• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

FAIR

  • Find Answers
  • Blog
  • Media & Apps
  • Conference
  • Bookstore
  • Archive
  • About
  • Get Involved
  • Search

Blog

Putting Together an Awful Story

May 21, 2014 by Stephen Smoot

picard-facepalm2An anonymous author* writing at the MorningStar Post blog “had an awful time putting [a] story together” on “the number of Latter Day Saints [sic] that are actually considered active,” and that Mormons are, per the title of the post, allegedly “leaving their religion in record numbers around the world.” (Link) What is the cause of this dire situation for the Church, and why was it so awful for the author to write on it? According to the article, which quotes an unnamed “high-ranking leader in Salt Lake City,” it is because “of unprecedented scrutiny of our doctrines and beliefs and stemming from the white washing of our own history, and the rise of social media sites where members and potential converts can learn of our hidden problems.”

This claim has been made before on many websites critical of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is a common trope for critics to say that the Church is nearing extinction because of the supposedly damning real history of Mormonism it has been hiding from its unsuspecting members. Instead of revisiting these claims in general, I want to focus specifically on the content of the blog post published by the MorningStar Post. To put it bluntly, and very charitably, the article is highly problematic. The author’s use of anonymous sources is extremely questionable, and both factual errors and blatant plagiarism also plague the article. In short, the article makes totally dubious and unsubstantiated claims about both LDS Church hierarchy and Mormon history. [Read more…] about Putting Together an Awful Story

Filed Under: Anti-Mormon critics Tagged With: Faith Crisis, Gospel topics, Joseph Smith, magic, Marlin K. Jensen, Mormon history, seer stones, Steven E. Snow

Coping with the “Big List” of Attacks on the LDS Faith

May 20, 2014 by Jeff Lindsay

One of the challenges in defending one’s faith is coping with critics who use the “Big List” technique in their attack. This involves throwing out numerous arguments to create the impression of an overwhelming barrage that decimates the faith in question (see the related post, “If Only 10% of These Charges Are True…“). The Big List is loaded with barbed questions that weren’t written in search of a real answer. If there is a good defense to the arguments raised at first, never mind, there are many more to be launched in different directions.

As with many topics in fields like history, science, and religion, the issues raised in Big List attacks are often complex and may require exploring abundant details to answer questions properly. Even for those who are prepared to answer questions on a wide variety of topics, the time it takes to lay a foundation and properly answer a question can be taken by the instantly impatient critics as an admission of weakness and confirmation that they are right, and then it’s time to move on to the next attack and the next. If reasonable answers are promptly provided for some attacks, or if the alleged weakness on further examination actually proves to be evidence in favor of the faithful position, the response can be ignored as new attacks from the Big List are hurled out.

This doesn’t just happen in anti-Mormon attacks. Attacks on many other faiths use the same approach. Interesting, attacks on some aspects of modern science by religious fundamentalists or young earth Creationists also may rely on the Big List approach, much to the exasperation of scientists who know there are good answers to the attacks, but often may not be able to adequately deal with the barrage of questions from critics not really interested in the answers. Some scientists call the tactic the “Gish Gallop” after Duane Gish, a Creationist noted for hurling numerous brief arguments to overwhelm opponents in debates on evolution.

One interesting recent example is discussed by famous science blogger PZ Myers in the post, “No! Not the list of stumpers again!” at Pharyngula. Myers writes:

There’s a common tactic used by creationists, and I’ve encountered it over and over again. It’s a form of the Gish Gallop: present the wicked evolutionist with a long list of assertions, questions, and non sequiturs, and if they answer with “I don’t know” to any of them, declare victory. It’s easy. We say “I don’t know” a lot.

Jack Chick’s Big Daddy tract is a version of the creationist list, and contains a fair amount of fantasy as well. You know what they believe will happen: they’ll ask that one question that the scientist can’t answer, and then they’ll have an epiphany, a revelation, and realize that all their science is a lie, at which time they’ll resign from their university position and join a good bible-believin’ church.

It happens to me all the time, too. At one talk I gave, there was a woman at the door who had printed a 5-page, single-spaced list of questions, and she was telling everyone going in to ask me to answer them — I invited her to come in and listen to the talk and ask them herself, and she ran away. I’ve had a Canadian creationist do the same thing, and then I talked to him for several hours in the hallway after the talk. He seemed stunned and angry that I actually had answers for most of his questions. I have been confronted by people with questions (more like ignorant assertions) about biology, who once I’ve answered them and reveal that I’m a biologist, switch to asking me about geology and the Big Bang, to get me into a corner where I’d have to say, “I don’t know.”

This approach, often launched by some of the same religious folks who like to denounce The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is painfully familiar to me.

By the way, for the record, I believe in God and believe that He is the Creator, yet believe that science and religion will ultimately be compatible when properly understood. I have no problem with the earth being billions of years old and with evolutionary tools being part of God’s toolkit for preparing a planet like ours for the miraculous spectrum of life that we have here. While I disagree with the arguments used by many Creationists, as one who loves science, I definitely believe that the majesty of the cosmos and the many intricacies of life cannot be reasonably explained as mere accidents, but are evidences of a remarkably clever and artistic Creator. So while I do not share some of PZ Myers views, I can relate well to the frustration of being hit with Big List attacks from religious critics not really interested in understanding or dialog.

One of my first experiences in helping to teach the Gospel after graduating from school and taking my first job in Appleton, Wisconsin involved a young college student, a new LDS convert, who had been given volumes of anti-Mormon literature by her former pastor. She came in with a stack of books, relying especially upon a thick tome published by a popular anti-Mormon organization. She asked one pointed question after another, all of which turned out to have reasonable answers, in my opinion, that we were able to offer on the spot. We dealt with them one at a time, turning to answers from the scriptures, when appropriate, or making points based on logic or other sources of information.

After about 40 minutes of this, she grew impatient and said something like, “Look, maybe you’ve got answers for the questions I’ve raised, but there are hundreds more arguments in this book. How can the Church be true when there are so many arguments against it?”

