by Steven Danderson on October 25th, 2009
Remember Bill Keller, who told his parishoners that “a vote for Romney is a vote for Satan“? While I’m not sure he REALLY thinks that Governor Mitt Romney is Satan, he is quite clear that he thinks we are hellish creatures who, along with those who refuse to join his jihad, should be straightway sent to hell, where we belong. And, if his web site is any indication, given even the flimsiest of chances, he would personally dispatch us there.
While Keller is obviously malicious, like other venomous anti-Mormons, I find the candor and consistency in his hatred to be most refreshing. Too often, after hearing a laundry list of untrue evils that we Latter-day Saints are supposedly guilty, I hear the accuser complain with words to the effect of, “But I’m NOT an anti-Mormon! I LOVE Mormons!”
Sorry, Ace, but spreading untruths about people is NOT a sign of love toward them!
Keller, on the other hand eschews that ingenuousness. He is adamant that we Latter-day Saints are demons from hell, and non-anti-Mormons are Judases–neither of which merit any love or consideration whatsoever. I don’t like his malevolent stance, but at least he does us the courtesy of leaving no doubt at all where we stand. I really do respect that.
Moreover, Keller’s attitude is in refreshing contrast to anti-Mormons who call us demons, but do not advocate the only just punishment for such threats. CS Lewis (2002) leaves no doubt that those in league with the devil are threats to be exterminated:
If … we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbours or drive them mad or bring bad weather, surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did. [Mere Christianity. Scanned from 1952 edition. Retrieved 26 October 2009 from http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/Mere%20Christianity%20-%20Lewis.pdf, 16]
It irritates me whenever somebody accuses others of serious offences, but advocate unserious remedies. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., for example, accuses doubters of global warming of treason, but doesn’t advocate the death penalty. Either Kennedy is unaware of the gravity of treason, or he misuses the word.
Bill Keller has no such problem. Neither does Ed Decker, from whom Keller apparently gets his information. Dr. Dean Helland (1990) (PhD, Oral Roberts University) tells of his break with Ed Decker after anti-Mormon violence incited by Decker spilled over to members of Helland’s denomination [Meeting the Book of Mormon Challenge in Chile. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilms International. 116-130, 198-214]
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, News stories, Politics | 12 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on October 24th, 2009
Jewish groups are upset at the thought of the Church baptising Holocaust victims. It seems that they are being egged on by one Helen Radkey. The Church had agreed that members are to do the work only for those in their line–or with the permission of their next-of-kin. Despite assertions that the Church has reneged on that agreement, the Church’s NewFamilySearch web site has software that would make such breaches extremely difficult. To add to this woe, the Vatican has expressed concern about the practise of baptism for the dead, and has issued instructions to end LDS access to their records.
Leaving the present difficulty for members of the Church to violate this agreement aside, I would like to comment on both the reasons for Jewish objections and what is actually being done by baptisms for the dead, and to perhaps reassure them of both our intent and the absence of negative effects of those baptisms.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Doctrine, General, LDS History, News stories, Temples | 40 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on September 27th, 2009
Obviously, President Bill Clinton wasn’t the first US president to be involved in sexual shenanigans. Roughly 100 years previous to the start of President Clinton’s term, another Democrat President was involved in a sex scandal: Grover Cleveland. Unlike Clinton’s false “I did not have sex with that woman,” Cleveland instructed his staff to “Tell the truth.”
Cleveland’s supporters, like Clinton’s a century later, took a “What of it?” approach–and, like Clinton, Cleveland was elected to two terms.
During the mid-1980’s, when I was living in the Middle East, I was being worked on by a dentist who was an Evangelical Christian. After detailing to me several of Joseph Smith’s alleged sexual sins–no doubt, gleaned from anti-Mormon sources, he concluded, “How can you accept as a Prophet such a wicked man as Joseph Smith?”
My answer: “So Joseph Smith was wicked. What of it?” Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, LDS History, Politics, Polygamy | 65 Comments »
by Keller on August 28th, 2009
FAIR announced its review of MormonThink.com during its annual conference held the first week of August. A response to that review was recently posted at that site. What follows are some of my observations, which are not necessarily shared by other FAIR volunteers, about the response
MormonThink does a good job at posing questions to their readers to get them to reconsider the plausibility of LDS truth claims. The authors, a coalition of Mormon and ex-Mormon skeptics [1] (some operating under a cloak of anonymity while accusing the Church of less than complete transparency), find previous faithful attempts by unofficial apologists to answer similar questions “unsatisfactory.” A FAIR review demonstrated that MormonThink’s own predominately negative answers were ill-informed, highly slanted (not objective as advertised), and fail to more than superficially engage faithful answers. MormonThink’s response to FAIR’s rebuttal is a mixed. On one hand, the response shows a commitment to accuracy and correcting some of its more egregious errors. On the other hand, the response justifies its failure to take FAIR more seriously by making an appeal to authority. MormonThink seeks the attention of General Authorities and they believe FAIR is usurping the Brethren’s role. This suggests to me that they are less concerned about answers and more concerned about getting attention for dissent. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, LDS History | 31 Comments »
by Keller on June 17th, 2009
This is my second installment where I tackle the accusation that Joseph Smith was a rake (Ken Jennings wouldn’t say so either.) before he ever received a revelation about plural marriage. I am partial to Dan Bachman’s theory that section 132 was received in stages as he lays out in “The Ohio Origins of the Revelation on Eternal Marriage” in a JMH 1978 article. Critics have likewise turned to the Ohio period to frame Joseph Smith as a sexual predator before the revelation was made public. Clark Braden, in his 1884 debate with an RLDS apostle pursued this agenda. He claimed that the [March 24,1832] tar and feathering was brought about by Eli Johnson’s brotherly outrage of Joseph Smith’s impropriety against Eli’s sister, Marinda Nancy Johnson. I am going to present some new information about Eli Johnson, but if I don’t make much sense please see the following links for background information: 1 2 3 .
