Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 10"

m
(→‎136)
Line 55: Line 55:
 
*{{s||JS-History|1|19}}
 
*{{s||JS-History|1|19}}
 
}}
 
}}
−
====136====
+
====136 - Do LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil"? ====
−
{{IndexClaim
+
{{IndexClaimItemShort
 +
|title=Losing a Lost Tribe
 
|claim=
 
|claim=
−
*Do LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil?"
+
Do LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil"?  
−
|response=
 
−
* {{FalseStatement}}
 
−
* [[Book of Mormon/Great and abominable church]]
 
−
* [[Plan of salvation/Salvation of non-members]]
 
 
|authorsources=
 
|authorsources=
−
*{{s|1|Nephi|14|10}}
+
{{s|1|Nephi|14|10}}
 
}}
 
}}
 +
{{FalseStatement}}
 +
{{:Question: Do Latter-day Saints believe that the scriptural terms "church of the devil," the "great and abominable church," and the "whore of all the earth" refer to a specific religion?}}
  
 
====136====
 
====136====

Revision as of 11:18, 6 December 2014

  1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Contents

Response to claims made in "Chapter 10: The Lord's University"


Chapter 9
A work by author: Simon G. Southerton
 Chapter 11

135

Claim
  • Mormons believe that if there is a conflict between science and religion, that the science is incorrect.

Author's source(s)
  • Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd edition, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), no page number given. GL direct link
  • Note: this reference is useless for establishing what statement of Elder McConkie's is being referenced.
Response
  • Some Mormons may believe this. Many others believe that there is no true conflict between science and religion, but realize that scientific ideas may be inaccurate based on limited data, or that religious understandings or preconceptions may need to be modified. The Church believes that the Lord "will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God" (A+of+F 1꞉9), which presupposes that previous ideas may be inadequate.
  • Mormonism and science

Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.

The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.


135-136

Claim
  • Mormonism reserves the right to identify scientific truth.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources provided.
Response

Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.

The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.


136

Claim
  • Mormonism declares that it "corners the market" on religious truth.

Author's source(s)
Response
  •  The author's claim is false: Latter-day Saints recognize that there is truth and good in all religions, and that God works through men of science to reveal truth as well.
  • Plan of salvation/Salvation of non-members

136

Claim
  • Joseph Smith declared that all other religions were false.

Author's source(s)
Response
Have the Presbyterians any truth? Yes. Have the Baptists, Methodists, etc., any truth? Yes. They all have a little truth mixed with error. We should gather all the good and true principles in the world and treasure them up, or we shall not come out true "Mormons."[1]

136 - Do LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil"?

The author(s) of Losing a Lost Tribe make(s) the following claim:

Do LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil"?

Author's sources: 1 Nephi 14꞉10

FAIR's Response

 The author's claim is false

Question: Do Latter-day Saints believe that the scriptural terms "church of the devil," the "great and abominable church," and the "whore of all the earth" refer to a specific religion?

According to the Book of Mormon, the "great and abominable church" and "whore of all the earth" refers to any organization that opposes the true Church of Jesus Christ

The Church does not teach or endorse the idea that these terms refer to any specific religion or organization. It is clear that in cases where past church authorities have modified this definition through speculation, that the First Presidency has firmly declared those speculations to be in error.

The criticism is based upon references in the Book of Mormon to the "church of the devil," which is referred to as the "whore of all the earth." For example:

And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. (1 Nephi 14꞉10)

George Q. Cannon publicly associated the "whore of all the earth" with those that persecuted the Church

Although the scriptures do not associate this "church" with a specific organization or religion, several early 19th century church leaders stated their opinions regarding who they considered the "whore of all the earth." For example, George Q. Cannon publicly associated the "whore of all the earth" with those that persecuted the Church:

