From < http://packham.n4m.org/unasked.htm > 03/10/2014 09:59
          [Downloaded in 2018; ~MAC]

QUESTIONS ABOUT MORMONISM THAT ARE NOT OFTEN ASKED; Updated 6/1/2007

Many of us left Mormonism because we asked too many questions for
which there were no satisfactory answers. Usually the Mormons we
asked (missionaries, bishops, family members) quickly told us that
our questions were improper, unnecessary, prideful, absurd, and/or
"inspired by Satan."

But any trial attorney knows that probing questions of an opposition
witness, based on what the witness has already said, is the way to
uncover and display the weaknesses or absurdities in the witness' story
and to show that the witness is lying - making it up. No witness would
be allowed to say, "You are asking too many questions - you should
just accept what I have told you and be content with that." If the
testimony is true, it will withstand the most probing questioning.

We are all familiar with many of the questions that have arisen
about Mormonism. But there are some questions that I have never heard
asked. I would like to share some of them that have occurred to me
lately. Feel free to use them in your own discussions with Mormons.

Joseph Smith was always being visited by angels. He had no hesitation
about telling his followers about the visitations. Why have no general
authorities of the church in the last hundred years told us about
their angel visits?

The president of the church is supposed to be able to translate ancient
records (D&C 107:92). The church now owns the Egyptian papyrus which
Joseph Smith identified as the "Book of Joseph". Why hasn't Gordon
Hinckley translated this precious scripture?

Why has no Mormon prophet (including Joseph Smith) provided a
translation of the few "reformed Egyptian" characters which were
copied from the plates and presented to Professor Anthon?

Why didn't Joseph make a rubbing of one or two of the plates, instead
of just trying to copy the "caractors" (which Martin Harris showed to
Professor Anthon)? It would have been so much faster, easier, and more
authentic. Wouldn't that have been a wonderful "facsimile" to include
in every copy of the Book of Mormon?

The Book of Mormon (1 Nephi 5:18-19) says that the "brass plates" should
"go forth unto all nations, kindreds, tongues". The Encyclopedia of
Mormonism says about them: "It is also evident from the scriptural
quotations in the Book of Mormon that the plates of brass contained
a more extensive record of the writings of Hebrew prophets than does
the present Old Testament. For example, the Book of Mormon includes
prophecies of Joseph of Egypt that are not found in the Bible, as well
as writings of Zenos, Zenock, Neum, and Ezias, prophets who are not
specifically named in the Old Testament." (Encyclopedia of Mormonism,
Vol.1, "Book of Mormon Plates and Records") So, where are they? Does
Deseret Book sell a translation?

If Moroni could simply appear and take the gold plates back when
Joseph had finished his translation, why couldn't he have simply kept
them with him in the first place, rather than leaving them buried
in the hill for all those years?  Why would God be so secretive
about allowing people to see the plates from which the Book of Mormon
was translated, and yet the Egyptian papyrus from which the equally
sacred Book of Abraham was translated got passed from hand to hand,
and was displayed to the public by both Chandler and Smith (Smith
gave his mother Lucy the franchise: she charged 25 cents to anyone
who wanted to see the papyrus.)

Why wasn't Joseph Smith - God's divinely appointed "translator" of
ancient documents (D&C 7, 21:1, 107:92, 124:125) able to identify
the Egyptian papyri correctly as the "Breathing Permit of Hor,"
dating from sometime around the time of Christ?

Why would God put a sacred scripture such as the Book of Abraham in a
common pagan burial papyrus? Did all such Egyptian "Breathing Permits"
with similar texts also contain Abraham's sacred words?

What about the stone box that the plates were concealed in for
so many years?  That would have been easy, and added credence to
the whole story. Why didn't some of Joseph's pals go out there and
retrieve this artifact of ancient workmanship that was 1400 years old,
and display it the way they displayed the mummies later?

About the "war in heaven..." How can spirits fight a war? Do they
get wounded, killed? What weapons do they use? Exactly where did this
war take place?  Where God lives (on the planet near Kolob)?

The war in heaven is supposed to have included everyone who eventually
will be born on earth, and everyone who already has been born (since
participation in the war determined our earthly destiny). That means
that the war ended before anybody was born on the earth. Is God no
longer producing "spirit children", then? If not, how is he going
to occupy his time? If so, is there going to have to be another war
in heaven?

Does God have any "fun"? Does he have a sense of humor? Does he ever
crack a joke?

If "salvation" means returning to the presence of God, does that mean
that the celestial kingdom is on the planet near Kolob?

The Book of Mormon says that for there to be happiness, there must be
"opposition" (2 Nephi 2:11) - in other words, there must be evil to
appreciate good.  But how then can we be happy in heaven, where there
will be no evil and no temptation?

Since there will be no temptation in heaven, doesn't that mean that we
will have lost our free agency, since we can no longer choose to sin?

If all of us spirit children desperately wanted a body, what about
the Holy Ghost, who doesn't have (and apparently never had) a body? (I
have seen this question asked a few times before.)

Mormons teach that Jesus was the Jehovah of the Old Testament, who gave
Israel the Ten Commandments, including the one that says they should
worship no other gods but him. But Mormons do not pray to Jesus, but to
"God the Father". So where is "God the Father" in the Old Testament?

