Straight from the Horse's Mouth

The title of this article means — from the original or most reliable source.

“Why would I want to read a book that is 2000 years old?” I was asked this question by a high schooler in a discussion about a book by Anton LaVey. That book was the Satanic Bible. He said that he thought the Satanic Bible made more sense than the Bible, which was written over 2000 years ago. The idea here is that a book written over two thousand years ago would not be trustworthy because it is so old. Not only would this be an issue of absolute truths (whether they exist or not), but also that more modern writings are supposedly more trustworthy. If absolute truths do not exist, then we can literally know nothing. If they do exist, then time would have no effect on such things.

Islam, for instance, came 600 years after Christ. Why should we trust what it says about Jesus? Let’s first look at a few examples of what the Quran says about Jesus.

Surely the likeness of Isa [Jesus] is with Allah as the likeness of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, Be, and he was (Sura 3:59).

This is saying that Jesus is a created being, much like what Jehovah’sWitnesses teach. The problem with this is that the first several verses in the Gospel of John teach something else:

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made. Without Him nothing was made that has been made (John 1:1-3).

This causes us to rationalize that if Jesus was there before the beginning, and everything was made through Him, and there was nothing made at all unless it was made through Him, then He must not be a created being, but He must be the creator of the universe, according to the Bible. This is in direct contradiction with the Quran.

Speaking of contradictions and absolute truths, both of these citations above cannot be correct. Either Jesus was created or He was not created. Why would we have any reason to believe that Jesus was not created? I think His miracles attest to who He claimed to be: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). People wanted to kill Him for blasphemy because He said this. Now why would we think this phrase means anything differently today? There is no reason to think that Jesus meant something else, because of the reaction of those who opposed Him. Jehovah’s Witnesses often make the claim that He never meant to be worshiped, but seriously, it seems inevitable if He was who He says He was. In any event, we have very strong evidences to believe that John’s testimony about Him is in fact true, absolutely.

Another example that I think shines like a sore thumb in the Quran is Sura 4:157-158:

And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa [Jesus] son of Marium [Mary], the messenger of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. Nay! Allah took him up to Himself; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Let’s look at what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 for a moment:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

Again, this is much the opposite of what the Quran teaches. Either Jesus was killed, or He wasn’t. Don’t you think the people who saw Him bleed out (see John 19:34) and those who wrapped His dead body full of spices and buried Him (see John 19:38-42) would know if He were dead or not? It seems ridiculous to even question such a thing.

So Islam came 600 years after Jesus. Shouldn’t we trust documents written closest to the source? Closest to the original?

Similarly, Mormonism was founded long after Jesus’ time on earth, but still has much to say about Him. Mormonism came 1900 years after Christ, and the sacred scripture to Mormonism is the Book of Mormon. Why should we trust what it said about Christ? The answer is that we shouldn’t. For one, it also directly contradicts things written about Jesus that are found in the Bible, and secondly, it was written nearly two millennia after Jesus time on earth.

The message that the Book of Mormon teaches can be summed up in 2 Nephi 25:23:

For we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all you can do.

This is very different from what the Bible teaches. Consider the partial plagiarism that Joseph Smith is guilty of from Ephesians 2:8-9:

For we know that it is by grace we are saved, through faith, and this, not of ourselves. It is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one may boast.

The two different messages clearly displayed here are that either our works help save us, or they do not. Again, this is like saying that a woman is both pregnant and not pregnant at the same time. Both cannot be true. Should we go by what some random dude in the 19^th Century says about the message Jesus gave us, or should we reach as close to the source as possible?

Joseph Smith, the author of the Book of Mormon, also says this about the book he authored with frequent plagiarized citations:

I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book (History of the Church, 4:461).

The most correct book of any on earth! Wow! Not having read all of the books that were ever printed on Planet Earth since the invention of books, myself, that seems like an enormous claim. It would be like me saying that this article is the most correct article on earth. I’m certain there will be a few raised eyebrows at this point, for good reason. It is simply a ridiculous claim. If the Book of Mormon is superiorly correct, why is it so filled with logical fallacies, plagiarism, and opposition to the Bible? Joseph Smith claims that God translated the Book of Mormon for him through a stone that he gazed at while it was in his hat. Why would the plates that he found be necessary at all if he didn’t even use them to translate the Book of Mormon, and why was the book translated into a language that was no longer spoken at the time of the translation?

