FairMormon

Register for the 2018 FairMormon Conference!
August 1-3 in Provo, Utah.

Anti-Mormon critics

FairMormon Conference Podcast #4 – Daniel Peterson, “What Difference Does It Make?”

by 3 Comments

Podcast: Download (97.2MB)

Subscribe: Android | RSS

This podcast series features a FairMormon Conference presentation each month. If you would prefer to watch the videos, they can still be purchased here for the 2017 conference. Older conference presentation videos are available on our YouTube channel and FairMormon TV for Roku, Amazon Fire TV, and Android TV.

Daniel Peterson, What Difference Does It Make?

Video and transcript available here.

Daniel C. Peterson

A native of southern California, Daniel C. Peterson received a bachelor’s degree in Greek and philosophy from Brigham Young University (BYU) and, after several years of study in Jerusalem and Cairo, earned his Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures from the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA). Dr. Peterson is a professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic at BYU, where he has taught Arabic language and literature at all levels, Islamic philosophy, Islamic culture and civilization, Islamic religion, the Qur’an, the introductory and senior “capstone” courses for Middle Eastern Studies majors, and various other occasional specialized classes. He is the author of several books and numerous articles on Islamic and Latter-day Saint topics–including a biography entitled Muhammad: Prophet of God (Eerdmans, 2007)—and has lectured across the United States, in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, and at various Islamic universities in the Near East and Asia. He served in the Switzerland Zürich Mission (1972-1974), and, for approximately eight years, on the Gospel Doctrine writing committee for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He also presided for a time as the bishop of a singles ward adjacent to Utah Valley University. Dr. Peterson is married to the former Deborah Stephens, of Lakewood, Colorado, and they are the parents of three sons.

East Coast Ignorance, or Using an Emotional Event for Another Anti-Mormon Hit Piece?

by

 

President Thomas Spencer Monson (August 21, 1927 – January 2, 2018).

 

On January 3, the New York Times published the obituary for Thomas S. Monson, You can find that obituary piece here: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/obituaries/thomas-monson-dies.html. The piece was written by the Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Robert D. McFadden. I am sure that Mr. McFadden is an excellent journalist. This is what the New York Times says about him:

Robert D. McFadden is a senior writer on the Obituaries desk of The New York Times and the winner of the 1996 Pulitzer Prize for spot news reporting. He has covered many of New York’s major news stories in his more than 30 years as a reporter and rewrite man for the paper, and has earned a reputation as one of the finest rewrite men in the business.[1]

But, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have been pretty upset about the tone of the obituary. Comments have been made that Fidel Castro and Hugh Hefner were painted in a better light than President Thomas Monson who dedicated his life to serving others. There have been numerous blog posts, Facebook posts, and articles discussing this. One example can be found in The Atlantic here: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/mormon-prophet/549773/.

The outrage over the obituary is strong enough that on January 8, the obituary editor put out an explanation defending the article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/reader-center/thomas-monson-obituary.html. One can argue if the explanation helped or hurt their cause. The editor talks about covering the public Monson and not the private one. The public Thomas Monson was a man of service, not one of great controversy. Perhaps they are just not informed? That’s not a good position to take for a newspaper.

The New York Times is in the business of selling newspapers and selling advertising. While we all hope they treat a good man fairly, they have the right to take whatever tone they wish. Being a newspaper man before he became a Church official, I’m sure President Monson appreciates that. So, I will leave matters of tone for others to debate.

What I will address is the accuracy of the writing. I know the New York Times is concerned about accurate news reporting, and there are some serious factual errors in this story that should be corrected.

Here they are in the order they appear, not necessarily in order of importance.

  1. “Many Mormons faced sanctions for joining online forums questioning church positions on women’s roles.”

I am not aware of ANY Mormons who have faced sanctions for joining an online forum or for questioning the Church positions on women’s roles. They will need to give examples. We have thousands, and probably millions of members who belong to many forums. We have members who are advocates of women rights and roles who are faithful members. I know some who work in the Church Office Building. I know members who hold differing views on women’s roles, homosexuality, and many political and social issues. Kate Kelly is cited in the article—perhaps the author thinks she is an example of this, but Kate Kelly was not excommunicated for joining a forum or even questioning the Church’s positions. There is a difference between questioning and actively campaigning against the Church and its teachings. Kate Kelly did the latter.