I said that it’s easy to make arguments against anything. I reminded her of the days of early Christianity when there were numerous false witnesses against Christ, when there were paid witnesses who said that the tomb had been raided by Christians to fake the Resurrection, when all the elite religious leaders of the Jews spoke against Christ, and when the whole Roman world seemed to speak against Christ and the Christians. There were volumes and volumes of arguments against the Church back then, too. “If you were living them, how could you see past the massive arguments and recognize the divinity of the Son of God and the truth of Christianity?”

Unwilling to acknowledge the importance of a spiritual witness, she returned to her anti-Mormon books. I pointed out that while we had examined only a few of the arguments, the ones she had raised had reasonable answers, and some even demonstrated a lack of integrity on the part of the authors. Her answer surprised me: “I don’t care. Even if only 10% of that book is true, that’s enough to prove the Church is false.”

Ah, the fallacy of the Big List, a key tool in the Adversary’s arsenal. Impress them with shear volume, wear them out with endless attacks, and many will succumb, overwhelmed by the image and impression of strength.

A few years ago I received a letter from a former LDS member explaining why he and his wife were leaving the Church. In that letter, he acknowledged that there may be “excuses” to deal with each anti-Mormon argument when taken individually, but that taken together as a whole, the case against the Church is overwhelming. He then listed a barrage of arguments, mentioning DNA and the Book of Mormon, anachronisms, 4,000 changes in the Book of Mormon, racism, polygamy, the Temple and masonry, etc. — problems that each can be dealt with if one takes the time to understand the issues and examines the assumptions behind them. Even then, one must be willing to recognize that there always will be some gaps in our understanding and that no amount of evidence and study will remove the need for faith or replace the power of a witness from the Holy Ghost. But in many cases, there are answers, sometimes powerful answers that turn apparent weaknesses in the Book of Mormon, for example, into strong evidence for authenticity. Such insights do not come from a superficial glance at the text and related literature. Sadly, he became another victim of the fallacy of the Big List.

There are tough arguments, indeed. DNA and the Book of Mormon is an example of this. For a meaningful understanding of the issues, one must identify assumptions and evaluate information from a variety of perspectives. In so doing, one can come away with a better understanding of what the Book of Mormon is and what it is not. But the Adversary would have us just fold based upon a superficial examination: “Wow, there’s no obvious Jewish DNA in the Americas. End of story!”

To help those coping with Big List issues, I’ve begin compiling my own list of recommended reading for students of the LDS religion. I hope it will be helpful to some. I’m not saying that you have to read this list before you leave the Church (or join it), but if you’re willing to look at answers and evidences, it might be a great place to start.

The Gospel is true, and the Book of Mormon is a divine, authentic book of scripture, in spite of whatever mountains of books and brochures against it the enemy can mount. And Jesus is the Son of God, no matter how many false witnesses and PhD’s and celebrities take a stand against Him. It’s not about who can shout the loudest and longest, but Whose gentle voice we listen for amidst the senseless shouting of men.

*Cross posted from Mormanity.

Filed Under: Anti-Mormon critics, Apologetics Tagged With: anti-Mormonism, DNA and the Book of Mormon, Mormon history

Articles of Faith 3: Craig L. Foster on Polygamy and its relationship to the LDS Church

May 19, 2014 by NickGalieti

https://media.blubrry.com/mormonfaircast/www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/AOF-CraigFoster-3.mp3

Podcast: Download (54.0MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Craig L. FosterPrior to graduating from BYU, Craig L. Foster served as a missionary in Belguim and France. Craig L. Foster earned a Bachelors degree in history and MLIS (or Masters of Library and Information Science) at BYU. He is also an accredited genealogist and works as a research consultant at the Family History Library in Salt Lake City. He has published books and articles on various aspects of Mormon History. Some of his writings on Mormon History discuss the history and theology of plural marriage within the context of Mormonism. Craig is also on the editorial board of the John Whitmer Historical Association Journal. Craig is the author of the article: Separated but not Divorced: The LDS Church’s Uncomfortable Relationship with its Polygamous Past found in the Interpreter: Journal of Mormon Scripture

 

Filed Under: Articles of Faith, Hosts, Joseph Smith, LDS History, Nick Galieti, Podcast, Polygamy, Women Tagged With: Craig L. Foster, D&C 132, polygamous wives, Polygamy

Fair Issues 55: Do Nephite Names find a “Home” in Middle East

May 17, 2014 by Ned Scarisbrick

https://media.blubrry.com/mormonfaircast/www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Fair-Issues-55-Pod.mp3

Podcast: Download (7.2MB)

Subscribe: RSS

MAIn this podcast Michael Ash gives examples of common Book of Mormon names such as Lehi, Nephi and Sariah that have origins from ancient sources.   The name “Sam” certainly seems out of place in an ancient Israelite document.  It has, in fact, been the target of criticism by various anti-Mormons through the years.  It is also, however, a perfectly good Egyptian name, and is also the normal Arabic form of “Shem.”

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.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon.

 

Filed Under: Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon, Conversion, Evidences, Faith Crisis, General, Hosts, LDS Culture, Mormon Voices, Ned Scarisbrick, Podcast, Power of Testimony

Faith and Reason 3: A Prophet’s Birth from Noble Heritage

May 16, 2014 by FAIR Staff

https://media.blubrry.com/mormonfaircast/www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/EVIDENCE-1-FINAL.mp3

Podcast: Download (7.2MB)

Subscribe: RSS

From the book: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith

by Michael R. Ash

In this episode, Michael Ash discusses: A Prophet’s Birth from Noble Heritage. Both Joseph Sr. and Lucy Mack Smith came from a line of worthy ancestors. Some of their progenitors were patriots, pioneers, and ministers. Seven were pilgrims who sailed on the Mayflower, and three of the seven signed the Mayflower Compact.

One of Lucy’s ancestors was John Lathrop, a former minister of the Church of England who allied himself with an independent religious body when he no longer approved of the church government. For eight years Lathrop and his congregation met secretly in London until they were arrested. During his imprisonment, Lathrop’s wife became fatally ill and he was allowed to visit her in her dying moments before returning to jail. He was finally released after pleading with the bishop for the sake of his motherless children. Lathrop and his children then sailed to America, where he became a leader in church affairs.

