Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Dear FiguringItOut, Thank you for your reply. My heart goes with you as you find yourself in these tough times! I hope you will, as I have, find the desire to learn more about the Book of Mormon and be drawn to it. It’s an amazing singularity.
Several readers (maybe yourself included) interpreted my post as a presumption of having received revelation in your behalf. This was not the case. I felt an overwhelming demand to take time to reply to you. I believed it was the spirit asking me to testify. (Felt it then and still do.) But there is a difference between testifying and receiving revelation for. Certainly God can ask us to testify to complete strangers… in fact, doesn’t He command us to? (If there were parts that sounded like I presumed to be receiving direct revelation for you, I didn’t write those parts well or shouldn’t have written them.) In my case, I felt I needed to testify, in a non trivial way, some thoughts and discoveries that were comforts to me when I felt some of the same feelings you described. There are, of course, many more, but I’ve already consumed much too much, for which I’ve been reprimanded.
So, my conviction I felt to share with you is this: it’s all true, the Book of Mormon, the Church, the Priesthood. Despite the confusing and sometimes disturbing things. Hope you’ll find it too!
I apologize for not having read the rule against apologetics before posting. It was certainly not done maliciously. [ EVERYONE, this is a long, traditionally apologetic testimony comment. The admins will be discussing it. For those of you who are prone to get extreme heartburn right now over this type of comment, feel free to skip it. Ray] Dear FiguringItOut,
I’m not even sure how I came across your post, but I’ve felt so constrained to reply that I’m certain the Lord has asked me to. So I signed up on this site for the express purpose of answering you.
Where to start? You mentioned, “Because to be honest, I want the church to be what I once thought it was.” First off, you can breathe easily again… the Church is true; it’s so much more true than you currently understand. Next, there are a lot of disturbing historical facts in the Church’s history (or, more appropriately, in the history of the members of the Church). It’s somewhat naive to dismiss them all as false as you preferred to earlier in your life. Many, many members of the Church live this way. In the end, this is ok, I suppose, because where you end up, given that you honestly are searching the truth, will be exactly where they are now, with the testimony that this is our Living God’s work.
It is very important to not flip to the other naive extreme, which is to unquestioningly believe that since you are reading some facts that appear historical, they are true because they sound rational. That is quite likely more naive than dismissing them as false, and here is why: many (not all) critics of the Church are motivated by unrighteous purposes. Some see themselves as “saving the poor naive Mormons” and may have good intentions. Consider first, however, that many do not; in fact, these are often people who have devoted a huge portion of their time to a destructive, not constructive, motivation of tearing down what they do not (or no longer) want to believe. Can we look for “enlightenment” in a destructive motivation? Beware, there are lies out there, a terrible lot of them and to a terrible extent. Believing otherwise is ignorance. The difficultly comes in sorting which are true facts and which are not, nearly impossible, but do not dismiss the motivation of the author, if it can be discovered!
I’ve been were you are in the past, hyperventilating because of reading that Joseph Smith translated with his head in his hat, or seemingly drew in missing parts to the Egyptian papyrus.
What I find very difficult to believe, however. or rather, what I intellectually simply cannot accept, is that he is
nota Prophet. You see, that is what those who drift from the Church on these grounds are saying. But you can’t pick and choose evidence if you want to be fair to yourself. There are many, many things in the Book of Mormon which cannot be so easily dismissed. I suspect I have forgotten more than 10 times the number facts about the Book of Mormon that are convincing that Joseph Smith was a prophet than I can still recall. I’m talking about facts that would have been virtually impossible for a man (any man) to know in 1830 and that, moreover, were indeed understood to the contrary by the scholars of 1830 or later, such that they actually used these points against Joseph Smith, and which only later, sometimes much later, were shown that, somehow or another, he had it right! There are dozens, or hundreds perhaps already identified. “Alma isn’t a Hebrew name, it is a Latin female’s name!” Then, in 1961, a prominent scholar in Israel, Professor Yigael Yadin, discovers an ancient land deed including the name as “Alma the son of Judah,” a Hebrew male’s name. Does that prove Joseph Smith is a prophet? Of course not! But he either knew more than all scholars from 1830 to 1961 or he got lucky. The phrase “land of Jerusalem” is used no where in the Bible or Apocrypha, yet appears in the Book of Mormon many, many times. Jerusalem is a city and wasn’t referred to as a land! This fact was used against Joseph Smith until the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered and the same phrase was found in the Dead Sea scrolls dating to time of the prophet Jeremiah! Does this prove he was a prophet? No, but he either knew more than all scholars from 1830 to the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls or he got lucky.
