Mormonism’s Top 50

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (answer 5)

Tower To Truth question:

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

——————————-

FAIR Answer:

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

Learn more here: Joseph Smith and prophetic test in Deuteronomy 18

——————————-

My Response:

If you click on the link provided by FAIR, it will take you to a page where their understanding of the Bible (and their sheer hatred for it) becomes apparent. They focus on the words of men like Jonah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Nathan and the angel who spoke to Samson’s parents. Let’s examine each of these and understand what’s really going on (besides FAIR tryting to throw up a smokescreen to defelct criticism).

First, they mention Jonah’s warning to Nineveh. “Forty days and Nineveh is overthrown!” (Jonah 3:4). These are the only words of the prophet we have, but we can see from the following verses that he said much more than that. Because in verse 5 it says the people of Nineveh believed God, proclaimed a fast &c. Besides, this was not a prophecy that Nineveh would be overthrown, as FAIR claims by saying

An example is found in the story of Jonah, who was told by God to prophecy to the people of Nineveh. Jonah prophesied that the people would be destroyed in 40 days (Jonah 3:4)—no loopholes were offered, just imminent doom. God changed things, however, when the people repented and He chose to spare them—much to the chagrin of that imperfect (yet still divinely called) prophet, Jonah.

But it never says Jonah was sent to prophesy against Nineveh–but to preach against it.

Next, they talk about the “failed prophecy” of Ezekiel, in ch. 26-28. However, this only gives further evidence of their hurried attempts to impugn the reputations of God’s prophets. It would take far more space than I have here to show why this will not work, if one studies the words properly. Ezekiel 26:3 tells us that God said “many nations” will come up against Tyre. Also, Nebuchadnezzar was not just the commander of Babylon’s army, but also the armies of those countries Babylon had conquered–those nations whose horses would be so abundant the people would be covered with the dust of their hooves (Eze. 26:10). While those who did the invading got the spoils, Nebuchadnezzar himself did not share in it, thus God gave him Egypt in chapter 29.

Next, they try to smear Jeremiah, by pointing out how he prophesied in ch. 34 that Zedekiah would die in peace, when ch. 52 says that he died in prison. According to many extra-biblical sources (Josephus, the Rabbins, Talmud) Zedekiah was indeed given a royal burial, thus fulfilling the prophecy God gave to Jeremiah.

Then comes Nathan. FAIR says:

Other examples include Nathan:

In 2_Sam. 7:5-17, we read that the prophet Nathan unequivocally prophesied to David that through his son Solomon the Davidic empire would be established “forever,” that the children of Israel would dwell in the promised land “and move no more,” and that the “children of wickedness” would no longer afflict them. These things are quite clearly stated. No conditions are attached to these promises, none whatsoever.[4]

Yet this prophecy clearly did not prove successful if it is interpreted literally.

And there they hit the nail on the head. This passage has Messianic implications. Of course, if you read Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, you find that Joseph was a direct descendant of Solomon, and the legal (though not by birth) father of Jesus. Thus, the davidic kingdom did indeed pass through Solomon. More sloppy work by a group that (ironically enough) calls itself “FAIR.”

Finally, the angel who spoke to Samson. Again, FAIR says:

[In] Judges 13:5, where it is recounted that an angel promised Samson’s mother that Samson would “begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.” No matter how liberal or expansive one wants to be with the facts of Israelite history (as recorded in the Bible or elsewhere), there is no way it can reasonably be concluded that Samson fulfilled this prophecy.

Not only did Samson fail to even “begin” to free Israel from the Philistines, but (1) there were times when he consorted with Philistine women, (2) he married a Philistine, (3) he himself never even led any Israelite troops against the Philistines, and (4) the Philistines eventually humiliated him.

You’re kidding me, right? They might want to read Judges 14:3-4—And Samson said to his father, “Get her [Delilah] for me, for she pleases me well.” But his father and mother did not know that it was of the LORD–that He was seeking an occasion to move against the Philistines. Yes, Samson did begin to deliver Israel when he brought down the Philistne temple with all their princes in it (see Judges 16:25-30). The angel never said he would be the one to finish the job.