Joseph Sr. and Lucy wed in 1796. The following year they delivered their first child, an unnamed daughter who died shortly after birth. Alvin, Hyrum, and Sophronia followed. The Smiths moved several times as they struggled to support their growing family. They finally settled in Sharon, Vermont after purchasing a farm from Lucy’s father, Solomon Mack. Joseph Sr. cultivated the farm and taught school during the winter. Gradually, their financial circumstances became more comfortable.

Joseph Smith Jr. was born on December 23, 1805. He was the fifth child of an eventual eleven to be born to the Smiths. Twenty-nine years had passed since America had declared her independence from England, and only twenty-two years had lapsed since the Revolutionary War had formally ended. The Bill of Rights had been in force for only fourteen years, and George Washington had died just six years earlier. Thomas Jefferson was serving as president of the United States –which consisted of only seventeen of our current fifty states.

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt. He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.

Julianne Dehlin Hatton  is a broadcast journalist living in Louisville, Kentucky. She has worked as a News Director at an NPR affiliate, Radio and Television Host, and Airborne Traffic Reporter. She graduated with an MSSc from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University in 2008. Julianne and her husband Thomas are the parents of four children.

Music for Faith and Reason is provided by Arthur Hatton.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Temple Blindness

May 15, 2014 by Jeff Lindsay

I am pained to see Latter-day Saints get carried away in cynicism over the Temple because some elements are linked to modern sources such as Masonry. This is an important theme in some attacks that have gained publicity recently, where it is argued that the Temple is a fraud because it does not contain elements from Solomon’s temple but from modern Masonry. As I explain on my LDSFAQ page on the LDS Temple and Masonry, neither Masonry nor any other modern source explains the ancient majesty of the LDS temple concept, which is completely foreign to the modern world and to Joseph Smith’s world. Numerous aspects of the LDS temple concept such as washings and anointings, baptism for the dead, and the sealing of families have no relationship to Masonry or and/or predate Joseph’s exposure to Masonry, making Masonry a completely inadequate source to explain the content of the Temple. The LDS Temple is much more at home in a very ancient setting and offers strong evidence for an actual Restoration. As for Solomon’s temple, the relationship might be stronger than blind critics could ever see, as I’ll explore below. 
[Read more…] about Temple Blindness

Filed Under: Masonry, Temples Tagged With: freemasonry, Temple

Letters to a Former Missionary Companion

May 14, 2014 by Mike Ash

MAThe following series of articles is a fictional dialogue between Shane and Doug, two former missionary companions many years after their missions. Shane writes to his friend Doug who has posted comments about his on-going faith crisis on Facebook. The characters are fictionalized composites of members who have faced these same dilemmas but the issues are based on very real problems which have caused some to stumble. Likewise, the responding arguments are based on the author’s own personal engagement with these same concerns as well as his discussion of these issues with other members who have struggled. (By Michael R. Ash, author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, and Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith.)

Dear Doug,

It was wonderful to hear from you again. Glad that your family is healthy and well. Exciting times now that your oldest daughter is off to college–––gray hairs on your head are sure to follow.

As an extension of our discussions on your Facebook page, I thought we could exchange some personal emails wherein we can address some of your concerns in greater detail. I can certainly appreciate your current struggle with your faith. I never told you this (my wife didn’t even know until recently) but I myself went through a similar faith crisis a number of years ago. I remember how my stomach hurt and how I had trouble sleeping. I had put so much of my life into the Church and suddenly I felt like I had been conned. I was angry, sad, and didn’t really know where to turn for answers. I started to bring up some of my issues in Priesthood and Sunday School classes, but the confused looks on other ward members’ faces quickly taught me to just keep quiet.

I tried talking to my bishop about it once. He was concerned for me but I don’t think he really understood what I was going through. He emphasized the importance of reading the Book of Mormon every day in addition to the New Testament (the Sunday School curriculum we were studying at that time) and reminded me of the importance of humility and prayer.

None of that seemed to soften the distress I was feeling from the things I was reading on the Internet. While I felt like a spiritual person, I began to wonder if I was deluding myself about my core beliefs. It wasn’t like there was a single silver bullet that had killed my testimony, but there was an accumulation of things–––like a thousand cuts (some were paper cuts, some were knife wounds) that were causing me to bleed out my religious convictions.

The thing that hurt the most was the same thing you pointed out on one of your Facebook posts–––I felt I had been lied to. It really bothered me that critics seemed to know more about the true history of my Church than I did. Why hadn’t I learned any of those things in my lifetime as a member of the Church? Why had I never been told that Joseph used a seer stone in a hat to translate the Book of Mormon? Why wasn’t I told the details about his many marriages (some of which sounded deviant)? It was hard for me to imagine that Church leaders didn’t know this information if critics knew about it. And if leaders knew about this information and weren’t sharing it with us–––the members–––it smacked of a “cover up.”

I really wished my dad was around to talk with. He loved to read church books. Sometimes he tried to share his findings with me but quite honestly, I reciprocated with perfunctory interest. I had a strong testimony since I was a kid. I went on a mission, married in the temple, and served as a bishopric counselor twice. I really didn’t get why Dad found interest in intellectual studies about the Church. I brushed it off as his “gospel hobby.” After he died I inherited his library of books but never read them. I nearly gave them all away to Deseret Industries but decided it looked cool to have so many books on my bookshelves.

At the peak of my own faith crisis–––with no one to talk to about my struggles and the issues that challenged my testimony–––I decided to categorize Dad’s books on the shelves according to topic. I found books on the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, Church history, and the lives of modern prophets. There were also books on philosophy, science, and early Christian and Jewish writings.

I found a number of books written by general authorities, books by authors I’d never heard of (and had no idea if they were LDS), and several books by the late Hugh Nibley. I don’t think I had ever read anything by Hugh Nibley (unless he had published something in the Ensign) but I knew who he was. I decided to read some of the things Dad found so interesting by starting with Nibley’s Since Cumorah.

