The Telling Silence—a Conversation with Mormons

“Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24).

One of our members (Verona) asked me to come to an appointment with Mormons a week ago Saturday because, when they came to the door, they said something about a new revelation, which sounded intriguing. We all thought the Mormon Church had received some up-to-the-minute news that would prove interesting. Therefore, Frank, Verona, Francine, Brandon, and I were gathered together to hear what this new spiritual revelation might be.

The two Mormons identified themselves as “elders,” which we did not challenge. We repeated that we were interested in this new revelation, but it soon became apparent that the only new revelation they had was the Book of Mormon itself. They had not communicated adequately concerning that and had left the wrong impression. We just let them talk for a while and asked questions for clarification. When we asked what their view of Jesus was, one of the men began by implying that He was a being who had evolved and God chose Him to be His Son, but the other one interrupted him and indicated that Jesus was always God’s Son. We wondered which they actually believed and which one was designed for the public to hear, but they moved quickly to another subject.

As usual, they affirmed that they believed and used the Bible (KJV) but that also they had an additional revelation from God. Then they talked about Joseph Smith who only had a 4th-grade education and how he had been searching for a church, but that none of them seemed to be following the Bible. Frank asked, “How does one know what the true church is?” They were thrown off their game a little and said something to the effect that there was not a true church; therefore the angel Moroni told Smith to begin another one. Frank repeated, “But how do we know what the true church is?” Eventually, they admitted that we know from what the Bible describes, but they seemed a little uncomfortable from that point on.

A Moment of Silence

As they told about Joseph Smith, they affirmed that God had always spoken to His people through prophets and that Joseph Smith was his prophet in the 19th century. They also claimed that Thomas S. Monson was His prophet today. I asked, “Who was the prophet in the 1700s, the 1600s, or the 1500s?” They quickly said, “There wasn’t one.” In fact, they claimed that God did not have any prophets from the first century until Joseph Smith in 1830. They asserted that the church went into apostasy, falling away from the truth. These were referred to as the Dark Ages. While the falling away was prophesied, it took time to occur. Some changes came as early as the second century, but it took 200 to 300 more years to become full-blown. Also, during the Reformation in the 1500s people began making their way back out of apostasy, although this process also took two to three centuries.

After they had time to explain all these things—the falling away, the absence of a prophet for all those centuries, the rise of Joseph Smith to translate the golden plates—Frank very calmly asked them a question that it was obvious they were unprepared to answer. He said, “You know that John’s coming was prophesied and that Jesus’ coming was prophesied.” They agreed. Frank asked, “Then why is there no prophecy in the New testament of someone so significant as you say that Joseph Smith is?” Both Mormons had that “deer in the headlights” look. They did not have a clue as to what to say. They were trying to think of something, but nothing came to mind. Seconds went by. None of us spoke. We waited for them. More seconds ticked by. The silence became almost deafening. What seemed like five minutes was probably only one, but it was a most significant and telling silence. They could not answer the question. Finally, one of them said, “And so, we are just explaining to people about the Mormon religion and about Joseph Smith.”

The other Mormon began looking at his wristwatch every few minutes from that point on. I gave the illustration about spending all of the money I had in my billfold. “Now, if someone asks me to borrow some money what will I tell them?” They responded appropriately, “You will tell them you spent it all and that you have no more.” “Then we read 2 Peter 1:3. “Now,“ I pointed out, “If God gave all to man that he needed that pertains to life and godliness, then what can He have left to give?” The pause this time was scarcely noticeable (only a second), and he repeated himself: “And so, we are trying to show people about Joseph Smith.” They were learning to ignore questions they could not answer.

Other Comments

Sometime during the hour’s discussion, I asked the two men if they would fellowship those who had been sprinkled, and they affirmed that they would. This was surprising, since they baptize by immersion. If they fellowship ”Christians” who have been sprinkled, then why do they baptize by immersion? They might as well sprinkle, also. One cannot make the case that the word baptism means “immersion” or say, as Paul does, that baptism is a burial in water—yet accept as Christians those who have never been Scripturally baptized. Of what advantage would it be to do it the right way? Do they immerse, then, for the remission of sins or as a means of someone joining the Mormon Church?

A larger question, however, is, “If they can fellowship those who are not Mormons, then of what advantage is it to be a Mormon? If people can be saved without being one, then they may as well stay with the religious group they are already with. Probably, they would say it is advantageous to be a Mormon and partake of all the wondrous prophecies of the Mormon Church. But many would prefer not to trust in someone who claimed to translate Reformed Egyptian, a language that linguists know nothing of, from golden plates, which then disappeared.

Frank and I both asked how we could believe this story was trustworthy, and they replied that there was the testimony of the three witnesses. I asked, “Isn’t it true that at least two of them left the Mormon Church?” They said that all three of them did, but two of them returned. I pointed out that none of the apostles left the faith (except for Judas who took his own life) and then returned. Those three Mormon witnesses do not seem credible.

They advised us to read the Book of Mormon and pray to see if it is true. Frank asked, “”What if the answer we receive is that it is not?” They could not fathom that possibility but stated: “If someone sincerely prays, they will receive the answer that the Book of Mormon is from God.” In phrasing it this way, they left themselves an out. If a person gets the wrong answer, he is obviously not sincere. Obviously, this is stacking the deck in one’s own favor and would work for anyone else as well as it does for them.

The Off-Centered Picture

In an effort to show why the Book of Mormon is needed, one of the young men said that the Bible is like a picture hanging on a nail on the wall. Occasionally, the picture is crooked, leaning one way or the other. What the Book of Mormon does is like a person putting a nail in at the bottom of the picture—to keep it straight. Frank immediately protested, saying that the Bible does not need any additional help—that it is self-sufficient and stands on its own. They gave up on that illustration.

Polygamy

Since we had their attention, I said, “I know you’ve been asked this question before, but with your continued revelations there have been contradictions. Joseph Smith taught monogamy in the Book of Mormon, but in Doctrines and Covenants there is a paragraph addressed to his wife Emma, telling her that she must accept polygamy. Later, polygamy was renounced.”

One of the Mormon men answered, “Yes, we have been asked that question before. Consider this text:

Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not be any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none.

For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

Wherefore, the people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes (Jacob 2:27-29).

I was about to say, the writer got it exactly right, but then he went on with the next verse:

For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things (Jacob 2:30).

I thought the man was going to make a point from this, but he stopped. I said, “What does that mean?” He repeated verse 30, as though it was self-explanatory. He then went on to explain that there was a time when several Mormon men were put to death, and polygamy was necessary. They then said that they really needed to leave, and, after a prayer led by Frank, they left. We discussed the verse and decided that they thought that, after God had gone to all the trouble of praising chastity, that (in their minds) He then contradicted Himself and said that polygamy would be all right, if He willed it so. None of us saw that interpretation suggested by the verse. Furthermore, God would be saying, “Polygamy is unchaste—unless I say it’s all right; then unchastity becomes chastity.” Hmmm. Do Mormons never see these contradictions?