h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Dear Royalrcrompton,

I hope I didn't come across harsh in my last post. But I didn't feel like you were being honest in your posts. Obviously, you feel like you have solid faith. I just wonder why you don't share it positively. You have written a book on Tests, Temption and Sin and maybe that is why you come across as negative and accusatory.

Instead of attacking the character or reputation of men others view with respect you would do better to share your your own faith positively. If it is worth believing then others will believe you.

The attacking stance is counter-productive and possibly devilish. Many attacked Jesus because of the rumours surrounding his birth. There was stigma attached to Him that probably prevented many from hearing him, even though he was the Son of God.

I do not believe that Mohammed was a prophet of God but if I want to share the faith with Muslims (and I have) I will not attack his character or reputation. I will share my faith. It can stand up on its own.

Your desire to attack the prophet Joseph Smith is off-putting. It is a good sign that I shouldn't trust your views on other things also. If you would share your own faith and what it means, I might not believe you, but at least I could respect you. Let me quess - "you don't want my respect"? Fair enough, but you give your own "brand" of Christianity a bad name (a spiritual stench) by being so downright disrespectful.

You and I both believe the Bible is true - and yet we do not agree with what the other claims it teaches. Something is missing. Someone is wrong. What resolves it? If not living prophets and additional scripture what resolves it - The pope? The Creeds? The oral tradtion? The selection of various teachers? What clears up the confusion?... because there is certainly confusion! How do two people who read the Bible differently find out who is right and who is wrong?

Mormonman,

Ps. Remember - "Speak the truth in love"

Dear Mormonman

Your assessment that I am not being honest is perplexing. How do you derive that judgment?

I should ask why you think my book " Temptation, Testing and Sin " has anything to do with being negative as opposed to positive. Did you read the book? In addition, have you some contact with people whom I have shared the gospel? Did they remark that I was solely negative and gave them no hope at all? If you are going to judge people, then you had better have first-hand understanding of their character, motives and the lifestyle in which they operate (which with respect to me, you know nothing).

People have every right to attack the claims of false prophets/ prognosticators. That falls under the umbrella of " fair comment." You might want to read Gal. 1 and see the curses pronounced by the Apostle Paul upon those who were attempting to pervert the gospel (not too positive is it?)

I believe that Mormonism is an insidious perversion of the truth and so I will do all in my power, in the leading of God, to point out its heresies in the hope that fewer people will become infected with its false doctrines. That Joseph Smith was a chartlatan and a necromancer is the historical recvord. And since there is nothing positive to share with the BBC h2g2 readership re Mormonism -- only the negative side, that is undoubtedly why my commentary will come across as less than positive with respect to any discussion with you as you continue to justify the claims of Joseph Smith ( again this is " fair comment " on both our parts).

I do not hate Mormons as you may believe. Surely, there are many thousands of Mormons who lead well-regulated lives. But the LDS Church erroneously attempts to pass itself off as a Christian denomination when, in fact, it is not. And it is for this key reason that I take up the spiritual battle against you and your ilk. And you are quite right sir, I really don't care one iota whether or not you have any respect for me.

As for you believing the Bible to be true, then why on Earth do you Mormons need to rely on other books? To do so, clearly indicates that you do not in fact, believe the Bible to be true, but only partially true -- otherwise you wouldn't be needing the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price etc.

Sincerely

RC

Dear RC,

I was wrong to say that I felt you were not honest. Now I know that you are being dishonest. When you read the Bible (or these posts) do you actually open your eyes?

You do not like when someone judges your book without reading it, or your message without hearing it, or your character with knowing it. Yet you have done the same with the Prophet of the Restoration.

You consistenly look at the roots of Mormonism when the Lord himself told us to judge things by their fruits. The fruits are good because the roots are good too. Joseph Smith is not the root of the restoration - the God of heaven is. The Bible is full of the promise of the restoration of revelation in the last days. But I do not know these things are true because I have read the Bible or any other book. I know because God has told me. What greater witness can I have than from God Himself? That is what is "needed" in our day and time - people who know how to pray and let God answer.

