“The Church is not all butterflies and cupcakes.”

Over this past week the Salt Lake Tribune ran several articles related to the LDS Church, blacks, and the now-defunct priesthood ban. One special report covered the story of Vanna Cox and her sisters. They grew up in the LDS Church very aware of their minority status. The Tribune reports,

“When [Vanna] and her sisters discovered the history of blacks in the LDS Church, they felt pride in black pioneers such as Jane Manning James and Elijah Abel and horror that Green Flake, a slave, was given as tithing to Brigham Young. They didn’t understand the ban on blacks in the priesthood or the racist beliefs of LDS leaders they admired.

“‘We had to learn that the church is not all butterflies and cupcakes,’ she says.”

Coming face to face with lesser-known aspects of Mormon history and doctrine can be a real shock to Latter-day Saints who have lived in a protected LDS bubble all their lives. The Church is definitely not all butterflies and cupcakes; there are skeletons in the closet and sometimes those bones set to rattling.

Beyond the issue of racism in the Church, a short list of additional things Latter-day Saints might find troubling could include:

An ex-LDS friend of mine felt the ground give way as a Mormon when she came across a statement made by Joseph Smith. She read,

“If they want a beardless boy to whip all the world, I will get on the top of the mountain and crow like a rooster. I shall always beat them…. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him, but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet” (History of the Church 6:408-9).

When my friend read that quote she thought enemies of the Church had made it up. “Surely Joseph Smith never said such a thing,” she thought. “A true prophet of God would never say something like that.” When she found Joseph’s bold claim in History of the Church, and found other equally troubling statements he had made, she realized Joseph Smith indeed was not a true prophet of God. She and her family left the Prophet and the church he founded; now they live for Christ.

Friends, the LDS Church is not all butterflies and cupcakes. Be encouraged to take a careful tour of the kitchen before indulging in the proffered sweets.

It is a snare to say rashly, “It is holy,”
and to reflect only after making vows.
-Proverbs 20:25-

About Sharon Lindbloom

Sharon surrendered her life to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1979. Deeply passionate about Truth, Sharon loves serving as a full-time volunteer research associate with Mormonism Research Ministry. Sharon and her husband live in Minnesota.
This entry was posted in Mormon History, Truth, Honesty, Prayer, and Inquiry and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

58 Responses to “The Church is not all butterflies and cupcakes.”

  1. Jeffrey says:

    Mmmmm. Those cupcakes look delicious.

    One thing about shot and killed three.. I thought it was shot three, injuring two, killing one (later died from bullet wound, not immediately).. Correct me if I’m wrong.

    My ex-mo brother and I had a talk the other night. He mentioned something that got me thinking that what IF the church held on tight to the doctrine that was taught in the early days of the church and instead of white-washing it and putting it under the rug throughout the years, but instead continue to proclaim it, what would Mormonism be like today?

    I think there would be a lot less members because people would recognize exactly how opposite it is from traditional Christianity, however I believe there would be a lot more retention than the church has today.

    Mormon people finding out that *gasp* Joseph had more than one wife?! wouldnt come as such a shock. Both my wife and her sister, and her brother, and other brother who were born and raised in the church didn’t know about Joseph Smith having more than one wife. (I’m not even sure her parents do) Because its not something openly known about, it comes as a shock and raises a red flag, they then delve deeper into the doctrine/history/inconsistency’s and find out things that some don’t like.

    It’s called “skeletons in the closet” for a reason. They are scary and because the church isn’t upfront with their existence, and when an LDS faithful opens the door, it can be spooky. Some don’t even open the door which is sad. Whats even worse is when you’re told not to even look into the closet.

    Anyone see the movie, the village? 🙂

  2. jackg says:

    Jeffrey,

    I believe the LORD is showing us exactly what true JS Mormonism would look like by exposing the FLDS compound in Texas. I find it interesting that LDS cannot see this truth. Obviously, JS wasn’t such a true prophet if they had to change along the way. Something to think about.

  3. David says:

    I like this article (I do, I really do), however, you have got to learn to anticipate LDS responses. I am surprised that an LDS broadside has not already been launched at traditional Christianity as there are plenty of skeletons there too.

    However, the type of errors (and by whom) are what really matter. Some of Joseph’s sins call into question Joseph’s status as a prophet – and thus the whole religion. These are beyond mere foibles. Issuing a formal statement denying polygamy, (which is supposed to be a sacred thing) when it was in fact going on, is a huge problem. Changes in the BoM during Joseph’s lifetime are huge problems. Brigham Young teaching heresy at general conference is beyond huge.

    Many spiritual leaders within Christianity (going pretty far back) have sinned badly. However, these acts do not call into question the whole religion. The issues surrounding Mormonism go back to its earliest days; you do not see such indictments of Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc.

  4. Sharon Lindbloom says:

    “One thing about shot and killed three.. I thought it was shot three, injuring two, killing one (later died from bullet wound, not immediately)”

    Good catch Jeffrey–thanks. According to John Taylor, Joseph Smith shot three men, two of whom died later of their wounds. I’ve corrected the article above.

  5. Howdy all. I just heard about a group soon to be formed called Formerly Anti-Mormons. The group will be centered around a 12 step program for recovering anti-Mormons that can’t (regardless of how hard they try) leave the church/Joseph Smith alone – it’s supposed to be similar to the way alcoholics overcome alcohol.

