My beautiful, brilliant fiancée @sophie_r_nelson is making her debut as a "Catholic philosopher" on June 18th!

All Mormons had going for them was being nice, and now I’ve learned that they’re not even that lol.

Despicable.

Mormons: "Our guy won the debate!" Meanwhile, the debate:

Reviewing my Mormonism debate on @CapturingChrist with @TradVat2 tonight at 8PM EST. youtube.com/watch?v=eI8hl7pX… Just a reminder that these are *undeniable historical facts* about the foundational prophet of Mormonism: --He was a prominent diviner and necromancer whose main source of income was hunting for treasure with the seer stones that he later used to 'translate' the Book of Mormon throughout the entire period when he later claimed that he experienced the series of apparitions upon which Mormonism was based. --The consensus among Joseph's neighbors was that Joseph and his relatives were unscrupulous, disreputable, and dishonest - and that they had told lots of contradictory stories about the discovery of the golden plates. There is early, directly and indirectly corroborated, sworn testimony that he communicated with evil spirits using the stones, that he offered animal sacrifices to appease evil spirits in failed attempts to gain access to hidden treasure using the stones, etc... --Joseph Smith was arrested for his money-digging activity. The defense that he - along with friendly witnesses that testified in his defense - offered during a preliminary hearing was that Joseph *really did have magical abilities.* And he described experiences that *could not possibly be explained by a sincere mistake or genuine confusion* but are either lies, borderline psychosis, or genuinely paranormal events. --On the evening when he later claimed that he encountered the angel Moroni, Mormon friendly witnesses confirm that he had just gotten back from an unsuccessful treasure quest. Numerous, converging lines of historical evidence indicate that the *original account* he gave of the discovery of the plates involved *an evil treasure guardian* rather than a prophetic calling and an interaction with an angel and that his later accounts *gradually developed over time to include more and more religious content and to strip away the occult context.* These golden plates were supposedly the source text for the Book of Mormon. --According to Mormon friendly sources, when Mormon missionaries brought the 'Gospel' to Kirtland, a demon rampage broke out among the early Mormons and they began to engage in bizarre and erratic behavior due to demonic influence. Then, when Joseph came and tried to institute authorities to manage the demon rampage, he laid hands on a guy to ordain him as a high priest, the guy he was trying to ordain was instantly demon possessed and began convulsing. Then the demon took turns possessing everybody in the room all day and for the greater part of the night. --Throughout each phase of Joseph's prophetic ministry, basically every high-ranking member of his Church was possessed by a demon and/or deceived by a demon into promulgating false revelations in the name of God, including Joseph himself. This despite the fact that these high-ranking members claimed powers of discernment and spiritual authority over demons that were totally inconsistent with these episodes - and even several episodes contradicting authoritative revelations promulgated by Smith in canonized LDS 'Scripture.' --In the final weeks of his life, Joseph was indicted for the sex crimes of adultery and fornication. Joseph vigorously maintained his innocence until his dying breath. Even conservative LDS historians now concede that he was objectively guilty of these sex crimes since they were defined by reference to legal marriage. Two weeks after his indictment, he would incite the destruction of a printing press that told the truth about his sexual misconduct. Two weeks after that, he died in a shootout in Carthage Jail while awaiting trial.

Look, it's not rocket science. If someone sacrifices an animal to a demon during the time he's allegedly receiving divine revelation, chances are he's not from God.

Pray for the Muslims who joined the livestream today. One of them renounced Islam and accepted Christ, and one is on the fence. Pray that they come to know that Jesus is Lord and Islam is false.

Ted Bundy claimed an angel appeared to him and gave him a pseudorandom sequence of 6,500,000 alphanumeric characters. Despite the fact that the historical evidence indicates that Bundy originally claimed that he received this list from a demon, if anyone wants to challenge the claim that Bundy's pseudorandom sequence was divinely inspired, they need to have read all 2,600 pages of this pseudorandom sequence of characters from cover-to-cover. It will not suffice to have read a representative sample of 100 pages. In fact, it's not even good enough if you've read 800 pages of the list. You need to read all 2600 pages to be qualified to debate. Here is a brief teaser. If you read this and pray about it, perhaps God will inspire you to read the rest: "a3%ergqwerwywyht4h5wy2gwg5ve4s^QQ*%Wqreqrewfwerfqwfwergerbtdtrxf5650dsfa9sdfadfasf()dfasdfasfascs!@@@@@5wt5twg5vte446h6e5h5h6e^"

Did you read the entire Book of Mormon before deciding it isn't true? "No."

Let me get this straight. The video begins with a clip to poison the well against me. None of the arguments I present in the opening are explained to the audience at all. You slander about me by stating that my position is that the Hurlbut affidavits are 100% true. I know that you know that is not my position - so it is literally you maliciously lying about me to your audience. You lie and say that all my information was from Mormonism Unvailed when you know that I referenced tons of other sources. You cut between two second sound-bites - in several cases you edit out the context in a way that is outright deceptive. You dont mention a single response that I gave to Luke's arguments or include any exchange of more than a couple seconds between me and Luke.

A lot of people are confused into thinking that reading the Book of Mormon in its entirety is necessary to judge whether it is influenced by demons. The following analogy might help. Suppose you learn that a husband has written a very nice, lengthy letter to his wife. But then you learn that the husband has had multiple affairs, is manipulative, a liar, and physically abusive. Moreover, you learn that he was doing all this at the same time that the letter was written. Do you need to read the full letter to know whether it had negative influences? No, you do not. In a conversation about influence or inspiration of a given work, what’s primarily relevant is the proximate context. Now, suppose that you decide to confront the husband. You point out the fact that he was unfaithful, manipulative, abusive, and so on when he wrote the letter. Suppose he responds by asking, “But did you read the whole thing?” Most people can see how silly of a requirement this is in this context. You don’t need to read the full letter to know that there’s something deeper going on.

“The Book of Mormon has produced so much good fruit”

Ethan: *lays out historically grounded case that the proximate context of BoM is demonic* Mormons: “Ok but did you read all of it?” Ethan: “I read the relevant parts” Mormons: “AHA you lose!”

Many such comments

Christian: "Would Joseph Smith be a false prophet if he sacrificed a sheep to a demon?" Mormon: "I don't know"

Ethan: *lays out devastating historical case that the Book of Mormon is demonic* Luke:

Are Mormons Christians?

T-minus 24 hours until I debate Ethan on whether the Book of Mormon is demonic. I hope to see you all there, wish me luck! youtube.com/live/FkDS9IeyBf0…