I’ve been talking with an LDS friend through email for a while and he sent me a book on church history called Saints, Sinners and Christian History by James Packer. Catholics claim Peter transferred his apostolic authority to the bishop in Rome, but the author of the book points out there’s no historical or ecclesiastical evidence to support that claim. “The church in Rome had little influence and apparently tried to exert none . . . until the last quarter of the forth century (p.52).”
0 Comments
Everything comes back to faith. Of course, Mormons agree with that idea. Here’s how a Mormon described his faith in a recent discussion I had.
"Faith in God. That is what counts. Faith in other things, is by, through, and for God. The fact that I have faith that Joseph Smith was a prophet or that the Book of Mormon is true is directly according to my faith in God...that Joseph Smith was His prophet, and that the Book of Mormon is His word. My faith in the Bible is, likewise, dependent of God. All faith is in God." So how do we apply faith in God to the issue of trusting the Book of Mormon? I see verses that say things like “The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever (Isa. 40:8)” and “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away (Matt. 24:35).” I have faith that God has preserved His words and teachings like He said He would. But the LDS church says the Gospel has been corrupted, scriptures have been lost and we need the Book of Mormon and other LDS scriptures to restore them. There are many verses of the Apostles teaching the Gospel, but none of them tell people to pray to know the Gospel is true. Many verses talk about false teachers, but none of them tell us to pray to know who the true teachers are. Many verses talk about prayer, but none of them tell us to use prayer to know whether a teacher or prophet is from God. So I have faith that the Bible shows us how we’re supposed to teach and follow the Gospel. But the LDS church says God calls us to pray to know the Book of Mormon is true. So believing the LDS claims would mean doubting my faith in God and the Gospel taught in the Bible. It would mean having more faith in Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon than in God and the Bible. It doesn’t make sense that God would ask us to have faith in Him by doubting the preservation of His words or the reliability of the Apostles’ teachings. So the next time you hear a Mormon say you need to have faith while praying about the Book of Mormon, ask them who or what the faith is supposed to be in. I know I’ve talked a lot about Moroni 10, but that’s because it’s so important to LDS doctrine and there’s many ways to respond to the verse. Look at it again. 4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. Basically, it’s saying if you do A, you will get B result. I’m not saying I know everything God has to teach us, so of course I’m willing to pray and ask Him to show me if the Book of Mormon is true. So I prayed about it, but nothing happened. Multiple Mormons have said I just need to keep reading and praying about it. But there’s a big problem with that thought process. Do a Google search on ‘placebo effect’ and you’ll see how powerful the human mind can be when it expects something to happen. http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/what-is-the-placebo-effect "Research on the placebo effect has focused on the relationship of mind and body. One of the most common theories is that the placebo effect is due to a person's expectations. If a person expects a pill to do something, then it's possible that the body's own chemistry can cause effects similar to what a medication might have caused. For instance, in one study, people were given a placebo and told it was a stimulant. After taking the pill, their pulse rate sped up, their blood pressure increased, and their reaction speeds improved. When people were given the same pill and told it was to help them get to sleep, they experienced the opposite effects. Experts also say that there is a relationship between how strongly a person expects to have results and whether or not results occur. The stronger the feeling, the more likely it is that a person will experience positive effects. There may be a profound effect due to the interaction between a patient and health care provider." Notice the second bolded part and compare it with the 'sincere heart' phrase in the verse. So if an investigator prays and doesn't receive a witness the first time, they are encouraged to keep reading and try again with a sincere heart. But trying harder just makes a stronger placebo effect more likely. A key point in the video is where he mentions one study where a group of women took placebos for over 5 years. 40% suffered withdrawals after they stopped taking them. That's incredible. They were probably just taking sugar pills, but they expected to feel results from taking them. Suffering from withdrawals means they were addicted to something. Plus, the length of the study shows us that placebo effects are not just short, isolated reactions. Our expectations can trigger placebo effects that last for years.