And to-day, those who are inciting mobs against this people; those who go to Congress, and incite persecutions against us; those who fulminate threats and frame petitions; those who meet together in conventions; those who gather together in conferences, are those who belong to this "mother of abominations," this "whore of all the earth," and it is through the influence of that accursed whore, that they gather together and marshal their forces in every land against the Latter-day Saints, the Church of the living God.[2]

Heber C. Kimball associated the "whore of all the earth" with the national government

Heber C. Kimball associated the "whore of all the earth" with the national government that failed to help the Saints during their times of persecution:

It is very easy to be seen that the nation that has oppressed us is going down. The Lord revealed to Joseph Smith something about the judgments that await the inhabitants of the earth, and he said in the revelations that the judgments should commence at the house of God. I will read to you parts of the revelations which speak of these things....and that great and abominable church, which is the whore of all the earth, shall be cast down by devouring fire, according as it is spoken by the mouth of Ezekiel the Prophet....[3]

Orson Pratt claimed that it was the founder of the Catholic Church in a publication that was later repudiated by the Church

Orson Pratt, in his 1853-1854 periodical The Seer, claimed that the founder of the Roman Catholic Church was “the Devil, through the medium of Apostates, who subverted the whole order of God” and that they derived their “authority from the Devil....”[4] The Seer, however, never achieved sufficient circulation to propagate this idea through the general Church membership. In fact, The Seer was disowned by the First Presidency in 1865 for containing "doctrines which we cannot sanction."[5]

Main article: Orson Pratt's The Seer repudiated.

Bruce R. McConkie's first edition of Mormon Doctrine associated it with the Catholic Church, before that edition was refuted by the First Presidency

Bruce R. McConkie is credited with promoting the idea within the modern church that the "great and abominable church" was in fact the Roman Catholic Church. The first edition of McConkie's Mormon Doctrine, a book which contained sufficient errors that the First Presidency declared that the book was "not approved as an authoritative book"[6] and that it should not be re-published, contained this rather direct statement:

It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church. Nephi saw this ‘church which is the most abominable above all other churches’ in vision. He ‘saw the devil that he was the foundation of it’ and also the murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have been a part of this satanic organization.[7]

The offending language was removed in the second edition of Mormon Doctrine and replaced with language more consistent with the Book of Mormon

When the first edition of Mormon Doctrine went into circulation, the idea that the "great and abominable church" was the Catholic Church became embedded in popular belief, despite the fact that this idea was never sanctioned or preached over the pulpit. A second edition of Mormon Doctrine was eventually released with the offending language regarding the Roman Catholic Church removed. In the second edition, McConkie states:

The titles church of the devil and great and abominable church are used to identify all churches or organizations of whatever name or nature — whether political, philosophical, educational, economic social, fraternal, civic, or religious — which are designed to take men on a course that leads away from God and his laws and thus from salvation in the kingdom of God.[8]

This statement more closely aligns with what the scriptures themselves say, without any additional interpretation. Modern church leaders have stayed close to the definition in the Book of Mormon, by identifying the "great and abominable" church as any organization the leads people away from the Church of Jesus Christ.


136

Claim
  • The current generation of Mormons is taught a selective view of Church history

Author's source(s)
  • Boyd K. Packer, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater than the Intellect," BYU Studies, 21:259 (1981)
Response

Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.

The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.


137

Claim
  • Many church members are "blissfully unaware" of Brigham Young's practice of polygamy

Author's source(s)
  • Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young, 1997
Response
  •  Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this.: how does the author know what members know? Brigham Young's polygamy is well known out of the Church. How likely is it that members remain unaware?
  • Brigham Young/Polygamy

Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.

The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.


137

Claim
  • Senior church leaders prefer that members not question changes in temple ordinances.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response
  • Church leaders "prefer" that members keep their covenants and not discuss the temple ordinances outside the temple.
  •  Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this.: members may discuss the endowment only in the temple; they may ask any question they like there of the temple president.
  • Temples/Endowment/Changes

138

Claim
  • LDS ecclesiastical leaders expect "unquestioning obedience" of church members.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response
  • Most bishops and stake presidents would find this unlikely, if not incredible.
  • The author is a former LDS bishop. Did he go contrary to Church teaching and demand this? If so, his action was wrong. If not, he is evidence against his own claim.
  • Authoritarianism and Church leaders
  • Dallin H. Oaks, "Unselfish Service," Ensign (May 2009): 93–96. off-site

Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.

