Category Archives: Christian Apologetics

Dealing with Anti-Mormon attacks

Posted on by

When I started blogging about LDS doctrine and issues a few years back I did not expect to get a lot of comments right away. After all, nobody knew about my blog yet. I was just another blog among millions. So I happily wrote all kinds of essays about things that had been on my mind for several years. Then I started promoting my blog and the number of comments picked up.

I enjoy reading the comments. Most of them are from my fellow LDS bloggers. We read each other’s material and provide feedback. It’s like a peer review system among bloggers. For the most part the comments are complimentary and encouraging. In other words, the writers of the comments either agree with my points of view or express understanding of what I have written.

A believing approach

Of course not everybody agrees with me. I am a very conservative, traditional Latter-day Saint, a typical Southern Californian with an easy-going, laid-back approach to life. I feel like I have always been blessed because of my faith and my participation in church. I tend to model my approach to life according to what I see and hear from church leaders, both local and general.

My faith in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ has served me well. It brings me happiness and satisfaction with the answers it provides to life’s challenges and the mysteries of eternity. For me, the counsel to constantly feed our testimonies has been sound. It works. Perhaps I have been blessed with the gift of not doubting, but I feel secure in my knowledge of the gospel.

Those who do not believe

When a reader disagrees with me, I like to initiate a dialog to determine if they perhaps did not understand my points. Sometimes that proves to be the case. Our differences are then resolved and we go merrily on our way. And then there are those who flat out tell me that I am wrong. They claim that my faith is false and that I am not really happy because I have been deceived.

Some of those who tell me I’m wrong are disaffected Mormons while others are evangelists for their Christian faith. Being a returned missionary I felt confident in my ability to deal with them. Usually after a few exchanges of comments we could come to at least acknowledge each other’s point of view. But how do you respond to someone who adamantly wants to prove you wrong?

And those who attack

I have in my library several books dedicated to dealing with those who fight against the truths of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. I have listed them at the end of this essay. Just this week I finished reading a new one that has proven to be tremendously helpful to me. I know it has been out a while so I am not the first to mention it but I learned some things that I would like to share.

In case you didn’t know it, there are people out there who make it their practice to troll the blogs of faithful LDS members and leave disparaging comments. I suspect that they are becoming just a little bit dismayed by all the good we are doing. One of them wrote on his blog, “What’s up with Mormons and blogging? It’s as if their leaders told them to put out a good public image.”

Shaken Faith Syndrome

The book is called Shaken Faith Syndrome and it is published by FAIR. The author, Mike Ash, has been involved in LDS apologetics for many years. It is divided into two parts. The first 108 pages contain a series of essays addressing the whole idea of dealing with criticism and doubt. I especially liked chapter seven: Betrayal and Church “Cover-Up”. I have seen that firsthand here.

On an early essay here at Latter-day Commentary I wrote that I had visited a few LDS discussion boards and was amazed at the number of people writing that they didn’t know about some piece of history. They expressed shock when they discovered it and then outrage when they decided that the church had somehow failed them because they didn’t know about this historical fact.

No church cover-up

The example provided was that Joseph Smith entered into polygamous relationships in his life. It still amazes me the number of people who don’t know or believe this. As I wrote in my earlier essay, I learned this in seminary and thought everybody else growing up in the church did too. It’s not just converts who go through this. Lifelong members have had the same experience.

So is the church to blame because we don’t know about Joseph’s plural wives? I have never felt that there was a cover-up of any kind. If there was, then it was unintentional. Sure, some of the early histories were written to only provide a faith-promoting view. What’s wrong with that? The shock and sense of betrayal are not what I would consider a faithful or believing response.

Unrealistic prophetic expectations

In other words, if we are serious about our gospel scholarship, it is inevitable that we are going to discover some not-so-pleasant things about our history. This fits perfectly with the idea that the Lord reveals things to us line upon line, precept upon precept. For some, learning difficult things about our history becomes a major test in their life. I sympathize and yet see this as immature.

