Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
History and Religion
Is there seeming evidence against the Restoration? Sure!

Is there seeming evidence against the Restoration? Sure!

Last updated on: September 23, 2025 at 12:27 am by Dan Peterson

0 Comments

Is there seeming evidence against the Restoration? Sure! 2025-09-23T00:27:15-06:00 Dan Peterson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The St. Louis Missouri Temple (LDS.org) Alas, I don’t believe that I’ll be passing by this temple on either Tuesday or Saturday. I once attended an endowment session in it, though, with my late brother.

My Monday was exceptionally long and very busy, and I had no time whatever, none at all, to do any writing today. Not even on my blog. But I’ve made it a practice to post a daily entry on this blog, and I’m going to be traveling almost all of Tuesday. Which means that I’m likely to fall even further behind. So I’ve elected to re-post something that I wrote several years ago. I think that it’s still worthy of a read, and I still stand behind it. I’ve modified it only very slightly here from its original iteration, and nothing of substance has been changed:

“Can There Be Any Valid Criticisms of the Church?”

I saw this title (or something like it) on a Latter-day Saint-related message board. I haven’t yet read through the thread there, and I may not. But I once posted something on this subject and have been attacked ever since for what I said, by people who plainly didn’t understand what I said. So I thought, What the heck? I’ll try it again.

Yes, there can be valid criticisms of the Church. Both of the Church as an assemblage of people and of the Church as an institution.

To choose a few trivial examples:

We, as Saints, could and should be doing better at home teaching, attending the temple more often, being more active missionaries, working better at family history research, being more charitable in our behavior, being more service-oriented. (If nobody else in the Church is defective in those areas*,* I certainly am. Which means that, even if I’m the only one, the Church membership isn’t living up to its full potential.) More of our youth should be serving as missionaries. Our musical and artistic tastes might be better. Our movie-going and novel-reading preferences might be more consistent with our values, more elevated. We should ourselves generate better literature and movies and art.

As far as the Church itself goes, the Lord himself has been critical of it from time to time, as have its leaders. But here are some fairly insignificant criticisms that I myself have offered: Our art and architecture have sometimes been pretty uninspiring. Our Sunday school and other manuals have often been quite uninteresting. Our meetings are sometimes boring. (And so forth.)

(I expect that some readers will want me to share some more serious areas of disagreement with Church leaders and some weightier criticisms. I’m afraid that I’ll have to disappoint them. I’m not going to be lured into public attacks on my church. And anyway, [a] that’s not the point of this post and [b] I don’t really have any truly serious criticisms or areas of disagreement. I am, to use the silly language favored by one faction of critics, a “chapel Mormon.” Mainstream and orthodox. Not for the sake of being mainstream and orthodox but simply because that’s what I actually believe.)

Here, though, is the more serious question that some really want to ask:

Can there be any valid evidence against the Church?

To which my answer is No, there cannot.

This is the point at which some of my critics began to froth years ago, and over which some continue to wax occasionally indignant still today. So permit me to explain:

My answer presumes the Church to be true. Why? Because I believe it to be. Hence, I make that assumption and I freely admit to doing so. (The question is about my personal opinion on the matter, right?)

Since the Church is ex hypothesi true, there can be no genuine evidence that it is false. But there can be and is seeming evidence against its claims, evidence that reasonable people might well regard as genuine and damning. In the end, though, on the assumption that the claims of the Church are true, what seems to be genuine, damning evidence against it must ultimately prove not to be such.

There is evidence that parallel rails on a train track converge in the distance. However, they don’t actually converge at a distance; they remain parallel. The visual evidence that they converge proves to be illusory.

There is evidence that the Sun goes around the Earth. For millennia, close watchers of the sky thought that it did, and they had reasons for thinking so. However, we can now explain those reasons, that evidence, in other ways.

There might be evidence strongly suggesting that Frank killed Bob. But if, in fact, it was Jim who killed Bob, and not Frank, the evidence suggesting that Frank was the murderer must eventually be reinterpreted as demonstrating no such thing.

It’s in that sense that I say that there can, in the end, be no valid evidence against the claims of the Restored Church. Ultimately, you see, there can never be proof that something that is true is actually false.

Now, before closing, I need to make a few points:

I’m not advocating a closed mind. I’m not saying that I refuse to consider evidence contrary to my religious beliefs. I’m not saying that there are no substantial arguments against the Restoration that deserve consideration. I’m not saying that every objection has been answered to the satisfaction of every rational and honest mind. I’m not even saying that every objection has been answered to my own full and complete satisfaction. Anomalies and challenges remain. I am saying that my conviction that the claims of the Restored Gospel are true entails the corollary conviction that arguments against its truth are, in the end, wrong.

I hope that helps. Though I really doubt that it will help some folks in certain circles of my critics.

Good critics can be a blessing. As a grinding wheel sharpens a knife, they can (and often do) sharpen arguments and help to clarify propositions.

Incompetent critics, by contrast — e.g., those who regularly, grossly misread what their opponents say and who fail to grasp arguments and issues — are pretty much useless and a waste of time. Unfortunately, though, they’re both prolific and extremely vocal, across the web. It takes real discipline to ignore them. Discipline that I’ve too often lacked. As the saying goes, I’m a work in progress.

History and Religion

Travel and Religion

Previous Post

September 21, 2025

Perhaps I should just let sleeping dogmatists lie?

Next Post

September 23, 2025 "You really ought to give Iowa a try" (from "The Music Man")

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"I have cpnsidered in my mond if the 4 volume Saints could be made into ..."

John Pack Lambert

From Serbia’s “White City,” Belgrade

"Another class of memories are of individuals who previously lived. Some of these remembered individuals ..."

PlasmaMiasma

Accounts of Premortality?

"Sutherland's lecture sounds interesting. He seems to restate the Washington consensus that trade brings peace ..."

B. Wilson

Learning more about a region of ..."

"In a meeting today, I learned another important reason why accurate (or at least as ..."

the PROBLEM

From Serbia’s “White City,” Belgrade

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 March 2014 August 2013 February 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Philemon, what does Paul call Onesimus?

Select your answer to see how you score.

My friend My helper My very heart My brother