Steven Harper's Testimony

[_Daniel Peterson]

I'm particularly happy about this new entry on "Mormon Scholars Testify," which, in my opinion, represents an unusually important statement by one of the rising stars in Mormon historiography:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/2065/steven-c-harper

[_Polygamy-Porter]

I read his entry.

Several points stand out for me.

...I know that the Book of Mormon is true because I feel the Holy Spirit when I read it and abide by its precepts.

He knows because he feels?

The Book of Mormon makes me a better father and husband, a better follower of Jesus Christ. I know that about it.

I have always been puzzled by this seemingly rote statement from members. How does reading this book make a man a better father and husband?


He acknowledges the defectors, which I think is good.

I am deeply saddened by reports of Saints losing their faith after becoming conscious of one or more controversial issues of the Mormon past.

Then he goes on to say

I believe. I choose to believe....

It boils down to just that. A choice to believe or not to believe what Joseph Smith wrote.

[_Rambo]

haha I thought this was the Prime Minister of Canada. I was thinking why the heck would Steven Harper have a testimony in this website when he is not even a Mormon.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Wait until I post Pierre Trudeau's testimony.

[_Polygamy-Porter]

Wait until I post Pierre Trudeau's testimony.

If you mean the 15th Prime Minister of Canada who died a Catholic, may I ask when his necro baptism and temple work were done and who did he appear to and give his testimony?

[_Rambo]

by the way Steven Harper is in town and I drive by his house all the time. My family and I were going to go caroling to his house the other night but he was not home. There is always four cars around his house with body guards in them and a van that monitors the cameras out on his drive way.


Oh funny story one time steven harper called my house and asked if my parents were home. (I thought he said that is it was Brother Harker) I said to him no they are at the temple right now. He was like ok..... Then he said well I am calling for them to vote for me for the leadership of the conservative party. Then I was like ok.... (what the heck was he talking about and why was brother harker asking for votes). That night on the national news Stephen Harper was being interviewed and I recognized his voice. I then told my parents that he called for them today. My dad asked what did you tell him. I said I told him you were at the temple! We all had a good laugh :)

[_moksha]

Wait until I post Pierre Trudeau's testimony.

Get Garry Trudeau too. Adding the testimonies of Duke, Honey and Zonker from the world of Doonesbury would show these Mormon critics a thing or two.

[_Inconceivable]

I'm particularly happy about this new entry on "Mormon Scholars Testify," which, in my opinion, represents an unusually important statement by one of the rising stars in Mormon historiography:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/2065/steven-c-harper

Here are some hi-lights:

1)"There is much that I do not know".

2) "I do not know how to understand plural marriage".

3) "I have studied the complicated historical record of it diligently and there is very much that remains unclear".

4) "I don’t know exactly how to understand D&C section 132".

5) "I don’t know what to make of the problematic letter purportedly from Joseph Smith to Nancy Rigdon".

6) "I recently gave a talk at a leadership meeting. My topic was historical issues with which Saints sometimes struggle. I catalogued the historical problems, briefly describing each. While describing the received wisdom on plural marriage, I had a distinct and undeniable thought that came from outside me. “You do not know what you are talking about,” it said. It was right. I do not know how to think about plural marriage."

Here is a man who is honest in his heart and is willing to admit it. If one of the "scholars" still can't draw a moral conclusion after years of studying Smith's deplorable behavior, who can?

7) "I continue to thoroughly examine the historical record, seeking light and truth by study and also by faith".

I think his bosses ought to consider giving his priestcraft payments an extra zero to keep him lulled and pacified. They put these poor guys in a position where they are ruined if they follow their conscience.

"I do know, as a result of that process, that Helen Kimball and Lucy Walker both left testimonies that Joseph did not exploit them, and that they both testified that they received their own revelations, as Joseph invited them to do, before being sealed to him".

Steven, Let me help you understand why you're having troubles here:

A mistress always seems to find some justification for breaking up a legal marriage. What mistress would be willing to admit she was duped into carrying on an adulterous relationship with a married man? Regardless, who in their right mind would give a home wrecker credibility? Besides, you're getting a statement from the wrong woman. How did Joseph Smith's wife Emma feel? We know how she felt, don't we?

"Those who knew Joseph best believed him most. The historians who edit the Prophet’s papers believe. Many of the historians who know the historical record best are firm in the faith. They believe."

Once again, Emma Smith is conveniently omitted from the list of those that knew him most. It is telling, how very seperate Mormon couples are in their communications and relationship with each other - That a man's boy friends and mistresses are more intimate with him than his only legal helpmeet. This statement should make any man that keeps secrets from his wife feel duplicitous, pathetic and unworthy of her.

Or did Emma just not understand Joseph and the stress and pressures that an important social architect must endure? Isn't she required to take one for the team? Yeah, right. Heard it before from John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Rudolf Juliani.. and that guy who told an inconvenient truth (in this case, just the wrong inconvenient truth).

Good luck.

[_drdrfor]

Stephen Harper writes, quite succinctly:

I believe. I choose to believe....

At last, not a statement of what someone "knows" as in similar testimonies, but stated as the choice that it is. Ultimately we all choose to believe or choose to disbelieve.

We sort things in our minds, things we believe, things we don't. Facts often have little to do with these decisions. Or rather, we sift and sort through facts to find the ones that appeal to us.

I'll leave to others to reflect upon the "why" behind our choices.

[_kairos]

Mr. Harper's testimony is to me agonizing- like a scientific paper for the engineering physics Phd's at MIT.

He tries so hard to make things fit from a scientist's perspective and that's OK ;he can believe what he chooses to believe.

I would bet a year's tithing (his ) that had he been born irish catholic in boston, being a Mormon would NEVER be a variable in the equation of his life, even if his catholicity lapsed.

I think that would be true as well for many of the "scholars" who testify to the truthfulness of the Mormon gospel on MST.

I sense an internal "struggle" by Harper and others
to "believe" the Mormon gospel-seems as if they are "white knuckling" to believe.
Jesus tells us when the Son of man sets you free, you are truly free!

for what it's worth that's how i have felt every minute for the last 25 years when I gave my life to Christ as both Savior and Lord!


k