July 20, 2008

Fred (not real name),

I want to thank you for sending me the “Christ Clone Trilogy” books. I thought it was a very interesting interpretation of the events of the second coming of Christ. I’ve wondered which, or how many of the events in Revelations should be understood literally or symbolically. I’m not sure the Lord has made it very clear one way or the other. One thing I am sure of is that they will be fulfilled, and when it is over with we will understand it clearly.

It seems pretty obvious from the implied chronology that the author feels it’s going to happen pretty soon. I believe he is right. I know this has been a common feeling among most Christians for the last couple of hundred years, but in the eternal span of things, what’s a couple hundred years? But I’ve often felt that if I lived long enough, maybe into my 80’s, that I’ll see it. One thing I feel very strong about is that our children will see it.

I hadn’t heard of these books before, so I didn’t really know where the author would be coming from. I admit I almost stopped reading when I got to the part where Christopher starts his rant against Yahweh and starts preaching New Age. I thought, “Oh, no. Here we go; a plug for New Age, secularism and all that goes with it.” I put it away for a couple of days when it occurred to me that for all his apparent goodness Christopher met a lot of the requirements for the Anti-Christ; the wound to the head that wouldn’t heal, etc., so I picked it up again.

I thought it was interesting that he has the Jews fleeing to Petra. I don’t recall anything in the Bible naming Petra as the place, but I guess that’s author’s privilege. Coincidentally my sister’s son-in-law just returned from Petra with the BYU Archeology Department doing a dig in a number of Nabataean tombs. He sent pictures through their family blog and described the buildings and what they found. I know they won’t mind if I give you the web address. It’s http://bradandchelsea.blogspot.com/. Turn down the sound if you don’t want to hear the music Chelsea put on it (actually it’s pretty good; eclectic and easy on the ears). You may have to go back a ways into the blog to see it all. He was there for some time and came home about a month ago.

I guess it’s safe to assume you read the books and know what’s the author says about the LDS faith, so I assume you may also be curious about my thoughts on it. If not, I apologize for the big letter, but it’s important to me that you understand where my faith comes from, what we really believe, and why.

The great Anglican theologian Austin Farrer warned, “Though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned.” I too don’t believe that argument converts, but a lack of defensibility implies there is nothing defensible.

On pages 151-152 the author, speaking through Scott Rosen, makes a point of “explaining” Mormon beliefs. He makes some declarative statements that are flat out incorrect. And though he doesn’t come right out and say it, he implies that Mormons aren’t “Christian” since he lists us along with Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, etc. This idea that we’re not Christian gets thrown at us all the time, but it’s because certain groups redefined the definition of “Christian” so tightly that only they seem to qualify. Sort of like writing technical specs for a piece of equipment that are so strict only one manufacturer can bid even though there are other qualified suppliers. I think a lot of them would be surprised to find out that according to their definitions of “true Christianity”, for example based on the Godhead (Trinity) using the Nicene Creed as a standard they automatically exclude about 1/3 of the western Christian religions and all of the Eastern Orthodox and Coptic Christian churches.

But he seems to be a very believing, faithful person, so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he’s repeating statements from people he believes are authorities and doesn’t actually know much about our beliefs. I can’t go into a lot of detail of where he misquotes or just misses the mark, but I think a couple of examples can show his understanding of Mormon doctrine and history is vague and borrowed.

The author leans heavily on discrediting Joseph Smith in regards to the origins of “The Book of Abraham” as found in one of our set of scriptures known as the “Pearl of Great Price”. He uses as a source Fawn Brodie’s 1933 book, “No Man Knows My History, The Life of Joseph Smith”. Almost no one takes Ms. Brodies book seriously any more it’s so full of misquotes, assumptions and bad research. In 1946 it was reviewed and discredited by Hugh Nibley in “No Ma’am, That’s Not History” as a good example of non-scholarly writing. Klaus Baer listed in that footnote as one of the two translators of the two books the author claims are the actual papyri translations but which have nothing to do with the Book of Abraham. I think it’s interesting that Dr. Nibley was one of Dr. Baer’s first students and was famous inside and outside of the LDS church for his extensive knowledge of and volumes of work on Egyptian studies. Historical documents show that there were at least 5 papyri and only two have been recovered. The history and content of those papyri has been the source of many studies by both LDS and non-LDS scholars. If you’re interested you can read a good review at http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=224 and there are links to others.