It was a fascinating read and it opened my eyes to things about the Book of Mormon which I had never before considered. For me, the scriptures–––including the Book of Mormon–––where almost like untouchable faxes from the mind of God to the pen of prophets. I took everything they said as literal, or nearly literal. When I had first stumbled upon the writings of critics, I was badly shaken because they were able to show that some of the things that seemed literal to me were impossible, illogical, or contradicted by other scripture or the word of modern prophets.

After reading Nibley’s book I realized–––for the first time in my life–––that real people who interacted in real ways with a real ancient environment recorded the scriptures. The obvious had never occurred to me before–––I was reading the scriptures from my 21st century mind-set instead of trying to understand the scriptures from within the framework of an ancient context.

Since Cumorah was the first glimmer of light in my darkening testimony. It didn’t necessarily convince me that the Church was true, but it did make me realize that I really didn’t know that much about my own scriptures–––scriptures I had been reading regularly since my mission–––and offered hope that maybe there were logical answers to the critical claims I had read online.

It took me less than four days to devour Since Cumorah, so I dug deeper into Dad’s books. My dad was raised on an Idaho farm but got his agricultural degree at Utah State University. So mixed in his collection were several books on agriculture. As I categorized Dad’s old library I tried to separate his Church books from his agricultural books and novels. Suddenly I realized that several books that I had been putting in the agricultural pile (the books were entitled FARMS Review) were actually Church books–––most of which contained multiple essays, and all of which were tied to an organization supported by BYU. Apparently FARMS was an acronym for The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (since that time I’ve discovered that they changed their name to the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Studies). Dad had probably a dozen different FARMS Reviews dating back to the late 1980s.

To my wonderful surprise, this collection of books addressed many of the exact issues with which I was struggling. While I didn’t find answers to all of my questions in that collection, I found enough to convince me that the critics didn’t have the last word on any of these topics. I also found that there are strong intellectual reasons to believe. One of the most important things I discovered from my research was that there was no Church “cover up.” Many of the issues that troubled me were actually acknowledged and discussed in official Church publications and in publications officially supported by the Church.

The other very important thing that I realized–––and this is obvious in hindsight–––is that the same data can be interpreted in different ways. This happens all the time in science, history, politics, and so forth. It’s inescapable in religious matters as well. I’ve read some critics who imply that they’ve won the argument by declaring, “See Mormon scholars don’t deny that Joseph Smith’s various accounts of his First Vision contain discrepancies.” However, while critics and believers often agree on the data, they can disagree with the interpretation or significance of the data.

When I went through my faith crisis, it seemed that there was no way to understand the troubling information and still believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet. The new pro-LDS scholarly material that I discovered, however, showed me that such things could be understood in a context of belief. I didn’t need to abandon my faith. If my previous spiritual experiences meant anything to me–––if I felt that there was a spiritual element of truth to Mormonism–––I could harmonize seemingly difficult issues in a worldview that saw Joseph Smith as the prophet of the Restoration. I even found that such a worldview was supported (not proven, but supported) by historical and archaeological evidences that made more sense in the context of belief than they would in a context of unbelief.

My testimony had been bruised and healed. Once my brain recognized that belief was a viable and logical option, my heart was once again able to enjoy the wonderful peace I feel with the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

After devouring every Church-related book my dad bequeathed to me, my thirst for knowledge lead me to the Interpreter Foundation (www.MormonInterepreter.com)–––a site conceived by many of the scholars once associated with FARMS–––and the website FairMormon.org, which helps struggling members who are beset by the same challenging issues that damaged my faith. I found tons of answers on the FairMormon site, as well as videos, podcasts, and a bookstore with many books that helped me think more critically about my beliefs and assumptions. All of this–––my past history with the same difficult issues with which you are currently struggling–––has given me an insight into what you are going through. If you are willing, I’d really like to correspond with you and discuss those issues you raised on your Facebook page.

Your friend,

Shane.

Filed Under: Apologetics Tagged With: Faith Crisis, Michael Ash, Shaken faith syndrome

New Gospel Topics Essay: “Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints”

May 13, 2014 by Stephen Smoot

A 19th century depiction of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, printed in T. B. H. Stenhouse's book The Rocky Mountain Saints (1873).
A 19th century depiction of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, printed in T. B. H. Stenhouse’s book The Rocky Mountain Saints (1873).

A new essay on the Gospel Topics website went up this morning. It is titled “Peace and Violence among 19th-Century Latter-day Saints” and covers, among other things, 19th century vigilantism and violence among Latter-day Saints.

The article begins by emphasizing that the Church strives to emulate Jesus’ call to peace.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is founded on the teachings of Jesus Christ. The virtues of peace, love, and forgiveness are at the center of Church doctrine and practice. Latter-day Saints believe the Savior’s declaration, found in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon, that “blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” In Latter-day Saint scripture, the Lord has commanded His followers to “renounce war and proclaim peace.” Latter-day Saints strive to follow the counsel of the Book of Mormon prophet-king Benjamin, who taught that those who are converted to the gospel of Jesus Christ “will not have a mind to injure one another, but to live peaceably.”

But, given the religious persecution perpetuated against the Saints in the 1830s and 40s, and given the historical context of vigilantism in 19th century America, the article goes on to discuss lamentable moments of violence and retaliation that the Saints committed. During the 1838 Missouri War, for example, “some [Mormon] leaders and members organized a paramilitary group known as the Danites, whose objective was to defend the community against dissident and excommunicated Latter-day Saints as well as other Missourians.” While the Danites may initially have had noble intentions, as the war escalated their actions quickly turned violent and aggressive.

Danites intimidated Church dissenters and other Missourians; for instance, they warned some dissenters to leave Caldwell County. During the fall of 1838, as tensions escalated during what is now known as the Mormon Missouri War, the Danites were apparently absorbed into militias largely composed of Latter-day Saints. These militias clashed with their Missouri opponents, leading to a few fatalities on both sides. In addition, Mormon vigilantes, including many Danites, raided two towns believed to be centers of anti-Mormon activity, burning homes and stealing goods.

But violence among 19th century Mormons did not end in Missouri. As the Saints settled the Rocky Mountains, vigilantism and violence cropped up in some instances of conflict with Native Americans. As relationships between some Mormons and Native Americans strained, “A series of battles in February 1850 resulted in the deaths of dozens of Utes and one Mormon. In these instances and others, some Latter-day Saints committed excessive violence against native peoples.”

