I am grateful for the CES letter. It helped me out of a faith crisis. Once I took the time to check the receipts of the letters claims, I discovered that they were actually doing what they accused the church of doing, being manipulative, dishonest, and hiding true history and the church wasn't. Doing that exercise I learned so much more about the history and doctrines of the church. If it wasnt for the challenge, I wouldnt have grown in my faith as much. So thank you Brother Runnells!
@@wesleykarnesoh please . I also read the ces letter. And then went and checked it all out and was amazed at the things that were found that the ces letter was wrong on. Just research the real history of the church.
Alma stated, “… if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you.” Conversely, if you have had a belief and you desire to not believe or even if you choose to not “nourish” that belief you are at risk for losing whatever belief you have had. It’s my observation that people leaving the Church, for the most part have been subconsciously or consciously looking for an excuse to do so.
I really wanted to believe. I studied long and hard and consulted teachers. I came to the conclusion that its not true. It was like losing the a loved one. Your comment is proof that lds folk harshly judge those who leave
@@UVJ_Scott Again, judging me by dogmatically saying I didnt study the book of mormon. I have three copies that have been read front to back with hundreds of highlights. I studied it daily for two years on the mission. Just accept that people can read and pray about and come to different conclusions.
What you said was very judgmental. 40+ years in the Church. Served in 3 bishoprics, and desperately wanted to find reasons for the issues. And that is the very short version.
@@celicalostandfound help me understand. Do you believe Joseph manufactured the Book of Mormon? What church do you believe is the true church or do you believe that God doesn’t have a true church? What doctrine do you disbelieve? I’ve spoken with many former members and almost all left because they don’t like the Church’s stance on homosexuality. So they justify leaving based on the CES letter or some other rationale.
As I've read many of the comments, I think something that is important to include in the equation as to why some people are able to remain true to their faith in Jesus and others stray may come down to spiritual gifts. Though my family was not active in the church from my birth to when I started college, I feel like I've always had a gift of testimony. As I've aged, into my 60s now, I continue to be solidly founded in my faith in the Redeemer and clear on seeing, knowing, and experiencing all the good in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and able to overlook and tolerate the imperfections of the members of the Church, including myself. I study the words of the Prophet and the prophets and have no doubt that they are leading us to Christ, to bring others to Christ, and to prepare us for His return
Mr. Huntsman, I like your comment. I’m not a fan of the CES letter. It seems to be full of many little trivial matters along with the major problems. But I can respect someone who understands the issues and has a informed choice to be Mormon. Unfortunately most Mormons are not informed which breaks my heart. Take care My man and stay strong in Christ.
I am starting to realize the same thing as you, not all have the gift of faith, not all have the gift of a testimony or some spiritual gift that allows you to see through something like the CES letter, thats why if you have a spiritual gift that can uplift someone, we should use it.
I’ve personally experienced what he’s talking about. I got into a religious ‘discussion’ with someone at the SeaTac airport. The timing was crazy because I was almost done reading the Book of Mormon in a 6 day period. He rattled off memorized bullet points of near meaningless subjects without taking a breath. Emphasized odd or strange historical moments as fact, even though the dead no longer have any say or defense. Once I picked up on the obvious strategy- to overwhelm, that’s all I needed. Everything I had just read in the BOM about priestcrafts and false prophets was literally standing in front of me. It’s so easy to discern. I loved bearing my testimony each time he accidentally paused. I’m so grateful for the Holy Ghost and give all credit to God to have these amazing experiences.
Playbook. Study Lehi's dream, particularly pertaining to the great and spacious building. Apply the necessary gaslighting tactics until members fall into forbidden paths.
@@istx3 When he was five years old? Who reported it? Did he? To whom? His mother? How many dreams like that did you have when you were five? To have had such a dream means that he was already a prophet at five. If I were you, I'd pay attention to everything he said later in life, starting with his testimony of the Book of Mormon.
@@davidjohnzenocollins Correct, JS, Sr. It's interesting how people pick at somewhat plausible threads, more like pieces of lint, and try to pick apart the whole thing. You're hacking at imaginary leaves instead of digging at the roots: to convince people to stop believing the Book of Momon, you have to dig at their testimonies from the Spirit and the book's transformation of their lives. To do that effectively, you have to yourself sincerely read, ponder, and pray about the Book -- oh, but you must have already done that, right?
My son's pastor thought it would be important to GIFT me a dvd about "what's REALLY behind Joseph Smith and temples" for Christmas. So I put his name in the temple (it's what you do for those you're concerned for 💜🙏🏼right?) I never push my beliefs on them when I go watch my grandkidss programs, yet I hear negative talk about "those Mormons" about half the time I visit. Pretty tacky and rude.. My dad always said that if you're always bad-talking other churches instead of teaching about Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit of testimony in your heart, then your church must not be worth much....💡
When I was around the age of 10, I went to my friend’s church, I’m pretty sure it was Methodist or Presbyterian, they were prepared for my visit somehow. I had to defend my beliefs and hear some pretty blatant attacks on the LDS church during my visit. It was interesting, we’d never preached to my friend or his family, they only knew we were LDS. I wish more people spent more time explaining what they believe and living it and inviting others to “Come and See”, than trying to explain what others believe and mocking them.
@@thebenplatt it was decades ago but mostly I remember being given some pamphlet about Joseph Smith and then being informed that God does not communicate through a single prophet or by revelation and that the Bible was the only word from God and his prophets that we needed. It was interesting, I just sat there, explained what I believed about modern day revelation and can’t remember much more, although there were a few other things I can remember being informed about what I (“Mormons”) believed. I never went back to that church and my friend moved away a few years after that, we remained friends at our elementary school though, so the time I don’t think I recognized that they were trying to bash me, looking back it was clearly what they were doing and it was just odd. I think The Book of a Mormon can up again when I pulled out my Bible from my scripture holder and I pulled out the Book of Mormon during the class while getting out the Bible. That was interesting too, like I had pulled out porn or something. Good times.
@@thebenplatt The Bible predicts the book of Mormon and Christians ministers and teachers purposefully ignore and hide these things from you, yes, this plain truth right in your own Bible. Want proof? Grab your Bible and let's show you. Link UTube video titled (Book of Abraham part 7) make sure it's part 7. Link My name Paul Gregersen to get there
@@thebenplatt The biggest attack they hope destroys your faith is the attack on the book of Abraham which they intentually try to prove Joseph Smith failed to translate right. In just a few minutes allow me to completely destroy the CES letter. Link UTube video titled ( BOA ep 16) link my name Paul Gregersen to get there
Back in the early '70's a friend and I researched a number of anti-mormon publications. We looked up the footnotes to trace back to their sources. We found that almost inevitably the sources quoted other sources (sometimes multiple iterations) that ultimately used E.B. Howe's book "Mormonism Unvailed." Since that book had been thoroughly debunked I came away from the experience with the resolve never to take anti literature at face value.
Brigham Young prevented Africans from entering into the temple. This is a fact and these ideas were carried on for decades after him. Assuming this instance was quoted numerous times and got its source from "Mormonism Unveiled" would it be reasonable to say that it is a faulty source if it is using real facts? I suppose the point I am trying to make is that we need to be dissecting the facts that the source claims to have. Something coming from pro or anti LDS material is no wrong or right simply because it takes a biased stance.
The difference is the CES links all their sources and most are from the church’s actual website. Research for yourself, don’t take apologist’s word for it.
When I returned to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints after almost 2 decades of walking away, my bishop had me read The Miracle of Forgiveness by Spencer W. Kimball. EVERYTHING in that book was written kindly, truthfully, spiritually, and in a manner to LIFT UP all human souls to Jesus Christ (those who would choose Him.) I sustain ALL of God's prophets from Adam, to Joseph Smith, to Russell M. Nelson. Each has been a faithful, repentant servant of Jesus Christ, and deserves RESPECT given for all that they have done for God's people. In the SACRED name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Amen 🫂🙏🏻🕊🕯
@@gemmeerobinson1803 I think some Protestants and evangelical Christians believe this. Paradoxically, it seems to teach of an all-loving God who is prepared to doom good people to an eternity in Hell. This includes sincere individuals of all faiths (or none at all) who don't believe in a specific and limited interpretation of the Holy Bible. Surely, all just and honest people know in their hearts that this notion is false. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that who have not accepted Jesus prior to their resurrection - and there will be numerous opportunities for every person who has ever lived to do so up until then - will inhabit a kingdom of glory that exceeds earthly joy. But those who love Jesus, their family, friends, strangers, AND enemies, and have kept His commandments (John 15:10) will inherit a far greater glory, with all the promises given to Abraham and his posterity. Furthermore, the Jews, God's covenant people, will one day know that Jesus is their Messiah, and will be valiant in their devotion to Him.
@@gemmeerobinson1803 and Jesus Christ lifts, gives, and blesses everything/ everyone who come unto Him. I'm grateful for my personal relationship with Jesus Christ 🌞🙏🏼💜🕊🫂
4:03 I've also called the tactic 'shotgun argumentation', you blast a victim will a massive bullet point list with so many arguments that it is overwhelming. By presenting a large number of arguments in rapid succession, the opponent is intimidated from answering them all. If an amateur apologist manages to address them, they just shoot again.
@@advocate7643 It can if the person asking for them to be addressed is clearly not interested in having it be addressed, by how they ask. Its futile if they just preemptively Move the Goalpost as they write. How can a good faith actor expect one person to take any time to address a CES Letter, because it takes more time and study to address it than it was to copy and paste it to begin with. If any one of the issues were actually strong enough to take the church down, it should be able to stand on its own. Maybe then expect it to be addressed in a timely manner and after they do, don't simply repeat it to someone else and pretend it's gone unaddressed.
They are all arguments from repetition. You just regurgitate arguments from the nineteenth century, arguments which have been thoroughly and carefully treated by responsible LDS writers and scholars. You make it sound as if no Mormon has ever dared to respond to these arguments. In fact they have, yet critics are bullying regular, non-expert, people by dragging the conversation to an ad nauseam state in order to then assert one's position as correct if one item you ask them has not been contradicted.
@@advocate7643 Rubbish - you've closed your mind, you've cast off the truth, and you're bashing the faith on this faith-promoting channel. And there isn't anything you could put forth here that we couldn't shoot down in 5 minutes. You speak in generalities because you have zero arguments... "the church doesn't have straight answers" what nonsense - that's patently false.
Excellent presentation. When I began my mission back in the 80's I felt a need to be prepared to confront anti-Mormon accusations. I got a copy of The Truth About The God-Makers and found it very helpful. Not just that it addressed specific accusations, but also that it laid out the kind of tactics and methods used by those who craft such accusations. I would also say it has built my faith and confidence in the church to see the kinds of shenanigans our critics must resort to, but far too many get so emotionally impacted by the accusation that they buy it and don't look for the rebuttal or give it honest consideration.
@@alienwarex51i3 To start with, it isn't that uncommon for people to independently make the same spelling errors. Also keep in mind that Joseph only dictated the words, the scribe was the one to write them down. It could be that the scribe misspelled because that was how they were used to seeing it in their Bible, or it may be that they recognized what Joseph was dictating matched a part of the Bible and they used that to help them record it. Either way it really doesn't prove anything other than Joseph's scribes were mortals who sometimes spelled things wrong. So what.
@@incogneato790 I should mention that these errors include not just misspellings, but entire missing words, the same missing words present in the KJV. For example the KJV in Isaiah 2:9 says "And the mean man boweth down [...]" just as the 1830 BoM does. This is an obvious mistake, which was later corrected in the BoM (2 Nephi 12:9) to say "boweth not down." This is one of about a dozen instances of the BoM having the exact same errors as the KJV - errors that are _only_ found in the KJV. So, the idea that these are simple coincidental misspellings that happen to align with the same misspellings in the KJV seems unlikely. The response from FAIR is that God must have dictated these errors to Joseph for whatever unknown reason. To me, that seems like a weak response. I don't think people are getting too emotionally flustered to buy the rebuttals; I think too many of the rebuttals are just too weak.
@@alienwarex51i3 What I said still applies though. There is what Joseph Smith spoke, and there is what the scribe wrote. We only have what the scribe wrote. Each scribe was likely familiar with the KJV and could have very well have been unconsciously influenced by that in how they recorded what was said or made an honest mistake, or could have recognized what was being said matched something said in the KJV so copied it from there on purpose to 'get it right'. None of that is a challenge to Joseph translating by the gift and power of God. Someone can attribute something nefarious to it if they like, but that is only a reflection of their bias, not proof of anything. "And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."
Dan Hoen didn't really listen. Brother Smith basically said he took some of the weakest arguments to show the example of the way the CES letter and by extension most anti attacks come. Even then, he said he had to dig deep to find the way the letter made stuff up. Let's take a book and grab a few words here and there separated by paragraphs and pages to show alleged plagerism. It shows the author of the letter starts with short cuts and goes from there. The prophet could literally stand at the pulpit in General Conference and address every single issue in the CES letter. I'll say it again. No answer would ever be good enough.
@@danhoen4129 You again. You still haven't admitted to the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologists. Are you going to admit that Paul debunked your anti-Mormon and Egyptologist friends?
@@danhoen4129 Ignored Paul Gregersen's absurd theories? They're not ignoring anything. They're no more ignoring Paul Gregersen's videos than any other pro Book of Abraham videos from other members of the church. Therefore, why would they only ignore the pro Book of Abraham videos from Gregersen?
@@danhoen4129 The answers are more than reasonable, logical, and faithful, but you are of a lying spirit and so no answer will suffice. Christ ran into unbelieving people such as yourself. As sad as it is that people leave the church, it is also a benefit that people like you are gone, no longer a lingering poison directly affecting true members. And if you're thinking people are leaving the LDS church in droves, actually all Christian churches are experiencing this same phenomenon, but to admit this you would have to be honest, and clearly you are not. More to the point, scripture clearly prophesizes that it is people like you within the church who create unrest and a loss of faith. It is often what drove the apostles to visit the meridian churches to clear up disputes and to warn the faithful members of the wolves within the flock seeking to create as much chaos and destruction as possible. You are of this vein! And speaking of logical fallacies, oh please. You wouldn't know a logical fallacy if it hit you over the head. Good luck with the Santa Claus thing!
"We hope Spidey is not an anti-Mormon”, that actually made me lol. Was dealing with this anti shiz for quite a while. So I totally get when you say 95% of it is old. Nice talk. Thanks.
@@steel6322 If the members devoting their time to the church doing so enjoy doing so, how is that a waste of their time? Do whatever people who disagree with the church enjoy slandering the church, don't they have anything more enjoyable to do? I can't see persistently slandering someone or a group as enjoyable.
@@steel6322 Where I live negative truths will be classified as slander if it has not been proven in court. I once slandered an academy not knowing telling the truth could be slander.
@@steel6322 I were just saying what's classified as slander in my country, do you agree churches are organisations? The law is we cannot give any negative information about organisations unless they have been proven in court. So-called critics, whatever they want to call themselves are very unprofessional. "The Church is full of paedophiles and sex addicts." Would you consider that professional religious debate or slander and deceit? Are the majority of adults in the church paedophiles? "If you tell your parents you're LGBTQ+ they'll disown you!" Would you consider that religious debate or 'critics' slandering parents in the church? "If you don't believe your parents and peers will abandon you!" Is that religious debate or slandering parents and friends? Would you consider any of that slander fearmongering the person who loses their faith? I would consider it religious debate if it was about the religion itself, not 1 personal experience out of millions who haven't experienced abuse by the church. Abusing members is not what the majority of church members do.
So I'm investigating my faith a little bit (member my whole life) and read the CES letter immediately before watching this video. I'm extremely glad that I watched this video in conjunction with reading the letter. This video did an extremely good job of debunking several things the letter presented as fact, and exposed them as laughably bad, paper thin arguments. Every point you addressed, you completely dismantled, which proves your own point about the "Death by a thousand cuts" method... almost. It does a really good job! However, some points that the CES letter makes are not just fluff, or easily debunked 'cuts'. Some of them are more akin to bullet holes, that the church has responded to, but never provided a good answer for. Those points were conveniently left out in this video. For example, the Book of Abraham. The church itself has addressed this issue in an essay on their website, but it was lackluster and didn't really answer the question. It pretty much said, "Yes, we admit that there is a problem, and we agree that the translation was entirely false. But maybe they meant something different in Abraham's time! Maybe the parchment was just a catalyst for inspiration to Joseph Smith! We don't really know, but we know that you shouldn't worry about it." The church very cleverly provides non-answers to these extremely faith-shaking issues, and avoids them altogether when their listeners don't know any better. And believe me, these issues are faith-shaking. Knowing that Joseph Smith apparently has multiple, well-backed allegations of translation fraud (Even outside of the CES letter and other similar anti-mormon literature) that the church has no real answer to, shakes my faith in the authenticity of the Book of Mormon translation greatly. Great video, for real. I'm seriously very glad I watched it. It changed my perspective of the CES letter, and decreased it's perceived credibility vastly, and revealed that a lot of it was fluff manufactured to deceive. However, it would have been much better if it didn't conveniently avoid the topics that actually have significant weight to them - faith destroying weight. I will continue watching Greg Smith's firesides in hopes that I will find some of these 'silver bullet' questions answered more honestly fairly than the church itself, because I can tell that he is a faithful, and credible source.
