On December 16, 2013 the reddit exmormon forum held an AMA (Ask Me Anything) Q&A with highly respected Mormon historian Richard Bushman. Following are a few forum-member questions, along with Dr. Bushman’s answers (in no particular order). You will also find a few excerpts from a lengthy statement Dr. Bushman addressed to the forum members.
Q: “How much of an impact do you think that Sidney Rigdon’s Campbellite ideas haveon modern LDS theology? Did he significantly alter Mormonism after he joined, or did he just find a group that already taught a lot of the things he believed?”
by grindael
Dr. Bushman: “Joseph Smith was very eclectic. He drew upon ideas from all over, including Masonic ritual. I am not aware of source criticism of Rigdon’s influence, but I am inclined to think it was fairly large. It is quite possible that the idea of Restoration came from him. Restoration in the Book of Mormon refers to the restoration of Israel, the return of Israel to its favored place in God’s eyes, not the restoration of the New Testament church. Rigdon who was a restorationist along with Campbell could very well have turned Joseph’s thinking in that direction. I also think he may have been responsible for the phrase “creeds are an abomination.” That was [a] hobby horse of Alexander Campbell’s. Since Rigdon was involved in writing Joseph Smith’s 1838 history, he may have been one to introduce that language into the account of the First Vision.”
Dr. Bushman: “I have read through the imposing array of questions posed over the past week and hardly know how to begin. They are pointed, relevant, sincere, and deserve more of a reply than I can possibly manage. I will do what I can during our open chat hour on Monday, but for now I would like to say something about my beliefs as I have been currently voicing them. A few weeks ago during one of the seminars that Terryl and Fiona Givens and I have been offering for people working through their doubts and questions, an old friend sat me down during the lunch break, looked me in the eye and asked, ‘Richard, do you believe Joseph Smith saw the Father and the Son in the grove?’ I said of course and the moment passed, but his question lingered on and moved me to think again about what I do believe about the founding stories.
The First Visions
“I am very much impressed by Joseph Smith’s 1832 History account of his early visions. This is the one partially written in his own hand and the rest dictated to Frederick G. Williams. I think it is more revealing than the official account presumably written in 1838 and contained in the Pearl of Great Price. We don’t know who wrote the 1838 account. Joseph’s journal indicates that he, Sidney Rigdon, and George Robinson collaborated on beginning the history in late April, but we don’t know who actually drafted the history. It is a polished narrative but unlike anything Joseph ever wrote himself. The 1832 history we know is his because of the handwriting. It comes rushing forth from Joseph’s mind in a gush of words that seem artless and uncalculated, a flood of raw experience. I think this account has the marks of an authentic visionary experience. There is the distance from God, the perplexity and yearning for answers, the perplexity, and then the experience itself which brings intense joy, followed by fear and anxiety. Can he deal with the powerful force he has encountered? Is he worthy and able? It is a classic announcement of a prophet’s call, and I find it entirely believable.”
Dr. Bushman: “…I am also impressed by the Book of Mormon. It is riddled with nineteenth-century Protestant theology and phrasing, but still is an incredible narrative of a civilization’s rise and fall…”
Dr. Bushman: “So what it comes down to is that I believe in the founding events. I think of them as the foundation of my faith. But they are the foundation, and I do not live in the cellar. I live in the rooms built on these events, the way of life, the attitudes, the institutions, the relationships, the experiences they support. This is what I meant when I spoke to Anselm Min, the Catholic theologian at Claremont Graduate School where Claudia and I taught for three years. Anselm took me to lunch soon after we arrived at Claremont and bluntly asked me how I could believe in Joseph Smith. My immediate response was that when I lived in the Mormon way I became the kind of man I wanted to be. Those words summed up a lot—my sense of having God’s spirit when I needed it, the salutary discipline of Mormon life, the friendships and commonalities of a Mormon ward, the requirement of unselfish service, the valuation of family, the tempering of pride and fear—a host of things. Like many people, I wrestle with demons. I frequently feel inadequate to my responsibilities. At the same time, I know I can be better, and when I live the Mormon way, I am lifted up. I see things more clearly. I can figure out how I really feel. I know how to relate to my wife and children and colleagues. I am temperate, incisive, generous, and focused. On bad days, Claudia and I often say we are out of sync with the universe. Over the many years I have been in the Church, I find that following the Mormon path puts me back in sync. I don’t use the word ‘know’ a lot, but I do know I am a better person for being a Mormon.”
Q: “You said that your testimony was somewhat mystical. Can you expand on this? What does it mean to have a mystical testimony? You said that you believed the Book of Mormon was literal history. How does this literal belief in the Book of Mormon relate to your mystical testimony? Do you have a mystical testimony that the Book of Mormon is literally true? Can you clarify what you believe about the historicity Book or Mormon?”
Dr. Bushman: “I enjoyed our conversation at the Huntington very much. It is hard to remember all that transpired, however, and I don’t remember talking about a mystical testimony. It is not a word I ordinarily use. As a young man in the mission field I did pray very hard about the Book of Mormon and came to feel that it was right. By that I meant everything seemed to fall into place. But that came after a lot of thinking and questioning. My conclusion was something like what we mean when we say something is a good fit. My thoughts and feelings came together. The question of 
historicity is complicated. I suppose I come down in something like a Blake Ostler position; the book is a melding. The fact is there is a lot of Christian theology couched in nineteenth century language in the book, not what you find in ancient Hebrew texts. It is possible there was more Christianity in antiquity than we think; Margaret Barker’s work points in that direction. Or it is possible that translation involved taking ancient language and giving it modern Christian meanings, as Paul and Christ use Hebrew texts for their purposes. Since the book was intended for a nineteenth-century audience, the translation employed nineteenth-century language, not just occasional words, but large bodies of thought. I don’t think this question is settled yet, even among Mormons.”
