Share This Episode
Viewpoint on Mormonism Bill McKeever  Logo

10 Reasons Why We Cannot Fellowship with the LDS Church Part 10

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever
The Truth Network Radio
August 19, 2021 9:07 pm

10 Reasons Why We Cannot Fellowship with the LDS Church Part 10

Viewpoint on Mormonism / Bill McKeever

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 662 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

August 19, 2021 9:07 pm

We continue the series with Bill McKeever and Aaron Shafovaloff.


When one examines the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a biblical perspective view .1 limited sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect. And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism hoping you're having a very pleasant Friday.

Welcome to this edition of the viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry had with me today is Aaron shuffle all of my colleague at MRM we been looking at a statement that was made in the late 1800s it was in 1897 that a group of Presbyterians got together and listed 10 reasons why Christians cannot fellowship the Mormon church. We not only looked at the 10 reasons that were included in this statement that we've also been talking about a rebuttal that was made to the statement of rebuttal by Elder BH Roberts was a general authority in the church at that particular time was fascinating, though, is that when you look at what BH Roberts has to say. He rarely says that what was in the statement is inaccurate. After he came out with his rebuttal, and I might mention this was first released in 1997 in 1921. It is published in the desert written news newspaper owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. We don't know how it got printed in their two days after it was released in the desert written news in 1921. BH Roberts makes his rebuttal to this statement, then the group that was supporting these 10 reasons came out with a rejoinder to BH Roberts and this is what it says at the beginning of this rejoinder and I think you really need to listen to the wording of this. The reason for the re-issue of this pamphlet is to show as can be abundantly done that Mormonism in the essence of its beliefs has not changed in the 25 years since the reasons the 10 reasons were issued.

Remember it's been 25 years now since it first came out, I would argue Erin that after over hundred and 20 years. A lot of these points are still valid.

Perhaps not the argument against plural marriage and Adam God. But certainly the other points are still abundantly taught in the LDS church today and if I could say something to the Christians listening. I would highly recommend taking an interest in the history of some level of Christian engagement of Mormonism. There is a tremendous continuity of this substance of our complaint against Mormonism and the substance of our gospel to the money people.

It's not just a post-1960s phenomena. There have been Christians from the very beginning trying to reach Martens at sharing the same gospel giving the same complaints and you what. There is a question in the early 1900s, of whether or not Mormonism was substantially and fundamentally changing.

There is a kind of false optimism that it was going to mainstream into it to Christianity. There will be recurring instincts in the future of people with me, I wonder if it's it's going to become an evangelic fish kind of movement that we have seen over and over again. Now it's essentially the same spirit. Let me go on in this rejoinder because they proceeded to say if the terms herein used are offensive to the Mormon church Mormons have only themselves to blame. The quotations given in support of the reasons are a severe indictment of Mormonism that any statements of the writers of the leaflet. Still worse indictments could be quoted from accepted Mormon authorities just make a quick comment on that the quotations given in support of the reasons are severe indictment of Mormonism than any statements of the writers of the leaflet. That's kind of an approach that we have always taken the Mormonism cite their own material I can give my opinions but my opinions are going to mean a lot to a latter-day St. what is going to mean a lot.

Hopefully to them when you cite their own material, their own conference messages their own Scriptures, their own manuals and the statements from their presidents of their profits that carries a lot of weight. The rejoinder goes on to say. Moreover, Mormon authorities have never been gentle in dealing with the sensibilities of non-Mormons repeatedly. Those who do not obey Mormon teachings are threatened with damnation that still a truism to this very day.

Tell us more about this rejoinder.

I think it's significant that the author, the rejoinder finds other quotes given in 1897 in general conference by an apostle, which says quote the living oracles are worth more to the Latter Day Saints than all the Bibles. In other words, there's other teachings within the Mormon church that we ought to go beyond the Scriptures beyond the Bible to living revelatory statements by lead leaders that are even more important than what is each of the dead letter of what is in Scripture and in other words, there is this proof of maximum is in the. The appeal to minimalism is a very selective appeal in this rejoinder it says Mr. Robert speaking to BH Roberts objects to the quotations which are taken from the non-sacred books of his church. That would be the standard works. It goes on to say. Yet these books are printed by the official authority of the church and reprinted with the imprimatur of the church for circulation. Many of them up to the present time. They are for the instruction of their own people. Mr. Roberts in his numerous writings refers to the same authorities to enforce his claims.

One of the authorities objected to his Roberts own book new witness for God, but it bears the statement that it was approved by a committee appointed by the first presidency.

I'm quoting as Orthodox and consistent with our teachings, not one of these quotations contained in the 10 reasons has been withdrawn or officially repudiated by the church.

