Could The Book of Mormon be considered mythology?

[Stephen168]

You have said that my support of Mormonism is:

No, I said, ”your posts are sophistry grounded in a false dichotomy.”
The Book of Mormon is the only subject on which I’ve seen you spend any effort to support Mormonism. Usually, you make false claims about the Catholic Church in an effort to claim the Mormon Church is true.

Sophistry is just argumentations judged “bad.”

No, sophistry is rhetoric with the intention to deceive.

I think your posts are sophistry and that reason does not direct one to Catholicism.

Your “same to you but more of it.” is not a valid argument after six the grade.

If you would like to DEMONSTRATE in some non-subjective way “sophistry,” you are welcome to try, but I think the word “sophistry” is rhetoric for “arguments with which I do not agree.”

While rhetoric does not require reason, sophistry is rhetoric with the intention to deceive. Mormonism is irrational and cannot be supported by reason. You engage is sophistry to proselytize.
For example”
Ex-Mormon: I left Mormonism because it is irrational.
Tom: The “irrational” should violate the law of non-contradiction at some point. To me that is the most fundamental law of rationality. I have removed almost all of this from my thought, but I regularly see in the thought of critics of the CoJCoLDS. I doubt you and I have in mind the same irrational things in mind when we use the term irrational.
Reader of posts: Tom listed one of the three ancient laws of logic then rambles on then concluded it doesn’t matter to him.:shrug:But it matters to the ex-Mormon.

Tom: The Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.
Tom: Yes, the Mormon Church has lost and changed doctrine, but unlike the Catholic Church, we don’t claim otherwise, we are led by a prophet who gives us continuing revelation, so doctrine will change.
Tom: Let me list some examples of Catholic changing doctrine
Reader of Tom’s posts: Believing that change is bad while at the same time saying it is good would be a violation of the law of non-contradiction.
Yes, sophistry is rhetoric with the intent to deceive.

“False dichotomy” is however much more concrete. There are numerous dichotomies in my writing and some of which you may believe to be false. Some of which I might agree with you at least partially. So, can you show me which dichotomies I employ that you believe are false.

When I considered returning to the Catholic Church over a decade ago now, it was dichotomous thinking that was not as absolute as I had supposed that lead me to more seriously consider that I was not on the correct path.

Also, I regularly accuse you of offering a “false dichotomy.” I will make it explicit as I am asking that you do for my positions. You said:

Joseph Smith said the Book of Mormon was a history of ALL the American Indians. We know that it is not true. Therefore, Joseph Smith is not a prophet. Yet you claim, it proves he is a prophet and that the Mormon Church is true.

From the above rambling, I have to wonder if you understand the logical fallacy of the false dichotomy/false choice/false dilemma. It is claiming that there or only two choices when in fact there are three or more choices. While it is often used in rhetoric it is not rational.

You ask me to list a false choice you have presented when I already gave you one in post #56: If Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, it is false. Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon, so it is true. BUT there is a third choice. The Book of Mormon was not written by Joseph Smith AND it is false. Most scientists believe Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon AND it is false. Yet, you continue to claim that Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon as if it means something.

Joseph Smith said, by revelation and recorded in Mormon scripture, the Book of Mormon was a history of ALL the American Indians. Science has proven his claim and revelation to be false. The dichotomy is, does that make the Book of Mormon false as claimed by Joseph Smith? All the possible answers would be yes or no. If the dichotomy is false, you just have to provide the third possible answer.

Another dichotomy is, does that make Joseph Smith a false prophet? Again, all the possible answers would be yes or no. If the dichotomy is false, you just have to provide the third possible answer.

While I can confidently say both answers are yes, you must ramble on at great length is change the premise. But the premise is a historical fact which cannot change.

You can answer no to both questions because as Richard Lyman Bushman said, a Mormon’s “testimony” is their empirical evidence.

 

[Stephen168]

I am failing to find the time to respond as I wish I could.
Here are is an observation and a few questions.

It seems that Lax was concerned that Margaret Barker was not anything but a scholar heralded by Mormons. Tarquin finds pages describing Barker’s scholarship and says that she has little to say supporting Mormonism, “She provides no more significant support for Mormon claims than does the actual tribe Nhhm for the fictional location Nahom”.
Lax: Barker is a scholar. She has formal training in scripture and ancient languages. She was selected by her peer scholars to be the head of The Society of Old Testament Study. By any definition she is a scholar and she is not merely heralded by Mormons.
Tarquin: Barker has spoken and written specifically in support of the BOM as capturing an authentic ancient religion. If you expect her to connect the dots and say that the BOM a text that appeared supernaturally in the 19th century could not do this without God’s help, scholars do not do that and she has never publically said something. But, she has spoken at BYU and at the Library of Congress specifically discussing the BOM and how it captures the ancient religion of Lehi’s day.

I am not a scholar. I draw conclusions from data for a living. I tend to do similar things in my personal/spiritual life.

I conclude with many critics that Joseph Smith could not have produced Lehi’s journey with numerous points of contact including the PLACE Name Nahom without more information than the Hebrew Bible. I reject the view of these particular critics that the maps containing almost no information about Lehi’s journey other than the name Nahom were LIKELY to be in Joseph’s hands or SUFFICIENT to provide the detain in the BOM. This leaves me believing that the supernatural is supported.

In concert with Barker, I see evidence for an ancient view of Christianity in the BOM. I have read a couple of her books and her papers/lectures specifically on Mormonism. Joseph Smith was once criticized for Christianizing Lehi’s 600BC departure from Jerusalem. The BOM has too much Christ in ancient Judaism. Margaret Barker’s work mutes this criticism and instead suggests that many aspects of the BOM fit in Lehi’s Jerusalem in ways that nobody in the 19th or 20th century thought they should (hence the criticism).

That folks like TT and a couple of BYU professors (and interestingly enough David Waltz) have criticized Barker’s work is not unexpected for anyone who knows how scholars work. That this somehow means that Barker is no longer a non-Mormon scholar who believe the BOM captures an authentically ancient religion in remarkable ways is ridiculous. Barker is precisely what I was told could not exist.

Now, nobody seems to care that I keep saying this, but I will say it again.

No religious scholar, no historian, no professionally trained scholar of any stripe believes that Pope is the successor of Peter in the way that the Pope claims to be the successor of Peter. I have seen many writings by non-Catholic scholars that show that it is unlikely the Pope is the successor of Peter and NONE by non-Catholic scholars that conclude the Pope is likely Peter’s successor (in any way other than they were both religious leaders who spend/spent time in Rome, some non-Catholic scholars do not advocate that Peter was never in Rome). As I have pointed out, if a scholar found that they could not deny that Peter intended the Pope to be his successor and that the Pope is in fact the successor of Peter, these scholars would almost certainly become Catholic. Then they would cease to be non-Catholic scholars and you would have zero non-Catholic scholars.

Truth be told, the term Methodist has to do with METHOD. Perhaps I should expect Catholicism to have a Methodist scholar so committed to the forms of worship and so unconcerned with the theology and the underpinnings of worship that they can claim the Pope is Peter’s successor, but instead by a Methodist still. Maybe I should expect you to find such a scholar. And if you did, then you would be at the same place I am as a LDS. But as of now, by your own test, Catholicism fails were Mormonism passes. Cool!

Anyway, I was pulled away after my first couple of sentences and when I returned I had some more time so I wrote the above.
I do see differences in the way Lax and Tarquin assessed Margaret Barker. Perhaps the two of you can come to an agreement about if she is a scholar and if she has provided support to the BOM as an ancient text.

To summarize:
Not everyone is Catholic, therefore, the Book of Mormon is true.

Sophistry? I think so.

 

[TOmNossor]

No, I said, ”your posts are sophistry grounded in a false dichotomy.”

Stephen,
Let me get this bit out of the way first.
I have never had a class in rhetoric and my last philosophy class was over 20 years ago. I had viewed the definition of “sophistry” as “a false argument; sophism.” Perhaps I should have viewed it as: “rhetoric with the intention to deceive.” I apologize for my ignorance. In Internet dialogue I have seen both sides and everyone in the middle claim others arguments are “sophistry” and not thought they were calling their opponent “dishonest.”

So, when I said your arguments were “sophistry” my intent was to communicate exactly what I said my intent was:

Sophistry is just argumentations judged “bad.” I think your posts are sophistry and that reason does not direct one to Catholicism. If you would like to DEMONSTRATE in some non-subjective way “sophistry,” you are welcome to try, but I think the word “sophistry” is rhetoric for “arguments with which I do not agree.”