I don’t mean that in a disparaging way. I simply mean that it is a normal process of growing up in the gospel to learn new truths and to change our beliefs accordingly. Prophets are not perfect. It is unrealistic to expect them to know everything, especially in those areas which they have not studied. Can a prophet express his opinion and it not be the way things actually are? Of course!

Amateur LDS apologetics

The rest of the book provides great responses to specific anti-Mormon claims. I wish I had this book when I was dealing with my own antagonistic visitor who wanted to contest my essay on the Book of Abraham. There is a real talent to apologetics and I applaud those who can do it well. I suspect that most new LDS bloggers like me could use a course to develop the skill.

Mike’s book is well written, thought-provoking and for me, a little bit eye-opening. No, reason alone cannot answer all life’s questions, but it would be better if LDS bloggers, and all members for that matter, were more prepared with reasonable answers to difficult questions from our readers who do not have the advantage of a secure witness borne of the spirit of gospel truths.

Summary and conclusion

My antagonistic visitor derided me and claimed that I always retreated into an unreasonable bubble of a testimony when I could not answer his challenges to his satisfaction. Not having experienced personal revelation himself, he could not relate to the idea that we can and should obtain knowledge of spiritual things through the ministrations of the Holy Ghost in prayer.

I normally don’t finish my essays with a testimony but in dealing with apostate attacks, there really is no other way. I know from personal revelatory experience that God can and does send his spirit to teach us things that we can learn in no other way. We can stand as witnesses to those things that are true even though we were not eyewitnesses at the time. The effect is the same.

For more information:

1. Shaken Faith Syndrome, Michael R. Ash, 2008, Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research
2. Take Heed That Ye Be Not Deceived, Richard I. Winwood, 1992, self-published but now available electronically on the FAIR website
3. Guess Who Wants to Have You for Lunch? Alan Denison & D.L. Barksdale, 1999, FAIR
4. One-Minute Answers to Anti-Mormon Questions, Stephen W. Gibson, 1995, Horizon Book Publishers, available online at LightPlanet
5. They Lie in Wait to Deceive, volumes 1-4, Robert L. & Rosemary Brown, 1981-86, Brownsworth Publishing Company, available at FAIR

You don’t know what you think you know

Posted on by

I know that some of my readers are lawyers, some are philosophers and some are very active apologists of our faith. I know this because I read your blogs and am much impressed by your sound reasoning and logical approach to questions of religion, both doctrinal and practical.

I am not trained in rhetoric, argument or apologetics. I am just your basic, average member of the LDS church who loves his religion and finds great joy in attempting to understand and to practice it better each day of my life. I love the doctrines of salvation and of the restoration.

A common understanding

My blog attracts all kinds of readers: stalwart LDS members of pioneer heritage, enthusiastic recent converts, those who are trying to become more active in the faith, those who are leaving the church and even former members who are very much opposed to the work of the church.

My dialogs with those who are members of the LDS faith or those who are former members all seem to have one thing I can rely on: we are familiar with the idea of the personal testimony and what it means to Mormons as the fundamental basis for our firm commitment to our religion.

A foreign concept to some

But when it comes to dialogs with those who are not of our faith, never have been, and who state that they have no intention of ever becoming LDS, I find myself constantly having to explain how our testimonies color our world and why they are so powerful in driving our daily lives.

I’m beginning to suspect that the ideas of having a testimony, of holding it, feeding it, losing it and regaining it are foreign concepts to my visitors who are not LDS. I wish I could come up with an analogous experience that they would understand so I could compare apples to apples.

Even Ex-Mo’s understand

I mean, even the Ex-Mormons who now mock us and our testimonies know that it is a very basic part of our faith. They know that the whole purpose of Primary, Sunday school, Seminary and just about every meeting we attend is really to strengthen our testimonies of the restored gospel.

They may say they never had one or that they were the victims of mass hypnosis or that they are so over their participation in the church because they got a “real” education when they grew up. But do members of other churches not have a similar experience growing up in their religion?

Too much logic and reason

I’m thinking that everyone has to deal with how they feel about their faith at some time in their life. It can’t all be an intellectual exercise where you learn the doctrines and history, analyze it objectively for reason and then reject every semblance of emotion that may have been involved.

