FAIR

Apologetics

Mormon Fair-Cast 202: Barry R. Bickmore, “Restoring the Ancient Church”

by

Podcast: Download (38.0MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Barry R. Bickmore Restoring the Ancient Church 2nd EditionBarry R. BickmoreMills Chrenshaw who is the host of the program “Drive Time Live” on K-Talk AM 630 radio in Salt Lake City Utah interviews Barry Robert Bickmore about his book “Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity.”  In this interview brother Bickmore relates how the teachings of the early Church are reflected in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

This book meticulously examines the earliest teachings of Christianity and how some of those teachings were modified, abandoned, or forgotten in the centuries following the death of the Apostles. By exploring the writings of early Christian leaders, Dr. Bickmore is able to recover those early teachings while illustrating the significance they played in the theology and Christology of the pristine Christian Church. Most importantly for Latter-day Saints, Dr. Bickmore demonstrates that many of forgotten early Christian teachings were restored through the prophet Joseph Smith.

This 2nd edition is enlarged and revised.  This book is available through the FairMormon bookstore here .

A written review of Barry R. Bickmore’s first edition from a non-LDS perspective is also available at FairMormon here.

This interview was used by permission of Mills Crenshaw and K-TALK radio. The opinions expressed in this interview do not necessarily represent the views of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or of FairMormon.

 

LDS Church Essays Tackle Controversial Issues

by

[This article first appeared in the Student Review. It has been reposted here with slight alteration.]

In a fireside devotional given at Utah State University in November 2011, Elder Marlin K. Jensen, an emeritus Seventy and former Church Historian and Recorder for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, included a question and answer segment in his remarks. During this Q&A, one member of the audience asked about the concerning trend of Church members, particularly younger members, leaving the Church over controversial historical issues they encounter online and elsewhere. “Is the Church aware of that problem?” the questioner asked. “What about people who are already leaving in droves?” Jensen’s response to this question has gone viral, having been reported in the press and discussed on a number of blogs and other sites. “The fifteen men that are above me in the hierarchy of the Church . . . really do know. And they really care. And they realize that, maybe, since Kirtland we’ve never had a period of—I’ll call it apostasy—like we’re having right now, largely over these issues.” Jensen then explained that the Church was then in the process of creating resources to address these concerns. “So we are trying to create an offering that will address these issues and be available for the public at large and to people who are losing their faith or have lost it.” [Read more…] about LDS Church Essays Tackle Controversial Issues

A Yankee Lawyer’s Guide to the “Mormon Apocalypse”

by

A British man named Tom Philips has filed a fraud action in England against President Thomas Monson and is claiming that it will bring on the “Mormon Apocalypse.” However, rather than inciting fear and panic among the faithful, if they know about the case at all, the most common response is one of bewilderment among Mormons and non-Mormons alike. That is due partly to the fact that it seems quite odd that someone would pursue a case for fraud that is based on faith claims and personal opinions. But, at least for Americans, the odd nature by which the claim has arisen procedurally is equally puzzling.

As an American civil defense lawyer, I think I have been as befuddled by this case as anyone. So I’ve consulted British lawyers and legal sources and come up with the following guide to what Phillips has called, the “Mormon Apocalypse.”

1. Private prosecution of a criminal matter in England

First, let’s consider how this matter was initiated. Under English law, a member of the public may, with some exceptions, act as a private prosecutor of a criminal matter. In order to do so, a person must first do what is called “laying an information” at a magistrate’s court. This is simply a written statement that clearly describes the offense with a citation to the pertinent criminal statute. Once this is done, a magistrate or clerk may issue a summons. Before doing so, the magistrate or clerk tries to verify that the statement actually alleges some criminal wrongdoing, it has not been filed too late, it has been filed in the correct location, and the person filing the statement is the proper person to be making the claim. The magistrate or clerk is not required to make any inquiries into the facts before issuing a summons. However, the court must at least be satisfied that at least some evidence exists to support the claim, which is the purpose in this case of the statements of Bloor and Ralph. Therefore, any assumption that the magistrate in this particular case must have already weighed the facts and found the evidence supporting the claim to be well-founded is incorrect. Furthermore, since a summons requires the defendant to come to court either in person or to appear through an attorney, President Monson will not be required to appear in person.