http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/what-is-the-placebo-effect In a recent, well-publicized and fascinating study of Parkinson disease (PD), it was discovered that the patients who improved with placebo had changes in their brain that were identical to the changes caused by the actual medication (called levodopa). The placebo effect can go far beyond emotional reactions. Their brains changed themselves simply because they expected it to happen. That's just from the first page of Google results. I'm sure I could find many more examples. The human mind has an incredibly powerful ability to create reactions, changes and/or events when we expect them to happen. Like I said above, I’m not opposed to God revealing some new truth to me. A common response from a Mormon is that we just need to have faith that God will reveal the truth to us. But God already has revealed truth to us through the Bible. Relying on prayer like they suggest is putting a lot of faith in the human ability to discern between a response from God and a reaction generated by our expectations. Continuing to pray about it while expecting a response is also putting an extreme amount of faith in the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith before you receive confirmation from God. I was recently talking to a few LDS missionaries about how we can trust Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon and they suggested this video would help answer the question. Basically, it’s saying Joseph Smith wouldn’t have died for a lie, so he must have been telling the truth about the Book of Mormon. But the premise is flawed. If he was lying, he wasn’t the first to die for a lie and he wasn’t the last. Compare Joseph Smith’s life with other “prophets” in history and similar patterns emerge. Muhammad, founder of Islam 1. He was influenced by a variety of Christians when he was young. 2. Claimed an angel appeared and gave him unique scripture while praying. 3. Believed he was a prophet called by God to restore the true teachings of the Old Testament and Jesus. 4. Comforted his followers with new revelation while facing death after being poisoned by a Jewish woman. David Koresh, American leader of the Branch Davidians 1. Tried multiple Christian denominations while growing up. 2. Claimed to receive specific, unique direction from God through prayer and visions. 3. Believed he was a modern day prophet chosen by God. 4. Continued to rely on his prophetic insight while facing imprisonment and death. There’s at least two explanations for this pattern. Maybe Joseph Smith started out lying and he got so attached to the power, admiration and authority that he was willing to die for it. Plus, by the time he was arrested, admitting the church was a lie wouldn’t have helped him. Or maybe Smith, Koresh and Muhammad all sincerely believed they were prophets. Maybe an angel actually visited them. Gal. 1 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. Paul certainly thought it was possible that an “angel” could preach a false gospel. So the issue isn’t about if Joseph was lying or if he saw an angel. It’s if a gospel matches what the apostles taught. God wouldn't ignore a sincere prayer about what religion to follow, right? The question sounds simple, but it can be dangerous if you’re not careful. The focus on using prayer to test faith is a fundamental part of the LDS faith. Take a closer look at what they ask you to do. Here is a commonly used verse from the end of the Book of Mormon.
Moroni 10 4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. So if you have faith in God, a sincere heart and real intent while praying about the Book of Mormon, the Holy Spirit will reveal that it is true. It almost sounds like Moroni is blaming you if you don't receive a confirmation of the Book of Mormon. I was recently talking with some missionaries about this issue and they suggested I read Alma 32. It compares hearing the Book of Mormon to a seed and encourages us try an “experiment” of planting the seed. If the seed grows, then we know the Book of Mormon is true. But what if the seed doesn’t grow or produce fruit? Alma 32 38 But if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out. 39 Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof. This passage actually does blame you if you don’t receive a confirmation. You could question this idea directly or take another approach. If this model of praying about a faith system is reliable, then wouldn’t it work on other faiths? So make a deal with your Mormon friend. Tell them you’ll agree to pray about the restored LDS Gospel if they pray about the preserved Gospel. Paul made it clear in Galatians 1:8-9 he had already explained the Gospel to the church. But to be sure, he went over it again. He also talks extensively about the Gospel in Romans. Our claim is that careful, exegetical study of those texts, along with other supporting texts in the New Testament, is enough to believe in, follow and teach others about the full, complete Gospel of Jesus Christ. Your Mormon friend may not see the truth of the preserved Gospel after the first prayer, but don’t let that discourage them. It just means they need to have more faith in God and the preserved Gospel. They just need to keep having faith in the preserved Gospel while praying about it until the truth is revealed. They may say something about how absurd that is and they would be right. God may use a prayer like this to reveal truth to someone, but you can’t base a whole belief system on the prayer. But if they can’t trust this experiment to test the preserved Gospel, why do they put so much faith in it to test the restored Gospel? If you spend much time in a Mormon discussion, especially if it’s with missionaries, they’ll probably ask you to read the Book of Mormon. Missionaries quickly lose interest if you refuse to read their scripture. Don’t let this discourage you. Reading a bit of the Book of Mormon can make your discussion easier. Most Mormons will tune you out if you base your understanding of their doctrine on something you read on a website. But it’s a lot easier to ask questions based on strange verses you read. Here’s some I found while reading a few passages Mormons said were good places to start.
