Skip to main content

FOLLOWING UP ON A MISSION EXPERIENCE: THE BIBLE VS. THE BOOK OF MORMON

First and foremost, I would like to wish my wife a happy birthday! She turns 22 today, and I feel so blessed and so lucky to have her in my life! She means everything to me! 

With that said, I would like to reflect on an experience I had on mission. When I was in my last area, my companion and I went to visit a less-active. My companion had set up the appointment, and said that the brother was very excited to see us. Something about it all just didn’t seem quite right, so just before going in I reminded my young companion about the feelings of the Spirit and how to distinguish them apart from other influences.


When we went in, we were invited to sit down in the living room, where this brother, his wife and his two kids were all there waiting. He gave us some materials he had printed off of the internet and proceeded to give us an anti-Mormon spiel. He informed us that he had a video he wanted us to watch, we politely obliged after which he turn on the film The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon, a “documentary” produced by Living Hope Ministries. The premise of the film was to compare the archeological “evidence” for the Bible with that of the Book of Mormon. Although professing to be balanced, it was clearly slanted, with the agenda of discrediting the Book of Mormon. After watching for probably 20 minutes or so, we informed our host that we had other appointments we needed to get to. He gave us the DVD, we briefly exchanged some words about the presentation, and then left.

This was not the first time I had been shown (and subsequently given) an anti-Mormon film on my mission. I was a little worried this time, however, because I had very young companion, and I was not sure how he would handle it. I can’t remember talking about it much afterwards, but I’m sure we did. When we reported the visit to the Bishop (as is custom to do when missionaries visit less-actives), he said he would talk to him and direct him to some materials on Book of Mormon evidence if he was interested (I can only assume that he had something from FARMS or FAIR in mind, but I do not know).

This was an important experience for me. This experience and many others like it are what piqued my interest in apologetics. After that experience, I had determined that when I got home, I was going to find responses to the things I had been exposed to.[1] 
  
I have since read a lot of LDS scholarly and apologetic material. Sometimes when I look back on this experience, I think to myself, “If only I knew then the things that I know now!” For example, I wish I had known some of the basic methodological problems that arise in comparing Old World and New World archeology.[2] I wish I had known about hieratic, demotic and other types of “reformed” Egyptian writing systems.[3] I also wish I had known about the fascinating discoveries along the Arabian Peninsula pertaining to Lehi’s trail and the locations of the Valley of Lemuel, Nahom, and Bountiful.[4] While I doubt any of that information would have been persuasive to this less-active/anti-Mormon that I encountered, it would have been useful so that I could have provided real, informed, dialogue on the issues presented in The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon, as well as being able to adequately defend the beliefs, which I deem of great value, against the blatant attack which we were subjected to.[5] 

Among the materials in apologetic research I have come across the following direct responses to the film The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon:




I personally have found each of these reviews to be helpful, insightful, and interesting. Each one takes a different approach, and I think each is successful in its objectives to bring another side of the story to the table.

Reflecting back on this has helped me realize just how silly it is to leave the LDS Church, or lose your testimony over some piece of archeological, geographical, or any other “scientific” evidence (of lack thereof). To do so presumes that one knows all there is know on the subject (or at least that they know all relevant information), but what happens when subsequent research or discovery makes that previous information (which drove them out of the church) irrelevant? Is the dissident likely to then return to the fold? No. Once the lens of skepticism has replaced the lens of faith, there will always to be reasons to doubt. 

I could have walked away from that encounter with a fractured, or even shattered, testimony; and I would likely have never discovered that the whole premise of the film is based on a straw man. However, I realized that I frankly did not know everything. I knew my knowledge in archeology and anthropology was virtually non-existent, and I also knew that my knowledge of the scriptures was limited, at best (no matter how well anyone ever knows the scriptures, that knowledge will always have limitations). So rather than assume that, because bits of information that I had did not seem to add up, the Book of Mormon must not be true; I decided, in faith, that more research needed to be done.

You know how this story ends. I got home, I did some more research, and I found the reviews listed above, along with a whole host of additional information which sheds greater light on the issues mention in that film, and many other critical and anti-Mormon sources which I have come across both before and after this experience.

It has been said that patience is a virtue, and in this case I would have to agree. Realizing that our knowledge (both our personal knowledge, and the knowledge possessed by mankind in general) is forever limited, it seems to me wise to be patient in dealing with “evidence” for the Book of Mormon, or any other aspect of faith.[6] It also seems wise that we understand some things will never be proven – and some things are not meant to be. After all, faith cannot exist without there also being a measure of doubt.
  