The reason why English Law allows a private party to proceed with a criminal prosecution in this manner is that until 1986 there was no professional prosecution service in England and the majority of prosecutions were commenced by police officers “laying information” and applying for either a warrant or summons.  Since the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act however, English Police have been given extensive powers to arrest, charge and require bail of individuals suspected of criminal offences thus reducing their need to apply for warrants of arrest. In 1986, a national Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, has been given the responsibility for almost all criminal prosecutions in England. In Scotland, the legal position is different from that which exists in England. There has always been a professional prosecution service in Scotland and private prosecutions are not allowed. The same is now true of most countries in the former British Empire.  Today, private prosecutions, such as that initiated by Philips are very rare in England and are increasingly regarded by many lawyers and judges as an unnecessary and undesirable historical anomaly.

In this case, “information was laid” by Tom Phillips on behalf of Stephen Colin Bloor and Christopher Denis Ralph, and a summons was issued on behalf of each of them summoning President Monson to appear (though he may do so through an attorney) before the court on March 14. In this case, one summons names Stephen Colin Bloor (an ex-Mormon dissident), as an alleged victim and another names Christopher Denis Ralph (another ex-Mormon dissident) as another alleged victim. Each summons states as follows:

That between 3rd February 2008 and 31st December 2013 dishonestly and intending thereby to make a gain for himself or another or a loss or risk of loss to another made or caused to be made representations to [Stephen Colin Bloor/Christopher Denis Ralph], which were and which you knew were or might be untrue or misleading and thereby induce the said [Stephen Colin Bloor/Christopher Denis Ralph] to pay an annual tithe to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, namely that:

  1. The Book of Abraham is a literal translation of Egyptian papyri by Joseph Smith.
  2. The Book of Mormon was translated from ancient gold plates by Joseph Smith, is the most correct book on earth and is an ancient historical record.
  3. Native Americans are descended from an Israelite family which left Jerusalem in 600 B.C.
  4. Joseph and Hyrum Smith were killed as martyrs in 1844 because they would not deny their testimony of the Book of Mormon.
  5. The Illinois newspaper called the Nauvoo Expositor had to be destroyed because it printed lies about Joseph Smith.
  6. There was no death on this planet prior to 6,000 years ago.
  7. All humans alive today are descended from just two people who lived approximately 6,000 years ago.

Contrary to section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006.

You are therefore summoned to appear before Westminster Magistrates’ Court 181 Marylebone Road, London, NW15BR on 14/03 2014 at 10AM in Courtroom 6 to answer the said information.

Failure to attend may result in a warrant being issued for your arrest.

Of course, the significance of February 3, 2008, is that this is when Thomas S. Monson became President of the Church.

It should also be noted that despite the reference to the possibility of an arrest warrant being issued if President Monson does not attend court, there is no legal requirement for him to physically attend.  Under § 122 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980, found here, a defendant who is represented by a lawyer is deemed to be present at Court and § 23 of the same Act allows all preliminary matters prior to trial itself to be dealt with by lawyers representing a defendant if “the Court is satisfied that there is good reason for proceeding in the absence of the accused.” Good reason would of course include the distance between London and Salt Lake City.

The purpose of the hearing on March 14 is merely administrative in nature, and nothing substantial is likely to occur. For example, President Monson (or his attorney on his behalf) will be asked to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty, and it will be determined whether the case should be heard in the higher level “Crown Court.” Since these allegations involve criminal fraud, and a high-profile defendant, the case would presumably be transferred to Crown Court. That is where all preliminary legal arguments will take place, and, if the case is not dismissed beforehand on a pre-trial motion, a trial by jury would occur there.

However, this is an unusual situation. So it is possible that at the first hearing the court will agree to consider a motion to dismiss.  It is also possible that the CPS will take over the case and discontinue it, which is something the CPS is entitled to do with any private prosecution. Of course, the case is not likely to be taken over unless CPS has already decided to discontinue it.

Also, it is possible for the defense to ask for more time before entering a plea and thus the case may simply be adjourned, perhaps with a direction to Phillips that he should serve his evidence on the defense.  There are a broad variety of possibilities at this preliminary stage. But basically, either the case will be concluded by a dismissal, or it will more likely be adjourned to proceed on another date, likely at the Crown Court.

Although some seem to imagine that a media circus will ensue in which President Monson is hauled into court in front of flashing cameras and shouting reporters, even an entire trial can proceed without a defendant being physically present if he is instead present through video link. Providing evidence through video link is increasingly common in English Courts.