This of course means I was not calling you a liar or dishonest. It also is not intended to be playground banter.

I have claimed that you were calling me a liar and dishonest in the past and I will claim this again. You are calling me a liar.
I have wondered if you truly feel that I am a liar or if you are just using this as a rhetorical device. I have suggested this in our past interactions. Part of the reason for my confusion is when you obliquely call me a “liar,” I explain that you just called me a “liar” and you say something that implies you are calling my statements false and …. Well, the truth is my statements could be false and I would not be a “liar,” but if my statements are given with the “intention to deceive” then I am a “liar.” Perhaps your reticence to say more clearly what you say is not because you are just employing rhetoric but because to be more clear would be to violate rules at Catholic Answers. I typically find following rules at Catholic Answer not too difficult, but you calling me a liar does violate the rules whether you do it obliquely or clearly. I however am not particularly concerned with enforcing rules at Catholic Answers.

Anyway, you may say that you have called me a liar if you like, you may deny that you have called me a liar if you like. I will read what you say and if you NEED and ASK me to respond, I will. If you do not, I may not respond it will just depend upon how I feel.

Oh! And, I am the world authority on my “intent to deceive” or my lack of “intent to deceive.” My posts here are not made with an “intent to deceive.” I really believe the **** I say here. I even really believe I am rational and believe the **** I say. I doubt anyone with an “intent to deceive” would say anything other than what I just said, but I thought I would say it anyway.

Now that that part is out of the way, let me say this too.

I do not believe that any response to the positions I offer would produce the clarity that you claim exists within this debate. Thus one of main things you do is call me a liar. This is not nice, but more importantly for the sake of truth, it doesn’t deal with evidence.

Now, I hope to get to your post. I would be happy if you changed your tone toward me as I was sincere when I said (earlier in this thread):

Stephen,
I am not sure I am secure enough to see me through your eyes so regularly. I think I am however.

Of course, do not change to protect my feelings, I am really not that fragile. If you want to change for other reasons though I will think that could be good.
Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

The Book of Mormon is the only subject on which I’ve seen you spend any effort to support Mormonism. Usually, you make false claims about the Catholic Church in an effort to claim the Mormon Church is true.

I have spent effort in other areas and on this board too. I just TRULY believe the BOM is a VERY strong point for the CoJCoLDS. It is the strength of the BOM that IMO supports the difficulty with the coming forth of the BOA.
It is my belief that there is no good non-supernatural explanation for the BOM. This fact (my perception of fact) means that were I Catholic I would have to fit the existence of the BOM into a rational framework. I do not KNOW of a satisfactory rational framework to do this, and this is my BIGGEST problem with Catholicism (I am sincere in that I think there are other BIG problems in Catholicism, even bigger Catholic problems than the BOA is within Mormonism).

Let me briefly state this so that my attempt not to state it does not overshadow my point and create another opportunity for you to call me a liar (or not call me a liar or whatever). I could believe that the BOM was produced via supernatural (name removed by moderator)ut from an evil force. If Protestantism is true, I do not see much of how, but if there is some sense in which “there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church,” perhaps. Christianity recognizes that supernatural evil was around in 600BC, 35AD, and 400AD. The empirical evidence that the BOM is an authentic history COULD be a product of supernatural evil. I believe in that case, the only way to KNOW is to seek guidance from God. This of course is the method that leads many folks to the CoJCoLDS AND it is the method I employed long after I became an intellectual Mormon. So today, I am an intellectual Mormon with a firm conviction that it is impossible for the BOM to exist without (name removed by moderator)ut from the supernatural AND a spiritual testimony that this supernatural (name removed by moderator)ut is from God not the adversary.

You can call the above whatever you like, but without my “testimony” (which I didn’t have for many years as a former Catholic LDS), I believe the empirical evidence for the BOM being an ancient text that came forth via supernatural means outweighs the problems of the BOM by such a large amount, that I am a LDS on the strength of this evidence.

Now to your examples:

Ex-Mormon: I left Mormonism because it is irrational.
Tom: The “irrational” should violate the law of non-contradiction at some point. To me that is the most fundamental law of rationality. I have removed almost all of this from my thought, but I regularly see in the thought of critics of the CoJCoLDS. I doubt you and I have in mind the same irrational things in mind when we use the term irrational.
Reader of posts: Tom listed one of the three ancient laws of logic then rambles on then concluded it doesn’t matter to him.:shrug:But it matters to the ex-Mormon.

Stephen, it would so easy to parody what you just did with some Catholic thing. Like a stupid thing, “Call no man father.” Like a more difficult but answerable thing like, “No salvation outside the Catholic Church.” Like something I think is not answered in a consistent way, “dying … with original sin only.”
When I answer supposed “contradictions” in LDS thought, I do precisely the same thing Catholic Answers does with supposed contradictions in Catholic thought. It is my OPINION that you think such is fine when the Catholic apologist does it, but when I do it is sophism. I am unaware of a time when I said, “it doesn’t matter to me.”
All that being said, I am aware of many folks who have left the CoJCoLDS claiming something that was part of the church didn’t make sense to them. I sometimes am AMAZED that they think this thing was part of the CoJCoLDS in the first place. In these instances and many others, I do not agree with them that their thing is part of the CoJCoLDS at all.
Beyond this you will need to provide a more specific example.
cont …

 

[TOmNossor]

Tom: The Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.
Tom: Yes, the Mormon Church has lost and changed doctrine, but unlike the Catholic Church, we don’t claim otherwise, we are led by a prophet who gives us continuing revelation, so doctrine will change.
Tom: Let me list some examples of Catholic changing doctrine
Reader of Tom’s posts: Believing that change is bad while at the same time saying it is good would be a violation of the law of non-contradiction.
Yes, sophistry is rhetoric with the intent to deceive.

I think this is a particularly weak example.
First, where have I said “the Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.” I am not sure I have ever thought this was a sufficient reason to point to the restoration, but I am sure I have not thought this in many years. Maybe a specific loss like the loss of the ability to receive revelation and write inspired from God, but this would not align with how you are using the argument. Why don’t you show me where I said this and include a link so I can read it in context please.

Second, Catholicism believes that there is no more Public Revelation. Catholicism believes no Pope can write inspired scripture other than the first Pope, Peter. LDS do not believe there is no more Public Revelation and that the person who sits in the chair of Peter can in fact write inspired scripture. The dictum of St. Vincent de Lerins was used by Catholic thinkers to define orthodoxy and reject innovation for many hundreds of years. There is no such thing in Mormonism.
So when Newman writes his essay claiming that Catholicism DEVELOPED (which is a soft word for CHANGED), multiple Bishops rejected it and Rome at least looked at it with suspicion. This too has changed, but Newman’s “marks of valid developments” are not present in SOME of the post Vatican II developments IMO, meaning that Newman probably would not recognize some post Vatican II developments or at least his “marks” are absent.

So TOm’s point is that CHANGE within a Catholic framework (and for simplicity here let’s say an acorn becoming a dog) means Catholicism is not true. CHANGE within a LDS framework does not have the same damning impact. I do not see how this is so controversial. Do you understand my argument? Why do you disagree?

And, I have no intent to deceive. This is what I believe. This is what I think is reasonable. I am often taken aback when nobody here can even see what I am saying at all.

cont …

 

[TOmNossor]

…
You present two options:
You show Joseph Smith said the BOM was a history of all American Indians.
1.The BOM is a history of all American Indians as Smith said. Maybe Smith is a prophet.
2.The BOM is not a history of all American Indians as Smith said. Smith CANNOT be a prophet.
I can assert the BOM is a “history of ALL American Indians.” (or I could question if he said…)
But instead, I suggest Joseph Smith was not the author of the BOM, it is not a history of ALL American Indians. Instead God authored the BOM, it is scripture from historical people who included historical data in it. And Joseph Smith’s lack of knowledge concerning the scope of the BOM does not disqualify him as a prophet…

From the above rambling, I have to wonder if you understand the logical fallacy of the false dichotomy/false choice/false dilemma. It is claiming that there or only two choices when in fact there are three or more choices. While it is often used in rhetoric it is not rational

If this is not an example of me accurately claiming your argument is a “false dichotomy” then you are correct I do not understand.