As for your belief in the Bible - how genuine can it be when you misuse the book so much? You like the message straight and direct - listen to this from the Lord as recorded in 2 Nephi 29:

3 And because my words shall hiss forth—many of the Gentiles shall say: A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible.
6 Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?
7 Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?
8 Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall run together also.
9 And I do this that I may prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.
10 Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written.


That language, from the lord, is as direct as it can get.

Now what of those biblical passages you are fond of asserting sustain your view that God cannot give more than the Bible. Some things should be said as preliminaries. First, no one in the Bible had a Bible. So it is a little hard to argue that all they needed was the Bible. Second, all these books are written to people who had already been taught the gospel. That gospel was not book-based it was revelation-based. Third, one can believe the books of the Bible are true without believing they are complete. Consider the following from the last chapter of John's gospel:

24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Fourth, the only way to know the things of God is by revelation (1 Corinthians 2). Yet you clearly deny revelation. The point is you deny the means by which these men were able to preach (and write) the gospel in the first place.

Let me deal with the 4 most common biblical passages used to argue that there cannot be more scripture:

Galatians 1 - How do you know what gospel Paul was preaching? Why was he so concerned that some would seek to change it? How can your religion be the same as his unless you got it in the same way? How can you be so sure someone hasn't changed the Bible from the gospel Paul preached to "another gospel"? Many plain and precious things may have been taken away? The standard, beyond scripture, has to be living prophets and apostles. That was the standard Paul set.

2 Timothy 3:14-17. Who taught Timothy? Why could Timothy trust him? What scriptures did Timothy know from his youth up (obviously Old Testament)? Is the Old Testament sufficient? It is true so why do we need more? Did Paul know he was writing scripture, and that therefore, more scripture would be given beyond what was already written? How could he do that... if all scripture was already given! The test for scripture here is that it comes by inspiration and that it "profitable".

Hebrews 1:1-2. Did the Bible exist when this was written? If Christ was the last revelation - how could Paul "add" to the scriptures? Paul wasn't even converted until after the ascension! When are the "last days" - the time of Paul? Or does this mean "in the most recent days"? Are these the "last days"? What prevents Jesus from continuing to speak through prophets and apostles today (the real last days) as He did in those early days? Where is the Bible mentioned in this scripture?

and finally,

Revelation 22:18-19. Again did the Bible exist when this was written? Which book is John speaking about, the Bible or the book of revelation? Why is he certain some will want to both take away or add to the prophecy of his book? Was this actually happening? If I say this scripture is about the whole bible, when it is not, am I adding to this prophecy? If I say that the testimony of Jesus is no longer the spirit of prophecy, when it is (Rev 19:10), am I taking away from the prophecy of this book?

None of these scriptures, or any others, show that the Bible is a closed canon. It is only closed to those who do not know how to get the spirit of prophecy and revelation. None of these scriptures show that the Bible is complete or sufficient.

Now, none of this "proves" that the Book of Mormon is true or that Joseph Smith is a prophet. This only shows that the Bible does not say there can be no more Bible. The Bible, in fact, says the opposite. So how can you say that you believe the Bible when you clearly contradict it?

I know that the Bible is true but it is not complete. I know the Book of Mormon is true but that it is not complete. There is no closed canon. Otherwise, God would cease to be God. So now it turns out that you are actually a (practical) atheist!

We "need" more than the Bible. We need God, we need Christ, we need the spirit and we need prophets. And guess what, we have them!

Dear Mormonman

We are going around in circles, revisiting the same arguments, so I will now sign off on this topic. You are entitled to your opinions and I defend your right to make them. However, unlike you, I would never dare to call someone dishonest without some evidence to back it up. You apparently have no compunction about besmirching someone's character without a clear understanding of their actions (as historically recorded).

I have no " hate-on " for Mormons. I am concerned for their spiritual welfare as I am for all those who claim to be Christian but who hold to unbiblical theological doctrines as do the LDS Church, The Watchtower Society and numerous other cults. The bottom line about Mormonism is whether one accepts the testimony of Joseph Smith. It is incomprehensible for me to fathom how seemingly intelligent individuals can hold to a belief system that has been advanced by someone who could provide no extant, historical or scientific backing to his claims. All the major religions of the world are able to, at least, provide some historical support for their beliefs -- but with regard to the revelations of Joseph Smith as compiled in the Book of Mormon, there is nothing to corroborate his fanciful imaginations.

Yes, I may not have read all the Book of Mormon or Pearl of Great Price. But in my defence, I have perused the writings of several analytical critics who have spent a great deal of time reading and comparing the LDS canons (Holy Bible, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrine and Covenants etc.) These critics all unanimous in their dismissal of Mormonism as holding to anything factual. They all expose Joseph Smith for his lack of candour and his known alignment with the black arts -- notably " peek stone " gazing ( a form of clairvoyancy not unlike crystal ball gazing). Furthermore, that Joseph Smith was an acknowledged necromancer disqualifies him from having received a new revelation from God. One has only to read Deut. 18 to discover that God NEVER works through such mediums. They may be regarded as " prophets " by their followers, but they are not prophets of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob -- they are plainly false prophets who are in league with the devil. So in view of Deut. 18, Joseph Smith's gospel revelations must be regarded by sincere biblical scholars as pure bunk.

For the information of others who may be following this entry, please refer to the following publications for a careful review and summarisation of the LDS belief system :

Is Mormonism Christian? Gordon S. Fraser, Moody Press, Chicago, 1977

The Four Najor Cults, Anthony Hoekema, Eerdmans Press Grand Rapids, 1963

Confronting the Cults, Gordon R. Lewis, Baker Books , Grand Rapids, 1966

Kingdom of the Cults, Walter Martin, Bethany Press, Minneapolis, 1968
(with later reprints )

What the Cults Believe, Irvine Robertson, Moody Press, Chicago, 1979

The Changing World of Mormonism, J. & S. Tanner, Moody Press, Chicago, 1980

RC

Dear RC,

There is plenty of proof that you are not being honest. You have not been honest with your use of the Bible - or with your "research" of the Mormon Faith. All the books you list are anti-Mormon books. This is a fairly one sided list. All these people attempt to prevent people from reading the Book of Mormon for themselves or from listening to any genuine members of the church. They have succeeded with you - you haven't even read the Book of Mormon! How "fair" can your assessment be? These books you list tell lies about Joseph Smith, distort the history of the church and misrepresent the doctrines of our faith. Are there no 'objective' books to read - those who are 'neutral' as to the belief system of the LDS people?

Can you honestly keep saying that Joseph Smith was aligned with the "black arts" and was a necromancer when all you have as proof is the word of those who were enemies to him and the work he established? Lies have always been told about true prophets. Surely the greatest false prophecy is the one you yourself believe - that is, that God would cease to call prophets! The devil himself is behind such a prophecy. And it is false.

Do you honestly think God would leave the earth, and any claim to prophecy upon it, only in the hands of the devil? There MUST be true prophets.

"NOW faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." [Hebrews 11:1]. I have my evidence. That you cannot "see" it does not mean that it is not real. Did people accept that Christ was the Son of God because of historical support alone?

There is historical support for what Joseph Smith says, things that have come to light recently, things that he could not have known. But that is not the foundation of my faith. My faith is based on revelation - just as Paul's was. (Besides there is not as much evidence for the Bible or it's more dramatic doctrines as you claim).

All this shows me, that you are not being honest with the Bible, with your research of mormonism or with my (biblically based) questions. I have tried to be patient. I have given you repeated and fair chances to take back your false claims and to show me why you believe the Bible teaches what you claim it does. You have failed to stop attacking what you know so little about and you have failed to answer those questions I put to you.

I would ask anyone reading these posts to be fair in their assessment of Joseph Smith, to read his own testimony and the testimony of those who knew and believed him. Only after you have read both sides, and then asked God which is true, can you say that you know. Either Joseph is a true or he is a false prophet. You won't find that out by asking anyone other than God himself. Who would tell us not to "Ask of God"?