1 Nephi 6 1 And now I, Nephi, do not give the genealogy of my fathers in this part of my record; neither at any time shall I give it after upon these plates which I am writing; for it is given in the record which has been kept by my father; wherefore, I do not write it in this work. 5 Wherefore, the things which are pleasing unto the world I do not write, but the things which are pleasing unto God and unto those who are not of the world. 6 Wherefore, I shall give commandment unto my seed, that they shall not occupy these plates with things which are not of worth unto the children of men. Moses obviously thought recording the genealogy from Adam to Abraham was worthy for men to know. Matthew and Luke both felt it was pleasing to God to trace Jesus’ genealogy back to King David. Yet this author refuses to record any genealogy saying they’re just pleasing to men, but not of worth to men. Genealogies may be boring, but they still play an important role. They help show the Bible is a record of real men who really lived. The genealogies in the Gospels help connect their story with the people and timeline of the Old Testament (OT). The Book of Mormon asks us to trust it without giving links to the OT. They mention Jerusalem and a few other people from the OT, but they don’t mention any specific events in the OT. Someone claims to be Christ later in the book, but he certainly doesn’t act like the Christ in the Bible. Look at the first thing they say Christ does when he visited the Americas. 3 Nephi 3 Behold, that great city Zarahemla have I burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof . . . that great city Moroni have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea . . . that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth . . . the city of Gilgal have I caused to be sunk . . . and the city of Onihah and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Mocum and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Jerusalem and the inhabitants thereof . . . , that great city Jacobugath . . . the city of Gadiandi, and the city of Gadiomnah, and the city of Jacob, and the city of Gimgimno . . . to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face . . . And many great destructions have I caused to come upon this land, and upon this people, because of their wickedness and their abominations. So he destroyed at least 11 cities because of their sin. But the worst part is in the next verse. 13 O all ye that are spared because ye were more righteous than they. To be clear, I’m not denying God did similar things in the Old Testament. The issue is Christ spent most of His ministry on earth reaching out to the worst types of sinners in the land. He forgave the people who killed Him. Any mention of human righteousness was a critique, often very harsh, of religious leaders. The LDS Christ is not the Christ in the New Testament. 3 Nephi 2 14 And it came to pass that those Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites; 15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites; In other words, some Lamanites joined God’s people and their skin turned white. Basically, following God = white skin and sinning = dark skin. I don’t get it. Why aren’t there any examples of skin color changes in the Bible? Has anyone’s skin color changed when they joined the LDS church? Such an important, pivotal event like the restoration of the lost gospel would have been predicted in the Bible, right?
Ezekiel 37 15 The word of the Lord came to me: 16 “Son of man, take a stick and write on it, ‘For Judah, and the people of Israel associated with him’; then take another stick and write on it, ‘For Joseph (the stick of Ephraim) and all the house of Israel associated with him.’ 17 And join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand. 18 And when your people say to you, ‘Will you not tell us what you mean by these?’ 19 say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am about to take the stick of Joseph (that is in the hand of Ephraim) and the tribes of Israel associated with him. And I will join with it the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, that they may be one in my hand. Mormons say the stick (which can also be translated as ‘scroll’) for Judah is the Bible and the stick for Joseph is the Book of Mormon, and the joining of the two sticks is God restoring the gospel and giving the Book of Mormon to the world as scripture along with the Bible. Regardless of whether the sticks are just sticks, scrolls or symbolism for something else, the passage does not support the LDS interpretation. This is another example of Mormons focusing only on parts of a passage that support their view. Verse 21 describes God gathering the people of Israel and bringing them back to their land. Verses 24-28 say David will be their king forever. The focus of the passage is God restoring Israel, not the gospel. Since Israel doesn’t have David as its king, the sticks have not been joined. Acts 3 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, 21 whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago. A key phrase here is “until the time.” Since heaven received Jesus until the time for restoring, it means Christ will return from heaven when all things are restored. Plus, this says ALL things will be restored. As we saw in Ezekiel 37, one of those things includes King David ruling on the earth again. Since Christ has not returned and David isn’t king, the time of restoration has not happened yet. Ephesians 1 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. Mormons claim the “fullness of time” started when Joseph Smith was called as a prophet to restore the gospel. But there’s no indication that this is a prophecy of future events. Paul uses the terms “we” or “us” 7 times in verses 3-10. Paul was writing to encourage the Ephesians by talking about spiritual blessings believers have in Christ. It doesn’t make sense that Paul would suddenly start talking about an event that wouldn’t happen for 1600 years. Secondly, this passage doesn’t say anything about the gospel being lost or needing to be restored. Paul was writing about the blessings the believers have in Christ. But if the LDS interpretation is true, many of the believers at that time would see the church lose the gospel. Why would Paul include that in a passage about blessings? Matt. 24 10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. 