How CES Letter’s False Portrayals Of Mormons Influence Our Beliefs

This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice (conflictofjustice.com). Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.

A strawman argument fallacy is an effective way to place a debate opponent on the defense and attack their character. Basically, a strawman argument is a lie about someone’s beliefs or behavior. Instead of explaining what their beliefs are, the debate opponent is forced to defend themselves from the lies.

Setting The Narrative – This is something Antimormons frequently do. They twist quotes, beliefs, and historical events out of context which may portray Mormons in a way that they can more easily attack. This caricature of Mormons can’t be too different than what Mormons really are, because then it wouldn’t be convincing, but just slightly altered in a way that makes Mormonism more vulnerable to ridicule. Effective strawman arguments don’t just lie about what a person believes, they focus on the belief system as a whole to make it look evil. For example, popular media frequently brings up centuries-old issues of polygamy to attack today’s Mormon beliefs about the nuclear family. Antimormons have become extremely adept at telling people what Mormons “actually believe” which makes Mormons appear bizarre, contradictory, and scary.
 
 

“Agitation, whether spoken or written, generally focuses on one event, and one contradiction, and seeks to make a single idea powerfully clear to broad numbers of people. It is like a sharp knife seeking to expose and make raw a glaring contradiction and draw blood around it.”

(Revolution)

See also:

237 Falsehoods In CES Letter

CES Letter focuses strawman arguments on a small handful of issues which attack the Mormon belief system as contradictory. They start with contradictions about the Book of Mormon, and move on to contradictions about the Book of Abraham, then marriage, then priesthood, and then finally focus on Mormon the Mormon belief system itself. They finish with a strawman argument about why Mormons don’t believe they are a cult.

Book Of Mormon Strawman Arguments

Claims Of What The Book Of Mormon Says – These claims make it look like the scriptures contradict with each other, science, and history:

• CES Letter incorrectly claims the Joseph Smith bible translation “should match” what is in the Book of Mormon. But this ignores differences in contexts, and what Joseph Smith’s translation of the bible really was; it included clarification of meaning and prophetic commentary. Why should they match?
• CES Letter incorrectly claims the Book of Mormon quotes the italic translator’s words from the KJV bible “word for word”.
• CES Letter incorrectly calls the KJV an “edition” rather than version of the bible.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims Jesus quoted Isaiah in Matthew.
• CES Letter matches up the wrong verses of the Joseph Smith bible translation with the bible to make them look contradictory, and incorrectly claims Joseph Smith omited verses 26-27 out of 3 Nephi 13. The appropriate passages are there, CES Letter just matched the wrong verses.
• CES Letter makes a list of animals and technologies that they claim the Book of Mormon say was “available between 2200 BC-421 AD”. But the Book of Mormon mentions the elephant as existing among the Jaradites shortly after 2400 BC, but does not mention elephants any later than that. No, the Book of Mormon does not claim elephants existed 2200 BC – 421 AD. Some say the Tower of Babel was built in 2200 BC at the latest, and likely much earlier. Mammoths or Mastodons did indeed live in the Americas many thousands of years ago.
• The Book of Mormon sounds more similar to a book called View of the Hebrews because CES Letter incorrectly lists Sharon, Vermont as the location of the 1830 Book of Mormon. This is false. Joseph Smith was born in Vermont, but the Book of Mormon was first published in Palmyra New York, a good distance away.
• The Book of Mormon sounds more similar to the book View of the Hebrews because CES Letter misrepresents what the Book of Mormon and this other book say. For example, they say it talks about America as “an unihabited land” and “a valley of a great river.”
• The Book of Mormon sounds more similar to a book called Late War because CES Letter likewise misrepresents what the Book of Mormon and this other book say.
• The Book of Mormon sounds more similar to a book called First Book Of Napoleon because CES Letter likewise misrepresents what the Book of Mormon and this other book say.
• CES Letter claims “2,000,000 people” died at Hill Cumorah, but doesn’t mention that most of them died in Jaradite times which was many thousands of years ago. CES Letter incorrectly claims the Nephite sand Lamanites “numbered in the millions.”
• Maps in CES Letter misrepresent both Book of Mormon geography and the geography of Joseph Smith’s New England region. The maps invent geography that isn’t there. This incorrectly makes it seem like we ought to have enough detail to pin down the Nephite civilization to any one archaeological location.
• CES Letter claims the “Book of Mormon taught and still teaches a Trinitarian view of the Godhead.” But Mormon doctrine has always said Jesus is the fullness of the Father, the creator of everything physical, the Father of salvation, the character of the Eternal Father, and One God with the Father and Holy Spirit, just as the Book of Mormon says. There is nothing in the Book of Mormon that differs from or contradicts other Mormon sources.
• CES Letter says Joseph Smith used a seer stone for translating. This is a common myth (thank you South Park), but Mormons never claimed that this is how the Book of Mormon was produced. CES Letter can’t back up their claim that he “used the exact same method” to translate as he did to locate “buried treasure,” as the two are totally different activities. This strawman argument is a key “big lie” about Mormons, so they back up this claim with further lies that Joseph Smith supposedly translated “while the gold plates were covered or put in another room or buried in the woods”.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims Joseph Smith did not talk to anyone about the First Vision before 1823, and publishes a chart that is riddled with falsehoods about the First Vision accounts to make them look contradictory.