You ask me to list a false choice you have presented when I already gave you one in post #56: If Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon, it is false. Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon, so it is true.

Stephen, this is a false choice IMO. It is also not what I said.
This is an example of why you can inaccurately trumpet your reason and my lack of reason, you are not reading correctly.
I will start with the most important omission on your part, I said (and you quoted, but bolding has been added):

I might add that there is zero conflict between what any church leader has taught about the location of Jerusalem, river of Laman, valley of Lemuel, Nahom, and Bountiful. All Old World geographical features in the BOM, the path along the Frankincense trail, and a handful of cultural/historical aspects of Lehi’s journey align perfectly with all LDS leader statements. I have read from critics about maps that mention Nahom, but I find it unlikely that Joseph Smith could have seen these maps and even if he did I do not see on the maps near the amount of detail necessary to create the journey I see in the BOM. So again here my judgement is that this is beyond what a 19th century fellow in upstate NY could produce. And this has nothing to do with “as claimed by Joseph Smith,” but I am stuck with no adequate explanation for its existence in the BOM.

I am intentionally allowing for the very flawed IMO theories you seem to favor that the BOM was written by some non-inspired man other than Joseph Smith.
My position is that the BOM could not have been written by anyone who had not walked the Frankincense trail and probably could not have been written by anyone who didn’t walk the Frankincense trail departing from Jerusalem around 600BC.

The second problem with you calling this a “false dichotomy” is that I am responding to a claim you made. You made a big deal about the BOM “as claimed by Joseph Smith.” The first part of my response was suggesting that an author of a text should have a better understanding of the text than Joseph Smith did. Thus, he is not the author. And him not being the author is the LDS position anyway. Your judging negatively the LDS truth claims because Joseph Smith didn’t know the geography of the BOM doesn’t align with what I believe Joseph Smith’s role as “translator” of the BOM.

Finally, the non-Joseph Smith and non-inspired author of the BOM is not a position held by the majority of critics of the CoJCoLDS. You said:

Most scientists believe Joseph Smith did not write the Book of Mormon AND it is false.

Very few HISTORIANS hold this view due to the extreme difficulty of getting such a text to and through Joseph Smith. If however you mean “word print” analysis, then at least I understand from where you are coming. None of that can explain Nahom, and a lot of that is very flawed, but I have read ever “word print” BOM study I could find so we can talk about that if you like.

Joseph Smith said, by revelation and recorded in Mormon scripture, the Book of Mormon was a history of ALL the American Indians. Science has proven his claim and revelation to be false. The dichotomy is, does that make the Book of Mormon false as claimed by Joseph Smith? All the possible answers would be yes or no.

When I see you say, the above, I respond by showing why I think the BOM is from God and Joseph Smith is a prophet. And we shouldn’t expect all Joseph Smith to say about the BOM to be true like all Tolkien might say about The Lord of the Rings.
Please quote the revelation you are speaking about and I will tell you my thoughts.
Alternatively, you can acknowledge that I have regularly claimed that Joseph Smith said things that I do not think are correct about the BOM. He was not consistent in his statements meaning that such MUST be the case, but there are things Joseph Smith said about the BOM that are not true. So, I can say that BOM is not what Joseph Smith claimed it to be when he said some things. Other times Joseph Smith pointed strongly to a Central American setting for the BOM and with this I agree. But even here, I claim the BOM being precisely what Joseph Smith claimed it to be is a non-issue.
Anyway, I can try to respond more specifically to your instance if you like.

Richard Lyman Bushman said, a Mormon’s “testimony” is their empirical evidence.

I do not think that … means what you think that … means!

I think I will close here. I hope I have not left Lax’s comments too unaddressed, I have thought of much to say and not taken the time to say it. Sorry.
Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

…
Now, nobody seems to care that I keep saying this, but I will say it again.

No religious scholar, no historian, no professionally trained scholar of any stripe believes that Pope is the successor of Peter in the way that the Pope claims to be the successor of Peter. I have seen many writings by non-Catholic scholars that show that it is unlikely the Pope is the successor of Peter and NONE by non-Catholic scholars that conclude the Pope is likely Peter’s successor (in any way other than they were both religious leaders who spend/spent time in Rome, some non-Catholic scholars do not advocate that Peter was never in Rome). As I have pointed out, if a scholar found that they could not deny that Peter intended the Pope to be his successor and that the Pope is in fact the successor of Peter, these scholars would almost certainly become Catholic. Then they would cease to be non-Catholic scholars and you would have zero non-Catholic scholars.

Truth be told, the term Methodist has to do with METHOD. Perhaps I should expect Catholicism to have a Methodist scholar so committed to the forms of worship and so unconcerned with the theology and the underpinnings of worship that they can claim the Pope is Peter’s successor, but instead by a Methodist still. Maybe I should expect you to find such a scholar. And if you did, then you would be at the same place I am as a LDS. But as of now, by your own test, Catholicism fails were Mormonism passes. Cool ….

To summarize:
Not everyone is Catholic, therefore, the Book of Mormon is true.

Sophistry? I think so.

Stephen,
I believe your summary is NOT EVEN CLOSE.
Asking for non-Mormon scholars to believe things only Mormon’s believe and even rejecting folks who become Mormons while believing things relevant to our discussions is a ridiculous standard that Catholics couldn’t meet. And yet Margaret Barker is a Methodist scholar who believes very uniquely Mormon things.

I hope others can see that your summary has almost nothing to do with my point.
Charity, TOm

 

[Stephen168]

"Stephen168:

Ex-Mormon: I left Mormonism because it is irrational.
Tom: The “irrational” should violate the law of non-contradiction at some point. To me that is the most fundamental law of rationality. I have removed almost all of this from my thought, but I regularly see in the thought of critics of the CoJCoLDS. I doubt you and I have in mind the same irrational things in mind when we use the term irrational.
Reader of posts: Tom listed one of the three ancient laws of logic then rambles on then concluded it doesn’t matter to him. :shrug:But it matters to the ex-Mormon.

Stephen, it would so easy to parody what you just did with some Catholic thing.

Yes, you could provide a parody, a work of fiction. I’ll stick with the truth of what happened.
"Stephen168:

Tom: The Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.
Tom: Yes, the Mormon Church has lost and changed doctrine, but unlike the Catholic Church, we don’t claim otherwise, we are led by a prophet who gives us continuing revelation, so doctrine will change.
Tom: Let me list some examples of Catholic changing doctrine
Reader of Tom’s posts: Believing that change is bad while at the same time saying it is good would be a violation of the law of non-contradiction.
Yes, sophistry is rhetoric with the intent to deceive.

So TOm’s point is that CHANGE within a Catholic framework (and for simplicity here let’s say an acorn becoming a dog) means Catholicism is not true. CHANGE within a LDS framework does not have the same damning impact. I do not see how this is so controversial.

You have made my point again. It is not controversial, it is a violation of the law of non-contradiction, an example of irrational Mormon thinking with sophistry added.

If this is not an example of me accurately claiming your argument is a “false dichotomy” then you are correct I do not understand.

Because it is not what I said, so I repeated what I said.
"Stephen168:

Joseph Smith said, by revelation and recorded in Mormon scripture, the Book of Mormon was a history of ALL the American Indians. Science has proven his claim and revelation to be false. The dichotomy is, does that make the Book of Mormon false as claimed by Joseph Smith? All the possible answers would be yes or no. If the dichotomy is false, you just have to provide the third possible answer.

Another dichotomy is, does that make Joseph Smith a false prophet? Again, all the possible answers would be yes or no. If the dichotomy is false, you just have to provide the third possible answer.

…

"Stephen168:

While I can confidently say both answers are yes, you must ramble on at great length to change the premise. But the premise is a historical fact which cannot change.

To summarize:
DNA has proven the Book of Mormon is false as claimed by Joseph Smith. The American Indian is not from the near east.

Mormon’s can easily reject the empirical evidence because a Mormon’s “testimony” is their empirical evidence.

I do not think that … means what you think that … means!

It means exactly what I think it means. Richard Lyman Bushman explained it very well.

 

[TOmNossor]

Stephen and All,
I cannot be clearer than I was and if you do not see my point there is something preventing me from communicating or you from understanding.
Hopefully this as captured by you will show the reader that you edited my post for the purpose of making your point and the reader will recognize what I said anyway. I will then provide the full exchange to demonstrate that you are not trying to understand or respond to my points.