11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. 12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. 13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. See, many will fall away. That’s the apostasy when the church lost the gospel. So how can the gospel be proclaimed to the world if it’s not restored? There’s a few things wrong with that argument. Firstly, it says “many” will fall away, not that the whole church would fall away. The same applies to false prophets leading “many” astray. Secondly, there are still many falling away and many false prophets. If that’s the definition of apostasy, then the apostasy is getting worse. Finally, nothing in this passage suggests the gospel will need to be restored. If the restoration of the gospel is such an important event, why doesn’t Jesus mention it here at all? Isaiah 29 11 And the vision of all this has become to you like the words of a book that is sealed. When men give it to one who can read, saying, “Read this,” he says, “I cannot, for it is sealed.” 12 And when they give the book to one who cannot read, saying, “Read this,” he says, “I cannot read.” Mormons claim this prophecy was fulfilled in 1828. Joseph Smith wanted an Egyptian scholar to verify his translations. So he wrote some Egyptian hieroglyphics on a piece of paper along with their translations and had a friend, Martin Harris, take them to Professor Charles Anthon. According to Harris, Anthon gave him a certificate verifying the translation. But when Anthon found out the hieroglyphics came from an angel, he tore up the certificate and asked to see the gold plates to translate them, but Harris said he couldn’t because part of them were sealed. Anthon later denied he ever verified the translation. Mormons say Harris’ version of events is still credible because he went home and gave money to Smith to help found the church. There’s a few problems. First of all, Anthon was never actually given the book like the passage describes. All he saw was a paper with a few hieroglyphics. Secondly, why couldn’t Anthon translate the plates that weren’t sealed? He wasn’t saying ‘I can’t read them.’ He was saying ‘You won’t let me read them.’ Finally, the LDS version of events doesn’t even try to explain who the person was who couldn’t read. Mormons and Protestants/Baptists do agree on at least one thing. We agree that the original word for ‘baptize’ means ‘immersion.’ So we should interpret it as an act of immersing someone in water, not sprinkling water on their head. Unfortunately, Mormons don’t seem to apply the same method of interpretation to other passages.
According to LDS theology, heaven will be split into 3 kingdoms, the Celestial, Terrestrial and Telestial. They say this doctrine is in the Bible and quote from 1 Corinthians 15, 40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory (KJV). The Greek words for ‘celestial’ and ‘terrestrial’ mean ‘heavenly’ and ‘earthly,’ which is how the more modern versions translate them. Why would Paul refer to a kingdom of heaven as ‘earthly’? Even some non-Mormons say verse 41 might be suggesting there will be different kinds of glory. Maybe some heavenly bodies will be more glorious than others. Even if that’s true, it still doesn’t support the LDS interpretation of the passage. An accurate interpretation becomes much easier once we look at the context. Heavenly, celestial references are in blue and earthly, terrestrial references are in red. 35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? 36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: 38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. 39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. 40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body (KJV). Paul raises questions of how the dead will be raised and what kind of bodies they will have. His answer includes Paul referring to different kinds of bodies with various terms 18 times. But how many times does he mention kingdoms in heaven? Zero. He doesn't mention heaven itself at all. The focus of the passage is what heavenly bodies will be like, not different kingdoms in heaven. Our earthly bodies are corrupted, dishonorable, weak and natural. Heavenly bodies will be incorruptible, glorious, powerful and spiritual. The doctrine of 3 separate kingdoms in heaven is a fundamental part of the LDS gospel, but it’s not taught in the Bible at all. Paul made it very clear that if anyone teaches a gospel different than the one taught in the New Testament, they are accursed (Gal. 1:8-9). Why should we trust anything an accursed “prophet” taught? Joseph Smith didn’t know which church to trust when he was a boy. He happened to read James 1:5, If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him. So he prayed about it, which led to him founding the LDS church. This focus and reliance on prayer is a crucial part of the faith of every Mormon. This is where every discussion starts, even if it’s not mentioned, and it’s where every effective discussion will end up.