Is discussing religion and understanding theology only about being objective, reasonable and purely logical? How cold and sterile that seems to me. Perhaps avoiding dialog about the subjective feeling experience that makes religion come alive is limited to the male gender.

Feelings, passion and revelation

My most poignant and revelatory prayers are those that occur when my heart is broken and I am experiencing great distress over some trial or disappointment. It is when I am clearly feeling emotional about something that I seem to reach the deepest in my communications with God.

Likewise, some of the most powerful revelations I have received have come in those moments of passionate pleading when I am explaining to the Lord my need to understand a certain part of the gospel and how it applies to my life’s circumstances at that time. Such answers are powerful.

Revelation separate from emotion

However, on every occasion where I knew I was receiving revelation, when I knew my prayer was being answered while yet on my knees, the feelings of distress and discomfort disappeared. What flowed into my soul in those moments was accompanied with peace and deep satisfaction.

Because so much of my testimony has been gained in this manner upon my knees in conjunction with much pleading and asking, I have strong emotional memories attached to the revelation that has come as a result of my prayer. But I do not confuse the emotion with the answers received.

Revelation without distress

Thus, my faith, my testimony and my understanding of God’s love for me are increased with each revelatory experience. They are not as rare as they used to be. If I pay the price in intense and passionate effort, the revelation comes, and I know things that I did not know previously.

My prayers are not always answered while I am still on my knees. And not all my prayers are full of passionate, emotional pleadings. Faith does not need to be expressed in distressed, gut-wrenching importuning. A simple, quiet, yet powerful prayer will also lead to timely answers.

I know what I know

I long ago resolved any doubts about the church, the doctrine or the history. My prayers these days are more about understanding how I can be more effective in sharing the gospel with others. So I feel extremely comfortable in my knowledge and testimony of the basic tenets of my faith.

When discussing my religion with others not of my faith, I easily express that I know certain things when they come up in our dialog. It can be a shock when the other person responds with, “You don’t know what you think you know.” Excuse me? How do you know what I know?

Attempts to disprove

I suspect that such statements don’t come from those who are sincere in wanting to understand my point of view on things. For those who view religion as only logical and always reasonable, my assertion that I know something in my soul has often been challenged with a “prove it!”

When attempting to explain that this knowledge is a part of my testimony and that the knowledge was obtained through revelation, the charge is made that I have not really received knowledge and that my experience is totally subjective and therefore must be discredited and ignored.

Summary and conclusion

If you want an example of what I am trying to explain, go read the dialog in the comments of my essay on The Only True and Living Church. Especially note the comment about “retreating into the subjective bubble of your testimony.” How do you explain a testimony in a logical manner?

A testimony is not emotion, but it is accompanied by strong feelings. It is the result of study and effort to understand, and then confirming that knowledge in prayer. It is revelation and it is real. I wish I understood better how to explain it to those who have never experienced it themselves.

Mocking Mormons is not a new sport

Posted on by

I suppose I should be flattered. There are several sites out there that troll the Bloggernacle just looking for conservative bloggers that take themselves too seriously. I’m probably one of them. So I’m pleased to have been given a nice LOLcat award for some poor wording on a recent post about the Yes on 8 ads and kids being taught about same-sex marriage in public schools.

This California Prop 8 thing has been getting pretty intense in the news lately. It is probably very disconcerting to the more liberal denizens of the ‘nacle who are opposed to the church’s involvement in this issue. It will probably only get more heated over the next three weeks. I hope our political views will not get in the way of our love of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Mormon blogging is a small world

I have a sneaking suspicion that the only people who read my blog are other LDS bloggers. So my original intent in reaching out to those not of our faith was well-founded but perhaps not so very realistic. I have had a few comments from those researching the church but for the most part, I seem to attract readers who are on the fringe – those who are leaving or who have left.

Recently, I read an article about how few Internet Mormons there actually are. The majority of the church members – he calls them chapel Mormons – are not involved. They don’t know about the resources available to answer critics of the church. Nor do they know about amazing discussions taking place each day about the issues facing members living in an increasingly connected society.

Mocking is inevitable

My friend S.Faux posted an innocuous essay the other day about a common phrase used in New Testament times that pressed the “time to mock” button of some modern reader. It was all about the holy kiss, which sounds very unfamiliar in our day, but was apparently common back then. He illustrated his essay with a nice piece of artwork showing Peter and Paul greeting each other.

It is a sign of immaturity to mock things that you don’t understand or find hard to believe. They say it is all done in fun and yes, it can sometimes help to lighten things up when you see it from someone else’s point of view. But I am concerned for our newer LDS bloggers who share their testimonies in great sincerity and then get slammed by some ex-mo who thinks it’s funny.

Desecrating sacred things

It is inevitable in the virtual online world of LDS discussion that some of us inhabit, that we are occasionally visited by these rabid individuals. I am amazed at the talent of some who can craft a response that is intelligent and subtly mean at the same time. Others make every effort to openly offend and have not yet figured out how foolish they appear. It invalidates their point.

And then of course there are those who say they are on God’s side when they take things that are sacred to us and ridicule them in public display. No bolt of lighting comes down to zap them so they are happy to increase their efforts until someone takes the bait or they grow tired of being ignored. They have quieted down lately but you can read all about them over at the FAIR site.

Joseph was mocked

I enjoy my blogging activities about the church and LDS doctrine. Yes, my conservative views are very evident. I am also an older blogger so I see life from a different perspective from many who are proficient in the online world. Mocking on many forums and chat rooms is a common and acceptable practice. It can be a little shocking the first time a new LDS blogger is mocked.

This is not a new practice. It has been around since Joseph claimed he had seen a vision. It has just changed venues over the years until now it seems to reside online more than anywhere else. Some mocking can be said to be good natured, but I suspect most people don’t like it. Mocking is usually the forerunner to more active and serious efforts to tear down and destroy good faith.

The Savior was mocked

Those who lose their faith today are similar to those who rejected the Savior in the meridian of time. I can understand an honest loss of faith due to lack of belief in difficult doctrines. There were many who looked for a deliverer from Roman tyranny and were disappointed when Jesus did not live up to their expectations. They turned on him and mocked him as being weak.

The Redeemer was meek and did not revile. We do then same. The mocking of Jesus was at the zenith when he was taken, judged and placed on the cross. Some decided that he could not have been the Savior because he allowed himself to be crucified. We face similar mocking today as we meekly testify that these are indeed the last days and prepare for his triumphant return.

Summary and conclusion

I like to think I’m good-natured and have a thick skin when it comes to mocking. I try not to take offense at comments that are obviously from an individual who has been hurt and is taking in out on me because I wrote something that reminded him of that pain. I always try to think that it is not me that they are attacking, but the ideas that I espouse that they just don’t understand.

It is good advice to not take ourselves too seriously. That advice is especially applicable as we continue to discuss issues that are at the forefront of our political debate today. Mocking can be fun for those who engage in it and if done with the intent to help, then I suppose it can serve a purpose. It’s just seems so sad that there is no sense of the sacred from those who mock so well.

FAIR answers questions from LDS critics

Posted on by

There are many levels of faith and testimony within members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Some are lifelong members that have been recently exposed to anti-Mormon literature or have discovered an Ex-Mormon website. Others are new members that have been asked questions by their friends from their former faith.

FAIR, the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research can provide answers to some of those disturbing questions that are not always answered on the official LDS websites. It is an all volunteer organization of researchers and writers who have dealt with these age-old questions over the years in various formats and from multiple sources.

When I started blogging last year, I almost immediately began to get objecting comments from readers about some of my essay topics that they found difficult to accept. For example, I wrote about a discussion in a marriage group that Carol and I enjoyed as presented by our friends from the Church of the Nazarene in our neighborhood.

The question of marriage in heaven

The subject was marriage in heaven, which came up in one of the concluding lessons of the wonderful seminar from Emerson Eggerichs entitled Love and Respect. As I did then, I still heartily endorse it as one of the best marriage enrichment experiences of my life. Learning about pink and blue communication methods has changed so much for me.

