Friday, 7 November 2014

Mormonism

     The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is one of the fastest growing religious groups in the world, with an international membership of over 15 million.1 Its current assets total a minimum of $40 billion, with over $8 billion in annual gross income. Financial gain comes from its profit-making businesses and investments, and imposing a compulsory 10% income tax (“tithe”) on its members.2
     The founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, Jr., alleged to have been visited by Moroni, an angel of God, on 21 September 1823. This messenger purportedly revealed to him the location of an ancient book, engraved on gold plates, which contained “a record of the fulness of the divine laws and covenants” which God had delivered to the ancient inhabitants of the Americas. With these gold plates were two transparent stones, called Urim and Thummim, which Smith was to use in translating the book into English. Four years later he supposedly received the plates, and the first edition of the Book of Mormon was published in 1830.
    Three other men (Oliver Cowdery [Smith’s cousin], David Whitmer, and Martin Harris) also claimed to have seen the plates and the angel and heard the voice of God. Their testimony is printed in the front of the Book of Mormon. But how reliable are these witnesses? It is interesting that although they were all ordained as high priests, apostles, and church presidents, each left the Mormon Church within a few years, denouncing Joseph Smith, Jr. as being guilty of numerous crimes. In return the Mormon Church condemned them as reprobates and criminals. Whichever may be true, the testimony of these witnesses destroys the Book of Mormon’s credibility.
     There were also eight others who claimed to have seen the plates. Five were related to David Whitmer (one of the “three witnesses”), and the others were Joseph Smith, Jr.’s father and two brothers. By 1838, however, all of them who were still alive had left the Church, except Smith’s family (cf. R. C. Evans, Forty Years in the Mormon Church: Why I Left It 24-26). Further, of the first twelve apostles appointed in the Mormon Church and chosen by the “three witnesses” (Church History 1:541), seven were excommunicated (LDS Church News 50-51, cited in The Utah Evangel [Jan.-Feb. 1987]: 6).
     What about the testimony of Joseph Smith, Jr. himself? Can he be trusted? Today the Mormons portray him as a humble, godly man who simply answered the divine call to restore true religion. However, the facts of history paint a different picture of Smith. In 1826, three years after his alleged angelic visit, Joseph Smith, Jr. was arrested, tried and found guilty of fraud in Bainbridge, New York. Oliver Cowdery, one of the “three witnesses,” reported that before the plates were found, “some very officious person complained of him [Smith] as a disorderly person, and brought him before the authorities of the county” (Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate [Oct. 1835] 2:200-201). 
     The account of the trial was first published in Fraser’s Magazine in Feb. 1873 (7:229-30), in which Smith, described as “a disorderly person and an impostor,” confessed to using a seer stone to find hidden treasure for purposes of fraud and deception. As early as 1831 these events were mentioned in a letter published in the Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate, stating that for several years prior to the appearance of the Book of Mormon, Smith “was about the country in the character of a glass-looker: pretending, by means of a certain stone, or glass, which he put in a hat, to be able to discover lost goods, hidden treasures, mines of gold and silver . . .” (120). The letter went on to explain that Smith was “arrested as a disorderly person, tried and condemned before a court of justice.”
     In the court record Smith confessed that “for three years” prior to 1826 he had used a stone placed in his hat to find treasures or lost property. It is interesting that his money-digging activities began in 1823, the very time that he claims to have been visited by Moroni and received knowledge of the gold plates and transparent stones.
     For years the Mormon Church has denied the authenticity of this court document. The Mormon scholar Francis W. Kirkham agreed that if the court record could be proven authentic, “then it follows that his [Smith’s] believers must deny his claimed divine guidance which led them to follow him . . . . How could he be a prophet of God, the leader of the Restored Church to these tens of thousands, if he had been the superstitious fraud which ‘the pages from a book’ declared he confessed to be?” (A New Witness for Christ in America 1:486-87). Dr. Hugh Nibley, in his attempt to discredit this document, wrote: “. . . if this court record is authentic it is the most damning evidence in existence against Joseph Smith” (The Myth Makers 142). In the August 1971 issue of the Salt Lake City Messenger, the discovery of a document was announced which proved the authenticity of the published court record. It was the original bill of the 20 March 1826 trial, in which Joseph Smith, Jr. is called “The Glass looker.” A copy of this document is published in Jerald and Sandra Tanner’s Mormonism-Shadow or Reality? 33.
     Joseph Smith, Jr. is hailed by his followers as a martyred hero, who “willingly” gave his life for his testimony. But the facts of history tell us that he shot three of his assailants before he was killed (Time [4 August 1997]:52; cf. History of the Church 7:100-103). The Mormons may celebrate Joseph Smith, Jr. as a martyr, but he certainly did not go willingly! 
     Furthermore, where are the gold plates? Can they be examined so that Smith’s story may be verified? Smith conveniently claimed: “When, according to arrangements, the messenger called for them, I delivered them up to him; and he has them in his charge until this day . . .” The plates were supposedly written in a language called “the reformed Egyptian,” and the Book of Mormon states: “But the Lord knoweth the things which we have written, and also that none other people knoweth our language; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof” (Mormon 9:32, 34). Thus Smith, with the aid of the Urim and Thummim, was the only one able to translate the plates, and the world is asked to believe that his “inspired translation” is the word of God. 
     Smith supposedly copied some of the characters off the plates and Martin Harris (one of the “three witnesses”) took them, along with Smith’s translation, to Professor Charles Anthon for examination. Professor Anthon purportedly said that “the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian.” Harris claimed that Professor Anthon gave him a certificate of authenticity, but then tore it to pieces when he was told the background of the writing (Joseph Smith-History 1:64-65, in The Pearl of Great Price 56-57).
     Isn’t it ironic that Professor Anthon could determine the accuracy of Smith’s translation when the Book of Mormon maintains that “none other people knoweth our language”? How did Professor Anthon learn “the reformed Egyptian” since no other literature in that language exists? The truth is, Professor Anthon wrote a letter to E. D. Howe on 17 Feb. 1834 in which he denies the statements attributed to him by the Mormons. He said their claim “is perfectly false,” and considered the incident “a trick, perhaps a hoax.” His entire letter is reproduced in Walter Martin’s The Kingdom of the Cults 181-82.
     The Mormon Apostle Le Grand Richards wrote: “There is not an honest man or woman in this world who loves the Lord who wouldn’t join this Church if they knew what it was” (Deseret News [22 Jan. 1966]:16). After honestly examining the facts, however, and coming to know the true history of Mormonism, one’s love for the Lord would lead him/her in a different direction.
 --Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:
     1 See “Mormonism is fastest-growing faith in half of USA,” USA Today 2012, <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-05-02/religion-census-mromon/54701198/1>; also “Mormons Are Fastest Growing Religion,” CBN 2014, <http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/churchandministry/evangelism/mormons_are_fastest_growing_religion.aspx>.
     2 See Time (4 August 1997): 50-57; and more recently Bloomberg Businessweek, “How the Mormons Make Money” (18 July 2012), <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-10/how-the-mormons-make-money>.

