Answering Jeff Lindsay

  • Thread starter Thread starter awfulthings9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

awfulthings9

Guest
It seems that Jeff Lindsay is one of the more active Mormon apologists. His site, www.jefflindsay.com attempts to answer many of the more current objections to the LDS. Some attempts are more valid than others, but I do give him credit for a scholarly effort, which I found to be a good exercise in preparing to meet with Mormon missionaries.

He has one particular page called “My Turn”, where he goes on the offensive, providing a number of arguments in favor of LDS as the true church, challenging the critics to answer him as he has attempted to answer them. Searching online, I haven’t found anyone who has taken him up on this offer. I thought I would start this thread as an exercise in that.

You can visit the page here, but what follows are the actual claims:

Book of Mormon Questions: My Turn!
Questions on the Restoration and LDS Doctrine
 
How did Joseph know so much about the Arabian Peninsula?

Verse 6: And it came to pass that when he had traveled three days in the wilderness, he pitched his tent in a valley by the side of a river of water.

Note: No river flows into the Red Sea from the Arabian Peninsula.

Arabian Peninsula, in southwestern Asia,* is a vast land that is largely desert*. Saudi Arabia occupies most of the peninsula. The other countries on the peninsula are Yemen, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Kuwait. Bahrain, an island country, lies just east of the peninsula. The Arabian Peninsula has an area of about 1,160,000 square miles (3,004,000 square kilometers). *Most of it is dry wasteland. Rain seldom falls in some parts, and temperatures in the interior may rise to 130 °F (54 °C). *2001 World Book Encyclopedia.

Note: Joseph Smith was ignorant of Middle East geography.

Verse 8: And it came to pass that he called the name of the river, Laman, and it emptied into the Red Sea; and the valley was in the borders near the mouth thereof.

Note: No river flows into the Red Sea from the Arabian Peninsula.

Despite the vast area of the Arab world, only a small percentage of it is suitable for human settlement. * Much of the region is hot and dry, and it has large desert areas.* These include the Sahara in northern Africa, the deserts of the Arabian Peninsula, and the Syrian Desert. 2001 World Book Encyclopedia.

Note: Joseph Smith was ignorant of Middle East geography.

This is from:

truthandgrace.com/bom1nephi2.htm
 
I would say it is not really worth the effort. There may be refutations of Jeff Lindsay available at exmormon.org.

There is other research emerging which validates the BOM as something entirely different from what Mormons and anti-Mormons claim it to be. The evidence for that absolutely blows Lindsay and others out of the water.

So let it go, and relax.

We have some good Jewish friends here who are active in the counter-missionary movement. They agree with me that independent study and creative thinking are essential to encounters with those pesky Mormon-flies.
 
If one theorizes that Moroni was a fallen angel, that would explain everything. We know that the evil one has great intelligence but is a deceiver.
 
How could Joseph have known about ancient cement technology in the first century B.C. in Mesoamerica?

Lindsay seems to be addressing the word “concrete”, not “cement”.

In JS time, the word cement was in reference to cementing rocks or bricks together (1818 dictionary), to form a wall. He had examples in front of his own eyes of this “technology” being used by Native Americans. So the direct answer to Lindsay’s question, is, JS didn’t know about Mesoamerican “cement technology”, he knew about its uses by Native Americans in his own region.
 
Jerusha said:
So let it go, and relax.
Click to expand...
I disagree. This line seems to make it sound like I’m uptight and overly concerned about Lindsay’s threat.

I’m not.

As my post explained, I am presenting his “turn” as an exercise to those of us who want to prepare ourselves for spiritual battle and be ready for any turn a discussion might take with our Mormon friends. The idea that others, such as exmormon.org might have already taken care of the problem, so I should just let it go and relax seems like a bit of advice that we shouldn’t arm ourselves spiritually because someone else is probably taking care of it for us.

How about we give Lindsay the respect he deserves and provide argument against his claims (I’ll foward him the link - we’ve corresponded on other things, having nothing to do with religion - I’m quoted in his research on block scheduling). If someone wants to “let it go”, just ignore this thread.
 
We are quite well equipped to handle him if he tries to present his “evidence”.

I would suggest that you do some more research on past posts in this forum. We might end up converting him. This is our turf, remember. 😉 Sounds like he has nearly converted you? :confused:

Perhaps you don’t know that Jeff Lindsay is on the outer fringes of Mormonism. mormoncurtain.com/topic_apologists.html

A meso-American (LGT) location for the events of the BOM is not the traditional location, and, in fact, tears the geography and much of the story into absolute improbabilities. Most traditional LDS people, some modernists, and some exMormons and non-Mormons are firm believers in a northeast North America location as the most logical and simplest.

I would suggest you read thoroughly on the wevsite I just linked, as well as here.
 
lindsay typically takes extreme examples without bothering to establish a link to first create “plausibility”. (wild bees that have had their honey harvested, “seals” with heiroglyphicw on them that look almost like hebrew or egyptian, etc.) then he basically says that since there is way it “could” have happened then you just have to trust your testimony that in the end you’ll see that Joseph Smith was right about everything.
 
Jerusha said:
Sounds like he has nearly converted you? :confused:
Click to expand...
Jerusha, while I am trying to respect your voice in this conversation, you once again have posted a comment that I can’t help but take offence to, especially since the little smiley that follows shows your tone is in no way meant to be understood as anything but frustration.

Please quote where, in my posts, I give some clue that I am “nearly converted”.
Perhaps you don’t know that Jeff Lindsay is on the outer fringes of Mormonism. mormoncurtain.com/topic_apologists.html
Click to expand...
Perhaps you could explain to me what his being on the outer fringes has to do with the validity or invalidity of his arguments. Should a Mormon friend bring up one of the arguments that Lindsay uses, do you suppose it would be an effective strategy on my part to point out, “Well, that’s the same argument that Jeff Lindsay uses, and he’s on the outer fringes of your religion.”

Rather than resort to ad hominem attacks on Lindsay (and strange accusations against me), is it possible that we could steer this thread back on track and engage in the exercise I proposed, which is to answer his propositions?

Maybe I should have started this thread in the apologetics forum. I certainly didn’t expect it to turn into slights against me and attacks on Lindsay (and I don’t mean to imply this is what I’m getting from the rest of you, most of whom have tried to address his challenges).
 
awfulthings9 said:
I disagree. This line seems to make it sound like I’m uptight and overly concerned about Lindsay’s threat.

I’m not.
Click to expand...
I applaud your efforts. As a former Mormon myself, I am very glad to see people arm themselves for the spiritual battle that is waging. I’m always amazed when others do that instead of only those of us who were born and raised Mormon and were fortunate enough to escape the cult. Thank you so much for posting this and for your continued efforts on the wonderful people of Mormonism who need to understand God’s true Grace and the reality of the Trinity.

There are people at www.irr.org who can help you with any refutations necessary. Most of them have met Jeff and a host of others and are very good at what they do!!

I’m praying for you and the success of your efforts!

in Christ
Steph
 
“Perhaps you could explain to me what his being on the outer fringes has to do with the validity or invalidity of his arguments.”

His view is an extreme minority view, held by very few people.

“Should a Mormon friend bring up one of the arguments that Lindsay uses,”

Since I have found refuge in an area of the country that has very few Mormons, I do not have any Mormon friends. If I did, I would not discuss religion with them. If they persisted, they would no longer be my friends.

‘do you suppose it would be an effective strategy on my part to point out, “Well, that’s the same argument that Jeff Lindsay uses, and he’s on the outer fringes of your religion.”’

No, my strategy would be to argue that if there is any truth in the BOM, it HAS to be in a northeastern North American locale. I would not counter his mesoAmerican fantasy. I would leave that to others of the “team” here. Best defense is a good offense.

I’m sorry about the attitude problem yesterday. Stress.
 
His view is an extreme minority view, held by very few people.
Click to expand...
Which doesn’t invalidate it.
Since I have found refuge in an area of the country that has very few Mormons, I do not have any Mormon friends. If I did, I would not discuss religion with them. If they persisted, they would no longer be my friends.
Click to expand...
Which is an argument for why you wouldn’t pursue it, but your earlier posts were suggesting I shouldn’t.
No, my strategy would be to argue that if there is any truth in the BOM, it HAS to be in a northeastern North American locale. I would not counter his mesoAmerican fantasy. I would leave that to others of the “team” here. Best defense is a good offense.

I agree, but I personally desire to keep challenging myself to defend against ever more complex arguments. Not only is it good for spiritual warfare, but it is a mental exercise that keeps one’s mind turning.
I’m sorry about the attitude problem yesterday. Stress.
Click to expand...
I understand. Since Sunday, I’ve had an unbearable neck pain, which I always get when stress builds up. Take care.
 
I don’t know how much influence Jeff Lindsay has but he has done a nice job in defending some points in the lds faith. And he does present a formidable argument in favor of the lds faith.

In the end, it all comes down to faith. For the catholics here, they believe their church is true and as such dates back to Peter. For the mormons, they see the organizing of the lds church and the priesthood as a direct result of god wishing to organizing His church once more on the face of the earth.

