Thursday, September 10, 2009

How Can Truth Be An Abomination?

( Matt Vidovich

If you are not familiar to the many cracks that lay on the basic foundation of Mormonism, then this may come as a surprise to you. For the past two years, my research on Mormonism has left me only more confused about basic understanding on LDS doctrine. As the list of questions get longer, the list of answers fade away. Through my numerous conversations with LDS believers, missionaries, bishops, and even stake presidents, one claim rang loud in my ears that could not be ignored. “Many Churches and other religions have Truth, but our Church contains the fullness. ALL truth.” Mormons everywhere love to boast that the LDS Church does not criticize others, this includes any type of religion, or view of God. Even Mormon Publication contain ridiculous euphemisms that soften even their own doctrine.

(1) “Because the Church was no longer led by priesthood authority and revelation, error crept into Church teachings. Good people and much truth remained, but the gospel as established by Jesus Christ was lost, resulting in a period called the Great Apostasy.”

"Much truth remained." Not a small amount of truth but "much truth."

(2) “We have come not to take away from you the truth and virtue you possess. We have come not to find fault with you nor to criticize you. We have not come here to berate you. … Keep all the good that you have, and let us bring to you more good.” President George Albert Smith, quoted in Sharing the Gospel with Others, comp. Preston Nibley (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1948), 12-13; italics added.

Virtue you posses? Where does the Bible affirm that we posses virtue? Keep all the good that you have? What good are we without Christ? “Keep all the good that you have, and let us bring you more good.” This sounds like the motto of Masonry, “Making good men better.” Do you begin to see how the LDS church covers it’s embarrassing doctrine to fit the politically correct world around it?

They also project this pattern that “Good People” have some truth, and some is better then none. This idea “you’re not wrong, you’re just not right.” is pushed by the church, and is completely contrary to their own doctrine. A prime example of this is found in the Book of Mormon:

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).

This verse in 1 Nephi gives readers a clear cut, black and white illustration of who is and who isn’t true followers of Christ according to LDS doctrine. In v.17 it tells us that if we are not a part of the true church, then our “Foundation is the devil.” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a politically correct, postmodern way of presenting itself. It sidesteps the core of the issue and avoids any deep theological discussion, so as not to offend anyone.

Same statements have been made by the Church’s founding fathers. Brigham Young, John Taylor, James Talmage, Bruce McConkie, Joseph Fielding Smith, and of course Joseph Smith Jr. Smith once said, “My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right — and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong, and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were all corrupt . . .” (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol. 1, p. 5-6).

By cushioning the blow, the LDS church fails to be honest about their own doctrine. In closing I ask, how can any truth be an Abomination?


Charmaine said...

This is a tough one. And it's a slippery slope of semantics. Truth is truth is truth. Science and math are truth, but religion doesn't teach these. So how can one religion claim to have all truth? It's a misconception. What The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has, is Christ's restored church. His ancient religion and priesthood which was taken from the earth. We have the true gospel, the true priesthood, and the true prophet who receives direction from God and Jesus Christ.

I think all your quotes and scriptures can be argued on semantics and that your basic argument is truly an argument of interpretation. Which I do actually enjoy.

Being a woman, a Mormon, and at one time a Religion Major at a non-religious school makes me a bit of an enigma. I agree with you that members of our church do sometimes tend to "cushion the blow" and not be as open and forthright about major points of doctrine, but I think it's only because they don't totally understand them themselves. Even though we claim to have a fullness of Christ's gospel, we as men and women here on earth are only mortal and no one person, being finite and temporal, can claim to fully understand a gospel which is infinite and eternal. I think we have a hard time admitting our own mortality.

Did that make sense?

MattVidovich said...

Hi Charmaine,

Thanks for taking the time to post this comment! The first thing I want to point out is that my argument gives you my claim up front. I tell you in the first paragraph that the statement mormons give to others is "our church contains the fullness. ALL truth." This being the case, that mormon doctrine, LDS church goers, and the church itself affirm that this statement is true. Then how can any mormon church goer, or even the church (as they have posted these claims on their websites) say that there can be someone who believes in a separate God and yet contain truth?

This is not a slipper slope argument because the middle ground has been covered with quotes, LDS scripture, and websites. The claim is that which is stated above, the middle ground is the evidences, and the conclusion follows.

As far as semantics, you have not told me where I am wrong in my interpretation. So your claim is made, the evidence is not given, and your claim is your conclusion. Meaning this is a fallacy.

An other fallacy I noticed is generalization. You presented your points with no evidence, therefore failing to give an argument with evidence only subjective personal opinion.

Lastly I wanted to clarify that I did not say members of our church do sometimes tend to "cushion the blow", but rather that "the LDS church fails to be honest about their own doctrine." This is a huge difference, and wanted to make sure this was clarified.

Anonymous said...

I don't need evidence, or arguments of the Church of latter-day saints, all i know is i'm enjoying the gifts of the Holy Ghost! Saying the word latter rolls better with the tongue rather than saying last-day saint! It must be true!!