Q: “Problem with Anthon’s story. How could he have translated Reformed Egyptian when Egyptian had just barely been translated a few years earlier in France? Why would he lie about his abilities here when he had an otherwise upright career?”
Dr. Bushman: “He could not have translated Egyptian, and certainly not ‘reformed Egyptian.’ This story is garbled and confused in many respects, and I have found no way of straightening it out.”
Q: “Was Joseph Smith just simply (and sincerely?) wrong about the Book of Abraham? If so, what does that say about the Book of Mormon?”
Dr. Bushman: “I think he was sincerely wrong about the contents of the scrolls. He thought they were the writings of Abraham and Joseph and seems to have been wrong on that score. (There is still an argument that Abraham’s writings appeared on parts of the scroll we do not have.) I don’t think he was necessarily wrong about the English text. It does have marks of coming from the tradition of Abrahamic writings. Abraham and the Book of Mormon are alike in that both came by way of inspiration rather than literal translation. Joseph did not look at the plates as he translated, and he did not understand the Egyptian on the scrolls.”
In these few comments Dr. Bushman has clarified Mormon historical events as informed by his scholarly training and research:
- Joseph Smith drew on many sources as he crafted Mormonism. Two prominent foundational ideas of the Mormon faith likely came via Sidney Rigdon’s influence: Restoration and “creeds are an abomination.”
- The official 1838 account of Joseph Smith’s First Vision, though attributed to Joseph Smith, was not actually written by him (though he may have contributed to it). [Note: Several points of the 1832 account are at odds with the 1838 official account.]
- The Book of Mormon is “riddled” with nineteenth-century Protestant theology.
- Rather than affirming the appearance of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith (stated in the 1838 First Vision account but not in the 1832 account), Dr. Bushman affirms a personal belief in what he somewhat ambiguously calls the “founding events” of Mormonism.
- The historicity of the Book of Mormon is “complicated.” Rather than what one would expect to find in an ancient Hebrew text, the book is a “melding,” filled with large bodies of Christian theology and thought.
- Joseph Smith’s canonized story of the Anthon transcript (Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith—History 1:61-65) is “garbled and confused” with no evident way to resolve it.
- Joseph Smith was “sincerely wrong” about the content of the Book of Abraham scrolls, mistaking it for the writings of Abraham.
- The Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon are not literal translations; Joseph Smith did not look at the plates as he “translated,” and he could not understand Egyptian.
I very much appreciate Dr. Bushman’s candid responses to these tough questions, but I’m saddened by his decision to be a Mormon because it’s a “good fit” for him, because he feels like he’s a better man as a member of the Mormon Church. Dr. Bushman is happy to be a Mormon, happy to live his life according to the dictates of Mormonism. But this life is fleeting. When he stands before his Creator, Dr. Bushman’s “better” will not be good enough (Romans 3:10-12). His own righteousness (and this goes for all people), though perhaps impressive to us, will be as filthy rags before Holy God (Isaiah 64:6). Dr. Bushman, I plead with you to have the courage to forsake the “good fit” of Mormonism for the living water of Christ. May He become your hope, your righteousness, your all-in-all (Philippians 3:8-9, 14).
It all seems to stem from the idea that Mormonism just feels good to them. Nothing else really matters as long as that is true.
I appreciate Dr. Bushman’s honesty. But I also join you in praying for his salvation! Bushman’s answers in this Q&A remind me of a frank (but sad!) admission in his biography of Joseph Smith, Rough Stone Rolling: “Incredible as the [gold] plates were, hunting for deception can be a distraction. It throws us off the track of Joseph Smith the Prophet. In devising a story of a charlatan, we lose sight of the unprepossessing rural visionary who became a religious leader admired by thousands. What is most interesting about Joseph Smith is that people believed him. To understand the emergence of Joseph the Prophet, we must follow the stories told by family and friends who believed they were witnessing a miracle. From their accounts issues the Joseph Smith who has a place in history” (58).
Bushman is a smart guy and he knows it’s phoney baloney. He is good at putting it all on the shelf. He just happens to have an extremely large shelf so it won’t collapse. Maybe it’s made with iron rods
Guys like Bushman and Grant Palmer get it. They know the whole deal is a flim flam and while Palmer appears to have ditched Mormonism, Bushman tries to hold on to something he likes. Contrast Bushman with your average arrogant or naive TBM who shows up here and the differences are striking. We would never hear, from Bushman, what we hear from the various types of TBMs. He wouldn’t sacrifice his credibility to that degree. I’ve never read Bushman’s “Rough Stone Rolling” book but what I surmise is that Bushman gets his toes right up to the line but won’t cross it. In-other-words he won’t come right out and say what’s obvious.
I keep wondering why someone would sacrifice their salvation just to stay in a religion that they feel adds much to their life. Why not join the Elks Club, Moose Club, Optimist Club, or the Eagles Club. These organizations provide fellowship and many do good works.
falcon,
If one believes the statements form Bushman, he believes Joseph Smith was a prophet and that the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be. He also believes the Book of Abraham is what it claims to be. Given those beliefs, why would a person not be a member of the church. His gray area is in the methods arena, not doctrine or truth.