As Posted by Stephen 4:39pm 30Apr:

Stephen168:

Tom: The Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.
Tom: Yes, the Mormon Church has lost and changed doctrine, but unlike the Catholic Church, we don’t claim otherwise, we are led by a prophet who gives us continuing revelation, so doctrine will change.
Tom: Let me list some examples of Catholic changing doctrine
Reader of Tom’s posts: Believing that change is bad while at the same time saying it is good would be a violation of the law of non-contradiction.

Yes, sophistry is rhetoric with the intent to deceive.

So TOm’s point is that CHANGE within a Catholic framework (and for simplicity here let’s say an acorn becoming a dog) means Catholicism is not true. CHANGE within a LDS framework does not have the same damning impact. I do not see how this is so controversial. Do you understand my argument? Why do you disagree?

You have made my point again. It is not controversial, it is a violation of the law of non-contradiction, an example of irrational Mormon thinking with sophistry added.

As posted by TOm 2:45pm 30Apr:

Stephen168;13866554:

Tom: The Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.
Tom: Yes, the Mormon Church has lost and changed doctrine, but unlike the Catholic Church, we don’t claim otherwise, we are led by a prophet who gives us continuing revelation, so doctrine will change.
Tom: Let me list some examples of Catholic changing doctrine
Reader of Tom’s posts: Believing that change is bad while at the same time saying it is good would be a violation of the law of non-contradiction.
Yes, sophistry is rhetoric with the intent to deceive.

I think this is a particularly weak example.
First, where have I said “the Christian Church needed to be restored because doctrine has been lost and changed.” I am not sure I have ever thought this was a sufficient reason to point to the restoration, but I am sure I have not thought this in many years. Maybe a specific loss like the loss of the ability to receive revelation and write inspired from God, but this would not align with how you are using the argument. Why don’t you show me where I said this and include a link so I can read it in context please.

Second, Catholicism believes that there is no more Public Revelation. Catholicism believes no Pope can write inspired scripture other than the first Pope, Peter. LDS do not believe there is no more Public Revelation and that the person who sits in the chair of Peter can in fact write inspired scripture. The dictum of St. Vincent de Lerins was used by Catholic thinkers to define orthodoxy and reject innovation for many hundreds of years. There is no such thing in Mormonism.
So when Newman writes his essay claiming that Catholicism DEVELOPED (which is a soft word for CHANGED), multiple Bishops rejected it and Rome at least looked at it with suspicion. This too has changed, but Newman’s “marks of valid developments” are not present in SOME of the post Vatican II developments IMO, meaning that Newman probably would not recognize some post Vatican II developments or at least his “marks” are absent.

So TOm’s point is that CHANGE within a Catholic framework (and for simplicity here let’s say an acorn becoming a dog) means Catholicism is not true. CHANGE within a LDS framework does not have the same damning impact. I do not see how this is so controversial. Do you understand my argument? Why do you disagree?

And, I have no intent to deceive. This is what I believe. This is what I think is reasonable. I am often taken aback when nobody here can even see what I am saying at all.

Count me taken aback again!
This exchange here and this from later on the 30th make it clear to me that you are not trying to understand what I am saying. I can hope others agree (that you are not trying to understand my points not that they necessarily agree with my points), but I cannot be clearer.
Charity, TOm

 

[lax16]

It seems that Lax was concerned that Margaret Barker was not anything but a scholar heralded by Mormons. Tarquin finds pages describing Barker’s scholarship and says that she has little to say supporting Mormonism, “She provides no more significant support for Mormon claims than does the actual tribe Nhhm for the fictional location Nahom”.
Lax: Barker is a scholar. She has formal training in scripture and ancient languages. She was selected by her peer scholars to be the head of The Society of Old Testament Study. By any definition she is a scholar and she is not merely heralded by Mormons.

Please provide Barker’s educational background. I have not seen anything outside of Mormon circles referring to her as a scholar. What is the *head of The Society of Old Testament Study? *

In concert with Barker, I see evidence for an ancient view of Christianity in the BOM. I have read a couple of her books and her papers/lectures specifically on Mormonism. Joseph Smith was once criticized for Christianizing Lehi’s 600BC departure from Jerusalem. The BOM has too much Christ in ancient Judaism. Margaret Barker’s work mutes this criticism and instead suggests that many aspects of the BOM fit in Lehi’s Jerusalem in ways that nobody in the 19th or 20th century thought they should (hence the criticism).

Why isn’t her work mentioned outside of Mormon circles? Please provide a link if you disagree.

That folks like TT and a couple of BYU professors (and interestingly enough David Waltz) have criticized Barker’s work is not unexpected for anyone who knows how scholars work. That this somehow means that Barker is no longer a non-Mormon scholar who believe the BOM captures an authentically ancient religion in remarkable ways is ridiculous. Barker is precisely what I was told could not exist.

First, prove she is a scholar and we will go from there.

Now, nobody seems to care that I keep saying this, but I will say it again.

No religious scholar, no historian, no professionally trained scholar of any stripe believes that Pope is the successor of Peter in the way that the Pope claims to be the successor of Peter. I have seen many writings by non-Catholic scholars that show that it is unlikely the Pope is the successor of Peter and NONE by non-Catholic scholars that conclude the Pope is likely Peter’s successor (in any way other than they were both religious leaders who spend/spent time in Rome, some non-Catholic scholars do not advocate that Peter was never in Rome). As I have pointed out, if a scholar found that they could not deny that Peter intended the Pope to be his successor and that the Pope is in fact the successor of Peter, these scholars would almost certainly become Catholic. Then they would cease to be non-Catholic scholars and you would have zero non-Catholic scholars.

There were several non-Catholic scholars that did not believe in the Catholic Church at all, in fact taught against it, but are now Catholic.

Truth be told, the term Methodist has to do with METHOD. Perhaps I should expect Catholicism to have a Methodist scholar so committed to the forms of worship and so unconcerned with the theology and the underpinnings of worship that they can claim the Pope is Peter’s successor, but instead by a Methodist still. Maybe I should expect you to find such a scholar. And if you did, then you would be at the same place I am as a LDS. But as of now, by your own test, Catholicism fails were Mormonism passes. Cool!

Here are some conversion stories from Methodist to Catholic. I am not stating they are scholars, but they have impressive religious backgrounds:

chnetwork.org/converts/?fwp_denominations=methodist

Anyway, I was pulled away after my first couple of sentences and when I returned I had some more time so I wrote the above.
I do see differences in the way Lax and Tarquin assessed Margaret Barker. Perhaps the two of you can come to an agreement about if she is a scholar and if she has provided support to the BOM as an ancient text.

Charity, TOm

No, I can’t come to agreement because you have not provided anything else about her background. I think her own website speaks volumes about her lack of scholarly credentials.

 

[Stephen168]

Stephen and All,
I cannot be clearer than I was and if you do not see my point there is something preventing me from communicating or you from understanding.
Hopefully this as captured by you will show the reader that you edited my post for the purpose of making your point and the reader will recognize what I said anyway. I will then provide the full exchange to demonstrate that you are not trying to understand or respond to my points.

The Mormon Church has the irrational belief that change is bad, and at the same time change is good. The Catholic Church has NO bearing on what the Mormon Church teaches. You introduce this sophistry to try and defend Mormonism. Some say it is part of your proselytizing effort, while others say it is a natural reaction from a false choice story taught to Mormons: it is either the Mormon Church or the Catholic Church which is true.

Either way, I made my points:
The Book of Mormon, as claimed by Joseph Smith in a revelation recorded in Mormon scripture and taught by the Mormon Church until at least the 1970’s, has been proven false by DNA. The American Indians did not come from the near east. Any stories of maps, rocks, trails, temple worship, or places will not change that fact.

Tom’s posts are mostly sophistry and tangents in an attempt to support the unsupportable.

 

[lax16]

TOm - Just for fun, here is a list of well-known folks, including scholars, that are converts to Catholicism. I don’t know how many were Methodist, but they are interesting none the less.