You may find some answers by watching some Hannah Stoddard interviews. She has done a huge amount of research on Joseph Smith... reading the original documents etc. She also explains some issues with a church historian who didn't even believe in prophetic revelation. He created some church history to fit his narrative. I can look up some links for you if you're interested.
Maybe take a look a member ‘David Alexander’ a new member who has been involved with many churches. He speaks about these issues in an interesting way.
Keep digging if you can seriously think this guy was honest in his “debunking” … LDS apologetics are extremely deceptive and illogical. Furthermore, the CES Letter is only the beginning of the issues proving the church is a false and corrupt organization, only the tip of the iceberg.
When some of my very smart kids decided to disengage from the Church giving me some of the reasons likely in the CES letter. I thought I had pretty good explanations for most of their complaints but I could tell it was hard to give all explanation within their normal attention span. I asked what one thing I could say that might make a difference for them. One said that his major problem was the Book of Abraham. In my response I remembered something Professor/Dr. Hemery Eyring said about it; that he didn't know exactly how but he could accept that Joseph Smith received the inspiration from the papyrus, he had access, to write what we have in the book of Abraham, I also bore testimony that I had felt the spirit of God and truth in what was written in this Book. Sadly they have been on strange paths going from one extreme to another for the past 12 years. We have continued to love and pray for our family and try and follow the spirit by not arguing (but then I do write this).
Google Book of Abraham pt 8 truth discovery Paul Gregersen you tube. A video debunking the Egyptologists by presenting proper interpretation. Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong.
@@binmyrtmind Indeed. See the comment section of his videos. Notice how he refutes the arrogant Egyptologist assessments the critics try to use against Joseph Smith.
Though i agree with the anti/ex mormons in the comments that these were the weakest of attacks in the CES letter, it goes to show that they aren't genuine in their interests. Like the presenter says, it's the shotgun effect. Explaining polygamy will take far longer than the 15-20 minutes per topic the presenter is giving. Church History Matters podcast does the topic well
Well that's the real conundrum isn't it? There definitely is enough evidence to prove the church is false, however, there is certainly enough things that have happened in my life and in the lives of others to prove the church true. I spent many years trying to figure it out intellectually, came really close to having my name removed from the records of the church and spent many years reading anti and pro materials and even contributing to some of the anti stuff. Never though really could bring myself to 'pull the trigger' of leaving, nor could I get 100% past the Book of Mormon. Even at my MOST anti...I still would occasionally go to it's pages for comfort. When I was my most close to atheism...I listened to a book on bacteriology and DNA and was like...wow...nature is screaming there is a God. Then I opened to the other possibilities of Christ, etc., coming at it from the other side. I can't determine if it's true, I can't determine if it's false. I realize that I'm miserable as a nonbeliever, but this is good evidence to me of God. So I decided just to accept God and Christ, keep going and not worry about it. One day I was out of town at a fast and testimony meeting and a lady got up there and was talking about her depression and the gospel...and I realized...I haven't been suicidal for a long time. When I was atheistic and nonbelieving...I was really suicidal and was in psych hospital twice. Living the gospel, even though I had doubts...was a real antidote to my depression. Sure I have down days, but not like when I was into all the anti stuff trying to prove the church was false. For a long time I was...well the gospel is true, but the organization itself, I will reserve judgement on...except, if I believe in the gospel, and I believe the Book of Mormon is true...why am I continuing to tire my brain out about everything else? I'll live the gospel and serve in the church and let God resolve any lingering issues for me on the other side.
"Anti" are used in numerous occasions, however became popular in Christ. Anti Christ, Anti Mormons, do you think it was just coincident. Do you heard AntiSatan? You wouldn't find it anywhere, or very few if there is. It may be nonsense, but I believed there's a profound truth behind. My testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel of Christ in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is independent of any human philosophies. I came to know decade ago before I learned about the church. There's a God, Heavenly Father, His son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, they taught me of these truth, as i pray clear as noon day. I read and studied all the scriptures we have, including other floating books that claim written by the ancient prophets, I also read and examined numerous materials, and articles that exerting all powers to thwart, and destroy the Church. Yes, they may destroy the Church, nevertheless, the doctrine, and principles of the gospel will remain true and steadfast to His coming and in all eternity. Yet, as fallible as I, I choose to believe and remain true to the gospel, and die hoping of a blessed eternity in exchange of short time confusion, and challenges. The gospel has all the greatest attributes to live happily, I have nothing to doubt. To God all be the glory.
sounds like you are searching for Natural Moral Law which is part claims we are all reaching for god. Thus any path available or easily available makes sense to us. So even if that path is flawed it is still a path to take us where we need to go.
The CES Letter ignores the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith. Paul debunked the Egyptologists by presenting proper interpretation.
Thanks for sharing this. I've looked at the entire CES letter in depth and have come to similar conclusions. It is way overhyped in my opinion, as all of its supposedly valid points are easily debunked if one is willing to search for answers with an open mind and be willing to rethink one's previous assumptions. I have done that very thing over the past number of years, and have found that many of my previous assumptions were incorrect and needed to be reevaluated in light of new knowledge that needed to be brought into my overall 'world view', since all of us are (or should be) ever learning more as we age. The result was a much more logical and reasonable picture of reality which harmonizes human nature, limited human knowledge, science and religion in so many ways. It's also important, I believe, to keep this kind of open mindedness throughout life; that we should be open to new and exciting scientific discoveries and personal revelation and new ways of seeing things, etc. I'm also convinced that life is a journey that has great meaning and purpose, that we're here for a reason, for our souls to grow and learn from this human mortal experience. My faith provides this kind of clarity, which I am very grateful for. I just don't see those that attack the faith of others (either our faith or another's) as having this kind of 'light' about them, but darkness instead. I'm not impressed with the lack of light and goodness as well as the deceitful tactics they often make use of. It is also interesting that Greg quotes Manu Padro. I have read many of Manu's posts on the quora website, and have been impressed with his insights and interpretations. I don't think he is active on that website anymore though, and I'm not sure if any of his previous posts are there anymore. In his last posts a couple of years ago he was hinting that he was going to leave quora. His full name is Manual Padro, and he is an independent researcher who is currently writing a book that addresses how nineteenth-century witchcraft belief, misunderstood LDS practices, and the 1832 Cholera epidemic fueled the persecution of Joseph Smith and his followers. I have been active on the quora website for many years so if anyone wants to see my own answers to some of the claims of the CES letter, along with many answers to questions that are not part of the CES letter, feel free to search my posts there, as there are many. Unfortunately, that website (quora) has a big problem with trolls (as does much of social media), as well as a problem with an automatic question-generating algorithm that is annoying, but I still answer questions on there from time to time, if they are honest and not trolling questions :) I don't claim to have all the 'answers' by any means, nor do I consider my answers as 'final' as far as I'm concerned. I try to be open minded enough to be willing to reconsider and modify my answers as I learn and discover more new and interesting ideas and knowledge over time.
Why do they always ad hominem the author of the letter and criticize its format? Why not just address its most glaring points.. the anachronisms for instance or the issues with the book of Abraham. There is no such thing as 'anti-mormon literature'. People are just seeking the truth and these inconsistencies exist. Mormon apologetics is so inadequate.
They cannot get around the fact that Joseph presented the Book of Abraham as a direct translation, not as a revelation from on high. If it really was revelation, he didn't need the scroll. It's just another link in the long chain of Joseph weaseling his way out of uncomfortable situations (like the Martin Harris debacle). There's an old saying for things like this: don't piss on me and tell me it's raining.
@@AtticusLaineBlosYou're comparing the facsimiles to the explanation and expecting correlation. You're supposed to compare the facsimiles to the Book of Abraham to show contrast between God and Satan. Get it right.
Who cares about that letter and all the critics of the church? In reality all those people who fight against the church, they are in reality fighting against GOD HIMSELF, and HE will deal with them accordingly. Nobody will destroy this church!!
the reason we care about the CES letter is because of the souls it's harming. I agree that it is garbage, but nevertheless it uses incredibly effective and destructive methods to destroy the faith of others. For that reason, people need to wade through the garbage in contains to demonstrate to those who might find it persuasive that it is garbage.
@@matthewsmith5967 So you glorify a negative thing in order to save many? Why don’t you teach a principle that will strengthen the weak in the kingdom?
People like you are exactly what this guy is talking about in the beginning. If you watched the whole video you would see he actually does address some of these issues.
@@benjaminbenson2943 He is not intending to debunk the CES Letter, they’ve done that on separate videos. The purpose of this is to show how the laundry list fallacy works, that’s why he quoted Padro for so long. The presenter intended to show that the laundry list includes pathetic and lousy arguments as well as genuine arguments. This is why I don’t trust the CES Letter, because Jeremy is intentionally dishonest with his readers. When I read the letter nearly all of it was lousy, especially his DNA argument, that is actually one of the most laughable to anyone who knows about evolution. The CES Letter contradicts itself, so which argument do we accept? I don’t believe Jeremy is stupid enough to believe the lousy statements in his letter, that’s how I know he is not interested in telling people the truth. If critics want to be trusted, they should be honest because why will I trust intentional liars?
The church makes a claim. The claim is that the Book of Mormon is (heavily paraphrased) a historical account of people who migrated from Jerusalem to somewhere in the Americas, formed a society that rose and fell and was visited by Jesus after his resurrection. And that forms a second testament of Jesus Christ. As a missionary in the late 80s, i taught this. I stated it as fact and also shared my personal feelings. It is very important to me that what I taught is truth. So after I got home, I reasearched more. The idea that the Book of Mormon is a record of actual events is so completely laughable that I am embarrassed I once believed. There is not any archeological, linguistic, DNA or even dietary evidence that the events occurred. The CES Letter covers a lot of ground, and the presenter in this video spends a lot of time on the clearly weaker (and much less relevant) arguments. The map. Seriously? The CES Letter came way after I figured out that the BofM was not what it says it was. But the CES Letter is a good list of items that, many, WERE HARD TO FIND and not publicly acknowledged by the church at the time. He was an active member asking questions. He was excommunicated for it. The personal jabs at the author are a very low form of debate not relevant to the huge questions raised in the letter.
Not any archeological, linguistic or DNA evidence? You have clearly not done any research on the Hopewell Mound Builders; I would recommend them to you.
@Gary Hill oh man. Do you actually buy the Hopewell Mound theory? Man, take a step back. That theory is so cherry-picked. Be a serious person. Even if you hold out hope the BofM could possibly be a real history, DNA analysis is the absolute death knell of that fantasy. And you think there is an actual language called Reformed Engyptian that Israelites used because it was so compact to could save space on plates? It was an absolute joke. Joseph Smith was a con man. Straight up. It's obvious once you are out from under the spell of magical thinking.
DNA is actually one of the most ridiculous arguments in his book. As a disability rights advocate I have studied genetics as many disabilities are primarily genetic. Anyone who has studied genetics knows his argument of DNA is an oversimplification and a great ignorance towards genetic evolution. Genetic evolution occurs more quickly than his questions ask, Down Syndrome is primarily genetic with an additional chromosome and didn’t exist until the 17th century. As malaria has become endemic in Africa the sickle cell mutation has multiplied and has been found to work as a defence mechanism against malaria by the University of Edinburgh. As environmental changes occur, genetic evolution occurs sustaining mutations producing new metabolic pathways. Then the alleles in these disabled mutations enhance the adaptability of a population as a whole and accelerate the pace of evolution to adapt sooner. Very little of his book is actually accurate, most is oversimplification and propaganda.
@danielmoore4024 apologies if i am writing this comment twice. The previous one is not showing. DNA mutations as they relate to disabilities or how our diet, for example, may relate to gene expression are not the same way anthropologists use DNA. They want to be able to put the story together of human societies past and present. As you know, the amount of DNA data has exploded since 2000. If you or I take a DNA test,we can get a pretty clear picture of our ancestry. And there is no evidence any native americans have ancestry pointing to Israel. You use the word "ridiculous" to describe the DNA evidence. Can you point me to any reputable anthropologist that would back your claim? But DNA is one tool. IMO, the more damning evidence is the fact that the BofM talks of swords, chariots, brass plates ... metals. Metals leave lots of evidence (smelting, etc). There is none. The idea of pre-Columbian metallurgy is absurd. And let's not forget the people of the BofM spoke Hebrew and wrote on the plates in Reformed Egyptian. Read that sentence again and remember nobody recognizes reformed egyptian as a real thing, and there is no evidence of any native american languages influenced by Hebrew. Joseph was a con man. Straight up. The Book of Abraham evidence should be the most obvious example of his lies.
@@MrGhardisty I take it you fall for the mythical norm. Haven’t you even looked or something? Geneticists claim DNA neither proves nor disproves the Book of Mormon. The Human Genome Project is based upon a fallacy, why have they lied to the general public for nearly 3 decades about the results of the Human Genome Project, they still haven’t read even just 1 human genome, they clustered hundreds of humans together? DNA is not the “language of life” as Bill Clinton said in 2000, epigenetics are the language of life, it’s what happens on top of the genes that determine the state of the human. No one is born destined to develop Alzheimer’s disease, if humanity is genetically deterministic, we are genetically determined to not be genetically deterministic. If you haven’t yet, I recommend you read “The Myth of Normal Trauma, Illness and Healing In A Toxic Culture” by Dr. Gabor Mate and his son.
Thanks for this. As you explain, the CES letter uses the pinprick or shotgun approach. Runnels draws on 200 years of timeless tricks, so finding the truth on each claim is very time consuming. FAIR helps. Before studying the responses I, personally, started with the so called letter's big hitters: BoA claims, polygamy, BoM claims, etc. After debunking those, I went through much of the rest, and noted that, as with those big three, the rest is just more of the same standard propaganda, rumors, spin, ad hominem, etc.
I have informed the CES Letter of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologist claims. Paul demonstrates that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. I gave a basic description of how Paul Gregersen debunked the Egyptologists. Did the CES Letter ignore my comment? Of course.
Joseph tried to sell the copyrights of the BOM to people in Canada?? The papyrus was a scroll 'written by the hand of Abraham'?? Sending guys on missions and marrying their wives?? JST changes New Testament but 3rd Nephi says the same thing the New Testament 'incorrectly said'?? Joe started an illegal bank that failed?? Rock in the hat!?? Rod of Aaron??? Nah... a con is a con. Church is big business and be honest... it is sticky because 'what would "xx" think of me if I left? Bros want that glory of important callings... doesn't look good if you raise questions. Cults don't want you to leave and they're good at making you feel guilty. WAKE UP. You'll be ok on the other side. Just don't abandon your responsibilities in life outside the cult. You'll be alright.
@@anonymoustruth5950 He never actually said he was trying to debunk the CES letter. This was a 1 hour presentation for a YSA stake, it wasn't intended to cover all of the garbage in the CES letter, and nor was that what he claimed to do. His thesis is that the CES letter uses deceptive and manipulative tactics to push certain ideas, and that they aren't at all concerned about presenting well structured and internally consistent arguments against the Church, they are just trying to throw as many questions as they can at you to make you doubt your faith. And I think he demonstrated that fairly well. Does that mean that the CES letter lies about everything? No. Does it completely invalidate the CES letter? Also no, and he doesn't claim that it does. What it does mean is that you should approach its claims with skepticism and not panic. Don't come to hasty conclusions about your faith because of it, because it isn't giving you the whole story and it's often times dishonest.
The first few items in the CES letter revealed to me how poor this kid’s training was in doctrinal understanding. It’s like he never read the Scriptures for himself, but rather listened to what teachers taught him, and based his testimony on that. Anyone who has ever search the scriptures would know better and understand better about these things.
@@W.A.J.J. the one that stands out the most is his understanding of Laman and Lemuel. And many of his claims come from anti-mormon sources or sources that used anti-mormon sources
@@zionmama150 may I ask how you determine if a source is anti Mormon? Also how do you define anti Mormon? One last question, wouldn’t the source’s stance on Mormonism be irrelevant if the criticism provided is relevant? By example: if a person were anti bat 🦇, and they said “bats carry rabies.”. Is that criticism any less valid because they are anti bat?
@@W.A.J.J. anti mormon is stuff that people tell about the church that is lies. The Spirit witnesses the truth and cannot lie. And a person with eyes to see and ears to hear can know the difference between truth and error the more they have the Holy Spirit in their heart.
He didn’t do any research!!! lol!!! He stated he took research his friend did!!! Yes, I highly encourage you to do some research on early church history. Like the “ prophet” having wives of 14 and 16 years old. If you’re okay with oedophillia for. The founder of the church, then so be it.
I had heard of this ces letter off and on,, here and there and so i thought it must be pretty damning but never really looked at it because honestly I dont care what anyone says or writes I know the Book of Mormon is true and found out for myself long ago. None the less I have a friend whose a non member assumed I had read it (which i hadn't) so I thought I should look into it. Well, only one thing I can say is I was shocked at how weak the arguments are and still wondering how this ever turned anyone from the church?? But I think we all know that anyone who wants to really leave will latch on to pretty much anything to rationalize his/her decision.
