Circular Reasoning

[dcforrey]

According to an article on the LDS website we can know whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet by looking at his teachings. Here is an excerpt from an article by Joshua J Perkey:
Think about it. Everything you know in the Church, everything you believe, everything you do, really hinges on this question: Was Joseph Smith really called as a prophet? If the answer is yes, then the Church really is true, the Book of Mormon really is a book of holy scripture, the doctrines of the Church are true, and the Church really is led by prophets today. That pretty much affects every aspect of your life.

Still not sure? Here’s a little quiz that illustrates the point.

Which of the following doctrines and principles were taught by Joseph Smith, revealed through him, or made clear by his teachings? Check all that apply [below is a partial list].
The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price are true scripture.
Priesthood authority and power reside in the Church.
Mormon, Moroni, Alma, Nephi, Lehi, and many other individuals in the Book of Mormon were real people.
Jesus Christ visited the Americas and taught His gospel to the people there.
There are three degrees of heaven, and the highest is the celestial kingdom.
The Word of Wisdom is a true principle.
Families can be together forever through the sealing ordinances in the temple.
The leaders of my class or quorum, ward, and stake have been called of God.

How many principles did you check? The truth is, Joseph really did teach or reveal all of those things, and most of them are things people in his day did not know before he taught them (underlining mine).

So if you really want to know who you are, where you came from, and what God has in store for you in life, you really need to know that Joseph Smith was called as a true prophet. Knowing that leads you closer to Jesus Christ, and that makes all the difference.

Why Do I Need to Know Joseph Smith Is a Prophet?

Why Do I Need to Know Joseph Smith Is a Prophet?

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Mr Perkey’s argument is that we know Joseph was a prophet because he taught us things we didn’t know before he revealed them to us.
But I see a huge problem with that argument. It assumes that the new things he taught us are true.

I think it’s fair to say that if we ask someone today how they know if those things on the list are true they would respond that we know they are true because the Prophet told us they are true. Here is a relevant quote: “We should follow his inspired teachings completely. We should not choose to follow part of his inspired counsel and discard that which is unpleasant or difficult. The Lord commanded us to follow the inspired teachings of His prophet:
“Thou shalt give heed unto all his [the prophet’s] words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; “For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5). The Lord will never allow the President of the Church to lead us astray.”
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org...principles/chapter-9-prophets-of-god?lang=eng

I see a perfect example of circular reasoning. It starts by saying that we know that Joseph was a prophet because he told us new things that are true, and then completes the circle by claiming that the very reason we know those new things are true is that Joseph was a prophet and told us they were true.

 

[Catherineaurelia]

According to an article on the LDS website we can know whether or not Joseph Smith was a prophet by looking at his teachings. Here is an excerpt from an article by Joshua J Perkey:
Think about it. Everything you know in the Church, everything you believe, everything you do, really hinges on this question: Was Joseph Smith really called as a prophet? If the answer is yes, then the Church really is true, the Book of Mormon really is a book of holy scripture, the doctrines of the Church are true, and the Church really is led by prophets today. That pretty much affects every aspect of your life.

Still not sure? Here’s a little quiz that illustrates the point.

Which of the following doctrines and principles were taught by Joseph Smith, revealed through him, or made clear by his teachings? Check all that apply [below is a partial list].
The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price are true scripture.
Priesthood authority and power reside in the Church.
Mormon, Moroni, Alma, Nephi, Lehi, and many other individuals in the Book of Mormon were real people.
Jesus Christ visited the Americas and taught His gospel to the people there.
There are three degrees of heaven, and the highest is the celestial kingdom.
The Word of Wisdom is a true principle.
Families can be together forever through the sealing ordinances in the temple.
The leaders of my class or quorum, ward, and stake have been called of God.

How many principles did you check? The truth is, Joseph really did teach or reveal all of those things, and most of them are things people in his day did not know before he taught them (underlining mine).

So if you really want to know who you are, where you came from, and what God has in store for you in life, you really need to know that Joseph Smith was called as a true prophet. Knowing that leads you closer to Jesus Christ, and that makes all the difference.

Why Do I Need to Know Joseph Smith Is a Prophet?

Why Do I Need to Know Joseph Smith Is a Prophet?

www.churchofjesuschrist.org

Mr Perkey’s argument is that we know Joseph was a prophet because he taught us things we didn’t know before he revealed them to us.
But I see a huge problem with that argument. It assumes that the new things he taught us are true.

I think it’s fair to say that if we ask someone today how they know if those things on the list are true they would respond that we know they are true because the Prophet told us they are true. Here is a relevant quote: “We should follow his inspired teachings completely. We should not choose to follow part of his inspired counsel and discard that which is unpleasant or difficult. The Lord commanded us to follow the inspired teachings of His prophet:
“Thou shalt give heed unto all his [the prophet’s] words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me; “For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5). The Lord will never allow the President of the Church to lead us astray.”
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org...principles/chapter-9-prophets-of-god?lang=eng

I see a perfect example of circular reasoning. It starts by saying that we know that Joseph was a prophet because he told us new things that are true, and then completes the circle by claiming that the very reason we know those new things are true is that Joseph was a prophet and told us they were true.

Just Excellent!

 

[Erundur]

Mr Perkey’s argument is that we know Joseph was a prophet because he taught us things we didn’t know before he revealed them to us.

I don't think that was his argument. He is arguing that it is important to know whether Joseph Smith was a true prophet, because the principles he listed tell us who we are, where we come from, and what God has in store for us.

 

[Catherineaurelia]

I don't think that was his argument. He is arguing that it is important to know whether Joseph Smith was a true prophet, because the principles he listed tell us who we are, where we come from, and what God has in store for us.

But the argument really is this: you think those "principles" are true because Smith said they were true, and after all he is a prophet, seer and revelator, because he said so.

 

[Erundur]

But the argument really is this: you think those "principles" are true because Smith said they were true, and after all he is a prophet, seer and revelator, because he said so.

Not impressed. A false statement about why someone else believes what they do isn't much of an argument.

 

[Catherineaurelia]

Not impressed. A false statement about why someone else believes what they do isn't much of an argument.

I don't care if you are impressed are not. The question is on what basis do you believe the so-called "principles" taught by Smith, especially in light of all the proof that Smith couldn't prophesy his way out of a paper bag. You believe them because you also believe Smith was a true prophet - without any proof whatsoever. But Christians provide many pieces of "truth," proving Joey was an immoral person, lied consistently, and indulged in evil sexual practices under the cover of "God told me to do it." How anyone who has any degree of morality can set that aside and continue to follow Smith is beyond me.

 

[Erundur]

I don't care if you are impressed are not.

Good. Then you will never attempt to improve your arguments, which benefits my side.

 

[Catherineaurelia]

Good. Then you will never attempt to improve your arguments, which benefits my side.

your side has no arguments. You will not deal with facts, so make posts like the one here, demonstrating that you don't have the the least inclination to actually address issues Christians raise about your cult. For instance, how about the fact that Smith was a serial adulterer and told girls as young as 14 that his "god" told him to marry them. Tell me, if Russell Nelson had a "revelation" he was to marry your 14 year old, would you submit? Your average person would feel repulsed by Smith's sexual immorality, especially as it pertains to hebephilia. Yet Mormons blithely dismiss it, don't share that information with potential converts, and come on sites like this refusing to defend Smith or his "principles." Tell me, Erundur, polygamy was one of Smith's "principles," and he never denied the principle but jumped from the window of Carthage jail still claiming it was true. Will you take another spouse, or be a second spouse, depending on your sexual identification? If not, why not - either Smith's "principles" are true or they are as phony as the Kirland Three dollar bill. You can always move to the Lebaron colony as lots of Mormons did to continue the practice - so aren't you Mormons not practicing this "principle" really hypocritical when you come here to defend Smith's teachings - and you, yourselves, not even practicing them?

 

[dcforrey]

I don't think that was his argument. He is arguing that it is important to know whether Joseph Smith was a true prophet, because the principles he listed tell us who we are, where we come from, and what God has in store for us.

Thanks for responding.

In your view, what is the best way to know that Joseph was a prophet?

 

[Erundur]

Thanks for responding.

In your view, what is the best way to know that Joseph was a prophet?

Oh, I don't know what the best way is, but finding out that the Book of Mormon is true would be a good one.

 

[dcforrey]

Thank you. What is the best way to find out it is true? Or better yet, what convinced you that it is true?

 

[Erundur]

Thank you. What is the best way to find out it is true?

Ask God.
Moroni 10:3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

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.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

Or better yet, what convinced you that it is true?

My experience was kind of the reverse. I always believed the Book of Mormon, but the strongest witness I've ever received from the Holy Ghost was regarding the temple ordinances. So for me, since the temple ordinances are true, then Joseph Smith was a true prophet, and the Book of Mormon is from God. But that wouldn't work for someone who isn't already LDS.

 

[dcforrey]

Ask God.
Moroni 10:3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

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.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

My experience was kind of the reverse. I always believed the Book of Mormon, but the strongest witness I've ever received from the Holy Ghost was regarding the temple ordinances. So for me, since the temple ordinances are true, then Joseph Smith was a true prophet, and the Book of Mormon is from God. But that wouldn't work for someone who isn't already LDS.

Thanks for responding.

Wouldn’t accepting the Book of Mormon’s test to see if the Book of Mormon is true be a form of circular reasoning? What I mean is, if someone today says that they have a message from God, and that he also has a test to find out whether or not that message is true, should we accept the test that he proposes, or should we apply a test (or tests) that we already have in place? In the case of the Book of Mormon, why should we apply the Book of Mormon’s test? Wouldn’t that be accepting its own premise? And in the case of the Book of Mormon, what happens if a person “sincerely” asks God, and yet nothing happens? If a person applies the Book of Mormon’s test with a sincere heart, then if that person receives no confirmation, should that mean that the Book of Mormon is not true? Furthermore, if we tell that person to be more “sincere”, aren’t we telling that person that they must first try to believe it to be true before asking God if it’s true?