Shouldn’t we want to know what happened closest to the source? Would we trust documents that were written about the events of 9/11 2000 years after it happened or would the nearest testimonies surrounding the event be more accurate?

The closer we are to the source allows less time for embellishment. The closer materials we have to the actual event is going to be closer to what actually happened. This is why the Christian community gets so excited when an even older manuscript is discovered in the archives of the world’s greatest museums. They never disagree with the doctrines of Christianity!

Police know this tactic of sources all too well. This is why they separate their witnesses when interviewing at the scene of the crime. If the witness can talk with each other before they are interviewed, then they can change their story. Partial differences are naturally occurring, but there is never a question as to what really happened. Much like the gospels. They have very minor discrepancies, but they all make absolute claims that Jesus died and rose again. They do not budge on the doctrines.

Anton LaVey died the year I graduated high school. Class of ’97. He died in my lifetime. When someone reads this a thousand years from now, they will look at this and trust this source because I, the author was alive at the time of the event. Whatever legend or misinformation someone makes about the author or his book in the future, depending on the subject matter, the source could shut it down. That which is closest to the source is more trustworthy than that which is further away from the source. Just go straight to the horse’s mouth. There is a reason this idiom is so popular.

For more, see my book on Mormonism:

https://www.amazon.com/Mormonism-Refuting-Fundamental-Apologetics-Latter-Day/dp/1662885377/

Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus

Comments

Self-tests of Some of the World's Religions

It is fairly common for a religion of the world to give itself a sort of test for truth, since this is one question that is asked of any religion: “Why should I believe what you are telling me is true?” After all, the answer to such a question will ultimately result in followers of specific beliefs and doctrines, let alone religions, or will result in a lack of followers. If a religion can answer this question posed by seekers and thinkers, and therefore train its adherents to be able to answer why a religion is true, this will inevitably help people believe in such, even if the claims are false. If there is no answer, this is where a religion will perhaps find more trouble for itself. Many religions make an appeal to a higher authority, namely, God , for the veracity of their existence and as a result, no one can question the truth from such an authority. This is correct in a sense, that if in fact God is making such a claim, then what is said or stated is true ...

The Evidence and Power of Testimony

What to say to People who Demand more Evidence for God. Why is there something rather than nothing? Glacier National Park. © Nace Howell, 2018. The question is, how much evidence do you require? Would Jesus have to come back and slap you in the face with evidence that He is God? It seems to me that there is a line we must draw. We do this in all other areas of our lives, so why would we treat theism any different? When a court convicts, they do so “beyond a reasonable doubt.” I would like to take a few moments to explore this a bit. But before we get to that, I want to pose a question, which is… why are you the standard? What makes you think He has to prove His existence to everyone individually? He already created the universe from nothing. In the beginning, there was a big bang. Seriously… do you believe your mom when she tells you a story about her day? Did you believe the reports of 9/11 when they were happening? Do you accept the testimony of anything you hear on social ...

Who Made God? Identifying Categorical Errors

A category is simply a distinct class to which something belongs… A set of objects that can be treated as equal in some way. A Macintosh apple belongs to the category, apple, and not what we categorize as an orange. Similarly, colors are in a different category than taste. When we say, “apples and oranges” what we mean is that there has been a confusion of categories. Sure, they are both fruit, but when you examine both, there is an obvious difference. An apple is not an orange, and an orange is not an apple. Macintosh, Granny Smith, and red delicious are all apples. Navel, blood, and Valencia are all oranges. To mix the two, for instance, to call a navel orange an apple, would be a categorical error, sometimes referred to as a category mistake. How Identifying Categorical Errors can Help with Apologetics It seems that simply learning about or being reminded of categorical errors can help us be more aware of them. We have all heard or thought of ourselves, the...

Baptism is Not Necessary for Salvation According to the Early Church

Let’s dive right in. The Bible says in Acts 2:37-41, Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. The phrase in Acts 2:38 that reads, “for the forgiveness of your sins” modifies the word repentance, not the word baptism. See more about this Here . What is interesting is that those who translate the above verse as meaning that baptism is a requ...

