I’ve noticed a few people are convinced I only believe what I believe because I have never studied anything else.
That would be a lot easier for them, I’m sure.
But no.
I’ve read outside my faith. I’ve studied Catholicism, Protestant Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and more. I’ve read arguments against my own beliefs. I’ve listened to former members, critics, apologists, scholars, ministers, priests, pastors, and people who think they have the silver bullet against Latter-day Saints.
I did not stay because I was sheltered.
I stayed because the Restoration answers questions other traditions could not answer for me with the same clarity, authority, and covenant power.
I stayed because priesthood, temple ordinances, living prophets, continuing revelation, the Book of Mormon, and the doctrine of Jesus Christ do not weaken the Bible for me. They make the whole thing burn brighter.
You can disagree with me. You can think I’m wrong. You can even spend your spare time monitoring my posts and pretending I’ve never opened a book.
But do not confuse my conviction with ignorance.
I have looked around.
I still choose Jesus Christ.
I still choose His restored gospel.
I still choose this Church.
The funniest part of Book of Abraham discourse is watching people act like Latter-day Saints have never heard the argument before.
We have.
Some of us still read it and hear God.
People who are genuinely kind are not weak.
They just learned somewhere along the way that cruelty is easy, bitterness is lazy, and softness takes real strength.
That’s fair to raise, and it’s the actual issue.
But it still doesn’t settle what you think it settles. The facsimiles are only one piece of the Book of Abraham discussion, and even critics usually know the surviving fragments do not equal the full source Joseph had.
So no, “Egyptologists disagree with the facsimile explanations” is not the same thing as “case closed.”
Joseph Smith translated an ancient record by the gift and power of God, restored Christ’s Church, brought forth priesthood keys, revealed temple ordinances, and sealed his testimony with his blood.
But sure, tell me more about your three recycled questions.
I’m not denying early Christian writings exist. I’m saying their existence doesn’t prove uninterrupted authority.
You’re still treating apostasy like it has to fit neatly between two dates. The LDS claim is that after the apostles, authority and doctrine drifted over time until a Restoration was needed. Early fathers can show development. They don’t erase the problem.
The scriptures are basically one long record of God restoring truth after people lose it.
So yes, multiple apostasies make the Restoration more necessary, not less. And Joseph Smith makes a whole lot more sense when you notice the pattern.
You’re asking for a single date because it’s easier to argue against a moment than a centuries-long drift. I’m not falling for it.
Even historians debate stages of doctrinal development, authority disputes, councils, schisms, and changes in practice. Apostasy was gradual. That’s the point.
@DanPBingham Then bring facts, not vibes.
You pre-dismissed the arguments before making one of your own, then called that intellectual honesty.
That’s not a debate, Dan. That’s a landing page with confidence issues.
@WretchedNetwork If the gospel we teach were wrong, why not just use what we actually believe? Satan has a great hold on you. Praying for your soul, Korihor.
Spends years building a platform around attacking a faith he clearly doesn’t understand, and somehow we’re supposed to believe he’s the voice of discernment. Wild way to spend a ministry.
You’ve made your master very proud, Korihor. I mean Todd.