During this time was also the so-called “Mormon Reformation” of the mid-1850s.

In the mid-1850s, a “reformation” within the Church and tensions between the Latter-day Saints in Utah and the U.S. federal government contributed to a siege mentality and a renewed sense of persecution that led to several episodes of violence committed by Church members. Concerned about spiritual complacency, Brigham Young and other Church leaders delivered a series of sermons in which they called the Saints to repent and renew their spiritual commitments. Many testified that they became better people because of this reformation.

One aspect of this “reformation” was the proliferation of violent rhetoric or imagery in the sermons of some Church leaders, such as Brigham Young and Jedediah M. Grant.

Nineteenth-century Americans were accustomed to violent language, both religious and otherwise. Throughout the century, revivalists had used violent imagery to encourage the unconverted to repent and to urge backsliders to reform. At times during the reformation, President Young, his counselor Jedediah M. Grant, and other leaders preached with fiery rhetoric, warning against the evils of those who dissented from or opposed the Church. Drawing on biblical passages, particularly from the Old Testament, leaders taught that some sins were so serious that the perpetrator’s blood would have to be shed in order to receive forgiveness. Such preaching led to increased strain between the Latter-day Saints and the relatively few non-Mormons in Utah, including federally appointed officials.

Commonly termed “blood atonement,” this rhetoric, while mostly just that, also appears to have led to violence in some instances.

While many of the exaggerated claims that appeared in the popular press and anti-Mormon literature [about blood atonement] are easily disproven, it is likely that in at least one instance, a few Latter-day Saints acted on this rhetoric. Nevertheless, most Latter-day Saints seem to have recognized that the blood atonement sermons were, in the words of historian Paul Peterson, “hyperbole or incendiary talk” that were “likely designed to frighten church members into conforming with Latter-day Saint principles. To Saints with good intentions, they were calculated to cause alarm, introspection, and ultimately repentance. For those who refused to comply with Mormon standards, it was hoped such ominous threats would hasten their departure from the Territory.”

Violence committed by 19th century Mormons reached its bloody apogee in 1857 with the terrible massacre of a group of emigrants from Arkansas at the site of Mountain Meadows in southern Utah. The history of this event, besides being summarized by the new essay, has been discussed in an article published in the Ensign and in the 2008 volume Massacre at Mountain Meadows. As explained by the essay, “while intemperate preaching about outsiders by Brigham Young, George A. Smith, and other leaders contributed to a climate of hostility, President Young did not order the massacre. Rather, verbal confrontations between individuals in the wagon train and southern Utah settlers created great alarm, particularly within the context of the Utah War and other adversarial events.” So then who was ultimately responsible for this crime? “A series of tragic decisions by local Church leaders—who also held key civic and militia leadership roles in southern Utah—led to the massacre.”

The essay concludes by acknowledging violence committed by 19th century Mormons but also emphasizing a need for caution in outright condemning the early Saints as a violent people.

Many people in the 19th century unjustly characterized the Latter-day Saints as a violent people. Yet the vast majority of Latter-day Saints, in the 19th century as today, lived in peace with their neighbors and families, and sought peace in their communities. Travelers in the 19th century often noted the peace and order that prevailed in Mormon communities in Utah and elsewhere. Nevertheless, the actions of relatively few Latter-day Saints caused death and injury, frayed community relationships, and damaged the perception of Mormons as a peaceful people.

The violent actions committed by early Mormons should not be excused or justified, but should be understood in proper historical context. Thankfully, the tumultuous early years of the Church, which saw violence being committed both against and by Mormons, are behind us. Hopefully we can learn from the mistakes of the past while also tempering rash judgement with sound historical understanding.

For more on the topics discussed in the new essay, be sure to check FairMormon’s articles on the Mormon Reformation, crime and violence in early Utah, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, and blood atonement. Also, as you’re browsing the new Gospel Topics essay, be sure to click on the links on the right of the page, such as on the link to the new Doctrine and Covenants and Church History seminary manual, for further reading.

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

Filed Under: Apologetics, LDS History Tagged With: Blood Atonement, Danites, Mountain Meadows Massacre, Violence

Articles of Faith 2: Royal Skousen on Book of Mormon Critical Text Project and Mary Whitmer Witness to the Gold Plates

May 12, 2014 by NickGalieti

https://media.blubrry.com/mormonfaircast/www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/AOF-RoyalSkousen-2.mp3

Podcast: Download (57.4MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Royal SkousenRoyal Skousen is a professor of linguistics and English at Brigham Young University. He is considered to be a leading expert on the textual history of the Book of Mormon.

Royal Skousen talks about his 25+ year effort on the Book of Mormon Critical Text Project, his findings about the language of the Book of Mormon and his assertion that the text is from the language of the 1600’s, not the language of Joseph Smith’s day–concluding that Joseph was revealed an English text, not taking broad theories and applying them to the language of his day.

Royal is also the author of an article from the Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture entitled Another Account of Mary Whitmer’s Viewing of the Golden Plates. This article articulates the discovery of an additional account of Mary Whitmer’s being shown the Gold Plates from the Angel Moroni. This account articulates a motivation for Moroni’s showing her the plates.

For other texts from Royal Skousen, click here.

 

Filed Under: Articles of Faith, Book of Mormon, Hosts, Joseph Smith, LDS History, LDS Scriptures, Nick Galieti, Podcast Tagged With: Book of Mormon Critical Text Project, Book of Mormon language, gold plates, linguistics, Mary Whitmer, Royal Skousen

Mothers as Saviors

May 11, 2014 by SteveDensleyJr

Mother’s Day may be the most ironic of holidays. It is calculated to be a time to pay homage and respect to women. It is an opportunity for women to look back with satisfaction on what they have accomplished. But so often, women can be made to feel embarrassed by the attention and discouraged by comparisons to the idealized version of motherhood. In response to the marvelous webpage the Church recently posted called “Motherhood,” one mother wrote about how disappointed she was at the statement that Motherhood is “the highest, holiest service assumed by humankind.” She explained that motherhood is a mere biological function, and that her highest calling is to become like Christ, not to simply give birth. I am afraid that many modern mothers see their roles as mothers in this way. And at the risk of further embarrassing mothers with attention, or discouraging them with a seemingly impossible comparison, I want to suggest that while it is true that a mother’s highest calling is to become like Christ, it is through acting in her role as a mother that this highest calling is actualized.

