Defending the Faith at Temple Square

Posted on August 26, 2013 by Sharon Lindbloom

A healthy Mormon and Christian Debate at Salt Lake Temple Square with host Dave Bartosiewicz

Posted in Afterlife, Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism, Salvation | Tagged , , , , | 172 Comments

Joseph Smith and Honesty

Posted on August 22, 2013 by Sharon Lindbloom

In the July 2013 issue of Ensign magazine, young Mormons are taught about the importance of “Honesty and Integrity.” One suggestion given for use in teaching the youth the principles of honesty and integrity is a 2005 General Conference address given by the current Mormon President, Thomas Monson. The talk is titled, “The Prophet Joseph Smith: Teacher by Example.”

Joseph Smith by grindael watercolorPresident Monson’s conference talk covers several positive attributes he believes Joseph Smith exemplified. On the topic of honesty President Monson said,

“A few days after his prayer in the Sacred Grove, Joseph Smith gave an account of his vision to a preacher with whom he was acquainted. To his surprise, his communication was treated with ‘contempt’ and ‘was the cause of great persecution, which continued to increase.’ Joseph, however, did not waver. He later wrote, ‘I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true. … For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it.’Despite the physical and mental punishment at the hands of his opponents which the Prophet Joseph Smith endured throughout the remainder of his life, he did not falter. He taught honesty—by example.” (Ensign, 11/2005, 68. Bold in the original.)

President Monson might have chosen a better example to illustrate Joseph Smith’s honesty. As Mormon historian James B. Allen wrote:

“According to Joseph Smith, he told the story of the vision immediately after it happened in the early spring of 1820. As a result, he said, he received immediate criticism in the community. There is little if any evidence, however, that by the early 1830’s Joseph Smith was telling the story in public. At least if he were telling it, no one seemed to consider it important enough to have recorded it at the time, and no one was criticizing him for it. Not even in his own history did Joseph Smith mention being criticized in this period for telling the story of the first vision.“

Not only is there no evidence for young Joseph Smith being persecuted and treated with contempt due to talking about his vision of the Father and the Son, there is evidence to contradict such a claim. According to Palmyra resident Orsemus Turner, as a youth Joseph Smith was part of a juvenile debating club and “became a very passable exhorter in evening [Methodist] meetings” where he was welcomed and allowed to preach.

President Monson would not have found a solid example to illustrate Joseph Smith’s honesty in the story of the Kinderhook Plates, either. The Kinderhook Plates were six small brass plates allegedly found in 1843 in a burial mound in Illinois. They were found buried with a 9-foot skeleton and “covered on both sides with ancient characters.” The plates were given to Joseph Smith to translate and he later wrote, “I have translated a portion of them, and they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth…” Many years later, long after Joseph Smith’s death, two of the men who purported to find the plates claimed it was all a hoax. Nobody paid much attention to this claim for another 30 years. But then, according to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism,

“Interest was kindled again in 1920 when the Chicago Historical Society acquired what appeared to be one of the original Kinderhook plates. Later the Chicago plate was subjected to a number of nondestructive tests, with inconclusive results. Then in 1980, the Chicago Historical Society gave permission for destructive tests, which were done at Northwestern University. Examination by a scanning electron microscope, a scanning auger microprobe, and X-ray fluorescence analysis proved conclusively that the plate was one of the Kinderhook six; that it had been engraved, not etched; and that it was of nineteenth-century manufacture. There thus appears no reason to accept the Kinderhook plates as anything but a frontier hoax.” (Kinderhook Plates, 2:789, 790)

President Monson would not have found a convincing example to illustrate Joseph Smith’s honesty in Smith’s Nauvoo polygamy experience, either. On Sunday morning, May 26, 1844, Joseph Smith addressed his congregation and proclaimed his “Testimony Against the Dissenters in Nauvoo.” The Prophet touched on several charges that various people were making against him, denying them all. He said,

“God knows, then, that the charges against me are false.

“I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives…

“William Law…swears that I have committed adultery…

“What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one.” (History of the Church, 6:410-411)

Joseph Smith actually had more than thirty wives when he preached on that spring morning in Nauvoo. And chances are that most them were there, listening as their husband/prophet publicly denied them.

Are these the sorts of things President Monson had in mind when he encouraged Mormon Church members in 2005, “May we incorporate into our own lives the divine principles which [Joseph Smith] so beautifully taught—by example—that we, ourselves, might live more completely the gospel of Jesus Christ”?