The author makes two other sweeping statements that are blatantly wrong. For one thing he claims that Joseph supposedly learned from the papyri that “black people were supposed to be servants and slaves to whites and Asians.” This is outrageous and I have to believe that he’s never read the Book of Abraham or he would know that there is no such passage or doctrine in this or any other LDS scriptures, direct or implied.

When Joseph ran for president in 1844 he ran on an emancipation/abolitionist platform calling for the Federal government to pay the slave owners for their slaves and release them to freedom. This is a matter of public record. One of the reasons for the Missouri persecutions, when the church was driven out of that state was because the predominately New England Mormons weren’t slave owners and they were upsetting the political balance of a slave state.

It also bothers me a little that in talking about comparing religions the author says on page 150, “We compare everything about them, but we never get around to looking at whether any of the religions can be proven true. Then on page 154 he says, “I never cared much for blind faith, Mr. Hawthorne. I want something that can prove itself worthy before I put my trust in it”. As he discredits other religions he does so based on the alleged lack of physical proof of their origins or traditions. Maybe I misunderstand him, and this seems to fly in the face of Hebrews 11:1 but if physical evidence is what he wants, let’s give it to him.

Regarding the origins of Book of Mormon he makes the statement on page 151, “Unfortunately for our search for proof, there has never been any shred of archaeological evidence to support Smith’s account of the history of the Americas. Not one non-Mormon archaeologist or scholar has ever found anything to lend even the slightest credence to Smith’s claims.” This is an old and worn-out claim by LDS critics Gerald and Sandra Tanner and anyway he’s pretty out of touch with what’s been going on in the last several decades in Mesoamerican Archaeology.

When the Book of Mormon first came out next to nothing was known about the people of Mesoamerica, so any written statements about their culture, origins or religion would have been foolish to make and impossible to back up. This would be a pretty stupid thing for an unschooled farm boy like Joseph to write about and presumably easy to discredit.

Quoting an excerpt from “Archaeological Evidence and the Book of Mormon” by Michael R. Ash,

“It is also worth noting that there is a growing body of evidence from New World archaeology that supports the Book of Mormon. Dr. John Clark of the New World Archaeological Foundation has compiled a list of sixty items mentioned in the Book of Mormon. The list includes items such as "steel swords," "barley," "cement," "thrones," and literacy. In 1842, only eight (or 13.3%) of those sixty items were confirmed by archaeological evidence. Thus, in the mid-nineteenth century, archaeology did not support the claims made by the Book of Mormon.

“As the efforts of archaeology have shed light on the ancient New World, we find in 2005 that forty-five of those sixty items (75%) have been confirmed. Thirty-five of the items (58%) have been definitively confirmed by archaeological evidence and ten items (17%) have received possible--tentative, yet not fully verified--confirmation. Therefore, as things stand at the moment, current New World archaeological evidence tends to verify the claims made by the Book of Mormon.”

If you’re interested you can read the entire writing at: http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/Archaeological_Evidence_and_the_Book_of_Mormon.html and a direct response to the Tanners claim at http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=532.

If Joseph wrote the Book of Mormon himself then he made some pretty bold statements in the story about Lehi’s family leaving Jerusalem to travel into the Arabian Desert. I’ll cover only two of them.

In 1830 Arabia was pretty much a mystery to every one in the west except a handful of specialized scholars, and the prevailing notion was that it was a barren, waterless wasteland, which it is. In 1 Nephi, chapter 2, Nephi (or Joseph if you will) describes a river in a valley that ran into the Red Sea, three days journey into the wilderness. This used to be a point of ridicule for Book of Mormon critics since no such place was known to exist and it was believed impossible in that climate.

