)
    Many, many more things were said by Brigham Young that prove that he understood who both God and Adam actually were, but these, of course, are never quoted. Above all else, it should be noted that Joseph Smith, whom Brigham Young revered as a Prophet of God, revealed in 1830 (many years before Brigham's supposed comments) that Adam was known in the preexistence as Michael, the Archangel (D&C 27:11; Rev. 12:7).

    ---> Yes, Mormons believe that God has a body (D&C 130:2). Mormons also believe that when the resurrected Jesus appeared to His Apostles, and let them touch the physical body that He had after His death (Luke 24:36-43), He wasn't trying to confuse them: "Ha ha, fooled you! I'm really a ubiquitous unembodied spirit without parts or passion!"

    ---> "Right-living Mormon men may progress...and...become gods themselves." First of all, this is phrased in such a way as to suggest that Mormons believe that only Mormons will "go to Heaven," but this is not entirely correct. Mormons believe that in order to be given all that the Father has in store, one must be obedient to His commandments. One of these is baptism by the proper authority, which is the priesthood. In our day, Mormons believe that that priesthood authority is only held in the LDS Church (the Catholic church, among others, believe the same about themselves). Thus, it is only through the Church that one can receive the necessary ordinances that God requires of all His children. This authority has come and gone throughout all the history of this world, as prophets have been accepted and rejected. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the current and final organization that will be given the authority prior to Christ's return. For the living who learn of the Church, this is their opportunity to prove their obedience to the Lord. Those who do not hear the Gospel while in mortality have the opportunity to accept it after they die. Ultimately, it is the Lord who judges mankind, so we cannot know until judgment day who has been acceptable to the Lord and who has not. Mormon prophets have said time and again that there are plenty of good non-LDS men and women who have lived, who will be at the right hand of God, and that there are also LDS men and women who will be found at His left.

    As far as becoming like God, here are some scriptures that indicate that this is the ultimate goal of mankind.

  8. God said, "Thou shalt not have strange gods before me," and the author(s) see Mormon belief as strange.

    ---> Indeed, whenever we see a thing as strange we should take that as an indication that it is not true, right? If that is your opinion, you may wish to read Isaiah 28:21, Hosea 8:12, 1 Peter 4:4, Luke 5:26, and most especially Acts 17, verses 18 and 20.

The final accusation, unnumbered for some reason, is: "That all believing Christians are shocked and disturbed by this blasphemy may-just may-be nudging the Mormon leadership to soften their rhetoric (if not actually change their heresy). A case in point is an interview with current church prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, published in the San Francisco Chronicle..." This, as if I need to even say it, is yet another "fine" example of how things are distorted and spread, like all anti-Mormon manure, as far and as wide as is humanly possibly. I remember hearing about that interview shortly after it took place. I also remember being somewhat disturbed by it. However, being that none of the parties involved in the dispersion of this story were then, or are now, interested in anything but sensationalistic journalism, the facts were not represented. Thankfully, I kept any judgment in reserve. Church leaders have been deliberately misquoted in the past, and LDS theologies intentionally misrepresented, by magazines, newspapers, and other media, and this would be neither the first nor the last time. President Hinckley, speaking sometime after the incident, made it perfectly clear that what was being extrapolated from his comments was not what he had intended. An excellent discussion of this incident can be found here, on the FAIR wiki. Current Church leaders are not backpedaling, nor are they "[disparaging their] prophetic predecessors," as the author(s) suggest.

Parting words:

"Choose, if you like, any one of these three attacks: on Christians; on the sanctity of life; on God." This is a surprising suggestion, being that the author(s) inform us, in their article, "The Gods of the Mormon Church," that one should confront the poor, confused, dishonest, misguided Mormons with charity, and logic, and "the truths of the Catholic faith." Now we're supposed to attack them. Huh.

"Ask your Mormon listener to explain the contradictions of his church." This is an absolutely loaded phrase. We aren't trying to find out if Mormon doctrines really are contradictory - that's a given. We just want them to explain their contradictory beliefs so that we can show them that they're wrong. Do you want to know why Mormons believe that God and Christ chose a fourteen year-old farmboy to restore their Gospel? Because he had not been indoctrinated by seminaries, nor received accolades from men or theologians. He simply wanted to know what God would have him do, and he was willing to do whatever it was. He attended several churches that all seemed to contradict one another with their interpretations of Bible passages. The preachers all told him that they, themselves, were correct. The Bible didn't clear things up, since the preachers all said it meant different things. However, as mentioned earlier, James 1:5 stood out to Joseph as he read, because God tells us that if we need to know something, we can ask Him! Please, read about Joseph Smith's experience, in his own words, here. The promise is that you can ask God if these things are true, as well. Of course, to know what Mormons ACTUALLY believe, you really should talk to one.

"Don't be satisfied with a personal, subjective, emotional "testimony," the author(s) warn us. And why not? A true testimony is not subjective! When the Holy Ghost tells you that something is true, despite, or without, evidence, this is called faith (see Hebrews 11, especially verse 1). It is also called a testimony, because the Spirit of God has testified to you, through personal revelation, that a thing is true ("I receive not testimony from man" (John 5:34); "[F]lesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father" (Matt. 16:17)). This becomes a binding personal contract between an individual and God. It is the method designed by God for all mankind to find and know truth. This, I believe, is the reason that the greatest sin of all is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

We wrap things up with: "When they aren't forthcoming, be prepared to offer the truth."

Right on, dude. Right on.



Further Reading: