Missionaries from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) actively urge people to engage with the Book of Mormon by reading it and praying over its contents. They believe that this practice can lead to a personal revelation of its truth through divine guidance from the Holy Ghost, which is central to their missionary work.
The Book of Mormon itself, specifically in Moroni 10:3-5, invites readers to approach the text with prayer, seeking a personal affirmation of its divine origin from God. LDS members often express that there’s no greater proof of truth than the personal spiritual confirmation one receives through the influence of the Holy Spirit.
From The LDS missionary manual:
Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ
Chapter 1: Your Commission to Teach the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ
You are surrounded by people. You pass them on the street and travel among them. You visit them in their homes and connect with them online. They are all children of God—your brothers and sisters. God loves them just as He loves you.Chapter 3: Invitations You Might Extend
Will you read the Book of Mormon and pray to know that it is the word of God?Chapter 5: Use the Book of Mormon to Teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ
The Prophet Joseph Smith said, “The Book of Mormon [is] the most correct of any book on earth” (introduction to the Book of Mormon).
Grammatical and Typographical Corrections: Many of the changes made to the Book of Mormon since its initial publication in 1830 are grammatical, typographical, or clarifications of language. This includes fixing spelling errors, improving punctuation, and updating archaic English to make the text more understandable to contemporary readers.
Clarifications for Clarity: Some changes were made to clarify ambiguous passages or to correct perceived mistakes in transcription or translation. For instance, there are instances where words were changed to better reflect what was believed to be the original intent of the text.
Doctrinal Adjustments: Although less common, there have been changes that some might argue subtly shift doctrinal implications. These are often debated, with critics pointing out that they might suggest a reworking of the text to align with evolving church doctrine.
Given the extensive revisions made to the Book of Mormon over the years, including significant changes in grammar, doctrinal interpretation, and even content, the assertion that it is “the most correct of any book on earth” seems more like an audacious claim of divine perfection undermined by the very human need for correction and clarification.
In the landscape of religious discourse, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) presents an intriguing paradox in its approach to seeking truth and understanding. On one hand, the Church vigorously promotes the “Mormon Challenge,” encouraging individuals to read the Book of Mormon and pray about its authenticity, relying on a personal spiritual confirmation from the Holy Ghost. On the other hand, there is an underlying discouragement from engaging with materials or viewpoints that challenge or contradict LDS doctrine, often labeled as “anti-Mormon literature.” This essay aims to explore this apparent hypocrisy, examining how the LDS Church’s encouragement of circular logic in affirming its own scripture contrasts with its caution against external critique.
In “The Book of Mormon: The Heart of Missionary Proselyting
By Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin, he writes:
To more effectively flood the earth with the Book of Mormon, we must begin by better preparing our missionaries. We need missionaries who come into the mission field with burning testimonies of it. Even more importantly, we need more missionaries—including member missionaries—who are truly converted and have had spiritual experiences with the Book of Mormon. A missionary will not be effective if he or she does not have a strong testimony of this sacred volume of scripture. Indeed, I believe a missionary’s effectiveness and success is directly related to his or her own conversion to, testimony of, and love of the Book of Mormon.
Naturally, the question begs to be asked: “Is the proselyte’s reading and prayer that provides proof of The Book of Mormon’s authenticity, or is it the missionary’s strong testimony?” Hmmm?
The “Mormon Challenge”: A Test of Faith and Spirituality
The cornerstone of LDS missionary work involves inviting people to engage with the Book of Mormon, particularly through reading and prayer, as outlined in Moroni 10:3-5. This approach is not merely about intellectual assent but is deeply rooted in the promise of a spiritual witness. Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin emphasizes the critical role of missionaries having a personal testimony of the Book of Mormon, suggesting that the effectiveness of missionary work is tied directly to this spiritual conviction. This practice frames the Book of Mormon’s authenticity as something to be confirmed through personal revelation rather than external validation or scholarly critique.
The Discouragement of “Anti-Mormon” Literature
However, this open invitation to personal inquiry within the LDS framework contrasts sharply with advice from within the Church community to avoid so-called “anti-Mormon” literature. This term often encompasses any material that questions or opposes LDS teachings, history, or practices. The rationale, as explained on some platforms is to protect one’s spiritual health from what is deemed “spiritually toxic.” Yet, this perspective raises questions about the Church’s commitment to “individual freedom of inquiry, thought, and expression,” as proclaimed by former President Gordon B. Hinckley.