Objectivity is the Language of Heaven

NDErs (i. e. people who have claimed to have had a Near Death Experience ) often report that when they go to Heaven, they frequently see and recognize people such as friends and family members. It is often also reported that when they were communicating with friends and relatives, they realized that they weren’t speaking English, but that they were telepathically speaking to one another. It seems it would be impossible to have communication with others without learning every language that has ever existed under the sun, but since heaven is a perfect place, [1] then communication should be perfect as well. In other words, it seems unlikely that there are barriers to communication. So, I should be able to communicate with the Apostles, upon my arrival for instance, but how? I personally only really know how to speak English fluently. My Spanish, Japanese, German, Russian, Chinese, and Latin is like that of a child, and my Greek is only in reading and writing. If ...

Using Guilt to Guide to the Truth

While taking a cultural apologetics class in my doctorate, I rambled along in a 30-page paper and in it, I wrote that, “I define religion as an anthropological system consisting of worship which is often filled with specific sacred rituals that seeks to appease or eradicate guilt.” My professor red-penned this and said that I am not yet in an authoritative position to make such definitions. But I was never asked how I came up with such a definition. The thing is, working on my second post-graduate degree in apologetics, studying many other religions on a deeper level was inevitable, and by this, I noticed a pattern in all of them which was the fact that they all seek to appease or eradicate guilt, including Buddhism , even though many adherents of Buddhism claim that it is not a religion . The point is that all religions seek to eradicate guilt on some level, because guilt crosses all cultures and times, to all people . Guilt transcends all people. The ...

Two Problems Jesus has with the Mormon Doctrine of Eternal Families

Mormonism teaches that those who are married in a temple can be married for eternity. In Doctrine and Covenants 132:15–20, we find the following: 15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word , and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead , and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. 16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. 17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God for...

How to Show a Mormon the Difference Between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus

I find that Mormons frequently claim that they are Christians, and that they want to be referred to as Christians, and that they have even recently sought to distance themselves from the word “Mormon.” The problem is, they worship another Jesus, and here is how to show them the difference between the Mormon Jesus and the Biblical Jesus. Before we get to that, some clarifications are necessary. Specifically, that they cannot even distance themselves from being called "Mormons." The Mormon President Russell Nelson said, “What’s in a name or, in this case, a nickname? When it comes to nicknames of the Church, such as the “LDS Church,” the “Mormon Church,” or the “Church of the Latter-day Saints,” the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us—even His Atonement.” [1] ...

The Highest Virtue

A virtue is a trait of excellence. What is the highest virtue? It seems that based on the nature of truth, that truth itself is perhaps the highest virtue. For instance, I could say that love is the highest virtue, but then I could ask the question of whether that is true or not. If it is or isn’t true, this places truth virtuously higher than love, at least in some sense. The fact that I can question love through the lens of truth seems to place truth above love in height of virtue. On the other hand, if I said that truth is the highest virtue, then it seems that it would be loving to tell others the truth! Perhaps truth and love go hand in hand, but this also concerns the nature of what truth is. Truth is a requirement for love, which I argue here , but is love a requirement for truth? Love must contain truth in order to be true love. But truth does not have to contain love in order to be true truth. Take for instance, mathematics, or numbers in general… Sometimes, t...

The God of the Killdozer Operator, Marvin Heemeyer

While working toward becoming an apologist and a pastor, I was a heavy equipment operator. I have over 15 years’ experience in the field, focusing on hydrological restorations (stream bank and river restoration and water dam removals) and site development for building pads (ranging from houses to one million + sq. ft. warehouses). I say this because I want to show where the heart for writing article this came about. Marvin Heemeyer purchased a bulldozer from an auction which was a Komatsu D355A with an operating weight of 97,907 lbs. (this does not include the weight of Heemeyer’s fabricated addition). In the picture above, I am operating a Komatsu D155AX which has an operating weight of 89,300 lbs. (If I remember correctly, we were developing the site for a 550,000 sq. ft. warehouse building pad). Heemeyer then went on a rampage in his armored bulldozer in Granby, CO. I don’t want to go into great details about what led up to Heemeyer doing what he did, nor do I want to go into great ...

Apologetics and Evidence

Search This Blog