A few years ago, I had the opportunity to meet Dr. Valerie Hudson and hear her talk about her ideas regarding the status of women in the Church.[1] While Dr. Hudson was a professor of political science at Brigham Young University, she was listed as one of the “100 Top Global Thinkers of 2009″ by Foreign Policy Magazine for her work in showing that the status of women in a society is linked to the fate of their nations with regard to their domestic stability, prosperity and national security. Her political ideas are interesting to me and have important significance for world affairs. However, her ideas as they relate to the gospel are even more interesting and have eternal significance.

Of course, when talking about women and the priesthood, there are many things we don’t know or understand, and it is easy to hurt people’s feelings, especially on Mother’s Day. In that regard, I would like to make it clear that Dr. Hudson’s ideas, and the things I have to add, are only one way of looking at things. They do not answer every question, but I hope it will help shed some light on some issues.

Like so many things in the gospel, the foundation for these ideas goes back to the beginning. As spirit children of our Father and Mother in heaven, we desired to become like them. But we could only do so if we received bodies and the opportunity a mortal life would give us to grow, and to be tested to see if we were worthy to exercise the same power that is exercised by God.

I can imagine that we must have watched as Adam and Eve went to Earth and were placed in a garden, located eastward in Eden.[2] They were first told to “Be fruitful, and multiply, and [to fill][3] the Earth.”[4] This would allow the rest of us to enter mortality, and give us the chance to gain bodies, gain experience, and be tested.

However, in their initial state of innocence and immortality, they were unable to have children.[5] So among all the other trees in the garden, there were two that were more important than the others. There was the Tree of Life, which had fruit that would allow Adam and Eve to live forever, and there was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, which would make them mortal, but able to have children.[6] The fruit of this tree was the only one that would allow Adam and Eve to have the experiences they needed to be able to grow and progress toward becoming as Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother.[7]

As Eve, the mother of all living, decided to partake of the fruit and then offer it to Adam, we must have rejoiced as we understood that as Eve offered this fruit to Adam, she was also giving all of us the opportunity to pass through the veil that divided us from mortality in order to come to this Earth. Throughout history, Eve has stood as a symbol to the world of the folly of women, and the way in which women have only brought evil into the world. However, through the restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith, we have learned that Eve is to be respected, admired and revered for her wisdom and willingness to leave paradise so she may help all of us to receive bodies, to be tested, and gain the experience we need in order to become as our Heavenly Father and Mother.

Of course, once we passed through the veil and came to this Earth, it is our hope that we may pass back through the veil and live forever in the presence of God. Before doing so, we must be able to partake of the fruit of the other tree, the Tree of Life. The problem for us now, is that as we experience mortality, and gain the experience we need to become like God, we invariably sin and become unworthy to live with God. After Adam and Eve became mortal, God barred the way to the Tree of Life in order to help protect us from living forever in our sins and being forever shut out from the presence of God.[8] So before partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Life, and passing through the veil back into the presence of God, we must become cleansed of our sins through the atonement of Christ. In order to do this, we must have faith, repent, and be baptized by water and by the Holy Ghost.

The ordinances of baptism and confirmation, which enable us to become clean, are administered by those who hold the priesthood. So, Eve stood at the veil by the Tree of Knowledge to help us to pass through the veil to enter into mortality, and Adam, who holds the priesthood, stands at the veil by the Tree of Life, to help us pass back through the veil to enter into eternal life. We could not experience eternal life, and live as God lives, without the roles played by both Adam and Eve. Both roles are essential. One is not more important than the other. Just as Adam hearkened unto Eve in partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, Eve should hearken unto Adam as they make their way toward the Tree of Life.

Every mother is like Eve in that she stands at the veil and helps spirit children of our Heavenly Father enter into mortality. Fathers who hold the priesthood usher us back toward the veil and give us access to the Fruit of the Tree of Life through administration of the priesthood ordinances.

Of course, all of the ordinances of salvation are performed in our temple buildings. Paul teaches that our bodies are temples since temples are where the Spirit of God dwells, and the Spirit of God should dwell also in us.[9] Beyond this, in the ordinances of the priesthood there seem to be additional ways in which a woman’s body is analogous to a temple, where these ordinances take place.

In the Book of Moses, we read that being born again through baptism by water and by the Holy Ghost is analogous to our first birth. In Moses 6:59, we read that “inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, . . . even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory.”

In the temple, we also receive protective clothing. Similarly, a spirit is clothed with a body when it enters the temple of a mother’s body.[10] In the temple, the way to the celestial room is covered by a veil. Similarly, women in the temple wear veils. That which is most holy in the temple, is covered by a veil.

I think it is significant, when we think about all of the ordinances that are necessary to our exaltation, that while we all need to be baptized and confirmed, washed, anointed, endowed and sealed, only men need to enter into the oath and covenant of the priesthood. We know that the covenants we make are intended to help us to grow and to become perfected. So with respect to attaining perfection, it seems that women already have something that is lacking in men. As Elder Matthew Cowley taught, “men have to have something given to them [in mortality] to make them saviors of men, but not mothers, not women. [They] are born with an inherent right, an inherent authority, to be the saviors of human souls … and the regenerative force in the lives of God’s children.”[11]

We are further told by Paul that while women need men to be exalted, men also cannot be exalted without women. Paul wrote: “Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.” Thus, we are exalted together.[12]

As we consider the roles of men and women, we may tend to think that men’s roles are more important. Once we pass through the veil and receive the gift of physical life that is given to us by our mothers, the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, as we make our way around the circle of life back toward the veil, to receive the gift of spiritual life, the fruit from the Tree of Life, we may become focused on the role that men play in this regard and mistakenly think that it is more important. Our backs are turned toward the Tree of Knowledge as we face the Tree of Life.