------------------------------------------------------

Notes:

1.      1. I’m sure this gentleman, along with the others who threw anti-Mormon propaganda at me, would be sorely disappointed to find out that, rather than damage my testimony and cause me to lose the faith, their actions made an apologist out of me! No doubt the last thing they want is another Mormon apologist!




4.     4. See articles in the special issue, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 15, Iss. 2 (2006): Lehi and Sariah’s Wilderness Trek: Illuminating the Real-World Setting for an overview of the research on Lehi’s trail and these locations done by various LDS researchers.

   5. As can recall, all I had in way of rebuttal was a garbled and distant memory of my ninth-grade seminary teacher reading us some clip from some article about a discovery regarding the “place which was called Nahom” (1 Nephi 16:34), to which this individual simply responded, “That’s not very impressive.”

   6. Kevin Christensen makes a similar point in his recent review of William D. Russell’s critique of the Book of Mormon published in Sunstone nearly thirty years ago. Christensen observes that many of the arguments Russell uses in his call to abandon the Book of Mormon have since turned out to be wrong. See Christensen, “Hindsight on a Book of Mormon Historicity Critique,” FARMS Review, Vol. 22, Iss. 2 (2010), pg. 155-194

Comments

  1. I know that feeling of “If only I knew then the things that I know now!” But the bottom line is this family could have found out what you did just as easily as you.

    Missionaries don't have any obligation to find answers to other people's questions or doubts. Some words of reassurance, encouragement, and testimony of the truth should suffice.

    In other words, he and his family needed to do their own heavy lifting. You did the heavy lifting after your mission and benefited for it, but they got nothing out of it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To me it boils down to our own personal testimony of truth. When we have a powerful witness of truth we would have to climb underneath or over that testimonly then let go and fall. Some are in their tender moments of their testimony. They may not have really read and prayed about the Book of Mormon that they might gain a more sure witness of truth.
    Perhaps I am searching what goes on in the minds of others. I have been less active once for several years. I kept reading the Book of Mormon though. Nothing during time of inactivity did anything of anti-mormonism have any persuasion upon me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for you comments Scott and Blaine.

    Scott, I couldn't agree more about the responsibilities of missionaries in those situations.

    I also agree about the benefits of "heavy lifting," and the truth is, if you aren't willing to do the research yourself, it just wont matter.

    I have benefited in a number of ways due to my drive to do further research and then weigh the arguments and evidence on both sides. Besides adding support for an "intellectual testimony," doing the digging has helped me learn important research and critical thinking skills and methods and that have been a huge benefit to me in school and other areas of life.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 15 “Best Books” to Read BEFORE Having a Faith Crisis

Elder M. Russell Ballard recently stressed that it is important for Gospel educators to be well-informed on controversial topics, not only by studying the scriptures and Church materials, but also by reading “the best LDS scholarship available.” I personally think it is imperative in today’s world for every Latter-day Saint—not just Gospel educators—to make an effort to be informed on both controversial issues as well as knowing reliable faith-building information as well.
(Given that Elder Ballard’s CES address was published to general Church membership in the Ensign, I think it’s safe to say that Church leadership also feels this way.)
An important step in the process of getting informed is reading the 11 Gospel Topic essays and getting familiar with their contents. But what’s next? How can a person learn more about these and other topics? What are the “best books” (D&C 88:118) or “the best LDS scholarship available”?
Here are 15 suggestions.
1. Michael R. Ash, Shaken Faith S…

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:


As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…

New Paper on Isaiah in the Book of Mormon

Joseph M. Spencer, an adjunct professor at the BYU religion department, recently published a paper in the non-LDS peer review journal Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception, titled, “Isaiah 52 in the Book of Mormon: Note’s on Isaiah’s Reception History.” Spencer is a young scholar who is doing exciting stuff on the Book of Mormon from a theological perspective.
The paper is described as follows in the abstract: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of Mormonism to American religion, little attention has been given to the novel uses of Isaiah in foundational Mormon texts. This paper crosses two lines of inquiry: the study of American religion, with an eye to the role played in it by Mormonism, and the study of Isaiah’s reception history. It looks at the use of Isa 52:7–10 in the Book of Mormon, arguing that the volume exhibits four irreducibly distinct approaches to the interpretation of Isaiah, the interrelations among which are explicitly meant to speak to nineteent…