So, you can now see how fast and loose FAIR likes to play with their interpretations of biblical prophecies, just so long as it makes the true prophets look bad long enough to fool someone into thinking Joseph Smith was a true prophet (which he wasn’t. That Civil War “prophecy” wasn’t so grand once you examie it a little closer).

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (Answer 4)

Tower To Truth question:

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

——————–

FAIR Answer:

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

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

————————————-

My Response:

This is another case of the LDS church saying that a doctrine that they held for over 140 years was simply “one man’s opinion.” Give it a rest, folks. Either the “prophet” is speaking as from God’s mouth, or you can’t trust anything they say. Here we come back to Ezra Taft Benson’s words in “14 Fundamentals”—

Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.

Did you hear what the Lord said about the words of the prophet? We are to “give heed unto all his words”–as if from the Lord’s “own mouth.”

That’s right, give heed to the words of the LDS prophet–unless they don’t make sense, or their prophecy doesn’t come to pass, or it becomes an embarassment to their cause, or they really need for Utah to become a state–then you don’t really have to listen, because it’s “just his opinion.”

Interstingly, in this same message, Youngs says,

“Brother George Q. Cannon brought me a god from the Sandwich Islands, made out of a piece of wood. If all the people bow down to such a god as that, it is in accordance with their laws and ordinances, and their manner of dealing among themselves; the Lord permits them to do as they please with regard to that matter, and this illustration will apply to all the nations upon the face of the earth. People who fall down beneath the wheels of Juggernaut, and are crushed to death; who sacrifice their children in the worship of idols; if they act according to the best of their knowledge, there is a chance for their salvation, as much as there is for the salvation of any other person.”

Here is the quote in question:

We have this illustrated in the account of Cain and Abel. Cain conversed with his God every day, and knew all about the plan of creating this earth, for his father told him. But, for the want of humility, and through jealousy, and an anxiety to possess the kingdom, and to have the whole of it under his own control, and not allow any body else the right to say one word, what did he do? He killed his brother. The Lord put a mark on him; and there are some of his children in this room. When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the Priesthood, and of coming into the kingdom of God, and of being redeemed from the four quarters of the earth, and have received their resurrection from the dead, then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity. He deprived his brother of the privilege of pursuing his journey through life, and of extending his kingdom by multiplying upon the earth; and because he did this, he is the last to share the joys of the kingdom of God.

Did you notice that? Blacks will not receive the Melchizedek priesthood until all the sons of Adam have received it, and have been redeemed, and resurrected. And not until then! Obviously, not all of Adam’s sons have received the Melchizedek priesthood, or been redeemed or resurrected. Yet another false prophecy. Go figure!

Of course, this is in line with their beliefs that blacks and Indians were a “dark and loathsome people” (1st Nephi 12:23; 2nd Nephi 5:21; Jacob 3:5; Alma 3:6, etc. etc. etc.)

I would answer the issue of “the mark of Cain” or “disobedience in the pre-existence” or however the Mormon church wants to play this thing. But it’s a rabbit trail, one I won’t even go down. I could mention Galatians 3:28, or Ephesians 2:14-18, or Revelation 5:9, or why it took the Mormon church so long to understand what these verses meant, even though Joseph Smith was supposedly a “prophet of God.” But I won’t.

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (answer 3)

Tower To Truth question:

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

—————————————-

FAIR Answer:

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

—————————————

My Response:

Well, at least they got one thing right: All of [Brigham Young’s] statements cannot be reconciled with each other. His doctrine seemed to change more than the weather.

So, what did Brigham Young say about Adam, the Ancient of Days? Here is the text that is at the core of the matter (Link to the JOD). No ellipses, here is the whole text so that you may see and understand that nothing I am about to comment on is taken out of context (capitalization in the original, all emphases mine):