    The one girl, Paula, that I’ve traded emails with said coming off of hard-core anti-Mormonism was very much akin to “kicking the bottle” as she put it – she said her mind was “totally consumed” with it and that it was extremely difficult to “break-free” but she did it.

    Anyway if anyone here is trying to break free of anti-Mormonism this may be a good thing for you – I’m following this with great interest so I’ll keep you posted as I hear more. Cheers. Jase

  6. Berean says:

    Jason, welcome to the “wagon”. Your sarcasm is humorous, but not amusing when one considers the end result of this spiritual blindness that the Mormons are under. The penalty of our Mormons friends going to outer darkness is too great for us to simply sit on our hands and do nothing. Ezekial 3:17-19 says that if we don’t warn them their blood will be on our hands. I’m not going to be responsible for that. So, where does that leave us? I’ll side with Ezekial and the words of Jesus in the Great Commission and keep witnessing to Mormons. I’ve heard ex-Mormons who angrily stated that they wished some/any Christian out there would have said something to them early on. I’d encourage you to hang out here. Have a cup of Mormon Coffee. It’s great. I love the “coffee” here. (Our Mormon friends know how to make good coffee too. The coffee in Nephi, Utah is great. I had a big cup of it this afternoon on my back from Idaho.)

    Sharon, great article as always. You and Aaron are doing a fine job! Keep up the good work!

    Berean

  7. I don’t know what to tell you Berean but it’s not a joke. Many anti-Mormons truly are consumed with bringing down Joseph Smith to the point that it takes up their entire lives and this program is supposed to aid them in recovery.

    Anyway, I’m only helping get the word out. If you are interested periodically check my Website (JosephSmith.com) since I don’t post here very often. I will at least announce it there and if I think the program is effective may put it in heavy promotion. Cheers. Jase

  8. germit says:

    Jason: Welcome to Mormon Coffee; I can agree that evangelism of ANY kind, maybe ministry of any kind, can “take on a life of its own” when not moderated by the Holy Spirit. You may not quite get this, but my concern in not that someone NOT be LDS, but that they know, love, and serve the real Jesus. I’ve spent most of the last year trying to help those in my church see that the Mormon faith and traditional christianity (maybe better described as orthodox christianity) are incompatible, and therefore we help our LDS friends and relatives “out of the pit”. No different than JS wanted to help his contemporaries out of their pit of dead and worthless religion (as he saw it) my main point here is that these efforts are in no way LIMITED to the LDS: I’m currently reading two of Eckhart Tolle’s books in preparation for a class that will (hopefully) help some out of the NEW AGE pit. you don’t know me, but believe me, Eckhart (bless his gentle little german soul) is getting ALL my attention (minus my daily Mormon Coffee fix) for EXACTLY the same reason that Mormon matters grabbed me for the better part of a year. JS made more sense than this guy, by the way, and I sure don’t think he was as enthralled with the $$ as Oprah seems to be. I know this might come across as Don Quixote tilting at religious windmills, but SOME in the body of christ have a role in pointing out the false gods, the false christ’s to the rest of the culture In whatever small way, I would count myself in that group then the trick is to find time to clean the garage and wax the car and talk to the wife (or “wives” if one is FLDS….couldn’t hold back, sorry) Again, welcome to “Coffee” germit

  9. David says:

    Jason,

    Thanks for the heads up. I am still struggling to gain a testimony of this groups existence. You gave no link and I searched the internet to no avail.

    Granted, this group could exist. A lack of evidence does not necessarily prove that it does not exist. We all know Nephites existed. Even if this group were trying hard to gets its message out, it is possible that no one here has ever heard of it. You say it exists, and we have every reason to believe you, so it must; typically, people do not lie to advance an agenda.

    Why don’t you do what Joseph Smith did and show us? Why take your word for it when you could simply get us in contact with this group that is supposed to be able to help us?

  10. eric017 says:

    A couple of thoughts. First, Christianity does have a checkered past. In 2000 years, countless times has Christianity been used to justify evil (eg. slavery). 19th (and 20th) century Mormons were not alone in using religion to justify bigotry and repression of non-whites. However, Christians seem much more open to the idea of condemning the actions and charactors of the past preachers than Mormons seem too. Has the LDS church ever outright said “Brother Brigham or Brother Joseph were wrong….they simply were wrong”? On any issue? If God is a God of love, why do the words of Young especially who proportedly God’s prophet seem so bigoted when it comes to race? These is a troubling question for Christians.

    Jason, Please be careful in assuming the motivation for people who are critical of the Mormon church. I think “anti-Mormon” has assumed the same status as “cult” in our lexicon. It is a loaded term that doesn’t really get us anywhere because it has an amorphous definition. From my experience most persons who display hatred for the LDS church are former members, and I agree that such behaviour is unhealthy and some may need a 12 step program or some such. But, we have to ask why. Why may former Mormons have so much anger towards the church? People leave the LDS church for a miriad of reasons. But one theme that runs through almost every former LDS’s words is anger about being duped. Anger about being lied too, from parents who may not have known better to the prophet who should have. Most people ‘recover’ from Mormonism after leaving the church, and after working things out in thier heads pretty much leave the church alone. For example, for me things started to unravel the day I walked into the MTC. And while I served the full two years, the MTC was the beginning of a five year process that in the end left me wanting to have zero to do with everything LDS. I then called myself an agnostic for ten years before coming to have a relationship with Jesus.

