• Ness Lipa

    <3

  • LeticiaVelasquez

    Fascinating journey which proves that from the greatest evil, can come the greatest good. Jeff has had me on his show and I knew part of his journey from Mormonism, but this interview filled in the important details. Well done.

  • Sue Meissner

    Not convincing testimony. Jeff was very young and did not understand the Mormonism in many ways. Very hard to convince faithful LDS that Jeff’s arguments are valid since they are based on basic tenant errors. One blatant error is that Mormonism is pure emotionalism. But then applauds the rosary. Huh? To non Catholics, nothing is more emotionalism than Catholic devotions. In LDS culture ’emotionalism’ is called a testimony from the Holy Spirit who witnesses the truthfulness of all things. I am sorry Jeff was met with bigotry by neighbors but I can imagine members looking down on behavior that destroys families and ruins children’s lives as it did in this case. Like driving off a cliff and being surprised by those on the sidelines yelling at you how stupid that act is. I am glad Jeff has found a religion he can relate to. Sometimes a good break from childhood heartache with the resultant blame on religion is warranted. Still waiting for a good, well ‘catechized’ LDS conversion to Catholicism to be aired.

    • Cam Davis

      I’m not Catholic, but I am Eastern Orthodox. I was raised LDS, knew my faith, and even studied under Phil Barlow, one of the top Mormon scholars in the world. Let me know if you ever want to talk.

      • Sue Meissner

        Maybe you know more about Mormonism than Jeff so you are aware of the misinterpretation of the faith. He never learned truth discernment by the Holy Spirit whch he calls emotionalism.

        Catholism has many noble aspects: Beautiful liturgy, long history, gorgeous religious art, but I believe Mormonism has more, with 530 additional pages that talk, preach, and testify of Christ. Who wants fewer not more words of Christ? I would find it hard to go back to less truth. Akin to relying soley on the Torah (first five books of the Old Testament) when the New Testament adds so much truth. THAT is the argument you need to make to Mormons from their perspectve why less scripture (sola biblia) is better than more ( Bible, Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants, living prophets and apostles). Sure, you could argue that the additional scripture is false but I have repeatedly put it to the test and found it inspired.

        Also, the anti Mormon slurs on EWTN really are a turn off. President Hinckley, LDS President and Prophet, said to non Mormons, ‘ Bring the good you have and see if we can add to it” That is the true spirit of evangelization, of Christ like conversion. I hope the Coming Home Network would not stoop to the level of religion bashing as they do with Mormonism. I do not hear that tactic with Anglican, Muslim, or Jewish converts….trashing their former religion to elevate Catholicism. If Catholcism cannot stand on its sole merits, then maybe it is wanting.

        • Cam Davis

          “He never learned truth discernment by the Holy Spirit whch he calls emotionalism.”

          In fairness to Jeff, I live and work in Utah and the way Mormons talk about their faith is often very emotion-based. Their testimonies are rooted in feelings they experienced. These same narratives were the norm among those I grew up around in Idaho.

          “… with 530 additional pages that talk, preach, and testify of Christ.
          Who wants fewer not more words of Christ?”

          More is not necessarily better. It is more important for one to ask whether or not the Book of Mormon actually contains divinely inspired words, or the words of Jesus, and whether the Book of Mormon
          contributes anything valuable and substantial to the Christian documents and traditions that already exist. I personally find nothing profound in the Book of Mormon that isn’t already presented in the Bible or early Christian tradition.

          “THAT is the argument you need to make to Mormons from their perspectve why less scripture (sola biblia) is better than more ( Bible, Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants, living prophets and apostles). Sure, you could argue that the additional scripture is false but I have repeatedly put it to the test and found it inspired.”

          Some people find the Bagavad Gita inspired. Some people find the Koran inspired (many more people than find the Book of Mormon inspired, in fact). What is needed in these conversations is not appeals to subjective experiences, but epistemological considerations, critical assessments of the texts on historical, philosophical, scientific, and theological levels, and the provenance of the ideas presented in those texts. For example, no matter how inspired one thinks the Book of Mormon is, one can’t get around the fact that it presents a very 19th century American flavor of Christ-narrative (this alone can explain why Americans who think like Americans like it so much), and fails the test of historical and archaeological analysis. This is why Mormons like Greg Prince are moving away from a historical view of the Book of Mormon in favor of an allegorical interpretation. The problem with this approach, however, is that the LDS Church has always claimed the Book of Mormon to be a historical record about Jewish peoples who came to the Americas. Moving away from this perspective would severely undermine the LDS institution’s authority, but they have survived similar setbacks
          in the past (polygamy, blacks and the priesthood).

          • Sue Meissner

            One needs epistemological to gain a testimony? Tell me which Biblical person encountering God engaged with critical analysis? Which Catholic religious divined anything sacred through reason? That is pure pagan philosophy mingled with early Christianity. Christ rejected the educated elites of his day. He chose the most simple men who were teachable. Sorry, but Catholicism seems to have an arrogance of educated elitism as somehow proof that the church is true. Yet, Saint Faustina, Padre Pio, Theresa of the little flower, Theresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, St Catherine of Sienna never related logical, rational, epistemological encounters with Christ. So, it would be very easy to see how simple Joseph Smith could experience an epiphany as well.

            Sorry you desire no further light and knowledge about Christ. What is the purpose of this life? What is the clear purpose of the Atonement? How does it work? Why was it necessary? What happens to unbaptized children? How to judge the truthfulness of all things? Who is the Holy Spirit? Christ’s relationship to “other sheep”. The unique importance of Isaiah. How to plant and grow the seed of faith? Temporal vs Spiritual death? Who qualifies for resurrection? Difference between resurrection and salvation. Why death? What happens after death? Our relationship to God and to Christ. How do God and Christ differ? How are they the same? The nature and the modus operendi of Satan. Just a few topics discussed clearly in the Book of Mormon.

            You say few read the Book of Mormon and compare it to the Koran or other Eastern writings. In what way do those testify that Jesus Christ is literally the Son of God? That he was born of a virgin, was baptized, preached, and was crucified thereby the atonement could be accomplished for the sins of mankind. Our salvation comes through Jesus Christ is what Mormonism teaches. The Book of Mormon IS that Testimony.

            You may wish to read Catholic and Mormon by Stephen Webb and Alanzo Gaskill. That will help you see the rich doctrines that are similar and those that differ between Mormonism and Catholicism. We can only hold discussions if accuracy and respect are shared.