A[edit]
Greg Abbott: Governor of Texas[1]
Creighton Abrams: US Army General; converted while commanding US forces in Vietnam
Vladimir Abrikosov: Russian who became an Eastern-rite priest; husband to Anna Abrikosova[2]
Anna Abrikosova: Russian convert to Eastern-rite Catholicism who was imprisoned by the Soviets[3]
John Adams: beatified person and Catholic martyr[4]
Mortimer J. Adler: American philosopher, educator, and popular author; converted from agnosticism, after decades of interest in Thomism[5][6]
Afonso I of Kongo: African king; although politically motivated he became quite pious[7]
Leo Allatius: Greek theologian[8]
Fanny Allen: daughter of Ethan Allen; became a nun[9][10]
Thomas William Allies: English writer[11]
Mother Mary Alphonsa: daughter of Nathaniel Hawthorne, born “Rose Hawthorne”; became a nun and founder of St. Rose’s Free Home for Incurable Cancer[12][13]
Veit Amerbach: Lutheran theologian and humanist before conversion[14]
William Henry Anderdon: English Jesuit and writer[15]
Władysław Anders: General in the Polish Army; later a politician with the Polish government-in-exile in London[16]
G. E. M. Anscombe: British analytical philosopher and theologian who introduced the term “consequentialism” into the English language[17]
Francis Arinze: Nigerian Cardinal and Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments[18]
Audrey Assad: American singer-songwriter and contemporary Christian music artist
Thomas Aufield: English priest and martyr[19]
B[edit]
Johann Christian Bach: composer; youngest son of Johann Sebastian Bach[20]
Thomas Bailey: royalist and controversialist; his father was Anglican bishop Lewis Bayly[21]
Beryl Bainbridge: English novelist[22]
Francis Asbury Baker: American priest, missionary, and social worker; one of the founders of the Paulist Fathers in 1858[23]
Josephine Bakhita: Sudanese-born former slave; became a Canossian Religious Sister in Italy, living and working there for 45 years; in 2000 she was declared a saint[24]
Banine: French writer of Azeri descent[25][26]
Maurice Baring: English intellectual, writer, and war correspondent[27][28]
Mark Barkworth: English Catholic priest, martyr, and beatified person[29]
Barlaam of Seminara: involved in the Hesychast controversy as an opponent to Gregory Palamas, possibly a revert[30]
Edwin Barnes: formerly an Anglican bishop[31]
Joan Bartlett: foundress of the Servite Secular Institute[32]
James Roosevelt Bayley: first bishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark[33]
Aubrey Beardsley: English illustrator and author; before his death, converted to Catholicism and renounced his erotic drawings[34]
Francis J. Beckwith: American philosopher, Baylor University professor, and former president of the Evangelical Theological Society; technically a revert[35]
Jean Mohamed Ben Abdejlil: Moroccan scholar and Roman Catholic priest[36]
Benedict Mar Gregorios: Metropolitan Archbishop of Trivandrum, 1955-1994[37][38]
Peter Benenson: founder of human rights group Amnesty International[39]
Robert Hugh Benson: English writer and theologian; son of an Archbishop of Canterbury[40]
Elizabeth Bentley: former Soviet spy who defected to the West; was converted by Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen
Bernardo the Japanese: one of the first Japanese people to visit Europe[41]
Jiao Bingzhen: painter and astronomer[42]
Conrad Black: Canadian-born historian, columnist, UK peer, and convicted felon for fraud; his conviction was overturned subsequently on appeal[43]
Tony Blair: former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; converted December 22, 2007, after stepping down as prime minister[44]
Andrea Bocelli: Italian tenor[45]
Cherry Boone: daughter of devoutly evangelical Christian entertainer Pat Boone; she went public about her battle with anorexia nervosa[46]
John Wilkes Booth: 19th-century actor; assassin of President Abraham Lincoln; his sister Asia Booth asserted in her 1874 memoir that Booth, baptized an Episcopalian at age 14, had become a Catholic; for the good of the Church during a notoriously anti-Catholic time in American history, Booth’s conversion was not publicized[47]
Robert Bork: American jurist and unsuccessful nominee to the United States Supreme Court; converted to Catholicism in 2003; his wife was a former Catholic nun[48]
Louis Bouyer: French theologian; converted to Catholicism in 1939[49]
William Maziere Brady: Irish historian and journalist, formerly a Church of Ireland priest[50][51]
Elinor Brent-Dyer: English writer[52]
Alexander Briant: one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales[53]
John Broadhurst: formerly an Anglican bishop[31]
George Mackay Brown: Scottish poet, author and dramatist from the Orkney Islands[54]
Sam Brownback: Governor of Kansas[55]
Orestes Brownson: American writer[56][57]
Dave Brubeck: American jazz musician[58]
David-Augustin de Brueys: French theologian and dramatist[59]
Ismaël Bullialdus: French astronomer; converted from Calvinism and became a Catholic priest[60]
Andrew Burnham: formerly an Anglican bishop[31]
John Ellis Bush: American politician, forty-third Governor of Florida[61]
Thomas Byles: priest who died serving others on the RMS Titanic[62][63]

 

[lax16]

C[edit]
Roy Campbell: South-African-born, English-based (later Portuguese-based) poet[64]
Edmund Campion: Jesuit martyr who wrote Decem Rationes, which denounced Anglicanism; one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales[65]
Alexis Carrel: French surgeon and biologist who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1912[66]
Rianti Cartwright: Indonesian actress, model, presenter and VJ; two weeks before departure to the United States to get married, Rianti left the Muslim faith to become a baptized Catholic with the name Sophia Rianti Rhiannon Cartwright[67][68]
Charles II of England, Scotland, and Ireland: his conversion is disputed by some historians[69]
Cecil Chesterton: British journalist; younger brother of G.K. Chesterton[70]
G.K. Chesterton: British writer, journalist and essayist, known for his Christian apologetics Orthodoxy, Heretics and The Everlasting Man[71]
Christina, Queen of Sweden: seventeenth-century monarch[72]
Djibril Cissé: French international footballer[73][74]
Wesley Clark: US Army General; former Supreme Allied Commander Europe of NATO; candidate for Democratic nomination for President in 2004[75]
Emily Coleman: American-born writer; lifelong compulsive diary keeper[76]
Henry James Coleridge: son of John Taylor Coleridge; became a priest[77]
James Collinson: artist who briefly went back to Anglicanism in order to marry Christina Rossetti[78]
Constantine the African: Tunisian doctor who converted from Islam and became a Benedictine monk[79][80]
Tim Conway: American comedian; converted to Catholicism because he said he liked the way the Church is structured
Gary Cooper: American actor who converted to the Church late in life, saying, “that decision I made was the right one”[81]
Frederick Copleston: English historian of philosophy and Jesuit priest[82]
Gerty Cori: Czech-American biochemist who became the third woman, and first American woman, to win a Nobel Prize in science, and the first woman to be awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine[83][84]
Richard Crashaw: English poet; son of a staunch anti-Catholic father[85]
D[edit]
Lorenzo Da Ponte: Italian writer and poet; converted from Judaism on his father’s remarriage[86]
Kim Dae-jung: President of South Korea, 1998-2003; 2000 Nobel Peace Prize recipient[87]
Christopher Davenport: Recollect friar whose efforts to show that the Thirty-Nine Articles could be interpreted more in accordance with Catholic teaching caused controversy among fellow Catholics[88]
Dorothy Day: social activist and pacifist; founder of the Catholic Worker movement; was raised nominally Episcopalian[89]
David-Augustin de Brueys: French theologian[90]
Regina Derieva: Russian poet[91]
Alfred Döblin: German expressionist novelist, best known for Berlin Alexanderplatz[92]
Catherine Doherty: Canadian pioneer of social justice; converted from Russian Christianity[93]
Diana Dors: actress who was once called a “wayward hussy” by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Geoffrey Fisher; in the 1970s she converted to Catholicism and had a Catholic funeral[94][95]
David Paul Drach: French Talmudic scholar and librarian of the College of Propaganda in Rome[96]
Augusta Theodosia Drane: English writer and theologian, also known as Mother Francis Raphael, O.S.D[97]
John Dryden: English poet, literary critic, and playwright[98]
Avery Dulles: American Jesuit theologian, professor at Fordham University;[99] son of former Secretary of State John Foster Dulles
Michael Dummett: British Analytic philosopher who devised the Quota Borda system[100]
Faye Dunaway: American actress[101]
Joseph Dutton: veteran of the American Civil War who worked with Father Damien[102]
E[edit]
Dawn Eden: rock journalist of Jewish ethnicity; was agnostic, now a Catholic concerned with the moral values of chastity[103][104]
Martin Eisengrein: German theologian and polemicist[105]
Ulf Ekman: Swedish charismatic pastor and founder of the Livets Ord congregation of the Word of Faith movement in Uppsala, Sweden[106]
Black Elk: Oglala medicine man[107]
Veit Erbermann: German theologian and controversialist[108]
William Everson: Beat poet whose parents were Christian Scientists; took the name Brother Antoninus in the 18 years he spent as a Dominican[109]
Thomas Ewing: US Senator from Ohio; served as Secretary of the Treasury and first Secretary of the Interior; foster brother of William Tecumseh Sherman[110]
F[edit]
Frederick William Faber: English theologian and hymnwriter[111]
Lola Falana: dancer and actress who became a Catholic evangelist after converting; founded The Lambs of God Ministry[112][113]
Leonid Feodorov: exarch of the Russian Greek Catholic Church; Gulag survivor; beatified by Pope John Paul II[114][115]
Ronald Firbank: British novelist[116]
Sir Henry Fletcher, 3rd Baronet, of Hutton le Forest: converted and spent his last years in a monastery[117][118]
Kasper Franck: German theologian and controversialist[119]
Antonia Fraser: British historian, biographer and novelist; her parents converted when she was young[120]
André Frossard: French journalist and essayist[121][122]
Georgiana Fullerton: English novelist; converted in 1846 when she was in her 30s[123]