Mormonman,

A friend of true faith.

It is interesting that RC never mentioned praying to know what is true. That reminds me of two scriptures:

Do ye not remember the things which the Lord hath said?—If ye will not harden your hearts, and ask me in faith, believing that ye shall receive, with diligence in keeping my commandments, surely these things shall be made known unto you.
1 Nephi 15:11

and

For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray ye would know that ye must pray; for the evil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray.
2 Nephi 32:8

Why do the scriptures that Joseph Smith restored repeatedly invite us to pray to know whether they are true? Why did Joseph have such confidence that we could ask of God and allow him to answer? And why does RC apparently lack that confidence?

This is the central issue - does God communicate with men in our day and time?

I have an answer to that question. The answer is "Yes!"

Judge the spirit of these invitations for yourself. True prophets are never afraid to invite others to pray. False prophets always are. They just don't want to take the risk that God might actually answer!!

Which "spirit of prophecy" does RC possess? (Revelation 19:10; 2 Nephi 32:8) The spirit of true or false prophecy? Each man must judge what is from God for himself. Those who pray in faith and sincerity can come to know.

The "ask of God" doctrine is central to the restoration. It is really that simple. There is no greater evidence than his answer.

Those interested in scholarly evidence can look at

http://jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml.

The evidence of Hebraisms, Chiasmus poetry forms, mesoamerican geography, ancient names, etc have all come recently. None of these could have been known by Joseph Smith during his own lifetime.

The doctrine of the book stands preeminently above all these, however.

I would like to further provide another source that one might find interesting. Anthropologists have discovered that a vast and ancient nation existed covering most of South America before and following the time the Book of Mormon claims the "Nephite" people fell who lived in "the land Northward". This quite strongly corrolated with the other people in the BoM the "Laminites". While it is difficult to find achieological remains of much of South America due to its climate, there have been and remain many reconized cultural similarities between the societies desribed in the BoM. This is something that no one could have known through any means at the time of Joseph Smith

Dear RC,

The following is a link to an article where two Evangelicals admit that critics of the LDS have not taken Mormon scholarhsip seriously. This article was back in 1997 and some have since taken up the charge.

What this shows is that your sources are seriously out of date and your attacks have all been refuted. If you want to continue your attacks, at least get up to date. Check out the scholarly evidences found for the Book of Mormon as noted by these two Evangelical scholars.

http://www.cometozarahemla.org/others/mosser-owen.html

Enjoy!

Mormonman

One of the constant attacks that RC made was that there is no corroborating evidence for the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. In fact, there is supreme corroborating and confirming evidence for the Book of Mormon. This evidence is very direct, powerful and accessible. The last prophet-writer in the book, Moroni, wrote the following words:

3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.
7 And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever.
Moroni 10:3-7

God has been merciful in speaking to his children since the days of Adam. Ponder that in your heart. As you read the Book of Mormon notice the wisdom regarding God and his plan that it brings. Ponder how it makes you feel in your heart. Remember all that God has done through time.
Then ask God the Father in sincere, honest and private prayer if the Book of Mormon is true. Ask him if it is scripture. Ask him if it is the word of God. Don’t just make up your own mind or let some other human decide for you. Ask God. Expect an answer. God himself will manifest its truth to you by the power of the Holy Ghost. That is how you will know.
Indeed, by that power you can know whether anything that claims to come from God is true. That is the ultimate evidence; the ultimate witness. Then you do not depend on anyone else for your knowledge of these things.
The Book of Mormon is Christ-centered. It acknowledges that he is. We can know that he is by the power of the Holy Ghost. In the final analysis, there is not other way to really “know”. We need revelation.
This is the power by which God has always worked, according to the faith we possess. He gives revelation to those who have faith. We attract the spirit when we have faith. Truly, God is “the same today and tomorrow, and forever.”