Book of Mormon scholars believe that the only possible path of travel for Lehi’s family would have had to be the Frankincense Trail, which roughly parallels Arabia State Highway 5 and started at the northern tip of the Gulf of Aqaba, a branch of the Red Sea and went south along the arable parts of western Arabia. The area called wilderness would be the uncultivated, nomadic areas along the trail, not immediately outside of Jerusalem where they started from. A camel can travel about 20 miles a day in this sandy terrain. About 60 miles south of the town of Aqaba at the northern tip of the gulf, west of highway 5 is the oasis of Tayyib al Ism. Running west from there for about 5 miles into and through the mountains is a desert stream, which until recently due to ground water pumping, ran year-round and emptied into the Gulf of Aqaba. (Remember, this is a desert river like what you and I know from our area, not what Joseph would think of in upstate New York).The narrow range through which it cuts is 1,200 to 1,800 feet high, dropping immediately onto the beach. Keep in mind that the only way a stream can cut through a mountain is for that stream to have been there before geologic pressures pushed the range up, and that stream has to run pretty much all the time or the rising ground will cut it off and divert it somewhere else. You can see the oasis on Google Earth at 28 d 33’ 59.95” N, 34 d 50’ 00.18” E and follow the stream west from there. If you zoom in on the upper course of the stream you can see water still on the surface in some spots. I’d say it’s pretty coincidental that Joseph in 1830 in New York would describe a feature like this in Arabia that actually exists.

Second, 1 Nephi 17: 5 says that near the end of their journey they traveled due East on their trail and that they “did travel and wade through much affliction in the wilderness” At the end of this part of the trail they wound up in a land on the sea coast that they named Bountiful “…because of its much fruit and also wild honey”. There the prophet Nephi was commanded by God to build a ship, so it implies that there was timber available too.

At the southern end of the Frankincense Trail a branch of the trail turns due east and crosses a huge barren sand dune area for hundreds of miles. That trail leads to an area where Frankincense trees grow near the borders of the present-day countries of Yemen and Oman, and ends in the coastal plain at the city of Salalah, Oman. You can see it on Google Earth at 17d 00’ 53.27” N, 54d 05’ 30.22” E.

There are several interesting things about Salalah. Its coastal plain - which is only about 80 miles long and 20 miles deep - is surrounded by high hills that cut it off from the desert and gather moisture coming in from the Indian Ocean. It is green and lush most of the year round with grasses and trees, streams and rivers flowing into the sea, just as Nephi (or Joseph) described it. When you look it up on Google Earth you can click on the many pictures of the large trees, streams, rivers and waterfalls that tourists have posted. There is no other place like it anywhere on the Arabian Peninsula. Some of the tourists’ comments are that it looks more like the Amazon. What’s more, it is a very ancient ship building city and for centuries used to receive teakwood shipments from India to build them.

So the question has to be, how could an unschooled farm boy living in upstate New York in 1830 have particular knowledge of a land that no one in his day in the US and Western Europe knew anything about? The answer is that he didn’t. He translated a record written by people who had been there and actually lived the events.

Personally, as interesting as all this may be I don’t believe that physical evidence constitutes a true basis for faith in Christ. Faith has to be much stronger than that; “…the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” But God also keeps His own rules and as Paul said in 2 Cor. 13:1, quoting the Law of Moses, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.”

So, regarding the golden plates from which Joseph translated the Book of Mormon, on pages 151-152 the author says, “And as for the golden tablets (by the way, they were plates bound like a large book, not tablets), Smith said that after he translated them, an angel took them into heaven, so we don’t have any physical evidence that there even were any tablets. There were eleven other people who said Smith had shown them the tablets, but all were either close friends or members of Smith’s family, and the stories these witnesses told did not match in many of their important details.”