@@scottsmith4145 The whole thing is a lie, especially the origin story. To begin with, the origin story is clearly an outright lie to anyone who understands rhetoric and saw his behaviour before and after the letter was produced. In the origin story he claims he's open to another perspective, but the questions say the exact opposite, that he's not open at all. Secondly, the inclusion of the lousiest arguments like the ones presented in this video. Jeremy is not stupid enough to believe these claims, so to include them when he doesn't even believe them is just outright dishonest of him. Thirdly, his activities on exmo reddit, let me quote him, "I didn't write the letter for the CES guy!" The letter never was for the CES Director, his target audience was "tbm", active members of the church, he had no interest in answers. Fourth, his reactions to the people who responded to his letter. Someone who wants answers doesn't neglect every answer they are given and mock the person who gave answers. Fifth, everyone who gave him answers he claims he neglected because they're not church officials, another outright lie. CES Directors are not church officials, so why expect official answers from a CES Director the letter wasn't even for? So he wasn't after official answers. Sixth, his failure to engage with the answers to his questions that had already been given. Jeremy was not the first to ask such questions, people had already answered them and he showed no interest in anyone's answers. That doesn't sound like someone who's open to another perspective.
This talk addressed 20% of the concerns brought up in the letters. If you want to prove a point, don’t go after the weakest argument and act like you’ve won the debate.
Actually, how about YOU try spending countless hours with your colleagues actually SEEKING OUT the CORRECT data from the false, far fetched "duhhh 20%", and summarize it into an hour of understandable TRUTH. There's much more than 20% here. There are HOURS of prayerful, intelligent research. BTW, nothing can or will stop the True Gospel of Jesus Christ. It would be unwise to fight against it unless you don't mind facing God with that🤨 Pride is unacceptable to Him.
@@guardianangel9517 topics he made no attempt to explain: book of Abraham origins, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, or anachronisms in the book of Mormon, JST plagiarism, presence of 18th century KJV errors in the BoM, kinderhook plates, the origins of the temple ceremony, racism in the priesthood, differing and conflicting accounts of the first vision, among many, many more. The burden of proof is on the church. They've made extraordinary claims about Joseph Smith and the church's origins. If no decent or compelling attempt is made to provide an explanation for ALL of this, how can anyone rationally come back?
@@guardianangel9517 Anytime someone starts a rebuttal with “actually” they’ve lost me. Your diatribe over there doesn’t address my main concern. The entire video is him “deconstructing” what the author admits is the weakest point of the letter. Then completely ignores the more convincing aspects of the letter and gives himself a pat on the back. It’s an actual straw man.
@@noahhall3703 That was the point, listen to the section “take home points”. They were the points of the presentation, give me a time he said he was intending to debunk the CES letter.
Mano Padro, even if a real "ex-Mo" certainly comes across as being VERY sympathetic towards the LDS church. I mean, simply being a former member of the LDS church does NOT make him "neutral" in his opinions. From the quotes the speaker gave from Mano, it certainly sounds like Mano Padro is an LDS apologist.
I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the arrogant Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretation. I gave a basic rundown on how Paul Gregersen proved Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
I had a big crisis of faith last night which involved a lot of different allegations of the history, and all of them linked to the CES letter. Its nice to hear someone nitpick this massive warhead. Im still pretty shaky on my faith toward the church but its comforting to know that there ARE questions and allegations the church can deflect/outright disprove
Are you being sifted? A mumbling 3rd grade educated, made up the restored church huh! go back to why? Under so much persecution why?and to willingly be murdered for it, by ex members. Think deeply of why Joseph would document every detail of his life and revelations he hides nothing!
Just study both sides…a lot! They will begin to distinguish themselves. Haters are on borrowed time. They have to move quickly and with great force to stir emotion. Take your time. In the end you’ll be stronger.
I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith. I gave a basic rundown on how Paul Gregersen demonstrates on his pro Book of Abraham videos that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii I am not surprised of No response. CES letter is a tool of Beelzebub. When responding to haters, and bashing them, I heard a small voice, That isn't Christ like. So, I don't fight anymore. It thank them thusly and with over 100 posts, none have responded. "Thanks, Beelzebub doesn't bash his buddies".
@@mtsaz100 Jeremy was very dishonest with the church educator who offered to answer his questions. Jeremy didn’t share his questions, he just gathered criticisms as lousy as these ones and posted them. I would have written back to Jeremy saying “Jeremy, I know you are not stupid enough to be concerned about these lousy arguments. I believe the questions about polyandry and the book of Abraham are yours, but you’re obviously not interested in answers.”
I wonder how these CESers deal with all the recent evidences in the Arabian Peninsula for the Book of Mormon? Also the Hebraisms in the text? Even if Smith had hidden a text in his hat, how would he have read it? He would have to have memorized the whole thing. Yes, some people with great memories memorize some books of the Bible, but it takes them years to do it. Smith just didn't have time.
Can you share your source for the Mano Padro quotes you share? I have found a few references online to this guy (although it appears his first name is "Manuel" or "Manu", not "Mano".) But I can't find much about him and haven't been able to locate any lengthy quotes like you share.
Hi Chad. Have you found information on this? Those quotes alone and the fact that I can't find them, his name is spelled wrong/differently, and that there's no actual citation anywhere, has me totally throwing out this whole video. I wanted to see a true "debunked" theory but now I feel as though the debunked theory is DEBUNKED! This guy is showing the same kinds of "tricks" he's talking about others doing....UGH
@@cicileigh393 The biggest trick used in the CES letter to deceive you is the book of Abraham claims that Joseph failed to translate it correctly. Please allow me in just a few minutes to destroy the CES letter claim forever by proving the opposite. Want to have some real dynamite to save testimonies link UTube video titled (BOA ep 16) link my name Paul Gregersen to get
instead of telling everyone how Jeremy is dishonest and manipulative---answer the questions, starting at 1 and run thru them 1 by 1. Lets see the answers! Thats all Jeremy wanted. He got ex'ed for asking legit questions. You don't answer them either. Pathetic
@@steel6322 Could you share which parts are dishonest please as I would like to know. There’s genuine evidence as in screenshots that prove the opening story of the CES Letter is a direct lie. A team of researchers have been able to find screenshots that show before he ever wrote to a CES director, he had already been hostile on mormonthink posting his letter there, asking for feedback, asking for more questions. Then after organising all the questions sent it to a CES director, he seeked mormonthink’s approval before asking the CES director, that’s not the behaviour of someone looking for answers.
So people are so dumb to make a proper research on the CES letter but not so dumb to verify and research for LDS doctrine and what is being taught in church?
CES letter: Condescending Excuse Syndrome. I started at claim #1. Debunked. Done. Now, on to more important things like a better use of green Jello... 😂
The CES issue dances around the Book of Mormon issue. Mainly that it isn’t able to disprove the Book of Mormon being translated from a historical record. Just lots of pretty red herrings
@@KylonRic The Church is true. No efforts by the devil and his puny minions can change that. As a matter of fact, those efforts just bolster its veracity.
An amazing thing about Runnell's "letter" is the number of people who have returned to the faith after leaving the Church because of reading it. The stories just keep piling up -
@@guardianangel9517 Yeah, isn't it STRANGE how Mormons expect ex-members, people who have dedicated entire years of their lives, 10% of their incomes, untold hours of volunteer service, people who once viewed life itself through the lens of the church etc. Isn't it just strange how Mormons expect those people to just shrug and go "Oh well, what's next?" and not talk about any of their experiences and traumas they endured? It's almost as if Mormons care more about the image of the church itself rather than the experiences of the actual people that comprise the church.
It’s because they want the best for those who are in a faith crisis and don’t want anyone else to fall prey to the church’s teachings: God was a created being, Satan was Jesus’ brother, there were gods before God and there will be gods after, there’s no Hell, etc. Basically all the teachings of the church which are 180 degrees from God’s Word.
@RobinSteward-ud5en It's funny to hear people who know nothing about LDS doctrine try to tell people about LDS doctrine. Good luck with that, Robin. ✌️
It's not strange at all: They know it's true. They can't leave the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints alone because they know it's true. They're really just fighting against themselves.
Wow! Doubt Bombing? You quote Mano Padro as some "expert" and yet ignore the fact that this tactic of "doubt bombing" is exactly what Mormon missionaries do on a daily basis when they go out proselytizing to people who are already part of a non-LDS Faith, typically a Christian denomination. Nice double-standard you've got there.
Doubt bombing isn't at all what missionaries do. They teach people the Gospel. They do not attack others' religions. If any do, they are going against what the church teaches. Preach My Gospel - the manual missionaries use - is readily available on the church website. You're welcome to look through it and show where it says to attack the beliefs of others if I'm wrong.
One of his dumbest arguments was about evolution va Adam and Eve, I think. It’s always blown my mind how school books and scientists falsely assume that the calculations they’ve made about how long the earth has existed or when dinosaurs were here in terms of tens of millions of years, have been constant throughout al that time and that no dramatic events ever sped up or slowed down any of those processes, like a volcanic eruption, global flood, or other events… especially when we already have proof that such dramatic events did take place.
It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they’re being fooled. Thanks Jeremy for this wonderful letter. The letter can’t be refuted. The church had/has no answers to the questions. This guy is just spouting word salad.
Jim Bennett debunked the CES Letter on every point. Paul Gregersen debunked the Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretation. I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on how Paul Gregersen demonstrates on his pro Book of Abraham videos that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
It is extremely troubling that academic researchers and authors can lack that much integrity. I work in biochemistry, and peer review and even expert edited books go through a lot of critique and attention before they can be published. Stuff like that wouldn't fly, and would be grounds for ethical investigation by your institution. It is disgusting and disappointing.
@@kp6553 Haha, I love the disclaimers at the bottom of all the FAIR explanations that say the "views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect" those of FAIR, officers or "supporters"... and that FAIR's "opinions" have nothing to do with the church. So... is there any real reliability or accountability? And why do so many members rely on it?
Tactical. That feels a good description of the CES letter and of Brother Smith’s approach dismantling it. It was not fun when he snidely commented on so much of what may be instrumental in undermining faith. I pray the church will begin to see that there are questions that need answers. It is the individuals responsibility to learn what they can, but the church has answers the members need. Many have “shelves” that are filled to the breaking point.
Tactical attacks require tactical responses. Brother Smith actually discussed the "shelves" of questions and how an individual, like himself, had to dig deep to see what was really said. If someone is already predisposed to take those attacks at face value rather than do the work to find them, no answer, no matter how rational will ever suffice.
I am sorry to say but there are some questions that have been given answers but many don't like the answer. there are others who foolishly judge it through modern lenses and are ignorant of the time and circumstances. there are others who wish to justify their own rebellious desires and sins as well. There are others the lord has specifically left in the realm of faith specifically to try us and to wait on him. I still have unanswered questions but it never shakes my testimony because first I still remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when the spirit told me undeniably that the Book Of Mormon was true also when Joseph Smith was a prophet also when it was revealed to me that the atonement and Jesus Christ are a literal reality and the savior of the world. I wish I could show these knowledges as objective evidence but that is not how the spirit works. As a result of this I don't let what I don't know override what I do and I continue to wait and trust on the lord for his own time. This is why my shelf has never buckled no matter the questions. As time has gone on many questions that sat on the shelf for years were solved over time and as i turned to the lord not away from him. Others I have received the prompting to be still and know he is God, and to trust him. A second problem is that we foolishly as members think the prophets and apostles are always plugged in so to speak and that every action or opinion they have must be the will of the lord (this is usually a indictment upon our own spiritual neglect or shortcomings) As if they can't have a wrong opinion or make natural human mistakes (please be aware this is not when they have declared what the lord has established as doctrine) Remember when John the Baptist was accused of being a wild man evil, and a freak for his wilderness lifestyle yet when Christ came and did the exact opposite they accused him of being a winebibber and sinful as well. The prophets can't win either way. This unfortunately leads to the 3rd mistake we rely on our own spiritual revelation to the point we think we become a law or exemption to ourselves and that exempts us or overrides what the the lords ordained apostles and prophets have declared (past or present). I believe i have received personal revelation in regards to certain church issues and practices past and present but I don't override the brethren and teach it as doctrine. first of all because that is not my authority and office, that was for me alone and I still must abide by the established doctrine or policy(which may not be the same thing) as it currently stands. Sometimes I have been proven right, sometimes partially right, and sometimes wrong but it led me to the correct answer later. This is where many of us stumble, I don't mean to ramble on but in a nut shell the idea that the church is supposed to answer and account for every question we have or actions of others past or present is a complete misunderstanding of the churches purpose not to mention unrealistic. That is incumbent upon you and me to seek the answers from the lord and wait on him. The purpose of the church is to help you make and keep your covenants with the savior while providing the priesthood authority and guidance to administer those ordinances and to make certain the doctrine of the lord is correctly interpreted and enforced to the accountability of the members who have made those covenants See Ephesians 4:11-14 , DC:1. I invite you to study Alma Chapter 32 again and remember how the scriptures in the past specifically the book of Mormon began to enlarge your soul and became delicious to you proving the word or seed was good (If you have not done this previously I will put the challenge to you). I also invite you (if you have stopped to) or continue to read the scriptures and pray as moroni and the savior taught. One of the mistakes I find people having doubts or questions make is the first thing they do is stop praying and reading their scriptures. Which to me is utter folly because it eliminates one whole side of the argument and cuts you off from revelation you might receive. Last I invite you to study Elder Renlunds talk from the last october conference on A framework for personal revelation. Sorry for the long answer but I hope it helps
Keep your chins UP Saints, and your souls fiull of joy 🤺🕊🙏🏻🫂💜🌞🪔 Matt 5:11-12 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in Heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. D&C 121:18-20 And those who swear falsely against my servants, that they might bring them into bondage and death- Wo unto them; because they have offended my little ones they shall be severed from the ordinances of mine house. Their baskets shall not be full, their homes and their barns shall perish, and they themselves shall be despised by those that flattered them. ************* All of us alive have the opportunity to repent and to love one another as Jesus Christ commanded us to. In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen 🙏🏻🕊 Love to ALL ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Fantastic. I figured a lot out for myself. But you summarice the methods plain and simple. So this is clearly evel deceitfull intend. Some seam honestly seaking for realety. The longer you observe the core of this people the clearer their nastyness comes to light. As you describe it if you debunk some of it they don't take it on. They tell exactly the old story to people who don't know and never mentione the plausibel answer. And as i saw in some videos Their tactic is information overload, make people feel rediculesly stupid, using psycotactis. Just what do they get out of it? Partly money, thousands of Dollars in donations, and constultan fees to help "heal" the damage coming out of ripping people out of theire friendcircles they are happy in . I saw fees of 200$ an hour. And i love your sarcasm ( of course they whine aobut it) If you dish it out you have to take it in. There are cases where this is completly fitting.
The nature of this world is that it has been designed (by a designer) to REQUIRE belief. In reality there are only two sources of opinion. One source is the designer, and the other is his antagonist. Truth doesn't even come from prophets. It comes THROUGH prophets. You must choose to believe. You will have to believe someone. I recommend starting with someone who loves you (like a child believing a good parent). Don't start believing anyone else until you are sure they love you at least that much!
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii his arguments were all strawman, he’s mocking these claims like they’re so Outlandish or death by a thousand cuts when they are much stronger evidence against LDS and the BOM than he’s admitting.
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii Well at 42:50 he speculates how the "cheesy amateur" (note, ad hominem) must have just set his computer loose on all the 19th century texts until he found one that fit a few words. Instead of addressing the question, why it's so similar, he set up the method as a straw man argument, then concluded it with ad hominem, which is sprinkled throughout the entire talk. He never really addresses the actual questions, he sets up straw men repeatedly and engages in ad hominem throughout. Sounds academically rigorous, right?
Poor presentation. Lots of absolute statements, assuming ill intent of anyone who writes critically about the church. Uses same tactics that he spends first half of presentation accusing opposing side of doing. Tells people to avoid “anti-Mormon” literature. Picks the weakest examples in CES letter, presenting them as ridiculous, then assumes all other issues are just as weak but doesn’t address them. Uses example from a book that is not even published yet that’s not part of the CES letter, that no one has access to, to prove a point. Does not explain that the CES letter was originally just a regular person writing an email to get answers to his questions from the CES director at the time to which he received no reply. I really hoped more from this.
You know that the story of how the CES letter was created has recently been debunked. The guy who wrote it spent months working on anti-Mormon Reddit sites compiling the “best arguments” to make. It was not an honest persons pursuit of help with his faith crisis. It’s a veneer of authenticity, making people feel a compassion for the poor bloke who wrote it that was as manufactured as the issues it pretends to present. All in actuality, done in bad faith.
I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the arrogant Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretation. I gave a basic rundown on how Paul Gregersen proved Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
@@chrisblanc663 Jeremy made it clear on Mormon stories that he was not a believer by the time he wrote the CES letter and also did not claim to come up with this information on his own. It was already out there in pieces. He did however want to find someone who had answers to his questions regarding the information he was coming across. His Grandfather knew the CES director at the time and thought it would help Jeremy to ask him all his questions. I have felt his frustration and eventually come to the same conclusion that there is simply no one in the church that has any good answers. Regardless of how he arrived at writing the CES letter, the information still stands and the church was not forthright about much of it until recently.