This is the ultimate test of the Book of Mormon. The book itself is not really on trial. We are. Do we have faith? Are we willing to believe? Can we get revelation? Are we willing to ask? Everyone stands on exactly the same grounds before God as far as this promise is concerned.

The promise has been fulfilled on numerous occasions. Millions have testified that the promise is true and millions more will join them. Are you honest enough to accept that God can speak and that He alone should be the source of your religious knowledge?

Everything that comes from God is intended to lead us toward God. That which comes from him also edifies and enlightens. The spirit of contention does not conform well to that purpose.

There are those who only attack the religion of others – they have nothing positive to say about their own religion. Being without revelation they are unable to speak positively for God. They spout venom and evil and build their reputations on attacking other religions.

One cannot speak for God unless and until God has spoken to him. No book can direct a church. Only those called and commissioned by God can do that. My exchange with RC evidences his attempt to avoid looking honestly at the revelations that sustain the calling of the prophet Joseph Smith. It also shows that I wasn’t as focused as I ought to have been.

The real question is how well we each know God and whether we feel comfortable and confident in approaching him in seeking answers to our prayers. RC never invited me to pray because God is not on his side. He could not invite me to seek God in confidence because he does not know God.

I will let Joseph Smith tell his own story:

“OWING to the many reports which have been put in circulation by evil-disposed and designing persons, in relation to the rise and progress of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, all of which have been designed by the authors thereof to militate against its character as a Church and its progress in the world—I have been induced to write this history, to disabuse the public mind, and put all inquirers after truth in possession of the facts, as they have transpired, in relation both to myself and the Church, so far as I have such facts in my possession. In this history I shall present the various events in relation to this Church, in truth and righteousness, as they have transpired, or as they at present exist, being now [1838] the eighth year since the organization of the said Church… Some time in the second year after our removal to Manchester, there was in the place where we lived an unusual excitement on the subject of religion. It commenced with the Methodists, but soon became general among all the sects in that region of country. Indeed, the whole district of country seemed affected by it, and great multitudes united themselves to the different religious parties, which created no small stir and division amongst the people, some crying, "Lo, here!" and others, "Lo, there!" Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist.
During this time of great excitement my mind was called up to serious reflection and great uneasiness; but though my feelings were deep and often poignant, still I kept myself aloof from all these parties, though I attended their several meetings as often as occasion would permit. In process of time my mind became somewhat partial to the Methodist sect, and I felt some desire to be united with them; but so great were the confusion and strife among the different denominations, that it was impossible for a person young as I was, and so unacquainted with men and things, to come to any certain conclusion who was right and who was wrong. My mind at times was greatly excited, the cry and tumult were so great and incessant. The Presbyterians were most decided against the Baptists and Methodists, and used all the powers of both reason and sophistry to prove their errors, or, at least, to make the people think they were in error. On the other hand, the Baptists and Methodists in their turn were equally zealous in endeavoring to establish their own tenets and disprove all others. In the midst of this war of words and tumult of opinions, I often said to myself: What is to be done? Who of all these parties are right; or, are they all wrong together? If any one of them be right, which is it, and how shall I know it?
While I was laboring under the extreme difficulties caused by the contests of these parties of religionists, I was one day reading the Epistle of James, first chapter and fifth verse, which reads: If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did; for how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know; for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible. At length I came to the conclusion that I must either remain in darkness and confusion, or else I must do as James directs, that is, ask of God. I at length came to the determination to "ask of God," concluding that if he gave wisdom to them that lacked wisdom, and would give liberally, and not upbraid, I might venture. So, in accordance with this, my determination to ask of God, I retired to the woods to make the attempt. It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty. It was the first time in my life that I had made such an attempt, for amidst all my anxieties I had never as yet made the attempt to pray vocally.
After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction. But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction—not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being—just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me. It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof." He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time.
Some few days after I had this vision, I happened to be in company with one of the Methodist preachers, who was very active in the before mentioned religious excitement; and, conversing with him on the subject of religion, I took occasion to give him an account of the vision which I had had. I was greatly surprised at his behavior; he treated my communication not only lightly, but with great contempt, saying it was all of the devil, that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days; that all such things had ceased with the apostles, and that there would never be any more of them. I soon found, however, that my telling the story had excited a great deal of prejudice against me among professors of religion, and was the cause of great persecution, which continued to increase; and though I was an obscure boy, only between fourteen and fifteen years of age, and my circumstances in life such as to make a boy of no consequence in the world, yet men of high standing would take notice sufficient to excite the public mind against me, and create a bitter persecution; and this was common among all the sects—all united to persecute me. It caused me serious reflection then, and often has since, how very strange it was that an obscure boy, of a little over fourteen years of age, and one, too, who was doomed to the necessity of obtaining a scanty maintenance by his daily labor, should be thought a character of sufficient importance to attract the attention of the great ones of the most popular sects of the day, and in a manner to create in them a spirit of the most bitter persecution and reviling. But strange or not, so it was, and it was often the cause of great sorrow to myself.
However, it was nevertheless a fact that I had beheld a vision. I have thought since, that I felt much like Paul, when he made his defense before King Agrippa, and related the account of the vision he had when he saw a light, and heard a voice; but still there were but few who believed him; some said he was dishonest, others said he was mad; and he was ridiculed and reviled. But all this did not destroy the reality of his vision. He had seen a vision, he knew he had, and all the persecution under heaven could not make it otherwise; and though they should persecute him unto death, yet he knew, and would know to his latest breath, that he had both seen a light and heard a voice speaking unto him, and all the world could not make him think or believe otherwise.
So it was with me. I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation. I had now got my mind satisfied so far as the sectarian world was concerned—that it was not my duty to join with any of them, but to continue as I was until further directed. I had found the testimony of James to be true—that a man who lacked wisdom might ask of God, and obtain, and not be upbraided.”