 

[lax16]

G[edit]
Ivan Gagarin: Russian Jesuit and writer of aristocratic origin[124]
Maggie Gallagher: conservative activist; a founder of the National Organization for Marriage[125]
Edmund Gennings and John Gennings: brothers; Edmund was a priest and martyr who converted at sixteen; his death lead to John’s conversion; John restored the English province of Franciscan friars[126]
Elizabeth Fox-Genovese: historian; founder of the Institute of Women’s Studies; wife of Eugene D. Genovese[127]
Eugene D. Genovese: historian; was once an atheist and Marxist[128]
Fathia Ghali: daughter of King Fuad I of Egypt and his Queen, Nazli Sabri; in 1950, both mother and daughter converted to Catholicism from Islam; the enraged king forbade them from returning to Egypt; after his death, they asked President Anwar Sadat to restore their passports, which he did
Vladimir Ghika: Romanian nobleman who became a Catholic monsignor and political dissident[129][130]
Richard Gilmour: bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Cleveland[131]
Newt Gingrich: American politician; Speaker of the United States House of Representatives[132]
Rumer Godden: English author of Black Narcissus and the 1972 Whitbread Award winner The Diddakoi; converted to Catholicism in 1968, which inspired the book In This House of Brede[133]
John Gother: English Roman Catholic convert, priest and controversialist[134]
John Willem Gran: former Bishop of Oslo; had been an atheist working in the film industry[135][136]
Graham Greene: British writer whose Catholicism influenced novels like The Power and the Glory,[137] although in later life he once referred to himself as a “Catholic atheist”[138]
Wilton Daniel Gregory: American Archbishop of Atlanta, 2005–present[139]
Moritz Gudenus: German priest[140]
Alec Guinness: British actor,[141] after whom the Catholic Association of Performing Arts (UK) named an award[142]
Ruffa Gutierrez: Filipina actress, model and former beauty queen; converted from Christianity to Islam back to Christianity[143][144][145]
H[edit]
Theodor Haecker: German writer, translator and cultural critic[146]
Kimberly Hahn: former Presbyterian; theologian, apologist and author of many books[147]
Scott Hahn: former Presbyterian minister; theologian, scripture scholar and author of many books[148]
Jeffrey Hamm: British fascist leader; converted by the renegade Catholic priest Fr. Clement Russell; succeeded Oswald Mosley as head of the British Union of Fascists
Thomas Morton Harper: Jesuit priest, philosopher, theologian and preacher[149]
Chris Haw: theologian and author of numerous books, including From Willow Creek to Sacred Heart, which detaile his conversion away from evangelical Protestantism[150]
Anna Haycraft: raised in Auguste Comte’s atheistic “church of humanity”, but became a conservative Catholic in adulthood[151]
Carlton J. H. Hayes: American ambassador to Spain; helped found the American Catholic Historical Association; co-chair of the National Conference of Christians and Jews[152][153]
Susan Hayward: Academy Award-winning American actress who helped found a church[154][155]
Isaac Hecker: founder of the Paulist Fathers[156]
Elisabeth Hesselblad: raised Lutheran; after her conversion, became a nun; beatified by Pope John Paul II on April 9, 2000; recognized by Yad Vashem in 2004 as one of the Righteous Among the Nations for her work in helping Jews during World War II[157][158]
Dietrich von Hildebrand: German theologian[159][160]
H.H. Holmes: Chicago serial killer portrayed in Erik Larson’s The Devil in the White City; allegedly converted in Philadelphia’s Moyamensing Prison, about a week before he was executed in 1896[161]
Walter Hooper: trustee and literary advisor of the estate of C.S. Lewis[162]
James Hope-Scott: English lawyer connected to the Oxford Movement[163]
Gerard Manley Hopkins: English poet and Catholic priest[164]
Allen Hunt: American radio personality; former Methodist pastor[165]
E. Howard Hunt: American spy and novelist[166]
Reinhard Hütter: American theologian[167]
I[edit]
Laura Ingraham: American broadcaster and political commentator
Princess Irene of the Netherlands: her conversion, related to her marrying a Carlist, became something of a national issue[168][169]
Vyacheslav Ivanov: poet and playwright associated with Russian symbolism; received into the Catholic Church in 1926[170][171]
Levi Silliman Ives: Episcopal Church of the USA Bishop of North Carolina[172][173]
J[edit]
Bobby Jindal: Governor of the US state of Louisiana; converted in his teens[174]
Gwen John: artist; Auguste Rodin’s lover; after the relationship she had a religious conversion and did portraits of nuns[175]
Abby Johnson: former Planned Parenthood clinic director; converted to Catholicism in 2011, two years after her pro-life conversion in 2009[176][177]
Walter B. Jones: US politician; Member of the United States House of Representatives[178]
Nirmala Joshi: Superior General of the Missionaries of Charity, 1997-2009[179]
Johannes Jørgensen: Danish writer, known for his biographies of Catholic saints[180][181]
man[198]

 

[lax16]