  1. “As the 16th president of the Latter-day Saints, succeeding Gordon B. Hinckley, Mr. Monson faced another test when church members, increasingly scouring online sources, found apparent contradictions between historical records and church teachings, which the church regards as God-given and literally true.”

Perhaps I am nit-picking on this one, but I take some umbrage with the idea that since Gordon B. Hinckley apparent contradictions have been found. The Church has an exceptional history department and there are numerous conferences on Church history – including the FairMormon conference. We have been discussing these topics for years. Additionally, we aren’t fundamentalist evangelicals in that every doctrine and practice is directly from God. This would be especially true with items related to history and science which are full of discovery. Yes, we have divinely inspired teachings, but they typically don’t have anything to do with history.

  1. “Some critics, including the website OnceDelivered.net, which identified itself as an expression of the Baptist faith, said the Latter-day Saints church had previously contended that Smith had been happily married to only one woman, and said the new teaching had used Scripture to “address the inconvenient truth of Smith’s polygamy.””

There are two issues here: First, one has to question why the New York Times reporter sought out a Website that states, “Mormonism fits a classic definition of a cult” and “So, is Mormonism a cult? According to our definition, yes.” Most LDS would rightfully classify OnceDelivered.net to be an anti-Mormon Website. There are many Websites out there that attack Mormonism with little understanding of what we actually teach and believe. It seems odd that the New York Times would be quoting from one for an obituary.

Secondly, the claim that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the term Latter-day Saints church would be incorrect and is offensive to most Mormons which underscores the lack of source reliability) previously contended that Joseph Smith was married to only one woman is incorrect. Yes, there are critics who have falsely made that claim, but the idea of plural marriage is taught by Joseph Smith and is part of our scripture in Doctrine and Covenants section 132 which can be found online at https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/132. That section was written in July 1843. Another activity you can try is to go to the Official Church Website LDS.org and type “Plural Marriage” into the search box. Many of those articles listed were written prior to Thomas S. Monson becoming prophet. There are many books that talk about this. One of our FairMormon volunteers stated he has 40 – 50 books on his shelf that discuss this topic. It was one of the main topics of the Reed Smoot Hearings in congress from 1904 – 1907. There is no new teaching on this. Ask most New Yorkers if early Mormons practiced polygamy and they would say yes. Many probably believe we still do. To say that we taught otherwise would be unbelievable.

  1. “In recent years, the church allowed historians access to church documents and records to a remarkable degree. Some published their findings online and in printed volumes, although they were usually vetted by church leaders.”

Having worked extensively with Church historians and independent historians, I have NEVER heard of Church leaders vetting anything except what is posted on the official Church Website to represent their position. Just the opposite is true. The Joseph Smith Papers are being published in their entirety on the Church Website. I have had complete freedom to publish anything without any vetting or oversight. There are LDS History conferences that are attended by Church Historians and many controversial and difficult topics are addressed. FairMormon has a conference every year where we talk about Church history. No one has ever vetted our talks.

The New York Times Obituary on President Thomas S. Monson needs a retraction and a rewrite. I’m sure the Times is interested in accuracy. Not correcting the record looks mean spirited, or ignorant. Neither of those positions is something that most newspapers aspire to be.

 

Scott Gordon serves as President of FairMormon, a non-profit corporation staffed by volunteers dedicated to helping members deal with issues raised by critics of the LDS faith. He has an MBA from Brigham Young University, and a BA in Organizational Communications from Brigham Young University. He is currently an instructor of business and technology at Shasta College in Redding, California. Scott has held many positions in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints including serving as a bishop for six years. He currently serves as Ward Mission Leader. He is married and has five children.

 

 

Attacking the LDS Church’s Tax Exempt Status

by

LDS Salt Lake City Temple
Photo from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Salt_Lake_Temple_spires.jpg

LGBT political advocate Fred Karger has threatened to file a complaint against the “Mormon Church,” otherwise known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, with the IRS once he uncovers the Church’s “vast business holdings and all of the secret political activities.”[1]  He hopes to get the tax exempt status of the Church revoked.[2] To assist with this, he has launched a TV ad campaign and has put up a new Website looking for tips and documents that will support his cause.

So, as I understand it, once he finds evidence of a crime—because he is sure there has been a crime, he will act on it and report the Church to the IRS, which he is sure will revoke the Church’s tax exempt status.