The only way to gain confirmation of this event is to “ask of God.” That is the doctrine of the Latter-day Saints and it is better doctrine than you will hear from many others that claim to represent Christ (when they are not even on speaking terms with him!)

One can deceive others by using truth in a dishonest way. Consider the following:

"Satan is the great deceiver, the father of lies (see John 8:44). This is not because Satan tells only lies. His most effective lies are half-truths or lies accompanied by the truth. A lie is most effective when it can travel incognito in good company or when it can be so intermarried with the truth that we cannot determine its lineage.
Suppose, for example, we referred to Paul as “an Apostle who went about to destroy the Church.” Or suppose we referred to King David as a “servant of the Lord who was an adulterer.” As students of the Bible, we can recognize the elements of truth in each statement. Yet we know that each statement, by itself, conveys a lie. This example shows how easily a deceiver can discredit an individual by mingling events from different periods in his life. None of us is immune from that kind of deception. Youthful folly and the mistakes of inexperience can easily be used to discredit a person and detract from later accomplishments.
In this manner, the deceiver can attempt to undercut the repentance and forgiveness made possible by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. In this manner, the adversary can attempt to discredit the principle of eternal progress that is central to the gospel plan.
Satan can even use truth to promote his purposes. Truth can be used unrighteously. Facts, severed from their context, can convey an erroneous impression. Persons who make true statements out of an evil motive, such as those who seek to injure another, use the truth unrighteously."
Elder Dallin H. Oaks

This is what these books that are anti-mormon in their agenda do - they distort and deceive by using half-truths. This is part of the reason I accused Royal Crompton of dishonesty. He ought to know better.

Christ said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" and yet we all know that lies were told about him and that they continue to be told about him. Some of these lies were mingled with questions about his birth etc. They were embarrassing. Similarly, his servants are often lied about and their motives and actions judged by those who know nothing (but claim to know everything) about God or his ways.

In ancient scripture the Book of Mormon is simply known as "Truth". Acceptance of it is akin to acceptance of the Lord Jesus Christ - it contains the message of salvation and anyone willing to read, ponder and pray about it will come to know for themselves the truth.

Mormonman