In my essay I described the LDS view of marriage, especially how it relates to our marriage relationship in the eternities. Emerson had pointed out the scripture in Matthew 22:30 and said that we are not married in heaven but are angels to God. Of course we believe that we are married in heaven and I gave some scriptural justification for it.

An anonymous commenter decided to take exception to my explanation and began to berate me for believing in a false prophet and belonging to a church that taught false doctrines. It seems that every time I have brought up the subject of marriage in my blog I get someone objecting to some aspect of our beliefs. Why is it such a difficult subject?

How I answered the challenge

Although I was familiar with FAIR, I decided to answer my commenter from my own experience, using a technique from my missionary days. I am convinced that almost all objections to our doctrine can be answered by one simple question. Does the Book of Mormon contain revelation from God? If so, then Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet.

Of course if Joseph was a prophet then the church he established is the kingdom of God on the earth in the last days. To me, that always leads to the importance of authority to act in the name of God and therefore, keys of the priesthood. With these keys, families can be sealed together for eternity. Hence we are assured that there is marriage in heaven.

There is a wealth of material on this subject on the FAIR site that I could have added to the dialog that perhaps would have helped my anonymous friend. There are answers there to difficult questions and beliefs of the restored gospel unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Eternal marriage is a difficult one for many people.

How FAIR can help with these challenges

For example, this one-page response from Marc A. Schindler says it so much better than I can. This challenge comes up so often in blogging that every LDS blogger should be familiar with the contents. It would almost seem to me that some who like to question our faith cruise the LDS blogs just looking for this subject so they can quote Matt 22:30.

The FAIR website is easy to use. Besides providing material that is original to FAIR, they are also kind enough to point to other outside sources that have additional helps. In this case, a link to an Ensign article from Feb 1986 and a link to an entry on Light Planet by W. John Walsh are both extremely helpful. This particular objection is very common.

When you refer your friends or readers to these essays on FAIR, you are engaging in what is called Apologetics. If you are not familiar with the term, it might be helpful to read this essay by Gary Bowler. No, we are not apologizing for what we believe. We are defending our faith. We strengthen our own knowledge and testimonies at the same time.

Additional resources available on FAIR

I have been engaging in email dialogs and frequenting online message boards that deal with the topic of religion for many years. FAIR began as a group of individuals like me, who love to discuss religion, got together to create a central repository for their resources and shared articles that they had written. FAIR has been around now for about ten years.

The site has grown over the years and become more and more useful. Besides the topical guide, they recently created a Wiki, that is easy to navigate and fairly comprehensive. If you are not familiar with a wiki, think Wikipedia, one of the most popular sites on the Internet. The real advantage of a wiki is the community contributions with hyperlinks.

The FAIR journal is a monthly email newsletter that contains news of changes to the FAIR websites and lists of new material that has been published in the last month. I highly recommend this free service. You can join FAIR as a member on several different levels. Content providers are welcome as the wiki is constantly in need of additions.

Summary and conclusion

Perhaps you have no intention of engaging in apologetics. I feel the same way. I like to present uplifting and faith-promoting essays on my blog. Most of the subjects I deal with include some aspect of LDS doctrine that is not common to my readers who do not share my faith. Because of this, I often find myself defending my viewpoints in the comments.

I love blogging about the church and the restored gospel. It has blessed my life so much and in so many ways. I am completely convinced that living the restored gospel of Jesus Christ can solve all the problems of the world. I have often said that we have so much more to offer than other churches. Of course, we don’t say this arrogantly, but it is true.

FAIR can help explain and defend the parts of our religion that are not familiar to people. Of course, our own personal explanations and witness are the best. But we may not always be familiar with all the scriptures and quotes from prophets and apostles that can back up our claims. That’s where FAIR can help. It is an easy to use online resource.