However, lawyers for the Church will almost certainly seek to have the charges dismissed as a nullity at an early stage.  First, English law does not allow courts to adjudicate on issues of religious belief, (see e.g., Khaira v Shergill, [2012] EWCA Civ 983). The Church could also argue for a dismissal on the basis that the case is vexatious, malicious and an abuse of process. And if the case were to proceed to trial, there are other issues that undermine the viability of this case that are noted in more detail below.

It should also be noted that if Phillips does not prevail against the Church, he may[i] be required to pay the legal fees incurred by the Church in defending against this claim.

2. The Fraud Act of 2006

The statutory basis for the claim against President Monson lies in the Fraud Act of 2006, found here. Specifically, Subsection 2 of the Act explains that “Fraud by false representation” occurs when:

1. A person dishonestly makes an untrue or misleading statement (in a way that is either express or implied),

2. That the person knows is, or might be, untrue or misleading,

3. Intending that by making the statement, he will make a gain for himself or another, or cause a loss to another or expose another to a risk of loss.

Section 12 of the Act further provides that where an offence against the Act was committed by a “body corporate,” but was carried out with the “consent or connivance” of any director, manager, secretary or officer of the body corporate, then that person, as well as the body itself, is liable.

The penalty under the statute is imprisonment of not more than 12 months and/or a fine of an undetermined amount, but which could be ordered up to the amount of tithing paid by Bloor and Ralph in reliance on the alleged statements.

From this, it seems that the primary questions raised are:

  • Did President Monson or the Church as a “body corporate” make the representations that are listed in the warrant?
  • Did he or the Church do so “dishonestly?”
  • Are the representations untrue or misleading?
  • Did President Monson know they are false or misleading?
  • Did he do any or all of these things with the intent of making gain for himself or the Church or with the intent to cause Bloor or Ralph to incur a loss?
  • Did Bloor and Ralph pay their tithing because of these statements?

What this all boils down to is this: Assuming the case is not dismissed at a preliminary stage, the question will be, can Phillips as prosecutor of this action prove beyond a reasonable doubt that President Monson knows the Church is false and has nevertheless used his position as President of the Church to publish false statements that are intended to cause Bloor and Ralph to pay tithing, and did Bloor and Ralph pay tithing because of those statements?

3. Analysis of the claims

It is unclear whether Phillips is claiming that President Monson made fraudulent statements to Bloor and Ralph in person, or if these are statements that President Monson allegedly made, or caused to be made on the internet among the publications of the Church.[ii] It is possible that the court might hold that Phillips must prove that these statements were made directly to Bloor and Ralph, and that it is not enough that any statements were published to the world in general on the Church’s website. However, the law on this point may be unsettled. Assuming that publications on the internet are sufficient, we can then examine the various questions in light of statements published by President Monson or the Church within the past few years that appear on the Church’s website.

The first question is, did President Monson make, or cause to be made, any of these statements since becoming president of the Church? Clearly, many of these statements appear on the Church’s website. However, it is somewhat unclear with others. For example, I am not aware of any unambiguous statement from the Church or from President Monson since he became President that there was no death on the planet before 6,000 years ago. Furthermore, it is somewhat unclear whether Phillips will need to prove that the alleged statements originated after President Monson assumed leadership of the Church, or whether statements that were made previously, and only perpetually republished on the internet or in written publications can form a viable cause of action.

Did he or the Church make these statements “dishonestly?” The English Court of Appeal in Regina v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053 established a two-part legal test that applies to all charges involving “dishonesty.” The first question is “whether according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest. If it was not dishonest by those standards, that is the end of the matter and the prosecution fails.”  If (but only if) the defendant’s conduct was dishonest by those standards, the jury must consider the second question, which is “whether the defendant himself must have realised that what he was doing was [by the standards of reasonable and honest people] dishonest.” From all of the public information available about President Monson, it is hard to imagine what evidence Phillips could present that would convince a jury both that reasonable and honest people would think that he had been dishonest and that he realized that what he has taught as President of the Church would be considered to be dishonest.

Are all of these statements demonstrably false or misleading? No. Rather, nearly all of them are matters of faith and not demonstrably false. Many of the statements are simply matters of opinion. (E.g., the Book of Mormon is the most correct on Earth.) Those which are statements of faith or opinion cannot be disproven. It should be also be noted that, contrary to what some critics of the Church have claimed, President Monson will not be required to prove that each of the alleged statements is true. Rather, Phillips will be required to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that these statements are false, that President Monson knew they were false, and that he made them with the intent to defraud Bloor and Ralph and that they paid tithing in reliance on these statements.