K[edit]
Nicholas Kao Se Tseien: world’s oldest priest[182]
Katharine, Duchess of Kent: first member of the British royal family to convert to Catholicism for more than 300 years[183]
Joyce Kilmer: American journalist, poet, literary critic, lecturer and editor[184][185]
Kim Yuna: South Korean figure skater and Olympic gold medalist[186]
Russell Kirk: American historian, moralist and figure in US Conservatism[187]
Sister Gregory Kirkus: English Roman Catholic nun, educator, historian and archivist[188]
Harm Klueting: priest and historian; had been Lutheran and had two children[189]
Dean Koontz: American novelist known for thrillers and suspense; converted in college[190]
Knud Karl Krogh-Tonning: Norwegian; had been a Lutheran professor of theology[191]
Albert Küchler: Danish painter who became a Franciscan friar[192]
Lawrence Kudlow: CNBC host and business columnist[193][194]
Sigiswald Kuijken: Belgian violinist, violist and conductor[195]
William Kurelek: Canadian painter[196]
Stephan Kuttner: expert in canon law[197]
Demetrios Kydones: Byzantine theologian, writer and statesman[198]
L[edit]
Karl Landsteiner: Austrian biologist and physician; received the 1930 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine; converted from Judaism to Roman Catholicism in 1890[199]
Joseph Lane: Territorial Governor of Oregon; first US Senator from Oregon; pro-slavery Democratic candidate for US Vice President in 1860; openly sympathetic to the Confederacy during the Civil War; studied Catholic doctrine and converted with his family in 1867[200]
Halldór Laxness: Icelandic writer; received the 1955 Nobel Prize in Literature; converted in 1923;[201] left the Church, but returned at the end of his life[202][203]
Graham Leonard: former Anglican Bishop of London[204][205]
Ignace Lepp: French psychiatrist whose parents were freethinkers; joined the Communist party at age fifteen; broke with the party in 1937 and eventually became a Catholic priest[206]
Dilwyn Lewis: Welsh clothes designer and priest[207]
Francis Libermann: venerated Catholic, raised in Orthodox Judaism; has been called “the second founder of the Holy Ghost Fathers”[208]
William Lockhart: first member of the Oxford Movement to convert and become a Catholic priest[209]
James Longstreet: Confederate general turned Republican “scalawag”[210]
Frederick Lucas: Quaker who converted and founded The Tablet[211]
Clare Boothe Luce: American playwright, editor, politician, and diplomat; wife of Time-Life founder Henry Luce;worked on the screenplay of the nun-themed film Come to the Stable; became a Dame of Malta[212][213]
Arnold Lunn: skier, mountaineer, and writer; agnostic; wrote Roman Converts, which took a critical view of Catholicism and the converts to it; later converted to Catholicism due to debating with converts, and became an apologist for the faith, although he retained a few criticisms of said faith[214]
Jean-Marie Lustiger: Roman Catholic Archbishop of Paris, 1981-2005; a Cardinal
James Patterson Lyke: Roman Catholic Archbishop of Atlanta, 1991-1992[215]
M[edit]
Alasdair MacIntyre: virtue ethicist and moral philosopher[216]
Gustav Mahler: Austrian composer; converted from Judaism[217]
Enrique de Malaca: Malay slave of Ferdinand Magellan; converted to Roman Catholicism after being purchased in 1511[218][219]
Henry Edward Manning: English Anglican clergyman who became a Catholic Cardinal and Archbishop of Westminster[220]
Gabriel Marcel: a leading Christian existentialist; his upbringing was agnostic[221]
Jacques Maritain: French Thomist philosopher; helped form the basis for international law and human rights law in his writings; also laid the intellectual foundation for the Christian democratic movement[222]
Tobie Matthew: Member of English Parliament who became a Catholic priest[223]
James McAuley: Australian poet; converted in 1952[224]
Claude McKay: bisexual Jamaican poet; went from Communist-leaning atheist to an active Catholic Christian after a stroke[225][226]
Marshall McLuhan: Canadian philosopher of communication theory; coined the terms “the medium is the message” and “global village”; converted in 1937 after reading the works of G.K. Chesterton
Thomas Merton: American Trappist monk and spiritual writer[227]
Vittorio Messori: Italian journalist and writer called the “most translated Catholic writer in the world” by Sandro Magister; before his conversion in 1964 he had a “perspective as a secularist and agnostic”[228][229][230]
Alice Meynell: poet and suffragist[231]
Czesław Miłosz: poet, prose writer, translator and diplomat; awarded the Neustadt International Prize for Literature and the 1980 Nobel Prize in Literature[232]
John Brande Morris: priest, writer, student of Patristic theology, and scholar of the Syriac language[233]
Henry Morse: one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales[234]
Malcolm Muggeridge: British journalist and author who went from agnosticism to the Catholic Church[235][236]

 

[lax16]

N[edit]
Takashi Nagai: physician specializing in radiology; author of The Bells of Nagasaki[237]
Bernard Nathanson: medical doctor; a founding member of NARAL; became a pro-life proponent[238]
Patricia Neal: won the Academy Award for Best Actress for her role in Hud[239]
Knut Ansgar Nelson: Danish-born convert who was a bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Stockholm[240]
Irène Némirovsky: author of the controversial David Golder, autobiographical Le Vin de solitude, and posthumous success Suite française[241][242][243]
Richard John Neuhaus: priest; founder and editor of the journal First Things[244]
John Henry Newman: English priest and cardinal, famous for his autobiographical book Apologia Pro Vita Sua in which he details his reasons for converting[245]
Keith Newton: formerly an Anglican bishop[31]
Donald Nicholl: British historian and theologian who has been described as “one of the most widely influential of modern Christian thinkers”[246]
Barthold Nihus: German convert who became a bishop and controversialist[247]
Robert Novak: American journalist and political commentator; raised Jewish, but practiced no religion for many years before converting to Catholicism in the last years of his life[248]
Alfred Noyes: English poet, best known for “The Highwayman”; dealt with his conversion in The Unknown God; The Last Voyage, in his The Torch-Bearers trilogy, was influenced by his conversion[249][250]
O[edit]
Frederick Oakeley: priest and author known for his translation of “Adeste Fideles” into English as “O Come, All Ye Faithful”[251][252]
John M. Oesterreicher: Jewish convert who became a monsignor and a leading advocate of Jewish-Catholic reconciliation[253]
William E. Orchard: liturgist, pacifist and ecumenicist; before becoming a Catholic priest he was a Protestant minister[254]
Johann Friedrich Overbeck: German painter in the Nazarene movement of religious art[255]
P[edit]
Coventry Patmore: English poet and critic known for The Angel in the House[256]
Joseph Pearce: anti-Catholic and agnostic British National Front member; became a devoted Catholic writer with a series on EWTN[257][258]
Vladimir Pecherin: Russian convert and priest whose memoirs were controversial for criticizing both the Russian government and the Catholic Church of his time[259]
Charles Péguy: French poet, essayist, and editor; went from an agnostic humanist to a pro-Republic Catholic[260]
Walker Percy: Laetare Medal-winning author of The Moviegoer and Love in the Ruins[261]
Sarah Peter: American philanthropist; daughter of Ohio governor Thomas Worthington
Johann Pistorius: German controversialist and historian[262]
John Hungerford Pollen: wrote for The Tablet; Professor of Fine Arts at the Catholic University of Ireland[263]
Kirsten Powers: American political analyst & fox news columnist.
Agni Pratistha: Indonesian actress, model and former beauty queen; elected Puteri Indonesia 2006; converted to Catholicism after marriage, although initially denied rumors of conversion[264][265][266]
Vincent Price: American actor; converted to Catholicism to marry his third wife, Australian actress Coral Browne (she became an American citizen for him); he reportedly lost interest in the faith after her death[267]
Erik Prince: founder of Blackwater Worldwide[268]
Augustus Pugin: English-born architect, designer and theorist of design; known for Gothic Revival architecture; advocate for reviving the Catholic Church in England[269]
R[edit]
Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne: co-founder of the Congregation of Our Lady of Sion, which originally worked to convert Jewish people like himself[270]
Marie Theodor Ratisbonne: co-founder of the Congregation of Our Lady of Sion; converted before his brother[271]
Sally Read: Eric Gregory Award-winning poet who converted to Catholicism[272]
William Reynolds: English Roman Catholic theologian and Biblical scholar[273]
Dewi Rezer: Indonesian model of French descent; converted to Roman Catholicism[274][275]
Anthony Rhodes: English writer
Paul Richardson: formerly an Anglican bishop[276]
Knute Rockne: Norwegian-American Notre Dame football coach, 1918-1930; converted from Lutheranism
Alban Roe: Benedictine; one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales[277]
Lila Rose: president of Live Action (an anti-abortion organization)
Sylvester Horton Rosecrans: first bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Columbus[278]
William Rosecrans: Sylvester’s brother, a Union Army general in the American Civil War[278]
Anthony Ross: Scottish priest who served as Rector of the University of Edinburgh from 1979 to 1982[279]
Joseph Rovan: historian, member of the French Resistance, adviser on Franco-German relations[280]
S[edit]
Nazli Sabri: Queen of Egypt; mother of King Farouk of Egypt
Siegfried Sassoon: English poet, writer and soldier; converted in 1957[281]
Joseph Saurin: French mathematician and Calvinist minister[282]
Paul Schenck: converted from Judaism to Episcopalianism to Catholicism; currently a Catholic priest and pro-life activist[283][284]
Heinrich Schlier: German theologian[285]
Dutch Schultz (Arthur Flegenheimer): American mobster; converted to Catholicism during his second trial, convinced that Jesus Christ had spared him jail time; after being fatally shot by underworld rivals, he asked to see a priest and was given the last rites; his mother insisted on dressing him in a Jewish prayer shawl prior to his interment in the Catholic Gate of Heaven Cemetery
E. F. Schumacher: economic thinker known for Small Is Beautiful; his A Guide for the Perplexed criticizes what he termed “materialistic scientism;” went from atheism to Buddhism to Catholicism[286]
Countess of Ségur: French writer of Russian birth[287]
John Sergeant: English priest, controversialist and theologian[288]
Elizabeth Ann Seton: first native-born citizen of the United States to be canonized by the Roman Catholic Church[289][290]

 

[lax16]

