Books >> Religion & Spirituality >> Christianity >> Mormonism

I come onto the Protestant Evangelist VS. Latter-day Saint debate with little bias, for I am wouldn't call myself either at the present time. For the Protestants (in their unusual epistemology) start witht he position to prove Mormonism wrong and "help" them, before analysing the LDS church on a factual level, this book will be a blessing. The problem? I feel that though this book has the ring of truth it is in turn specious.

When I purchased and glazed through this book, I came to the rather obvious inference that this book was whipped together rather quickly. In earlier times my friends and I used to humorously joke that we whipped homework together "on the bus on the way to school," I would say Morey did just that (in a symbolic manor) -- this book doesn't have the thorough scholarship that is needed to tackle the 'big leagues' of LDS scholarship and apologetics in FARMS, FAIR, even SHIELDS. The essay by two extremely bright indivuals titled "Mormon Scholarship and Evangelical Neglect" which is a detailed analysis of the current lack of ANY scholarship to respond to LDS is a valid cause for concern which this book does not fill.

The book is divided into two sections. Part 1 is a "how to use this book" which gives a brief discription of the LDS church from an Evangelical perspective, and then continues to give nine "documented" false prophecies. A found a number of statements in Part 1 to be unusual and noteworthy. First, he states that Mormons are "disciples of Joseph Smith" (pg. 12). In all my studies of LDS doctrine, history, and culture, I have yet to read a LDS refer to him/herself as a "disciple of Joseph Smith." (Though they do refer to themselves as disciples of Jesus quite often).

Morey then continues (ibid.) to give tell us "A Christian needs to understand what a 'cult' is." His definition is what I refer to as the "Protestant" one, as there is no set in stone definition of cult and a Mormon could easily turn around and make a definition that makes Protestants to be "cultists" and in a "cult" while LDS are excluded from this definition. Mormonism has many similarities to the early church: is the early church a cult? Morey basically argues that any church that doesn't view the Bible as #1 authority, 100% is a cult, yet the early church didn't even have a Bible -- not some three hundred years after Christ where the century long debate concerning book authority was finally clamped down upon. I have a hard time believing the canon is the work of God or closed.

Morey then continues and tells us that a Christian "must understand that Mormonism is a cult." Circular reasoning--yes. He then states that Mormonism is "built entirely upon Joseph Smith" -- this statement is ENTIRELY not true. Mormonism is based upon the standard works (KJV, BOM, D&C, PGP), past and present general authorities. It would be like me turning back at Morey and saying that "Protestantism is built entirely upon Paul of Tarsus."

Morey's first false prophecy (hereby FP) is concerning Jesus' return and Joseph Smith's teachings concerning it. The 1891 issue is clearly a conditional prophecy (hmmm...similar to Jonah's escapades), while other's concern Jesus coming "soon" and "not many days hence", etc. etc. We must recall that the NT speaks of Jesus coming back "soon" and even before everyone from that generation dies. While scholars such as Witherington and Sproul have done detailed examinations of eschatology, Morey's comparisons are hypocritical.

FP#2 concerns the 12 tribes of Israel. I admit to having never studied that and its relation to Mormonism, so I would examine his criticisms in that area. Next though, is his "moon man" FP criticism. Morey's analysis is horrible. His only first person (or Hyrum, Joseph Smith's brother) quotations come from a source dated around 40 years after Joseph Smith's death.

Morey's arguments about the LDS trip to Salem are not given a time-limit and can yet occur. For the others I have yet to discuss, I again admit to ignorance concerning them. Though all of the alleged false prophecies of Joseph Smith seem to me to have about all the substance of most of the alleged contradictions of the Bible and false prophecies of the Bible.

Morey concludes by writing "what should evey Mormon know" (pg. 117) where he quotes some biblical passages. I found his statement that we cannot be saved by baptism to be odd. It seems many Protestants believe in "decisionism" -- that one must make the sinners prayer (or similar) and/or they are saved at a specific moment which is much similar to the LDS view of baptism. It's not a work, it is what initiates grace though (as clearly something has to, and Protestants typically believe it is the sinner's prayer).

Oddly, Morey writes there is a "heaven to gain and a hell to shun" as one of his finishing statements. LDS accept this and argue (to some extent successfully) that the Bible could and possibly does refer to three levels of heaven upon which we will reside. He concludes by writing that Jesus is the only name we can come to to be saved (and that Joseph Smith can't save us). Who said Mormons believed that Joseph Smith cleansed their sin? Any Mormons perhaps (this excludes some alleged statements in JoD by Brigham Young which we are at best unable to be sure were an accurate recording).

I found this book to be bad, and another needless book among the 2000 other "anti-Mormon" books that have been (or still are) in publication. Sadly, I can recommend no good scholarly criticisms of Mormonism: there are none that i know of. I recommend a good, thorough analysis of Mormon doctrine, church, culture, history and then come to a full conclusion. Not some cheap shots from the hip from (Bob Morey), a man who is not an expert in the field.