The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
The work repeats itself on p. 10-11, 38-39., 40., 41., 45., 137., 138., 140., and 142.


139

Claim
  • The Church "unofficially" discourages prayer to "Mother in Heaven"

Author's source(s)
  • AAUP Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. 1998. "Report of Committee A," Academe: Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors. Sept./Oct.: 71-4.
Response
  • Surely it is the Church's privilege to instruct its members in what it believes and condones, and what it does not? Members then make their own decision.
  • Nature of God/Heavenly Mother

140

Claim
  • Church leaders are "loath" to make unequivocal statements of doctrine.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response
  •  Absurd claim: a review of any general conference demonstrates that leaders are quite happy to make unequivocal statements.
  • If an area has no unequivocal statements, this is probably because it is not "doctrine," and the Church has no official position. Leaders are rightly wary of being misconstrued in such areas.
  • Church doctrine/Changing

Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.

The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
The work repeats itself on p. 10-11, 38-39., 40., 41., 45., 137., 138., 140., and 142.


140

Claim
  • BYU's emphasis is on conformity rather than personal freedom.

Author's source(s)
  • Student Honor Code, Brigham Young University
Response
  •  Absurd claim: the only source is the student honor code. How does this erode personal freedom? Every prospective student is aware of it, and agrees to abide by it. If he/she wants to do otherwise, he/she can easily choose to go elsewhere.
  • Authoritarianism and Church leaders

141

Claim
  • CES insists that gospel learning takes precedence over secular learning.

Author's source(s)
  • The only sources referred to are "parents."
Response
  •  Absurd claim: Why is it strange that a group hired for religious instruction to supplement college or university work should want religion taught?
  • Mormonism and education  [needs work]

142

Claim
  • CES instructs students not to attempt to locate Book of Mormon geographical locations

Author's source(s)
  • No source provided.
Response

Logical Fallacy: Black-or-White—The author presents two alternative states as the only two possibilities, when more possibilities exist.

Members are encouraged not to focus on the geography to the exclusion of the Book's more important spiritual message. BYU and FARMS (now the Maxwell Institute) have published a great deal of member scholarship on geography, however. If the Church opposed this, it could easily be stopped.

Ironically, the author knows that there is no official geography (see p. 205) but continues to act as if it scandalous that the Church does not preach a non-official idea as official—perhaps hoping we will conclude that the model he describes is the official one which the Church dare not renounce.

The work repeats itself on p. 43, 142., and 205.


142

Claim
  • Limited geography theories advanced by FARMS are "much too controversial" for CES students

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

142

Claim
  • Spencer W. Kimball believed in a hemispheric Book of Mormon geography

Author's source(s)
  • A talk by President Kimball given in 1977 (not listed in "Works Cited" section)
Response

Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.

The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
The work repeats itself on p. 10-11, 38-39., 40., 41., 45., 137., 138., 140., and 142.


142

Claim
  • Church members are shocked at the "limited archaeological evidence" for the Book of Mormon

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.

The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.


143

Claim
  • LDS apologists continue to tell members how "scientists continue to get it wrong."

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument.

<Rather than interact with arguments the author labels "apologetic" (i.e., any interpretation which does not suit his naive view of the matter), the author hopes to marginalize them and reject them from consideration by claiming they are somehow novel, contrary to the Book of Mormon's plain meaning, or driven by desperation.

Many statements indicate that these ideas are generally not novel, and were certainly developed well before any pressure from DNA arguments—they arose from the Book of Mormon text itself.