Posted in Joseph Smith, Mormon History | Tagged , , , , , , , | 23 Comments

Moroni 8:18 — Things Have Changed for Mormons

Posted on August 18, 2013 by Aaron Shafovaloff

Posted in Book of Mormon, God the Father, King Follett Discourse, Lorenzo Snow, Mormon Scripture | Tagged , , , | 142 Comments

Hymns teaching false doctrine

Posted on August 15, 2013 by Eric Johnson

In order to discover new quotes to insert into a revision of our book Mormonism 101, I have decided to read through a number of LDS manuals, including the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church series. Tonight I was paging through the volume featuring the talks and writings of Heber J. Grant and I came across this particular quote:

 “The more beautiful the music by which false doctrine is sung, the more dangerous it becomes. I appeal to all Latter-day Saints, and especially to our choirs, never to sing the words of a song, no matter how beautiful and inspiring the music may be, where the teachings are not in perfect accord with the truths of the gospel” (p. 167).

Grant is quoted on the same page as saying,

“No individual singer, or organization of singers, in the Church, should ever render a selection unless the words are in full harmony with the truths of the gospel. . . “

sheet-musicIf this is the case, I say “amen.” Using my copy of the 1985 Hymns of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, allow me to suggest the Top 10 hymns, in descending order, that I recommend the LDS Church leaders take out immediately since they are in disagreement with the biblical gospel:

10. Hymn 19: “We Thank Thee, O God, for a Prophet.” Words include:

“We thank thee, O God, for a prophet to guide us in these latter days. We thank thee for sending the gospel to lighten our minds with its rays. . . .Rejoice in his glorious gospel, and bask in its life-giving light. Thus on to eternal perfection, the honest and faithful will go, while they who reject this glad message shall never such happiness know.”

9. Hymn 300: “Families can be Together Forever.” The words of the two verses are:

“I have a family here on earth. They are so good to me. I want to share my life with them through all eternity. While I am in my early years, I’ll prepare most carefully, so I can marry in God’s temple for eternity.”

Refrain: “Families can be together forever through Heavenly Father’s plan. I always want to be with my own family; and the Lord has shown me how I can. The Lord has shown me how I can.”

8. Hymn 25: “Now We’ll Sing with One Accord.” Words include:

“And an angel surely then, for a blessing unto men, brought the priesthood back again, in its ancient purity. Even Joseph (Smith) he inspired. . . And the Book of Mormon true, with its covenant ever new, for the Gentile and the Jew, he (Smith) translated sacredly. God’s commandments to mankind, for believing Saints designed. And to bless the seeking mind, came to him from Jesus Christ.”

7. Hymn 303: “Keep the Commandments.” The words of this hymn are straightforward in four simple sentences:

“Keep the commandments; keep the commandments! In this there is safety; in this there is peace. He will send blessings; he will send blessings. Words of a prophet: Keep the commandments. In this there is safety and peace.”

6. Hymn 26: “Joseph Smith’s first Prayer.” Words include:

“Suddenly a light descended, brighter far than noonday sun, and a shining glorious pillar, over him fell around him shone, while appeared two heavenly beings, God the Father and the Son … . ‘Joseph, this is my Beloved; Hear him!’ Oh, how sweet the word! Joseph’s humble prayer was answered, and he listened to the Lord. Oh, what rapture filled his bosom, for he saw the living God.”

5. Hymn 287: “Rise, Ye Saints, and Temples Enter.” The three verses of this hymn read:

“Rise, ye Saints, and temples enter; seek the path that leads ahead. Seal in everlasting circles all our loved ones, quick and dead. Learn the plan of exaltation; with His sacred laws comply. Live to earn in binding covenant blessings of our God most high. Elohim, thou great designer, wilt thou heaven’s powers bestow, as thy faithful sons and daughters serve in temples here below.”

4. Hymn 225: “We are Marching on to Glory.” The first two verses are:

“We are marching on to glory; we are working for our crown. We will make our armor brighter, and never lay it down. Then day by day we are marching, to heaven we are bound. Each good act brings us nearer that home where we’ll be crowned.”

3. Hymn 284: “If you Could Hie to Kolob.”

Verse 1: “If you could hie to Kolob in the twinkling of an eye, and then continue onward, with that same speed to fly. Do you think that you could ever, through all eternity, find out the generation where Gods began to be?”

Verses 2 and 3 include: “Or see the grand beginning, where space did not extend? Or view the last creation, where Gods and matter end? . . . The works of God continue, and worlds and lives abound; improvement and progression have one eternal round. There is no end to matter; there is no end to space, there is no end to spirit; there is no end to race.”

