FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Array
Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Mormonism 101/Chapter 1: Difference between revisions
(mod) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
*''Ensign'' (June 1993), p. 10. | *''Ensign'' (June 1993), p. 10. | ||
|response= | |response= | ||
*The authors quote from Joseph Smith's eulogy of Elder King Follett, yet they fail to mention Smith's quote of John 5:19, 26 where the Savior states that He can do nothing but what He saw His Father do. {{ | *The authors quote from Joseph Smith's eulogy of Elder King Follett, yet they fail to mention Smith's quote of John 5:19, 26 where the Savior states that He can do nothing but what He saw His Father do.<ref>{{TPJS1|start=346}}</ref> | ||
*{{Detail|Nature of God/"Celestial sex"|Nature of God/Heavenly Mother}} | *{{Detail|Nature of God/"Celestial sex"|Nature of God/Heavenly Mother}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
*The authors ask if it is the Church's position that God did not know whether Adam and Eve would transgress His commandment. | *The authors ask if it is the Church's position that God did not know whether Adam and Eve would transgress His commandment. | ||
|response= | |response= | ||
*Such a question rather ridiculous, since the Evangelical interpretation of the biblical text implies that the Atonement of Jesus Christ was an afterthought to undo the ill effects of Adam's sin. | *Such a question rather ridiculous, since the Evangelical interpretation of the biblical text implies that the Atonement of Jesus Christ was an afterthought to undo the ill effects of Adam's sin.<ref>John F. MacArthur, Jr., ''The Vanishing Conscience; Drawing the Line in a No-Fault, Guilt-Free World'' (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1995), 109-115.</ref> The LDS position, most succinctly stated in the Pearl of Great Price, is that God counseled with His spirit children concerning the plan and that Jesus Christ's Atonement is not "Plan B." ({{s||Moses|4|}} and {{s||Abraham|3|}}) | ||
*{{Detail|Plan of salvation/Original sin}} | *{{Detail|Plan of salvation/Original sin}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 121: | Line 121: | ||
*Don Lattin, "Musing with the Prophet," ''San Francisco Chronicle'', 13 April 1997, sec. Z1, p. 3. | *Don Lattin, "Musing with the Prophet," ''San Francisco Chronicle'', 13 April 1997, sec. Z1, p. 3. | ||
|response= | |response= | ||
*Leaving aside the authors creation of a straw man argument | *Leaving aside the authors creation of a straw man argument<ref>A "[[Logical_fallacies/Page_4#Straw_man|straw man]]" is a false weak argument built up by an author, which is subsequently torn down. Upon tearing it down, the author implies that not only was the false weak argument destroyed, but also the original argument.</ref> implying that Latter-day Saints gainsay that God is infinitely exalted above any and all mortal humans, they ignore the Book of Genesis, which states that man is created in God's image. ({{s||Genesis|1|27}}) Is it logical to think that man has zero in common with the Creator who chose to make mankind in His image? | ||
*The authors implicitly criticize President Gordon Hinckley's quote of Lorenzo Snow's couplet. By this, they ignore I John 3:1-3. Do the authors disbelieve that Christians will be like Jesus? | *The authors implicitly criticize President Gordon Hinckley's quote of Lorenzo Snow's couplet. By this, they ignore I John 3:1-3. Do the authors disbelieve that Christians will be like Jesus? | ||
*The authors disdain alleged LDS disbelief in God's omnipotence. Can God lie? If not, then He is not omnipotent. If He can, why are there scriptures that state that He cannot? ({{s||Titus|1|2}}) It is only in this sense that members of the Church disbelieve God's absolute omnipotence. Members of the LDS Church do not question whether God is mighty enough to create the universe, or to effect the Atonement. | *The authors disdain alleged LDS disbelief in God's omnipotence. Can God lie? If not, then He is not omnipotent. If He can, why are there scriptures that state that He cannot? ({{s||Titus|1|2}}) It is only in this sense that members of the Church disbelieve God's absolute omnipotence. Members of the LDS Church do not question whether God is mighty enough to create the universe, or to effect the Atonement. | ||
| Line 189: | Line 189: | ||
=={{Endnotes label}}== | =={{Endnotes label}}== | ||
=={{Further reading label}}== | =={{Further reading label}}== | ||
Revision as of 02:47, 10 June 2014
Response to claims made in "Chapter 1: God the Father"
A FAIR Analysis of: Mormonism 101 A work by author: Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson
|
Chapter 2: Jesus |
23
Claim
- The fallacies of the author's logic become apparent in the opening paragraphs of the chapter. They begin with a quote from Spencer W. Kimball:
Men with keen intelligence got together ... [at] Nicea and created a God. They did not pray for wisdom or revelation. They claimed no revelation from the Lord. They made it just about like a political party would do, and out of their own mortal minds created a God which is still worshiped by the great majority of Christians.