The work repeats itself on p. xv, 42., 143., 148., 200., 203., and 206.
  •  Absurd claim: Some LDS DNA apologists, for example, are world-class experts in their field. These authors object to the misappropriate and misapplication of science, including that found in the work here under review:
  • Michael F. Whiting, "DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [24–35] link
  • John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 101–108. off-site wiki
  • John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [36–37] link
  • D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, "Who Are the Children of Lehi?," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [38–51] link
  • Note that the author merely dismisses these experts, he does not engage their evidence or arguments.


143

Claim
  • Most members follow their leaders without question.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response
  • Most bishops and stake presidents would find this unlikely, if not unbelievable.
  • The author is a former LDS bishop. Did he go contrary to Church teaching and demand this? If so, his action was wrong. If not, he is evidence against his own claim.

Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.

The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.


143

Claim
  • LDS theology supports a literal interpretation of the creation of man.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

143

Claim
  • LDS theology supports a literal interpretation of the tower of Babel.

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

143

Claim
  • LDS theology supports a literal interpretation of the Flood

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

143-144

Claim
  • The perception is that the Church has officially denounced evolution.

Author's source(s)
  • McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1979.
  • Boyd K. Packer, "Our Moral Environment," Ensign, May 1992, p. 66. (This talk does not specifically mention the theory of evolution - Packer is stating that we are not simply "advanced animals," which the author includes in his quote.)
Response

144

Claim
  • Henry Eyring (father of Henry B. Eyring) indicated that he could accept evolution.

Author's source(s)
  • Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist, 1998.
Response
  • If a well-known scientist could publicly express support for evolution and differ with some Church leaders, how does this contribute to the "perception" that the Church has "officially denounced evolution"?
  • The book cited was published and distributed to LDS youth—hardly the act of a Church trying to stamp out any support for evolution.

145

Claim
  • Eyring "avoided singling out senior leaders of the church for the bad press that evolution has received in LDS circles."

Author's source(s)
  • Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist, 1998.
Response
  • Eyring was not shy about demonstrating where he and (say) President Joseph Fielding Smith differed on this subject.

146

Claim
  • The Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri

Author's source(s)
Response

146

Claim
  • Mormons believe that the continents separated only after a global flood.

Author's source(s)
Response

146

Claim
  • Mormons are "compelled" to believe in a global flood as symbolizing the "baptism of the earth"

Author's source(s)
  • No sources given.
Response

148

Claim
  • FARMS' goal is to deter members from reading any book that challenges their faith

Author's source(s)
  • The author states that this is an "obvious" conclusion.
Response

Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument.

<Rather than interact with arguments the author labels "apologetic" (i.e., any interpretation which does not suit his naive view of the matter), the author hopes to marginalize them and reject them from consideration by claiming they are somehow novel, contrary to the Book of Mormon's plain meaning, or driven by desperation.

Many statements indicate that these ideas are generally not novel, and were certainly developed well before any pressure from DNA arguments—they arose from the Book of Mormon text itself.

The work repeats itself on p. xv, 42., 143., 148., 200., 203., and 206.


Notes

  1. ↑ History of the Church, 5:517. Volume 5 link
  2. ↑ George Q. Cannon, "PREDICTIONS IN THE BOOK OF MORMON, etc.," (April 6, 1884) Journal of Discourses 25:128.
  3. ↑ Heber C. Kimball, "OBSERVANCE OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD," (January 6, 1861) Journal of Discourses 9:131.
  4. ↑ Orson Pratt, The Seer (Washington D.C., April 1854).
  5. ↑ Deseret News (12 August 1865): 373.
  6. ↑ Dennis B. Horne, Bruce R. McConkie: Highlights From His Life & Teachings (Eborn Books, 2000), [citation needed].
  7. ↑ Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine [1st edition] (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1958).
  8. ↑ Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd edition, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), 760. GL direct link
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Mormonism/Books/Losing_a_Lost_Tribe:_Native_Americans%2C_DNA%2C_and_the_Mormon_Church/Chapter_10&oldid=131817"