The Book of Mormon talks about the ancient Americans using cement. Clearly, that’s preposterous. Oh, well, until cement works were discovered well into the 20th century. Does that prove Joseph Smith is a prophet? Of course not! But he either knew more than all scholars from 1830 to the 20th century, or he got lucky.
What about the Valley of Lemuel, through which Nephi states Lehi led his family and where there is a continual flowing river running into the Red Sea? Again, attack that Joseph Smith.. he doesn’t know anything, there are no such continually flowing rivers that empty into the Red Sea! That is, that any scholars knew about, until 1995 when such rivers were discovered (in valleys, no less!). Does that prove Joseph Smith is a prophet? Of course not. But he either knew more than all scholars from 1830 to the 1995, or he got lucky.
How did he know people would later discover both Egyptian and Hebrew writing in the ancient American writings? Scientists who found these were utterly baffled. But you and I know exactly how those languages were known to them, don’t we? Again, he just got lucky?
How did he know horse bones (or very similar to horse) would be discovered? Luck?
How did he even know some things we take for granted, like the fact that ancients would ever conceive of writing records on metal plates? Such others have since been discovered. More Luck?
If you take this course long enough, you reach an intellectual conclusion that you are either fooling yourself or Joseph Smith was far luckier than statistically possible or you accept the only other alternative: he was inspired of the Living God: he is a prophet. You can’t get around it! You can’t leave the Church believing the anti-church literature without answering to these or you are fooling yourself.
How lucky? I’ve studied statistics enough that I tried to work out a rough guess once. Maybe I’ll formalize it more someday, it isn’t anything very special, just a rough idea of the order of magnitude of impossibility we are concerning ourselves with here. It goes something like this: collect a sample of evidences like the 5 listed above and assign an extremely liberal chance that somehow, though no other scholar of his time nor for years to come evidently knew about it, that somehow Joseph Smith did. How does 20% chance sound? That’s pretty darn generous given no expert knew this. But, let’s be more conservative, let’s give this super scholar, Joseph Smith, a 40% chance that he knew each of these facts
that no one else in his lifetime or for years thereafterknew. Still, what is often overlooked in statistics is that to calculate probability as we are here, the events must be independent. NASA scientists overlooked this when they built the Challenger and had they not, it may not have exploded because the o rings they believed to be redundant all failed. (Their chances of failure we not independent.) One could argue that some of the events that Joseph Smith would have gained knowledge of are not independent. For example, he found some obscure source of knowledge of ancient Hebrew and, if so, knowing that Alma could be a male Hebrew name also shed light for him that a city called Nahom (1 Nephi 16:34), where Ishmael was buried, existed in an area consistent with Lehi’s travels. The mathematical complexities here become impossible to model, so let us simplify by fudging, somewhat unscientifically, of necessity, with an irrationally large chance of Joseph Smith’s knowledge. Let’s agree upon a 70% chance that Joseph Smith knew each of these facts. Now, bear in mind, we are not supposing that Joseph Smith got lucky, rather, that is what we are calculating. We are attempting to say either he knew all these factsor he got extraordinarily lucky, to the extent we calculate.70% chance of him knowing each of these, when apparently no one else, including and especially his scholarly criticsknew them is absurdly high, enough so that it should more than compensate for the argument that knowledge of some handful of the facts listed may not be independent. If we list 25 such evidences (a conservative number given that many exist in one single web pages collection here:
http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml ),we reach the chance that Joseph Smith knew all these facts as: 0.7 raised to the 25th = 0.0001. That’s one 100th of 1 in 100! However, the truth is that 25 is a low estimate (go purchase and read the fairly new book “Voices from the Dust.”), I believe and that if we take the time to really search, we may readily compile 50 or 100. The chances raise exponentially, for 0.7 to the 50th is 0.000000018!