Did President Monson know these statements are false? There is no evidence that President Monson thinks that what he and the Church have been teaching is false. While some critics have claimed that he does not really believe the Church is true, and has not testified of the foundational doctrines of the Church for many years, he has, in fact, done so as evidenced here.

Did he do any or all of these things with the intent of making gain for himself or the Church or with the intent to cause Bloor or Ralph to incur a loss? I am aware of no evidence to support this element of the claim and it seems impossible to prove that President Monson had any such intent.

Did Bloor and Ralph pay their tithing because of these statements? While it seems plausible that a reason that Bloor and Ralph paid their tithing, at least in part, because of faith in the general idea that the Book of Mormon is the word of God, it would seem strange if they felt induced to pay tithing on the basis of each of the particular statements that are alleged to have been made, such as the statement: “There was no death on this planet prior to 6,000 years ago.”

In summary, this case may be dismissed within the next few months on the simple basis that English law does not allow courts to adjudicate on issues of religious belief. If it proceeds beyond that stage, even if it can be proven that President Monson and the Church made all of the alleged statements, those that have been made are not demonstrably false but are matters of faith, or opinion, and there is every indication that President Monson believes the Church is true, so cannot be held to have knowingly misled anyone regarding the truth claims of the Church.


[i] In the original version of this post, I said the Phillips “will” be required to pay fees if he does not prevail. However, I have since learned that this particular issue may be more complicated than originally thought due to the fact that this is a private prosecution of a criminal matter.

[ii] With respect to the substance of the statements, FairMormon has written a large number of articles that address the various topics that are raised in these allegations. Regarding the translation of the Book of Abraham, see here and here. Regarding whether Abraham himself wrote on the papyrus owned by Joseph Smith, see here. For evidences that the text of the Book of Abraham is of ancient origin, see here. For a general list of articles regarding the Book of Abraham, see here.

For a general list of articles regarding the Book of Mormon, including articles related to the translation process, the historicity of the Book of Mormon, DNA evidence regarding Native Americans, as well as the comment that the Book of Mormon “is the most correct book on earth,” see here.

On whether or not Joseph and Hyrum Smith may properly be considered martyrs, see here and here. On the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor, see here.

On the question of whether there was death on the planet prior to the Fall of Adam, see here. For a list of articles discussing evolution and related issues, see here.

Fair Issues 43: Why aren’t other peoples mentioned in the Book of Mormon?

by

Podcast: Download (6.9MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Ash (newer) PictureWhy didn’t Nephi include explicit information about “others” in the small plates?  Unlike the large plates – which recorded the more mundane, political and warring elements of Nephi history – the small plates focused on Nephite “ministry.”

In this podcast brother Ash explains why the “other” peoples who lived in the larger New World population are missing from the Book of Mormon.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore.

Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

Fair Issues 42: Dismissing Book of Mormon Geography Inaccuracies

by

Podcast: Download (6.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Ash (newer) PictureThe traditional LDS folk-belief asserts that the Lehites arrived to a nearly vacant New World,…this assumption – like many other assumptions about the about the Book of Mormon – comes from a naïve reading of the text that was filtered through the 19th century misunderstanding of the human migrations that populated the ancient New World.

In this article brother Ash explains this common error and extends our understanding of this important issue.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore.

Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

 

A New Church History Seminary Manual

by

Screen Shot 2014-02-05 at 11.17.54 PM
The cover page of the new edition of the Doctrine and Covenants and Church History seminary manual.

[Cross-posted from Ploni Almoni: Mr. So-and-So’s Mormon Blog.]

The Church has released a new edition of the Doctrine and Covenants and Church History manual for seminary students. One of the remarkable aspects of the new manual is that it includes a discussion of several sensitive topics in church history. These topics include the following.

1. The various accounts of the First Vision are highlighted in the new manual. “There are nine known accounts of the First Vision—four written or dictated by Joseph Smith and five written by others retelling his experience,” the manual states (p. 20).