Refrain: “We are marching, marching homeward to that bright land afar. We work for life eternal; it is our guiding star.”

2. Hymn 290: “Rejoice, Ye Saints of Latter Days.” The first three verses are:

1: “Rejoice, ye Saints of latter days, for temples now in many lands, where Saints endowed with power from God, may learn to keep the Lord’s commands.”

2. “Come, let us go up to his house; We’ll make our covenants and say: ‘All we are given we give to thee. Accept our love, we will obey.”

3. “O Saints, rejoice!” Our kindred dead may now receive eternally the fullness of the gospel’s joy. Arise, ye Saints, and set them free!”

1. Hymn 27: “Praise to the Man” (you knew this one had to be #1), composed by W.W. Phelps. All the words are as given:

1. “Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah! Jesus anointed that Prophet and Seer. Blessed to open the last dispensation, kings shall extol him and nations revere.”

Refrain: “Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven! Traitors and tyrants now fight in vain. Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren; death cannot conquer the hero again.”

2. “Praise to his memory, he died as a martyr; Honored and blest be his ever great name! Long shall his blood, which was shed by assassins, plead unto heaven while the earth lauds his fame.”

3. “Great is his glory and endless his priesthood. Ever and ever the keys he will hold. Faithful and true, he will enter his kingdom, crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.”

4. “Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven; earth must atone for the blood of that man. Wake up the world for the conflict of justice. Millions shall know ‘Brother Joseph’ again.”

Now it’s your turn. Do you have nominations to add to this Top 10 list?

Posted in LDS Church | Tagged , , | 14 Comments

The Doctrine of Christ

Posted on August 12, 2013 by grindael

The latest speculation about Mormon doctrine comes from lawyer turned “apostle” D. Todd Christofferson who spoke about the subject at the April 2012 General Conference, calling it “The Doctrine of Christ.”

LDS Leaders Then-NowIn this talk Christofferson makes the following observation:

“In some faith traditions, theologians claim equal teaching authority with the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and doctrinal matters may become a contest of opinions between them. Some rely on the ecumenical councils of the Middle Ages and their creeds. Others place primary emphasis on the reasoning of post-apostolic theologians or on biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. We value scholarship that enhances understanding, but in the Church today, just as anciently, establishing the doctrine of Christ or correcting doctrinal deviations is a matter of divine revelation to those the Lord endows with apostolic authority.”

According to Christofferson, then, Mormon doctrine is the teaching of “authorized” church leaders given by “divine revelation.” He continues,

“At the same time it should be remembered that not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that ‘a prophet [is] a prophet only when he [is] acting as such.’

“President Clark, quoted earlier, observed:

“ ‘To this point runs a simple story my father told me as a boy, I do not know on what authority, but it illustrates the point. His story was that during the excitement incident to the coming of [Johnston’s] Army, Brother Brigham preached to the people in a morning meeting a sermon vibrant with defiance to the approaching army, and declaring an intention to oppose and drive them back. In the afternoon meeting he arose and said that Brigham Young had been talking in the morning, but the Lord was going to talk now. He then delivered an address, the tempo of which was the opposite from the morning talk.’”

In a footnote, Christofferson adds that Clark didn’t actually know if the story his father told even happened. So for Christofferson and Clark, an unverified story, perhaps folklore, illustrates the principle that even the President of the Church himself may not always be moved upon by the Holy Ghost when he addresses the people? This is not what those like Orson Hyde said about Brigham Young:

“Some persons say that Brigham does not give revelations as did Joseph Smith. But let me tell you, that Brigham’s voice has been the voice of God from the time he was chosen to preside, and even before. …He possesses skill, wisdom, and power that trouble wise men and rulers. God will make him a greater terror to nations than he ever has been. I will now quote a few passages from the revelations of God as contained in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants:—‘My words shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice out of the heavens, or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.’ Again, concerning his servants—‘Whatsoever you shall speak by my Spirit shall be Scripture—shall be the word of the Lord, the will of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.’ Again, from the New Testament, Jesus says, ‘Whosoever heareth you (whom I send) heareth me.’” (Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 8:234-235, October 7, 1860)

Which Mormon “prophet,” will they claim, didn’t have the “constant companionship” of the Holy Ghost? If they can’t tell us that, then they can’t say the “prophet” did not always speak by his power.