This is the folly of those dismissing Joseph Smith’s divine calling of a prophet on intellectual bases. Ultimately, they have to answer “How did he create the Book of Mormon?” But they don’t… they can’t. Instead, they use their feeble arguments as self justifications for a self-gratifying, godless, faithless lifestyle,
and ignore this blatant, glaring, and unanswered flaw in their reasoning.You can’t tell me “He got lucky, over and over.” That argument works for one or two or a handful of evidences, but I will never be able to abandon reason to the extent of 0.00000001 or less (remember, we were extremely conservative… try the math again with 25%!) No, that is the problem. No matter what fancy you throw against the prophet, the burden of answering against this impossibility lies in your court and ever will. You no longer can suppose Joseph Smith a fraud because today’s Egyptian experts find no trace of the Pearl of Great Price in the accounted for papyrus (by the way, my understanding is that it is undisputed that only a fraction of the papyrus were recovered… we don’t have the rest.), for example, because you haven’t answered those evidences that you cannot throw away! You can’t claim fraud without staring in the face the numerous evidences he could not have known and answering to them. Henry Eyring, who I believe is the same as the world renowned scientist and father to our Apostle, says this:
“An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn’t bother me in the least. God doesn’t need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham’s thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose.” (Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist, p. 46 )
The concerns you’ve listed are quite age old, also, you should know. Try as you may, you can’t disprove the truth. Joseph Smith WAS a prophet of God; I do not have the faith in Joseph Smith the man that you need to possess to claim otherwise. I don’t have that faith in him, sorry. The only explanation is a divine one. Read this article.. (you are seeking the truth, right? Or are you seeking self justification, the choice is yours):
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=72&chapid=865 Imagine you are walking though a jungle of trees and happen upon, in the midst of these trees, a dying octopus. How did it get there? What can it mean? You know enough science that you feel absolutely certain that octopi simply do not inhabit jungles, so you conclude you must be in an ocean. But wait a minute! One inexplicable fact (or even a short list of them) is no grounds for dismissing all other evidence! You are surrounded by trees, you aren’t underwater, you are on solid ground 100s of miles away from an ocean. How can you shut your eyes to such? You may never be able to explain the octopus, but I assure you, nonetheless, you are not in an ocean. We don’t know the whole story of the Pearl of Great Price, but I am not unscientific enough to dismiss all that I do know, shutting my eyes to many, many more facts that exist, like it or not, that cannot be overcome if Joseph was not a prophet. It’s scientifically absurd.
Imagine for a moment that Joseph made it all up and explain these, his actions. He somehow convinced 3 men to go along with a fictitious angel Moroni story. Later, all three of these men fell from the Church. Could he afford to excommunicate them, who knew his secret? Of course not! He couldn’t dare. Oh, but he did. Where was the hesitation of his being exposed? All three of them were excommunicated! What a blessing to you and me that this took place. Reason what it means; don’t be blind. These men were committed to do whatever it would take to bring down and discredit the Prophet. Yet, they
could not deny seeing that angel. No, not one of them, ever. To their death. Later, some returned to the truth of the gospel. Wake up and see these evidences for what they mean, I implore you. Read Thomas Marsh’s own words: http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/TBMarsh.html So why do we have these scarey, weird things in Church history we don’t know how to account for? I don’t know for sure, but I submit that the answer is in the first principle of the gospel, absolutely essential to why we are here:
Faith. Why is the name Jesus Christ never given in the old testament? Because, don’t the Jews deserve the chance to prove their faith? Why did Moroni take back the plate instead of God directing them to a museum where Joseph’s translation would eventually be confirmed? Faith. It’s not in His plan. Were it so, He wouldn’t have cast the veil of forgetfulness at birth in the first place, would he have? We underestimate the importance of Faith all too often and how vital it is to our probation and salvation. Faith for every level. You’ve passed the basic understanding of the gospel of many LDS members. Isn’t it only fair you have a chance to prove your faith as well with some of these trickier concerns? So Joseph Smith put his face in a hat with stones. So what? He needed a dark place and that seems a logical way to get it. Who are you or am I to dictate to the Almighty God what His means of communication to men is allowed to be, and that it may not include seer stones or a Urim and Thummim? Joseph Smith gave differing versions of the First Vision? So what? So read them all like a