Mormon Coffee

“[T]rue learning increases both knowledge and mystery. The more knowledge we have of God from the Bible, the more mysteries we apprehend. The benefit of increasing mystery this way (rather than by means of preserving ignorance) is that what we do know gives direction to what we don’t know.” (>>)

Consider the fact that Mormons told the women in the visual illustration that they were lying, since “Joseph Smith only had one wife.” The LDS Church lies by 1) not educating the common Mormon people about the nature of Joseph Smith’s polygyny and polyandry, and 2) allowing gigantic “faith-promoting rumors” concerning polygamy to perpetuate, all to the benefit of people maintaining their belief in Smith as a prophet.

Read through JosephSmith.net, notice the lack of any information on Smith’s polygamy, and think about the following:

“Even sharing the truth can have the effect of lying when we tell only half-truths that do not give the full picture. We can also be guilty of bearing false witness and lying if we say nothing, particularly if we allow another to reach a wrong conclusion while we hold back information that would have led to a more accurate perception. In this case it is as though an actual lie were uttered.” (Robert J. Matthews, Ensign, October 1994, p. 54)

The full-length video is available on YouTube, Vimeo, iPod format, MPEG 2 (great for burning to DVD), and Windows Media. Individual videos are also available:

• Patty Bartlett Sessions
• Marinda Johnson Hyde
• Elizabeth Davis Durfee
• Mary Rollins Lightner
• Sylvia Sessions Lyon
• Louisa Beaman
• Eliza R. Snow
• The Partridge Sisters
• Lucy Walker
• Martha McBride Knight
• Helen Mar Kimball
• Sarah Ann Whitney

I also have posted one clip of a Mormon’s opinion on the illustration:

Comments (57)

Last Saturday—the Shabbat, as Jewish believers call it—my friend and I attended a conservative Jewish synagogue service. The Jews believe in meeting all morning long, so from 9:15 until noon, they read from the Torah, prayed Hebrew prayers, and even meditated on Psalm 150. (“Why don’t we use musical instruments in our service?” the rabbi asked. “Because if the string on our instrument broke, we might be tempted to fix it and thus break the Sabbath.”)

Afterwards, we ate lunch with the congregation, actually consuming the stereotypical bagels and lox along with herring and tuna. Then, thanks to our decade-long relationship with the rabbi, we were invited at 1 p.m. to share Christianity with about 50 Jewish believers. After about 35 minutes of a prepared talk where we were very transparent, we opened the floor for questions.

What followed was what I would have expected in a Mormon ward. In fact, there was one instance where I—no kidding—had to literally remind myself that we were answering Jews and not Mormons. Here were just some of their many questions:

• “Are you saying that, unless we accept the Jesus of the New Testament, we will go to hell? But doesn’t God want everyone to go to heaven?”
• “What do you mean, we are sinners? I’m 85% good!” (My reply: “Well, you’re doing better than I am, and yet you’re still failing 15% of the time.”)
• “How can you say lusting after a woman is adultery? I still like to look at the ladies.” –said by a man in his 80’s
• “How is it possible that Jesus is God Almighty? Doesn’t the Bible say God is one?”

There were three or four Holocaust survivors in the audience, and they pointed out the sin of anti-Semitism, even referring to times when they personally had been called “Christ-killers.” Humbly, we read from the recent WEA declaration (“The Gospel and the Jewish People: An Evangelical Statement”) that begins, “We sadly acknowledge that church history has been marred with anti-Semitic words and deeds and that at times when the Jewish people were in great peril, the church did far less than it should have.” And, yes, we must admit that some throughout history have also unfairly treated or attacked the Mormon people.

When the scheduled one-hour talk stretched into an hour and a half, the rabbi finally closed the meeting. Much to our surprise, we did not receive any negative reaction afterward, and a dozen folks waited patiently to talk to us individually. I was able to hand out eight The Case for Christ books (Lee Strobel), while three or four others told me that their friends had already given them copies! (Christian, you’re doing your job!) One elderly Jewish man even asked the rabbi if we could return for further discussion—wow!

But the biggest smile of the day came when a septuagenarian gentleman put his hand on my shoulder and quietly asked, “Do you know how you are a success with our group? You watch how many fall asleep. I always say you are successful with only 10 percent who fall asleep. But nobody fell asleep today!” Those who don’t understand Christianity might disagree with us, but many want to hear what we have to say, even if they don’t agree. And if we don’t have answers to these very fair questions, then we are not doing what 1 Peter 3:15-16 commands us to do.

To every man an answer.

Comments (5)

I’m crossing my legs as I write.

Well, OK, not literally, but as figuratively as you will allow me to do so.

Why? Well, last Friday night (6/2) I attended the Manti Miracle Pageant, the annual story-telling of Joseph Smith’s history where thousands of Mormons gather together to remember the roots of their beginnings.

Of course, the pageant that plays on the side of the hill of the Mormon temple in this small town focuses on Smith, and so for more than two decades (I first came out in 1987 myself) Christians have come out to the public streets in front of the temple for 3-4 hours before the pageant begins to engage Mormons in conversation. Typically, there are many discussions and little trouble. This dynamic really gives the pageant a unique personality, something even faithful Mormons have even told me is true.

For those who don’t believe such evangelism works, perhaps you can talk to a number of former Mormons who were introduced to the gospel at Manti. Or contact Chip Thompson, the founder of the Ephraim Church of the Bible, a church with a building now too small to accommodate all they bring in every Sunday, the vast majority who are former Mormons. What a good problem to have!