This sounds a lot like when he accused the Church of election fraud in 2008. The Church filed some of its reports with the State of California using the wrong forms. They gave the State the correct amount of in-kind donations, but in the last two weeks of the election failed to put it on the daily form that is required.

To be clear, they told the State the correct number, but just put in on the wrong form, which had a different due date.[3]

Even though the state law in question specifically states it doesn’t deal with election fraud[4]; even though the Church corrected the paperwork and paid their fine for late notification; even though the State of California recognized that the instructions were not clear so they changed them after this incident, it didn’t stop Fred Karger from crying fraud. In an article in the Huffington Post he claimed,

“The FPPC prosecuted the Church, and after an 18 month investigation, found the Mormon Church guilty on 13 counts of election fraud. The Church plead guilty and paid a fine.”[5]

This isn’t even possible because the FPPC does not deal with election fraud and specificially says so on its Website.[6] To put it another way, if it involves the FPPC, it isn’t election fraud. If it were election fraud, it would go to Investigative Services in the Secretary of State’s office, which it didn’t in this case.

For a more in depth discussion on this, see http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/background-information-on-the-fppcs-enforcement-process

If you want more discussion on Prop 8 and Mormons, see http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_politics/California_Proposition_8

Since that time Fred Karger seems to be looking for other avenues to punish the Church. This Mormon tips ad campaign seems to be his new project.

In reading the comment section of articles about Fred’s new project, I have seen quite a bit of confusion from others regarding politics and a church’s tax exempt status.

So let’s review the information about politics and all tax exempt organizations including churches.

All tax exempt organizations, including churches, are allowed to be politically active.

For those that missed it, let me repeat that. All tax exempt organizations, including churches, are allowed to be politically active.

Some tax exempt organizations even have political lobbying as one of their main activities. Think of organizations like the Sierra Club, the NRA, Planned Parenthood, AARP, GLAD, National Association for Transgender Rights, and even Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. Lobbying is a big part of their purpose for existing. Can you imagine the uproar if the NRA or Sierra Club were not allowed to be politically involved?

So long as they qualify under the IRS substantial part test, it is legal to be political. The substantial part test maintains an organization cannot spend a substantial part of its total budget on political activities. While it is unclear what “substantial part” means, most organizations use a 20% rule of thumb.[7] The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an international organization with millions of members. Given the Church’s low level of political involvement, even Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, the leading advocacy organization on the issue, does not see any risk of the LDS Church violating this rule.[8]

What churches and other 501(c)3 organizations are not allowed to do is engage in political campaigning for a particular candidate.[9] There has been some recent controversy on this. More on that later. First let’s talk about the tax exempt nature of churches.

The Supreme Court debated this issue in 1970. In Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York, the Supreme Court ruled 7-1 the tax exemption for churches is fair because tax exemption is a benefit not solely given to religious groups, but includes groups like schools and nonprofits. They made the following findings:

  1. The First Amendment tolerates neither governmentally established religion nor governmental interference with religion. Pp. 667-672.
  2. The legislative purpose of tax exemptions is not aimed at establishing, sponsoring, or supporting religion. Pp. 672-674.
  3. The tax exemption creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, far less than taxation of churches would entail, and it restricts the fiscal relationship between them, thus tending to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other. Pp. 674-676.
  4. Freedom from taxation for two centuries has not led to an established church or religion, and, on the contrary, has helped to guarantee the free exercise of all forms of religious belief. Pp. 676-680.[10]

Chief Justice Burger even addressed the common complaint that churches should only be tax exempt as they feed the poor and do other good works. He wrote:

We find it unnecessary to justify the tax exemption on the social welfare services or “good works” that some churches perform for parishioners and others — family counseling, aid to the elderly and the infirm, and to children. Churches vary substantially in the scope of such services; programs expand or contract according to resources and need. As public-sponsored programs enlarge, private aid from the church sector may diminish. The extent of social services may vary, depending on whether the church serves an urban or rural, a rich or poor constituency. To give emphasis to so variable an aspect of the work of religious bodies would introduce an element of governmental evaluation and standards as to the worth of particular social welfare programs, thus producing a kind of continuing day-to-day relationship which the policy of neutrality seeks to minimize. Hence, the use of a social welfare yardstick as a significant element to qualify for tax exemption could conceivably give rise to confrontations that could escalate to constitutional dimensions.[11]

Now let’s look at the restrictions. As I already said, churches and other tax exempt organizations may not campaign for a particular candidate. But, the ban on churches supporting candidates is not as old as, and is less settled than, the tax exempt status of churches. In 1954, then Senator Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas put forward a new law that made it so tax exempt organizations could not support specific political candidates. This not only affected churches, but all 501(c)3 non-profit organizations. There have been several recently who have lobbied for a repeal of this law claiming it violates the first amendment. Many believe that it was put forward in retaliation for the support a non-religious non-profit organization that gave support to Johnson’s political opponent.[12] There has been some recent discussion as to whether the law is constitutional, but it has already survived several court challenges and is unlikely to change.

To summarize:

All non-profit organizations including churches are allowed to be politically involved. Under current law, the only two restrictions they have are:

  1. They can’t publicly support a political candidate.
  2. They can’t spend a substantial part of their budget on politics. This is currently interpreted to mean spending more than 20% of their total budget. Total budget includes everything they do.

Other than those two restrictions, they are free to support or oppose any political cause they please. This can be national, state, or local politics and is not limited to items of a religious nature.

Finally, there is one more claim that Mr. Fred Karger makes on his Website that we need to address. He states:

The Mormon Church’s business holdings, estimated to be nearly $1 trillion, are run as tax free enterprises owned outright by the Church. Thus the Mormon Church does not likely pay any federal, state or local taxes on its profits from all its holdings.

This is simply false. In 1991 April General conference, Gordon B. Hinckley said the following:

I repeat, the combined income from all of these business interests is relatively small and would not keep the Church going for longer than a very brief period. I add, also, that these commercial properties are tax-paying entities who meet their tax obligations under the laws of the areas where they are located.

Again, all such commercial properties are taxed under the government entities where they are located. Not only do they pay property taxes, but also income taxes on any profits. So it is with all of the commercial operations of the Church.[13]

To summarize:

  1. Churches can legally be involved in elections and political issues involving gay marriage, marijuana use, euthanasia, housing, gun control, missile defense, global warming, taxes, zoning changes, school bonds, or any other issues they desire. Demands for revoking tax exempt status shows a lack of understanding of the law.
  2. Churches, under the Johnson Amendment law, may not campaign for a particular candidate. There is controversy over the legality of this law, but it has been upheld in more than one court decision.
  3. The Supreme Court has ruled that churches are not to be judged for tax exemption based on feeding the poor or doing other good works. That would create a situation of government monitoring churches, create excessive entanglement, and would violate the constitution.
  4. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pays taxes on all of its commercial properties such as Deseret Book, Bonneville International Corporation, and Utah Property Management Associates. This includes property taxes and income taxes.
  5. Fred Karger, the person heading up this campaign to strip the Church of its tax exempt status by soliciting questionably obtained documents, does not have a good track record for understanding the law, or representing what it means.

There is no risk of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (aka The Mormon Church) losing tax exempt status no matter what political cause it may engage in. Political speech is all constitutionally protected. This issue has already gone to the Supreme Court and they have ruled on it. This recent campaign by Fred Karger is nothing more than Don Quixote attacking windmills.

—————————————————————————————————————–

[1] Quote from Fred’s recent Television commercial which is airing in Utah this month.

[2] http://www.sltrib.com/home/4690644-155/lgbt-activist-plans-ad-blitz-targeting

[3] http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/statement-regarding-fppc-settlement

[4] http://www.fppc.ca.gov/enforcement/file-a-complaint.html

[5] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fred-karger/mormon-church-bleeding-me_b_8299882.html

[6] http://www.fppc.ca.gov/enforcement/file-a-complaint.html

[7] http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-much-lobbying-can-nonprofit-do.html

[8] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Tax-exempt-benefit-disputed-in-Prop-8-campaign-3183401.php

[9] https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/limits-political-campaigning-501c3-nonprofits-29982.html

[10] https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/397/664

[11] https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/397/664 Page 674

[12] http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/22/donald-trump/donald-trump-correct-lyndon-johnson-passed-legisla/

[13] https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1991/04/the-state-of-the-church?lang=eng

The Joseph Smith Papers: Administrative Records: Council of Fifty, Minutes, March 1844-January 1846

by

[For more information on the Council of Fifty, see Matthew J. Grow’s 2016 FairMormon Conference presentation.]