  11. subgenius says:

    I must admit that as a former convert to LDS i may have an advanatage of a different life experience and the benefit of being an “investigator” prior to my conversion. However, most of Sharon’s “troubling” list above was known to me and it is not troubling to me at all. I have been Catholic, Protestant, Agnostic, and Atheist – all have their own skeletons, but it is not the church that has the skeletons, it is the people in the church which have them. Issues like racism, inquisitions, gender-bias, and abuse are not the rule but rather the exception. The founding of this country saw a dramatic shift in how mankind views his place in this world. Prior to John Locke, the idea that any man could be president was ridiculous. People were born to be kings and such and others born to be slaves. Even the most devout christian believed that blacks had their place, women had their place, and peasants had their place. The self-righteous rhetoric over this issue is ridiculous. I will concede that the LDS church has not handled the blacks with priesthood doctrine transition to many outsiders liking, but that is not our purpose -pleasing those who criticize us. Just as the pope has never formally apologized for the Priest-sex-abuse scandal of late (they even had to have several meetings to determine if it was wrong).
    Now Sharon’s taken out of context quote by JS above is embarassing……for her. She has pieced together segments of an address given to dissenters, given a prejudicial lead-in for the quote, and then seemingly given it creedence by the parenthical citation that follows. Sharon, you obviously have a talent for skirting the edge of slander.
    As for the kitchen, i have been there. I also made sure to eat all my vegetables before dessert. I would encourage everyone to do the same.

    Berean- Ezekial 3:17-19 is meant for us regarding people like you.

    JasonB – a much needed injection for many on this blog

  12. eric017 says:

    As an agnostic, I pretty much could have cared less about the church. In the beginning there was anger (perhaps even anti-Mormon thought), but I came to embrace who I was as a person who’s whole ancesteral history and culture was entirely tied to the life in the Mormon Corridor.

    I probably would have stayed blissfully carefree with respect to Mormonism hadn’t God stepped in and I realized the the LDS church isn’t just another Christian church. When I accepted Christ, things changed in my heart. I suddenly cared about people in a way that I never had when I was LDS. My motivation completely changed (when LDS: becoming the best Mormon I could be, to discovering some universal truth as an agnostic, to doing God’s will as a Christian). The way I see it, asking Christians to overcome thier “anti-Mormonism” (which is really simply saying stop being critical of us) is akin to Christians asking Mormons to discontinue the missionary program. Criticism does not imply hatred. My relationship with Christ is the most cherished thing in my life. Jesus has changed me in unimaginable ways….and more than almost anything, I want to share this relationship with my TBM family whom I love most. But also, I want to see Mormons who in general are wonderful God fearing people to come to truly understand Jesus.

    I post here for two reasons. First, to get ideas about how to talk about Mormon issues with my family in the most effective way possible (sometimes this means passiveness, but sometimes it means bluntness). Second, because I think as a former Mormon now a Christian I can offer perspectives for Christians how to communicate with Mormons and I also try to throw ‘curve-balls questions’ to Mormons to try to get them to think and view things from different more critical perspectives. Criticism isn’t hate, rather, I think our ability to think critically is a blessing from God that will ultimately lead us His truth.

  13. eric017 : <>

    Excellent question. The majority are conned by anti-Mormon sensationalistic activism and in some cases outright lies hence they go on a wild tear of vengeance based on false claims.

    Carl Mosser and Paul Owen, very well known Evangelical scholars point out very plainly that the counter-cult movement lacks the skills and training necessary to answer real Mormon scholarly apologetic. That’s harsh and it’s coming from Evangelicals that have done the hard research.

    Their paper: “Mormon Scholarship, Apologetics, and Evangelical Neglect: Losing the Battle and Not Knowing It?” is a devastating blow to Deckeresq anti-Mormons raised on National Enquirer-type stories about Joseph Smith. Based on their ground-breaking paper we have to toss out the entire crop of anti-Mormon books from Obediah Dogberry to Grant Palmer. To wit:

    “…there are, as far as we are aware, no books from an evangelical perspective that responsibily interact with contemporary LDS scholarly and apologetic writings.3 In a survey of twenty recent evangelical books criticizing Mormonism we found that none interact with this growing body of literature. Only a handful demonstrate any awareness of pertinent works. Many of the authors promote criticisms that have long been refuted; some are sensationalistic while others are simply ridiculous. A number of these books claim to be “the definitive” book on the matter. That they make no attempt to interact with contemporary LDS scholarship is a stain upon the authors’ integrity and causes one to wonder about their credibility.”

    Ouch. I encourage you to study their paper. Anyway, the point is that the “anger towards the church” is the fruit of believing the anti-Mormon propaganda that Mosser and Owen so devastatingly refute with their brilliant in-depth research.