Claims Of Book Of Mormon Archaeology – CES Letter also misrepresents what experts and Mormon scholars say about the Book of Mormon to make Mormon beliefs appear contradictory:
CES Letter incorrectly claims “Joseph Smith and other prophets have taught” that Hill Cumorah was in New York and that “apologists are coming up with” the theory that instead “it happened in Central or South America”. There could be multiple locations called Cumorah. Joseph Smith never taught that Cumorah was in New York. Other prophets have not contradicted the theory that the Cumorah battle did not take place in New York, apart from a few speculative writings in much later years. CES Letter uses the present tense “are coming up with”, as if the theory is currently being developed and hasn’t been around for over a century, which it has.
CES Letter references an alleged LDS archaeologist named Thomas Ferguson. From what I could find, Thomas Stuart Ferguson helped found the NWAF as a fundraiser, but it only became a subset in BYU’s anthropology and archaeology division, and he was quickly replaced when BYU acquired it.

Book Of Abraham Strawman Arguments

Claims Of What The Book Of Abraham Says – The narrative makes it look like the scriptures contradict with each other and science:
CES Letter takes an idiom, “by his own hand,” literally . Joseph Smith didn’t mean that this was the specific piece of paper that Abraham wrote on. There is a comma between “written by his own hand” and “upon papyrus.” This is writing from Abraham and it appears on a papyrus.
For each Facsimile from the Book of Abraham, the diagrams in CES Letter list “Joseph Smith’s interpretation” opposite a “Modern Egyptological Interpretation,” falsely suggesting they should be the same. Why would they be the same? Joseph Smith did not literally translate the symbols or words but gave their meaning in a different context. In fact, he made it perfectly clear that there was the Abraham context and then there was the Egyptian context: “in this case, in relation to this subject, the Egyptians meant…” Different case. Different subject. Different meaning.
The diagram in CES Letter misplaces where figure #11 is, the “pillars of heaven”.
CES Letter incorrectly claims that pencil markings behind the papyrus and the final engraving were “penciled in by Joseph Smith and his associates.” Joseph Smith wasn’t an engraver and it is unlikely he made the pencil markings as they are different than the engraving that he approved.
The diagram in CES Letter incorrectly claims Joseph Smith gave no annotation for figures 22 and 23. Yes, he did.
The diagram in CES Letter incorrectly misspells “its” as “it’s” in Joseph Smith’s interpretation for Figure 6 Facsimile 2, making Joseph Smith sound confusing. CES Letter incorrectly claims Figure 7, the Egyptian god Min, “is Heavenly Father” according to Joseph Smith. No, Joseph Smith never said that. Actually, he made it clear the Egyptian context was different, and never calls this figure Heavenly Father.
The diagram in CES Letter identifies Figure 2 Facsimile 3 by the writing above the character Isis’s hand “Isis the great, the god’s mother.” But Joseph Smith was concerned with “the characters above his head” not the writing above the hand.
CES Letter incorrectly claims 86% of certain chapters in the Book of Abraham “are quotations or close parahrases of King James wording.” Actually, they are very different, and if anything the Bible appears to be a paraphrasing of the Book of Abraham text.
CES Letter incorrectly characterizes cosmology in the Book of Abraham as Newtonian, and incorrectly characterizes modern science as debunking Newtonian physics.
CES Letter incorrectly says the Book of Abraham claims the sun “gets its light” from a star named Kolob. But the Facsimile says this is what Egyptians believed, not what Abraham or Joseph Smith believed.
The Book of Abraham sound more similar to the book Philosophy of a Future State because CES Lettermisrepresents what the Book of Abraham and this other book say. For example, they say it talks about intelligences populating stars and the universe revolving around the throne of God.
CES Letter quotes a BBC News clip that takes a quote by Elder Jeffrey R. Holland totally out of context, clip out much of his explanation, and falsely implies that he provided no further explanation about the Book of Abraham translation.
CES Letter claims the LDS church “conceded” that “Joseph’s translations of the papyri and the facsimiles do not match what’s in the Book of Abraham.” But Joseph Smith did not translate the recovered papyri into the Book of Abraham and the church never claimed he did. CES Letter misrepresents what the church says in their essay.