Addendum:  Since this article was posted, the Mormon Church has publicly acknowledged that its founder, Joseph Smith, Jr., was married to up to 40 women, including a 14-year-old girl and others who were already married. They seek to vindicate Smith by alleging that God commanded polygamy and then later retracted it. See <www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng>.       

Related Posts: Questions For My Mormon Friends

Related articles: J. W. Wallace's Danger of Belief "In" without Belief "That" 

Recommended Websites: Nathan Franson's Mormon Study Website, Lance Mosher's 3 Tests the Book of Mormon Can't Pass

Image credit: http://www.i4m.com/think/photos/Deconstructor.jpg

Saturday, 1 November 2014

Questions About the Lord's Supper

Q: Is alcoholic wine to be used in the Lord’s Supper?

     We read of Jesus instituting the Lord’s Supper in Matt. 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20; cf. 1 Cor. 11:23-26. The bread is unleavened (Matt. 26:17; Mark 14:12), representing Christ’s body. The cup containing “the fruit of the vine” (Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18) represents Christ’s blood, shed “for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28).
     Leaven or yeast (zumÄ“) was prohibited in all grain offerings to God (Lev. 2:11; 6:14-17). Because leaven permeates and ferments, it is metaphorically applied to pervading and corrupting influences (Matt. 13:33; Luke 13:21; Gal. 5:9), including doctrinal error and corrupt behavior (1 Cor. 5:6-8). Jesus warned about the “leaven” or negative influence of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and Herod [Antipas] (Matt. 16:6, 11, 12; Luke 12:1; Mark 8:15; cf. 3:6; 6:14-28; 12:13).
     The Greek word oinos, often translated “wine” in our English Bibles, is never employed with reference to the Lord’s Supper. The expression used is gennema tas ampelou (“fruit of the vine”), contextually meaning the juice of grapes (cf. Lev. 25:5; Rev. 14:18). The same species of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) converts carbohydrates to carbon dioxide in bread (causing it to rise) and to alcohol in grape juice (causing it to ferment). Seeing that yeast (leaven) was prohibited in the Passover bread (Deut. 16:3), it follows that the same would be absent from the fruit of the vine, i.e. non-alcoholic.

Q: When is the Lord’s Supper to be observed?