    Ref: http://www.cephasministry.com/mormon_apologetics_losing_battle.html

  14. germit says:

    Jason Sure, scathing paper (Mosser and Owens) and all, but put me in the category of “agree to disagree” with these authors conclusion about Mormon schhoarship being that healthy and irrefutable. “only a handful aware of the pertinent works” and the real gem “there are ,as far as we are aware (flag that clause), NO BOOKS from an evangelical perspective that responsiblly interact with contemporaryy LDS Scholarly and apologetic writings..” emph mine all I can say is these guys don’t get out much I’ll be happy to review their sources as sooon as I possible can, but my research in the last year does NOT jive with their conclusion. OF course a lot depends on how one decides to define “interacts responsibly” not sure what kind of standard they would accept for that

    by the way , is there really a 12 step program or was that humor (I’m learning to take a joke, so if that’s what it was, cool; just don’t want towaste time looking for a group that doesn’t exist. PRAISE GOD for our country where we enjoy (for now) the freedom to join, and then fall into apostasy, from any # of groups that’s a great privelege Happy Dad’s day, everybody germit

  15. eric017 says:

    I will agree that there is “Deckeresque anti-Mormon” material around, and I will agree that this type of material is counter productive. But, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that people leave the church because the are “conned” by such materials. Often, people leave because they realize that the LDS church isn’t what it claims (i.e. not true). They do this by critically examining what different sources of information has to say. Perhaps I’ll read Mosser and Owen, but from my experience much of the apologetic writing regarding Mormonism involves using LDS produced materials to show inconsistances in doctrine within the LDS church (i.e. patterns of changing doctrine in a way that seems more consistant with PR needs than anything else) and inconsistancies with the Christian Gospel as understood through the Bible. I think people are smarter than you give them credit for. Any ex-Mormon knows that much of what is in “The Godmakers”, for example is stretching things if not untrue. But there are things in past LDS doctrine and history that have never been officially refuted by the LDS church that place a film like “Joseph Smith: Prophet of the Restoration” in much the same light. That is, stretching things if not outright untrue. More often the LDS strategy seems to be simply leaving out details (again that are never officially refuted) that aren’t “faith promoting”. The fact that the LDS leadership appears unwilling to discuss honestly thier own history to me shows a lack of leadership.

  16. Another point from our lovely Evangelicals Mosser & Owen: “Our fourth conclusion is that at the academic level evangelicals are losing the debate with the Mormons. We are losing the battle and do not know it. In recent years the sophistication and erudition of LDS apologetics has risen considerably while evangelical responses have not.4 Those who have the skills necessary for this task rarely demonstrate an interest in the issues. Often they do not even know that there is a need. In large part this is due entirely to ignorance of the relevant literature.”

    A very serious verbal towel-snap to the collective bottom of the counter-cultists if there ever was one. That stings.

    Now Mosser and Owen are not promoting the LDS crusade but they ARE facing the truth of LDS claims head on and recognizing some very sobering realities:

    “…Mormons, in distinction to groups like JWs [Jehovah’s Witnesses], produce work that has more than the mere appearance of scholarship. The second conclusion we have come to is that Mormon scholars and apologists (not all apologists are scholars) have, with varying degrees of success, answered most of the usual evangelical criticisms. Often these answers adequately diffuse particular (minor) criticisms. When the criticism has not been diffused the issue has usually been made much more complex.”

    Who among you are honest enough to admit such? Few if any.

    Anyway, David – I didn’t give a link because there isn’t one. The group is in the early formative stage. I have offered hard drive space on my server in Arizona as well as C# & SQL programming and bandwidth donations, we’ll see if they take me up on the offer.

    Viva La Revolucion! – JosephSmith.com

  17. falcon says:

    Well if Mosser and Owen say it, and wrote it in a book, then I give up! It must be true. And if it appears on the internet, then I’d really know it’s true. How about if I write something that is just the opposite? Is that true? I could even say “according to me”. I find the whole presentation to be a little self-serving like “Mormons good, Evangelicals bad….really bad.” I see this as another one of those Mormon rabbit trails they like to run Christians down in order to draw attention away from the issues being discussed….like the article posted above. For those interested, take a walk over to The Mormon Curtain website. The writings come from the exMo crowd. I’d say the Utah Mormons are doing enough on their own to drive the faithful away. By the way, according to me 98% of Christians involved in Mormon outreach are doing it for the glory of God. And 97% have IQs that exceed 135. You 3% know who you are because someone else is reading this to you.

  18. Marley says:

    I don’t believe the majority are conned by anti-Mormon sensationalistic activism. Once your complete and total trust has been violated by 30 years of “teachings”, and when you have been told to avoid being deceived by outsiders, it is crushing to find out that the deceivers are on the inside, or is that called “milk before meat”?
    For women if we don’t look for meat we don’t get it. In my old ward we always had a counselor to the bishop sit at the back of Relief Society to make sure we didn’t have any real discussions, or opinions.
    When you find out (Thank God for PBS)that there are multiple versions of the first vision, when you find out about Joseph’s teen wives, when you find out about the Book of Abraham you wonder what other facts have been kept from you, and a HUGE sense of relief hits you because now you KNOW why you never got the “burning” when begging for a witness of anything based on mormonism.
    You can’t really start to heal and figure out how you feel about God and religion when you are constantly being blindsided by “FACTS”.
    How many hours would one spend looking for biological parents if you found out you were adopted? If you found out you had an illness, how many hours would you spend researching treatments and cures? How many hours do people spend on degrees in theology? How many hours did we spend learning false teachings about a mormon history filled with fantasy?
    The amount of time people spend seeking the truth, if it brings them peace and the chance of a new beginning is worth every second.
    Share Matthew 15:1-20 about foolish traditions and listening to “your heart”. I have five adult members of my family who are now actually “studying” the bible instead of the BofM because of that one bible passage.
    Just my simple thoughts.

  19. gundeck says:

    Jason,

    Please note that the paper you site was published in 1998 and a call for a scholarly approach to the refutation of claims coming from the LDS church. The point of the Article clearly is to anounce that the LDS church is heavely invested in apologetics and that Christian scholars need to engage with this new “scholarship”.