President Spencer W. Kimball,
Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 426.
If the above quote from Mormonism's twelfth president is correct, then the God proclaimed by the Mormon Church is not the same God who is worshiped by millions of Christians today. Few would debate that the concept of God is paramount in any belief system. If two people hope to consider themselves of the same faith, they need to agree on their definition of the Almighty God. If they cannot agree on this vital point, they would be deceiving themselves and others to say that their faiths are the same.
Despite Kimball's claim, many laypeople in the Mormon Church insist that the God they worship is the same God worshiped by millions of Christians throughout the world. The problem with this assumption is that it does not concur with many statements made by the LDS leadership.
- The authors claim that "many laypeople in the Mormon Church insist that the God they worship is the same God worshiped by millions of Christians throughout the world.
Men with keen intelligence got together ... [at] Nicea and created a God. They did not pray for wisdom or revelation. They claimed no revelation from the Lord. They made it just about like a political party would do, and out of their own mortal minds created a God which is still worshiped by the great majority of Christians.
President Spencer W. Kimball,
Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, 426.
If the above quote from Mormonism's twelfth president is correct, then the God proclaimed by the Mormon Church is not the same God who is worshiped by millions of Christians today. Few would debate that the concept of God is paramount in any belief system. If two people hope to consider themselves of the same faith, they need to agree on their definition of the Almighty God. If they cannot agree on this vital point, they would be deceiving themselves and others to say that their faiths are the same.
Despite Kimball's claim, many laypeople in the Mormon Church insist that the God they worship is the same God worshiped by millions of Christians throughout the world. The problem with this assumption is that it does not concur with many statements made by the LDS leadership.
Author's source(s)
- Spencer W. Kimball, Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 426.
Response
- The authors' first fallacy is the use of ambiguous terminology. They wish to confuse a differing understanding of who God is with worshipping another god altogether. To understand the tactic used by the authors, consider the city of Cleveland, Ohio. One of the historical black marks against the city was the pollution quite evident in Lake Erie. Cleveland certainly became a different city once the lake was cleaned up. By the reasoning of the authors, one would conclude that Cleveland, Ohio became Cleveland, Tennessee once Lake Erie was cleaned up.
- Secondly, the authors beg the question by assuming that doctrines first canonized in the Nicene and related creeds (with which President Kimball profoundly disagreed) were entirely biblical. Leaving aside the truth or falsehood of those creeds, this reviewer has yet to read any biblical text that equates nonbelievers in the creeds with nonbelievers in Christ.
- For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Latter-day Saints aren't Christians
24
Claim
- LDS leaders have stated that "worship of the God of Christianity's creeds will not result in salvation." Joseph Smith described these creeds as "an abomination in his sight."
Author's source(s) - Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2d ed. p. 270.
- Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, p. 55.
- Bruce R. McConkie, "Our Relationship with the Lord," speech given at BYU devotional, 2 March 1982, p. 3.
- For a detailed response, see: Jesus Christ/Worship different Jesus
25
Claim
- The authors make the following claim:
"To be sure, historical Christianity has never advocated the belief in a tangible deity."
"To be sure, historical Christianity has never advocated the belief in a tangible deity."
Response
- Is Jesus not God? (John 1꞉1-3)
- Did the Apostles and others not touch Him, after His resurrection? (Luke 24꞉36-39)
- For a detailed response, see: Nature of God/Corporeality of God
Not Eternally God
25-27
Claim
- The authors assert the Mormons do not believe that God is "Eternal," citing Joseph Smith's King Follett discourse. This is interpreted by the authors as describing "the limitations that Mormon leaders place on God."
- In endnote 8, page 286, the authors also make the following claim:
"Being a polygamist, the LDS Elohim sexually created spirit children with his heavenly wives. All spirit beings in existence were produced this way. The Heavenly Mother doctrine finds no scriptural support within any of the four LDS scriptures."