The first three witnesses, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris wrote this statement that appears near the title page of the Book of Mormon. They wrote that they;

“…through the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, have seen the plates which contain this record, which is a record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites, their brethren, and also of the people of Jared, who came from the tower of which hath been spoken. And we also know that they have been translated by the gift and power of God, for his voice hath declared it unto us; wherefore we know of a surety that the work is true. And we also testify that we have seen the engravings which are upon the plates; and they have been shown unto us by the power of God, and not of man. And we declare with words of soberness, that an angel of God came down from heaven, and he brought and laid before our eyes, that we beheld and saw the plates, and the engravings thereon; and we know that it is by the grace of God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we beheld and bear record that these things are true.” (Italics mine)

This is a pretty heavy statement. What the author either conveniently leaves out or doesn’t know - I tend to think the latter is true - is that all three men fell away from the church not very many years later and were excommunicated for their hostility towards Joseph. Yet to the end of their lives none of them ever recanted their testimony, and they had plenty of opportunity and reason to do it. Oliver Cowdery who had acted as a scribe to Joseph during most of the translation practiced law years later in Missouri - a Mormon-hostile state - after leaving the church. On one occasion during a trial he was challenged by the opposing attorney about his witness to the Book of Mormon in an effort to discredit him. In the middle of this trial he bore solemn testimony of what he had seen and that it was true and he couldn’t deny it. This is also a matter of public record. Oliver and Martin eventually returned to the church many years later. David never did, but he never denied his story either.

The other eight witnesses wrote:
“…Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it. (Italics mine)

These witnesses were different from the first in that they were not shown the plates by an angel, nor did they hear the voice of God, but were shown them by Joseph. Of these eight, the two members of the Whitmer family and Hiram Page fell away from the church at one point or another (Christian and Peter Whitmer both died in 1835), but none of them ever recanted their testimony and defended the book to the end of their lives. Mormons were very unpopular at that time, so it would have been very natural to recant if it hadn’t been true. These kinds of witnesses would hold up in any court of law. Why are people so eager to disregard them off-hand?

Additionally, Josephs own wife Emma drifted away from the church after Joseph was killed. Years later when the church was in Utah and she had remarried and was old and living in Illinois she wrote a statement about the plates and Joseph’s work:

“The plates often lay on the table without any attempt at concealment, wrapped in a small linen tablecloth, which I had given him [Joseph Smith, Jr.] to fold them in. I once felt of the plates, as they thus lay on the table, tracing their outline and shape. They seemed to be pliable like thick paper, and would rustle with a metallic sound when the edges were moved by the thumb, as one does sometimes thumb the edges of a book. … I did not attempt to handle the plates, other than I have told you, nor uncover them to look at them. I was satisfied that it was the work of God, and therefore did not feel it to be necessary to do so. … I moved them from place to place on the table, as it was necessary in doing my work.” (The Saints’ Herald, 1 Oct. 1879, p. 290; spelling modernized.)

Even though Emma did not see the plates directly, what she had seen and felt by the Spirit deepened her conviction of the truth of the Book of Mormon. As a result, she bore this powerful witness and testimony of the book to her son:

“My belief is that the Book of Mormon is of divine authenticity—I have not the slightest doubt of it. I am satisfied that no man could have dictated the writing of the manuscripts unless he was inspired; for, when acting as his scribe, your father would dictate to me hour after hour; and when returning after meals, or after interruptions, he would at once begin where he had left off, without either seeing the manuscript or having any portion of it read to him. This was a usual thing for him to do. It would have been improbable that a learned man could do this; and, for one so ignorant and unlearned as he was, it was simply impossible.” (Ibid.)

Scott Rosen makes the statement on page 155 referring to the early apostles being persecuted and killed for their testimony of the resurrection; “…do you think they would have willingly died as martyrs for something they knew was a lie?” … “I’m talking about people, who, if the resurrection was a lie would have known it! These people said they had seen Jesus resurrected from the dead and chose to die rather than change their story.” This isn’t physical evidence for belief and I think he makes an excellent point.

One last statement he makes through Rosen on page 173 that I thought was interesting was in relating the story of the two thieves on the cross with Christ. He quotes Luke 23:42 & 43 where the one thief asks Christ to remember him when He comes into His kingdom. He writes, “Jesus’ response to the thief was very unusual. He didn’t give him a list of things to do so that he could be accepted by God. He didn’t tell him he had to be baptized, or sanctified, or take communion, or do good works, or walk across burning coals, or make a pilgrimage, or chant, or anything. He simply said ‘I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.’”