    Before you get to worked up about a 10 year old paper, in response to their own call for scholarship, Carl Mosser, Paul Owen with Francis Beckwith edited “The New Mormon Challenge, Responding to the Latest Defenses of a Fast Growing Movement” in 2002. Their book is a must read for anyone interested in a “New” Christian response to the latest “apologetic” line coming out of Salt Lake. Of particular interest to me was Paul Capan’s and William Lane Craig’s chapter “Craftsman or Creator” an examination of the Mormon view of creation compared to traditional Christianities view of creation ex nihilo.

    Interestingly they chose to quote J. Gresham Machen (founder of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church ) “The defense of the faith should be of a scholarly kind. Mere denunciation does not constitute an argument; and before a man can refute successfully an argument of an opponent he must understand the argument that he is endeavoring to refute…”

    The Christian response to Mormon claims has come a long way in the 10 years since “Mormon Scholarship, Apologetics, and Evangelical Neglect” was published. As Christians we owe Carl Mosser and Paul Owen a debt of gratitude for calling us to a high standard in apologetics.

  20. Engaging Mormonism is not a purely academic affair, nor should it be. While I’d agree with Owen and Mosser that evangelical scholars should spend more time addressing the folks at Provo, it’s a shame that more officials from Salt Lake City don’t participate and provide clarity to the fog of Mormonism.

    One criticism I have of Owen and Mosser is that they project academia onto lower-level apologetics meant to be digested by the common people, meant to be used in interpersonal conversations with friends and strangers. Talking to so many regular Mormons, it’s hard for me to be told to view all of Mormonism through the lens of BYU academia.

    – Aaron

  21. David says:

    Paul Owen has dug himself into pit with several evangelicals (including pastors) and not all are involved in the counter-cult movement. Over at http://www.reformedcatholicism.com he pretty much had a melt down (a lot of people had melt downs) a while back. I think few evangelicals share his opinions.

    As far as Beckwith is concerned, well that is a different story altogether. For Mosser and the others (including Owen) who worked on The New Mormon Challenge, I think they over state things. First, not all of the arguments in The New Mormon Challenge are new. Second, yes Mormons have answered many objections a long time ago, however, those answers have only impressed those in their own camp (and even that not very well).

    This cadre of scholars (some from Biola) are the ones who brought you the Ravi Zacharias event/debacle. I seriously question what they are doing and how (I am not the only one either). I question choosing Blake Ostler to be present to engage audience members at the press conference type thing they had for the release of The New Mormon Challenge. Blake is one of the better LDS apologists, but I don’t think his theology is representative of rank-and-file Mormons.

    Mosser and Owen just said your camp is more academically astute than the JW’s. This is something to brag about? Jason have you interacted with the arguments that these men have leveled against Mormonism? Would you be terribly impressed if I brought out some quotes from the guys over at Signature Series?
    One of problems I have with the school of thought that these men belong to is that they put too much weight in what LDS apologists and theologians write/say and not enough on what GA’s past and present) have said.

    BTW, if indeed there is a 12-step group forming for anti-Mormons, are you the right person to be involved with it? I mean that is like letting a bartender be involved with AA. Honestly, you kinda seem a bit counter counter-cult to me.

  22. Rick B says:

    Jason, We have the Quron, satanic Bile, JW’s Bible and other such books out their, Simply because they exist and claim to be, does that make them true? According to your Logic about owen and mosser, the books I mentioned must be true because they have people who believe they are true. Thats really stupid logic. Rick b

  23. falcon says:

    I hate to be the skunk at the garden party here because there have been many good responses to Jason’s post. I say this because of what I see as Jason’s purpose in posting here. Isn’t it to discredit and discourage those of us who seek to shed the light of day on Mormonism? All this talk about the 12 step program was an attempt to take the wind out of the sails of those of us who labor to bring the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to a group of lost and deceived people. This is spiritual warfare and in this endeavor God has told us to put on the full armor to fight againist the attacks of the enemy. The shield of faith is of particular importance because it stops the firey arrows. The helmet of salvation protects our minds. The sword is the Word of God we use to inform, correct and rebuke as necessary. There’s more but all of the weapons with the exception of the sword are defensive weapons to protect us. So, to be honest, I really don’t take the Jason’s to seriously. He doesn’t really address the points made in the article but rather goes after Christians who are bringing some spiritual water to a parched group of people. We are very effective in what we do. The Jasons don’t want Mormonism to be exposed. His tactics just fire me up more.

  24. germit says:

    Sorry, but you have exceeded your daily comment limit [3] at Mormon Coffee.

    The following comment was not accepted …

    ===============================================

    Aaron: right on the money with your comment about apologetics and scholarship: not everyone needs to be C.S. Lewis or G.K. Chesterton (OK: or Hugh Nibley, happy there Jason??) all believers are called to be able to give a reason for the hope that is within them. For some, this will be in a class room or on a post like this one, but what a shame to limit the field of apologetics to these areas, or demand that everything have grad school status before God gives it the OK; quite possibly the BEST apologetics is happening in much quieter arenas, but men and women of no title or degree, in front of very small (earthly) audiences, and will never see their efforts in a professiional journal scholarship certainly has its place, but to our own master we stand or fall, and HE is able to make us stand blessings and permanence to the work of your mind and hands germit

    ===============================================


    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG.
    Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1502 – Release Date: 6/13/2008 7:25 PM

  25. winter says:

    I take it that some of you would like it if the LDS Church would be more ‘honest’ to it’s roots and doctrine if it just stuck to what Joseph Smith taught and practiced.

    Well, that would not be honest to our roots. The members of the LDS Church believe in – living prophets and continuing – being better today than we were yesterday.

    Do you expect anyone to believe that the LDS Church is the only Church with some skeletons in its closet? Could not a list of ‘evils’ be fabricated against every other people?

    Partially snipped. Stick to the related topics and don’t make personal attacks. – Aaron

  26. germit says:

    winter: as some have said post-Watergate: it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup. Evil has been done, and will be done by all kinds of people in all kinds of groups. How are such actions handled and what are the appropriate responses. One hallmark of a group that supports a false god or false philosophy is an unwillingness to forthrightly deal with it’s own history, warts and all. Yes racism continues to be area where many churches, mine included, have a long way to go, but I expect, no: DEMAND that my pastor deal with our track record on this issue in an honest way, and clearly point out that if racism was winked at in the past, this was sin and we , as fully as we can, repent of that and go forward. The LDS response seems to be: well, new revelation, praise God, let’s just all move forward with Gods plan. I suggest that half repentance is no repentance. I could’nt stay in a church like that , but then I guess that’s why I’m here and you’re there.

    There ARE some LDS who are “raising the bar” so to speak, and want honesty, clarity, and when needed, heartfelt contrition when dealing with their corporate shortcomings. Lord help us all: germit

  27. Ralph says:

    Just a thought. As mentioned all churches/religions have their fair share of skeletons in the closet. That does not make it any less true or false. One has to find what they are willing to believe in and stick to it warts and all. But with all of the stuff posted on this blog I think many of you are making a mountain out of mole hills with some of the issues brought up.

    Yes we teach in classes that polygamy happened in the early times of our church. As to who practised it we do not teach so most don’t know or understand that JS had more than one wife. But there are a couple of revelations in the D&C about it from JS himself, so the connection is there. Most know about BY but it is not openly taught in the manuals that he practised polygamy. As for the 14 year old wives, well as I said on another post, about 14 of the states allow marriages to people younger than 16 – this includes 14 and 13 year olds – in this day and age. So that’s no legal problem, but if you have a personal objection to it then make it your own don’t push it on others.

    As far as black people and the priesthood, that has been answered many times with the Bible. God works to His own timetable, not ours and He does things according to His larger picture not ours. In this respect why should we apologise for something we believe that God did. With the racist comments made by some of our church leaders in the past, why should I apologise for something someone else said/did if I am not at fault? It’s like when my son died, many people said they were sorry. Why should they be sorry, they didn’t kill my son. They can give commiserations or empathise with me but they don’t need to apologise.

    JS’s boast has been discussed in the past. He is not wrong by saying he did greater than Jesus in keeping a church together because the Bible states His true disciples will do greater works than Him. JS’s only wrong that I can see was the boasting.

  28. germit says:

    Ralph: I would submit that these issues are “molehills” to you because you’ve allowed yourself to accept a lower bar of honesty for your church: the teaching that you do get in church about polygamy isn’t so much information as disinformation (that’s why so few know the truth about JS past) but here is something to think about: judging from your posts, I’m willing to bet that your PERSONAL level of honesty is actually much higher than that of your church. I know that’s a subjective call on my part, but IF it were true, isn’t that a red flag to you??
    As for the “God did it” regarding the ban, put that statement at arms length and ask yourself how could the same God who said “there is neither greek or jew, slave or freedman, etc” POSSIBLY have signed off on descrimination IN THE CHURCH??
    your posts are very good, by the way thanks, germit

  29. falcon says:

    If you’re a Mormon the first thing you have to learn is that your personal testimony tops all evidence that a) the BoM is not a historical document b) Joseph Smith might not be the guy the Church says he is and c) there’s a whole bunch of Church history that isn’t just NOT taught, but stuffed into a closet with a “do not open” sign on the door. There is a constant theme that runs through the stories of exMos and that is that they feel the Church deceived them. How many times have we heard exMos say they feel they were duped; that they gave their time, money and energy to a lie. The result is an intense anger.
    For our friend Ralph, who is a smart, reflective guy, a “it doesn’t matter, all religions have skeletons in their closet” attitude has to be developed. In fact, there is nothing that can’t be explained away or alibied for. For example, so what if Joseph Smith married a 14 year old? It’s legal even today to marry 14 year olds in some states. So I ask, if the current prophet’s wife dies and he sees a 14 year old girl he’s hot for, and the parents give permission, why not fly the whole crew to New Hampshire for example, get married, come back to Utah, run a lap around the temple, it’s all good and legal. What’s wrong with that? It’s legal. If the same prophet, upon the death of his wife, decides to marry his long time male best friend, why not? Fly to California where as of today you can do that. It’s legal and if there is no sex involved, they’re just friends, why not? My Jonathan Swift point here is, there is nothing that can’t be justified or explained away in the pursuit of protecting the Mormon story. When in doubt repeat the standard issue testimony, it’s all good.
    Ignorance is not only bliss, it’s essential.

  30. Ralph says:

    Falcon,

    There are skeletons in the closet of your church/religion, does that make it a false religion to you? Are all of them openly discussed in your meetings with others of your faith or are they left by the wayside, forgotten until someone questions or points them out? All of the information about the past acts in the LDS church are available for the members – as I mentioned both polygamy and the ban on the priesthood for blacks are taught in our classes that they did happen and are part of our history. Also some of the revelations given about them are found in the D&C. That is not a cover-up. Just because it may be mentioned in classes once a year or something like that, or that many members do not know about it because they forgot or missed a lesson or the teacher did not go through the material on the day does not mean that the church is neglecting to tell us about the topic. Do you tell your new converts that the doctrine of the Trinity as described in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds is not found in the Bible? Or that according to the original Nicene Council, God only consisted of the Father and the Son making a Duality, that it wasn’t until half a century later they decided to place the Holy Spirit in to make the Trinity? If you don’t then aren’t you pulling the wool over your converts’ eyes similar to how you are accusing the LDS church of doing?

    As for your argument about the current prophet marrying a 14 yr old girl – If he does it the legal way and if the girl wants to marry him why should I care? Why should anyone LDS or non-LDS care? But the argument about the same sex marriage was just sensationalistic on your behalf. The LDS church teaches that marriage is only between man and woman unlike some Christian churches I know about. So the prophet would never marry a male whether it is legal or not.

  31. Jeffrey says:

    Falcon, theres a difference between creating Racist Doctrine, and members of the faith just being racist, even if its done in the guise of religion.

    The question is does the church leadership teach racist doctrine.. No true Christian church out there has taught that, and if they did, I would challenge their ability to call themselves a Christian church.

  32. Jeffrey says:

    Oops, I meant Ralph, not Falcon, hah.. sorry, at work and kind of rushed to make a comment.

  33. falcon says:

    Ralph,
    The history of the early Christian Church is well known. Countless books and aricles have dissected it. In 2,000 years the Church has reafirmed it’s doctrine, plowing the same ground countless times. Mormons are sailing around on a ship without a rudder, blown here and there with every new wind of doctrine.
    Mormonism continues to disguise itself to look like the First Baptist Church. So all this business of being open and honest is disingenuous. You have a prophet that was bedding kids and married women and the Church hides it and you defend it. Ralph what’s the pay off to you that you would accept such hideous behavior?
    People accept the doctrine of the trinity because it’s long and well established as the doctrine of the Christian Church. It’s a settled issue. I don’t think anyone gets to exercised about it, unless you belong to a heretical group such as Mormonism.
    Ralph you keep trying to do this argument from equivalency while defending Mormonism. It’s all “Yea, well look what so and so did.” It’s like “Well so what if Hitler put Jews in internment camps, Roosevelt did the same thing to Japanese Americans.”
    This is a continual ploy you use. You are a living example of a TBM. Joseoph Smith was a prophet of God and the Mormon Church is true and that’s the end of the discussion. Evidence to the contrary is rejected because you have a testimony. I’d probably be the same way if I woke-up every morning thinking I was going to become a god. I’d want to protect that notion no matter what.

  34. Ralph says:

    Jeffery,

    Here are a couple of websites that discuss racism in Christianity, more especially the Southern Baptists.

    http://www.thinkchristian.net/index.php/2006/07/20/the-church-racism-and-historical-injustice/

    http://atheism.about.com/b/a/258042.htm

    http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/05/14/baptist/index1.html

    http://www.probe.org/content/view/833/162/

    The last web site is about Christianity in general, not just Southern Baptists, and here is a quote from the last website which I find negates your comment about racism not being taught by Christianity but as opinion of people. Note the part I bolded –

    “Not only did Christianity fail to offer the … [Black] hope of freedom in the world, but the manner in which Christianity was communicated to him tended to degrade him. The … [Black] was taught that his enslavement was due to the fact that he had been cursed by God. … Parts of the Bible were carefully selected to prove that God had intended that the…[Black] should be the servant of the white man….”

    So Christianity taught that the Black was “cursed by God”. This is what was taught from the pulpits so you can’t tell me it wasn’t seen as doctrine. If you want to say it was the ministers’ opinions then why can’t you let the LDS say that it was only a personal opinion of our leaders as well?

  35. I would quickly admit that Mormonism inherited racism from Protestantism. However, Mormonism pushed this racism as revelatory doctrine from the pulpit of people who claimed to be apostles and prophets. It’s a lot harder to distance oneself from apostle and prophets than it is pastors and non-authoritative theologians.

  36. Ralph says:

    Falcon,

    You said ”you keep trying to do this argument from equivalency while defending Mormonism”. I have said many times in the past – You and others on this site ask how we can believe what we believe, so I am showing you how by reflecting your belief back onto you. How can you believe in the Trinity when the Trinity described in the 2 main creeds is not found in the Bible? Just to point out I am only discussing the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds here plus any others based on these. If you have something that predates these which you wish to believe in then that’s fine. Then in my last post I asked the question do you tell any converts about this detail on the Creeds? If not isn’t that being dishonest because you are not giving full disclosure. Is this not the same as you accusing the LDS of not telling investigators about how we believe that we can become like God? Even though the Trinity is “well established as the doctrine of the Christian Church” does not mean that it is correct.

    As far as your last statement goes, I have said that I have done much research into the LDS church at one point in time and questioned most of what I believed in. I have found my evidences of the truthfulness of the LDS church from all of this research. I went through sites like MRM, Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Ed Decker’s site, Ex-Mormon, Mormon Outreach Ministry, among others. I also looked into some other churches’ teachings for comparison. I also went to FAIRLDS and FARMS and the main LDS site. So its not because I wake up every morning thinking about my future as a god, its because I have chosen to believe in this church from my own research AND a spiritual witness.