The Circular Logic of Confirmation
The “Mormon Challenge” essentially creates a loop where the scripture itself is used to prove its own validity. This method, while fostering a deep personal connection to faith, also inherently discourages external questioning or the exploration of alternative historical or theological viewpoints. Critics like Bill McKeever argue that this approach bypasses rational examination, relying instead on emotional and spiritual confirmation which might not withstand scrutiny from historical evidence or theological critique.
In response to the “Mormon Challenge,” Bill McKeever at the Mormon Research Ministry observes “Praying About the Book of Mormon – Is it Biblical?”
It is indeed a rarity to finish a discussion with a Mormon without being challenged to read and pray about the Book of Mormon. Following numerous discussions regarding the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, I have been asked by the zealous Latter-day Saint to forget what I have learned in order to pray about truth. On several occasions I have asked my LDS acquaintance if praying about the book is going to remove all the evidence which clearly shows this book is not from God.
When I refuse to pray about the book’s authenticity, I am often accused of not believing in prayer. The truth is, it is because I do believe in the sacredness of prayer that I don’t pray about what I believe to be nothing more than a 19th century novel. Nowhere does the Bible ever direct the believing Christian to pray about the truthfulness of any book, religious or otherwise. This however, does not mean that it is wrong to pray and ask God for guidance regarding any truth-claim, but because the Holy Spirit will only confirm that which is true, it is erroneous to assume the Spirit’s confirmation if reality conflicts with the assumed conclusion.
In essence, the test of Moroni 10:4 is a no-win situation. The one who is challenged must accept the book as true otherwise his integrity is placed under suspicion. If a person does accept the challenge (albeit unbiblical as it is) and concludes that the Book of Mormon is not of God, it is obvious to the Mormon that the person who prayed Moroni’s prayer either did not have a sincere heart, real intent, or perhaps even their faith in Christ was somehow inadequate. Mormons are convinced that if these three ingredients are used properly the test will yield positive results. Since it is not possible (in their mind) for the book to be wrong, the one who prayed must have done something wrong. To prove my point, ask your Mormon acquaintance if he/she will renounce Joseph Smith and the LDS Church if you were to pray about the Book of Mormon and, as a result, felt that God told you it was not scripture. If they will not agree to this condition they unwittingly confirm the fact that this is not a fool-proof method for determining truth. If it is possible for you to get an erroneous “negative” answer, why is it not possible for them to get an erroneous “positive” answer?
Of all people, the Christian should know that the heart of man is desperately wicked and cannot be trusted (Jeremiah 17:9). Because we are sinful creatures, we can be swayed by our emotions and sinful desires. Sincerity does not necessarily determine what is true because our sincerity is borne out of preconceived notions. If our preconceived notions are in error, our sincerity will be misguided. Proverbs 14:12 tells us, “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.” Clearly, God’s Word demonstrates that feelings can be deceptive. Because of this, the sincere truth seeker must base his decisions using more objective means.
The challenge becomes even more problematic when considering the implications of a negative or neutral result from this prayerful inquiry. If one does not feel the confirmation of the Book of Mormon’s truth, the LDS perspective might argue that the individual’s heart or intent was not sincere, thus preserving the scripture’s claim to divine origin through an unfalsifiable test.
Hypocrisy in Practice
This dual stance reflects a broader issue within religious communities where the encouragement of personal spiritual experiences is juxtaposed with a protective shield against what might challenge those experiences. The LDS Church’s discouragement of reading materials that might offer a critical or alternative view of its history or doctrines can be seen as a contradiction to the principle of individual inquiry. If truth is to be sought in sincerity, why shield believers from perspectives that might lead to a more nuanced understanding or even a different conclusion?
Freedom of Inquiry vs. Protection from Harm: The Church’s encouragement of personal revelation seems to advocate for an open, personal relationship with divinity. However, by cautioning against “anti-Mormon” literature, it suggests that this inquiry should not lead outside the Church’s doctrinal boundaries, potentially limiting the full exercise of the very freedom it preaches.
Selective Exposure: This selective exposure to information can be seen as fostering a confirmation bias where only affirming data or experiences are considered valid, thus perpetuating a cycle where the Church’s narrative is rarely challenged within its community.