If we are to accept only the books specified by Mr. Roberts. How do we know that his books or his replies are official or authoritative. No one not even know Mormon can ever be. Just sure what the church teaches. If you're giving an unofficial account of what constitutes official doctrine is inherently problematic if the church is giving its authority's stamp of approval on the sources we ought to take her seriously. They ought not be discounted or said to be off limits are off the table when it comes to the light of public scrutiny. One of the objections that Roberts gave in his rebuttal was, as mentioned here, as we just talked about not going after the standard works but other things, but then this rejoinder says the Mormon church is always taught revelation upon revelation, but the fact is that the presidents of the church since the original Joseph have seen how troublesome it might be to publish and defend new revelations. We have certainly seen that on the streets when were talking with Latter Day Saints.

They want to boast that the reason why there church more closely represents the first century Christian churches because they have this abundance of latter-day revelation, they would say that because we don't place that same kind of emphasis on latter-day revelation were a part of the great apostasy, but I think they're right in bringing to the surface.

In this rejoinder you go after that latter-day revelation and they get upset with you. That shouldn't be, they should be able to defend that now.

I would agree with what Robert said in his rebuttal. We can't just take arbitrary statements that a leader said over the water cooler. But what you do when they were making these comments in general conference.

What you do when they're making these statements in their books.

You take Spencer Kimball, for instance in the book the miracle of forgiveness. A lot of Latter Day Saints want to repudiate that book even though it was in print for how many decades and only recently went out of print it still cited quite often in many church manuals do you think that Spencer Kimball was putting down ideas. He really didn't believe to be true that some of of course he believed this on some of the charges.

BH Robertson said the church is silent on this or that and the rejoinder says, quote margins are accustomed to be silent on many things, and it is this idea that sometimes Mormons feel very encouraged to believe something that they don't feel encouraged to publicly confess there certain things are taught to the children encouraged, either expressly or by implication or by a high suggestion but aren't necessarily given out as public confession to journalists. George q. Cannon is quoted in the rejoinder on January 28, 1900, as saying this in the Celtic tabernacle quote our elders and going out to preach the gospel have to be exceedingly cautious, lest they give strong meat to the people were only prepared to receive the milk of the word.

If they give strong meat. Persecution is raised immediately.

For this reason, they have to reserve eternal truths with which they are familiar. That should be problematic. Why can't you just answer us straight up further difficulties in Christianity. Yes, there are am I shy to talk about them. If somebody really has a sincere question about be glad to try to explain it as best as I can in a way that I hope they will understand where I'm coming from, but I'm certainly not going to be deceptive you know like if they asked me what do you believe in the Trinity, although not really all course I do. Explain what I believe it to be. Do you believe in hell will yes I do when I will explain that you may not like my answer but I'm not going to hide from the fact that I may believe these things. In conclusion, the rejoinder has this summary of the issues here and it reads as follows. Mr. Roberts, BH Roberts, that is, frankly, admits that reasons one and two are correctly stated his admissions to be carefully studied number two.

He claims that reasons three, five and seven are essentially true and he says, enough said. Number three has his reasons for eight are partially untrue, but notice that, though he tries to soften the charges made. He virtually declares them to be true, for he seems to reject entirely only reason six and 10. However, Mr. Roberts, dare not deny specifically the authority of a single quotation given here or elsewhere, nor dare he deny the authority of the living oracles who uttered them. He takes refuge in a sweeping denial in a silence of the church while admitting that prominent Mormons have taught such doctrines.

The church is never repudiated them or their doctrines. I think even more damning is the next statement that comes after those bullet points and this is basically how this rejoinder and it appears that the Mormons considered the 10 reasons of sufficient importance to put forth their best protagonist to reply to them in the reply becomes a confession and that's exactly true. He doesn't really deny them.

He did certainly does not give good arguments why we should not believe this to be true statements regarding the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and I think that it I think they're right. His reply actually becomes a confession you can't say we don't believe it, and then say it's true and he does that by addressing the complaints that the Presbyterians had BH Roberts substantially confirmed the substance of the criticisms that Christians had of the Mormon faith.

I love the last page to the document says, and the truth shall make you free. I think before we sign off on this, though, we should go back to the very beginning of the document and I want to make this statement very clear because sometimes people misunderstand fellowship as opposed to friendship. The statement itself wanted to make it clear that they were not saying that we should not be friends with the LDS church.

We don't having ill will towards those who are members of the LDS church. But when it comes to fellowship when it comes to breaking bread in that area. We have to stand firm and we cannot cross that line. I'm sorry if that offends them, but you know what there's a lot of things Latter Day Saints believe that offends me, that's just life. Let's go on but I think there's a lot of truth in this, that in these 10 reasons why Christians cannot fellowship the Mormon church are certainly something that we should take into account today. Thank you for listening you would like more information regarding his research ministry. We encourage you to visit our website you can request our free newsletter Mormonism research. We hope you'll join us again as we look at another viewpoint is

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime