Plausible Deniability: The Mormon Panacea

Enjoy the satire as well as three Viewpoint on Mormonism MP3s:

Also see the related article at MRM.

This entry was posted in Authority and Doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Plausible Deniability: The Mormon Panacea

  1. Mike R says:

    Aaron, I appreciate your efforts at trying to help the Mormon people see through the rhetoric
    of BYU professors and Mormon apologists as they try to rationalize their leaders’ teaching track
    record, a record that clearly undercuts the claimed authority of these men to be trustworthy
    guides in spiritual truth on many vital issues. I find it rather interesting that one Mormon apostle
    ( McConkie counseled a BYU professor that if he (McConkie) were to teach false doctrine then
    that was his problem, but it was the duty of the professor to keep his mouth shut about it and not make waves etc. The Mormon people have been convinced that to please God and gain His favor
    they must submit to the Mormon heirarchy , so any excuse with suffice for some Mormons who
    are faced with any threat to this arrangement . No wonder Jesus warned of false prophets, He
    knew that they would resort to being creative in convincing their followers to submit .
    Thankfully there have been many Mormons that have seen through this rhetoric of their
    leaders. One such person testifies : ” The final decisive moment was when I realized that the
    prophets routinely contradict themselves through their doctrines and that it is impossible to
    discern what is doctrine versus opinion . No amount of praying and good works could resolve
    the extensive contradictions. We all know why. I found myself required to accept fact, truth,
    and the light of Christ. ” May the Mormon people exchange their apostles for those they can
    trust, those who Jesus actually did send out to preach His simple gospel , their message has
    provided spiritual freedom for 2000 yrs now.

  2. Kate says:

    So Aaron I have a question??? You mentioned the doctrine of the Blacks not able to hold the priesthood until 1978. If you look at the “revelation” given by Spencer W. Kimball in the D&C, it is not an actual part of the D&C. It is a “declaration” can you explain this to me? Is it part of LDS canon or is it just his written opinion? The last entry as scripture was in 1918, given by Joseph F. Smith. The 1890 manifesto concerning polygamy isn’t canonized either. Could this be a deception and that is why the revelation of polygamy by Joseph Smith (section 132) hasn’t been removed? If things have to be part of the LDS canon to be official, then one could argue that these revelations to stop polygamy and allow Blacks to hold the priesthood are actually not official and just these past prophets opinions right?

  3. Kate, Mormons would point you to Official Declaration 1 & 2, which I believe are included in the printed quad (at the very least they are at scripures.lds.org). The problem is that OD 1 doesn’t cease the long-term theology/doctrine of polygamy, it only temporarily suspends the earthly practice.

    Similarly, OD 2 doesn’t reverse any theology used to justify the pre-1978 ban. In fact, OD 2 seems to imply that the priesthood restriction was already required by God, and that God was now “extending” the priesthood (contra liberal Mormons who see OD2 as mere clarification of God’s policy in contrast to man’s policy).

  4. Kate says:

    Aaron,
    Thanks. The Official Declaration 1&2 are printed in the Quad. I can still argue that this is just “opinion.” Of course it does say” Official” Declaration, but the Journal of Discourse was also official in Brigham Young’s day. Mormons often say that if it isn’t canonized then it’s not official doctrine and may just be an opinion. How clever of these past two prophets to make these things just official declarations. That leaves it open to change back to the original practices at a moment’s notice. 🙂 I don’t know why this is surprising to me, I guess I just never really put it together, but LDS women know that polygamy will be practiced again in this lifetime. Some I know are trying to mentally prepare for it. How sad. I wonder if the Blacks know that their priesthood could be revoked at a moment’s notice also???

  5. fproy2222 says:

    Kate December 1, 2011 at 2:53 pm (So Aaron I have a question??? You mentioned the doctrine of the Blacks not able to hold the priesthood until 1978. If you look at the “revelation” given by Spencer W. Kimball . . . )

    Having been a Jim Crow Protestant in the south before joining God’s Church, I had an interest in the revaluation. I think the best way for me to tell you about it is to tell you what happened when I first heard of President Kimball’ s announcement that tit was time for all members to be able to go to the Temple.

    I was working with two guys that would fit right in with your crowd when one afternoon in 1978 I walked into the office and they told me about President Kimball’s announcement. I looked at them and told them that I knew it was coming, but because of the nonsense they told me about the Church, I just could not believe them when they told me this. Later that night I found that for once they had told the truth.

    fred

  6. fproy2222 says:

    Another good example of what happens when people vote on what God’s Word is instead of following God’s Prophet.

    fred

    Small Ky. church bans interracial couples
    “The vote by members last Sunday was 9-6, Harville said.”

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57334337/small-ky-church-bans-interracial-couples/

  7. Mike R says:

    Why do Mormons have to resort to creating all kinds of excuses for the behavior of their
    prophets and apostles in respect to some of the important teachings they’ve offered ? After
    all it’s the other churches who offer only the “precepts of men” on important spiritual truths,
    especially saving truths but we are assured by Church curriculum : ” I am not leading the Church
    of Jesus Christ ….I want this distinctly understood. No man does. Joseph did not do it; Brigham
    did not do it , neither did John Taylor….We seek to obey the Son and follow His footsteps. He
    will lead—no man will ever lead—His Church. If the time or condition should ever come to pass
    that a man , possessing human weaknesses, shall lead the Church, woe be to the Church, for it will
    then become like the churches of the world, man-made , and man-led, and have no power of God
    or of life eternal and salvation connected with it, only the wisdom, the judgement and intelligence
    of man . I pity the world because this is their condition. ” [ Mel. Priesthood Quorums Course of
    Study , 1970-1971 , p.196 ] .
    The above statement is an exclusive one, because only Mormon prophets and apostles claim to
    be personally directed by Jesus to reveal His truths, only the Mormon prophets have been found
    to be faithful in consistently providing His spiritual truths that affect one’s relationship with God
    towards receiving eternal life. Jesus is actively teaching His people using these men so they can
    be trusted: ” Our Heavenly Father communicates in a very clear way to His children .In the
    teachings of the gospel there is no uncertain sound…” [New Era,11-2007] .

  8. Mike R says:

    cont. However , despite these exclusive claims of being trustworthy in relaying God’s truths
    Mormon authorities have exhibited a pattern of vacillating on important teachings, a pattern
    that amounts to a hit and miss record of being reliable spiritual guides . Far from providing
    a clear and uncertain sound concerning many of their doctrinal offerings, Mormon apostles
    have been seen to be sincere but sincerely wrong , in short , false teachers. This has pushed
    some Mormons into rationalizing their leaders’ behavior away. The ministry, Reachout Trust,
    has spoke about this Mormon mindset :
    ” Mormonism attempts to appeal to converts by claiming consistent and reliable guidance
    from God , which they claim is absent from the Christian churches. However , they also use
    the claim to prophetic guidance to change ‘ restored ‘ truth when it suits them and defy their
    followers to dare question the living prophets who alone speak for God. Caught between their
    faith in the prophets of Mormonism and their experience of inexplicable change and doctrinal
    inconsistencies Mormons are forced to excuse , explain , conceal and deny the pronouncements
    of their own leaders in an attempt to keep the faith. In the face of such circumstances ,
    Christians should be ever more patient, prayerful and consistent in their witness. ”
    [ Who Speaks for Mormons ,p1 ]

  9. grindael says:

    Unfortunately Fred, Mormons do vote on “God’s word” in the Mormon Church. Nothing can be passed off on the membership as “officially binding” unless it is first voted on by the Church. In fact, the priesthood ban being lifted, was stalled for years, because the Twelve Apostles were divided over it, and could not come to a consensus, mostly because of Ezra Taft Benson, and Joseph Fielding Smith. When the death of these men, and mounting social pressure dividing the church over the issue, Kimball finally had a “revelation”.

    As for your article on the small church in Kentucky, what does that prove? _johnny

  10. grindael says:

    And if the church had been listening to it’s “prophets”, it would still be listening to Brigham Young, who said,

    “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.” ~First Presidency Statement, August 17, 1949. (George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark, David O. McKay)

    Had “all the rest of the children” received their “blessings in the holy priesthood” by 1978? Listening to “prophets” in the Mormon Church, doesn’t seem to amount to much now, does it? _johnny

  11. Kate says:

    fred,
    Oh hon, you are talking to the wrong person about racism. I do not and have never had a racist bone in my body. It angers me. Mormonism has racial roots from the very beginning, starting with Joseph Smith. Even as a Mormon this didn’t sit well with me. The difference with Mormon racism is that it was said to be a revelation from God! What nonsense! Did Jesus not command us to love EVERYONE as ourselves?? I have older generation Mormon family who still hold these racist views because it was pounded into their heads until 1978. They were raised by Mormon parents who held the same racist views because it was their DOCTRINE and REVELATION from their Mormon prophets and leaders. I have family who couldn’t even watch Black people on t.v. in the 70’s because of the teachings their mother had from church her whole life! The article you posted about the couple angers me, no one should be treated this way. How does this prove that God told Spencer W. Kimball to allow Blacks to hold the priesthood? My question to Aaron was more along the lines of why isn’t this revelation actually canonized in the D&C? Why is it just a declaration? Seems like a deception to me. Instead of trying to find someone, ANYONE that has done something similar, maybe you should be telling us why the LDS church has done these things. Show us the reasoning behind Mormon doctrines and teachings.

  12. Mike R says:

    Fred, take a moment to read what I posted above concerning trusting Mormon prophets.
    Then re-read what Johnny has posted. Then do the right thing and ” Let God be true, but
    every man a liar ” [ Rom 3:4]. Dismiss your prophets . Jesus will meet you and free you
    from any further of the ” uncertain sounds” which have become their m.o. on many
    important teachings .

  13. Mike R says:

    Kate, well said !

  14. fproy2222 says:

    Kate December 3, 2011 at 9:44 am—-(Oh hon, you are talking to the wrong person about racism. I do not and have never had a racist bone in my body. It angers me. Mormonism has racial roots from the very beginning, starting with Joseph Smith. Even as a Mormon this didn’t sit well with me. The difference with Mormon racism is that it was said to be a revelation from God!)

    Mormons, by revelation from God, would not alow blacks to hold the Priesthood.

    As a Jim Crow Christian in the 60’s we knew it was god’s word to keep the blacks down.
    By common consent, southern Christians agreed that it was god’s will that blacks needed to be kept in there place. By today’s common consent, it looks like the larger group seems to be against this small Baptist church in Ky., but in the 60’s the common consent against blacks was the norm. Remember, the KKK was a group of Christians who got together to keep their form of Christianity pure. Freedom Riders were attacted, people were beaten and some even lost there lives.

    If you look close under what you see on tv, you will still find a large southern Christian movement.

    So, to demist rate your dislike of racism is more then just another way to show you do not want to be a Mormon, please point to your blogs and letters to other Christian churches showing that your true concern is improving how all people are treated.

    fred

  15. fproy2222 says:

    grindael December 3, 2011 at 6:51 am–(Unfortunately Fred, Mormons do vote on “God’s word” in the Mormon Church. Nothing can be passed off on the membership as “officially binding” unless it is first voted on by the Church. In fact, the priesthood ban being lifted, was stalled for years, because the Twelve Apostles were divided over it, and could not come to a consensus, mostly because of Ezra Taft Benson, and Joseph Fielding Smith. When the death of these men, and mounting social pressure dividing the church over the issue, Kimball finally had a “revelation”.)

    There are different kinds of voting in the Church.
    The one most observed is where we say we will uphold the decision that has been made we make it binding on ourselves.
    Then there are the ones made in different groups as to what activity to do, the kind of activities where all choices are ok, it is just up to the group as to what they want to do.
    And then there are the ones like you spoke of, where the Twelve and the Presidency keep going to the Lord and saying we think it is time to do something and the Lord keep saying “No, not yet“, and finally He said “Now“.
    I do not know why the Lord chose to update the revaluation when he did, but I knew before hand that he would someday.

    fred

  16. fproy2222 says:

    Mike R December 3, 2011 at 10:13 am—(Let God be true, but every man a liar )

    Since you say you are a liar, of what value is your teaching?

  17. Mike R says:

    The Apostle Paul stated : ” Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that
    they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal for God , but not according
    to knowledge.” [ Rom. 10:1-2 ] . There is much here that parallel’s the Mormon people.
    So many of the people that Paul knew and had lived with were trusting in their leaders to be
    accurately representing God in dispensing His spiritual truths , much like the Mormon
    people who rely on their prophets and apostles to teach them correct doctrine . The claim
    of Mormon authorities to relay spiritual truth form God is clear as they claim to be the sole
    “legal” channel that God uses to dispense His important truths thru, the one place where
    pure unpolluted spiritual guidance is available . Yet when we look into the track record of
    this claim we notice something very troubling . Mormon authorities have been guilty of the
    very same type of behavior that the Jewish leaders in Jesus’ day were were guilty of, that of
    “teaching for doctrines the commandments of men ” [ Mark 7:7]. Though perhaps not on the
    same scale as the Jewish leaders but nevertheless Mormon leaders have damaged the simple
    gospel of Jesus by adding requirements , commandments, laws , that pertain to how salvation
    is received etc. Mormon leaders have been proud to enlighten the world on the truths about
    God and salvation that have come packaged with their “restored” gospel. New truths, new
    requirements, new counsel from modern day prophets. But Mormon leaders have not been
    consistently accurate in their teachings , and this has resulted in carefully crafted alibi’s to
    excuse their errors as false apostles-Rev2:2

  18. Mike R says:

    The Mormon people deserve better spiritual guides . There is a guide they can follow with
    confidence , Peter discovered this truth — Jn.6:68 . Jesus guided His followers and they
    were faithful in dispensing His gospel to everyone. This gospel [ 1 cor 15:1-4] concerned
    how a person could be made right with God and receive eternal life, it is a timeless message.
    May the Mormon people completely come follow Jesus, may they walk away from their
    spiritual guides , their prophets , these men who have claimed to be personally directed by
    Jesus but unfortunately , by many of their teachings have detoured the Mormon people from
    important truths . May the Mormon people realize that not all false prophets are violent or
    immoral individuals, some can repeatedly preach on living a moral lifestyle. But someone may
    ask , ” if my prophets and apostles have misled me about salvation, it’s not my fault, it’s theirs
    right?” Isa. 9:16 and Matt 15:14 speak to this issue. This is why Jesus warned of future false
    prophets—Matt 24:11,24; So did His apostles— 2Cor. 11:4 ; 1 Jn 4:1,2. It can be difficult to
    realize that men who look like your grandfather and who are polite and gentle persons could
    be false prophets. But “false” means inaccurate , and prophets who look harmless and act polite
    can teach faulty doctrines , being sincere but sincerely wrong is an old malady .
    God help those Mormons who have seen that something is’nt quite right with their leaders,
    something that deserves a closer look. May these precious people look afresh into the New
    Testament at Jesus and the timeless truths therein that He gave His apostles to tell us.

  19. grindael says:

    This speaks for itself:

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/12/05/ky_church_overturns_ban_on_interracial_couples/

    Fred,

    You are being disingenuous. You were speaking about following “prophets”, contrasting that to the Church in Kentucky (who have since overturned the original “ban”) about voting. But your church does the exact same thing. Mormon “prophets” cannot foist a “revelation” on the church, without it being voted on. Also, the Church can overturn any decision of it’s President by vote. (Case in point, Joseph Smith rejecting S. Rigdon as Councillor, but the Church voting to sustain him). So really, having a “prophet” in your Church, doesn’t make much of a difference, and your original comment didn’t make much sense in the light of the facts.

    As for Kimball “updating” Young’s revelation. That is not what happened. Kimball made Young out to be a false prophet. For Young said that what Kimball did, would never happen. One of them, was wrong. If that is the case, then the church is false, because if Kimball was right, Young was wrong and a false prophet, and if Young was right, then Kimball is a false prophet. Given the Church’s track record of caving in to social pressure, I’m not surprised that what you “expected” to happen, did.

    But to go to the heart of the matter, the doctrine was wrong from the get-go, and has no place in an organization that says that it is the “only true and living church on the face of the earth.” They said the doctrine itself was a “commandment” from God, and that is simply false. Patently so. _johnny

  20. grindael says:

    And it was more like, “we must stand behind this embarrassing doctrine because it will make our former prophets look bad”. Then came the social pressure of the 60’s. “No not now.” Then came the division in the church itself, the threats of violence and boycotts, and the social stigma, and then finally… “God has changed his mind.” http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no39.htm

  21. grindael says:

    The KKK was a fringe movement. All of the instances you site, are un-scriptural, and though those that perpetuated them, did so under the banner of “Christian” they were wrong. Society (and true Christians) have turned the tide on such hypocrisy. None of the above though, claimed that they were the only “true” church on the face of the earth, with exclusive “authority” to speak for God, and gave racism as a “commandment”. The Mormons did so. There is a unique difference in what happened in historical Christianity, and what happened in Mormonism. Mormon prophets kept the racist doctrines in place for over a hundred years, and the rank and file members sustained them in it. Christianity, has always had those who took the higher road, and renounced it. The Catholics, had a Papal Bull against racism and slavery in the 1400’s. That many ignored it, and that almost all Bishops in early America were racist, does not speak against the Christian ethic, it speaks against the individuals who were wrong. This country went to war over the issue. We are still battling it. But Jesus said, “For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Matthew 7:14). Mormons were the only ones who said that God actually commanded racism, by the mouth of their own prophets, and had the whole church stand behind them for over a century. That is, and always will be an issue. _johnny

  22. 4fivesolas says:

    The KKK is to Christianity as Mormonism of the 1800s is – it is a racist Cult – denying essential Christian beliefs and advocating racist doctrine. I remember reading about the false doctrine of this racist group that diverges far from true Biblical Creedal Christianity, much like Mormonism. Mormons share a common doctrinal racist foundation with the Klan.