Marriage Strawman Arguments

Character Attacks – Previous strawman arguments made scripture appear contradictory. A few character attacks were slipped in with those–such as the alleged Book of Mormon parallels that involved racist ideas such as “Righteous Indians vs. savage Indians,” which leads us to associate the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith with racism. In the section on Polygamy and marriage, CES Letter attacks Joseph Smith’s character:

• Sealing and civil marriage are two different things. Joseph Smith’s sealings did not involve physical relations if they were for “eternity only.” CES Letter‘s claim that “The Church now admits the polyandry” is false. They claim, “Church historian Elder Marlin K. Jensen and unofficial apologists like FairMormon do not dispute the polyandry.” This is false. It was not polyandry. It is easy to tell salacious tales of sordid affairs with married women, but CES Letter provides zero evidence that Joseph Smith’s sealing to married women was the same thing as marriage. This false equivilence with “marriage” is carried to further character attacks throughout CES Letter.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims “The Church now admits that Joseph Smith married Helen Mar Kimball.” They never admit this. They say she was “sealed to Joseph,” not married, an important difference of words.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims Joseph Smith “married” foster daughters. The premise of this argument is a flat-out lie. They were not foster daughters and it is a false equivelance to call it “marriage.”
• CES Letter claims these were “young girls.” Some were 17 years old, but Eliza Partridge was 22 years old. By 19th century standards, they were not very young.
• CES Letter incorrectly characterizes D&C 132 as disregarding the consent of women.
• CES Letter uses present tense grammar that mischaracterizes obsolete commandments as still applicable. Polygamy today is banned.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims “the only prerequisite that is mentioned for the man is that he must desire another wife.” Actually there were important prerequisites. CES Letter claims D&C 132 doesn’t say revelation from a living prophet is needed regarding polygamy. Actually, it says that quite clearly.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims plural marriages were “rooted in the notion of sealing for both time and eternity.” The “new and everlasting covenant,” or eternal sealing was different than civil marriage and did not involve physical relations. Marriage for time and sealing for eternity were separate. This strawman argument is a key “big lie” about Mormons.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims Joseph Smith was sealed prior to Elijah’s coming in 1836.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims “polygamy is permitted only ‘to multiply and replenish the earth’ and ‘bear the souls of men.'” But this was not the only reason polygamy was permitted.
• CES Letter claims Joseph Smith was “denying he was a polygamist” in D&C 101 and “public sermons.” But Joseph Smith did not deny polygamy in the way he was practicing it. D&C 101 was published before polygamy started, and it wasn’t even written by Joseph Smith.
• CES Letter claims polygamy was kept secret until 1852, but it was pretty common knowledge by then.
• CES Letter claims Joseph Smith got “his buddies” to sign an affidavit “stating that Joseph did not practice polygamy”, but this affidavit had nothing to do with Joseph Smith. It was signed by the Relief Society, not his “buddies,” polygamy wasn’t a “rule or system” yet, and these signers weren’t “witnesses.”
• CES Letter claims Joseph Smith was lying to “the world” about polygamy “over the course of 10+ years.” But Joseph Smith was murdered in 1844 (by Antimormons), and there is no evidence of eternal sealings or polygamy before 1836. That’s only 8 years, if he were lying.
• A graph in CES Letter quotes from the law of Moses in Leviticus. But that doesn’t apply. CES Letter claims “Warren Jeffs is more closely aligned to Joseph Smith Mormonism than the LDS Church is” because of the fake similarities that they repeat. The graph incorrectly claims Fanny Alger was only 16 when the alleged sealing occured. It uses sillouttes of young-looking girls with modern-day haircuts are used in the place of 1800’s adult women, and assigns numbers to the women (Wife #1, Wife #2, etc) instead of potraying them as people.

