I use a lot of electronic books in my personal and academic life, and Logos provides many of them, such as the JPS Torah Commentary. Many other good scholarly works are available from Logos, such as the Anchor Bible Dictionary. Some of their material would be more accurately classified as “pseudo-scholarship.”
Recently, Logos has made a marketing decision to publish an “apologetics” collection with many of the anti-Mormon classics (and yes, these easily fit whatever definition of anti-Mormon you’d like.) These works generally misrepresent LDS thought and doctrine, and ignore relevant LDS scholarship, as two Evangelical scholars conclude.
In marketing Mormonism: Changes, Contradictions, and Errors, which “compares quotes from Mormon leaders and the Book of Mormon itself to the Bible” Logos chose the following example.
Does God the Father have a body of flesh and bones?
Yes: “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also…” (April 1843, Doctrine and Covenants 130:22)
No: “Holy, holy God; we believe that thou art God, and we believe that thou art holy, and that thou wast a spirit, and that thou art a spririt, and that thou wilt be a spirit foverever” (Alma 31:15)
From start to finish, this resource shows that Mormonism is not in sync with the Bible and is often self-contradictory to its own scriptures as well.
Any Mormon can tell you what’s wrong with this. Alma 31:15 is a quotation from an apostate group that Alma is out to reclaim, not doctrine taught by Nephite prophets. Our two authors, supposedly “both experts on cult issues, specifically those related to Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnesses” would receive an F in a basic seminary exegesis class for such flagrant disregard of context.
Like most other self-proclaimed cult experts who repackage the same misrepresentational junk to the even less well-informed EV’s who buy it, our authors ignore basic differences in assumptions and worldview between LDS and themselves that actual Evangelical scholars (such as Richard Mouw) DO recognize- namely that LDS are not infallible, Bible-based Christians, but follow a dynamic Old Testament authority pattern. Scripture and canon come from inspired prophets. (See quote below.)
Is it any wonder, therefore, that we don’t take such EV reasoning or witnessing seriously when it is flawed on such a fundamental level?
It is important to underscore here the way in which the Mormon restoration of these ancient offices and practices resulted in a very significant departure from the classical Protestant understanding of religious authority. The subtlety of the issues at stake here is often missed by us Evangelicals, with the result that we typically get sidetracked in our efforts to understand our basic disagreements with Mormon thought. We often proceed as if the central authority issue to debate with Mormons has to do with the question of which authoritative texts ought to guide us in understanding the basic issues of life. We Evangelicals accept the Bible alone as our infallible guide while, we point out, the Latter-day Saints add another set of writings, those that comprise the Bookof Mormon, along with the records of additional Church teachings to the canon- we classic Protestants are people of the Book while Mormons are people of the Books.
This way of getting at the nature of our differences really does not take us very far into exploring some of our basic disagreements. What we also need to see is that in restoring some features of Old Testament Israel, Mormonism has also restored the kinds of authority patterns that guided the life of Israel. The old Testament people of God were not a people of the Book as such- mainly because for most of their history, there was no completed Book. Ancient Israel was guided by an open canon [of scripture] and the leadership of the prophets. And it is precisely this pattern of communal authority that Mormonism restored. Evangelicals may insist that Mormonism has too many books. But the proper Mormon response is that even these Books are not enough to give authoritative guidance to the present-day community of the faithful.The books themselves are products of a prophetic office, an office that has been reinstituted in these latter days. People fail to discern the full will of God if they do not live their lives in the anticipation that they will receive new revealed teachings under the authority of the living prophets.
– Evangelical scholar Richard Mouw, “What Does God Think About America?” BYU Studies, 43:4 (2004): 10-11.