What’s interesting is that he equates paradise with the Kingdom of God and lists several specific things that he says are unnecessary to reach the kingdom that contradict what Christ himself said in other places. Now rather than deconstructing the author’s position I want to explain more what we as Latter-day Saints believe. I won’t get into the aspect of the necessity of sanctification as taught by Paul and Peter, but I’ll touch on baptism and good works.

Before I discuss good works I need to tell you that Mormons do NOT believe that works save us, rather they are the outgrowth and evidence of true faith as taught by the apostle James. I can’t make it any more plain than a few passages from the Book of Mormon;

“And now, my brethren, I have spoken plainly that ye cannot err. And as the Lord God liveth that brought Israel up out of the land of Egypt, and gave unto Moses power that he should heal the nations after they had been bitten by the poisonous serpents, if they would cast their eyes unto the serpent which he did raise up before them, and also gave him power that he should smite the rock and the water should come forth; yea, behold I say unto you, that as these things are true, and as the Lord God liveth, there is none other name given under heaven save it be this Jesus Christ, of which I have spoken, whereby man can be saved. For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.” (2 Nephi 25: 20 & 23, Italics mine)

This is Mormon doctrine pure and simple. Irrespective of what some other churches say about us we do not believe there is any other path to salvation except through Christ. But the Lord himself said works were essential to faith and not a simple declaration of belief.

“Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: (Mathew 7: 16-24, italics mine)

Clearly, from the Lord’s own mouth a simple verbal declaration of faith is not enough, rather faithful obedience and doing what the Lord commands is the measure of faith. As I said above, good works are the outgrowth and evidence of true faith as taught by the apostle James (James1:22-25 and Chapter 2). In “Mere Christianity” C. S. Lewis said that arguing about which was more important, faith or works, was like arguing about which blade of a pair of scissors was the most important. Obviously neither is effective without the other.

Regarding baptism, Christ told Nicodemus in John 3:5 “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” This being born of water is commonly understood by the majority of religious scholars to refer to baptism, the ritual sign of the covenant we make with God that we will take upon us Christ’s name, remember Him always and keep His commandments. It is both symbolic of washing and cleansing of sins and of death, burial and rebirth of the new man. At the end of Mathew the very last commandment he gives to his apostles here is,

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you…” (Mathew 28:19 & 20, italics mine).

To emphasize the importance of baptism Christ himself went to John the Baptist to be baptized. John, knowing that the covenant was for repentance and cleansing, and knowing that Christ was pure and blameless was astonished and said “I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?” Christ told him “Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.” In other words, although Christ knew he had done nothing to be cleansed of he was keeping God’s law and his own commandments in every way, and showing us the way by being baptized under proper, recognized authority as an example. (Mathew 3: 13-17) There are plenty of other statements by Christ and passages in the apostolic letters regarding the necessity of baptism to be saved, but this will do for now.

So Christ teaches that baptism and faith as shown through how we try to live our lives is essential to enter the Kingdom. Yet he told the thief that he (the thief) would be with him in paradise that very day. Christ can’t lie, so how do we reconcile these statements and requirements. It begs the question as to whether Paradise and the Kingdom of God is the same thing. It also leads to the question, if these things are essential to salvation what about all the billions of people who lived without ever hearing about Christ before they died, much less being baptized? Does the Father care so little for them as to reject them out of hand or is there a way for them too?

The Bible gives the answer to both questions. The morning of the resurrection Mary Magdalene and others came to the tomb to finish the burial preparations. In brief they found the tomb empty so everyone but Mary left the garden. The risen Lord met her there:

And … she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master. Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:14-17, italics mine)

Now if He hadn’t ascended to the Father yet, where was he for those days His body was in the tomb? Peter tells us:

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. (1 Peter 3: 18-20, italics mine)

Now this talks only about a prison where the spirits of those who lived during the time of Noah are kept, and Christ went to them after his death to preach, but it only speaks of a prison. Here’s where the Book of Mormon sheds more light.