Priesthood Strawman Arguments

Attack On Spiritual Authority – Next, the focus in on the Mormon priesthood and our belief that we have authority to act in God’s name. CES Letter makes behavior by priesthood leaders look further outlandish and associates immoral behavior with the role as priesthood leaders:
CES Letter takes a snippet of quote out of context to misportray Brigham Young’s teachings about Adam. CES Letter claims: “I was told that Brigham Young was acting as a man when he taught that Adam is our God.” I’m not sure who told him that, but it isn’t true. Mormons don’t believe Brigham Young taught Adam is our God, as a “man” or prophet.
CES Letter incorrectly claims Brigham Young taught that “a person’s blood had to be shed to atone for their own sins as it was beyond the atonement of Jesus Christ.” CES Letter omits portions of the sermon which clarify that the unpardonable sin is a separate issue from contrition through sacrifice. He never said sins which required the “blood of the man” wouldn’t be covered by the atonement of Jesus Christ. Brigham Young did say there was an unpardonable sin, but he never said that the unpardonable sin required the blood of the man.CES Letter is mixing two separate issues.
CES Letter claims: “The Church now confirms in its May 2014 essay that Blood Atonement was taught by the prophet Brigham Young.” But all the church confirms in that essay is: “leaders taught that some sins were so serious that the perpetrator’s blood would have to be shed in order to receive forgiveness.”
CES Letter claims church leaders lacked discernment to know Antimormon murderer Mark Hofmann’s “embaressing documents” about the church were forgeries. But the priesthood does not give people the power to read minds and tell if a piece of paper is a forgery. Why should they? Physical historical items do not verify or pose a “grave threat” to the church, as faith is not built on relics.
CES Letter claims “I was told that Brigham Young was acting as a man when he taught” the alleged Adam-God theory. But Brigham Young made it clear when he was speaking as a prophet, statesman, or if he was just “reckoning” his personal opinion. I’m not sure who told CES Letter that, but it isn’t true. Mormons don’t believe Brigham Young taught Adam is our God, as a man or prophet.
CES Letter says Joseph Smith was duped into translating a hoax set of metal plates, called the Kinderhook Plates. But Joseph Smith never gave a translation, he only remarked on the similarity of some characters with the Egyptian papers.
CES Letter says church leaders thought the Kinderhook plates were authentic. But hurch historians have always doubted that the Kinderhook plates were authentic. CES Letter‘s quote by skeptic Richard Bushman is without merit and is false: “Church historians continued to insist on the authenticity of the Kinderhook plates until 1980.” Regarding the hoax plates, CES Letter incorrectly calls the church’s drawings of the plates “facsimiles.” The church did not use this term. CES Letter uses this term to build false association between the Book of Abraham and the Kinderhook Plates.

Belief System Strawman Arguments

Attack On Faith & Knowledge – With doubts about scripture, marriage, and priesthood introduced, CES Letter finally focuses on the Mormon system of faith and knowledge. Our method for gaining knowledge begin to appear like superstition, and we doubt inspiration of the Holy Ghost. We feel ashamed of the fruit of the tree of knowledge that we have tasted. Many of these strawman arguments reference back to earlier arguments:

• CES Letter portrays the Mormon “testimony” as being based on feelings. God’s method of revealing truth is not through feelings. The whole point of life is not to have knowledge but to gain faith by discovering knowledge.
• CES Letter complains that all religions don’t believe the exact same thing, but what person on earth believes exactly the same thing as someone else? “This is God’s model and standard of efficiency?” Well, why should everybody in the world have to be Mormon?
• CES Letter perpetuates a common myth that D&C 8 was about a divining rod that Oliver Cowdery supposedly used to find treasure. D&C 8 was never about a divining rod. Mormons do not believe in such superstition.
• CES Letter incorrectly portrays testimonies as statements of what you “know is true.” But a testimony can be only what a person believes or hopes for. Who is CES Letter to tell me what my testimony has to be? A testimony is not a pre-written script or repeated prayer. It is simply a public explanation of one’s belief.
• CES Letter says they felt the “Spirit” while watching R-rated movies. Well, so? Mormons never claimed there was no truth in R-rated movies or anything that can teach good principles. What matters is how the content is portrayed and the message it gives.
• CES Letter says Lion King must be a true story if you feel the “Spirit” while watching it. But Mormons never claimed a story must be true if it teaches morals that are confirmed by the Spirit.
• CES Letter complains that people get inspiration “to marry this person or go to this school or move to this location or startup this business in this investment,” and it sometimes ends in disaster. Why would the Spirit’s inspiration end in disaster? Skeptics often compare the Holy Ghost to a vending machine that we go to for blessings, or a Magic Eight Ball that we go to for answers. But Mormons go to the Spirit of God for support and help, not for free handouts or to relinquish responsibility for their life pursuits.
• CES Letter says “Joseph did not use the gold plates for translating the Book of Mormon,” presumably insinuating that Mormons believe he used a seer stone with no help from the plates themselves. This is completely false.
• Regarding the LDS temple ceremony, CES Letter quotes Mormon President Heber C. Kimball: “The Masonry of today is received from the apostasy which took place in the days of Solomon, and David. They have now and then a thing that is correct, but we have the real thing.” Did he say here that we have the exact same ceremony Solomon had? No.
• CES Letter reasons that people who see temple ceremony content on the internet ought to “get into the Celestial Kingdom” according to Mormons. But knowing signs and tokens from a Youtube video doesn’t mean anything, just as swimming in water is not a baptism. CES Letter misrepresents the function of LDS temple ordinances and what they mean.
• CES Letter incorrectly says 2 Nephi 2:22 and Alma 12:23-24 say there was no death at all on earth prior to Adam. There is no need for Mormons to “reconcile” these kinds of fake contradictions between faith and science.
• The LDS understanding of Noah’s ark is different than mainstream Christianity, and CES Letter seems to mingle the two. CES Letter seems to copy the typical atheist talking points against mainstream Christianity and assume they apply to Mormons. Skeptics typically characterize the Tower of Babel as well in a way that neither Mormons nor Mainstream Christians believe.
• CES Letter complains that in the Book of Mormon, Nephi kills “L aban for the brass plates.” The Lord did not command Nephi to kill Laban only for the brass plates, but also for the sake of self-defense, the survival of Nephi’s new civilization, and because it was legally justified.
• CES Letter complains that in the Bible, Israelites were killed by snakes if they didn’t look at the brazen serpent. Whining and ingratitude actually aren’t what the brazen serpent was about. It was a teaching moment, that the correct path for survival is simple but restrictive.
• The Law of Moses did not ban the mixing of cotton and polyester. It is an anachronism for CES Letter to claim the Hebrews had either one of these products. This law did not ban wearing two different clothings of different products, but of weaving them (they only had linen and wool at the time) together to mimic priestly robes of the temple. The law did not specify the death penalty for this infraction. CES Letter tells several lies here to incorrectly make it look like “rebellion” was defined in the Bible arbitrary and petty terms.
• CES Letter repeats the false equivelance of eternal sealings with civil marriage, as they complain Zina Jacobs was “married” to Joseph Smith and then Brigham Young.
• CES Letter uses a photo of Kirtland Temple with the phrase “Church of the Latter Day Saints” in it, as they incorrectly claim the church changed its name twice. But this sign is a creation by the RLDS splinter-sect.
• CES Letter says LDS leaders have warned against information on “the scary internet,” and warned against “daring to be balanced by looking at what both defenders and critics are saying about the Church.” Mormons never said we shouldn’t get both sides of every argument. They just warned that there is some fake news out there.
• CES Letter incorrectly claims the racial priesthood ban was “doctrine and revelation.”
• CES Letter incorrectly claims there is “zero transparency to members of the Church” about the church’s finances. They further mischaracterize how much tithing funds is given to humanitarian aid and what tithing money is spent on.
• CES Letter alleges that the church has a “Strengthening the Church Members Committee” which is “spying and monitoring” on people. This is a fake conspiracy theory.
• CES Letter says they had dismissed the idea that Mormonism was a cult, because we are good followers, do good works, and have a large population of 15 million. No, this is not why Mormons think we are not a cult.

Big Lie – This is what all of the strawman arguments lead up to: the issue of whether Mormonism is a cult. This is the singular contradiction that all of this fake evidence leads up to, that the church behaves as a cult would rather than how a true church of God would. The strawman arguments are arranged in such a way that they support each other, with a small handful of big lies as keystones for each category. To me, it appears like the Big Lies are:

1. No evidence for the Book of Mormon
2. Joseph Smith said he translated the Book of Abraham from a papyrus that we have today and is actually the Book of Breathings
3. Plural marriages always involved sealing for time and therefore were physical relationships like civil marriage.
4. Testimonies are based on feelings which could very well just be human emotion.

Progressively, the strawman arguments become more and more about the basic structure of our belief system. Through clever use of repetition and by progressing the narratives, we feel our most basic structure for faith and knowledge dismantled. The final conclusion is the issue of whether Mormons are cultists.

See also:

CES Letter vs. Nazi Propaganda Techniques

Mormons are unique and easy to indentify, and that makes us perfect targets for misportrayals of who we are. Rather than just throwing out lies and seeing what sticks, Antimormons in general have perfected the game to where one misportrayal builds on another and big lies completely dismantle our faith. It is weird to think that a propaganda piece can convince a person that they actually believe things completely different than what they believe, but that’s what Antimormonism does. A Mormon could walk away convinced that Mormons believe in the most horrible things one could imagine. It’s that effective.

(All claims in this article are personal opinion and speculation. Quotes regarding CES Letter are derived the March 2015 version of CES Letter and may not reflect more recent versions.)