In September 2013, it was announced that the minutes from the Council of Fifty would be published as part of the Joseph Smith Papers project. This was significant because they had not been available for research, and so most of what was known of the council had been gleaned from journal entries of members and rumors spread by publications such as the Nauvoo Expositor, which were repeated over the years by each generation of critics. Besides being able to put these hyperbolic claims to rest, we now have new information about what happened during the Nauvoo period, and some new statements made by Joseph Smith and other early members of the Church.

The Council of Fifty was a secret organization formed in Nauvoo, made up of the leaders of the Church, as well as other men, including some nonmembers, with Joseph Smith at the head. Their purpose was to do civil business, separate from the ecclesiastical business done elsewhere. Under Joseph Smith, the three major functions involved Joseph’s presidential campaign, planning a “theodemocracy [that] would protect liberty and freedom ‘for the benefit of ALL’” [page xxxvi], and to find a place of refuge away from the government of the United States, which had failed them.

After the death of Joseph Smith the council was reconvened under Brigham Young, and dealt with the repeal of the Nauvoo charter, completing the temple, and finding a new place to settle. It was later reconvened in 1848, after settling in Salt Lake City, and functioned off and on until 1885. This book contains the minutes through January, 1846, and there are currently no plans to publish the rest, which would be beyond the scope of the Joseph Smith Papers. [Read more…] about The Joseph Smith Papers: Administrative Records: Council of Fifty, Minutes, March 1844-January 1846

Why Build Temples?

by

The Lima Peru Temple
The Lima Peru Temple

This week, critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have again been opining online on the extravagant furnishings inside LDS temples. The implication being that this is a dreadful waste of money on expensive edifices when the funds could be spent on assisting the poor. A first glance, this complaint appears reasonable. Why indeed should so much funds be devoted to building temples rather than to poverty relief?

We all know that poverty relief consists of two types, handling out bread and fishes, that can sustain a man and his family for a few days, or handing out a fishing pole and seeds, together with instructions on how to catch fish and grow grain, that will sustain the man and his family for months and years to come.

Fresh water is flowing for the first time to villages in Indonesia.
Fresh water is flowing for the first time to villages in Indonesia.

The Church does both of the above kinds of relief, in the form of emergency assistance, or in such wonderful programs as the Perpetual Education Fund. But there is another form of assistance that vastly exceeds either of these types. In countries like Peru (or Ghana, or many other places), the Church has built temples, to which any member holding a recommend may attend, no matter what his or her social status may be.

Inside the temple, no one can tell who is the Peruvian peasant or who is the banker from Lima. All are alike (even in dress), and all are treated the same.

Can you imagine what this does to the self-esteem of that Peruvian peasant (or, indeed, to the viewpoint of the banker)? The temple is the Great Leveler, and unlike the Marxist ideal where everyone is supposed to be leveled down to the proletariat, it levels everyone up, to become kings and queens.

No amount of poverty relief, no matter how lavishly dispensed, could possibly achieve such a remarkable outcome. When viewed from this angle, the amount the Church spends on temple construction could be considered more effective than any other outlay.

All this, even before considering the religious aspects of this work (ie, that God commanded it, or that temples are an essential element in LDS theology in the work of salvation for all mankind).

But this is not just an LDS theme. In my opinion, religious edifices have always elicited such responses. The great cathedrals of Europe were built at great expense, by the elite of society, but also with the enthusiastic participation of the lower classes, who saw these structures as their own. (This adoration does not extend to secular buildings, btw. When I toured Versailles back in 1991, my first thought was “Now I know why they had the French Revolution.”) The theme also holds true in non-Christian societies. The Great Buddha of Nara, constructed in the 8th century when Nara was the capital of Japan, was a project that encompassed all layers of society (it included raising a wooden structure to house the statue that is the largest purely wooden building in the world), and it is an awe-inspiring sight even now, more than 1200 years later.

Celestial Room in the Accra Ghana Temple
Celestial Room in the Accra Ghana Temple

And, of course, in the LDS context (as in the above non-LDS examples), the temples must be built of the highest quality materials possible. This serves to cement the leveling-up effect. Even the Church’s outlays for the downtown shopping mall in Salt Lake City, which has elicited such scorn from critics, is a part of this same effort, by upgrading the environment around the Salt Lake Temple (and Conference Center), so that members visiting from faraway places can feel safe and secure.