The multiple accounts of the First Vision were prepared at different times and for different audiences. In these accounts, Joseph Smith emphasized different aspects of his experience of the First Vision, but the accounts all agree in the essential truth that Joseph Smith did indeed have the heavens opened to him and see divine messengers, including God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Because the 1838 account was part of Joseph Smith’s official history and testimony to the world, it was included in the Pearl of Great Price as scripture. (p. 20)

The manual then recommends students to read articles by Milton Backman and Richard Lloyd Anderson published in the Ensign discussing the various accounts of the First Vision (pp. 20, 22).

2. There is an entire chapter devoted to the Mountain Meadows Massacre and the Utah War (Lesson 151). The manual gives a brief historical overview of the events leading up to the massacre and acknowledges the participation of “Latter-day Saint leaders and settlers” in the crime (p. 523). Besides citing an article on the Mountain Meadows Massacre published in theEnsign, the manual also reproduces this quote given by President Henry B. Eyring at the 150 year anniversary of the massacre.

The gospel of Jesus Christ that we espouse, abhors the cold-blooded killing of men, women, and children. Indeed, it advocates peace and forgiveness. What was done [at the Mountain Meadows] long ago by members of our Church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct.

3. In a chapter on the history of the Pearl of Great Price there is a brief overview of the history of the Book of Abraham, including the loss and recovery of several papyrus fragments once in the possession of Joseph Smith (pp. 524–526). Included in the discussion about the Book of Abraham is this (which is actually reprinted from the Church’s Pearl of Great Price Student Manual).

In 1966 eleven fragments of papyri once possessed by the Prophet Joseph Smith were discovered in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. They were given to the Church and have been analyzed by scholars who date them between about 100 B.C. and A.D. 100. A common objection to the authenticity of the book of Abraham is that the manuscripts are not old enough to have been written by Abraham, who lived almost two thousand years before Christ. Joseph Smith never claimed that the papyri were autographic (written by Abraham himself), nor that they dated from the time of Abraham. It is common to refer to an author’s works as ‘his’ writings, whether he penned them himself, dictated them to others, or others copied his writings later. (p. 525)

(Incidentally, yours truly has written a thing or two on this subject over at the Interpreter blog, which you can access here.) The manual also states, “Although we do not know the exact method Joseph Smith used to translate the writings, we do know that he translated the book of Abraham by the gift and power of God” (p. 525).

4. The new manual has material covering the practice of plural marriage, including an entire chapter on Joseph Smith’s plural marriage (Lesson 140) and a mentioning of Post-Manifesto plural marriage. Below are a few pertinent excerpts from the manual.

In this dispensation the Lord commanded some of the early Saints to practice plural marriage. The Prophet Joseph Smith and many other Church leaders found this commandment difficult, but they obeyed it. After receiving revelation, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto, which was accepted by the Church as authoritative and binding on October 6, 1890. This led to the end of the practice of plural marriage in the Church (see Official Declaration 1). (p. 204)

While Joseph Smith was working on the inspired translation of the Old Testament in 1831, he read about some of the ancient prophets practicing plural marriage (also called polygamy). Under this practice, one man is married to more than one living wife. The Prophet studied the scriptures, pondered what he learned, and eventually took his questions about plural marriage to Heavenly Father in prayer. . . . the Prophet Joseph Smith was reluctant to begin the practice of plural marriage. He stated that he did not begin the practice until he was warned that he would be destroyed if he did not obey. . . . Because of a lack of historical documentation, we do not know about Joseph Smith’s early attempts to comply with the commandment. However, by 1841 the Prophet had begun to obey the commandment and to teach it to some members of the Church, and over the next three years he married additional wives in accordance with the Lord’s commands. The Prophet Joseph Smith’s obedience to the Lord’s commandment to practice plural marriage was a trial of faith for him and his wife Emma, whom he loved dearly. (pp. 477–478)

Practicing plural marriage brought additional challenges. Because the practice was initially kept very quiet, rumors began to spread about Church leaders marrying additional wives. These rumors greatly distorted the truth, slandered the names of the Prophet and other Church leaders, and contributed to increased persecution against the Saints. (p. 479)

A small number of Latter-day Saints continued to enter into new plural marriages after the Manifesto was given. In 1904, President Joseph F. Smith announced “that all [plural] marriages are prohibited, and if any officer or member of the Church shall assume to solemnize or enter into any such marriage he will be . . . excommunicated”. . . . This policy continues today. (p. 530)

Towards the end of the chapter on Joseph Smith’s plural marriage, the manual warns, “Much unreliable information pertaining to plural marriage exists on the Internet and in many print sources. Be cautious and wise with such information. Some authors who write about the Church and its history present information out of context or include partial truths that can be misleading. The intent of some of these writings is to destroy faith” (p. 479). I myself have raised a similar point in this post. The manual then concludes by recommending, “Reliable historical research concerning the practice of plural marriage can be found at josephsmithpapers.org and byustudies.byu.edu” (p. 480).