FOF,
I think you better take another look at what Bushman says and compare it to your view on these matters. Does he sound like you? I don’t think so. There is a major amount of hedging on his part. What does he say about your beloved BoM and in particular the “translation”. The BoA is a whole other matter. Would you say the following:
“The Book of Abraham and the Book of Mormon are not literal translations; Joseph Smith did not look at the plates as he “translated,” and he could not understand Egyptian.”
I wish he would have delved into Smith putting his magic rock in his hat trick. Is there anything about the “magic” glasses?
And how about this:
“Joseph Smith drew on many sources as he crafted Mormonism. Two prominent foundational ideas of the Mormon faith likely came via Sidney Rigdon’s influence: Restoration and “creeds are an abomination.”
So much for “revelation” from God.
Look FOF, a guy like Bushman has to struggle to maintain faith in the religious system he so much enjoys. He knows what’s going on. The type of faith he practices isn’t like what you practice. You’re all in and buy all the myths. Bushman knows better but enjoys the buzz he gets from Mormonism.
We can only hope that he, and you, come to that point in your life where you put your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for your salvation and leave a religion of dead works created by men.
falcon,
Bushman believes the BOM is what it claims to be. He believes Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. He believes Thomas Monson is a prophet. He believes the BOA is what it claims. He believes Joseph Smith saw the Father and Son.
I think you need to read his statements again. He does not understand the methods or processes of those foundational events, but he believes in those events.
Read the whole transcript.
FoF,
You said, “Bushman believes the BOM is what it claims to be. He believes Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. He believes Thomas Monson is a prophet. He believes the BOA is what it claims. He believes Joseph Smith saw the Father and Son.”
Wow, why don’t you use actual quotes to back up that testimony instead of putting words in his mouth.
here’s a link to a testimony that Bushman actually wrote instead of the testimony you opened from a Mormon cannery. http://mormonscholarstestify.org/396/richard-lyman-bushman
here is a quote from bushman from the link I posted. “Staying in that practical vein, I sometimes tote up a few specifics about the church. What makes it work? While I am a constant inquirer, I like being a Mormon. I like its gritty, down-to-earth feel, and when I stop to think about it, lots of good things come to mind.”
Then he goes on to talk about why he like Mormonism. Not giving any of the the things you said.
He concluded, ” In my case, the interrogation all goes on under an umbrella of faith. I am looking to support what I know in my heart is good and true. Others may have had their confidence shaken and don’t know which way to turn—towards faith or away from it. I cannot say that they must swim toward the shore where I stand, or perish; the truth is that we have to find our own footing in our search for understanding. I can only say that Mormonism has served me well and that I believe most people would be better off if they followed the Mormon way.”
Basically he likes being Mormon because he like the community and helps him be a good person. He recommends it because he likes it.
I found the following statement by Mr Bushman interesting , speaking about Sidney Rigdon
he say :
” It is quite possible that the idea of restoration came from him…..Rigdon who was a
restorationist along with Campbell could very well have turned Joseph’s thinking in that
direction .”
Total apostasy ? restoration of the gospel / church ? These were ideas Joseph Smith came up
with from his own mind or someone else’s but one thing is for sure : they did’nt come from God
to him .
FOF,
Did you read what Bushman wrote? What are the implications of his words. Here we go again……..
“Joseph Smith drew on many sources as he crafted Mormonism. Two prominent foundational ideas of the Mormon faith likely came via Sidney Rigdon’s influence: Restoration and “creeds are an abomination.”
Just take the first sentence for example. He’s saying that Joseph Smith crafted Mormonism from many sources. What does that tell us? Does it sound like revelation? Grant Palmer says much the same thing. Here’s the point unless you missed it or can’t grasp it. Smith made up the religion!
Then there’s “creeds are an abomination” comes from Sidney Rigdon. I thought that Smith picked that tid bit up during his first vision? It wasn’t revelation FOF. Smith had human sources that aided him in his invention.
“The Book of Mormon is “riddled” with nineteenth-century Protestant theology.” Not only that but Smith copied the Bible directly. Now tell me you can’t figure out what’s going on here. Bushman makes it plain what the source of Smith’s religion were.
“The historicity of the Book of Mormon is “complicated.” Rather than what one would expect to find in an ancient Hebrew text, the book is a “melding,” filled with large bodies of Christian theology and thought.”
“Complicated”? What’s that code language for? To me that is veiled way of saying that the historicity is a real problem for the BoM.
“Joseph Smith was “sincerely wrong” about the content of the Book of Abraham scrolls, mistaking it for the writings of Abraham.”
FOF, I guess if he has the testimony that you present on his behalf, he has it despite what is obviously not the same perspective that you have on all things Mormon.
Let’s do this for FOF.
Let’s put Bushman in the Mormon believer category of, “I knew about all that stuff a long time ago but it doesn’t effect my testimony one bit.” OR, let’s call it something like, “What the church teaches about these things isn’t really accurate, but I really like the church and the Joseph Smith story so I’m sticking to it.”
Bushman seems to have some sort of man-crush on Joseph Smith. He can look past all of the things that drive former Mormons I know out of the LDS fold. Now this is where the Mormon “testimony” is vitally important. It’s the “knowing” which indicates that God has spoken to you and you now have this confirmation that the whole deal is true. It’s the testimony that allows the Mormon, in this case Bushman, to look past the evidence and obvious contradictions between what the LDS teaches and the facts, and shout “Eureka, I’ve found the truth”.
For we who are in Christ Jesus Our Lord and for whom the testimony regards who He is and what He’s done for us, the Mormon testimony is fools gold regardless of how it makes someone feel.
