Apologetics

“Though argument does not create conviction, 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. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.”
(Austin Farrer, “The Christian Apologist,” in Light on C.S. Lewis, ed., Jocelyn Gibb [New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1965], 26.)

In 1823, seventeen-year-old Joseph Smith was told by the angel Moroni that: “God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.” (Joseph Smith History 1:33.) In the nearly two centuries since that revelation, we have seen the fulfillment of this prophecy. Since the day Joseph revealed that he had seen a vision he was criticized by some and supported by others. Books, articles, pamphlets, lectures, newsletters, and even movies have been made in an attempt to debunk the boy prophet and the religion he was instrumental in restoring. With the introduction of the internet we have seen the addition of web pages, discussion forums, newsgroups, email lists and chat-rooms dedicated to attempts at destroying or defend The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In the past fifty years we have seen tremendous advances in scholarship relating to ancient Christianity and Judaism, as well as Book of Mormon scholarship. Joseph Fielding Smith once said, “Every member of the Church ought to know that it [the Book of Mormon] is true, and we ought to be prepared with an answer to all of those critics who condemn it.” (“The Book of Mormon, A Divine Record,” Improvement Era, Dec. 1961, 925.) Many members have taken that counsel seriously. There are a number of pro-LDS groups (many of which are included in my Apologetic Links-- the most notable of which is FARMS) who have published research defending Mormonism with the tools of advanced scholarship. Some non-Mormons have taken notice of the high-caliber nature of this research.

A recent article, for example, in the Trinity Journal (19:2) entitled, “Mormon Apologetic, Scholarship and Evangelical Neglect: Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It?” by non-Mormons Carl Mosser and Paul Owen, notes that “...Mormon scholars and apologists (not all apologists are scholars) have, with varying degrees of success, answered most of the usual evangelical criticisms” (p. 180). Not only do they acknowledge that LDS scholars have adequately answered many anti-Mormon criticisms, but some anti-Mormons seem to be aware of “pertinent [LDS] works” and continue to “promote criticisms that have long been refuted.” Mosser and Owens feel that such lack of interaction with “contemporary LDS scholarship is a stain upon the [evangelical] authors’ integrity and causes one to wonder about their credibility” (p. 181). Whereas Mosser and Owens recognize that Mormon scholarship is often “rigorous” and “warrants examination,” they also complain that “there are (as far as we are aware) no books from an evangelical perspective that responsibly interact with contemporary LDS scholarly and apologetic writings” (p. 182). Mormon scholars, they note, are “contrary to evangelical perceptions, legitimate scholars. We use the term scholar in its formal sense of ‘intellectual, erudite; skilled in intellectual investigation; trained in ancient languages’” (p. 180). These LDS scholars, they admit, are earning advanced degrees at prestigious colleges in fields relating to studies of the New Testament, Early Christianity, and Near Eastern languages and cultures. “The significance of these facts is simple: Mormons have training and skills to produce robust defenses of their faith” (p. 189).

LDS scholars, they note, are heavily involved in the International Dead Sea Scrolls Editing Team, and that the LDS scroll “research is readily accepted by the larger academic community, and Mormons are increasingly asked to collaborate on, contribute to, or edit books with non-LDS scholars.” The writings of some LDS scholars has been accepted so widely by the non-LDS world, that “evangelicals quote Mormon scholars for support more than they know” (p. 200-1). Mosser and Owens are not the only non-Mormons to take notice of LDS scholarship. They mention that James H. Charlesworth, “the world’s leading authority on ancient pseudepigraphical writings” thinks that parallels between the Book of Mormon and ancient texts deserve “‘careful examination.’” Similarly, non-Mormon, Harold Bloom (of Yale), “is perplexed as to how to explain the many parallels between Joseph Smith’s writings and ancient apocalyptic, pseudipigraphical, and kabbalistic literature” (p. 193-4).

My Criticism Studies is a on-going work attempting to categorize and rebut all the major anti-Mormon charges, either with my own writings (which admittedly rely on the works of many LDS scholars) or with links or articles from other LDS authors.

Michael R. Ash