The persuasive argument can be broken down into parts to

better understand how it works.

First you start with assumptions - statements that all people

accept as true and factual.

Next, you use these assumptions and logic to extend what

is accepted as truth, arriving at an irrefutable conclusion.

Assuming the logic is sound and the assumptions are true,

you must accept the conclusion as the truth. However, if the

assumptions are not true, no amount of flawless logic can make the

conclusion true.

Even if you use perfectly sound common sense, a conclusion

that is certain is not possible when the assumptions are not first

accepted as truthful.

With this in mind, let's suppose someone starts a persuasive

argument by saying, "Assuming the world is flat, it implies that ...."

Even if he were to use perfect logic, you would not be the

least convinced that any kind of conclusion he came to would be

anything near the truth, because you do not believe his assumption

is true - that the world is flat.

The letter assumed "that the universe and all it contains

has not always been here ... Before that point in time there was

nothing at all".

This assumption probably is accepted by most of your

readers as truthful, but Mormons do not agree with this statement.

Rather, we believe that matter is eternal. When we read in

the Bible that God "created" the world, Mormons believe it

means "formed" or "organized".

It's the same sense of the word when you say that an artist

creates a masterpiece. You do not imply that his work of art came

into existence from nothing. Rather, you mean that he has

skillfully used existing materials by organizing and forming them

into something beautiful and inspiring.

In like manner, God formed this universe with matter already

in existence, matter that is as eternal as He is.

At this moment, those reading this may be thinking that

we've reached another impasse due to differences in our respective

"interpretations" of the meaning of the Scriptures. This is not the case.

There is ample evidence that supports the idea that matter

is eternal and not created. In the much older Hebrew version of

the Old Testament what we translate as "create" in our English KJV

of the Bible is the Hebrew word "baurau" which means

organize, form or fashion.

Oxford University's Rev. Baden Powell wrote, "The idea of

'creation,' as meaning absolutely 'making out of nothing,' or

calling into existence that which did not exist before, in the

strictest sense of the term, is not a doctrine of scripture" (Cyclopaedia of

Biblical Literature).

If this notion of creation from nothing does not come from

scripture, then how is it that most Christian churches teach it?

If the intention of your reader was to include us in his

discussion of our own beliefs, he will have to use another assumption to be

convincing. It's no different than if I were to start a persuasive

argument by saying, "Assuming the Bible and the Book of

Mormon are both Holy Scripture from God, then it implies ..."

If I use sound logic, my conclusion should be convincing to

a Mormon, but would mean little to someone who did not agree

with my first assumption that the Book of Mormon is true.

The letter also used the scientific theories of relativity and

the Big Bang to substantiate its conclusion. My own

understanding of these theories is nowhere complete, but what little I do

understand supports my own beliefs about the nature of God.

I understand that relativity says that our perception of the

passage of time is subjective. How we perceive events taking place

in time depends on our speed relative to those events. Our

perception of time and space are dependent on each other. Because

they are dependent, scientists refer to them as a single thing called

space-time.

This idea, in part, led scientists to ask what would happen if

gravity were to overcome the universe's present expansion

and make it collapse. What would happen if there were a Great

Collapse of the entire universe?

Their conclusion was that space and, therefore, time would

cease as we know and measure them. In turn, their conclusions led

Stephen Hawking to propose the reverse. A great explosion: The Big Bang.

The theory concerns itself with what happens immediately

(sometimes in millionths of a second) after the big event. It does

not concern itself with what was there just before it happened, nor

with the why or how it happened.

Scientists cannot measure or observe what existed before

the Big Bang. They can only see and measure the after-effects, so

that is what they concern themselves with.

According to theory, had the temperature or speed of the

Big Bang been different in the least bit, the physical universe

would have been fundamentally different. This is why scientists

agree that a conscious intelligence is involved intimately in the

creation of our universe.

In the preface to his book "The Big Bang," Joseph Silk of

UC Berkeley writes, "It is a theory based on astronomical data,

painstakingly gathered at observatories around the world, and on

recent advances in particle physics toward an understanding of

the ultimate nature of matter. The search is far from over, and

the theory is still incomplete."

In other words, there are still many questions that the Big

Bang doesn't answer.

In fact, physicists have recently observed situations where

matter appears to travel faster than the speed of light. This is

important because Albert Einstein used the assumption that nothing

travels faster than light for his Theory of Relativity.

In the current issue of Discovery Magazine is an article

about some physicists that are questioning Einstein's entire theory

because of this one possibly flawed assumption.

The Theory of Relativity is an important part of the basis of

all our current scientific understanding of the universe. Nowhere

that I have read, do Relativity or Big Bang claim matter came

from nothing.

On a different note, the letter mentioned the Mormon phrase

"a burning in the bosom".

This is used by many Mormons to describe the sensation they

feel when the Holy Ghost is communicating with them on a

spiritual level.

From my own experiences as a young Mormon missionary

long ago and in more recent discussions with non-Mormons

about this feeling, I have not found a single person who

understood what I meant by "a burning in the bosom," yet the letter claimed

that this sensation was felt by all people of all faiths.

Instead, those with other beliefs have expressed to me their

being satisfied, content, or finding comfort from their faith. These

feelings are real and are felt by Mormons as well, but I believe are

not the same feelings we have when the Holy Ghost is telling us

that something is true.

Whatever we may say to describe our feelings when

visited by the Holy Ghost, I believe our words will always fall short.

I think what we are sensing and describing is only an

secondary effect of what is really going on inside us - a transfer of

knowledge from God to man; revelation. The experience is profound and

should be life-changing.

The writer of the letter claimed he had asked for this

knowledge, but had not received it. It is true that some do not get an

answer right away, while others seem to get their answer almost

immediately.

Brigham Young, the great western colonizer, second prophet

to the Church and successor to Joseph Smith, did not gain his

knowledge that the Church was true until he'd struggled with it for

two years.

I do not understand all of God's Will. Why one should receive

and another not receive an answer is beyond my knowledge. Why

one should receive quickly and another receive only after great

time and effort is likewise beyond my understanding.

Although this does occur, it doesn't take away from the

reality of the answers that I and millions of other Mormons have

received by the Holy Ghost.

I know God loves all people and that He wants them all to know

the truth, but He does it according to His will and not ours.

My faith is that He knows what is best for each of us and is

intimately involved in our individual searches for truth.

Mormons may not agree with many traditional Christian

beliefs, but I think there is one thing we Christians can all agree on. If

we do not know that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world and

has paid the penalty for our individual sins, then whatever else we

may have discovered won't amount to a hill of beans.

Kevin Bentley

Peachtree City

<!--##############