"And now I would inquire what becometh of the souls of men from this time of death to the time appointed for the resurrection? Therefore, there is a time appointed unto men that they shall rise from the dead; and there is a space between the time of death and the resurrection. And now, concerning this space of time, what becometh of the souls of men is the thing which I have inquired diligently of the Lord to know; and this is the thing of which I do know. Now, concerning the state of the soul between death and the resurrection—Behold, it has been made known unto me by an angel, that the spirits of all men, as soon as they are departed from this mortal body, yea, the spirits of all men, whether they be good or evil, are taken home to that God who gave them life. And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow. And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of the wicked, yea, who are evil—for behold, they have no part nor portion of the Spirit of the Lord; for behold, they chose evil works rather than good; therefore the spirit of the devil did enter into them, and take possession of their house—and these shall be cast out into outer darkness; there shall be weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and this because of their own iniquity, being led captive by the will of the devil. Now this is the state of the souls of the wicked, yea, in darkness, and a state of awful, fearful looking for the fiery indignation of the wrath of God upon them; thus they remain in this state, as well as the righteous in paradise, until the time of their resurrection. "(Alma 40: 7, 9 & 11-14, italics and underlining mine)

Peter says the state of the wicked is prison, Alma teaches us that the state of the righteous is called paradise, and that this is before the resurrection and judgment. Christ told the thief he would be with him in paradise that day. Modern-day revelation teaches us even more about this condition. In a vision, given to President Joseph F. Smith in Salt Lake City, Utah, on October 3, 1918 he describes what was shown to him:

"And I wondered at the words of Peter—wherein he said that the Son of God preached unto the spirits in prison, who sometime were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah—and how it was possible for him to preach to those spirits and perform the necessary labor among them in so short a time. And as I wondered, my eyes were opened, and my understanding quickened, and I perceived that the Lord went not in person among the wicked and the disobedient who had rejected the truth, to teach them; But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead. And the chosen messengers went forth to declare the acceptable day of the Lord and proclaim liberty to the captives who were bound, even unto all who would repent of their sins and receive the gospel. Thus was the gospel preached to those who had died in their sins, without a knowledge of the truth, or in transgression, having rejected the prophets. These were taught faith in God, repentance from sin, vicarious baptism for the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, And all other principles of the gospel that were necessary for them to know in order to qualify themselves that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. And so it was made known among the dead, both small and great, the unrighteous as well as the faithful, that redemption had been wrought through the sacrifice of the Son of God upon the cross. Thus was it made known that our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the flesh; That they might carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his words." (Doctrine and Covenants 138: 28-37)

So salvation is made available to all the billions of those who lived and died either rebelliously, not understanding or without ever hearing of Christ, something the author never even alludes to. What justice or love would there be in Christ if He just cast these people off because they never knew? I also think of all the people who did hear about Christ but were taught it was a lie, or were taught twisted versions of Christian doctrine, or only knew bad examples of Christians such as abusive, self-righteous parents who claimed to be followers of Christ but abused their wives or children or just plain lived horrible lives. Who would give any credibility to such a persons proclaimed religion? I don’t know of any other Christian denomination that can explain how all these people, children of a loving God can have a chance at salvation and eternal happiness.

Well this letter is already long enough. I’ve heard a lot of very odd things from other people about what Mormons supposedly believe and I think it’s strange that there are so many who seem to think they have to attack us instead of relying on the strength of their own doctrines to attract or keep their congregations.

We invite faithful people to keep whatever truths they have and add to that what we have to offer. We don’t ask them to accept what we teach on face value, but tell them to ask the Father in sincere prayer if it’s true, and to act on the answer. The Book of Mormon has this promise:

And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things. (Moroni 10: 4-5, Italics mine)

I know this book is real scripture. I know Joseph was a real prophet and that he translated it by the gift and power of God. I know there are real prophets and apostles with priesthood authority today and I’m grateful for it. Some time ago I gave a copy of the Book of Mormon to Jason. I hope you take the opportunity to read it yourself and try the promise. I know if you’re serious you’ll get the same answer I got a long time ago.

Sincerely,

Gordon