true student should and get a good appreciation of what probably happened. You know these were recorded long after the sacred event. Do you suppose he was superhuman somehow and remembered absolutely everything, keeping every fact and recollection in his superhuman mind perfect? Or did he make mistakes and leave some things out in some accounts (possibly intentionallygiven his current audience)? Which is it? Was he the superhuman mastermind so clever that he never once, no, not once, mixed up 1000 years of vast historical accounts and intricate stories with intricate political and social themes and wisdom of spirituals truths that take a life time to comprehend, together with undiscovered chaisms and differing author styles contained in the Book of Mormon or was he a human being that got things mixed up, misquoted and slightly changed from one recounting to the next? You can’t both on the one hand claim he was a superhuman genius that pulled off an unparallelled, yet fraudulent, literary masterpiece and on the other hand try to prove him a fraud by putting on display discrepancies in how he recounts the First Vision. The case only serves to prove the point: that he couldn’t have fabricated the Book of Mormon, surpassing all other literary geniuses such as Shakespeare, etc. who get things mixed up all the time in their works. As for treasure hunting, by Joseph’s own admission: “I was left to all kinds of temptations; and, mingling with all kinds of society, I frequently fell into many foolish errors, and displayed the weakness of youth, and the foibles of human nature; which, I am sorry to say, led me into divers temptations, offensive in the sight of God. In making this confession, no one need suppose me guilty of any great or malignant sins. “
Why is it, incidentally, that we need suppose prophets are perfect, and any sign to the contrary should discredit their divine calling? Do they not have the same right to prove themselves in this mortally as you and I? Do they not have their free agency? You know the gospel; it only makes sense. Is it possible Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or some other latter day prophet tried to cover something up that we wish they would have just made known? Surely it is possible, are they not imperfect men? But do not suppose these were not righteous men called of God even if they had done such. Jonas ran away from God’s commandment. David committed adultery and, essentially, manslaughter. Stake presidents sometimes fall. Bishops sometimes commit adultery. Apostles have fallen, even to Judas’ betrayal of the Messiah! Do not be content to hinge your salvation on the acts of another man. Do not suppose they are not on this earth for the same reasons you and I are, to be tested as well as to lead. But do not suppose it is within our right to decommission he whom God has commissioned.
Now, enough intellectualism, as much as I love it. You will never definitely satisfy yourself with it, ever. Go read Matthew 16:15-17. Are you truly seeking? Find your scriptures and read it. Why does the Savior call Peter blessed? Is not this intellectual (alone) quest for the truth the
exactly and preciselyasking “flesh and blood” to reveal it? Why was Peter blessed? Because his testimony was much more than that. I tell you plainly, the historical and physical evidences leave no room in my mind for the alternative, yet what is more, I know the Church is Christ’s Church in my heart. It was irrevocably burned into my soul in no uncertain terms that the Book of Mormon is God’s word, and though my memory of the dozens of circumstantial evidences supporting it fails me, yet I can never suppose to pretend this testimony wasn’t given to me by something higher than earth over 20 years ago. The Book of Mormon is God’s word. More than this, your very life tells you the gospel the Church contains is true. I believe Jesus Christ when he told the Jews in the temple at the Feast of Tabernacles what he told them in John 7:16-17. He wasn’t lying. And I can no more explain how salt tastes than I can explain how I know this, only that it is obvious unless you’ve shut off the spirit in your life. Yes, you can breathe easily again… the Church is true, there is no doubt.
A word of advice, repeated: be careful whom you trust when considering the voice of critics. One of the most enlightening papers you will ever read from critics of the Church (the honest, not malicious kind of critics, mind you) is here, on their own web page:
[anti-Mormon link deleted by admin]You say you are serious, so take the time to read it. It is written by those who believe it is their duty to educate and save the Mormons, critics of the Church, and yet, I had to do additional research to convince myself it wasn’t written by some LDS hoax maker in disguise because of how convincing their evidence is that we have the truth. By their own admission, they have no one even in the same realm as well known LDS scholars such as Hugh Nibley. They have no answer to these, thus their title and thesis “Mormon Scholarship, Apologetics, and Evangelical Neglect:
Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It?” trying to convince their own scholars that they are losing the battle and that they need to take it more seriously because the Mormon church are no idiots. It’s absolutely fascinating.