Our Father in Heaven begat all the spirits that ever were, or ever will be, upon this earth; and they were born spirits in the eternal world. Then the Lord by His power and wisdom organized the mortal tabernacle of man. We were made first spiritual, and afterwards temporal.
Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken-He is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, must hear it, and will know it sooner or later. They [Adam and Eve] came here, organized the raw material, and arranged in their order the herbs of the field, the trees, the apple, the peach, the plum, the pear, and every other fruit that is desirable and good forman; the seed was brought from another sphere, and planted in this earth. The thistle, the thorn, the brier, and the obnoxious weed did not appear until after the earth was cursed. When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal. When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by theHoly Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he [Jesus]

took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession. I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and over-righteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone. I have heard men preach upon the divinity of Christ, and exhaust all the wisdom they possessed. All Scripturalists, and approved theologians who were considered exemplary for piety and education, have undertaken to expound on this subject, in every age of the Christian era;and after they have done all, they are obliged to conclude by exclaiming” great is the mystery of godliness,” and tell nothing.
It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim [God the Father], Yahovah [Jesus], and Michael [Adam, God]

, these three forming a quorum, as in all heavenly bodies, and in organizing element, perfectly represented in the Deity, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
Again, they will try to tell how the divinity of Jesus is joined to his humanity, and exhaust all their mental faculties, and wind up with this profound language, as describing the soul of man, “it is an immaterial substance!” What a learned idea! Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation.
I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told. Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever,that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost.
 

 

 

Hmm. I wonder what he meant by all that. Yeah, it’s, um, real difficult to figure out what he was saying. (‘Scuse me while I wipe off the sarcasm dripping from my lips.)

What strikes me as odd is that it took the LDS church some 130 years to finally admit that, um, yes, this is something Brigham Young taught. They never refuted the teaching, but they never admitted to it either. Kinda like how the Catholic Church will neither embrace (offcially) nor deny a doctrine until enough of the faithful embrace it, after which it becomes “Tradition” and thus doctrine.

But, alas, in 1981, every Mormon’s favorite apostle, Bruce McConkie, did his best to put the issue to bed in a letter to LDS in Britain:


So, let me understand this. When the prophet speaks, he’s speaking from God only if what he says lines up with the Standard Works. Of course what they fail to mention is that one of the “Standard Works” is the teaching of the “living prophet.” And we are to value the words of the “living prophet” even over the Standard Works and any dead prophets. Don’t take my word for it, here are the words of Ezra Taft Benson, former LDS president, in his “Fourteeen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet“:

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

In section 132, verse 7, of the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord speaks of the Prophet–the President–and says: “There is never but one on the earth at a time on whom his power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred.” Then in section 21, verses 4-6, the Lord states:
Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;
For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.

For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.

Did you hear what the Lord said about the words of the prophet? We are to “give heed unto all his words”–as if from the Lord’s “own mouth.”

Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

President Wilford Woodruff stated: “I say to Israel, The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.” (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, selected by G. Homer Durham [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1946], pp. 212-213.)

President Marion G. Romney tells of this incident, which happened to him:

I remember years ago when I was a Bishop I had President [Heber J.] Grant talk to our ward. After the meeting I drove him home….Standing by me, he put his arm over my shoulder and said: “My boy, you always keep your eye on the President of the Church, and if he ever tells you to do anything, and it is wrong, and you do it, the Lord will bless you for it.” Then with a twinkle in his eye, he said, “But you don’t need to worry. The Lord will never let his mouthpiece lead the people astray.” [In Conference Report, October 1), p. 78]

[…][…]

 

 

So, in other words, only listen to the living prophet, except when he contradicts the Standard Works, which are not as important as the words of the living prophet, who doesn’t always speak for god.

Er, something.

Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This, however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel. But, be it known, Brigham Young also taught accurately and correctly, the status and position of Adam in the eternal scheme of things. What I am saying is that Brigham Young contradicted Brigham Young, and the issue becomes one of which Brigham Young we will believe. The answer is we will believe the expressions that accord with the teachings in the Standard Works.