I agree that it might be a good thing to ask God. But before asking God I would examine what the Book of Mormon says, and what the claims of Joseph Smith were, and then evaluate them based on more than one factor. I would look at the character of Joseph, the historical accuracy of the Book of Mormon, the teachings of Joseph compared with the Bible, etc. In fact, wouldn’t you do exactly that if someone came along claiming to have new information from God? In your case, wouldn’t you compare it with what you consider to be the truth revealed to you in the Book of Mormon, D&C, etc?

 

[Yodas_Prodigy]

But the argument really is this: you think those "principles" are true because Smith said they were true, and after all he is a prophet, seer and revelator, because he said so.

Exactly... Then we get into the old Word Faith Televangelist argument, "Touch not the Lord's annointed."

 

[Erundur]

Wouldn’t accepting the Book of Mormon’s test to see if the Book of Mormon is true be a form of circular reasoning?

I don't think so. The test isn't unique or specific to the Book of Mormon. You don't have to believe the Book of Mormon is true to believe that studying and asking God is a viable test.

Assuming that the book is false and refusing to apply the test it proposes because one already knows it's false sounds more like circular reasoning to me.

What I mean is, if someone today says that they have a message from God, and that he also has a test to find out whether or not that message is true, should we accept the test that he proposes, or should we apply a test (or tests) that we already have in place?

Well, you can use any test you want, of course (like maybe the James 1:5 test ), but this test is a good one, since in matters of faith, it seems like it would be a good idea to involve God in the process.

 

[dcforrey]

I don't think so. The test isn't unique or specific to the Book of Mormon. You don't have to believe the Book of Mormon is true to believe that studying and asking God is a viable test.

Assuming that the book is false and refusing to apply the test it proposes because one already knows it's false sounds more like circular reasoning to me.

Well, you can use any test you want, of course (like maybe the James 1:5 test ), but this test is a good one, since in matters of faith, it seems like it would be a good idea to involve God in the process.

Thank you for responding.

Once a person accepts the Book of Mormon as true, and the prophet as being God’s spokesman, it seems to me that the person has placed himself in a position in which he must accept whatever the prophet says whether or not it seems right. In other words, once the prophet has been tested and approved, there is no going back. The testing is over.

Should members of the church fully accept everything the prophet says whether or not it seems to be true? That appears to me to be the case:
We should follow his inspired teachings completely. We should not choose to follow part of his inspired counsel and discard that which is unpleasant or difficult. The Lord commanded us to follow the inspired teachings of His prophet:
“Thou shalt give heed unto all his [the prophet’s] words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;
“For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5).
The Lord will never allow the President of the Church to lead us astray.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org...principles/chapter-9-prophets-of-god?lang=eng

 

[Erundur]

Once a person accepts the Book of Mormon as true, and the prophet as being God’s spokesman, it seems to me that the person has placed himself in a position in which he must accept whatever the prophet says whether or not it seems right.

I suppose that's possible. What do you think one should do in that case?

In other words, once the prophet has been tested and approved, there is no going back. The testing is over.

In a way I suppose that's true. Once you know something you can't unknow it.

 

[brotherofJared]

I suppose that's possible. What do you think one should do in that case?

In a way I suppose that's true. Once you know something you can't unknow it.

This is why I don't believe the "prophet test" in the Bible is biblical. It makes no sense. We see, time and time again, of prophets making statements that there's no way that normal moral people could see it come to pass. The virgin both occurred centuries after Isaiah made his famous statement, unto us a child is born. Who was alive when Isaiah said it when it actually occurred? No one.

So, yes, once you draw the conclusion that this is a prophet sent from God. He's got that calling for life. There is no testing anymore.

 

[Theo1689]

This is why I don't believe the "prophet test" in the Bible is biblical. It makes no sense. We see, time and time again, of prophets making statements that there's no way that normal moral people could see it come to pass.

You mean like Smith and Young making "prophecies" that the Sun and Moon were inhabited by people looking like Quakers, 150 years before the Lunar Landing?

That's a GREAT tactic for false prophets, isn't it?

 

[Magdalena]

This is why I don't believe the "prophet test" in the Bible is biblical. It makes no sense. We see, time and time again, of prophets making statements that there's no way that normal moral people could see it come to pass. The virgin both occurred centuries after Isaiah made his famous statement, unto us a child is born. Who was alive when Isaiah said it when it actually occurred? No one.

So, yes, once you draw the conclusion that this is a prophet sent from God. He's got that calling for life. There is no testing anymore.

When someone’s “prophecies” have time limits, like most of Smith’s did, and people see that he was wrong, that means he wasn’t a prophet. It means he was a false prophet. Like the ones God warned us about.

You can’t just overlook all the false prophecies in favor of maybe two that haven’t come true “yet,” and call him a real prophet. That’s just nuts.