Matt Slick and the Fall of Adam

Posted on by


I imagine the majority of people who search for information on the church go to Google and type in “Mormons” or “Mormonism.” A Google Search on “Mormonism” today brings up the Wikipedia entry before it brings up the official website of the Church. The Church has a paid entry under “Mormons” so a search there brings up our site first and it is highlighted.

Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

On that same first page of Google searches for “Mormons” or “Mormonism” you will find the site for CARM – The Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry. If you haven’t heard or read about Matt Slick before, then you aren’t a regular visitor to Christian Apologetics websites. Although many have done so, I’m not sure if I would characterize the site as particularly Anti-Mormon.

While Mr. Slick is clear that he opposes Mormonism, he does not seem to be rabid or vitriolic in his writings. As he says, “I can’t speak for all who oppose Mormonism, but I have no grudge against it at all. I was never a Mormon and no Mormon injured me in the past. They are nice people. The problem isn’t with them. It is with what they teach. It simply isn’t Christian.”

In other words, his material seems palatable to the intellect, does not seem to be written for shock value or to offend and may be worth considering. Let’s face it, the man has gone to a lot of trouble and effort in his writings on Mormonism. The focus of his site is not particularly the LDS Church, but it does comprise a large portion of the activity there. Mr Slick is based in Idaho.

The challenge from Mr. Slick

On his page, “Are you a Mormon?” Mr. Slick offers a rambling explanation to members of the Church as to why he feels we are wrong. He suggests that we hold Joseph Smith in higher esteem than we hold the Savior, and that our understanding of the role of the Redeemer is flawed. He quotes the eighth article of faith and announces that it is the source of our problem, that we have allowed non-biblical teachings to creep into our church.

Obviously, Mr. Slick has missed the main focus of our message, that we believe in a “Restored Christianity.” This is such an age-old complaint from mainstream Christian religionists that I am surprised he uses this argument here. If he wants to hold an intelligent dialog with Mormons, he needs to focus on the concept of modern revelation. Instead he closes with this observation:

“It is interesting to note that in Mormon theology it was a blessing for Adam to have transgressed God’s word so that his eyes could be opened. Both Adam and Eve specifically pointed to their transgression as a blessing. But the Mormon will say that it was the transgression that allowed the seed to come, the knowledge of good and evil, and the truth of redemption. My point is simple, the fall, the sin of rebellion is celebrated in Mormonism. I thought only the ungodly celebrate sin.”

Why the fall was a good thing

This is the fourth time in the past week that I have had the opportunity to refer to 2 Nephi chapter 2 starting with a wonderful essay from my fellow LDS blogger, S. Faux on Mormon Insights. I have used it in a previous blog post, in a home teaching visit and in Bishopric meeting this morning. Mr. Faux is correct. With the focus on agency, the fall and redemption, 2 Nephi chapter 2 is indeed the core of the Book of Mormon.

I am constantly amazed when I have discussions with my Christian friends about the fall of Adam that they view it is as a bad thing. Don’t they get it? If it weren’t for the fall, we would not be here! I guess having grown up with doctrines like this found in the Book of Mormon, I have been so blessed to understand this basic doctrine as found in verses 22 and 23.

22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.
23 And they would have had no achildren; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no bjoy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no csin.
Summary and conclusion

I’m not trying to call Mr. Slick out on this one. I’m just trying to point out that yes, we do indeed celebrate the fall of Adam as being a major part of the theology of salvation. Were it not for the fall, there would be no need for redemption. How can he imply that it was not necessary and not the central focus to accomplishing the purposes of God? I am so grateful for the fall of Adam.

Mr. Slick obviously does not understand the doctrines of salvation. Perhaps a reading of Bruce R. McConkie’s talk on The Three Pillars of Eternity would be helpful. Even better, if he can handle it, is Elder McConkie’s last talk, The Purifying Power of Gethsemane, in which he ties together the fall, the atonement and the resurrection. If there were no fall, we would not be here.

We have so much more to offer you, Mr. Slick. Your website is impressive. You have gathered a lot of material and written a lot of essays about our faith. But you have missed the central theme of Mormonism – a more complete understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the plan of Salvation. This all came about because a boy went into the woods to pray after reading the Bible.