The human body (in spite of a few design flaws) does what it does
very well: it ingests nourishment, expels waste, uses the physical
senses to acquire information, stores information in the brain cells,
has systems to distribute needed nourishment (food, oxygen), reproduces
itself when coupled with another body, defends itself against disease,
etc. Why does God need or want such a thing?

What good are any of these bodily systems to an omnipotent being? (He
doesn't need eyes to see, does he?)

Why does God need our "mother in heaven" to produce spirits? If both
God and "mother in heaven" have physical bodies, why don't their
reproductive activities produce bodies, instead of spirits?

In most religions, the rituals are conducted by a priest wearing
priestly robes, with the worshippers dressed in ordinary clothing. But
in the Mormon temple it's just the opposite: the worshippers wear
the "robes of the priesthood" and the ones conducting the rituals
are dressed in ordinary clothing (white, to be sure, but still just
ordinary clothing). Isn't this backwards?

What is the purpose or symbolic meaning of the little string that
connects the men's temple cap to the shoulder of the temple robe?

Mormon boys are usually ordained to the Aaronic priesthood at
age twelve and hold offices in that priesthood until they are
about eighteen, when they are ordained to the higher Melchizedek
priesthood. But boys who hold the Aaronic priesthood are never taught
the first and second "signs" or "tokens" of the Aaronic priesthood,
nor are they allowed to wear the robe of the Aaronic priesthood. They
only receive these things after they are ordained to the Mechizedek
priesthood, in the temple endowment. Why aren't Aaronic priesthood
holders given those things?

D&C 129 gives a test by which you can know whether someone claiming
to be an angel from God is telling you the truth: you offer to shake
his hand, and if you can feel his hand, that proves he is an angel. So
if I walk up to you and tell you I am an angel from God and I have a
message for you, and you shake my hand, I will pass the test. Isn't
that rather stupid?

The Book of Mormon mentions a harlot named Isabel (Alma 39:3). "Isabel"
is a name that only came into use in France and Italy during the late
middle ages.  How could it occur in the Book of Mormon during Alma's
life? (Of course, this is only one of hundreds of anachronisms in
the Book of Mormon.)

D&C 137:7 says that all those who die without having heard the gospel
will automatically inherit the celestial kingdom. Why then is it
necessary to do temple work for them, the purpose of which is to
enable them to enter the celestial kingdom?

The early Christians (except for Paul's Gentile converts) continued to
practice Judaism (Acts 2:46), circumcising, avoiding unclean foods and
not eating with Gentiles. The agreement between the Jerusalem apostles
(Peter, James, et al.)  and Paul seems to have been that Gentile
converts did not need to practice Judaism, but that converts from the
House of Israel did. Since most modern Mormons, by revelation in their
patriarchal blessings, are of the "house of Israel," why do they not
observe those requirements (circumcision, Jewish dietary rules, etc.)?

God revealed the "Word of Wisdom" (D&C 89) as a health guide for the
Saints.  Why did he not mention the necessity of boiling questionable
water, avoiding excessive salt, avoiding obesity, washing hands after
voiding? Instead he recommends tobacco as a poultice for bruises.
Many utterances by Mormon prophets and apostles in the past are now
disregarded by the modern church, with the explanation that those men
were merely expressing a personal opinion, or suggesting an idea on
their own, without intending it to be taken as the Word of God. And yet
today's prophets and apostles urge Mormons to accept their utterances
(especially in General Conference) as divinely inspired. Why don't
the modern prophets label each utterance as "in my personal opinion"
or "thus saith the Lord" so as to avoid future confusion?

At D&C 35:8-9 God says that "all those who believe on my name" will
be able to heal the sick if they "ask it in my name in faith." (See
also 84:68.) But 42:44 says that when Mormons are sick they should
call at least two elders, who are to pray and lay hands on the sick
(presumably to effect healing, although the passage says that they
might die anyway). Mormon tradition emphasizes that it is holders of
the Melchizedek priesthood who should anoint the sick with consecrated
oil and bless them, using the power of the priesthood. If any faithful
Mormon (including non-priesthood holders such as women) can heal the
sick, why is priesthood authority required? How is it better? Does
God pay more attention to the blessing of two elders than to the
prayer of a concerned and devout mother? And why does the oil make a
difference? It isn't even mentioned in Mormon scripture as necessary
or helpful for healing the sick.

In 1978 the president of the church (Spencer W. Kimball) received
a revelation which reversed over a hundred years of church practice
and doctrine. Until then, black members were not allowed to hold the
Mormon priesthood, nor could black members receive the endowment or
be married for eternity in the temple. Any trace of Negro ancestry
was a bar, however worthy they otherwise might have been. In the
announcement of the revelation (the revelation itself has never been
published, only the fact that it was received) at D&C OD-2, the First
Presidency said that the revelation came as a result of their having
"pleaded long and earnestly [with God]..., spending many hours in the
Upper Room of the Temple, supplicating the Lord for divine guidance."

Two questions arise:

1) Why would the church leaders be pleading for God to reverse one
of his doctrines?

2) Are the Brethren similarly spending hours in the temple pleading
for God to grant the priesthood to faithful women? And to remove all
stigma from homosexual members, even those who are in permanent,
loving relationships with a partner of the same sex?

I'm sure there are more unasked questions, but that's enough for now.
Please suggest any other question that you don't think anyone else
has asked....

Comments? (Please, no preaching, testimonies, or hate mail!) Write:
< packham@teleport.com > [born circa 1931, he's probably dead]