Bad Cavalry Apologetics - Part 3: Book of Mormon Witnesses

-

More articles from this series:
Part 1
Part 2

Mormon antagonist and Cavalry Admin Travis Anderson presents arguments for the credibility of the Three and Eight Witnesses of the Book of Mormon. His analysis responds to Michael Licona and Gary Habermas's 'A Case for the Resurrection of Jesus,' which compares Mormon witnesses to Jesus's resurrection witnesses.

Though Anderson correctly identifies this as a false comparison, his commentary on Bart Ehrman's remarks about the Book of Mormon witnesses reveals an inconsistency. He selectively applies rigorous criticism to Licona and Habermas but not to Ehrman, reflecting a pattern in LDS apologetics where evidence standards shift based on their alignment with LDS truth claims.

Anderson states:

"None of those that left the church ever retracted or recanted their testimonies they continued to validate and verify what they had seen especially with the three Witnesses two of the witnesses Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris rejoined the church later on in life."

This argument contains 3 key logical fallacies:

1. Non Sequitur: Maintaining testimony about a religious text after leaving its organization does not validate the original testimony. Persistence of belief does not establish truth.

2. Special Pleading: Anderson applies inconsistent credibility standards by:

  • Omitting that seven of eleven witnesses were excommunicated
  • Failing to address how excommunications affect his argument
  • Dismissing testimony from excommunicated LDS critics (the Tanners, Dehlin, Runnels) while affirming other apostates testimony as legitimate
3. Denying the Antecedent: Anderson's implicit reasoning follows the flawed structure below.

  • If testimonies were false, witnesses would recant upon leaving
  • Witnesses did not recant
  • Therefore, testimonies must be true

Example of this in a formal expression:

  1. If P then Q (If false → would recant)
  2. Not Q (Did not recant)
  3. Therefore not P (Therefore not false/must be true)

NOTE: (As a general rule, I do not recommend or point people to CES Letter despite this infographic's reference to it, for additional reading on issues with the witnesses please see this article instead)

In conclusion, Anderson's selective emphasis on Cowdery and Harris rejoining the church, while omitting discussion of the majority who were excommunicated, demonstrates a concerning pattern of cherry-picking evidence to support what seem to be predetermined conclusions.

Popular posts from this blog

Examining the bad fruits of Robert S. Boylan

-
Image
Recently, Mormon blogger-apologist Robert Boylan ( aka - ' Scriptural Mormonism ' ) took the opportunity to make some inflammatory remarks regarding Ex-Mormon Evangelical Micah Wilder, who had been part of the Christian musical ministry group geared towards Mormons & Ex-Mormons, known as Adam's Road.  Last month, Wilder confessed on his website to years of unrepentant sin during his time in the group and is no longer participating in ministry. A few brief points: 1. As awful as the situation is for all involved, confession of that sin is both biblical & appropriate. 2. I hope that Micah belongs to a solid church, that practices both membership & church discipline and are actively praying for & walking alongside him through a biblical process of repentance & restoration to the body. ( Please , be in prayer for them! )  7/30/24 Update: It seems as though he is not seeking to repent at this time, which is rather worrying. 3. Whenever circumstances as t...
Read more

Refuting Connor Smith & FAIRMormon on alleged False Prophecies in the Bible

-
Image
Last week, a follower notified me of this post in the Somewhat Civil Christian Debates FaceBook group by their Mormon moderator: In this article, we are going to explore Smith's arguments & whether or not they hold any water under scrutiny, and I shall do my best to respond point by point. First , I'd like to point out that Smith is not giving credit to his source for these allegations of false prophecies in the Bible.  The content of Smith's forthcoming arguments originates (almost verbatim) from this  FAIRMormon / LDS article  and if one takes the time to compare the two, it is rather plain to see that he is well... plagiarizing his peers arguments here. Of course, Smith is free to do as he pleases on the internet. However I cannot help but wonder, why he didn't bother to just drop the link & point people to the relevant sections to read it for themselves? But I digress.  Those of us who are not believing members of the Mormon religion, may already be famil...
Read more

Mormon apologetics: Appeals to theosis critically examined

-
Image
Theosis or Apotheosis: Which is it? Have you ever talked to a Mormon, either online or in person who quoted one of the early church fathers to support their belief that they can become a god in the next life?  If so, you're likely already aware that Mormons believe in a doctrine called ' eternal progression ', and when speaking with Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox or Protestants/Evangelicals they will often claim that such a doctrine was taught by the early church fathers in their literature (Patristics), and is best known today as ' theosis '. This is then usually followed up with one or more quotations that in some cases, truly do seem to lend support to such a claim.  However, it must be pointed out that this is a false equivocation on the part of the Mormon and is by no means a novel tactic. ( See this excellent  article  from Fred Anson on beggarsbread.org for more information ) The definition of theosis that Mormons functionally use is actually known as apot...
Read more