5. On describing the nature of the Joseph Smith Translation, the manual says the following.

Around the fall of 1830, Joseph Smith was commanded by the Lord to translate the Bible. He did not translate the Bible from one language to another; nor did he have an original biblical manuscript to work from. Instead, Joseph would read and study passages from the King James Version of the Bible and then make corrections and additions as inspired by the Holy Ghost. Thus, the translation was more of an inspired revision than a traditional translation.The Joseph Smith Translation is estimated to have affected at least 3,400 verses in the King James Version of the Bible. These differences include additions (to clarify meaning or context), deletions, rearranged verses, and complete restructurings of certain chapters. The Joseph Smith Translation clarified doctrinal content, especially the mission of Jesus Christ, the nature of God, the nature of man, the Abrahamic covenant, the priesthood, and the Restoration of the gospel. (pp. 180–181)

6. The historical circumstances surrounding the priesthood ban and President Spencer W. Kimball’s 1978 revelation are discussed in a chapter on Official Declaration 2 (Lesson 157). As part of this discussion, the manual reprints the introductory material to OD 2 printed in the 2013 edition of the scriptures.

The Book of Mormon teaches that ‘all are alike unto God,’ including ‘black and white, bond and free, male and female’ (2 Nephi 26:33). Throughout the history of the Church, people of every race and ethnicity in many countries have been baptized and have lived as faithful members of the Church. During Joseph Smith’s lifetime, a few black male members of the Church were ordained to the priesthood. Early in its history, Church leaders stopped conferring the priesthood on black males of African descent. Church records offer no clear insights into the origins of this practice.

There is also the recommendation at the end of the chapter for students to “go to Gospel Topics on LDS.org and search for ‘race and the priesthood'” to learn more about the priesthood ban (p. 545).

7. Finally, in discussing section 77 of the Doctrine and Covenants, the manual straightforwardly says, “The 7,000 years [in vv. 6–7]  refers to the time since the Fall of Adam and Eve. It is not referring to the actual age of the earth including the periods of creation” (p. 280).

I am sure there is more that could be said about the new manual, but suffice it to say from the above examples that the Church is implementing productive measures towards introducing these sort of issues in a faith-promoting, safe, and positive environment (seminary). This will hopefully serve to “inoculate,” to use the popular metaphor, seminary students against the often highly debatable claims and negative information one can currently find on the Internet. While one might perhaps quibble over how certain issues are addressed in the new manual, that there is even a discussion at all in Church curriculum is, in my estimation, a step in the right direction.

Book of Mormon and DNA Studies

by

[Cross posted from Ploni Almoni: Mr. So-and-So’s Mormon Blog.]

The Church has released a new article addressing criticisms of the Book of Mormon based on DNA evidence (link here).

Here are a few of my thoughts.

1. For anyone who has been following this issue, there is nothing really new or groundbreaking with this article. It is, rather, a basic summarization of the work of John Sorenson, Ugo Perego, Michael Whiting, Matthew Roper, John Butler, and other scholars who have written on this subject.

2. The article explicitly acknowledges the existence of non-Book of Mormon populations in the Americas.

The evidence assembled to date suggests that the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA. Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska. These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians. (Internal citations removed)

The article also acknowledges the possibility of the presence of “others” besides the peoples described in the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon itself . . . does not claim that the peoples it describes were either the predominant or the exclusive inhabitants of the lands they occupied. In fact, cultural and demographic clues in its text hint at the presence of other groups. . . . Joseph Smith appears to have been open to the idea of migrations other than those described in the Book of Mormon, and many Latter-day Saint leaders and scholars over the past century have found the Book of Mormon account to be fully consistent with the presence of other established populations. (Internal citations removed)

This, incidentally, converges with one of the changes that the Church made to the introduction of the 2013 edition of the Book of Mormon. Whereas the introduction use to identify the Lamanites as the “principle ancestors” of modern Native Americans, it now reads that the Lamanites are “among the ancestors of the American Indians.”

Given this recent trend, it seems evident that the Church is very much open to the possibility of a so-called “Limited Geography” for the setting of the Book of Mormon, although one must be careful not to assume the Church takes any official position on any single proposed geography.