Bushman’s own words from the transcript:
On the first vision of Joseph Smith:
“I think this account has the marks of an authentic visionary experience. There is the distance from God, the perplexity and yearning for answers, the perplexity, and then the experience itself which brings intense joy, followed by fear and anxiety. Can he deal with the powerful force he has encountered? Is he worthy and able? It is a classic announcement of a prophet’s call, and I find it entirely believable..”
On the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated:
“I also believe the statements of the witnesses to the gold plates. I am not persuaded by the spiritual eyes argument. …..Speaking of spiritual eyes does not detract from the reality. I am inclined to accept the witness statements at face value. The strength of the testimonies, in my opinion, is also increased by the numbers. It was not just a single individual who said he saw them but eleven persons. That impresses me. Where do we have better attestation of a supernatural event?”
On the Book of Mormon, he states:
“Those are little pieces, but they indicate how I feel about the founding events. I am also impressed by the Book of Mormon. It is riddled with nineteenth-century Protestant theology and phrasing, but still is an incredible narrative of a civilization’s rise and fall. A few years ago in a class on contemporary Mormonism that Claudia and I were teaching at Columbia, one of the students asked me do you believe the Book of Mormon. I said that it was an incredibly complicated book that worked on many different levels. In my opinion, it was either a work of genius or inspired, and knowing what I do about Joseph Smith, I don’t believe he was capable of writing it. I really don’t know how the published text relates to the text on the plates, considering that Joseph did not look at the plates as he dictated the book. There are various ways of explaining that, but I do think the Book of Mormon is a marvelous creation and far beyond Joseph Smith’s natural powers in 1829.”
So it is either a “work of genius” or “inspired.” And he states that he does not believe it is the former, leaving it as an inspired work of God the only answer.
Selective listening or reading will always lead to an inaccurate understanding and perspective. As I said before, Bushman’s “gray areas” are in the methods category. In other words, he is not sure HOW it all happened, but he believes it did happen.
You guys try to make it sound like he is only a member of the church because it makes him feel fuzzy and that he doesn’t really believe in our core faith claims. And you are wrong.
Read it again.
FoF,
You leave out the the account he was speaking of was the 1832 account which differs from the Church official account.
I am going to post this quote from Bushman again, “In my case, the interrogation all goes on under an umbrella of faith. I am looking to support what I know in my heart is good and true. ”
I know you are going to focus on the words, “what I know in my heart is good and true.” That’s Mormon lingo for it feels good, burning bosom stuff. I want to take the focus to the phrase, “looking to support.” I read Rough Stone Rolling. In the face of obvious deception and bad behavior, Bushman constantly is trying to make it work. He is “looking to support.” I was a Mormon when I read Rough Stone Rolling. TBM through and through. I was looking to learn my church history. I was on Bushman and Joseph’s side for over half his book. Then I realized, “why am I working so hard to give Joseph the benefit of the doubt, over and over.” I was looking for truth, not “looking to support.”
Here’s another quote, “I have not tried living by the tenets of any other religion and acknowledge I might very well benefit by some other religious discipline. From all I can tell, religions of all kinds help people to live well. But I am not about to give up my religion to try out others when mine serves me so well. It is one important reason why I hang on to Mormonism. An article in the New York Times yesterday reported research that found people with faith are happier than those without. What would you do if your mind told you there is no God but living as an atheist made you miserable. That is a tough spot to find yourself in. I am grateful that what I believe to be true also helps me to live a satisfying life.”
Oh, Jaxi, all of that is great, but according to FoF, you nothing but an ignoramus.
Jaxi,
Good post………………..you rock girl! That’s sort of hip jive isn’t it?
I’m wondering if FOF and Bushman think the same about Mormonism. It appears to me that Bushman knows all of the things that would drive a lot of people out of Mormonism, as I’ve said, but just likes Mormonism. He makes it work for himself.
I like your take on his book. I read one review where the writer said that if you had A,B,C and D on a certain subject, Bushman would choose A and C because it reinforces what he wants to believe and ignore B and D because it doesn’t. You sort of said the same thing in a different way.
What do we know? Joseph Smith was not a prophet. The BoM is a fantasy. The LDS church is not the one true church. The Mormon prophet isn’t a prophet hearing from God.
What do we also know. Jesus is the Christ. His vicarious death on the cross provides salvation for all who place their faith and trust in Him. We can’t add anything to what Jesus did for us on the cross. Our works flow from our faith and the transformed life we experienced is as a result of being born again. These works bring honor and glory to Jesus.
Jaxi,
You pointed out that fof left out some info. I pointed out he does that with the bible. He claims it’s to hard to include everything. Really? Its to hard to say, bushman was using the 1832 version, but since it has so many changes, and my church uses the newer updated version, I will quote that.
Really fof? Hard hard was that. For someone who claims to be open and honest with lots of true seeking and integrity, you sure seem to mislead people a lot by what you purposely leave out.
rick,
FOF does that to protect what he wants to believe in. He conveniently ignores those things that don’t reinforce what he wants to believe in. Mormons who learn the truth about Smith and his myth have to do that. It’s a requirement.
Sandra Tanner gives a great testimony of coming out of Mormonism and to a saving relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Over time, her and Gerald were challenged by their own study regarding the veracity of Smith’s claims specifically and the LDS church. They finally got down to the BoM. They would just believe that. They began attending a Christian church still carrying the BoM. Well it wasn’t long before the BoM fell by the wayside along with the entire Mormon program.
