For Any Latter-Day Saint: One Investigator's Unanswered Questions

Features

• Cover Type: Paperback with 397 pages
• Published by: Sharon Banister January 1, 1988
• ISBN 10 Number: 0940999307
• ISBN 13 Number: 978-0940999305

Product Review
In essence, this is a 392 page questionnaire designed to lead someone through a series of confrontations with hard, cold facts There is no doubt that For Any Latter-Day Saint is a valuable resource for anyone dealing with the issue of Mormonism and its relation to the truth. -- Rocky Mountain Christian newspaper: Book Review by Bret Carter

This book is unique in its approach. It is very well researched and documented and has been published with a very pleasing typeface which is extremely easy to read. -- The Inner Circle newspaper, (Sept 1988), Book Review by Dennis A. Wright

This work is not the run of the mill work written to expose Mormonism in a polemical way this is the classic book, outlining a gentle caring way to deal with people with whose doctrines we may disagree. -- Alan C. Mitchell, Minister, Kuna, Idaho

Product Description
400 pages -- Workbook-style. Question-And-Answer Format. A study in workbook style directed to any Latter-day Saint who will examine his beliefs and compare them with LDS documents and with the Bible. An great study for others to learn more about the Latter-day Saint beliefs.

Reader Reviews
Although this is indeed a better book than most book critical of Mormonism by an Evangelical, it still fails. Firstly, the book is, for the most part, a re-hash of Jerald and Sandra Tanners' book "Mormonism: Shadow or reality," with many of the arguments found therein being simply lifted from the Tanners' book. Additionally, her interpretations of the Bible seem to be eisegetical as opposed to exegetical, as with her interpretations of the Book of Mormon and so forth. Another criticism is that she is either intentionally deceitful or simply ignorant of how many of her charges would destroy the Bible's credibility. For example, she makes a huge deal (as do the Tanners) that Joseph Smith edited a number of revelations from the 1833 Book of Commandments. However, as Melvin Peterson pointed out, as a prophet, he was entitled to do so. That this is true is found in the Bible. Jeremiah 36:32 has Jeremiah editing his previous writings. Additionally, as with 99.9% of critics, she claims that Alma 7:10 is incorrect. However, 2 Kings 14:20 claims that the City of David (i.e. Bethleham) is "at Jerusalem." Moreover, she often claims that unfulfilled _commandments_ as false prophecies. For example, she claims D&C 84:3-5 is a false prophecy. However, (i) it is not a prophecy but a commandment that was not obeyed due to mob persecutions - see D&C 124:48-52 (also see Jeremiah 18:7-10) and (ii) verse 5 was fulfilled at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple according to the diaries of those who were at the event. She, as with the Tanners, has quotations with the context wrench out. She quotes one LDS as saying LDS do not believe in hell. However, the context was abiut the proverbial sense of hell. LDS theology does believe in hell, contrary her ignorance. Her arguments against the Book of Mormon were weak, mainly relying on a faulty though popular eisegetical interpretation of 2 Nephi 30:5, prior to the 1981 correction (see Daniel 12:10 for a proper exegetical interpretation of the Near Middle Eastern understanding of "White"), and the charge the Book of Mormon was plagiarised from Ethan Smith's "View of the Hebrews." Having read "View of the Hebrews," I am amazed why critics continue to harp over this, as the parallels are weak and contrived. Although this book is one of the best books critical of Mormonism I have come across, it has too many failings such as the above, and many more, that prevents it from being convincing.