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions (answer 2)

Question from Tower To Truth:

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

——————————–

Answer from FAIR:

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

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

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

Learn more here: Brigham Young and moonmen
Learn more here: Joseph Smith and moonmen

———————————————————-

My Response:

Well, considering the fact that Brigham was supposed to be a “prophet” of God, don’t ya think God would have given him just a little more insight than your garden-variety, back yard astronomer? Does this mean that the Mormon “prophets” don’t ask God, “I’m about to say this. Is this true? Because if it is, we’re both going to look foolish!” They can say all they want to about this only being Brigham’s “opinion.” This was not stated as opinion, but rather as fact. Here is the whole quote:

Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? When we view its face we may see what is termed “the man in the moon,” and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain. It was made to give light to those who dwell upon it, and to other planets; and so will this earth when it is celestialized. (Journal of Discourses, 13:271)

In this statement, he purports to know more about the moon and sun than “the most learned” whom he calls “as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows.” And, as he said, he believed there was “no question” that the sun was inhabited. Young took his information from a hoax perpetrated by a reporter for the New York Sun. What a sad commentary about God if His “prophet” can be conned by a work of satire by a two-bit newspaper writer.

Besides, if Brigham Young is to be believed, this sermon is, indeed, Mormon Scripture.

“I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them into the celestial kingdom, as I know the road to my office. It is just as plain and easy. The Lord is in our midst. He teaches the people continually. I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually.” (Young, Journal of Discourses 13:95)

Also,

“The Journal of Discourses deservedly ranks as one of the standard works of the Church, and every right-minded Saint will certainly welcome with joy every number (issue) as it comes forth.” (President George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, Preface, Vol.8.)

Taking these quotes together—along with other, similar quotes from Mormon authorities—and one can come to no other conclusion than the words contained in the Journal of Discourses are Scripture to the Latter-Day Saint.

This whole “man in the moon” situation seems to be just one more hoax that has been played on the early LDS church that their leaders fell for hook, line, and sinker (The Kinderhook Plates being another).

So, what about biblical prophets believing in a “flat earth?” FAIR quotes the Anchor Bible Dictionary and its references to different ways various parts of the universe, Hell, Heaven, etc. were portrayed through symbolism (pillars of the earth, foundation of the earth, belly of Sheol, etc.) Time and space (and moonmen) do not permit me to go into detail about the symbolism used in the Bible to illustrate things which the writers could not put into words.

by

50 Answers to 50 Mormon answers to 50 Anti-Mormon questions (answer #1)

FAIR (The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, not affiliated with the LDS church), has issued their “Answers to 50 Anti-Mormon Questions,” their answers to 50 questions about Mormonism, questions posted by Tower to Truth Ministries. Here is the first installment of how to answer these 50 Mormon answers to 50 “Anti-Mormon” questions.

—————————————–

Question from Tower To Truth:

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

——————————————–

Answer from FAIR:

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

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

———————————–

My Response:

Actually, yes, this WAS a prophecy. Doctrine and Covenants 84:1-5—1 A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and six elders, as they united their hearts and lifted their voices on high. 2 Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem. 3 Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased. 4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. 5 For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house.

Notice all the times that “Jesus Christ” says “shall.” The city “shall be built beginning at the temple lot…” In verse 4, “New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of saints…” And this temple “shall be reared in this generation…” Verse 5, “…this generation shall not pass away until an house shall be built, and a cloud shall rest upon it…the glory of the Lord shall fill the house.” These are not commands, these are things Jesus Christ Himself is (supposedly) saying shall happen. The one giving the revelation does not say, “build my city…build New Jerusalem…build My temple…” as if he is commanding that it be done. The voice is saying, “It shall come to pass…”

In their response, FAIR says, “This was not a prophecy, but a command from God to build the temple.” Yet if you follow the link Independence temple to be built “in this generation”, you find this little tidbit:

Meaning of “shall”

It is unclear from the wording of the 1832 revelation whether Joseph Smith meant it to be a prophecy or a commandment. When he declared the “temple shall be reared in this generation,” it’s possible that he meant this as a directive. If this is the case, D&C 84 is not actually a prophecy.

Well, which is it? Was this a command, or can we not be sure? Then there’s this:

Meaning of “generation”

If the revelation is meant as a prophecy, the timeline for its fulfillment depends on what Joseph meant by “generation.” Typically we consider this to mean the lifespan of those living at the time of the revelation.

Also notice in D&C 84:1, it is termed a “revelation,” not a “command.” In Doctrine and Covenants 1:37, it says, Search these commandments, for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in them shall all be fulfilled. This (the building of the temple) was a prophecy, one which went unfulfilled, thus one of many reasons to conclude that Joseph Smith was indeed a false prophet.