I really liked what Jaxi wrote above:
“I read Rough Stone Rolling. In the face of obvious deception and bad behavior, Bushman constantly is trying to make it work. He is “looking to support.” I was a Mormon when I read Rough Stone Rolling. TBM through and through. I was looking to learn my church history. I was on Bushman and Joseph’s side for over half his book. Then I realized, “why am I working so hard to give Joseph the benefit of the doubt, over and over.” I was looking for truth, not “looking to support.”
The money quote is the last two sentences. There is a huge difference between looking for the truth and looking for something that will support what you want to believe in.
I liked Jaxi’s post so much that I am giving her the falcon award for excellence in posting for the month of January. She will automatically be entered for the award for the year.
People do all sorts of mental gymnastics to protect what they desire to believe in. Mormons have perfected this emotional copping technique. The question is how far can they go without looking totally foolish? Bushman is really good at this. He’s obviously an intellectually gifted guy. But the fact of the matter is that he’s just more sophisticated at applying the technique and protecting the equity he has in Mormonism.
Don’t ever discount the power of desire as the major contributing factor to the Mormon who knows the truth about Mormonism but chooses to continue to believe in Smith, the LDS church, the “living prophet” and the BoM.
I don’t know if any of you remember one of our past posters, Jack Garcia. Jack has a very compelling testimony of how he left Mormonism and became a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. He said a couple of things I haven’t forgotten. One was that it took him five years to get all of the Mormonism out of him. The second thing was that long after he had intellectually understood that Mormonism was false, he still emotionally wanted to believe in it.
Now Mormons like our buddy FOF would rationalize by saying Jack’s emotionally desire was really God speaking to him. Quite to the contrary, Jack says that God did speak to him reinforcing what the Lord had led him to understand. That is, that Mormonism is a false religious sect.
Falcon,
I agree with your thoughts on fof. Sadly when any of us point out the deception of fof or any mormon posting here, it is a double edge sword for them. Its double edged because they claim to be loving the truth, seeking the truth and use the truth. But when we point out how they use deception then they either never reply to it, which proves they did, or they make excuses like fof did saying its to hard to add everything. Now we know that a lie since I showed how easy it was to add a sentace or two.
So lurkers can see and read that the mormons are lying and we showed them how. The other side of the sword is, when fof and other lds die and stand before God, they will be without excuse. They honestly cannot say to God, I did not know, or I myself was deceived by the Mormon church. God will point out how they were given the truth over and over, and they were told and shown how they lied and decived, yet they denied it, made no effort to change it and defened their church with more passion than they did trying to find the truth. It’s a double edged sword either way. But I pray for them all daily.
My favorite FoF-ism is when he responds to you but addresses only part of your point along with points that you didn’t even make, with a lie about something you said earlier on top. Happens all the time. It’s OK though, the investigators see it just as well. FoF is actually helping our cause as much as we are. Cheers
M.t.
What u said would be funny if it weren’t so true, instead its sad.
Yet fof gets bent out of shape when I call him a liar and claim he has zero integrity, yet its not just me saying that. Its everyone. So either were all out to get him, or he really is a false teacher.
Sadly he has not proven we all conspired to get him, and he has done nothing to change and prove he’s not a liar either.
rick & MT,
Mormons wonder how they get the reputation for being dishonest. So I guess we have to ask are they purposefully deceitful, has Mormonism warped their minds to a degree that what they say and do makes sense to them when it’s apparent that it’s not true to everyone else, or are they simply ignorant of the truth and just repeating what they’ve been told?
The first thing that I learned about Mormonism and the tactics that the sect uses in recruitment is to not be forth coming about Mormon history and the beliefs and practices. I remember Andy Watson telling me that in his writing, Richard Bushman gets his toes right up to the line, but he won’t pull the trigger so to speak. So in a way, Bushman is being forthright in at least presenting the information most Mormons would like to ignore, but he does the Mormon thing.
What Mormonism comes down to is the “testimony” because the facts in evidence don’t support the claims of Smith being a prophet, the BoM being an historical document, the LDS church being the one true church or the Mormon prophet really being a prophet as we think of it.
FOF’s a desperate man. I wouldn’t want to be in a position of having to defend a lie; especially a lie I wanted to believe. Is a lie still a lie if you don’t think it’s a lie? Of course it is. You’re just naive enough to keep repeating it because it makes you feel good.
It would make more sense to me if FoF were not even a Mormon but rather an atheist payed by the corporation to defend their religion. This way he could distort all day long all he wants and still sleep sleep easy because hey, it’s just a job. However, if FoF is the best and brightest apologist that Mormonism has to offer then it is easy to see why Mormonism won’t exist in 50 years. Stay testimony strong and compartmentalized, my friend.
I’m just wondering if this caller to the Heart of the Matter is FOF?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkL9KCBuoNU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWn4bb2uV2Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzexFtsJbRQ
@falcon
wow.. that would be hilarious if it was him. But that guy can’t even argue anything.
FOF is the BCspace of mormon coffee
Here are three more with the same guy. For those of us who labor in this ministry, what we encounter on a daily basis here on MC, is manifested by this caller on the Heart of the Matter. The guy is the poster child for the FOFs who have experienced the Mormon mind meld. What I’m wondering is do they have some sort of Mormon cookie cutter down at the wards?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y56kLIHkYYo&list=PL5F688D88F4950698
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TixmDf16DA&list=PL5F688D88F4950698
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCxdtTg7uyU&list=PL5F688D88F4950698
This “John” that calls into the Heart of the Matter show is almost a caricature.