Online advice comes from a variety of unofficial LDS spokespersons, like this one from AskGramps.com:
Question: I know we are counseled not to read anti-Mormon literature. What is the reasoning behind this? Shouldn’t it be of value to us to know what is being said about our religion? It sometimes gives you the feeling that church leaders don’t want you to know what’s in our history because it’s not always pretty. I personally believe that our “church” is like an individual. It is continually growing and changing; not ordinances -and anything questionable in the past is just part of it’s growth. Thoughts?
PaulaGramps: The answer is simple really. Life is too short and we have to much to do to grow spiritually for it to be in any way wise to ingest something that is by design spiritually toxic.
Simplistic? Absolutely. Life is not so short that there is that moment you realize the “Anti-Mormon” literature the church told you to stay away from, is mostly verifiable church history.
The Biblical approach to doctrinal inquiry and the search for “Truth.”
The biblical injunctions from 1 Peter 3:15 – 1but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, Colossians 4:6 – 2Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person., and Titus 1:9 – 3He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound[a] doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it. call for Christians to be well-prepared to defend their faith, emphasizing the need for study, grace in conversation, and a firm grasp of doctrine. These scriptures advocate for an engaged, informed faith that is open to dialogue and capable of withstanding scrutiny through understanding and respectful discourse. Here’s how this contrasts with the approach taken by some within the LDS Church, as described, and how it aligns with the practices of modern Christian thinkers:
Contrast with the LDS Church Approach:
Encouragement vs. Discouragement: The LDS approach, as discussed, involves encouraging members to engage with the Book of Mormon through prayer for personal revelation but discourages interaction with “anti-Mormon” literature. This creates a system where spiritual confirmation is sought within a very controlled informational environment, potentially limiting exposure to broader critical or comparative theological discussions.
Protective Shield vs. Open Inquiry: The LDS caution against materials that challenge its doctrines contrasts with the biblical call to be prepared to give an answer. The protective shield against external critique can be seen as contrary to the principle of individual inquiry, where understanding and defending one’s faith might require grappling with opposing viewpoints or historical critiques.
Nuanced Understanding: The biblical texts suggest that preparing a defense involves understanding not just one’s own doctrine but also being aware of alternative perspectives. The LDS discouragement of external critique could hinder this holistic preparation, potentially leaving believers less equipped to understand or respond to nuanced or divergent theological discussions.
Alignment with Modern Christian Thinkers:
Exposure to Diverse Philosophies: Modern Christian theologians and apologists like C.S. Lewis, William Lane Craig, or N.T. Wright often immerse themselves in a wide array of philosophical, scientific, and religious thought. They do this not to dilute their faith but to strengthen it, understanding that to defend Christianity effectively, one must know the arguments against it as well as the arguments for it. This mirrors the scriptural call to be prepared and knowledgeable.
Dialogue and Debate: These thinkers engage in public debates, write extensive works on apologetics, and participate in dialogues with those of differing views, embodying the principle from Colossians 4:6 of seasoning conversation with grace. This approach acknowledges that truth can be sought through sincere inquiry across boundaries, aligning with the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15 to defend one’s faith with gentleness and respect.
Intellectual Rigor: The approach of these thinkers often includes a rigorous intellectual engagement with both Christian and non-Christian thought, which can lead to a more robust defense of the gospel, as suggested in Titus 1:9. They understand that by exploring and possibly integrating or refuting other philosophical and theological perspectives, their defense of Christianity can be more comprehensive and compelling.
In essence, while the LDS approach might shield believers from potentially faith-challenging material to maintain doctrinal purity, modern Christian thinkers advocate for a more open, dialogical engagement with the world’s wisdom traditions. This aligns with the biblical encouragement of being prepared to give an answer, suggesting that true faith can withstand and even be strengthened by the crucible of intellectual and spiritual diversity. By engaging with different philosophies and religious thoughts, these thinkers not only prepare a defense but also enrich their understanding of Christianity, demonstrating that sincere inquiry can lead to a deeper, more resilient faith.
Conclusion
The LDS Church’s approach to truth-seeking through the “Mormon Challenge” while simultaneously advising against materials that might contradict or challenge its teachings illustrates a complex interplay between faith, doctrine, and inquiry. This dynamic can be interpreted as a protective measure to maintain spiritual unity and faith but at the potential cost of intellectual and spiritual freedom. For those within and outside the faith, this situation underscores the importance of a balanced approach to religious inquiry—one that values personal spiritual experiences but also respects the pursuit of truth through diverse sources and critical examination. Only through such an approach can one genuinely claim to seek truth with both an open heart and an open mind.