This entry was posted in Temples on 17 November 2014 by David Farnsworth

The Critic’s Big List of Problems

by

by Michael R. Ash

hands-computer-828898-galleryAny member who has undergone a faith crisis knows that there are many critics on the Internet who are happy to share a Big List of Mormon Problems to help facilitate one’s exit from the Church. These lists can serve as the catalyst for the initial testimony damage, or contribute the final straw in a “death by a thousand cuts” (the “Big List of Mormon Problems” is not the real name of any list but designates features which all of these lists have in common).

Such lists have been around long before the Internet was invented but received limited interest and distribution. While some of the works found their way into member or investigator homes, in the hands of missionaries, or even in local libraries, much of the material was picked up only by those critics or LDS apologists (defenders) who found the topics interesting.

Today, however, anyone can create a quick Big List of Mormon Problems, convert it to a pdf, and post it on-line. Depending on the creator’s writing abilities and social networking skills, a well-written piece by an outgoing author could quickly attain viral status. [Read more…] about The Critic’s Big List of Problems

Fair Issues 101: Types of evidence and the Book of Mormon

by

Podcast: Download (12.1MB)

Subscribe: Android | RSS

Ash (newer) PictureIn this installment brother Ash discusses the basic techniques used to establish different types of evidence and the Book of Mormon.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon

Fair Issues 100: Evidence versus proof

by

Podcast: Download (11.8MB)

Subscribe: Android | RSS

Ash (newer) PictureIn this installment brother Ash explains the differences between what we consider as evidence versus proof in religious matters.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon

 

Fair Issues 99: Emotion is part of testimony and decision making

by

Podcast: Download (9.6MB)

Subscribe: Android | RSS

Ash (newer) PictureIn this article brother Ash discusses how emotions play an integral part in our decision making process.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon

“Bring Forth Fruit with Patience”: Lessons on Faith and Patience from the Book of Mormon Archaeology

by

“Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience” (James 1:3).

“But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience” (Luke 8:15).

We don’t typically think of patience as a gospel principle, even though it is mentioned 66 times in the Standard Works. Patience is a virtue, yes, but you are more likely to hear that old adage than a scripture reference when being told you’ll just have to wait for something you want right now. Yet, despite this, the fact is patience is a necessary component to faith.

The relationship of patience and faith can be illustrated well with the Book of Mormon and archaeology. Critics love to claim that there is no archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, and produce lists of plants, animals, and material culture items which are thought to be absent from ancient America to make their point. The pitfalls of negative evidence, however, are quickly apparent if we are we willing to step back and look at some examples.

Let’s start with barley. Barley is mentioned several times in the Book of Mormon, and was long considered an anachronism in the text. In 1983, however, domesticated barely was found in Arizona dating back to AD 900. When apologists first pointed this out, critics were slow to cede ground and nit-picked that this still was not old enough for Book of Mormon times.

Subsequent evidence has demonstrated that in native American “little barley” was cultivated as early as 800 BC, and in widespread use from 200 BC through AD 1000. Geographically, it is known in predominantly in the eastern United States, but archaeological findings also show it was cultivated in the southwest and Mexico. As Book of Mormon Central recently pointed out:

Over time, more and more evidence for domestication of little barley in the Americas has emerged over an increasingly wider span of both time and geography. Little barley may have diffused to other regions of the Americas which were known to trade with the southwest and eastern United States, including the exchange of crops. In any case, evidence demonstrates that in at least some parts of the Americas, a type of barley was a highly important crop during Book of Mormon times.

Some will still nit-pick and claim that the Book of Mormon requires old world barley, but unless one insists on a narrow interpretation of the text, that simply is not true. Barley no longer poses serious problems for the Book of Mormon, and that’s the weakness of negative evidence: a single discovery can change the picture. Book of Mormon Central gets it exactly right when they say “discoveries like little barley illustrate the wisdom in keeping an open mind and avoiding hasty judgments while considering and exploring what the Book of Mormon says about Nephite life.”

barley-meme1 1

1983 was 153 years after the Book of Mormon was published, and all that time critics took advantage of the absence of barley; and right up until 1982, the absence of barely might have seemed pretty damning for the Book of Mormon. The value of patience here is clear.