He lives by mottos that have been fed to him by the LDS church. He doesn’t listen but keeps cycling through the same tape loop. A couple of interesting points is that someone from the PR department at LDS HQ called Shawn and was trying to shut this TBM down. This is what the LDS church produces but when a guy like this gets a mic, he’s embarrassing. But just keep sending in your tithe please.
The other interesting topic in the discussions is “John’s” wife. She obviously likes listening to Shawn but it’s causing distress in the marriage. “John” is forbidding her to watch Heart of the Matter or to even say Shawn’s name in the house. Now ladies and gentlemen that’s a true blue believing cult member (sorry lurkers).
Contrast this guy “John” with Richard Bushman. I don’t know what “John” would do with what Bushman presents. Bushman really could deflate a “John’s” LDS balloon fast. I suppose he’d do like FOF and just fill what Bushman is saying with his own meaning. It’s all about the psychological technique of continuing to believe despite the evidence. You get a special merit badge in Mormonism for doing this. It goes under the heading of having a “strong testimony”.
“John” is an object of pity, I think, as he keeps repeating that the LDS church apostles and prophets cannot lie. They can’t lead the members astray.
We have a lot of former Mormons posting here. I’m sure they’ve encountered the type of LDS believer that “John” represents. We can only hope that the testimonies of former members can have some effect on the LDS “Johns’ once these types get past the idea that the formers aren’t antis and certainly aren’t sons of perdition.
One more thing, my guess is that at some point John will either come out of the LDS church and become a Christian, join an FLDS group or start his own little program with him as the leader and four or five followers.
I came across this and it was updated a couple of days ago.
For those of you seeking answers regarding the LDS church and Mormonism, this will be helpful for you.
I must admit I enjoy this type of testimony. It always amazes me the amount of research these former Mormons do on their quest to get answers regarding all things Mormon.
http://www.cesletter.com/#trailer
http://www.cesletter.com/Letter-to-a-CES-Director.pdf
The biggest mistake I see on this website is the fact that
the “Gospel according to Mormonism” keeps getting confused
with the pitfalls associated with the “Culture of Mormonism.”
Unfortunately, the “Culture of Mormonism” is replete with examples
of what NOT to do, and how NOT to act. The failure of the majority
of the members of Mormonism to live the religion properly, or to
quote the beliefs of the religion correctly, should not have any bearing
on the actual doctrine of the gospel according to Mormonism.
(Plenty of examples in this blog are about failures of Mormon individuals.
See the Mountain Meadows Massacre for a perfect example of individual failure
that has nothing to do with Mormonism.)
Yes, Mormonism is a “sudo-christian” religion. Jehovah’s Witnesses
and Seventh-Day Adventists are also “sudo-christian.” (the word Cult is
misused all the time) Sudo-Christian religions are considered Christian.
Mormonism is a very difficult religion to live when it is observed properly.
Mormonism requires a huge amount of sacrifice of time, talents, and resources.
Mormons would welcome the opportunity NOT to have to pay 11% of their
income to Tithing 10% and Fast Offerings 1%. Mormons would welcome the
opportunity to not have to go to 3 hours of church meetings every Sunday.
Mormons would be happy to be able to do like the rest of society and drink
coffee, tea, alcohol, smoke, and go motorboating or motorcycle riding on the Sabbath Day.
Unfortunately, Mormons are restricted from doing things that others Christians
get to do.
Faith in Jesus. Whether or not you believe that the entire religion
of Mormonism is true is not the point. The point is that it is difficult to “judge
the true Faith” of a devout member of Mormonism when the path they have walked
has never been traveled by the naysayers. I am well familiar with the path that
the devout Non-Denom-BAC (Non-Denominational-Born-Again-Christian) walks.
The problem is that my Southern Baptist or Non-Denom real friends don’t have any
clue about how difficult the path is for devout members of Mormonism. Maybe my
Faith in Jesus is strengthened in Mainstream Christianity. But Mormons also have
Faith in Jesus, even though their definition of Jesus may not be “right on” according
to Mainstream Christians. If you want to see if Mormons have “the Faith in God”
necessary to be successful, it would be important to have a firsthand knowledge of
what their Faith entails. So lets start with an easy test of your Faith. The next “plate pass” at
church, go ahead and start paying 10% of your income to the church. If your heart
is truly converted to the Lord, and you have Faith in Jesus and are converted to the Law of
Tithing according to Malachi 3, you will be able to pay the 10% of Mammon and
not grudgingly give your gift to the Lord. Are you ready to “test your Faith” against
others that are paying the Lord’s Tithe? Can you condemn someone who is paying
11% to a church and say that they don’t have Faith? Start paying and let’s test that Faith.
I promise if you will start paying the Lord’s Tithe, your Faith in Jesus will be strengthened
stronger than it is right now.
WoW,
You could not be more wrong if you wanted to be.
Mormons are not Christians, and it is a differant jesus that they preach.
You can read in many parts of the Bible, God places His word above His name.
If that is true, then people like JS and Mormons in general cannot come along and change it, (J.S.T) For Example.
God rebuke Moses and Job for both misrepresenting God before the people. We cannot look at the Bible and See God saying, This is who I am, and tell us about Himself, then we come along and say, No, God, I view you the way I want.
God the Father says, Their are no gods before Him, and none will come after Him. Yet mormons come along and say, Sorry god, but according to JS their were gods before you, Like your fathers and his father, etc. And we can become gods and so your wrong.
We have Paul in Gal speaking about another gosepl, thats what Mormons teach. I could go on, but you get the point. You are wrong, and again, You have another gospel and Mormons are not christian, not even a sub group of Christians.
WoW,
I want to point something else out,
You claim mormonism is hard and we should not look to the failures of people in mormonism trying becasue it is hard.
I think you need to read your bible better, Jesus Said, My yoke is easy and my burden is light.
Jesus is not going to put stuff on us to to that is so hard, we almost always fail.
Jesus also said to the religious leadrers, You put burdons on the people so hard to bear, that not even your fathers did these things. My own wording of what He said.
Then things like the WoW are not taught in the Bible, and the Bible even speaks against these types of things. So again, your wrong and Mormons are not christians and are teaching a false gospel.
WOW,
Your entire post is about how difficult it is to live as a Mormon. Let me remind you of a couple of things. Lately, most of the posters on this blog are former Mormon. They’ve been there, done that and got the tee shirt as the saying goes.
How difficult a religion is to live is not related to whether or not it is true.
Tithing is not a measure of devotion to God. Under the New Covenant, sealed with the blood of Jesus, the Christian is not under the Law. There are some people who, like some in the first century church, seem to want to put themselves back under some sort of religious law and ritual. I’m not one of them. I think it would be a good exercise for you to read what Paul has to say on this topic. Try Galatians for a start.
Mormonism is man made. It is not a restoration of anything. If you want to belong to the “one true church” become a Catholic because they can trace their origins to the first century. But if you really want to belong to the “one true church” then find out who Jesus is, get yourself born again by the Spirit of God through faith in Our Lord, and then be ushered into the Mystical Body of Christ which is peopled by all those who are born again.
There is no regeneration of your spirit by putting faith in a Jesus who is the spirit offspring of one of the Mormon gods and one of his plural wives. You’re actually putting your faith in Joseph Smith which is a really bad idea.
WordofWisdom said
“So lets start with an easy test of your Faith. The next “plate pass” at
church, go ahead and start paying 10% of your income to the church. If your heart
is truly converted to the Lord, and you have Faith in Jesus and are converted to the Law of Tithing according to Malachi 3, you will be able to pay the 10% of Mammon and not grudgingly give your gift to the Lord. Are you ready to “test your Faith” against others that are paying the Lord’s Tithe? Can you condemn someone who is paying”
I’m quite prepared to test my faith against others that are paying the ‘Lords Tithe’
On a personal note I gave, year after year, well In excess of 10% of my income to charity. Now I’m retired I find myself giving over 15% of my pension & trust me it’s not easy but I do it because there are people in greater need than me & not because some tax avoiding corporation (the LDS) tells me I must. But, according to the LDS I would have to give an extra10% to a bunch of wealthy businessmen to qualify as a Christian. I wonder what our Lord would say about that.
OK, Let’s do some straight talking & put this tithing issue to bed. There is NO law of tithing in the Christian Church so what you say cannot be used to prove that the LDS follow Christ & in fact by paying tithes they actually demonstrate that they DO NOT know the teachings of scripture & DO NOT follow the Christ of the bible.
Christ NEVER tithed & NEVER told any of His followers to tithe.
Wow,
welcome. I think I understand what you tried to say in your comments and it
concerns the lifestyle of ” devout Mormons ” being authenically christian . While
I reject the Mormon teaching that the gospel of Jesus is a code of laws and rules
necessary to keep in order to qualify for eternal life , still as important as living a moral
lifestyle is there ‘s still the other side of the ” christian coin” , i.e. doctrine —what you
confess to believe about God/Jesus etc . Both sides of this coin together identify who
is a true ( saved) believer in Jesus . So when I look at Mormonism , I look to see what
it’s leaders have claimed /taught about God/Jesus , not just whether Mormons live a
consistent moral lifestyle that the New Testament records for the Body of Christ , His
fold . I hope that you can understand this point .
You mentioned that Mormonism ( and Jehovah’s witnesses etc ) are ” Sudo-christian ”
religions and to be considered as christian .
Did you mean ” pseudo ” instead of ” sudo ? Because pseudo means imitation , or even
false . With that in mind I do feel that MormonISM is a pseudo christian religion ,
because it is the teachings of men who claim to be Jesus’ modern day apostles with
the true doctrine about Jesus and His gospel of salvation — but these men are not
who they claim to be . I can’t equate every single person who goes to a Mormon Ward
each Sunday to not be a true Christian . I can however say that those Mormons who
are aware of what their leaders have taught about God / Jesus /salvation and believe
such , these are not true believers . The New Testament is clear that in the latter days
false prophets will come and detour people into believing ” another gospel” Gal 1:8
and ” another Jesus ” 2Cor 11:4 , thus putting their lives in peril spiritually .
You mentioned ” test your faith ” . One crucial test is to compare what your leaders
whom you follow as prophets /apostles have taught . Your own church Manuals
say that prophets are teachers , that is correct , so you need to test their teachings
with Jesus’ true apostles —1 Jn 4:1-6 . Why is this crucial ? answer : vr 1 .