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, LDS History, Polygamy | Comments Off
by Steven Danderson on May 2nd, 2009
I suppose that the rescue of the US-flag ship Maersk Alabama is old news by now. As we all know, President Obama ordered US Navy Seals to take out the pirates who attacked that undefended ship. Like Jonah Goldberg, I praise the President for allowing the US Navy to take quick, effective action on those who would harm the defenceless. While I didn’t vote for President Obama [I DID, however, vote for Alan Keyes in the 2000 GOP Primary in my home State!], and I think that his economic policies will merely bring about what he tries to avert, it is only right to acknowledge his proper actions as they occur.
Moreover, I think that those who fault President Obama in this are merely applying a mirror image of the “Bush Derangement Syndrome.” Like the extreme Left, who could see no good thing from former President Bush, the extreme Right can see no good in President Obama.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, News stories, Politics | 84 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on April 11th, 2009
Just before my wife and I went on vacation last week, My wife happened upon a book titled, Cults: Secret Sects and False Prophets, by Robert Schroeder [London: Carlton Books, 2007]. This book was purchased by a local college library, and my wife, who is also a college librarian wonders whatever possessed that school to buy such a BAD book.
All in all, pages 44-45 of this book is a typical, anti-Mormon screed, full of all manner of errors. Unlike the Church, Mr. Schroeder capitalized the d in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Perhaps this is the least serious error.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Doctrine, LDS History, LDS Scriptures | 59 Comments »
by Ugo Perego on February 6th, 2009
On January 28, 2009 Simon Southerton posted the following comments on the discussion board at exmormon.org about my recent scientific publication on Native American origins. He also took the opportunity to criticize Dr. Scott Woodward, former molecular biologist at Brigham Young University and current director of the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation (SMGF).
Having great familiarity and being personally involved with the subjects mentioned in Southerton’s remarks, I deemed it necessary to provide an alternative and more accurate version of the facts. This is simply a rebuttal to Southerton’s specific posting and it is not meant to be another treatise on the Book of Mormon vs. DNA issue, since there is already a great abundance of LDS scholarship addressing the topic.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon | 98 Comments »
by Steven Danderson on December 14th, 2008
I recently perfunctorily read a new study written by three Stanford University professors, titled “Reassessing authorship of the Book of Mormon using delta and nearest shrunken centroid classification,” and published in the latest issue of the journal, Literary and Linguistic Computing. While I admit to being disturbed by the article, it is not for the reason they would like it to be. I teach statistics at America’s largest privately-owned university, and, frankly, I see so many problems, I’m not sure where to begin.
To start, they were not exhaustive in alleged authors. In this regard, the “study” is not unlike choosing five National Football League (NFL) teams at random (and two Canadian Football League (CFL) teams as a “control”), and stating that the one with the best won-lost percentage won the Super Bowl. Choosing the best of an woefully incomplete list tells the reader nothing about “Who really wrote the Book of Mormon”–the Stanford authors’ clucking agreement with the authors of the book by that name notwithstanding–just as not checking out ALL NFL teams says nothing about the winner of the Super Bowl.
For one thing, Joseph Smith’s writings were missing from this study. I can imagine that even many anti-Mormons would be upset at crowning Solomon Spaulding’s Manuscript Story as the true Book of Mormon, if it were demonstrated that Joseph Smith’s letters or journal was a better match!
Moreover, the authors alleged by Latter-day Saints are VERY conspicuous by their absence. While I admit that there are no other samples of Mormon’s or Alma’s or Nephi’s writing than what is found in the Book of Mormon, the Book does extensively quote Jesus Christ–and not just the rerun of the Sermon on the Mount!
Why is the New Testament missing from this study? Surely, if Solomon Spaulding were the author of III Nephi 9-12; 15-21; 23; 26-30, rather than the Saviour, wouldn’t testing His words in the New Testament put the final nail in the coffin burying Mormonism? However,whether or not Jesus’ New Testament statements are a match with His alleged words in the Book of Mormon, these authors have made sure that the reader would never know it. What are they afraid of–that the Gospels would be a match?
It gets worse. As I read the results, not one of the works studied had more similarities with the Book of Mormon than dissimilarities. Their choice of Spaulding’s manuscript as the true source of the Book of Mormon, then, is like taking the last place team in each division of the NFL and congratulating the best of them for winning the Super Bowl. Just as every last place team is disqualified from the playoffs, let alone winning the Super Bowl, a manuscript with more dissimilarities than likenesses to the the Book of Mormon should also be disqualified from consideration.
In short, this game is rigged, and such a misuse of scholarship offends me as a teacher of statistics, as a Latter-day Saint, as a Christian, and as a fair-minded person. The fact that this pseudo-scholarship is in reality a poorly-reasoned anti-Mormon bromide makes it worse.
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, Book of Mormon, LDS History, LDS Scriptures, News stories, Uncategorized | 51 Comments »
by Scott Gordon on November 8th, 2008
It is interesting to see the reaction against Mormons now that the election is over. There are protests at the Temples, a chapel in Orangevale was vandalized, and a boycott on Utah has been called.
During the election, there was even an anti-Mormon commercial that shows Mormon Missionaries invading a home and pawing through women’s underwear to find a marriage certificate to tear up.
Some have commented that the ex-Mormon community has used the cover of the election to strike some blows against the Church.
On the positive side, Church Leaders in other faiths have come out in our defense.
I thought one of the more interesting ant-Mormon rants came from actress-comedian Rosanne Barr.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Anti-Mormon critics, News stories, Politics | 83 Comments »