3. The article approvingly cites the work of scholars and apologists associated with what was formerly known as the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS). This includes a volume edited by Daniel C. Peterson, former editor of the FARMS Review (now the Mormon Studies Review) and a prominent Mormon apologist. This should be clear indication that, contrary to the recently claims of some, the Church has not backed away from what is sometimes derisively called “classic FARMS” apologetics. To the contrary, the Church has appealed to “classic FARMS” scholarship in its own apologetic for the Book of Mormon.

4. The article urges caution in attempting to use DNA evidence to bolster the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon. “Much as critics and defenders of the Book of Mormon would like to use DNA studies to support their views, the evidence is simply inconclusive” (emphasis added). Misguided attempts by Latter-day Saints to use DNA to “prove” that the Book of Mormon is true should be very carefully reconsidered.

Finally, it can be reasonably inferred from this article that the Church is not backing away from Book of Mormon historicity. In fact, just the opposite appears to be the case. The Church is attempting, with this article, to demonstrate the plausibility of the historicity of the Book of Mormon in the face of criticism. I would therefore recommend this article to anyone who thinks that the Church is bowing to its critics or otherwise loosening its stance on the Book of Mormon’s historicity.

I would also recommend this article to anyone who is troubled by any arguments that attempt to use DNA evidence to disprove the Book of Mormon. One can also find more resources on issues relating to DNA and the Book of Mormon by accessing the FairMormon Answers website (link here).

Fair Issues 41: Real Science, truth coincide

by

Podcast: Download (7.1MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Ash (newer) PictureMichael R. Ash relates how real science, truth coincide with real Mormon scholarship.  While science is unable to answer the questions about the purpose for life, the hereafter, or many other thing that must be taken on faith, accurate science is necessary for the telling us about the world in which we live.  As Elder John A. Widtsoe said: “Truth is truth forever. Scientific truth cannot be a theological lie.”

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore.

Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

 

4th Watch 12: Too Serious or not Serious Enough

by

Podcast: Download (11.3MB)

Subscribe: RSS

4thWatch SmallHow serious do we take the gospel of Jesus Christ?  How serious do we take ourselves in relation to the gospel of our Savior?  Sometimes we can get caught up in the thick of thin things and overlook the weightier matters.

In this podcast brother Scarisbrick reviews a article done by Robert Kirby, a columnist for the Salt Lake Tribune newspaper.  The article is entitled “Is it worse to be too serious or not serious enough?”  Brother Kirby was also a speaker at the FairMormon conference this past August 2013.  You may read his article from the Salt Lake Tribune  here.

The “Kirb” is somewhat of a colorful character compared to your standard and average Mormon.  His rating for “light-minded” refers to lack of seriousness regarding sacred things.  It’s a class C Church misdemeanor in modern Mormonism.  Light-mindedness was probably a felony during Brigham’s Young’s day.  Brother Ned explores how we see this gospel principle from several perspectives

Books to Build Faith

by

DanPetersonI’m sometimes contacted by people who’re experiencing doubts about the claims of Mormonism or whose spouse or father or daughter has lost faith.  I always ask what the specific issues might be, and I then try to address those or to locate colleagues or printed resources that might help resolve their concerns.

I think that such efforts are extraordinarily important.  Elder Neal A. Maxwell, for whom the Maxwell Institute was named, was fond of Austin Farrer’s praise of the great C. S. Lewis: “Though argument does not create conviction,” Farrer wrote, “lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.”  (See Austin Farrer, “Grete Clerk,” in Jocelyn Gibb, comp., Light on C. S. Lewis [New York: Harcourt and Brace, 1965], 26.)  

Farrer’s words  long served as a kind of unofficial motto for several of those who were associated with the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), which later became the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship.  I think that motto was entirely appropriate.

I don’t, however, like to play only defense.  I don’t want to spend all my time putting out brushfires, playing catch-up, responding to crises. To use a very popular modern buzzword, I much prefer to be proactive.  I want to build faith to such a strength that crises will be less common, to create conditions under which such brushfires will be much more difficult to kindle.  Back to the sports metaphor:  If the defense is always out on the field, it may be able to keep the opposing team from scoring.  But if the offense doesn’t eventually come out to play, the prospects of victory will be very low.  A single error by the defense, one moment of inattention or poor execution, will be enough to lose the game.

