Over 16,529,761 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
Questions Mormons Should Ask Themselves
From FAIR, the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research
Anti-Mormon literature tends to recycle common themes. One popular approach over the years is for critics to ask a series of "questions" under the guise of sincerity, but with the ultimate aim of casting doubt upon faith or tripping up members of the Church.
Such tactics are not new; Jesus repeatedly faced questioners from among critics during His earthly ministry.
One set of questions that has made rounds is entitled Questions All Mormons Should Ask Themselves. T he list consists of 58 questions that are designed to confuse the reader. Each question is answered in detail in the full wiki article found at http://en.fairmormon.org/Questions_All_Mormons_Should_Ask_Themselves
Incorrect Assertions
There are a couple of interesting features to look for in this list and others. The first is that many of the questions don't just ask a question; they make an assertion. An example of this would be the question that person A asks person B: "Have you stopped beating your wife?" To answer "yes" or "no" is to agree to the assertion that at some point, you did beat your wife. Similarly, many of the questions start with a proposition thatmust first be answered before the rest of the question has meaning. You can ask all sorts of things in this way without actually taking the responsibility for defending the implications of your questions This is the case with a question like Question 15 below:
"Why does the Mormon church teach that there is no eternal hell when the Book of Mormon teaches that there is?"
The assertion is that the Mormon Church teaches that there is no eternal hell.. Our critic doesn't give us any examples of "the Mormon church teach[ing] that there is no eternal hell." A search of General Conference addresses from 1897 to 2007 doesn't turn up a single instance of any LDS leader teaching there is "no hell" — in fact, that phrase is almost exclusively used by speakers when quoting 2 Ne 28:22 ("And behold, others [the devil] flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell ...."; this passage was quoted 27 times between 1918 and 2004).
LDS scriptures and leaders emphatically teach there is a hell, and it is eternal. Where our critic is probably mistaken is that the traditional Christian view of hell — fire, brimstone, and pitchforks — is described as metaphorical by LDS scriptures: " as a lake of fire and brimstone.”
Faulty Interpretation
Another point involves interpretation. When providing a biblical scripture as the backdrop for a question, these questions often assert or imply a specific reading or interpretation of the text. In many cases, the interpretation is faulty. Isaiah, for example, lived at a time when Israelite religion was not strictly monotheistic in any sense. To read Isaiah's text as teaching some kind of strict monotheism does damage to the text, and if we (the respondents) disagree with the interpretation, it can change the question significantly. An example is Question 5:
“ How can any men ever become Gods when the Bible says, “Before me there was no god formed, neither shall there be after me”? (Is 43:10)
These critics often misunderstand the doctrine of theosis , or human deification. Yet is is a doctrine shared by many early Christians and much of modern Eastern Christianity (e.g., Eastern Orthodox).
However, the question asked here represents a misunderstanding of the Isaiah scripture in its ancient context when compared with the rest of the Bible. In this case, the reading is particularly problematic. The Christian site which asks this question would need to explain exactly what the scripture is referring to when it says "Before me" and "after me." Since they do not believe there is ever a time when God does not exist, it cannot really refer to anything at all, and certainly the text doesn't exclude a "during me" reading.
This passage is actually a comparison that Isaiah is drawing between the God of Israel (YHWH) and the Canaanite deity worshipped by many Israelites at the time: Ba'al. Ba'al had become chief of the Canaanite pantheon by defeating Yaam (another Canaanite deity). And by extension there was the presumption that he could also be superseded (we see this in the Ugaritic myths).
YHWH, on the other hand, did not replace anyone to become God, and, Isaiah claims, he would not be replaced. “Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." Such a text doesn't apply to the issue of strict monotheism, and it fits right in with an LDS model of theosis — while we may reach an exalted state and become heirs to the kingdom, we do not replace God, nor do we desire to.
Conclusion
The questions on this list, as well as others, may at first appear to raise legitimate issues. However, a more careful reading and consideration shows them to be no more valid than those attempts to destroy the Savior's work during His ministry.