@@chrisblanc663while I will agree the church has taken steps in the right direction regarding being more open with its history, I wouldn’t say it looks anything like repentance, at least not by the same standards they expect of us. It looks more like damage control by anyones standards.
lol, the simple weak minded are so easily sifted out. Joseph was severely persecuted by the same type of simple minded exers who always turn and rend righteousness.
This is funny, but I don't think he is trying to be funny. His "proof" is really lame. Examples: He calls out "doubt bombing" - does it occur to anyone that there are SO MANY errors that this is just telling the truth; or his exploration of the map passes right over the fact that these maps are basically identical. Wake up people!
@@TheMikesmith1964 Have you lived by the Book of Mormon? Have you tried reading from it daily and praying about it? If you haven't, you are cheating yourself and lying to God.
@@TheMikesmith1964 How could Joseph Smith time travel to the future to select communities that didn't exist before 1830? It's nonsense, that's why most critics avoid it. Doubt bombing is a real thing, it's not only used among religions, it's used a lot in politics. The proof is lame because the arguments are so lame, it doesn't take significant evidence to disprove a lousy argument. Numerous lousy arguments don't produce evidence. The lousy arguments the presenter selected, do you believe them? If so, you're the one who needs to wake up.
I see you side step the problem of Jospeh Smith using names of cities that did not yet exist. Even the Tanners are critical of that section of the Letter.
That Bishop should check the trash bin, before he wastes more money on printing more copies. Why can't people just pray and ask their God if they should believe anything they are questioning? James 1:5 people??
I wish someone would debate me.. i can completely dismantle Mormonism in ten minutes in fact it's one of the easiest religions to prove false... Honestly all you really need to do is read old JS most excellent translation of "the book of Abraham". Who knew JS could read hieroglyphs so well lol..
people interpret religious text in many ways…please share what secret info you have that disproves a huge religion that has been around for hundreds of years
@@jacobmccready236 1830 was the year the church was incorporated.. That's not even 200 years yet my friend... Seriously though if you people think Jesus was God then no offense but why doesn't he ever get anything right the first time?? He did what he did, died.. realized he messed up by telling everyone to "give up everything and follow me" AFTER he died so now he has to come back again as.a ghost to tell Paul "no Messed up now all they have to do is "believe baby " that's it no works just faith... Then 632 years later I guess he realizes he screwed up again so back he goes to help his Dad start Islam talks to Muhammad.. But wait.. What's this? Right after he does his ghost thing with Paul he turns back into a human.. Goes to America where it turns out there's a diaspora of Jews living that needs straightening out... I guess it didn't work out because there's no genetic links in today's Indian population to the Jews at all.. honestly though as crazy as the BOM sounds it must be true.. how do I know this? Because when JS used his magic rocks to read the secret disappearing plates he found that even though no one had used the archaic English of the Bible for over 200 years (you know like thee and thou) the BOM did... Since we know that's the way God really talks (archaic English) and the BOM was translated in 1829 long after the archaic usage then we know the BOM must be inspired by God.. Unless anyone is suggesting JS wrote it that way to make it sound more authentic.. you'll be excommunicated if you do and there'll be no more masonic (I'm sorry Aaronic) secret gestures "on the square" for you.. any similarities between Mormon Temple endowment and Freemasonry rituals no matter how numerous and identical they seem to be are completely coincidental... Seriously though watching you people make excuses after excuse and jumping through mental hoops trying to justify and explain your ridiculous beliefs entertains me to no end.. all logic goes out the window because there's no possible way you could be wrong 😂😆
Follow Jesus Christ. Walk with purpose through this world with your head up, eyes forward, and heart open. Do not follow those who drag their feat and kick up so much dust that it gets in your eyes, and ears, and throat. If your spiritual receptacles are clogged with dust and dirt, wash them clean and clear with the pure water offered by Jesus and his servants old and new. Get so much spiritual hydration in your system that it drowns out all the dirt kickers.
Why should we be so concerned when we know what our identity is . Here is some of I know .I know that a baby can grow up and become an adult.i know that we can grow up and become more like our heavenly parents .I have seen and know some of the patternes of life and becoming.i also know that I cannot develop faith if I need everything. I also believe that we are more than a physical body . I also believe that we are here on this spinning blue planet for a purpose a reason .I a ok so believe that since to this earth was made organized our heavenly Father heavenly Father has also called true teaches disciples prophets of our heavenly Father to gide us not only for what it makes of them but the good it does to them that listen to and follow.truley the essence or our the purposes of life is growth and to become and to overcome . growth and
They are not helpless victims of those devils. They have to conceive in their own hearts a will to be misled, to not seek out light and truth, to ignore warnings and even sad and tragic consequences. Most are reacting to personal offenses they perceive they have received from one or more members, or what they feel is too much sacrifice required by living the gospel, and do not mind an excuse to leave the church. So it happens quickly and surprisingly, seemingly without much consideration. Thus the lack of sincere research, discussion, prayer and faith, or even, as Elder Uchtdorf encouraged, to 'Doubt your doubts'.
Revelations 12:10 calls Satan the accuser of the Bretheren. This is the perdition attitude. Mr. Runnels when given a response doubled down and revised his objections. He is like a character who buys a bad stock and keeps doubling down all the way to the bottom because he won't admit that he was wrong. I see it all the time in the secular world. We call it Pride.
They can leave the church but they can never leave it alone. I had my own run in with this garbage and found it is old rehashed tropes with a lot of dishonest presentation and substantiated accusations. I love the beginnings of the CES letter that says Joseph smith got the ideas for names in the Book of Mormon from names of locations, cities, towns etc in his area. Just one problem Over half the places it claims were sources didn't even exist at the time or would have been common names even from biblical sources. The CES letter like all anti mormon tripe relies on half truths, convenient dishonest omissions, historical ignorance of societal and cultural norms of different periods of time and flat out lies and garbage research. Why does he remove it because he flat out lied.
@@jaredshipp9207It is regrettable to be sure. the CES letter like all anti garbage banks on ignorance, preying upon those who are already for any number of reasons having faith issues, but one of the greatest oversites I think we make as members of the church is we focus so much on teaching our children the gospel and then hoping they then get the spiritual witness from the spirit we then make the mistake of expecting that alone will sustain them when they have never been taught the arguments of the opposition. Even those who have had spiritual witnesses and know the gospel is true can be hit with a doubting brick in the face when they leave the sanctuary and defenses of their parents house and home ward and have to stride into the lions den and viper pit of the world and its modern pagan university temples with its secular professor priests of Baal. They are caught off guard by being presented arguments they never heard before and instead of suspecting they are being lied to by this new message they start to question the one they already have heard. I have tried to teach my kids before they leave home the oppositions arguments , their flaws, and their tricks and inform them with the sources they can go to counteract the Gods of the marketplace as Kipling put it who teach that Pigs have wings and that horses were wishes. I think we as parents need to be willing to take the antis head on rather than sheltering our children from them. Your train a soldier to fight by teaching him about his enemy not sheltering him from their threats.
The ces letter certainly has its faults. But a dumb claim does not invalidate an entire piece. Does the incorrect assertion about the names mean that Brigham Young did NOT ban africans from the priesthood? or mean that there IS hebrew dna in native americans? of course not.
@@Kaputnik11 First of all the DNA is a red herring if you read my other quoted even genetic critics dismiss this argument as improvable by given data either way. Second The priesthood ban was never claimed to be a revelation but was instigated as a policy and again If you read the Bible there is a historical precedent for such exclusions Moses forbade intermarriage with Gentiles (A policy later reinforced by Ezra), Gentiles were largely commanded to not be included in the gospel and were always distinctly excluded from certain ordinances and religious practices in ancient times. By the way even within the Gospel The Levites were the only ones who could hold the priesthood and officiate in the temple. This was due to social and political structure of the time but also as reward to the tribe of Levi and condemnation of the other tribes at MT. Saini regarding the golden Calf incident. this practice would be followed by all Jews even during and immediately following the the resurrections of the savior. Christ himself forbade the apostles to preach specifically to and baptize the gentiles living around them during his ministry and would take a revelation to Peter post ascension to convince him to lift the restriction. Was Jesus racist? Was Peter a bigot? In other words in the case of Brigham Young he also was constrained by the social, political, and cultural problems of his time. My personal opinion if it had not been for Segregation and reconstruction post civil war, there would have been no ban. Joseph Smith in his presidential platform was the only candidate of that election that included an abolishment of slavery and if we had followed it we may have avoided the entire Civil War. Brigham Young endorsed that platform and Josephs bid for president. It also should be noted even as he put the ban in place he specifically noted it was temporary and would be removed in the future. Why do that at all if your purpose is to forbid Blacks from getting the priesthood? The point is that the world has often given the prophets and the church lemons and they have had to make lemonade out of it as best they can while the lord softened hearts and prepared the way for further progress to be made in and outside of the church. You make a very historically dishonest argument when you judge past people by morals and circumstances that they had to lay the foundation for or didn't exist in their time or were not even feasible without significant bloodshed, conflict and, societal destruction. In a sense you are like a woman suffragist going back into the dark ages and advocating about women's rights. I'll come watch you burn at the stake as a witch or a heretic because you ideals are not even a glimmer in the eye yet and won't be for centuries nor would you be able to accomplish it in that particular environment in the first place. don't believe me ask William Tyndale. He went to the stake for printing the Bible so the public could read it. Brigham Young incidentally put severe restrictions on slavery and the treatment of them. In the Utah territory slavery almost didn't exist in fact there were only approximately 80 by the end of the Civil war. Yet Brigham stopped a slave trade between the Paiutes and the Mexicans and refused to join the confederacy when it approached them to join despite the atrocities and persecution the Union had allowed to be perpetuated on the church and its members. It is true that Brigham like many abolitionists and northerners who abhorred slavery still had some racial views which we would find unacceptable today but for his time period he would have been one of the progressives and not seen as a bigot. And it is certainly better than the progressive advocates of our day who like dogs to their vomit are re embracing segregation and racial discrimination under the faux labels of Equity, Diversity and Inclusiveness or Critical race theory.
@@gregbriggs4540 The Book of Mormon makes the claim that ancient Hebrews are the principle ancestors of Native Americans. This does not show up in Native American DNA however. We can show through DNA though where Native Americans do come from and it is not Hebrew. Therefore it is not a red herring. And at minimum if DNA evidence could not prove anything in this case (it can) you would still be left with the burden of proof that isn't being met by any secular sources. Again DNA is very useful in this scenario, but trying to claim that it means nothing will get you nowhere when we are trying to prove something. In regards to the priesthood ban... oh boy. on Fairmormons website it states this from George Albert smith in 1949. "The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time." So you are absolutely wrong. And this sentiment has been repeated numerous times even at General Conference. You lack of even the most basic understanding of this issue means that you should take some time and further read into what leaders of the church said about this issue. I think your rambling about present-ism and the Bible are entirely irrelevant. you are throwing out like half a dozen half baked theories to see if anything sticks or makes sense. Half of them even contradict each other. Like it is biblical but also Brigham Young making mistakes of moral character? Well which one is it? Because those seem mutually exclusive. So instead of getting into these horrible arguments I'm going to lay out a very simple logical path here in regard to Brigham young's stance and why it invalidates LDS rule. "Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." Brigham Young had this wonderful quote to say about gods law and interracial marriage. It very clearly states that it is in violation of gods law to have two races marry/ have kids. An acting prophet states that it... is... gods... law. And also states that it will always be so. And that those who break this law should be killed. Now is this true of gods will? According to your church YES! In a Church declaration it is said “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty” Well by nature of a prophet saying that it is gods law and is telling members that it is gods law what he said must have been the truth! Because he was never removed. He was free to continue to preaching this clearly incorrect version of gods laws with no input from the man upstairs and no correction during his lifetime. There was no indication at all that god stepped in to attempt Young from spreading this FOR DECADES. God and his method of removing prophets is absent here. so it either must be gods law that Africans cannot marry Europeans OR the church has now fallen astray because they no longer teach gods law. either way it doesn't look good for church truth claims at all. the Church has repeatedly used god as a justification for banning Africans from higher ordinances and if they claim it to be from god they cannot lie about it or they will be removed. So now we need to ask again. When Brigham Young "This will always be so" was he leading members astray? Or not?
I am grateful for the CES letter. It helped me out of a faith crisis. Once I took the time to check the receipts of the letters claims, I discovered that they were actually doing what they accused the church of doing, being manipulative, dishonest, and hiding true history and the church wasn't. Doing that exercise I learned so much more about the history and doctrines of the church. If it wasnt for the challenge, I wouldnt have grown in my faith as much. So thank you Brother Runnells!
Classic projection...
"I know you are, but what am i?"
@@wesleykarnesoh please . I also read the ces letter. And then went and checked it all out and was amazed at the things that were found that the ces letter was wrong on. Just research the real history of the church.
So according to you ,2+2=3. . No it doesn't. You only see what you want to see no matter how much you won't see what is right in front of you.
@@yapooa No what I discovered is the CES letter says 2+2 (shhh secretly...+7/2x600)=4.
@@stellaarthur2739 How about you watch the video.
Alma stated, “… if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you.” Conversely, if you have had a belief and you desire to not believe or even if you choose to not “nourish” that belief you are at risk for losing whatever belief you have had.
It’s my observation that people leaving the Church, for the most part have been subconsciously or consciously looking for an excuse to do so.
I really wanted to believe. I studied long and hard and consulted teachers. I came to the conclusion that its not true. It was like losing the a loved one. Your comment is proof that lds folk harshly judge those who leave
@@advocate7643 So your conclusion is Joseph Smith conjured up the Book of Mormon? You didn’t study the Book of Mormon. Your conclusion is impossible.
@@UVJ_Scott Again, judging me by dogmatically saying I didnt study the book of mormon. I have three copies that have been read front to back with hundreds of highlights. I studied it daily for two years on the mission. Just accept that people can read and pray about and come to different conclusions.
What you said was very judgmental. 40+ years in the Church. Served in 3 bishoprics, and desperately wanted to find reasons for the issues. And that is the very short version.
@@celicalostandfound help me understand. Do you believe Joseph manufactured the Book of Mormon? What church do you believe is the true church or do you believe that God doesn’t have a true church? What doctrine do you disbelieve? I’ve spoken with many former members and almost all left because they don’t like the Church’s stance on homosexuality. So they justify leaving based on the CES letter or some other rationale.
As I've read many of the comments, I think something that is important to include in the equation as to why some people are able to remain true to their faith in Jesus and others stray may come down to spiritual gifts. Though my family was not active in the church from my birth to when I started college, I feel like I've always had a gift of testimony. As I've aged, into my 60s now, I continue to be solidly founded in my faith in the Redeemer and clear on seeing, knowing, and experiencing all the good in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and able to overlook and tolerate the imperfections of the members of the Church, including myself. I study the words of the Prophet and the prophets and have no doubt that they are leading us to Christ, to bring others to Christ, and to prepare us for His return
Mr. Huntsman, I like your comment. I’m not a fan of the CES letter. It seems to be full of many little trivial matters along with the major problems. But I can respect someone who understands the issues and has a informed choice to be Mormon. Unfortunately most Mormons are not informed which breaks my heart. Take care My man and stay strong in Christ.
Well aren’t you just a special guy
What a long winded way to say that you’re better than others.
I am starting to realize the same thing as you, not all have the gift of faith, not all have the gift of a testimony or some spiritual gift that allows you to see through something like the CES letter, thats why if you have a spiritual gift that can uplift someone, we should use it.
@@CarlosRomero-pl9tk what part of the CES letter did you see through that was particularly disturbing?
I’ve personally experienced what he’s talking about. I got into a religious ‘discussion’ with someone at the SeaTac airport. The timing was crazy because I was almost done reading the Book of Mormon in a 6 day period. He rattled off memorized bullet points of near meaningless subjects without taking a breath. Emphasized odd or strange historical moments as fact, even though the dead no longer have any say or defense. Once I picked up on the obvious strategy- to overwhelm, that’s all I needed. Everything I had just read in the BOM about priestcrafts and false prophets was literally standing in front of me. It’s so easy to discern. I loved bearing my testimony each time he accidentally paused. I’m so grateful for the Holy Ghost and give all credit to God to have these amazing experiences.
Playbook. Study Lehi's dream, particularly pertaining to the great and spacious building. Apply the necessary gaslighting tactics until members fall into forbidden paths.
Did you know Joseph Smith Sr had "Lehi's dream" in 1811?
@@istx3 When he was five years old? Who reported it? Did he? To whom? His mother? How many dreams like that did you have when you were five? To have had such a dream means that he was already a prophet at five. If I were you, I'd pay attention to everything he said later in life, starting with his testimony of the Book of Mormon.
@brb5506 He said Joseph Smith Sr. Emphasis on Senior. The "Prophet" Joseph Smith's Dad had the dream, which was then turned into Lehi's dream.
@@davidjohnzenocollins Correct, JS, Sr. It's interesting how people pick at somewhat plausible threads, more like pieces of lint, and try to pick apart the whole thing. You're hacking at imaginary leaves instead of digging at the roots: to convince people to stop believing the Book of Momon, you have to dig at their testimonies from the Spirit and the book's transformation of their lives. To do that effectively, you have to yourself sincerely read, ponder, and pray about the Book -- oh, but you must have already done that, right?