One way that I choose to be proactive is to suggest a basic packet of books that I would like as many Latter-day Saints to read as possible, a set that I especially wish faltering members to be familiar with. I offer a few nominations here:

Richard Lloyd Anderson, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981).  I was once, I confess, sitting at the back of a rather unexciting church class, rereading Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses, when an academic colleague of mine from BYU sat down beside me. “Next to the scriptures,” he commented, “that’s the most faith-promoting book I’ve ever read.”

I’m inclined to agree with him. Richard Anderson, who earned a law degree from Harvard before receiving a doctorate in ancient history from the University of California at Berkeley, is one of the finest scholars the church has ever produced.  In this book, he subjects the Book of Mormon witnesses to meticulous examination.  They emerge from the process as sane, lucid, honest, reliable men—a fact of perfectly enormous importance because of the way their testimony directly corroborates central claims of Joseph Smith and Mormonism.

Brother Anderson has written many other very important articles on the witnesses—and on other relevant topics—since his book was published.  These are available online at the Maxwell Institute website, including but not limited to “Attempts to Redefine the Experience of the Eight Witnesses,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/1 (2005): 18–31; “Personal Writings of the Book of Mormon Witnesses,” in Book of Mormon Authorship Revisited: The Evidence for Ancient Origins, ed. Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1997), 39–60; and “The Credibility of the Book of the Mormon Translators,” in Book of Mormon Authorship: New Light on Ancient Origins, ed. Noel B. Reynolds and Charles D. Tate (Provo, UT: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1982), 213–37.  But Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses remains, I think, the place to start on this vital subject.

John W. Welch, ed., Opening the Heavens: Accounts of Divine Manifestations, 1820–1844 (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 2005).  In this book, the prolific polymath John W. Welch has assembled an impressive collection of original documents relating to six foundational topics in Mormon history: (1) the first vision, (2) the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, (3) the restoration of the priesthood, (4) Joseph Smith’s visionary experiences generally, (5) the restoration of temple keys, and (6) succession in the presidency (specifically the “transfiguration” of Brigham Young in Nauvoo).

Mark McConkie, ed., Remembering Joseph: Personal Recollections of Those Who Knew the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2003).  Mark McConkie, a professor in the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, has created a vast treasury in this book and in the accompanying bonus CD of intimate views of the Prophet Joseph Smith.  The sheer volume of material is deeply impressive. (The CD includes 2,000 pages of primary-source testimonials. The book alone includes statements from many scores of Joseph Smith’s contemporaries.)  Most of the accounts included—from Joseph’s family, friends, and acquaintances, and even from his enemies—have never been published before or are, practically speaking, inaccessible to ordinary people.  But they’re very much worth the time.  Joseph Smith, as described by those who knew him, comes across as an honest, good, and sincere man.  And once again, because of the nature of his claims, that’s something very important to know and understand.

Grant Hardy, Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader’s Guide (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010).  This is a somewhat more difficult book than the others I’ve recommended above, but, in my opinion, it’s a book that will abundantly reward the effort invested in it.

Grant Hardy, who holds an undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University in classical Greek and a PhD from Yale University in Chinese history, has published impressively on the history of historical writing from his perch at the University of North Carolina at Asheville, where he’s served as the chairman of the History Department.

In Understanding the Book of Mormon, he turns his highly trained eye on the historical writings of Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni, treating them as distinct personalities with very different approaches to their material.  Although he himself is an active and committed member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the purposes of this study he “brackets” the question of whether or not they were real individuals.  Nevertheless, the extraordinarily fruitful results of his study demonstrate that the writings of Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni are indeed quite distinct—and by far the most reasonable explanation for this, in my opinion, is that they represent three real, historically different men.

I believe that serious and fair-minded engagement with the four books I’ve recommended is virtually certain to strengthen faith in readers who’re even slightly open to the possibility that Mormonism is true.  Mark McConkie’s compilation will build confidence in the character of Joseph Smith.  Richard Anderson’s book and John Welch’s anthology provide powerful corroboration of Joseph’s claims to revelation.  Grant Hardy’s book demonstrates, at least in one area, how very complex, rich, and internally consistent the Book of Mormon is.

When people contact me with doubts and problems, I don’t want merely to try to allay their concerns.  I want to build their faith so that their areas of uncertainty will shrink relative to their areas of confidence. These books—and, of course, there are others—are well suited to do just that.