In the end, the catholic faith and the lds faith have much in common on social and moral issues. If there were more mormons and active catholics, the world would be a better place. The enemy is not with mormons against catholics or catholics against mormons. The war is against the evil that is now existing on this planet. The devil seems to be in command and the christian community seems powerless in its division among themselves.
 
awfulthings9 said:
Which doesn’t invalidate it.

When I started my research, I thought I was a minority of one. 😃 Tired of people saying “It is all true or it is all false.”

Which is an argument for why you wouldn’t pursue it, but your earlier posts were suggesting I shouldn’t.

I often fall into the assumption that my experiences are, or could be, the experiences of everyone.

I agree, but I personally desire to keep challenging myself to defend against ever more complex arguments. Not only is it good for spiritual warfare, but it is a mental exercise that keeps one’s mind turning.

Some people get extremely angry whenever their beliefs are challenged. Ever read “Under the Banner of Heaven”?
Click to expand...
 
why_me said:
I don’t know how much influence Jeff Lindsay has but he has done a nice job in defending some points in the lds faith. And he does present a formidable argument in favor of the lds faith.

In the end, it all comes down to faith. For the catholics here, they believe their church is true and as such dates back to Peter. For the mormons, they see the organizing of the lds church and the priesthood as a direct result of god wishing to organizing His church once more on the face of the earth.

In the end, the catholic faith and the lds faith have much in common on social and moral issues. If there were more mormons and active catholics, the world would be a better place. The enemy is not with mormons against catholics or catholics against mormons. The war is against the evil that is now existing on this planet. The devil seems to be in command and the christian community seems powerless in its division among themselves.
Click to expand...
The war is against anything that impedes salvation that steers us away from the truth. It comes down to faith, but not a niave faith. Faith can stand up to scrutiny and, since there is such a thing as objective truth, we owe it to ourselves and the Mormons to test all things to discover that objective truth. After all, either God is a trinity or he is not? Either Christ is God or he is not. Mormon doctrine would say not, and that they are good people doesn’t mean we should be indifferent to the fact that somebody has seriously errored in their understanding of salvation and revelation. I would be insulted if a Mormom didn’t view me in the same way.
 
awfulthings9 said:
The war is against anything that impedes salvation that steers us away from the truth. It comes down to faith, but not a niave faith. Faith can stand up to scrutiny and, since there is such a thing as objective truth, we owe it to ourselves and the Mormons to test all things to discover that objective truth. After all, either God is a trinity or he is not? Either Christ is God or he is not. Mormon doctrine would say not, and that they are good people doesn’t mean we should be indifferent to the fact that somebody has seriously errored in their understanding of salvation and revelation. I would be insulted if a Mormom didn’t view me in the same way.
Click to expand...
awfulthings9,
You do know that why me is a Mormon and as such is arguing from a Mormon perspective, correct?

Again, I applaud your efforts and since Mormonism is clearly in error… My prayers are with you!

in Christ
Steph
 
Okay, to get the thread back on track, let’s try some of these. So, a Mormon missionary throws this one at you:
If the gold plates never existed, how did Smith get so many witnesses to stand by that story to their dying day, even when many got angry with Smith and left the church?
Click to expand...
He follows up with these points:

Why would Martin Harris, a prosperous man praised by many non-Mormons for his integrity throughout his life, continue to claim that he had seen the gold plates and an angel, when this only brought harm to him?
Why would David Whitmer, after he became bitter toward Joseph Smith, still go out of his way to refute rumors that he had denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon?
If the Book of Mormon were a fraud, why involve “witnesses” at all - especially so many witnesses who might spill the beans and ruin everything?

This argument is similar (though not identical) to the Catholic argument that the testimony of the martyrs in the first century after Christ is good proof of the truth of Christianity.

So, how would you answer?
 
My response is that the Danites would get them, or their family members, for having spilled the beans about the fraud. They had been threatened, either overtly, or subtly. Also, there is a possibility that there was a source for the basic story.
 
awfulthings9 said:
Okay, to get the thread back on track, let’s try some of these. So, a Mormon missionary throws this one at you:

He follows up with these points:

Why would Martin Harris, a prosperous man praised by many non-Mormons for his integrity throughout his life, continue to claim that he had seen the gold plates and an angel, when this only brought harm to him?
Why would David Whitmer, after he became bitter toward Joseph Smith, still go out of his way to refute rumors that he had denied his testimony of the Book of Mormon?
If the Book of Mormon were a fraud, why involve “witnesses” at all - especially so many witnesses who might spill the beans and ruin everything?

This argument is similar (though not identical) to the Catholic argument that the testimony of the martyrs in the first century after Christ is good proof of the truth of Christianity.

So, how would you answer?
Click to expand...
Perhaps they did see something, that doesn’t mean that they saw actual gold plates though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top