Excellent presentation.
My son's pastor thought it would be important to GIFT me a dvd about "what's REALLY behind Joseph Smith and temples" for Christmas. So I put his name in the temple (it's what you do for those you're concerned for 💜🙏🏼right?)
I never push my beliefs on them when I go watch my grandkidss programs, yet I hear negative talk about "those Mormons" about half the time I visit.
Pretty tacky and rude..
My dad always said that if you're always bad-talking other churches instead of teaching about Jesus Christ with the Holy Spirit of testimony in your heart, then your church must not be worth much....💡
When I was around the age of 10, I went to my friend’s church, I’m pretty sure it was Methodist or Presbyterian, they were prepared for my visit somehow. I had to defend my beliefs and hear some pretty blatant attacks on the LDS church during my visit. It was interesting, we’d never preached to my friend or his family, they only knew we were LDS. I wish more people spent more time explaining what they believe and living it and inviting others to “Come and See”, than trying to explain what others believe and mocking them.
@@thebenplatt it was decades ago but mostly I remember being given some pamphlet about Joseph Smith and then being informed that God does not communicate through a single prophet or by revelation and that the Bible was the only word from God and his prophets that we needed. It was interesting, I just sat there, explained what I believed about modern day revelation and can’t remember much more, although there were a few other things I can remember being informed about what I (“Mormons”) believed. I never went back to that church and my friend moved away a few years after that, we remained friends at our elementary school though, so the time I don’t think I recognized that they were trying to bash me, looking back it was clearly what they were doing and it was just odd.
I think The Book of a Mormon can up again when I pulled out my Bible from my scripture holder and I pulled out the Book of Mormon during the class while getting out the Bible. That was interesting too, like I had pulled out porn or something. Good times.
It is Joseph Smith that taught that all other churches are abominations unto the lord and that TCOJCOLDS is the one true church.
@@thebenplatt The Bible predicts the book of Mormon and Christians ministers and teachers purposefully ignore and hide these things from you, yes, this plain truth right in your own Bible. Want proof? Grab your Bible and let's show you. Link UTube video titled (Book of Abraham part 7) make sure it's part 7. Link My name Paul Gregersen to get there
@@thebenplatt The biggest attack they hope destroys your faith is the attack on the book of Abraham which they intentually try to prove Joseph Smith failed to translate right. In just a few minutes allow me to completely destroy the CES letter. Link UTube video titled ( BOA ep 16) link my name Paul Gregersen to get there
Back in the early '70's a friend and I researched a number of anti-mormon publications. We looked up the footnotes to trace back to their sources. We found that almost inevitably the sources quoted other sources (sometimes multiple iterations) that ultimately used E.B. Howe's book "Mormonism Unvailed." Since that book had been thoroughly debunked I came away from the experience with the resolve never to take anti literature at face value.
Brigham Young prevented Africans from entering into the temple. This is a fact and these ideas were carried on for decades after him. Assuming this instance was quoted numerous times and got its source from "Mormonism Unveiled" would it be reasonable to say that it is a faulty source if it is using real facts? I suppose the point I am trying to make is that we need to be dissecting the facts that the source claims to have. Something coming from pro or anti LDS material is no wrong or right simply because it takes a biased stance.
Thanks for the research 👍🏻💡
The difference is the CES links all their sources and most are from the church’s actual website. Research for yourself, don’t take apologist’s word for it.
@@3keyevaluation I have looked them up, and the majority do not support the points asserted.
The CES letter hasn't been debunked but sorry HAHAHAHHHAHA
When I returned to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints after almost 2 decades of walking away, my bishop had me read The Miracle of Forgiveness by Spencer W. Kimball.
EVERYTHING in that book was written kindly, truthfully, spiritually, and in a manner to LIFT UP all human souls to Jesus Christ (those who would choose Him.)
I sustain ALL of God's prophets from Adam, to Joseph Smith, to Russell M. Nelson. Each has been a faithful, repentant servant of Jesus Christ, and deserves RESPECT given for all that they have done for God's people.
In the SACRED name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Amen
🫂🙏🏻🕊🕯
Kimball has Smith's created version of Jesus that cannot save therefore doomed as you stand with him.
@@gemmeerobinson1803 I think some Protestants and evangelical Christians believe this. Paradoxically, it seems to teach of an all-loving God who is prepared to doom good people to an eternity in Hell. This includes sincere individuals of all faiths (or none at all) who don't believe in a specific and limited interpretation of the Holy Bible. Surely, all just and honest people know in their hearts that this notion is false. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that who have not accepted Jesus prior to their resurrection - and there will be numerous opportunities for every person who has ever lived to do so up until then - will inhabit a kingdom of glory that exceeds earthly joy. But those who love Jesus, their family, friends, strangers, AND enemies, and have kept His commandments (John 15:10) will inherit a far greater glory, with all the promises given to Abraham and his posterity. Furthermore, the Jews, God's covenant people, will one day know that Jesus is their Messiah, and will be valiant in their devotion to Him.
@@gemmeerobinson1803
If this is doomed, I will take it😘
@@guardianangel9517 So be it. Without the living Bread, You're Toast. Really crummy choice for Satan burns everything.
@@gemmeerobinson1803 and Jesus Christ lifts, gives, and blesses everything/ everyone who come unto Him.
I'm grateful for my personal relationship with Jesus Christ
🌞🙏🏼💜🕊🫂
4:03 I've also called the tactic 'shotgun argumentation', you blast a victim will a massive bullet point list with so many arguments that it is overwhelming. By presenting a large number of arguments in rapid succession, the opponent is intimidated from answering them all. If an amateur apologist manages to address them, they just shoot again.
That doesn’t address the points.
@@advocate7643 It can if the person asking for them to be addressed is clearly not interested in having it be addressed, by how they ask. Its futile if they just preemptively Move the Goalpost as they write. How can a good faith actor expect one person to take any time to address a CES Letter, because it takes more time and study to address it than it was to copy and paste it to begin with. If any one of the issues were actually strong enough to take the church down, it should be able to stand on its own. Maybe then expect it to be addressed in a timely manner and after they do, don't simply repeat it to someone else and pretend it's gone unaddressed.
@@treystone9464 its been almost a decade and the church doesn’t have straight answers for most issues. What am I repeating?
They are all arguments from repetition. You just regurgitate arguments from the nineteenth century, arguments which have been thoroughly and carefully treated by responsible LDS writers and scholars. You make it sound as if no Mormon has ever dared to respond to these arguments. In fact they have, yet critics are bullying regular, non-expert, people by dragging the conversation to an ad nauseam state in order to then assert one's position as correct if one item you ask them has not been contradicted.
@@advocate7643 Rubbish - you've closed your mind, you've cast off the truth, and you're bashing the faith on this faith-promoting channel. And there isn't anything you could put forth here that we couldn't shoot down in 5 minutes. You speak in generalities because you have zero arguments... "the church doesn't have straight answers" what nonsense - that's patently false.
Excellent presentation. When I began my mission back in the 80's I felt a need to be prepared to confront anti-Mormon accusations. I got a copy of The Truth About The God-Makers and found it very helpful. Not just that it addressed specific accusations, but also that it laid out the kind of tactics and methods used by those who craft such accusations. I would also say it has built my faith and confidence in the church to see the kinds of shenanigans our critics must resort to, but far too many get so emotionally impacted by the accusation that they buy it and don't look for the rebuttal or give it honest consideration.
What sort of rebuttal can one give for the claim that KJV-specific typos appeared in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon?
@@alienwarex51i3 To start with, it isn't that uncommon for people to independently make the same spelling errors. Also keep in mind that Joseph only dictated the words, the scribe was the one to write them down. It could be that the scribe misspelled because that was how they were used to seeing it in their Bible, or it may be that they recognized what Joseph was dictating matched a part of the Bible and they used that to help them record it. Either way it really doesn't prove anything other than Joseph's scribes were mortals who sometimes spelled things wrong. So what.
@@incogneato790 I should mention that these errors include not just misspellings, but entire missing words, the same missing words present in the KJV. For example the KJV in Isaiah 2:9 says "And the mean man boweth down [...]" just as the 1830 BoM does. This is an obvious mistake, which was later corrected in the BoM (2 Nephi 12:9) to say "boweth not down." This is one of about a dozen instances of the BoM having the exact same errors as the KJV - errors that are _only_ found in the KJV. So, the idea that these are simple coincidental misspellings that happen to align with the same misspellings in the KJV seems unlikely.
The response from FAIR is that God must have dictated these errors to Joseph for whatever unknown reason. To me, that seems like a weak response. I don't think people are getting too emotionally flustered to buy the rebuttals; I think too many of the rebuttals are just too weak.
@@alienwarex51i3 What I said still applies though. There is what Joseph Smith spoke, and there is what the scribe wrote. We only have what the scribe wrote. Each scribe was likely familiar with the KJV and could have very well have been unconsciously influenced by that in how they recorded what was said or made an honest mistake, or could have recognized what was being said matched something said in the KJV so copied it from there on purpose to 'get it right'. None of that is a challenge to Joseph translating by the gift and power of God. Someone can attribute something nefarious to it if they like, but that is only a reflection of their bias, not proof of anything.
"And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ."
Anyone have any resources that address the CES letter not glibly but as a useful resource to prove the testament of Joseph Smith and the Church.
There are more videos here; maybe there's one you like better: ruclips.net/p/PLw_Vkm1zYbIHqtOJe70CrJyAMf7fvBftZ
Dan Hoen didn't really listen. Brother Smith basically said he took some of the weakest arguments to show the example of the way the CES letter and by extension most anti attacks come. Even then, he said he had to dig deep to find the way the letter made stuff up. Let's take a book and grab a few words here and there separated by paragraphs and pages to show alleged plagerism. It shows the author of the letter starts with short cuts and goes from there.
The prophet could literally stand at the pulpit in General Conference and address every single issue in the CES letter. I'll say it again. No answer would ever be good enough.
@@danhoen4129 You again. You still haven't admitted to the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologists. Are you going to admit that Paul debunked your anti-Mormon and Egyptologist friends?
Notice that Dan Hoen ignored my comment.
@@danhoen4129 Ignored Paul Gregersen's absurd theories? They're not ignoring anything. They're no more ignoring Paul Gregersen's videos than any other pro Book of Abraham videos from other members of the church. Therefore, why would they only ignore the pro Book of Abraham videos from Gregersen?
@@danhoen4129 The answers are more than reasonable, logical, and faithful, but you are of a lying spirit and so no answer will suffice. Christ ran into unbelieving people such as yourself. As sad as it is that people leave the church, it is also a benefit that people like you are gone, no longer a lingering poison directly affecting true members. And if you're thinking people are leaving the LDS church in droves, actually all Christian churches are experiencing this same phenomenon, but to admit this you would have to be honest, and clearly you are not. More to the point, scripture clearly prophesizes that it is people like you within the church who create unrest and a loss of faith. It is often what drove the apostles to visit the meridian churches to clear up disputes and to warn the faithful members of the wolves within the flock seeking to create as much chaos and destruction as possible. You are of this vein!
And speaking of logical fallacies, oh please. You wouldn't know a logical fallacy if it hit you over the head. Good luck with the Santa Claus thing!
"We hope Spidey is not an anti-Mormon”, that actually made me lol.
Was dealing with this anti shiz for quite a while. So I totally get when you say 95% of it is old.
Nice talk. Thanks.
Like he said, the new stuff is exciting, the old leftovers have been warmed up a few times and are a bit stale
The CES Letter uses the same arguments that were used by the Tanners and other critics back in the 1970s.
So accurate? 😂
what are those? legit questions?
Right at the beginning: “I’m surprised they have the time…” Do you realize how much time members devote to the church?? What a silly criticism.
@@steel6322
If the members devoting their time to the church doing so enjoy doing so, how is that a waste of their time?
Do whatever people who disagree with the church enjoy slandering the church, don't they have anything more enjoyable to do?
I can't see persistently slandering someone or a group as enjoyable.
@@danielmoore4024 The people doing that don’t see it as slander, but rather, the truth. Spreading what one believes to be true is usually enjoyable.
@@steel6322
Where I live negative truths will be classified as slander if it has not been proven in court. I once slandered an academy not knowing telling the truth could be slander.
@@danielmoore4024 Whatever. That’s not how religious debate works. Are you living on this planet by chance?
@@steel6322
I were just saying what's classified as slander in my country, do you agree churches are organisations?
The law is we cannot give any negative information about organisations unless they have been proven in court. So-called critics, whatever they want to call themselves are very unprofessional.
"The Church is full of paedophiles and sex addicts."
Would you consider that professional religious debate or slander and deceit? Are the majority of adults in the church paedophiles?
"If you tell your parents you're LGBTQ+ they'll disown you!"
Would you consider that religious debate or 'critics' slandering parents in the church?
"If you don't believe your parents and peers will abandon you!"
Is that religious debate or slandering parents and friends? Would you consider any of that slander fearmongering the person who loses their faith?
I would consider it religious debate if it was about the religion itself, not 1 personal experience out of millions who haven't experienced abuse by the church. Abusing members is not what the majority of church members do.
So I'm investigating my faith a little bit (member my whole life) and read the CES letter immediately before watching this video. I'm extremely glad that I watched this video in conjunction with reading the letter. This video did an extremely good job of debunking several things the letter presented as fact, and exposed them as laughably bad, paper thin arguments. Every point you addressed, you completely dismantled, which proves your own point about the "Death by a thousand cuts" method... almost. It does a really good job! However, some points that the CES letter makes are not just fluff, or easily debunked 'cuts'. Some of them are more akin to bullet holes, that the church has responded to, but never provided a good answer for. Those points were conveniently left out in this video. For example, the Book of Abraham. The church itself has addressed this issue in an essay on their website, but it was lackluster and didn't really answer the question. It pretty much said, "Yes, we admit that there is a problem, and we agree that the translation was entirely false. But maybe they meant something different in Abraham's time! Maybe the parchment was just a catalyst for inspiration to Joseph Smith! We don't really know, but we know that you shouldn't worry about it." The church very cleverly provides non-answers to these extremely faith-shaking issues, and avoids them altogether when their listeners don't know any better. And believe me, these issues are faith-shaking. Knowing that Joseph Smith apparently has multiple, well-backed allegations of translation fraud (Even outside of the CES letter and other similar anti-mormon literature) that the church has no real answer to, shakes my faith in the authenticity of the Book of Mormon translation greatly.
Great video, for real. I'm seriously very glad I watched it. It changed my perspective of the CES letter, and decreased it's perceived credibility vastly, and revealed that a lot of it was fluff manufactured to deceive. However, it would have been much better if it didn't conveniently avoid the topics that actually have significant weight to them - faith destroying weight. I will continue watching Greg Smith's firesides in hopes that I will find some of these 'silver bullet' questions answered more honestly fairly than the church itself, because I can tell that he is a faithful, and credible source.
You may find some answers by watching some Hannah Stoddard interviews. She has done a huge amount of research on Joseph Smith... reading the original documents etc. She also explains some issues with a church historian who didn't even believe in prophetic revelation. He created some church history to fit his narrative. I can look up some links for you if you're interested.
Maybe take a look a member ‘David Alexander’ a new member who has been involved with many churches. He speaks about these issues in an interesting way.
The Egyptologists were debunked by Paul Gregersen, the anti-Mormons are having nightmares.
Keep digging if you can seriously think this guy was honest in his “debunking” … LDS apologetics are extremely deceptive and illogical. Furthermore, the CES Letter is only the beginning of the issues proving the church is a false and corrupt organization, only the tip of the iceberg.
@@brittanyalexissingerAnnnnd it just got DISproven. So it's STILL weak.💙
When some of my very smart kids decided to disengage from the Church giving me some of the reasons likely in the CES letter. I thought I had pretty good explanations for most of their complaints but I could tell it was hard to give all explanation within their normal attention span. I asked what one thing I could say that might make a difference for them. One said that his major problem was the Book of Abraham. In my response I remembered something Professor/Dr. Hemery Eyring said about it; that he didn't know exactly how but he could accept that Joseph Smith received the inspiration from the papyrus, he had access, to write what we have in the book of Abraham, I also bore testimony that I had felt the spirit of God and truth in what was written in this Book. Sadly they have been on strange paths going from one extreme to another for the past 12 years. We have continued to love and pray for our family and try and follow the spirit by not arguing (but then I do write this).
Google Book of Abraham pt 8 truth discovery Paul Gregersen you tube. A video debunking the Egyptologists by presenting proper interpretation. Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong.
@@richardholmes5676 I agree Gregerson does a good job.
Your answer boils down to "just trust me bro"
@@binmyrtmind Indeed. See the comment section of his videos. Notice how he refutes the arrogant Egyptologist assessments the critics try to use against Joseph Smith.
@@TheWTFcakesThat's what God tells us when it comes to faith and the reward of eternal life, so I guess you don't believe Him either.
Though i agree with the anti/ex mormons in the comments that these were the weakest of attacks in the CES letter, it goes to show that they aren't genuine in their interests. Like the presenter says, it's the shotgun effect. Explaining polygamy will take far longer than the 15-20 minutes per topic the presenter is giving. Church History Matters podcast does the topic well
I like that podcast.