The terminology and customs we use in this fallen world sometimes also lend themselves to this improper ordering. The fact that men and women have different roles to play does not mean men and women are unequal. People can be different and still be equal.

Unfortunately, throughout the history of the world, Satan seems to have been at work confusing the roles of men and women and at times, leading the world to believe men are more important than women and more recently, teaching that men’s and women’s roles are the same or even that men are irrelevant. The messages we receive are confusing. We receive guidance from the scriptures, but even the scriptures can be difficult to understand. We read in the scriptures that Eve was told by God that “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”[13] Modern-day revelation can help in this regard. Commenting on this scripture, President Spencer W. Kimball said: “I have a question about the word rule. It gives the wrong impression. I would prefer to use the word preside because that’s what he does. A righteous husband presides over his wife and family”[14]

In the Proclamation to the World on the Family, we read: “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners.” So, what does it mean to say that men and women are equal, but that men preside?

Whatever else “preside” means, it cannot mean that the man is superior to the woman since in the same paragraph we read that fathers and mothers are equal partners. Therefore, presiding is simply a role fathers play that is equal to the role played by mothers. It is perhaps helpful in this regard to note that Elder Dallin Oaks stated that when his father died, it was not the young deacon Dallin Oaks who presided in the home, but his mother presided over his family.[15]

Elder Oaks clarified the responsibility to preside by quoting President Spencer W. Kimball when he said: “When we speak of marriage as a partnership, let us speak of marriage as a full partnership. We do not want our LDS women to be silent partners or limited partners in that eternal assignment! Please be a contributing and full partner”[16] President Kimball also declared, “We have heard of men who have said to their wives, ‘I hold the priesthood and you’ve got to do what I say.’” He said that such a man “should not be honored in his priesthood”[17] So it is highly significant that the Proclamation on the Family states that men are to preside “in love and righteousness.”

Paul was perhaps elaborating on this concept when he wrote: “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church…. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it”[18] This is a different kind of leadership than the world is familiar with that would require the one who is at the head to give his life for the others.

The fact that men and women are intended to be seen as equals is suggested at, and in places explicit, though often misunderstood, in the creation story.  Elder Russell Nelson noted that: “From the rib of Adam, Eve was formed (see Gen. 2:22; Moses 3:22; Abr. 5:16).” He continued: “I presume another bone could have been used, but the rib, coming as it does from the side, seems to denote partnership. The rib signifies neither dominion nor subservience, but a lateral relationship as partners, to work and to live, side by side.”[19]

A more direct example is that God said that since it is not good that man should be alone, he would make “an help meet for him.”[20] This sounds to modern ears a lot like a servant. However, the word here for “help meet” is “ezer k’enegdo.” Diana Webb in her book Forgotten Women of God clarifies this word by explaining,”The noun ezer occurs 21 times in the Hebrew Bible. In eight of these instances the word means “savior”…. Elsewhere in the Bible, the root ezer means “strength…. the word is most frequently used to describe how God is an ezer to man.”[21] [22]

The other part of the term “help meet” which is commonly translated as “meet for” or “fit for” is the word “k’enegdo”. This word could possibly be most correctly translated as “exactly corresponding to,” like when you look at yourself in a mirror.[23]

With these ideas in mind, author Beverly Campbell in her book, Eve and Choice Made in Eden suggested that a better translation of this verse might be: “It is not good that man should be alone. I will make him a companion of strength and power who has a saving power and is equal with him.”[24]

So in what way are women saviors to mankind? Blogger Heather Farrell explained it in this way: “Women are ‘saviors’ to men by the fact that they give them life and nurture them towards the light of Christ. By conceiving, creating and bearing mortal bodies women make it possible for God’s children to start on their mortal journey and have the opportunity to become perfected. Without women there would be no gateway into this world and no opportunity for progress or exaltation. In addition, by being willing to sacrifice (their very lives if necessary) to bring children into this world women demonstrate the true meaning of charity. [Note that it also shows obedience and a willingness to consecrate.] From the very first breath a child takes he or she has been the recipient of charity and unconditional love. This is a powerful gift that a mother gives her child and it will be her love which will first remind the child of God and points him or her towards Christ. Each woman, regardless of her ability to give birth, is a savior to mankind when she loves men and nurtures a child closer to Christ.”[25]

As a man and a father, I stand in awe of women who are willing to give birth. Three of my own children were delivered by C-section, two of which were in emergency situations after 24 hours of hard labor. I have a sister who has experienced exceptionally difficult pregnancies and likens pregnancy, with no hint of exaggeration, to walking through the valley of the shadow of death. And yet, women continue to have children. Christ said that there is no greater love laying down your life for others.[26] Mothers show this willingness every time they give birth, and continue to exhibit this Christ-like attribute in the way that they sacrifice of themselves for their children throughout the rest of their lives.

Of course, in light of the miraculous power of motherhood, and the endless opportunities for service, where would men be in the grand scheme of things without the opportunity to exercise the priesthood? Of course, the priesthood is not the power to order others around or compel others to obey one’s will, but it is an opportunity to bless the lives of others through service. We learn in the Doctrine and Covenants that the priesthood only operates “upon the principles of righteousness.” Men may be ordained to the priesthood, “but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.”[27] We further read that “No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of thepriesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; Bykindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge thesoul withouthypocrisy, and without  guile.” [28] Isn’t it interesting that these are the same ways in which power and influence is maintained by a mother: by persuasion, long-suffering, gentleness, meekness and by love unfeigned. And isn’t it interesting that Christ Himself, in speaking of his desire to save the Jews of Jerusalem, compares himself not to a proud rooster, but to a protective mother hen.[29]

Now as we talk about motherhood, some women will unfortunately feel excluded. In this regard, I love the words of Sheri Dew, the former General Relief Society President who, of course, has never borne children. She said: “While we tend to equate motherhood solely with maternity, in the Lord’s language, the word mother has layers of meaning. Of all the words they could have chosen to define her role and her essence, both God the Father and Adam called Eve “the mother of all living”—and they did so before she ever bore a child. Like Eve, … motherhood began before [women] were born. Just as worthy men were foreordained to hold the priesthood in mortality, righteous women were endowed premortally with the privilege of motherhood. Motherhood is more than bearing children, though it is certainly that. It is the essence of who … women [are]. It defines [their] very identity, [their] divine stature and nature, and the unique traits our Father gave [women]…. Motherhood is not what was left over after our Father blessed His sons with priesthood ordination. It was the most ennobling endowment He could give His daughters, a sacred trust that gave women an unparalleled role in helping His children keep their second estate. As President J. Reuben Clark Jr. declared, motherhood is “as divinely called, as eternally important in its place as the Priesthood itself.”[30]

Note various ways in which the word “mother” is used, not just as a noun referring to a person who has given birth. It is often used as a verb meaning: to care for, nurture, protect, teach, befriend, guide, sometimes indulge, oftentimes to discipline, but always to love.