“Apostle” Moses Thatcher claimed that unlike “hireling” Christians, Mormons speak the truth when delivering doctrine to the “saints”:

“They [the elders of Israel] speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost and not as those paid with a price. A true servant of God is not afraid of public opinion, but will rebuke that opinion if wrong. …I bear to you my testimony that Wilford Woodruff is a prophet of the Most High God. I know that he speaks by revelation. He communes with Brigham Young, though Brigham Young, we say, is dead. Joseph, the great modern prophet since death, has communed with our venerable living leader. Thus are we lead step by step through the inspiration that comes from God and his servants;…” (Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses 2:316-317, November 2, 1891)

Brigham YoungBrigham Young was emphatic that neither he nor anyone authorized by him ever taught false doctrine and challenged the world to show otherwise:

“You may ask the question: Has no one Elder in Israel ever taught false doctrine? Yes, but no man has who has been authorized to teach, guide and direct the Saints. Did Jesus, Peter, James, John or Joseph Smith ever teach a false or incorrect doctrine? Not that you or I know of; we cannot find it.” (Journal of Discourses 12:310, November 29, 1868)

“I am at the defiance of earth and hell to put a finger on the place or time that a false doctrine was taught to any one, a wrong taught to any one, or when evil was justified in any one, all the liars and all the lies on earth and in hell to the contrary notwithstanding.” (Journal of Discourses 13:217, July 17, 1870)

This would include Young’s teachings on Adam-god, blood atonement, and the priesthood ban on blacks.

Brigham Young also said that false doctrine, if taught, would be detected by the “saints” almost immediately:

“I can say this for the Latter-day Saints, and I will say it to their praise and my satisfaction, if I were to preach false doctrine here, it would not be an hour after the people got out, before it would begin to fly from one to another, and they would remark, ‘I do not quite like that! It does not look exactly right! What did Brother Brigham mean? That did not sound quite right, it was not exactly the thing!’ … I will defy any man, to preach false doctrine without being detected; and we need not go to the Elders. of Israel, the children who have been born in these mountains possess enough of the Spirit to detect it.” (Journal of Discourses 14:205, August 13, 1871)

What is Christofferson talking about when he says that “It is commonly understood in the Church that a statement made by one leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, not meant to be official or binding for the whole Church?” He gives no specifics, but I can provide examples from Conference Addresses when the speaker gives his opinion — and clearly states that it is an “opinion.” Here’s one:

“In my opinion, there were classes and races, and separation into different groups and conditions before we came to this world, and all are getting what they are entitled to receive here.” (Melvin J. Ballard, Conference Report, April 1915, 62. For a few more examples see Journal of Discourses 1:220, 8:21; Collected Discourses 4:277; Conference Report October 1951, 85)

The Conference Addresses of the Church (from the Journal of Discourses to the present) are full of such opinions. How can you know when these men are giving their opinions? Why, they tell you so.

Christofferson would have members think Church leaders are prone to intermix opinion, speculation and folklore in with their doctrinal teachings without mentioning it, perhaps forgetting that they are (and were) commanded to speak by the power of the Holy Ghost. Wilford Woodruff taught the opposite:

“When the Apostles and Elders of Israel are called to teach you, when they are called to go abroad and to teach the inhabitants of the earth, they are commanded of the Lord to speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and when a man speaks as he is moved upon by the Holy Ghost, it is the word of the Lord, it is the mind of the Lord, it is the will of the Lord, it is Scripture, it is the power of God unto salvation unto every one that believes. If we do not have the Holy Ghost we have no business to teach. But when the Elders of Israel do teach you by the Holy Ghost, you have the revelations of God to you. We have these revelations lying before us for our guidance day by day, as well as the living oracles.” (Brian Stuy, Collected Discourses 2:46, April 6, 1890)

Try to pin down these current “apostles” about how and when Mormon “prophets” and “apostles” did not have the gift of the Holy Spirit, or when their “apostles” were not authorized to teach and proclaim doctrine. They will not give any satisfactory answers. What is the doctrine of Christ according to Mormon Scripture? It is the voice of Christ spoken through his servants by the power of the Holy Ghost:

“What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.” (D&C 1:38)

Since no Mormon audience that we know of ever spoke out against any of the sermons in the Journal of Discourses or subsequent Conference Reports, we can rest assured that these men were speaking by the “power of the Holy Ghost” and were indeed teaching doctrine and scripture unless (as they did frequently) they indicated that they were just giving their opinion.