Well that's the real conundrum isn't it? There definitely is enough evidence to prove the church is false, however, there is certainly enough things that have happened in my life and in the lives of others to prove the church true. I spent many years trying to figure it out intellectually, came really close to having my name removed from the records of the church and spent many years reading anti and pro materials and even contributing to some of the anti stuff. Never though really could bring myself to 'pull the trigger' of leaving, nor could I get 100% past the Book of Mormon. Even at my MOST anti...I still would occasionally go to it's pages for comfort. When I was my most close to atheism...I listened to a book on bacteriology and DNA and was like...wow...nature is screaming there is a God. Then I opened to the other possibilities of Christ, etc., coming at it from the other side. I can't determine if it's true, I can't determine if it's false. I realize that I'm miserable as a nonbeliever, but this is good evidence to me of God. So I decided just to accept God and Christ, keep going and not worry about it. One day I was out of town at a fast and testimony meeting and a lady got up there and was talking about her depression and the gospel...and I realized...I haven't been suicidal for a long time. When I was atheistic and nonbelieving...I was really suicidal and was in psych hospital twice. Living the gospel, even though I had doubts...was a real antidote to my depression. Sure I have down days, but not like when I was into all the anti stuff trying to prove the church was false. For a long time I was...well the gospel is true, but the organization itself, I will reserve judgement on...except, if I believe in the gospel, and I believe the Book of Mormon is true...why am I continuing to tire my brain out about everything else? I'll live the gospel and serve in the church and let God resolve any lingering issues for me on the other side.
"Anti" are used in numerous occasions, however became popular in Christ. Anti Christ, Anti Mormons, do you think it was just coincident. Do you heard AntiSatan? You wouldn't find it anywhere, or very few if there is. It may be nonsense, but I believed there's a profound truth behind.
My testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel of Christ in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is independent of any human philosophies. I came to know decade ago before I learned about the church. There's a God, Heavenly Father, His son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, they taught me of these truth, as i pray clear as noon day.
I read and studied all the scriptures we have, including other floating books that claim written by the ancient prophets, I also read and examined numerous materials, and articles that exerting all powers to thwart, and destroy the Church. Yes, they may destroy the Church, nevertheless, the doctrine, and principles of the gospel will remain true and steadfast to His coming and in all eternity.
Yet, as fallible as I, I choose to believe and remain true to the gospel, and die hoping of a blessed eternity in exchange of short time confusion, and challenges. The gospel has all the greatest attributes to live happily, I have nothing to doubt. To God all be the glory.
LOL your standard of proof is miserably low
sounds like you are searching for Natural Moral Law which is part claims we are all reaching for god. Thus any path available or easily available makes sense to us. So even if that path is flawed it is still a path to take us where we need to go.
I know the church is true due to its complexity.
The CES Letter ignores the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith. Paul debunked the Egyptologists by presenting proper interpretation.
Thanks for sharing this. I've looked at the entire CES letter in depth and have come to similar conclusions. It is way overhyped in my opinion, as all of its supposedly valid points are easily debunked if one is willing to search for answers with an open mind and be willing to rethink one's previous assumptions. I have done that very thing over the past number of years, and have found that many of my previous assumptions were incorrect and needed to be reevaluated in light of new knowledge that needed to be brought into my overall 'world view', since all of us are (or should be) ever learning more as we age. The result was a much more logical and reasonable picture of reality which harmonizes human nature, limited human knowledge, science and religion in so many ways. It's also important, I believe, to keep this kind of open mindedness throughout life; that we should be open to new and exciting scientific discoveries and personal revelation and new ways of seeing things, etc. I'm also convinced that life is a journey that has great meaning and purpose, that we're here for a reason, for our souls to grow and learn from this human mortal experience. My faith provides this kind of clarity, which I am very grateful for. I just don't see those that attack the faith of others (either our faith or another's) as having this kind of 'light' about them, but darkness instead. I'm not impressed with the lack of light and goodness as well as the deceitful tactics they often make use of.
It is also interesting that Greg quotes Manu Padro. I have read many of Manu's posts on the quora website, and have been impressed with his insights and interpretations. I don't think he is active on that website anymore though, and I'm not sure if any of his previous posts are there anymore. In his last posts a couple of years ago he was hinting that he was going to leave quora. His full name is Manual Padro, and he is an independent researcher who is currently writing a book that addresses how nineteenth-century witchcraft belief, misunderstood LDS practices, and the 1832 Cholera epidemic fueled the persecution of Joseph Smith and his followers. I have been active on the quora website for many years so if anyone wants to see my own answers to some of the claims of the CES letter, along with many answers to questions that are not part of the CES letter, feel free to search my posts there, as there are many. Unfortunately, that website (quora) has a big problem with trolls (as does much of social media), as well as a problem with an automatic question-generating algorithm that is annoying, but I still answer questions on there from time to time, if they are honest and not trolling questions :) I don't claim to have all the 'answers' by any means, nor do I consider my answers as 'final' as far as I'm concerned. I try to be open minded enough to be willing to reconsider and modify my answers as I learn and discover more new and interesting ideas and knowledge over time.
Why do they always ad hominem the author of the letter and criticize its format? Why not just address its most glaring points.. the anachronisms for instance or the issues with the book of Abraham.
There is no such thing as 'anti-mormon literature'. People are just seeking the truth and these inconsistencies exist.
Mormon apologetics is so inadequate.
They cannot get around the fact that Joseph presented the Book of Abraham as a direct translation, not as a revelation from on high. If it really was revelation, he didn't need the scroll. It's just another link in the long chain of Joseph weaseling his way out of uncomfortable situations (like the Martin Harris debacle). There's an old saying for things like this: don't piss on me and tell me it's raining.
Joseph Smith never mistranslated the Book of Abraham papyri.
@@AtticusLaineBlosYou're comparing the facsimiles to the explanation and expecting correlation. You're supposed to compare the facsimiles to the Book of Abraham to show contrast between God and Satan. Get it right.
Who cares about that letter and all the critics of the church? In reality all those people who fight against the church, they are in reality fighting against GOD HIMSELF, and HE will deal with them accordingly. Nobody will destroy this church!!
the reason we care about the CES letter is because of the souls it's harming. I agree that it is garbage, but nevertheless it uses incredibly effective and destructive methods to destroy the faith of others. For that reason, people need to wade through the garbage in contains to demonstrate to those who might find it persuasive that it is garbage.
@@matthewsmith5967 So you glorify a negative thing in order to save many? Why don’t you teach a principle that will strengthen the weak in the kingdom?
What a joke. Doesn’t even address the issues raised in the CES letter. Guy probably didn’t even read it.
Doesn't even address the issues raised in the CES letter??
People like you are exactly what this guy is talking about in the beginning. If you watched the whole video you would see he actually does address some of these issues.
Adding benjaminbenson2943 to my bot list
Yeah, I’m not a bot, and I did watch the video, and I reiterate that the points are not addressed. 🤷♂️
@@benjaminbenson2943
He is not intending to debunk the CES Letter, they’ve done that on separate videos. The purpose of this is to show how the laundry list fallacy works, that’s why he quoted Padro for so long.
The presenter intended to show that the laundry list includes pathetic and lousy arguments as well as genuine arguments. This is why I don’t trust the CES Letter, because Jeremy is intentionally dishonest with his readers.
When I read the letter nearly all of it was lousy, especially his DNA argument, that is actually one of the most laughable to anyone who knows about evolution. The CES Letter contradicts itself, so which argument do we accept?
I don’t believe Jeremy is stupid enough to believe the lousy statements in his letter, that’s how I know he is not interested in telling people the truth. If critics want to be trusted, they should be honest because why will I trust intentional liars?
The best jeopardy player of all time is LDS
Not a stupid religion at all
The church makes a claim. The claim is that the Book of Mormon is (heavily paraphrased) a historical account of people who migrated from Jerusalem to somewhere in the Americas, formed a society that rose and fell and was visited by Jesus after his resurrection. And that forms a second testament of Jesus Christ.
As a missionary in the late 80s, i taught this. I stated it as fact and also shared my personal feelings. It is very important to me that what I taught is truth. So after I got home, I reasearched more.
The idea that the Book of Mormon is a record of actual events is so completely laughable that I am embarrassed I once believed. There is not any archeological, linguistic, DNA or even dietary evidence that the events occurred.
The CES Letter covers a lot of ground, and the presenter in this video spends a lot of time on the clearly weaker (and much less relevant) arguments. The map. Seriously?
The CES Letter came way after I figured out that the BofM was not what it says it was. But the CES Letter is a good list of items that, many, WERE HARD TO FIND and not publicly acknowledged by the church at the time. He was an active member asking questions. He was excommunicated for it. The personal jabs at the author are a very low form of debate not relevant to the huge questions raised in the letter.
Not any archeological, linguistic or DNA evidence? You have clearly not done any research on the Hopewell Mound Builders; I would recommend them to you.
@Gary Hill oh man. Do you actually buy the Hopewell Mound theory? Man, take a step back. That theory is so cherry-picked. Be a serious person.
Even if you hold out hope the BofM could possibly be a real history, DNA analysis is the absolute death knell of that fantasy. And you think there is an actual language called Reformed Engyptian that Israelites used because it was so compact to could save space on plates? It was an absolute joke. Joseph Smith was a con man. Straight up. It's obvious once you are out from under the spell of magical thinking.
DNA is actually one of the most ridiculous arguments in his book.
As a disability rights advocate I have studied genetics as many disabilities are primarily genetic. Anyone who has studied genetics knows his argument of DNA is an oversimplification and a great ignorance towards genetic evolution. Genetic evolution occurs more quickly than his questions ask, Down Syndrome is primarily genetic with an additional chromosome and didn’t exist until the 17th century. As malaria has become endemic in Africa the sickle cell mutation has multiplied and has been found to work as a defence mechanism against malaria by the University of Edinburgh.
As environmental changes occur, genetic evolution occurs sustaining mutations producing new metabolic pathways. Then the alleles in these disabled mutations enhance the adaptability of a population as a whole and accelerate the pace of evolution to adapt sooner. Very little of his book is actually accurate, most is oversimplification and propaganda.
@danielmoore4024 apologies if i am writing this comment twice. The previous one is not showing.
DNA mutations as they relate to disabilities or how our diet, for example, may relate to gene expression are not the same way anthropologists use DNA. They want to be able to put the story together of human societies past and present.
As you know, the amount of DNA data has exploded since 2000. If you or I take a DNA test,we can get a pretty clear picture of our ancestry. And there is no evidence any native americans have ancestry pointing to Israel.
You use the word "ridiculous" to describe the DNA evidence. Can you point me to any reputable anthropologist that would back your claim?
But DNA is one tool. IMO, the more damning evidence is the fact that the BofM talks of swords, chariots, brass plates ... metals. Metals leave lots of evidence (smelting, etc). There is none. The idea of pre-Columbian metallurgy is absurd.
And let's not forget the people of the BofM spoke Hebrew and wrote on the plates in Reformed Egyptian. Read that sentence again and remember nobody recognizes reformed egyptian as a real thing, and there is no evidence of any native american languages influenced by Hebrew.
Joseph was a con man. Straight up. The Book of Abraham evidence should be the most obvious example of his lies.
@@MrGhardisty
I take it you fall for the mythical norm.
Haven’t you even looked or something? Geneticists claim DNA neither proves nor disproves the Book of Mormon. The Human Genome Project is based upon a fallacy, why have they lied to the general public for nearly 3 decades about the results of the Human Genome Project, they still haven’t read even just 1 human genome, they clustered hundreds of humans together?
DNA is not the “language of life” as Bill Clinton said in 2000, epigenetics are the language of life, it’s what happens on top of the genes that determine the state of the human. No one is born destined to develop Alzheimer’s disease, if humanity is genetically deterministic, we are genetically determined to not be genetically deterministic.
If you haven’t yet, I recommend you read “The Myth of Normal Trauma, Illness and Healing In A Toxic Culture” by Dr. Gabor Mate and his son.
Thanks for this. As you explain, the CES letter uses the pinprick or shotgun approach. Runnels draws on 200 years of timeless tricks, so finding the truth on each claim is very time consuming. FAIR helps. Before studying the responses I, personally, started with the so called letter's big hitters: BoA claims, polygamy, BoM claims, etc. After debunking those, I went through much of the rest, and noted that, as with those big three, the rest is just more of the same standard propaganda, rumors, spin, ad hominem, etc.
I have informed the CES Letter of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologist claims. Paul demonstrates that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. I gave a basic description of how Paul Gregersen debunked the Egyptologists. Did the CES Letter ignore my comment? Of course.
@@DougVandegrift Google Paul Gregersen Book of Abraham pt 14 you tube.
Joseph tried to sell the copyrights of the BOM to people in Canada?? The papyrus was a scroll 'written by the hand of Abraham'?? Sending guys on missions and marrying their wives?? JST changes New Testament but 3rd Nephi says the same thing the New Testament 'incorrectly said'?? Joe started an illegal bank that failed?? Rock in the hat!?? Rod of Aaron??? Nah... a con is a con. Church is big business and be honest... it is sticky because 'what would "xx" think of me if I left? Bros want that glory of important callings... doesn't look good if you raise questions. Cults don't want you to leave and they're good at making you feel guilty. WAKE UP. You'll be ok on the other side. Just don't abandon your responsibilities in life outside the cult. You'll be alright.
wow this video is so inspirational, thank you soo so much for this🙏🙏🙏
Except this doesn’t actually debunk the CES letter 😂
@@anonymoustruth5950Could you expand on that?
@@anonymoustruth5950 He never actually said he was trying to debunk the CES letter. This was a 1 hour presentation for a YSA stake, it wasn't intended to cover all of the garbage in the CES letter, and nor was that what he claimed to do. His thesis is that the CES letter uses deceptive and manipulative tactics to push certain ideas, and that they aren't at all concerned about presenting well structured and internally consistent arguments against the Church, they are just trying to throw as many questions as they can at you to make you doubt your faith. And I think he demonstrated that fairly well.
Does that mean that the CES letter lies about everything? No. Does it completely invalidate the CES letter? Also no, and he doesn't claim that it does. What it does mean is that you should approach its claims with skepticism and not panic. Don't come to hasty conclusions about your faith because of it, because it isn't giving you the whole story and it's often times dishonest.
@@matthewsmith5967 while he literally used deceptive and manipulative tactics. 😂
@@matthewsmith5967 the absolute irony of your comments is outstanding.
Excellent job, Greg! And thank you to FAIR for sharing it with us.
The first few items in the CES letter revealed to me how poor this kid’s training was in doctrinal understanding. It’s like he never read the Scriptures for himself, but rather listened to what teachers taught him, and based his testimony on that. Anyone who has ever search the scriptures would know better and understand better about these things.
What things? Thanks
@@W.A.J.J. the one that stands out the most is his understanding of Laman and Lemuel. And many of his claims come from anti-mormon sources or sources that used anti-mormon sources
@@MrGenejudson That’s basically what all anti-mormons do.
@@zionmama150 may I ask how you determine if a source is anti Mormon?
Also how do you define anti Mormon?
One last question, wouldn’t the source’s stance on Mormonism be irrelevant if the criticism provided is relevant?
By example: if a person were anti bat 🦇, and they said “bats carry rabies.”. Is that criticism any less valid because they are anti bat?
@@W.A.J.J. anti mormon is stuff that people tell about the church that is lies. The Spirit witnesses the truth and cannot lie. And a person with eyes to see and ears to hear can know the difference between truth and error the more they have the Holy Spirit in their heart.
My only suggestion for improvement. Add a laugh track for all the great jokes.
But seriously, great video!
Thank you for your research and your encouragement for us to do our own research!
He didn’t do any research!!! lol!!! He stated he took research his friend did!!! Yes, I highly encourage you to do some research on early church history. Like the “ prophet” having wives of 14 and 16 years old. If you’re okay with oedophillia for. The founder of the church, then so be it.
I had heard of this ces letter off and on,, here and there and so i thought it must be pretty damning but never really looked at it because honestly I dont care what anyone says or writes I know the Book of Mormon is true and found out for myself long ago. None the less I have a friend whose a non member assumed I had read it (which i hadn't) so I thought I should look into it. Well, only one thing I can say is I was shocked at how weak the arguments are and still wondering how this ever turned anyone from the church?? But I think we all know that anyone who wants to really leave will latch on to pretty much anything to rationalize his/her decision.
@@scottsmith4145
The whole thing is a lie, especially the origin story.
To begin with, the origin story is clearly an outright lie to anyone who understands rhetoric and saw his behaviour before and after the letter was produced. In the origin story he claims he's open to another perspective, but the questions say the exact opposite, that he's not open at all.
Secondly, the inclusion of the lousiest arguments like the ones presented in this video. Jeremy is not stupid enough to believe these claims, so to include them when he doesn't even believe them is just outright dishonest of him.
Thirdly, his activities on exmo reddit, let me quote him, "I didn't write the letter for the CES guy!"
The letter never was for the CES Director, his target audience was "tbm", active members of the church, he had no interest in answers.
Fourth, his reactions to the people who responded to his letter. Someone who wants answers doesn't neglect every answer they are given and mock the person who gave answers.
Fifth, everyone who gave him answers he claims he neglected because they're not church officials, another outright lie. CES Directors are not church officials, so why expect official answers from a CES Director the letter wasn't even for? So he wasn't after official answers.
Sixth, his failure to engage with the answers to his questions that had already been given. Jeremy was not the first to ask such questions, people had already answered them and he showed no interest in anyone's answers. That doesn't sound like someone who's open to another perspective.
16:50 calling Heartlanders crack smokers. Nice bridge building there!
This talk addressed 20% of the concerns brought up in the letters. If you want to prove a point, don’t go after the weakest argument and act like you’ve won the debate.
Exactly. Classic straw man
Actually, how about YOU try spending countless hours with your colleagues actually SEEKING OUT the CORRECT data from the false, far fetched "duhhh 20%", and summarize it into an hour of understandable TRUTH.
There's much more than 20% here. There are HOURS of prayerful, intelligent research.
BTW, nothing can or will stop the True Gospel of Jesus Christ. It would be unwise to fight against it unless you don't mind facing God with that🤨
Pride is unacceptable to Him.
@@guardianangel9517 topics he made no attempt to explain: book of Abraham origins, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, or anachronisms in the book of Mormon, JST plagiarism, presence of 18th century KJV errors in the BoM, kinderhook plates, the origins of the temple ceremony, racism in the priesthood, differing and conflicting accounts of the first vision, among many, many more.
The burden of proof is on the church. They've made extraordinary claims about Joseph Smith and the church's origins. If no decent or compelling attempt is made to provide an explanation for ALL of this, how can anyone rationally come back?
@@guardianangel9517 Anytime someone starts a rebuttal with “actually” they’ve lost me. Your diatribe over there doesn’t address my main concern. The entire video is him “deconstructing” what the author admits is the weakest point of the letter. Then completely ignores the more convincing aspects of the letter and gives himself a pat on the back. It’s an actual straw man.
@@noahhall3703
That was the point, listen to the section “take home points”.
They were the points of the presentation, give me a time he said he was intending to debunk the CES letter.
This needs to be seen. It also appears under Lethbridge YSA.
Mano Padro, even if a real "ex-Mo" certainly comes across as being VERY sympathetic towards the LDS church. I mean, simply being a former member of the LDS church does NOT make him "neutral" in his opinions. From the quotes the speaker gave from Mano, it certainly sounds like Mano Padro is an LDS apologist.
I know many people who have left the church and are honest about critics. They see critics are the most disingenuous and dishonest people.
You did a horrible job debunking the CES letter 😂😂
He wasn’t even trying to debunk the letter, why can’t any of you understand what this presentation’s about?
I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the arrogant Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretation. I gave a basic rundown on how Paul Gregersen proved Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
This is progressive for a YSA meeting. In my stake no one wants to discuss the CES Letter, even if they have read it.
It's time to be bold and to pick a side.
No room for lukewarm ❤
I had a big crisis of faith last night which involved a lot of different allegations of the history, and all of them linked to the CES letter. Its nice to hear someone nitpick this massive warhead. Im still pretty shaky on my faith toward the church but its comforting to know that there ARE questions and allegations the church can deflect/outright disprove
Are you being sifted? A mumbling 3rd grade educated, made up the restored church huh! go back to why? Under so much persecution why?and to willingly be murdered for it, by ex members. Think deeply of why Joseph would document every detail of his life and revelations he hides nothing!
Just study both sides…a lot! They will begin to distinguish themselves. Haters are on borrowed time. They have to move quickly and with great force to stir emotion. Take your time. In the end you’ll be stronger.
CES LETTER = IF you can't beat them with the facts,
Baffle them with BullSquat, edited for "G" rating
I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith. I gave a basic rundown on how Paul Gregersen demonstrates on his pro Book of Abraham videos that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii I am not surprised of No response. CES letter is a tool of Beelzebub. When responding to haters, and bashing them, I heard a small voice, That isn't Christ like. So, I don't fight anymore. It thank them thusly and with over 100 posts, none have responded. "Thanks, Beelzebub doesn't bash his buddies".
@@madogg152I believe I've heard a small voice on that too. I didn't remember it until I seen your comment.
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii 😇😇😇🤩
I knew the author as a young man and his family when they lived in our ward. I am saddened to know he took this path.
Now he’s an atheist
he had legit questions. No one answered instead of this ivens guy who seemed to be very arrogant and dishonest in handling the whole thing.
@@mtsaz100
Jeremy was very dishonest with the church educator who offered to answer his questions. Jeremy didn’t share his questions, he just gathered criticisms as lousy as these ones and posted them. I would have written back to Jeremy saying “Jeremy, I know you are not stupid enough to be concerned about these lousy arguments. I believe the questions about polyandry and the book of Abraham are yours, but you’re obviously not interested in answers.”
Read Jim Bennett's response to the CES Letter where he debunks many of the claims made by Jeremy Runnells.
I wonder how these CESers deal with all the recent evidences in the Arabian Peninsula for the Book of Mormon? Also the Hebraisms in the text? Even if Smith had hidden a text in his hat, how would he have read it? He would have to have memorized the whole thing. Yes, some people with great memories memorize some books of the Bible, but it takes them years to do it. Smith just didn't have time.
There is none. No secular historian agrees.
Fantastic talk. Thank you for posting this
He doesn’t debunk the CES letter at all
@@anonymoustruth5950Could you expand on that?
Can you share your source for the Mano Padro quotes you share? I have found a few references online to this guy (although it appears his first name is "Manuel" or "Manu", not "Mano".) But I can't find much about him and haven't been able to locate any lengthy quotes like you share.
I am seeking the same.
I actually saw an interview with him on another channel a couple years ago, but cannot remember the channel. Was a GREAT interview👍🏻
Hi Chad. Have you found information on this? Those quotes alone and the fact that I can't find them, his name is spelled wrong/differently, and that there's no actual citation anywhere, has me totally throwing out this whole video. I wanted to see a true "debunked" theory but now I feel as though the debunked theory is DEBUNKED! This guy is showing the same kinds of "tricks" he's talking about others doing....UGH
@@cicileigh393 The biggest trick used in the CES letter to deceive you is the book of Abraham claims that Joseph failed to translate it correctly. Please allow me in just a few minutes to destroy the CES letter claim forever by proving the opposite. Want to have some real dynamite to save testimonies link UTube video titled (BOA ep 16) link my name Paul Gregersen to get
He’s not debunking the CES letter
Every Faith has detractors. Live and Let Live. 🙏♥️🙏
instead of telling everyone how Jeremy is dishonest and manipulative---answer the questions, starting at 1 and run thru them 1 by 1. Lets see the answers! Thats all Jeremy wanted. He got ex'ed for asking legit questions. You don't answer them either. Pathetic
He got excommunicated for apostasy. Much different than asking questions.
@@jaromhall7111 Asking questions is a universally understood concept. Apostasy can mean whatever an organization defines it as.
@@steel6322
It’s evident Jeremy is just been dishonest, so why should we trust his letter is accurate?
@@danielmoore4024 Greg Smith is dishonest in this video. I would never claim that anybody is 100% honest in every statement they make.
@@steel6322
Could you share which parts are dishonest please as I would like to know.
There’s genuine evidence as in screenshots that prove the opening story of the CES Letter is a direct lie. A team of researchers have been able to find screenshots that show before he ever wrote to a CES director, he had already been hostile on mormonthink posting his letter there, asking for feedback, asking for more questions. Then after organising all the questions sent it to a CES director, he seeked mormonthink’s approval before asking the CES director, that’s not the behaviour of someone looking for answers.
So people are so dumb to make a proper research on the CES letter but not so dumb to verify and research for LDS doctrine and what is being taught in church?
CES letter: Condescending Excuse Syndrome.
I started at claim #1.
Debunked.
Done.
Now, on to more important things like a better use of green Jello... 😂
This was so excellent! It was awesome that the speaker not only provided the answers, but also had fun with some of those accusations.
dancing around the ces issues.
Have you noticed the anti-Mormon pukes are ignoring the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the arrogant Egyptologists?
Issues being that it is the devil's work.
I noticed you avoided my comment on the arrogant Egyptologist assessments against Joseph Smith being debunked, proven stupid.
The CES issue dances around the Book of Mormon issue. Mainly that it isn’t able to disprove the Book of Mormon being translated from a historical record.
Just lots of pretty red herrings
@@KylonRic The Church is true. No efforts by the devil and his puny minions can change that. As a matter of fact, those efforts just bolster its veracity.
Truth doesn't change. That's why the approach hasn't changed.
An amazing thing about Runnell's "letter" is the number of people who have returned to the faith after leaving the Church because of reading it. The stories just keep piling up -
This!
Have not heard of even one. THAT'S WEIRD. 🤔
@DirtyHeadCTurtle311 listen to the Comeback podcast.
Is interesting to note that many people who leave the church can't thereafter seem to leave the church alone.
Isn't that STRANGE?💙
@@guardianangel9517 Yeah, isn't it STRANGE how Mormons expect ex-members, people who have dedicated entire years of their lives, 10% of their incomes, untold hours of volunteer service, people who once viewed life itself through the lens of the church etc. Isn't it just strange how Mormons expect those people to just shrug and go "Oh well, what's next?" and not talk about any of their experiences and traumas they endured? It's almost as if Mormons care more about the image of the church itself rather than the experiences of the actual people that comprise the church.
It’s because they want the best for those who are in a faith crisis and don’t want anyone else to fall prey to the church’s teachings: God was a created being, Satan was Jesus’ brother, there were gods before God and there will be gods after, there’s no Hell, etc. Basically all the teachings of the church which are 180 degrees from God’s Word.
@RobinSteward-ud5en It's funny to hear people who know nothing about LDS doctrine try to tell people about LDS doctrine. Good luck with that, Robin. ✌️
It's not strange at all: They know it's true. They can't leave the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints alone because they know it's true. They're really just fighting against themselves.
Wow! Doubt Bombing? You quote Mano Padro as some "expert" and yet ignore the fact that this tactic of "doubt bombing" is exactly what Mormon missionaries do on a daily basis when they go out proselytizing to people who are already part of a non-LDS Faith, typically a Christian denomination. Nice double-standard you've got there.
Doubt bombing isn't at all what missionaries do. They teach people the Gospel. They do not attack others' religions. If any do, they are going against what the church teaches.
Preach My Gospel - the manual missionaries use - is readily available on the church website. You're welcome to look through it and show where it says to attack the beliefs of others if I'm wrong.
How is telling people that their churches priesthood leaders don’t actually have the priesthood not doubt bombing?
The fact that they have to lie about the church shows how weak their argument is.
lie? where?
One of his dumbest arguments was about evolution va Adam and Eve, I think. It’s always blown my mind how school books and scientists falsely assume that the calculations they’ve made about how long the earth has existed or when dinosaurs were here in terms of tens of millions of years, have been constant throughout al that time and that no dramatic events ever sped up or slowed down any of those processes, like a volcanic eruption, global flood, or other events… especially when we already have proof that such dramatic events did take place.
It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they’re being fooled. Thanks Jeremy for this wonderful letter. The letter can’t be refuted. The church had/has no answers to the questions. This guy is just spouting word salad.
Jim Bennett debunked the CES Letter on every point. Paul Gregersen debunked the Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretation. I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on how Paul Gregersen demonstrates on his pro Book of Abraham videos that Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
A trick?! Already lost me…
It is extremely troubling that academic researchers and authors can lack that much integrity. I work in biochemistry, and peer review and even expert edited books go through a lot of critique and attention before they can be published. Stuff like that wouldn't fly, and would be grounds for ethical investigation by your institution. It is disgusting and disappointing.
Anti-Mormon literature isn't about integrity, it's about agenda.
The CES Letter wasn't written by an academic.
@@kp6553 that’s for sure. 😊
@@kp6553 Haha, I love the disclaimers at the bottom of all the FAIR explanations that say the "views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect" those of FAIR, officers or "supporters"... and that FAIR's "opinions" have nothing to do with the church.
So... is there any real reliability or accountability? And why do so many members rely on it?
@@brucejensen3700 misleading how?
Thank you for this coherent explanation. Beautiful presentation.
Tactical. That feels a good description of the CES letter and of Brother Smith’s approach dismantling it. It was not fun when he snidely commented on so much of what may be instrumental in undermining faith. I pray the church will begin to see that there are questions that need answers. It is the individuals responsibility to learn what they can, but the church has answers the members need. Many have “shelves” that are filled to the breaking point.
The Church has gone to great lengths to provide answers. Will you listen?
Whatever happened to taking responsibility for the strength of our own shelves?
Tactical attacks require tactical responses. Brother Smith actually discussed the "shelves" of questions and how an individual, like himself, had to dig deep to see what was really said. If someone is already predisposed to take those attacks at face value rather than do the work to find them, no answer, no matter how rational will ever suffice.
I am sorry to say but there are some questions that have been given answers but many don't like the answer. there are others who foolishly judge it through modern lenses and are ignorant of the time and circumstances. there are others who wish to justify their own rebellious desires and sins as well. There are others the lord has specifically left in the realm of faith specifically to try us and to wait on him. I still have unanswered questions but it never shakes my testimony because first I still remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when the spirit told me undeniably that the Book Of Mormon was true also when Joseph Smith was a prophet also when it was revealed to me that the atonement and Jesus Christ are a literal reality and the savior of the world. I wish I could show these knowledges as objective evidence but that is not how the spirit works. As a result of this I don't let what I don't know override what I do and I continue to wait and trust on the lord for his own time. This is why my shelf has never buckled no matter the questions. As time has gone on many questions that sat on the shelf for years were solved over time and as i turned to the lord not away from him. Others I have received the prompting to be still and know he is God, and to trust him. A second problem is that we foolishly as members think the prophets and apostles are always plugged in so to speak and that every action or opinion they have must be the will of the lord (this is usually a indictment upon our own spiritual neglect or shortcomings) As if they can't have a wrong opinion or make natural human mistakes (please be aware this is not when they have declared what the lord has established as doctrine) Remember when John the Baptist was accused of being a wild man evil, and a freak for his wilderness lifestyle yet when Christ came and did the exact opposite they accused him of being a winebibber and sinful as well. The prophets can't win either way. This unfortunately leads to the 3rd mistake we rely on our own spiritual revelation to the point we think we become a law or exemption to ourselves and that exempts us or overrides what the the lords ordained apostles and prophets have declared (past or present). I believe i have received personal revelation in regards to certain church issues and practices past and present but I don't override the brethren and teach it as doctrine. first of all because that is not my authority and office, that was for me alone and I still must abide by the established doctrine or policy(which may not be the same thing) as it currently stands. Sometimes I have been proven right, sometimes partially right, and sometimes wrong but it led me to the correct answer later. This is where many of us stumble, I don't mean to ramble on but in a nut shell the idea that the church is supposed to answer and account for every question we have or actions of others past or present is a complete misunderstanding of the churches purpose not to mention unrealistic. That is incumbent upon you and me to seek the answers from the lord and wait on him. The purpose of the church is to help you make and keep your covenants with the savior while providing the priesthood authority and guidance to administer those ordinances and to make certain the doctrine of the lord is correctly interpreted and enforced to the accountability of the members who have made those covenants See Ephesians 4:11-14 , DC:1. I invite you to study Alma Chapter 32 again and remember how the scriptures in the past specifically the book of Mormon began to enlarge your soul and became delicious to you proving the word or seed was good (If you have not done this previously I will put the challenge to you). I also invite you (if you have stopped to) or continue to read the scriptures and pray as moroni and the savior taught. One of the mistakes I find people having doubts or questions make is the first thing they do is stop praying and reading their scriptures. Which to me is utter folly because it eliminates one whole side of the argument and cuts you off from revelation you might receive. Last I invite you to study Elder Renlunds talk from the last october conference on A framework for personal revelation. Sorry for the long answer but I hope it helps
@@gregbriggs4540 what do you mean when you say you “know”?
What is knowledge to you?
Thanks
Great Presentation. Thanks for your work.
Makes more of these videos
Keep your chins UP Saints, and your souls fiull of joy
🤺🕊🙏🏻🫂💜🌞🪔
Matt 5:11-12
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake.
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in Heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
D&C 121:18-20
And those who swear falsely against my servants, that they might bring them into bondage and death-
Wo unto them; because they have offended my little ones they shall be severed from the ordinances of mine house.
Their baskets shall not be full, their homes and their barns shall perish, and they themselves shall be despised by those that flattered them.
*************
All of us alive have the opportunity to repent and to love one another as Jesus Christ commanded us to.
In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen 🙏🏻🕊
Love to ALL
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Interesting
Fantastic. I figured a lot out for myself. But you summarice the methods plain and simple. So this is clearly evel deceitfull intend. Some seam honestly seaking for realety. The longer you observe the core of this people the clearer their nastyness comes to light. As you describe it if you debunk some of it they don't take it on. They tell exactly the old story to people who don't know and never mentione the plausibel answer. And as i saw in some videos Their tactic is information overload, make people feel rediculesly stupid, using psycotactis. Just what do they get out of it? Partly money, thousands of Dollars in donations, and constultan fees to help "heal" the damage coming out of ripping people out of theire friendcircles they are happy in . I saw fees of 200$ an hour. And i love your sarcasm ( of course they whine aobut it) If you dish it out you have to take it in. There are cases where this is completly fitting.