Frances Shand Kydd: mother of Diana, Princess of Wales[291]
Michael Shen Fu-Tsung: Qing Dynasty bureaucrat who toured Europe; a painting of him was titled “The Chinese Convert”[292]
William Tecumseh Sherman, Civil War General, was born into a Presbyterian family but raised in a Catholic household by foster parents after his father died. Sherman attended the Catholic Church until the outbreak of the Civil War, which destroyed his faith. His wife and children were Catholic and one son, Thomas Ewing Sherman, became a Jesuit priest.
Ralph Sherwin: one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales[293]
Frederick Charles Shrady: American religious artist, primarily of sculpture[294]
Angelus Silesius: German Catholic priest and physician, known as a mystic and religious poet[295][296]
David Silk: formerly an Anglican bishop[31]
Richard Simpson: literary writer and scholar; wrote a biography of Edmund Campion[297]
Edith Sitwell: British poet and critic[298][299]
Delia Smith: English cook and television presenter; her books A Feast for Lent and A Feast for Advent involve Catholicism[300]
Timo Soini: politician who leads the Eurosceptic True Finns party; converted during the time of Pope John Paul II[301]
Reinhard Sorge: expressionist playwright who went from Nietzschean to Catholic[302][303]
Etsuro Sotoo: Japanese sculptor[304]
Muriel Spark: Scottish novelist, author of The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie;Penelope Fitzgerald states that Spark said that after her conversion she was better able to, “see human existence as a whole, as a novelist needs to do”[305]
Ignatius Spencer: son of George Spencer, 2nd Earl Spencer; became a Passionist priest and worked for the conversion of England to the Catholic faith[306]
Adrienne von Speyr: Swiss medical doctor and later Catholic mystic[307]
Henri Spondanus: French jurist, historian, continuator of the Annales Ecclesiastici, and Bishop of Pamiers[308]
Friedrich Staphylus: German theologian who drew up several opinions on reform for the Council of Trent despite not attending[309]
Ellen Gates Starr: a founder of Hull House who became an Oblate of the Third Order of St. Benedict[310]
Jeffrey N. Steenson: first ordinary to the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of Saint Peter; former bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande[311]
Edith Stein: phenomenologist philosopher who converted to Catholicism and became a Discalced Carmelite nun; declared a saint by John Paul II[312]
Göran Stenius (fi): Swedish-Finnish writer whose Klockorna i Rom (The Bells of Rome) has been praised as a post-war religious novel[313][314]
Nicolas Steno: pioneer in geology and anatomy who converted from Lutheranism; became a bishop, wrote spiritual works, and was beatified in 1988[315][316]
Karl Stern: German-Canadian neurologist and psychiatrist; his book Pillar of Fire concerns his conversion[317]
John Lawson Stoddard: divinity student who became an agnostic and “scientific humanist;” later converted to Catholicism[318]
Sven Stolpe: Swedish convert and writer[319]
R. J. Stove: Australian writer, editor, and composer; raised atheist as the son of David Stove[320]
Su Xuelin: Chinese author and scholar whose semi-autobiographical novel Bitter Heart discusses her introduction to and conversion to Catholicism[321]
Graham Sutherland: English artist who did religious art and had a fascination with Christ’s crucifixion[322]
Halliday Sutherland: Doctor, tuberculosis pioneer, best-selling author and defendant in the 1923 libel trial, Stopes v. Sutherland. Converted in 1919.[323]
Robert Sutton: English priest and martyr[324]
Sophie Swetchine: Russian salon-holder and mystic[325]
T[edit]
John B. Tabb: American poet, priest, and educator[326]
John Michael Talbot: American Roman Catholic singer-songwriter-guitarist, once a secular musician in the group Mason Proffit[327][328]
Allen Tate: American poet, essayist and social commentator, and Poet Laureate Consultant in Poetry to the Library of Congress[329]
Frances Margaret Taylor: founded the Poor Servants of the Mother of God[330]
Kateri Tekakwitha: Catholic saint informally known as “Lily of the Mohawks”[331]
Tabaraji of Ternate: Indonesian sultan; converted to Roman Catholicism after 1534; baptised with the name Dom Manuel[332][333]
Elliot Griffin Thomas: third bishop for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Saint Thomas[334]
John Sparrow David Thompson: first Catholic to be Prime Minister of Canada[335]
Alice B. Toklas: American-born member of the Parisian avant-garde of the early 20th century; had once been Gertrude Stein’s lover[336]
Meriol Trevor: British biographer, novelist and children’s writer[337][338]
Lou Tseng-Tsiang: Chinese diplomat who became Benedictine abbot and priest “Pierre-Célestin”[339][340][341]
Hasekura Tsunenaga: Samurai and Keichō diplomat who toured Europe[342]
Rajah Tupas: Filipino prince and son of the Rajah Humabon; converted with his family by Magellan[343][344]
Malcolm Turnbull
Julia Gardiner Tyler: second wife of US President John Tyler[345]

 

[lax16]

U[edit]
Barry Ulanov: editor of Metronome magazine; a founder of the St. Thomas More Society;[346] Mary Lou Williams’s godfather[347]
Kaspar Ulenberg: theological writer and translator of the Bible who had previously been Lutheran[348]
Sigrid Undset: Norwegian Nobel laureate who had previously been agnostic[349]
V[edit]
Sheldon Vanauken: author of A Severe Mercy; a contributing editor of the New Oxford Review[350]
Bill Veeck: American baseball team owner[351]
Johann Emanuel Veith: Bohemian Roman Catholic preacher[352]
Jean-Baptiste Ventura: Soldier, mercenary and adventurer of Jewish origin[353]
Johannes Vermeer: Dutch Golden Age painter[354]
Mother Veronica of the Passion: founder of the Sisters of the Apostolic Carmel[355]
Karl Freiherr von Vogelsang: politician and editor of the Catholic newspaper Das Vaterland[356]
W[edit]
William George Ward: theologian, philosopher, lecturer in mathematics[357]
Evelyn Waugh: English writer; his Brideshead Revisited concerns an aristocratic Catholic family[358]
John Wayne: American actor, known for his roles in war films and Westerns; converted to the Catholic Church shortly before his death[359]
Zacharias Werner: German poet, dramatist and preacher[360]
Eustace White: one of the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales[361]
E. T. Whittaker: English mathematician who was awarded the cross Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice in 1935[362]
Ann Widdecombe: former British Conservative Party politician; novelist since 2000[363]
Chelsea Olivia Wijaya: Indonesian actress and model; born in the Protestant religion[364]
Oscar Wilde: Irish writer and poet; converted on his deathbed
Mary Lou Williams: jazz pianist; after conversion, wrote and performed some religious jazz music like Black Christ of the Andes[347][365]
Paul Williams: academic who was raised Anglican and lived as a Tibetan Buddhist for twenty years before becoming Catholic[366][367]
Tennessee Williams: American playwright; converted in his later years as his life spiralled downwards
Sigi Wimala: Indonesian model and actress, converted to Catholicism after marriage[368][369]
Lord Nicholas Windsor: son of Catholic convert Katharine, Duchess of Kent; pro-life writer[370][371]
Gene Wolfe: Damon Knight Memorial Grand Master in science fiction and fantasy[372][373]
John Woodcock: among the Eighty-five martyrs of England and Wales[374]
Thomas Woods: American historian and Austrian School economist; wrote How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization[375]
John Ching Hsiung Wu: wrote Chinese Humanism and Christian spirituality; has been called “one of China’s chief lay exponents of Catholic ideas”[376]
Wu Li: Chinese painter and poet who became one of the first Chinese Jesuit priests[377]
John C. Wright: acience fiction author who went from atheist to Catholic;[378] wrote Chapter 1 of the book Atheist to Catholic: 11 Stories of Conversion, edited by Rebecca Vitz Cherico[379]
John Michael Wright: portrait painter in the Baroque style[380]
X[edit]
Xu Guangqi: Chinese scholar-bureaucrat, agricultural scientist, astronomer, and mathematician during the Ming Dynasty;[381] classed as one of the Three Pillars of Chinese Catholicism
Z[edit]
Israel Zolli: until converting from Judaism to Catholicism in February 1945, Zolli was the chief rabbi in Rome, Italy’s Jewish community from 1940 to 1945

 

[Horton]

Thanks Lax16.
Still waiting for Tom to produce a list of non-LDS scholars who support the BoM as claimed as true by JS.

 

[Stephen168]

Mortimer J. Adler: American philosopher, educator, and popular author; converted from agnosticism, after decades of interest in Thomism

Great list. Mortimer Adler is my personal favorite; coming to Christianity and finally the Catholic Church on the pure force of reason.