But on Friday night, as the pageant was about to begin, some Christians went to the restrooms across the street to take care of business. It’s just a part of nature after having been on the streets for four hours. And the restroom sign even said “Public restrooms.”

However, the Christians were met in the front of the restrooms by a wall of LDS security and public law enforcement officers. “You can’t use these,” the officers told them. Mormons were allowed to pass, but apparently Christian evangelists were exempt from using the Mormon-owned facility. One Christian woman who had been denied the use of these facilities peed her pants before arriving at a far-away restroom, a very embarrassing situation.

On Saturday evening, a Christian missionary in Mennonite attire was denied access to the bathrooms because the security official apparently believed she was one of the 34 Christian women who were portraying Joseph Smith’s wives. (These 34 women stood for most nights on the street as a visual illustration of Smith’s polygamous/polyandrous ways.) Later that evening, the officials backed off their strict regulation and allowed the missionaries to use these restrooms.

I have not been back to Manti since 2004—trust me, I missed it—but I don’t remember anything ever like this ever taking place in the many years I’ve attended. It appears this policy was enacted to punish the Christians for sharing the truth.

My question is this: Since when does a disagreement with philosophy mean that common courtesy should be ignored? After all, when a Jehovah’s Witness or Mormon comes to my door, the first thing my wife makes sure takes place is offering the missionaries a drink and “anything else” they might need. And we have fed more than one missionary over the years.

Apparently some Mormons are reporting that the incident at Manti never took place. It was insinuated in one email written by a Mormon official that if I were “spreading (my) ire in line, or having a conversation meant to be overheard, they (the security) were well within rights to tell (me) to leave. If (I) was packing (my) signs or pamphlets, they were well within rights to send (me) elsewhere.”

The email added, “While he certainly has freedom of speech, we shouldn’t be expected to provided (sic) him a soapbox. I suspect there is a very key piece of information about his own behavior that Eric is choosing to omit.”

Let me say, for the record, that I have never used these bathrooms once since I began attending the pageant in 1987. I was not in line that night, and I was not one of those denied use of the bathroom. In addition, there has been no evidence presented thus far that any Christian missionary did anything wrong near or in the bathrooms, including attempting to hand out literature, holding signs near the entrance, or doing anything illegal. We have been living within the rules for more than two decades in Manti and, generally, have had few to no problems.

The events talked about in this post really did take place, as the attached video will attest. As you will see, emotions fly because it was such a shock to not allow the evangelists access—especially the women who really needed to use the restroom. The police were on private property and were thus obligated to follow the wishes of the LDS leadership, as the one officer in the video states when he said “this is the property of the Church of Jesus Christ.”

There is nothing I have “chosen to omit” in this piece. Disagree with me if you want, but I believe it was unchristian to discriminate who could and could not use the public restrooms at the public event merely because the Mormon officials did not like the evangelism that was taking place in the public city streets.

Aaron’s Addendum concerning this second video: Kristin, the woman in the tape, was speaking in the video as the very pageant was going on. We were at the Miller’s restaurant together and we we all knew what she meant while we were listening. She obviously meant “after the Manti pageant evangelism” or something to that effect.

Comments (122)

Recently a letter from the LDS First Presidency was read in Sunday Mormon church services about the use of scriptures and visual aids in sacrament meetings and stake conferences. After stating that Church leadership is encouraged that members do study their scriptures, the letter said,

“In order to maintain an atmosphere of reverent worship in our sacrament and stake conference meetings, when speakers use scriptures as part of their talks they should not ask the congregation to open their own books to the scriptural reference. Also, members should not use visual aids and their sacrament meeting or stake conference talks. Such teaching methods are more effective in classroom settings and leadership meetings.

“We believe these adjustments will enhance the spirit of our worship services.”

Without any further explanation, I’m left wondering specifically how people looking up scriptures diminishes the “atmosphere of reverent worship.” Do those without their own scriptures find it distracting? Or is the sound of turning pages somehow irreverent? Do people who have missed the chapter and verse announcement make a racket asking their pew-neighbors where they are supposed to look?

Coming from a traditional Christian church background, I find this First Presidency directive really puzzling. Throughout my entire Christian life men in the pulpit have repeatedly expressed how much they love to hear the riffling of turning pages as people follow along in their Bibles. It’s my understanding that reading God’s Word in an effort to understand and know Him is itself an act of reverent worship.

When I look up a scripture passage during church I am better able to understand the Word and how it fits with the content of the sermon. I am better able to remember it. I am better able to find it later when I want to ponder the sermon and the scripture, or read the passage in its broader context. As far as I’m aware, the reverence of the setting is not disturbed, nor are the people around me, since they, too, are immersed in God’s Word.

This directive from the First Presidency reminded me of one of the last General Conference talks. LDS Apostle M. Russell Ballard related a funny story from his younger days in which he was in charge of his children during a sacrament meeting while his wife sang in the choir. He wrote,

“…I found myself sitting alone with my six children. I have never been so busy in my whole life. I had the hand puppets going on both hands, and that wasn’t working too well. The Cheerios got away from me, and that was embarrassing. The coloring books didn’t seem to entertain as well as they should.” (Ensign, May 2008, 108)

I’m sure every parent can relate to the dilemma of trying to keep small children quiet during church services. Yet, as I picture Mr. Ballard with his Cheerios flying and finger puppets waving – ineffectually, I might add – I honestly do not understand the concern that prompted the LDS policy for congregants to maintain an atmosphere of reverent worship by keeping their Quads closed.

Comments (10)