"Being a polygamist, the LDS Elohim sexually created spirit children with his heavenly wives. All spirit beings in existence were produced this way. The Heavenly Mother doctrine finds no scriptural support within any of the four LDS scriptures."
Author's source(s)
- Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345.
- Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 132.
- Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses 1:123.
- James E. Talmage, The Articles of Faith, p. 430.
- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:93.
- Spencer W. Kimball, Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 26.
- Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 2.
- Ensign (June 1993), p. 10.
Response
- The authors quote from Joseph Smith's eulogy of Elder King Follett, yet they fail to mention Smith's quote of John 5:19, 26 where the Savior states that He can do nothing but what He saw His Father do.[1]
- For a detailed response, see: Nature of God/"Celestial sex" and Nature of God/Heavenly Mother
Not Immutable
28
Claim
- The authors ask if it is the Church's position that God did not know whether Adam and Eve would transgress His commandment.
Response- Such a question rather ridiculous, since the Evangelical interpretation of the biblical text implies that the Atonement of Jesus Christ was an afterthought to undo the ill effects of Adam's sin.[2] The LDS position, most succinctly stated in the Pearl of Great Price, is that God counseled with His spirit children concerning the plan and that Jesus Christ's Atonement is not "Plan B." (Moses 4 and Abraham 3)
- For a detailed response, see: Plan of salvation/Original sin
Not Self-Existent
31
Claim
- The authors claim that
"Mormonism's view of God is both implausible and unbiblical. It is also illogical since it raises several questions as to how the first intelligence was able to elevate himself to the position of diety."
"Mormonism's view of God is both implausible and unbiblical. It is also illogical since it raises several questions as to how the first intelligence was able to elevate himself to the position of diety."
Author's source(s)
- Brigham Young, Discourses, 22.
- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 7:284.
Response
- For a detailed response, see: Nature of God
Not Transcendent
32
Claim
- The authors compare their idea of LDS theology with the Evangelical doctrine of God's transcendence:
God is distinct from His creation and the universe. When discussing the transcendence of God, we need to consider a number of aspects. Not only is the 'person' of God unlike human beings, but His moral character is also unique. He is infinitely exalted above that He has ever created.
God is distinct from His creation and the universe. When discussing the transcendence of God, we need to consider a number of aspects. Not only is the 'person' of God unlike human beings, but His moral character is also unique. He is infinitely exalted above that He has ever created.
Author's source(s)
- Hunter, The Gospel Through the Ages, 107.
- Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology: A Voice of Warning, 21.
- Orson Whitney, quoted in Collected Discourses, ed. Brian H. Stuy, 4.
- Bruce R. McConkie, The Mortal Messiah, 35.
- Don Lattin, "Musing with the Prophet," San Francisco Chronicle, 13 April 1997, sec. Z1, p. 3.
Response
- Leaving aside the authors creation of a straw man argument[3] implying that Latter-day Saints gainsay that God is infinitely exalted above any and all mortal humans, they ignore the Book of Genesis, which states that man is created in God's image. (Genesis 1꞉27) Is it logical to think that man has zero in common with the Creator who chose to make mankind in His image?
- The authors implicitly criticize President Gordon Hinckley's quote of Lorenzo Snow's couplet. By this, they ignore I John 3:1-3. Do the authors disbelieve that Christians will be like Jesus?
- The authors disdain alleged LDS disbelief in God's omnipotence. Can God lie? If not, then He is not omnipotent. If He can, why are there scriptures that state that He cannot? (Titus 1꞉2) It is only in this sense that members of the Church disbelieve God's absolute omnipotence. Members of the LDS Church do not question whether God is mighty enough to create the universe, or to effect the Atonement.
- For a detailed response, see: Nature of God/"God is a man"
33-34
Claim
- The authors state that Gordon B. Hinckley "made it not clear on whether such a concept was part of Mormon belief."
Author's source(s) - Don Lattin, journalist from the San Francisco Chronicle in an interview with President Hinckley in 1997.
- David Van Biema, Time, 4 August 1997, p. 56.
- For a detailed response, see: Nature of God/Hinckley downplaying the King Follett Discourse
Not Omnipotent
35
Claim
- The authors claim that Mormons believe that "God could stop being God."