  23. Mike R says:

    Fred, I’m trying to figure out what you meant as it really did’nt make sense. I’ll direct your
    attention to what Jesus gave His apostles to teach on the issue of different races : Acts 10:35-36.
    That has always been my position. Apparently for Mormon apostles it was’nt enough .

  24. Rick B says:

    Fred,
    It seems to me that as I said before, when LDS cannot answer questions they tend to thorw the Bible under the Bus and it seems you did just that.

    Your trying avoid the issue of Mormon prophets claiming IT WAS GOD who said Blacks cannot and NEVER WILL hold the priesthood. It this was said and it was said and taught as DOCTRINE/SCRIPTURE, Then you are following false prophets. So instead of saying, I admit it was taught and stated that it was scripture and this is a problem, you instead start talking about so called Christians that sin by claiming Blacks are an inferior race.

    If people simply would read the Bible and believe it this problem would be solved. God Created Adam and Eve, all humans came from them. God did not Create a white skinned Blue eyed people called Adam and Eve, Then Create a Black Couple then a Indian Couple and a Mexican couple, God simply created Adam and Eve.

    Then after people were born and lived more people came along, then god Took Noah and His family and destroyed the entire human race except for Noah and His family. The Human race started over from them. Then The tower of Babel came along and that was were God created the different races and languages of People. How come this is so hard? All people groups came from here, That means Whites and blacks and everyone in Between. So if you believe your prophets then defend them, otherwise answer why they were wrong and said it was scripture, not start calling out groups that are by their own choice living in sin.

  25. 4fivesolas says:

    Rick B,
    From Fred’s comments/answers I gather that he does not care one whit about Scripture – his beliefs are spoon fed to him by the current leadership/prophets of the Mormon Church. Fred does not need to consider past prophetic statements from Brigham Young that are contradicted by currently accepted prophetic statements. All past doctrine is void and null once declared so by current leadership. Polygamy and restriction of the Mormon temples by race could return next year – if the prophet said so – and Fred would follow along. I think a Mormon leader once said – once they speak, the thinking has been done. All a faithful Mormon need do is follow along. Of course, Fred could reject this system, but then he would have to leave the LDS religion and begin reading Scripture for it’s clear meaning rather than picking and choosing proof texts and glossing over everything that contradicts Mormon belief. Fred only sees his past association with racist Christians – he doesn’t understand that the catholic (worldwide) Church made up of believers from every tribe and tongue is so much bigger and so much more beautiful than his myopic caricature of one kind of sinful Southern American Christianity – that may be his experience, but Christians in Indonesian, Korea, Africa, even other Christians in America etc. etc. are not in the least descended from the fringe group Fred associated with.

  26. Rick B says:

    4/5
    I agree that Fred could care less about the truth, The sad part is that as a result he will not only spend eternity apart from God, but he will be punished for spreading the lies and misleading people. Then he points out fringe groups and try to use them as an example, all the while ignoring the fact their are fringe groups as they view them in Mormonism.

    Also really sad is the fact, their are lots of Mormons that flat out ignore the facts and rejecting the gospel for a lie, but when I point this out they get upset, yet they can never tell me where I am wrong and set me straight on the facts.

  27. 4fivesolas says:

    Fred,

    This statement you made requires explanation/context:
    “If you look close under what you see on tv, you will still find a large southern Christian movement.” Are you referring to Fox News/Republicans? Are you referring to TBN? Are you referring to News stories of Racist idiots (which, quite frankly I don’t see much of other than 12 freaks marching with the ACLU’s support or some such)? Are you referring to portrayals of Christians on tv programs as backwards or insensitive anti-gay bigots?

    Like much of what you say – you throw something out that is supposed to imply some nefarious association but is really nothing more than an vague assertion by you – which can’t be verified or denied – it’s an undefined implication of wrong doing – or slander.

  28. Rick B says:

    Fred,
    I think it is funny how you point to a few fringe groups or a few Christians who dont really have a clue.
    Yet I could point to you and make you an example and make you out to be a fringe group all to yourself.

    I can point out how you give really vague statements, You dont cite evidence or sources, you claim we are wrong yet do not tell us in detail how or why, and tell us what were missing. So for all of this, you give your church a black eye and make yourself out to look like the Crazy uncle hiding in the closet.

Leave a Reply