Note too that one of the central purposes of this life is to gain experience for the life to come. Not all men will be fathers or hold the priesthood in this life. Not all women will get married or have children in this life. It is interesting to find in the scriptures that every woman who is called “barren” eventually bears children of her own. This may be a lesson to us that whether in this life or the next, if we are true and faithful to the light we receive in this life, the experience we gain here will prepare us to receive every blessing God has in store for us in eternity. In Isaiah we read: “Sing O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord… For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee.”[31]

So the experience and calling of motherhood is available to all women. If we are not careful, it is possible to see it as a mere biological function. However, even as a biological function, motherhood is divine and has salvific powers. As women clothe the spirit children of heavenly parents with bodies, mothers share in the creative process of God. They provide opportunities for these children to make further progress toward exaltation. If women were not willing to give birth, the work of God in bringing to pass the eternal life of mankind would be utterly frustrated. And after acting as co-creators with God, once children are here, it is through acting in the role of motherhood that women develop and display the most divine of attributes. Through their sacrifice and service, they show Christ-like love. They show a willingness to make further progress toward becoming like Christ themselves. And when any of us show a wiliness to give our lives for others, whether it is through the process of childbirth or the process of dedicating our lives to nurturing, protecting, teaching, and loving others, it is the highest, holiest service assumed by humankind.

[1] http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2010-fair-conference/2010-the-two-trees

[2] Gen. 2:8.

[3] The word “replenish” is rendered from the Hebrew word “fill.” (See footnote to Gen. 1:28.)

[4] Gen. 1:28.

[5] 2 Ne. 2:23.

[6] 2 Ne. 2:23.

[7] Moses 5:11.

[8] Alma 42:2-5.

[9] 1 Cor. 6:19.

[10] Note that the tabernacle in the wilderness was covered in skins.

[11] Matthew Cowley Speaks, (1954), 109.

[12] 1 Cor. 11:11

[13] Gen. 3:16.

[14] “The Blessings and Responsibilities of Womanhood,” Ensign, Mar. 1976, 72.

[15] http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2005/10/priesthood-authority-in-the-family-and-the-church?lang=eng

[16] The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball [1982], 315.

[17] The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 316.

[18] Eph. 5:23 & 25.

[19] Russell M. Nelson, “Lessons from Eve,” Ensign, Nov 1987, 86.

[20] Gen. 2:18.

[21] See Strongs as well as discussion here: http://womeninthescriptures.blogspot.com/2010/11/real-meaning-of-term-help-meet.html and here: http://godswordtowomen.org/help.htm

[22] “For example the word “ebenezer” in 1 Samuel 7:12 is used to describe the power of God’s deliverance. “Eben” means rock and “ezer” means “help” or “salvation“. Ebenezer therefore means “rock of help” or “rock of salvation”. The root “ezer” is the same word that God used to describe to Adam who Eve was. She was not intended to be just his helper or his companion, rather she was intended to be his savior, his deliverer.” http://womeninthescriptures.blogspot.com/2010/11/real-meaning-of-term-help-meet.html

[23] The other part of the term “help meet” which is commonly translated as “meet for” or “fit for” is the word “k’enegdo”. It is hard to know exactly what the word k’enegdo means because it only appears once in the entire Bible. Yet Diana Webb explained that, “Neged, a related word which means “against”, was one of the first words I learned in Hebrew. I thought it was very strange that God would create a companion for Adam that was “against” him! Later, I learned that kenegdo could also mean “in front of” or “opposite.” This still didn’t help much. Finally I heard it explained as being “exactly corresponding to,” like when you look at yourself in a mirror.”http://womeninthescriptures.blogspot.com/2010/11/real-meaning-of-term-help-meet.html

[24] P. 25.

[25] http://womeninthescriptures.blogspot.com/2010/11/real-meaning-of-term-help-meet.html

[26] John 15:13.

[27] D&C 121:36-37.

[28] D&C 121:41-42.

[29] Matt. 23:37.

[30] Are We Not All Mothers, Ensign. Nov. 2001

[31] Isa. 54:1, 7.

* Note that the original footnote 11 of this piece has been removed. That footnote expanded on the concept of a woman’s body being analogous to a temple. Some people found the references to female anatomy to be objectionable. In order to avoid potentially offending others and distracting people from the main point of the piece, I have removed the footnote.

Filed Under: Women

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 140
  • Go to page 141
  • Go to page 142
  • Go to page 143
  • Go to page 144
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 201
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Faithful Study Resources for Come, Follow Me

Subscribe to Blog

Enter your email address:

Subscribe to Podcast

Podcast icon
Subscribe to podcast in iTunes
Subscribe to podcast elsewhere
Listen with FAIR app
Android app on Google Play Download on the App Store

Pages

  • Blog Guidelines

FAIR Latest

  • The Lord Is Hastening His Work
  • Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson
  • Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 – Mike Parker
  • FAIR December Newsletter
  • Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 137–138 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson

Blog Categories

Recent Comments

  • Diana on Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 132 – Mike Parker
  • JC on The Lord Is Hastening His Work
  • LHL on Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 132 – Mike Parker
  • Stephen Johnsen on Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 132 – Mike Parker
  • Bruce B Hill on Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 124 – Part 1 – Autumn Dickson

Archives

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • iTunes
  • YouTube
Android app on Google Play Download on the App Store

Footer

FairMormon Logo

FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Donate to FAIR

We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.

Donate Now

Site Footer