Dancing with a refuting the dumb the blind and fallen silly Willy’s
The nature of this world is that it has been designed (by a designer) to REQUIRE belief. In reality there are only two sources of opinion. One source is the designer, and the other is his antagonist. Truth doesn't even come from prophets. It comes THROUGH prophets. You must choose to believe. You will have to believe someone. I recommend starting with someone who loves you (like a child believing a good parent). Don't start believing anyone else until you are sure they love you at least that much!
So much cope in the video and threads. 😮
You’re not truly debunking the CES letter at all.
Could you expand on that?
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii his arguments were all strawman, he’s mocking these claims like they’re so Outlandish or death by a thousand cuts when they are much stronger evidence against LDS and the BOM than he’s admitting.
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii he’s playing a fraudulent game and using publicity spins to deflect, mock and attack his opponents.
@@anonymoustruth5950"his arguments were all strawman" Could you give some examples?
@@RichardHolmes-ll8ii Well at 42:50 he speculates how the "cheesy amateur" (note, ad hominem) must have just set his computer loose on all the 19th century texts until he found one that fit a few words. Instead of addressing the question, why it's so similar, he set up the method as a straw man argument, then concluded it with ad hominem, which is sprinkled throughout the entire talk. He never really addresses the actual questions, he sets up straw men repeatedly and engages in ad hominem throughout. Sounds academically rigorous, right?
Poor presentation. Lots of absolute statements, assuming ill intent of anyone who writes critically about the church. Uses same tactics that he spends first half of presentation accusing opposing side of doing. Tells people to avoid “anti-Mormon” literature. Picks the weakest examples in CES letter, presenting them as ridiculous, then assumes all other issues are just as weak but doesn’t address them.
Uses example from a book that is not even published yet that’s not part of the CES letter, that no one has access to, to prove a point. Does not explain that the CES letter was originally just a regular person writing an email to get answers to his questions from the CES director at the time to which he received no reply. I really hoped more from this.
You know that the story of how the CES letter was created has recently been debunked. The guy who wrote it spent months working on anti-Mormon Reddit sites compiling the “best arguments” to make. It was not an honest persons pursuit of help with his faith crisis. It’s a veneer of authenticity, making people feel a compassion for the poor bloke who wrote it that was as manufactured as the issues it pretends to present. All in actuality, done in bad faith.
I sent 2 comments to the CES Letter informing on the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the arrogant Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith by presenting proper interpretation. I gave a basic rundown on how Paul Gregersen proved Joseph Smith was right, the Egyptologists were wrong. The CES Letter ignored my comments.
@@chrisblanc663 Jeremy made it clear on Mormon stories that he was not a believer by the time he wrote the CES letter and also did not claim to come up with this information on his own. It was already out there in pieces. He did however want to find someone who had answers to his questions regarding the information he was coming across. His Grandfather knew the CES director at the time and thought it would help Jeremy to ask him all his questions. I have felt his frustration and eventually come to the same conclusion that there is simply no one in the church that has any good answers. Regardless of how he arrived at writing the CES letter, the information still stands and the church was not forthright about much of it until recently.
@@LA_2082 so the leadership of the church is repenting… that’s nice to hear you admit.
@@chrisblanc663while I will agree the church has taken steps in the right direction regarding being more open with its history, I wouldn’t say it looks anything like repentance, at least not by the same standards they expect of us. It looks more like damage control by anyones standards.
lol, the simple weak minded are so easily sifted out. Joseph was severely persecuted by the same type of simple minded exers who always turn and rend righteousness.
Like Oliver Cowdery accusing him of having an affair with Fanny Algier after Emma Smith caught him. Persecution! 🙄 give me a break
The sin guilty always attack the good Satan has been doing this for how long????
Fanny story by Oliver is fake made up by w law and the fallen they always try and cover their own fallen state
@@Hymie-j3p If Satan is attacking you with accusations of having an affair with someone why would you marry that person??
Im not sure you see the hypocrisy in your argument. Lol
Hypocrisy? How so?
MORMONS 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Latter Day Saints
🤺🤺🤺🤺🤺🤺🤺
Bounced on my boys CES letter to this 😎
could you reconstruct your sentence so that my simple mind can understand it??
GREAT TRUTHFUL TALK
This is funny, but I don't think he is trying to be funny. His "proof" is really lame. Examples: He calls out "doubt bombing" - does it occur to anyone that there are SO MANY errors that this is just telling the truth; or his exploration of the map passes right over the fact that these maps are basically identical. Wake up people!
@@TheMikesmith1964 Have you lived by the Book of Mormon? Have you tried reading from it daily and praying about it? If you haven't, you are cheating yourself and lying to God.
@@TheMikesmith1964
How could Joseph Smith time travel to the future to select communities that didn't exist before 1830? It's nonsense, that's why most critics avoid it.
Doubt bombing is a real thing, it's not only used among religions, it's used a lot in politics.
The proof is lame because the arguments are so lame, it doesn't take significant evidence to disprove a lousy argument.
Numerous lousy arguments don't produce evidence. The lousy arguments the presenter selected, do you believe them? If so, you're the one who needs to wake up.
I see you side step the problem of Jospeh Smith using names of cities that did not yet exist. Even the Tanners are critical of that section of the Letter.
The “proposed map” gets me man 🤦🏽♂️ 🤣
The CES Letter leaves out the reality of Paul Gregersen debunking the Egyptologists.
More than one or just one debunker
@@richardholmes5676 wow he proved one wrong how about the whole field of anthropology and archaeology looks like an impossible task
@@justins5756 The whole field?
@@richardholmes5676 as I’m the people who study the field of anthropology
@@justins5756 Anthropology doesn't apply here.
That Bishop should check the trash bin, before he wastes more money on printing more copies.
Why can't people just pray and ask their God if they should believe anything they are questioning? James 1:5 people??
Putting Taylor Petry on blast.
Thank you! 🙏
I wish someone would debate me.. i can completely dismantle Mormonism in ten minutes in fact it's one of the easiest religions to prove false...
Honestly all you really need to do is read old JS most excellent translation of "the book of Abraham". Who knew JS could read hieroglyphs so well lol..
people interpret religious text in many ways…please share what secret info you have that disproves a huge religion that has been around for hundreds of years
@@jacobmccready236 1830 was the year the church was incorporated.. That's not even 200 years yet my friend... Seriously though if you people think Jesus was God then no offense but why doesn't he ever get anything right the first time?? He did what he did, died.. realized he messed up by telling everyone to "give up everything and follow me" AFTER he died so now he has to come back again as.a ghost to tell Paul "no Messed up now all they have to do is "believe baby " that's it no works just faith... Then 632 years later I guess he realizes he screwed up again so back he goes to help his Dad start Islam talks to Muhammad.. But wait.. What's this? Right after he does his ghost thing with Paul he turns back into a human.. Goes to America where it turns out there's a diaspora of Jews living that needs straightening out... I guess it didn't work out because there's no genetic links in today's Indian population to the Jews at all.. honestly though as crazy as the BOM sounds it must be true.. how do I know this? Because when JS used his magic rocks to read the secret disappearing plates he found that even though no one had used the archaic English of the Bible for over 200 years (you know like thee and thou) the BOM did... Since we know that's the way God really talks (archaic English) and the BOM was translated in 1829 long after the archaic usage then we know the BOM must be inspired by God.. Unless anyone is suggesting JS wrote it that way to make it sound more authentic.. you'll be excommunicated if you do and there'll be no more masonic (I'm sorry Aaronic) secret gestures "on the square" for you.. any similarities between Mormon Temple endowment and Freemasonry rituals no matter how numerous and identical they seem to be are completely coincidental...
Seriously though watching you people make excuses after excuse and jumping through mental hoops trying to justify and explain your ridiculous beliefs entertains me to no end.. all logic goes out the window because there's no possible way you could be wrong 😂😆
The arrogant Egyptologist opinions against Joseph Smith were debunked, proven stupid. Care to refute?
Your family, president Wilde, and me
Follow Jesus Christ. Walk with purpose through this world with your head up, eyes forward, and heart open. Do not follow those who drag their feat and kick up so much dust that it gets in your eyes, and ears, and throat. If your spiritual receptacles are clogged with dust and dirt, wash them clean and clear with the pure water offered by Jesus and his servants old and new. Get so much spiritual hydration in your system that it drowns out all the dirt kickers.
Thank you!
Great video!
Bravo
Louis Pasteur was a liar.
Why should we be so concerned when we know what our identity is . Here is some of I know .I know that a baby can grow up and become an adult.i know that we can grow up and become more like our heavenly parents .I have seen and know some of the patternes of life and becoming.i also know that I cannot develop faith if I need everything. I also believe that we are more than a physical body . I also believe that we are here on this spinning blue planet for a purpose a reason .I a ok so believe that since to this earth was made organized our heavenly Father heavenly Father has also called true teaches disciples prophets of our heavenly Father to gide us not only for what it makes of them but the good it does to them that listen to and follow.truley the essence or our the purposes of life is growth and to become and to overcome . growth and
Unfortunately there are still many weak souls drawn away from the Church by the devil and his minions.
They are not helpless victims of those devils. They have to conceive in their own hearts a will to be misled, to not seek out light and truth, to ignore warnings and even sad and tragic consequences. Most are reacting to personal offenses they perceive they have received from one or more members, or what they feel is too much sacrifice required by living the gospel, and do not mind an excuse to leave the church. So it happens quickly and surprisingly, seemingly without much consideration. Thus the lack of sincere research, discussion, prayer and faith, or even, as Elder Uchtdorf encouraged, to 'Doubt your doubts'.
@@bmariechristine848 I agree. We all use the agency God gave us to choose to live the kind of life we live.
Revelations 12:10 calls Satan the accuser of the Bretheren. This is the perdition attitude. Mr. Runnels when given a response doubled down and revised his objections. He is like a character who buys a bad stock and keeps doubling down all the way to the bottom because he won't admit that he was wrong. I see it all the time in the secular world. We call it Pride.
They can leave the church but they can never leave it alone. I had my own run in with this garbage and found it is old rehashed tropes with a lot of dishonest presentation and substantiated accusations. I love the beginnings of the CES letter that says Joseph smith got the ideas for names in the Book of Mormon from names of locations, cities, towns etc in his area. Just one problem Over half the places it claims were sources didn't even exist at the time or would have been common names even from biblical sources. The CES letter like all anti mormon tripe relies on half truths, convenient dishonest omissions, historical ignorance of societal and cultural norms of different periods of time and flat out lies and garbage research. Why does he remove it because he flat out lied.
What gets me is how many members (or former members) have been duped by it and its weak and dishonest arguments. Sad.
@@jaredshipp9207It is regrettable to be sure. the CES letter like all anti garbage banks on ignorance, preying upon those who are already for any number of reasons having faith issues, but one of the greatest oversites I think we make as members of the church is we focus so much on teaching our children the gospel and then hoping they then get the spiritual witness from the spirit we then make the mistake of expecting that alone will sustain them when they have never been taught the arguments of the opposition. Even those who have had spiritual witnesses and know the gospel is true can be hit with a doubting brick in the face when they leave the sanctuary and defenses of their parents house and home ward and have to stride into the lions den and viper pit of the world and its modern pagan university temples with its secular professor priests of Baal. They are caught off guard by being presented arguments they never heard before and instead of suspecting they are being lied to by this new message they start to question the one they already have heard. I have tried to teach my kids before they leave home the oppositions arguments , their flaws, and their tricks and inform them with the sources they can go to counteract the Gods of the marketplace as Kipling put it who teach that Pigs have wings and that horses were wishes. I think we as parents need to be willing to take the antis head on rather than sheltering our children from them. Your train a soldier to fight by teaching him about his enemy not sheltering him from their threats.
The ces letter certainly has its faults. But a dumb claim does not invalidate an entire piece. Does the incorrect assertion about the names mean that Brigham Young did NOT ban africans from the priesthood? or mean that there IS hebrew dna in native americans? of course not.
@@Kaputnik11 First of all the DNA is a red herring if you read my other quoted even genetic critics dismiss this argument as improvable by given data either way. Second The priesthood ban was never claimed to be a revelation but was instigated as a policy and again If you read the Bible there is a historical precedent for such exclusions Moses forbade intermarriage with Gentiles (A policy later reinforced by Ezra), Gentiles were largely commanded to not be included in the gospel and were always distinctly excluded from certain ordinances and religious practices in ancient times. By the way even within the Gospel The Levites were the only ones who could hold the priesthood and officiate in the temple. This was due to social and political structure of the time but also as reward to the tribe of Levi and condemnation of the other tribes at MT. Saini regarding the golden Calf incident. this practice would be followed by all Jews even during and immediately following the the resurrections of the savior. Christ himself forbade the apostles to preach specifically to and baptize the gentiles living around them during his ministry and would take a revelation to Peter post ascension to convince him to lift the restriction. Was Jesus racist? Was Peter a bigot? In other words in the case of Brigham Young he also was constrained by the social, political, and cultural problems of his time. My personal opinion if it had not been for Segregation and reconstruction post civil war, there would have been no ban. Joseph Smith in his presidential platform was the only candidate of that election that included an abolishment of slavery and if we had followed it we may have avoided the entire Civil War. Brigham Young endorsed that platform and Josephs bid for president. It also should be noted even as he put the ban in place he specifically noted it was temporary and would be removed in the future. Why do that at all if your purpose is to forbid Blacks from getting the priesthood? The point is that the world has often given the prophets and the church lemons and they have had to make lemonade out of it as best they can while the lord softened hearts and prepared the way for further progress to be made in and outside of the church. You make a very historically dishonest argument when you judge past people by morals and circumstances that they had to lay the foundation for or didn't exist in their time or were not even feasible without significant bloodshed, conflict and, societal destruction. In a sense you are like a woman suffragist going back into the dark ages and advocating about women's rights. I'll come watch you burn at the stake as a witch or a heretic because you ideals are not even a glimmer in the eye yet and won't be for centuries nor would you be able to accomplish it in that particular environment in the first place. don't believe me ask William Tyndale. He went to the stake for printing the Bible so the public could read it. Brigham Young incidentally put severe restrictions on slavery and the treatment of them. In the Utah territory slavery almost didn't exist in fact there were only approximately 80 by the end of the Civil war. Yet Brigham stopped a slave trade between the Paiutes and the Mexicans and refused to join the confederacy when it approached them to join despite the atrocities and persecution the Union had allowed to be perpetuated on the church and its members. It is true that Brigham like many abolitionists and northerners who abhorred slavery still had some racial views which we would find unacceptable today but for his time period he would have been one of the progressives and not seen as a bigot. And it is certainly better than the progressive advocates of our day who like dogs to their vomit are re embracing segregation and racial discrimination under the faux labels of Equity, Diversity and Inclusiveness or Critical race theory.
@@gregbriggs4540 The Book of Mormon makes the claim that ancient Hebrews are the principle ancestors of Native Americans. This does not show up in Native American DNA however. We can show through DNA though where Native Americans do come from and it is not Hebrew. Therefore it is not a red herring. And at minimum if DNA evidence could not prove anything in this case (it can) you would still be left with the burden of proof that isn't being met by any secular sources. Again DNA is very useful in this scenario, but trying to claim that it means nothing will get you nowhere when we are trying to prove something.
In regards to the priesthood ban... oh boy. on Fairmormons website it states this from George Albert smith in 1949.
"The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time."
So you are absolutely wrong. And this sentiment has been repeated numerous times even at General Conference. You lack of even the most basic understanding of this issue means that you should take some time and further read into what leaders of the church said about this issue.
I think your rambling about present-ism and the Bible are entirely irrelevant. you are throwing out like half a dozen half baked theories to see if anything sticks or makes sense. Half of them even contradict each other. Like it is biblical but also Brigham Young making mistakes of moral character? Well which one is it? Because those seem mutually exclusive. So instead of getting into these horrible arguments I'm going to lay out a very simple logical path here in regard to Brigham young's stance and why it invalidates LDS rule.
"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." Brigham Young had this wonderful quote to say about gods law and interracial marriage. It very clearly states that it is in violation of gods law to have two races marry/ have kids. An acting prophet states that it... is... gods... law. And also states that it will always be so. And that those who break this law should be killed. Now is this true of gods will? According to your church YES!
In a Church declaration it is said “The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty” Well by nature of a prophet saying that it is gods law and is telling members that it is gods law what he said must have been the truth! Because he was never removed. He was free to continue to preaching this clearly incorrect version of gods laws with no input from the man upstairs and no correction during his lifetime. There was no indication at all that god stepped in to attempt Young from spreading this FOR DECADES. God and his method of removing prophets is absent here. so it either must be gods law that Africans cannot marry Europeans OR the church has now fallen astray because they no longer teach gods law. either way it doesn't look good for church truth claims at all. the Church has repeatedly used god as a justification for banning Africans from higher ordinances and if they claim it to be from god they cannot lie about it or they will be removed. So now we need to ask again. When Brigham Young "This will always be so" was he leading members astray? Or not?