Posted in Authority and Doctrine | Tagged , , , , , , , | 107 Comments

There is a Difference Between Truth and Error

Posted on August 8, 2013 by Sharon Lindbloom

From a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “Taking Hold of God,” delivered October 7, 1877:

Wheat and ChaffIn the present age, if any man can talk well, he will get a following whatever he may teach. I am astounded at some professors who can hear this man, today, and that man the next, though the two are diametrically opposed. Surely there is some difference between truth and error. Surely mere cleverness cannot neutralize false doctrine.

Our forefathers discerned between things that differed and when false doctrine came before them they cast it out, notwithstanding the eloquence of its advocate. I do not want you to be bigots. God deliver us from their bitter spirit, but I do want you to be sound Believers. There is a great difference between obstinate bigotry and a decided maintenance of that which we have believed. After all, what is the chaff to the wheat? There is a difference between the doctrines of men and the teachings of the Lord. No lie is of the truth. Garnish it as you may, it is still a lie. Oh to be rooted and grounded and built up in Christ! One of the most desirable things in this fickle age is to see around the minister of Christ a people who know the truth, and feel that the truth binds them fast to their God.

———

“His winnowing fork is in his hand,
and he will clear his threshing floor
and gather his wheat into the barn,
but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”
Matthew 3:12

Posted in Christianity | Tagged , , , | 112 Comments

Mormon Scholar Brian Hales Defends Joseph Smith’s Polygamy

Posted on August 5, 2013 by Aaron Shafovaloff

Listen for yourself here.

As one Mormon commenter put it:

“As someone who loves and values the church — is active and serves in the church — and as someone who has a lot to gain from being able to believe only the most positive interpretations about the documented events of his Joseph Smith’s life, my impression after listening to this interview is that this is the best interpretation that can be offered to defend Joseph, and it is not very reassuring.

Posted in Uncategorized | 122 Comments

Teaching my six and four-year-old to discern language about God

Posted on August 1, 2013 by Aaron Shafovaloff

girl-with-arms-open-wide-to-the-sky“John Caleb and Lydia, do you know how you say sometimes, ‘Daddy is the best’?”

“Yeah. It’s just something we say for fun because we love you.”

“And do you think Daddy is *actually* the best Dad in the world?”

“No.”

“Well, when some people say that ‘God is the best’, they say it but mean something else. They mean it like when you say, ‘Daddy is the best.'”

“Yeah, but God really *is* the best.”

“That’s right. Nobody is bigger or smarter than him. He is actually the best. And when we say that, we’re not just being fun.”

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

Joseph Smith Fooled by the Devil?

Posted on July 29, 2013 by Sharon Lindbloom
© 1999 Institute for Religious Research

© 1999 Institute for Religious Research

In late 1829 or early 1830 insufficient funding held up the first printing of the Book of Mormon. Martin Harris was trying to sell his farm to raise the needed capital, but was not having immediate success. At the urging of friends, Joseph Smith sought direction from God. Placing his trusty seer stone in a hat, Joseph looked in and received a revelation that instructed him to send representatives to Canada; there they would sell the copyright of the Book of Mormon and return with enough money to publish the book in the United States.

According to Mormon Apostle and Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer,

“Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery went to Toronto on this mission, but they failed entirely to sell the copy-right, returning without any money. Joseph was at my father’s house when they returned. I was there also, and am an eye witness to these facts. Jacob Whitmer and John Whitmer were also present when Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery returned from Canada. Well, we were all in great trouble; and we asked Joseph how it was that he had received a revelation from the Lord for some brethren to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right, and the brethren had utterly failed in their undertaking. Joseph did not know how it was, so he enquired of the Lord about it, and behold the following revelation came through the stone: ‘Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil.’ So we see that the revelation to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right was not of God, but was of the devil or of the heart of man. When a man enquires of the Lord concerning a matter, if he is deceived by his own carnal desires, and is in error, he will receive an answer according to his erring heart, but it will not be a revelation from the Lord. This was a lesson for our benefit and we should have profited by it in future more than we did…” (An Address to All Believers in Christ, 31)

Brigham Young once made this sage observation in relation to another matter:

“A man that will be fooled by the Devil—a man that has not sense to discern between steel grey mixed and iron grey mixed when one is dyed with logwood and the other with indigo, may be deceived again.” (A Book of Mormons, 185)

David Whitmer would probably agree for he offered readers this sound counsel:

“Remember this matter brethren; it is very important…Now is it wisdom to put your trust in Joseph Smith and believe all his revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants to be of God? Every one who does not desire to be of Paul, or of Apollos, or of Joseph, but desires to be of Christ will say that it is not wisdom to put our trust in him and believe his revelations as if from God’s own mouth!” (ibid.)

