You accuse those of us in Christian Apologetics ministries of creating a divide between Mormonism and Christianity. Correct me if I’m wrong, didn’t Mormonism begin with the “First Vision” of Joseph Smith? The “First Vision” states in verse 19 “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt…” POGP Joseph Smith 2:19. This statement by Joseph Smith is day one, hour one, minute one, second one of Mormonism, and is an all out attack on Christianity. In one sentence Joseph Smith states that “all churches are wrong, all creeds (creeds are Christian doctrine) are an abomination, and all professors of Christianity are corrupt.” Joseph Smith comes out with both barrels blazing and we Christians simply fired back in self-defense and we are accused of starting the fight. Your statement is simply not true. We Christians are merely defending ourselves from the attacks levied against us by the very foundational argument of Mormon Doctrine.

JLFuller, I was never ex-communicated. I was born and raised 6th generation Mormon, but began to study its history and foundations and found them to be fraudulent. I sent a letter to the Mormon Church and asked to have my name removed. I was sent a letter stating my name had been removed per my request. I was not ex-communicated; once again, you are wrong.

You won’t read my book because you cannot defend against it. You say you won’t dialogue because you only “dialogue with people who treat the subject respectfully.” As a Mormon you are required to believe in the “First Vision” which says all Christian churches are wrong, all Christian doctrine is an abomination, and all professors of Christianity are corrupt, and you believe that position is a position of respect? Whose starting point is the sewer JLFuller, Mormonism or Christianity?

You say on your website that you are an ex-Mormon. That tells me a lot. Being excommunicated is not a pleasant thing I am sure. But whatever bitterness you harbor is not ameliorated by attacking others.

You are correct in one area though – I have not read your book and have no intention of doing so. Your premise is preposterous. I am interested in religious dialog with people who treat the subject respectfully. But I have no interest in jumping into a sewer to do so.

Judging by JLFuller’s comments, they haven’t read the book. I’m accused of using only statements of Mormon leaders “long dead.” A simple review of the book would show that to be false. Not only does “When Salt Lake City Calls,” quote many living Mormon General Authorities, but being printed in October of 2007, it has quotes as recent as September of 2007 from the official magazine of the Mormon Church, “Ensign.”

Fuller makes the following accusation as well:

But you can bet one thing for sure – they don’t contact the Church for the rest of the story and they are artful at cherry picking, taking things out of context and jumping to poorly thought out and researched conclusions.

My wife and I have had a weekly TV program about Mormonism, “Truth Outreach,” since May of 2002, which has now gone international. I have invited the Bishop of Nauvoo, Illinois, the Stake President of Nauvoo, the Mission President of the Nauvoo area, the Public Relations Representative for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo – all have refused to come and discuss various topics of Mormonism on “Truth Outreach.” I have their letters of refusal, or the USPS Certified signature cards of delivery, if they failed to even respond to my requests, to prove my case. I have contacted the Public Relations Department of the Mormon Church in Salt Lake City asking them to please provide Mormon representation on various programs; again, letters of refusal to participate. I have been accused by Mormons in the local newspaper here in Nauvoo of misrepresenting Mormonism; so, I challenged the Mormon leadership to a public forum to discuss these accusations. Just like with this book, the silence is deafening. If I was making false statements it would be easy to prove. So why the silence? The answer is: I’m not making false statements. So, JLFuller, your “bet” is blatantly false.

JLFuller, you haven’t read the book either. If you have, please bring forth a logical, reasoned argument. I am very willing to defend my work against academic dialogue; will you present some?

I haven’t read your book and almost certainly will not because I don’t believe in relying on devoted critics of my faith to tell me what I believe. I would not ask a devoted critic of your faith (whichever one it is) to tell me what you believe.

My guess is that what you have done with your book is dig up a bunch of old quotations from Mormon leaders — probably from the 19th Century– and then have a field day with their statements. If I am right, then you are only one of thousands who have done the same thing over the last 178 years. Unfortunately, the only real impact of such efforts has been to stir up a lot of ill feeling.

I did not mean to malign the physical setup of your ministry in Nauvoo, but your physical premises do fairly shout out “anti-Mormon,” and they do so with all the delicacy and persuasiveness of the rather wild-eyed protesters who picket at LDS General Conference. My point is that such a setup does not endow your efforts with much credibility in the minds of serious, thoughtful people of good will.

Cordially,

Lowell Brown

President Hinckley has said a live prophet is better than a dead one and so it is. But these “expose” writers are quite willing to take information from excommunicated Mormons or people who swore an oath to kill Joseph Smith or other members or exterminate Mormons. They buy the fabrications of people who were openly hostile to the Church its leaders and members hook line and sinker but refuse to contact current leaders for the other side of the story before printing their slanders and misrepresentations. No, there is nothing new people like Hulse can say that hasn’t been said and written and printed countless times before. But you can bet one thing for sure – they don’t contact the Church for the rest of the story and they are artful at cherry picking, taking things out of context and jumping to poorly thought out and researched conclusions.

“When we give thanks in all things, we see hardships and adversities in the context of the purpose of life” and “We are meant to learn and grow through that opposition, through meeting our challenges, and through teaching others to do the same.”The Ensign, May 2003.

Now others will say that Elder Oaks was talking about physical and moral challenges in the article and he was. But if you read the whole article
you will see he refers to opposition in all things. That includes presentation of the Gospel as we believe it to be. It appears to this observer that this fellow in Nauvoo is fulfilling a universal injunction, odious as it may seem. In reality, the more outrageous the claims and behavior of our detractors the more opportunities we have to teach the Gospel.

Mr. Lowell equates credibility to the physical accomodations of an organization. I can’t, therefore, understand how the auditors found fault with the books at Enron?

I will accept the label as a bigot if either of you can show that in my book “When Salt Lake City Calls,” I misquoted, altered, deleted, or pulled out of context the several hundred quotations that I used. If on the other hand, my work is found to stand up to examination, I would be most interested to read an explanation that finds my conclusions, based on those quotations, to be in error.

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. (Samuel Johnson 1709-1784)