     The church assemblies at Corinth had regressed into something they were not supposed to be (1 Corinthians 11:17). Paul writes in v. 20, “Therefore when you come together in one place [epi to auto], it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper” (NKJV) or “When you come together, it is not the Lord's supper that you eat” (ESV). The implication of this reprimand, in light of what the apostle goes on to write, is that communion (cf. 10:16) was to be observed when these brethren assembled together, yet their abuses and misbehavior had rendered it unrecognizable. Paul then offers positive instructions for restoring the Lord’s Supper to what it was intended to be, namely a sacred memorial to commemorate Christ’s death (1 Cor. 11:23-29) kept on a regular basis (“as often” vv. 25, 26). The question is, how often? Since these Christians assembled every first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1-2), and they were to partake of the Lord’s Supper as often as they gathered together, weekly observance (each Sunday) is implied. Moreover, early Christians besides the Corinthians also practiced the Sunday-observance of the Lord’s Supper (Acts 20:7).
     Is there a particular time of day enjoined? Jesus established the memorial on a Thursday evening (Matt. 26:20) to commemorate his crucifixion, which took place the following day from about 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. (Mark 15:25; Matt. 27:45). Early Christians observed the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7), i.e. the day of Christ’s resurrection, which occurred early in the morning (Mark 16:9). The Lord’s Supper was designed for observance in God’s kingdom (Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:16), i.e. in the church, on a regular basis to remember Christ’s death (1 Cor. 11:20-26).
     While Acts 20:7 affirms that Paul’s Sunday sermon lasted until “midnight,” there is no indication as to when this assembly began or at what time communion was observed. As long as the Lord’s Supper is kept each Sunday (regardless of the time of day), the New Testament pattern has been followed.



Image credit: http://www.retrochristianity.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Lords-Supper2.jpg

Friday, 24 October 2014

Premarital Decisions About Non-Optional Matters

     Marrying someone other than a faithful member of the Lord’s church was never a personal option for me. I couldn’t imagine spending my life with someone with whom I wasn’t going to spend eternity. Neither did I want to marry a person with whom I couldn’t pray. If God ever blessed me with children, I didn’t want them growing up in a religiously divided home and likely influenced to take the wrong spiritual path. I determined that if my future wife and I couldn’t go to church together and serve the Lord together, I’d rather be single. And the kind of woman I wanted to marry had to have the same high expectations.

     I’m thankful that I eventually found my prospective bride, and during our courtship she and I discussed other fundamental convictions we needed to share. We both agreed that we ought not wait until after the “I do’s” were said to sort out critical issues. Decisions were mutually reached and set in granite before making such a monumental commitment. Here are some of the things we have never allowed to be optional in our marriage.

1. Divorce. We promised each other that the word “divorce” would not be part of our vocabulary. Our wedding vows included a lifelong devotion to God and to each other, which we have taken very seriously. “Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate” (Matthew 19:6b NKJV). Despite the not-so-enjoyable rough patches we have encountered along the way, even when divorce may have seemed like a tempting solution, it has never been considered. We have thus been compelled to work through challenging setbacks, ultimately making our marriage stronger.

2. Dishonesty. Trust is the foundation of any healthy relationship. From the beginning we both agreed to always be honest with each other. If one is caught off guard by the other and asked a pointed question, there is no pause to think about whether or not to be truthful. Even when it might seem unpleasant, there is no automatic switch into lying mode. Honesty really is the best policy, and the tangled web of deceit is thereby precluded. Love “rejoices in the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6b).

3. Secrets. Keeping secrets from one another is not something my wife and I do, birthday surprises notwithstanding. We share the same bank account and checkbooks, we know each other’s personal identification numbers and passwords, and we have access to each other’s cellphones and computers. If anyone (especially a woman) wants to confide in me in the strictest of confidence, I let this person know from the start that I don’t hide anything from my wife. If she can’t know about it, then I shouldn’t be told. I can keep a secret from anyone but her. “Who can find a virtuous wife?
 For her worth is far above rubies. The heart of her husband safely trusts her” (Proverbs 31:10-11a).

4. Infidelity. While I can’t imagine being unfaithful to my wife and vice versa, I am not so naïve to think that our marriage is uniquely immune from the evil allurements of this world that attack other couples. “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Corinthians 10:12). Making a big difference for us in avoiding this terrible pitfall are the precautions we have deliberately taken, particularly the first three non-optional matters listed above.

5. Consuming Intoxicants. I realize this is a non-issue for a lot of people, but in our premarital conversations it was a deal breaker. We have witnessed too many evils associated with beverage alcohol, and we didn’t want our family plagued by something so easily avoided. Why would we allow anything into our home that has so much destructive potential? If we have to depend on a dangerous synthetic stimulant to enjoy or improve or maintain our marriage and social life, there are deeper problems to address. “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise” (Proverbs 20:1).

6. Not Going to Church. It’s all about priorities. I want my family to be together forever. I want to help my wife and children go to heaven, I want them to help me go to heaven, and we want to take as many souls with us as we can. “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching” (Hebrews 10:23-25). In our family, attending the assemblies of the church is not questioned, negotiated, or debated. It’s simply what we do. God is first, and our extended church family has always been and continues to be such a blessing.

     The above list will unlikely be adopted by the romance novel industry or find its way into many “happily-ever-after” self-help books. But these basic principles have significantly helped our marriage and have provided a solid basis for a healthy and stable home.

--Kevin L. Moore


Related Articles: Richard Parr's A Successful Marriage, Wes McAdams' Open Letter About Dating, What the Bible Says About Marriage, Dave Miller, When Does Marriage Occur?

Image credit: http://cdn.tinybuddha.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Holding-Hands.jpg