———

And the LORD said to me: “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name.
I did not send them, nor did I command them or speak to them.
They are prophesying to you a lying vision,
worthless divination, and the deceit of their own minds.”
-Jeremiah 14:14-

Posted in Book of Mormon, Early Mormonism, Joseph Smith, Mormon History, Truth, Honesty, Prayer, and Inquiry | Tagged , , , , | 30 Comments

Confrontational or Grace-Filled Apologetics?

Posted on July 25, 2013 by Eric Johnson

One of the most frustrating things for those of us who work in the field of apologetics to the LDS people is having our motives and tactics be misunderstood. For example, many Mormons believe that anyone who tries to share the Christian faith with them must somehow be motivated by hate. The term “anti-Mormon” is a common term used to denigrate anyone who has the audacity to suggest that Mormonism is not the same as Christianity. Opposition, they argue, is nothing less than intolerance.

Yet those who belong to the LDS Church are not the only ones who are critical of various apologetic approaches. Some Christian scholars have also shared their opposition to methods they consider too aggressive. Certainly former Fuller Seminary President Richard Mouw—who likes to hobnob with BYU professors and LDS general authorities—is well known for his vocal disagreement against groups like Mormonism Research Ministry. Based on his talks and writings, it seems that he feels that there are more similarities than differences between Mormonism and Christianity.

dr-scorgie-web1Recently I came across an article in Perichoresis, a publication of Emanuel University of Oradea, Romania (Volume 10, Issue 1 (2012): 23-39), written by a theology professor (Dr. Glen G. Scorgie) at Bethel Seminary San Diego, my alma mater where I received an M.Div. The title of his article “Confrontational Apologetics Versus Grace-Filled Persuasion.” You can certainly look at my detailed response to his piece here, but I want to share a few reasons why I think this type of argumentation is faulty.

For example, the title is nothing less than the either/or fallacy, suggesting that there are only two ways to do apologetics. One method utilizes an aggressive, negative tactic (Dr. Scorgie likes to call this “smash-mouth apologetics”), with the other tactic marked by a gentle, positive demeanor. Demonizing styles that emphasize “stranger evangelism,” he apparently teaches his graduate students that lifestyle evangelism is the only appropriate way to do biblical apologetics. Using a word (“civility”) popularized by Richard Mouw (a man who, in Dr. Scorgie’s own description on page 33, “profoundly affected me”), he writes in his paper’s abstract, “The great challenge before Christian apologists is to speak and live in ways that combine uncompromising faithfulness to revealed truth with a generous spirit of loving service and civility. Grace-filled persuasion always trumps smash-mouth apologetics.”

Dr. Scorgie creates straw man arguments to make “confrontational” apologists look unbiblical. For example, he criticizes “important apologetics reference works” (even those written by scholars) by saying these apologists typically don’t teach proper ways of civil engagement. (I show in my article that his claim is baseless.) He saves his harshest criticism for those who are involved with apologetics to those in the cults, writing on page 31:

“Take, for example, someone who has a life-long ministry to cults. Have you noticed how, over time, they can start to sound a bit like a cult members (sic) themselves? Or consider this example. If a soldier has to fight the Taliban at close quarters for long periods of time, the risk is that they will begin to behave more and more like them. The principle is that we tend to absorb something of the tactics and tone of our opponents. In the sphere of apologetics this can be disastrous.” (p. 31)

Ironically, Dr. Scorgie’s generalization seems to use “smash-mouth” tactics rather than anything that could be considered “grace-filled.” Suppose I said, “Take, for example, someone who has been involved with higher education for all of his or her life. Have you noticed how, over time, they can get so caught up in their writing and pontification in the classroom that they seem quite comfortable in their ivory towers…” I certainly don’t believe this is true, even in a general way, because I do know a number of scholars who take their skills outside the classroom/research walls. Yet here is a man who, in one broad statement, is willing to throw lay apologists under the bus by painting them all as angry, bitter debaters.

People are going to hell, yet by their words, some Christian scholars don’t seem to mind. It would be nice if Dr. Scorgie would be willing to assist the apologists in the goal of reaching out to those who are enmeshed with false religions rather than just shooting his brothers and sisters in the back. After all, aren’t we supposed to be on the same team?

 

Posted in Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism | Tagged , , | 12 Comments