First of all, make it clear you’re not denying the power or importance of prayer for believers. James was saying prayer was important, but he was writing to believers, not people who didn’t know which belief to follow. The early church was facing ‘various kinds of trials’ and James was writing to encourage them, part of which included an urge to pray for wisdom about how to respond to trials. The idea that the verse is telling anyone to pray about which church is true is taking it out of context. Matt. 7 7 “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. So when Mormons ask God if the LDS church is true and they get a ‘yes’ answer, it must be right. There’s a few problems with that. For one thing, this passage is near the end of the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus covers at least 6 topics in chapter 7. If the verse is a model for how to know what faith is true, wouldn’t Jesus have spent more time on it? Secondly, if the LDS interpretation of verse 7 is accurate, then why isn’t the LDS church the dominant religion in the world? Verses 8-11 are Jesus saying God certainly gives good gifts to those who seek Him. If the LDS church is true, then how is God giving good gifts to Baptists, Catholics or Seventh-day Adventists when they ask for guidance? When sincere believers of those other faiths are studying the Bible asking God to open their eyes to His truth, why doesn’t He guide them toward the true LDS faith, or at least away from the false church? Or maybe this passage isn’t giving us a method to test which faith is true. So how can we know what teaching to trust? Galatians 1 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. So if anyone isn’t teaching the gospel revealed in the Bible, they are teaching the true gospel. Paul doesn’t mention prayer here at all. Also, notice that Paul doesn’t even leave open the possibility that he could change or update the gospel. The focus here is on the gospel they already received, not trusting in or praying about prophets. 1 John 4 1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. John uses the same test as Paul. If someone teaches anything that contradicts a fundamental doctrine in the Bible, they are not from God. There are plenty of verses that talk about prayer, but none of them describe using prayer to test prophets. The passages that actually talk about false prophets/teachers don't tell us to test them with prayer. Yes, the Bible does say we should pray to receive guidance from the Holy Spirit. But it also says we should test teachers and prophets by comparing their teachings with the Bible. Following Christ means we need to follow both of those principles. A common theme you’ll hear from Mormons is the idea that the role of a prophet in the Old Testament needs to continue during the church age. I would be a lot more willing to believe Joseph Smith was a prophet if he followed the pattern of those prophets, but there are some major issues in his story that break the pattern.
There are many examples in the Old Testament of Israel disobeying God and then facing oppression from others. But when people cried out to God, He answered by raising a judge or prophet to help. According to the LDS church, the early church disobeyed God by following human wisdom instead of God’s direction. The early church certainly faced oppression and persecution, so they must have been crying out to God for help. So why did God wait more than 1600 years to send a prophet? The LDS church also says agency (basically free will) is very important. There were plenty of people during those 1600 years who were sincerely trying to follow God. But if the LDS claims are true, then they weren’t able to truly follow God because no church on earth had the full Gospel. Where was their free will? One Mormon I talked to explained the 1600-year gap by saying God wanted some other factors established before the true church was restored. The printing press made it possible for more people to have their own Bible. People came to America as a place of religious freedom. Finally, the bill of rights was ratified a few decades before Joseph Smith founded the LDS church. But that’s not how the God of the Old Testament operated. A major focus of the Old Testament is that the glory of victory and deliverance belongs to God alone, which He made very clear in many different ways. God didn’t wait for a women’s rights bill to raise a female judge to lead Israel. People cried out to God, and He responded by calling a one-handed man to defeat the enemy. People cried out to God, and He told them to leave most of their soldiers at home during the battle. People cried out to God, and He called a man with a speech impediment to be speak for Him. He didn't have to wait until human strengths and efforts lined up for Him to act. One of the most consistent themes in the Old Testament is God using our weaknesses, not our strengths, to do His will and lead His people. Yet when people cried out to God after the early church, the LDS church says He waited until we got the Bill of Rights ratified? Or maybe the role of prophet doesn’t need to continue during the church age. |
Dustin McNab
I've talked to many Mormons over the past few years and I'd like to use this blog to share some effective responses I've found. Archives
July 2015
Categories |