WordofWisdom,
I found your post to be confusing at best. Here is why. You say the biggest mistake that this website makes is that we confuse Mormon Doctrine with its culture. Can you give us a few examples of this? Specific ones from this site? I don’t think you understand Mormonism very well, as your statement about the Mountain Meadows Massacre plainly shows. What happened at Mountain Meadows? A group of immigrants from Arkansas & Missouri were traveling through the Utah Territory and were attacked by Mormons. Why were they attacked? Because they were from Arkansas & Missouri, and Brigham Young ordered the attack. Why would he do so? Young gave the reason why himself. Here is Wilford Woodruff recording a visit that Young took to the Meadows in 1861:
Why would “the Lord” need to have over 100 Missourians murdered to take “vengeance”? Vengeance for what? Here is where Mormon Doctrine comes into play. Here is part of a “revelation” that Woodruff claimed he received in 1880:
Just a few months before the Massacre, “Apostle” Parley Pratt was murdered in Arkansas. Heber C. Kimball taught this to the Church just a month before the Massacre:
God showing “his power” according to Kimball, was to have the “saints” chase down and SHED THEIR BLOOD. John D. Lee recounts that Brigham Young stated,
Joseph Smith once prophesied that the Redemption of Zion would take place on September 11, 1836. It did not happen, instead the Mormons were driven out of the State of Missouri. The Mountain Meadows Massacre took place on September 11, 1857, in revenge for the murder of Parley P. Pratt and the Mormon troubles in Missouri.
Doctrine DIRECTLY influenced Culture. The “Mormon Individuals” that “failed” are actually Mormon “apostles and prophets”, who are the ones teaching the doctrines, claiming that they are the actual “oracles of God”, and that they speak FOR GOD, and AS GOD. Unfortunately you have failed with the example of the Mountain Meadows Massacre to separate Mormon Culture from the Mormon Gospel, because they are one and the same.
You write,
As Mike has pointed out, I think you are confused as to what “pseudo” means. You might want to look it up. In relation to Mormonism, it is a “cult” because it is spurious Christianity. Cult is also defined as a “spurious religion”, and there are many different cults, some more mild than others. The FLDS get a bad rap from SLC Mormons because they actually follow the teachings of Jo and Brigham. ALL OF THEM. Warren Jeffs only did what Joseph Smith did. He just did it more flagrantly, and with younger girls.
I don’t think that most Mormons would “welcome” not paying tithing or living the word of wisdom at all. I think you are totally wrong about that. The Mormons that I know, are happy to live their religion, when they believe in it. Those are not the reasons why most people leave the church. Mormons don’t get to do certain things because they obey REGULATIONS instituted by their “prophets”. That is what they obey, and they do it because they believe in their “prophets”.
Christians follow the Bible, and most that I know honor the Sabbath, and some pay more than 10% of their income, but not because they are FORCED, but because they willingly want to give to the church. It is not called tithing though, it is called gift offerings.
You write,
I don’t know where you are getting this from. I’m an Ex-Mormon who can easily “judge” MORMONISM. What I do not do, is make blanket statements about how Mormons live their religion. It is not my concern. My concern is with Mormon Doctrine and History, and with the leaders that make it, as it is with everyone here at this Blog.
You said,
I know many who do know how difficult it is for devout members of the Mormon Church. I also know that those who run MRM are also aware, as they live in Utah, and minister to Mormons. These kinds of blanket statements and comparisons don’t prove anything. If you are not a Mormon or never have been, then the same could be said about you. So I find it odd that you would bring this up.
You said,
I have firsthand knowledge of Mormonism having lived it for over a decade. I went on a Mission for the Church, and went through the Temple. And “successful” at what? Worshiping God in Spirit and in Truth? They worship THEIR God, (I’m sure) faithfully. But the Mormon God is not the Christian God. Not sure what you are trying to say here? What is your point?
You said,
Why would a Christian need to do this? Christians don’t live by the Old Law. They are under the NEW COVENANT. What was Tithing under the Old Covenant?
Why would any CHRISTIAN want to pay tithing as defined by Mormonism? How would that make any CHRISTIAN more faithful? How is that a successful test of a CHRISTIAN’s faith?
You say,
How so? Paul told us long ago that this won’t work:
Please read my comments on Mormon Tithing vs. what is required under the New Covenant, starting here. http://blog.mrm.org/2013/04/tithing-necessary-for-mormon-spiritual-health-and-welfare/comment-page-2/#comment-43976
James defined PURE (true), APPROVED, RELIGION, and he didn’t mention tithing:
Why should Mormons even be commanded to pay tithing at all, when in the Doctrine and Covenants it says,
I guess that Mormon “authorities” think that all the members are “slothful and not wise”, and won’t get any reward. They, after all, have to be COMMANDED to pay Tithing which every Mormon who has the Gift of the Holy Spirit should be eager to do, right? According to Word of Wisdom, every Mormon doesn’t want to pay tithing or do anything else, so they are all damned according to D&C 58. That’s a pretty bleak view of Church Members, WOW, don’t you think?
While I find fault with the leaders for their useless regulations, false doctrine and heresy, I cannot find fault with any lay Mormon who pays his tithing because he is obeying his conscience and following his faith.
Welcome WoW,
You just had your first experience of getting “your clock cleaned” by the very best of Mormon coffee. You should feel lucky cus these guys literally know more about Mormonism than 99% of Mormons.
I used to be just like you. I actually would come here and argue with them. Fast forward a few years later, and now I’m on their side. Funny how that worked out. But the truth is, nothing in your post made any sense whatsoever. In fact it was almost embarrassing how much of a braggart you are about your tithes. But why stop at just 10%? You should be giving everything to the church. This is the covenant you made in the temple, isn’t it?
Again, welcome. Keep posting comments. It just helps lurkers out there to see how empty and cult like the Mormon church is.
@wow
Please learn how to format your sentences. Small paragraphs would be helpful. Reading your post was making my eyeballs explode