Why on earth would you trust these people more than those LDS scholars?I’d be surprized if you’ve heard a single argument that isn’t reasonable and rationally answered by lds scholars at this web site: http://www.ldsfair.org Also, another resource:
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/ I’ll try not to be arrogant by calling these critics, so called intellectuals, “fools” and instead allow the Savior’s speak to them. Do you have know small children who believe Joseph Smith and Thomas Monson are prophets? I do. I have some. And those critics and they who have left the Church to justify their lifestyle have have no such testimony. Now read Matthew 11:25 and tell me it doesn’t apply with every word.
If you are under the impression that the apostles and general authorities of the Church aren’t aware of virtually every anti-mormon claim of “disproof,” think again. If you are under the impression these are deceiving men, oh my goodness, you couldn’t be further from the truth, just listen to them speak, general conference, etc. I am well past convinced that the motivation and ethics of these men are true and honorable; these aren’t superficial tears of deceit they shed in conference, absolutely not. I’d be quite surprised if there are any better men in the world. No, these are genuine men; the real deal. “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” Matthew 7:15-20 (Note in that passage of scriptures the Lord is warning “Beware of false prophets”. Did you catch the subtle fact that the Lord doesn’t say “Beware of anyone claiming to be a prophet for there shall be none in the future.” No, He even goes on to state “by their fruits ye shall know them.” It is more than mere implication that there
would be true prophets to come.You already know who these are, don’t let the great deceiver convince you other wise. They are here, trust me… trust them, trust the Lord.) I’ve taken hours of my day off work to compile this commentary, I’d ask that in the least you spend the time to investigate what I’ve so painstakingly assembled and, please watch the couple videos below, continuing in faith, knowing that God loves you and you can know the truth. Two of my favorite scriptures are John 7:16-17 and Matthew 16:15-17 (references above) and both of these testify that you are looking in the wrong place if you try to prove this all alone intellectually. Such is a denial of the very first principle of the gospel. You need more than that: it’s fundamental.
Both these videos are directed to you. You mentioned, “I was prayerful the entire way.” When you pray for answers, it is wisdom to not dismiss them when they come.
This you may have heard recently. Hear it again, if so:
In summary, breath easy, do not hyperventilate, for the Church is true. It’s ok to go back to feeling as you used to about it, and you’ll be the stronger for it when you really understand this material and really start to see this blatantly obvious light; that there is no way, absolutely no way, that it could be not true. I don’t have enough faith in men to believe that, it makes no scientific or statistical sense and, more than that, I know it in my heart, I’ve felt the confirmation in my life in a way that I simply can’t dismiss as my emotions. Now, I don’t know you at all, so it can’t be a personal thing if you choose to disregard all this and convince yourself that somehow the Church is fraud, but you should know a few things:
1. The Lord won’t stop you; He has given you your agency and refuses to take it from you.
2. The Lord will answer your prayers if you will allow Him. Don’t expect you will know how or when, so be watchful (is he answering some right now?) and be open to His way of things. C.S. Lewis said “There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, ‘All right, then, have it your way'”. You haven’t studied the Book of Mormon enough if you can believe it is fraud. “I cannot even open the book,” is utterly and precisely how the adversary would have it.
3. With or without you, the Church will continue to roll forth as Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream prophesies. (Incidentally, where else will you ever find answers to these prophecies, and Ezekiel’s and Isaiah’s and Malachi’s prophecies, by the way? No other church even dare’s suppose what they mean, let alone fulfill them! Your choices are the living Church or a vast myriad of dead ones.)
4. Though you search the rest of your life, I can promise you, you will never find real fulfillment or true joy anywhere outside His Church. Promise or curse, however you materialize it, but the emptiness you describe as devastation to your soul is precisely what lack of fulfillment this path will gain you, and for
real reason, namely, you are shutting the door on His Light and counsel. 5. I truly hope you won’t leave; somehow I feel a love for you I can’t explain.
One more final thought by C.S. Lewis that has come to mean an awful great deal to me because I can say the same of the gospel (our revealed true gospel) that he says of Christianity: “I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.” This is a realization of Christ’s promise in John 7:16-17 to me.
