For the critics... what do you say to missionaries?

[_thews]

I had two kids knock on my door tonight with white shirts and ties. I have glass in my front door so I knew what I was getting myself in for; I opened it and went outside. I first explained that my family was a former Mormon that goes back to the days of polygamy, and I felt it was sad that they didn't know what I knew about Mormon history... they just sort of gave me a blank stare. One of them was lilly white, and surprisingly enough, the other had dark skin. Inside, my head was screaming, "Dude, if only you knew what I know."

I decided to cut to the chase and ask them the one question I knew they couldn't answer... what happened to the Urim and Thummim? The white kid said it was taken back with the golden plates. I asked him to look up D&C10:1 when he got home and followed that up with a bit of history. I told him that, according to Mormon doctrine, the Nephite spectacles were taken back, leaving only Joseph Smith's seer stones. I went on to tell him that Joseph Smith owned the seer stones/Urim and Thummim before the Book of Mormon and they were occult objects... again, blank stare.

I smiled, shook their hands and told them they were nice kids and I wished them well, but I know for a fact that Joseph Smith was a false prophet of God. I have more than a few cars and three of them are out front. They asked me what was under the covers and I told them... the white kid told me he loved Pontiacs. We talked about how they're cool dinosaurs and it struck me how they were such nice kids, like I'd be proud of them if they were my sons.

Just curious to the critics who know the truth, do you engage missionaries? Do you fear bursting their fragile worlds with the truth?

[_Fence Sitter]

My wife frequently invites the missionaries over for dinner and , while I grumble about it, I enjoy their visits. I see no point in trying to disabuse them of any notions they might have, they have their whole lives in front of them to pursue what ever truths they might wish.

Mormon missionaries are not sent out to 'teach' the gospel, that would imply they even understand it at this age which they don't. They are sent out to testify of what they already believe. If they encounter someone who wants to argue about religion they should move on looking for more fertile (ignorant) grounds where what they say will be taken at face value. There is a reason they are much more successful with the uneducated.

While we are eating I try and engage the missionaries in small discussions about stuff like the apostasy (every one has confirmed that it is an important part of their message) or ask them if they believe that they can one day be Gods (again 100 % have said yes) or if the blacks were less than valiant in the pre-existence (that one usually gets mixed responses) and a variety of those interesting aspects that the Church is trying to back away from. It gives me some insight into what constitutes Chapel Mormon beliefs.

There is really a lot you can talk to them about that is interesting to both parties without ending up in a hostile discussion. I even told one pair of missionaries BC's line about how, for all we know, God might be black, I think they were a bit dumbfounded at the suggestion.

Oh and Thews would you please reload your avatar? I cannot see one for you.

[_Tobin]

Thews, you are confused. The Urim and Thummim were returned to God and were different from the seer stones (of which Joseph Smith had at least two).

[_zeezrom]

"Thank you for sharing that nice passage with us, Elders. Now, if you will be so kind, please turn with me to Odyssey Book I, lines 368-374..."

[_thews]

Thews, you are confused. The Urim and Thummim were returned to God and were different from the seer stones (of which Joseph Smith had at least two).

CFR

[_Tobin]

Thews, you are confused. The Urim and Thummim were returned to God and were different from the seer stones (of which Joseph Smith had at least two).

CFR

JSH 1:34 He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants;
JSH 1: 35 Also, that there were two stones in silver bows—and these stones, fastened to a breastplate, constituted what is called the Urim and Thummim—deposited with the plates; and the possession and use of these stones were what constituted “seers” in ancient or former times; and that God had prepared them for the purpose of translating the book.

[_RayAgostini]

Just curious to the critics who know the truth, do you engage missionaries? Do you fear bursting their fragile worlds with the truth?

My late friend, Max Nolan (from Western Australia), wrote this article for the New Era in 1985:

J. Golden Kimball in the South.

Elder Kimball’s introductory meeting with President Roberts was a memorable one, providing him and his companions with a missionary challenge from an unexpected direction.

“The first time I ever saw Elder Roberts was either in Cincinnati or St. Louis. He had been chosen as president of the Southern States Mission to succeed John Morgan. I left for Chattanooga, Tennessee, with twenty-seven elders assigned to the Southern States. There were all kinds of elders in the company—farmers, cowboys, few educated—a pretty hard-looking crowd, and I was one of that kind. The elders preached, and talked, and sang, and advertised loudly their calling as preachers. I kept still for once in my life; I hardly opened my mouth. I saw a gentleman on the train. I can visualize that man now. I didn’t know who he was. He knew we were a band of Mormon elders. The elders soon commenced a discussion and argument with the stranger, and before he got through they were in grave doubt about their message of salvation. He gave them a training that they never forgot. That man proved to be President B. H. Roberts” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1933, p.

Max eventually left the Church, after the 1993 excommunications of "intellectuals". He said he felt he could no longer belong to a church which excommunicated its best minds, but nevertheless retained a very fond regard for his experiences as a Mormon.

I wrote this blog tribute to him almost three years ago.

A Tribute To Max Nolan (reposted).

Roberts was very familiar with all of the controversies and challenges to his faith, and I suspect that he at least temporarily harboured some serious doubts, and his "devil's advocate" approach seems to be sustained in Max's article. He wasn't satisfied with the "simple approach" to Mormonism, but he also refused to accept that it was an "obvious" fraud.

[_KevinSim]

He wasn't satisfied with the "simple approach" to Mormonism, but he also refused to accept that it was an "obvious" fraud.

And he was right. Mormonism isn't an obvious fraud. People who would criticize it need to realize that the people who believe in LDS theology will never take those critics seriously until those critics take LDS theology seriously.

[_KevinSim]

I went on to tell him that Joseph Smith owned the seer stones/Urim and Thummim before the Book of Mormon and they were occult objects... again, blank stare.

The seer stones "were occult objects," and therefore, what?

I smiled, shook their hands and told them they were nice kids and I wished them well, but I know for a fact that Joseph Smith was a false prophet of God.

Thews, how do you "know for a fact that Joseph Smith was a false prophet of God"?

[_KevinSim]

Oh and Thews would you please reload your avatar? I cannot see one for you.

How does one reload one's avatar? I haven't seen mine in a while and I've been wondering if there's something I need to do to get it visible.