Author's source(s) - W. Cleon Skousen, The First 2,000 Years, p. 355-56.
- Skousen's work hardly represents LDS doctrine. The authors had to look pretty far from the standard works in order to make such a claim.
Claim
- The authors claim that "Mormonism has reintroduced polytheism to the modern world."
Response- For a detailed response, see: Nature of God/Polytheism
36
Claim
- The "Mormon God cannot create ex nihilo, or out of nothing." The authors claim that the "Mormon God" is limited to creating only out of existing matter.
Author's source(s) - John Widtsoe, A Rational Theology, p. 12.
- For a detailed response, see: Creation/Creatio ex nihilo
Not Omnipresent
37
Claim
- According to the authors, the "God of Mormonism cannot be personally present everywhere because he dwells in a finite body." They quote Brigham Young:
Some would have us believe that God is present everywhere. It is not so.
Some would have us believe that God is present everywhere. It is not so.
Author's source(s)
- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 6:345.
- James Talmage, The Articles of Faith, 42-43.
- Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 359.
Response
- The authors are implying that Mormons deny God's omnipresence. This is incorrect.
- More of Brigham's quote:
Some would have us believe that God is present everywhere. It is not so. He is no more everywhere present in person than the Father and Son are one in person. The Bible teaches that doctrine precisely as it is.
- Orson Pratt clarifies the concept of God's omnipresence:
He is omnipresent. Not personally; this would be impossible, for a person can only be in one place at the same instant, whether he be an immortal or a mortal personage; whether he be high, exalted, and filled with all power, wisdom, glory, and greatness, or poor, ignorant, and humble. So far as the materials are concerned, a personage can only occupy one place at the same moment. That is a self-evident truth, one that cannot be controverted. When we speak, therefore, of God being omnipresent we do not mean that His person is omnipresent, we mean that His wisdom, power, glory, greatness, goodness, and all the characteristics of His eternal attributes are manifested and spread abroad throughout all the creations that He has made. He is there by His influence—by His power and wisdom—by His outstretched arm; He, by His authority, occupies the immensity of space. But when we come to His glorious personage, that has a dwelling place—a particular location; but where this location is, is not revealed. Suffice it to say that God is not confined in His personal character to one location. He goes and comes; He visits the various departments of His dominions, gives them counsel and instruction, and presides over them according to His own will and pleasure. (Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses 14:234.)
== Notes ==
Further reading
FairMormon Answers articles
| Template code | Inserts this reference | Click to edit |
|---|---|---|
| {{To learn more box:responses to: 8: The Mormon Proposition}} | To learn more box:responses to: 8: The Mormon Proposition | edit |
| {{To learn more box:''Under the Banner of Heaven''}} | To learn more about responses to: Under the Banner of Heaven | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Robert Price}} | To learn more about responses to: Robert Price | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Ankerberg and Weldon}} | To learn more about responses to: Ankerberg and Weldon | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Ashamed of Joseph}} | To learn more about responses to: Ashamed of Joseph | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Beckwith and Moser}} | To learn more about responses to: Beckwith and Moser | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Beckwith and Parrish}} | To learn more about responses to: Beckwith and Parrish | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Benjamin Park}} | To learn more about responses to: Benjamin Park | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Bible versus Joseph Smith}} | To learn more about responses to: Bible versus Joseph Smith | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Bible versus Book of Mormon}} | To learn more about responses to: Bible versus Book of Mormon | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: ''Big Love''}} | To learn more about responses to: Big Love | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Brett Metcalfe}} | To learn more about responses to: Brett Metcalfe | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Bill Maher}} | To learn more about responses to: Bill Maher | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Bruce H. Porter}} | To learn more about responses to: Bruce H. Porter | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Carol Wang Shutter}} | To learn more about responses to: Carol Wang Shutter | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: CES Letter}} | To learn more about responses to: CES Letter | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Charles Larson}} | To learn more about responses to: Charles Larson | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Christopher Nemelka}} | To learn more about responses to: Christopher Nemelka | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Colby Townshed}} | To learn more about responses to: Colby Townshed | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Contender Ministries}} | To learn more about responses to: Contender Ministries | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Crane and Crane}} | To learn more about responses to: Crane and Crane | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: D. Michael Quinn}} | To learn more about responses to: D. Michael Quinn | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Dan Vogel}} | To learn more about responses to: Dan Vogel | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: David John Buerger}} | To learn more about responses to: David John Buerger | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: David Persuitte}} | To learn more about responses to: David Persuitte | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Denver Snuffer}} | To learn more about responses to: Denver Snuffer | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Dick Bauer}} | To learn more about responses to: Dick Bauer | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Duwayne R Anderson}} | To learn more about responses to: Duwayne R Anderson | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Earl Wunderli}} | To learn more about responses to: Earl Wunderli | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Ed Decker}} | To learn more about responses to: Ed Decker | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Erikson and Giesler}} | To learn more about responses to: Erikson and Giesler | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Ernest Taves}} | To learn more about responses to: Ernest Taves | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Fawn Brodie}} | To learn more about responses to: Fawn Brodie | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: George D Smith}} | To learn more about responses to: George D Smith | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Grant Palmer}} | To learn more about responses to: Grant Palmer | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Hank Hanegraaff}} | To learn more about responses to: Hank Hanegraaff | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Hurlbut-Howe}} | To learn more about responses to: Hurlbut-Howe | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: James Brooke}} | To learn more about responses to: James Brooke | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: James Spencer}} | To learn more about responses to: James Spencer | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: James White}} | To learn more about responses to: James White | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Jerald and Sandra Tanner}} | To learn more about responses to: Jerald and Sandra Tanner | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Jesus Christ-Joseph Smith or Search for the Truth DVD}} | To learn more about responses to: Jesus Christ-Joseph Smith or Search for the Truth DVD | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: John Dehlin}} | To learn more about responses to: John Dehlin | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Jonathan Neville}} | To learn more about responses to: Jonathan Neville | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Kurt Van Gorden}} | To learn more about responses to: Kurt Van Gorden | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Laura King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery}} | To learn more about responses to: Laura King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Loftes Tryk aka Lofte Payne}} | To learn more about responses to: Loftes Tryk aka Lofte Payne | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Luke WIlson}} | To learn more about responses to: Luke WIlson | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Marquardt and Walters}} | To learn more about responses to: Marquardt and Walters | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Martha Beck}} | To learn more about responses to: Martha Beck | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Mcgregor Ministries}} | To learn more about responses to: Mcgregor Ministries | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: McKeever and Johnson}} | To learn more about responses to: McKeever and Johnson | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: New Approaches}} | To learn more about responses to: New Approaches to the Book of Mormon | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Richard Abanes}} | To learn more about responses to: Richard Abanes | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Richard Van Wagoner}} | To learn more about responses to: Richard Van Wagoner | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Richard and Joan Ostling}} | To learn more about responses to: Richard and Joan Ostling | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Rick Grunger}} | To learn more about responses to: Rick Grunger | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Robert Ritner}} | To learn more about responses to: Robert Ritner | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Rod Meldrum}} | To learn more about responses to: Rod Meldrum | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Roger I Anderson}} | To learn more about responses to: Roger I Anderson | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Ronald V. Huggins}} | To learn more about responses to: Ronald V. Huggins | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Sally Denton}} | To learn more about responses to: Sally Denton | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Simon Southerton}} | To learn more about responses to: Simon Southerton | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Thomas Murphy}} | To learn more about responses to: Thomas Murphy | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Todd Compton}} | To learn more about responses to: Todd Compton | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Vernal Holley}} | To learn more about responses to: Vernal Holley | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Walter Martin}} | To learn more about responses to: Walter Martin | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Wesley Walters}} | To learn more about responses to: Wesley Walters | edit |
| {{To learn more box:responses to: Will Bagley}} | To learn more about responses to: Will Bagley | edit |
Copyright © 2005–2024 FAIR. This is not an official Web site of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The content of this page may not be copied, published, or redistributed without the prior written consent of FAIR.
| We welcome your suggestions for improving the content of this FAIR Wiki article. |
Sites we recommend: |
- ↑ Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976), 346. off-site
- ↑ John F. MacArthur, Jr., The Vanishing Conscience; Drawing the Line in a No-Fault, Guilt-Free World (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1995), 109-115.
- ↑ A "straw man" is a false weak argument built up by an author, which is subsequently torn down. Upon tearing it down, the author implies that not only was the false weak argument destroyed, but also the original argument.