The lesson learned from barely can be extended to other examples of common and long thought anachronisms. Consider wine, for instance. It is important to note that even in today’s vernacular, wine can refer to more than just fermented grape juice. Just google “apple wine,” “banana wine,” “pineapple wine,” and even “dandelion wine” to see my point. These kinds of “wines” were certainly known in pre-Columbian America. Book of Mormon Central explained: “Alcoholic beverages were made from a variety of fruits in the Americas before Columbus. These include bananas, pineapple, and agave, among others.” There were also native grapes, with some indication that it was used for wine-making.

wine_meme 1

Yet for the purposes of this post in illustrating the value of patience, I would like to highlight something else Book of Mormon Central mentioned: “There is also some evidence that the Old World grape was known and used for winemaking at one site in Chiapas, Mexico dating to between the first centuries BC and AD.” The evidence cited comes from a master’s thesis on an archaeological site in Chiapas (the region some geographers consider the land of Zarahemla) from 1978. It is less abundant, less widespread, and less well known than that of barley, but it is interesting nonetheless, and it follows the Book of Mormon by 148 years. Score one more for patience.

These kinds of examples are important to be aware of and keep in mind when dealing with some puzzles which are not so easily solved, like the horse. As Book of Mormon Central points out, there are certainly different possibilities, like loan-shifting and translator anachronisms that we ought to be open-minded about, but they are also keen to point out patience here as well. They note that there is some promising, yet inconclusive, evidence for horses in the Americas during Book of Mormon times. They then note, “it is best to be patient with the archaeological record. There is still much work to be done, and lots to be learned about life in pre-Columbian America.” Continuing on, they stress:

The vast majority of Mesoamerican ruins remain untouched underneath thick jungle growth, and other areas in the Americas have received even less attention. Also, the preservation of animal bones is very poor in the humid jungles of Mesoamerica. … Still, several items mentioned in the Book of Mormon once considered anachronistic have since been verified. This is why John E. Clark, a Latter-day Saint and prominent Mesoamerican archaeologist, declared: “the Book of Mormon looks better with age.” Such findings should urge caution against making final judgments based on absence of evidence.

Barley, and perhaps even wine, (to say nothing of Old World examples like Egyptian writing in Palestine, once thought to be an anachronism) illustrate this very point.

horses-knowhy2 (1) 1

Other lines of evidence further encourage patience among believers. Little, if anything, was known about the ancient Mesoamerican practice of carving the history and achievements of kings on “large stones” in 1830, but now the scholarly understandings of such things converge nicely with the description in Omni 1:20–22. Or the way social stratification and polygamy functioned together in the middle pre-Classic (ca. 800–400 BC), providing a fitting context for Jacob’s sermon in Jacob 2–3. Or the lineage histories of various Mesoamerican cultures, which fit the Book of Mormon in both form and function. Or tumbaga and how the “golden” plates are consistent with this alloy. Or the way the conceptual purposes of Mesoamerican bloodletting are tied into the “atoning blood of Christ” and blended well with ancient Israelite understandings of blood sacrifice.

All of this does not even touch the Old World connections, generally seen as more abundant and persuasive. Things like the detailed understanding of ancient olive cultivation found in Jacob 5; the ancient legal practice of duplicating or abridging documents and then sealing a portion, just as the Book of Mormon plates were abridged and sealed; ancient Israelite festival and coronation tie-ins to Benjamin’s speech; the extensive use of poetic parallelisms common to Hebrew writing; the practice of subscriptio, which appears twice in the Book of Mormon; Sherem’s and Abinadi’s trials in light of ancient Israelite law; and on and on I could go. I’ve yet to mention the Nahom altars, which some critics act like is the only thing Mormon apologists ever talk about.

While there are certainly still lists of puzzling features that invite further thought and research, many things now known about both the ancient Near East and pre-Columbian Mesoamerica shed light and insight on the Book of Mormon. Why not focus on what evidence we do have rather than pine for the evidence that is missing? Few who jump on the Internet today are aware that the list of anachronisms is getting shorter. As John Clark said, the Book of Mormon truly does look better with age. This trend certainly endorses patience while grappling with persistent puzzles. Such patience has yielded abundant fruit over the last 186 years, and will likely to continue to yield even more.

Neal Rappleye is a Research Project Manager for Book of Mormon Central. He blogs on Latter-day Saint topics at http://www.studioetquoquefide.com/