  37. germit says:

    Ralph: You normally construct a fairly well reasoned argument, but your logic is starting to go fuzzy:
    1. I’ve been a christian now for just over 30 years and I have NEVER heard of anyone, in any evangelistic or training situation “hold back” or “keep hidden” that teaching of the trinity, or how it was derived. Granted, many christians don’t understand the creeds as well as we should, but from our perspective, there is no history for us to be ashamed about, because the formation of the creeds and the political situation surrounding them did not (according to the historians I trust) play out as you and your LDS claim they have. You might reread Aarons back and forth with Blake Ostler about this issue, which I thought was excellent. Yes, you have other historians who see this differently, but citing a few favorites is not the same as knowing that the preponderance of scholarship backs you up. Are you making that claim?? The situation is different for your leaders and polygamy, and their stance on race. Too recent and too documented to ignore or treat as folklore, though your church has tried that before also.
    I think others have posted before on scriptural reasons to believe in the trinity, and that same material is pretty easy to find; the fact that the word “trinity” is not in the bible is the silliest reason in the world to discount the possibility that it’s biblical: it’s a word that describes, in part, a set of realities regarding the nature of God. Are those realities found in the bible or not? If so, zip it. If not, show us how the exegesis falls short and fails to show what we say it does. To compare our defense of the trinity, which has been accepted by the great majority of those calling themselves christian for the past 2 thousand years, and your defense of practices that BOTH your side and ours admit are against God strikes me as odd and illogical. Germit

  38. falcon says:

    Ralph,
    we’re dealing with the reality of the nature of God as taught in the Bible. What the doctrine is labeled is immaterial. What’s important is that the concept is there. You can’t find mother/father god and man’s progression to godhood in the Bible. You can’t find the concept of secret passwords that men use to call their wives through the veil or a place called the celestial kingdom. You can’t find descriptions of secret handshakes or throat slitting or bowel disection gestures either. You can’t find any Mormon rituals or concepts like eternal marrage. So in your deep study you missed something.
    I too have a witness from the Spirit and a testimony and it comes right out of Pentecost. Which of us has the reliable witness and revelation from God? There definitely is a spirit of Mormonism. It’s very strong and it has a tight hold on you. That’s evident. This is a spiritual battle.

  39. Jeffrey says:

    I mirror Aaron’s sentiments exactly.

    Maybe you failed to notice, but pastors of Christian church’s don’t claim to be the direct mouth piece of God. And, if one so happens to claim that, the whole of Christianity is quick to reject/refute that claim..

    The “Prophet” of the LDS church is supposed to be Gods mouthpiece on earth, and they even claim it. They also claim to not lead one astray.. It’s unfortunate that Brigham Young has done that with the rejected adam/god doctrine.

    I don’t see where you fail to realize this.

  40. falcon says:

    Mormon “prophets” have consistantly rejected the Gospel of Jesus Christ as clearly presented in the Bible and have embraced another gospel and another God. These prophets have taught doctrines that have been in error not only in regards to the Christian Gospel but to their own subsequent teachings. We know this because Mormon “prophets” and teachers reject the doctrines proclaimed previously. Now in the Christian faith, if someone teaches something that isn’t consistant with accepted doctrine, they are rejected and deemed a heretic. This is not so in Mormonism. Joseph Smith taught that plural marrage must be practiced to reach the highest level of what he called the celestial kingdom. Oops, subsequent “prophets” said “we’re not going to do that any more” but we’ll keep it on the books just in case God changes his mind again. However Smith’s joining of himself in marrage with young girls and other men’s wives is hushed-up least it tarnish the prophets image. What about the prophet Smith’s fraudulent translation of the Book of Abraham which proved beyond a doubt that he had no ability, gift or revelation to translate anything. Shhhhhhhh, it’s still accepted as scripture in the Mormon Church. B. Young’s adam-god doctrine. Another oops! Is the prophet Young labeled a heretic. Of course not. The Mormon rule is that revelation by the prophet doesn’t have to be true or even accepted by subsequent generations. We’re talking about the main dudes here, those that spoke for God,infallible, not some speculator. It’s just true for a time. Then it can become untrue. The Mormon cover-up and PR machine is kept constantly busy and the faithful must adapt a “what me worry” attitude.
    But for many Mormons there is a tipping point where the predonderance of evidence for them personally becomes too much and they bail on the program. Others maintain that their testimony tops any real evidence that the whole deal is bogus.

  41. Jeffrey says:

    Sub said “The pastors may not claim to be ‘prophets’ as a group but they are often seen by the congregation as such”

    I can only speak for me personally, but at church, it’s pretty obvious that the guy speaking isn’t Jesus Christ, nor a prophet of God. In this day and age, if some people put so much faith in their “church leader”, their faith is being put in the wrong person. Only Jesus Christ and his Word, deserve that faith (trust).

    The honest truth is that Christianity as a whole is getting more and more diluted. Sin becoming worse and more prevalent. And it should be as it is described in the Book of Revelation. Pat Robertson made “prophecies” of the world ending in 1982.. Did it? No.. he fails the test of a prophet so one should be very careful when listening to his teachings. Has he done some good things in life? Sure, but that doesn’t negate the fact that everything he says should be compared with what’s written in the Bible.

    That’s the difference here. Prophets are “more valuable” in the mormon church than any scripture. In other words, the “words of men” are more important than the Words of God. And, when the leaders of the LDS church “lead you astray” with false doctrine, you attempt to cover for them.

    You should put all your faith in Christ and in His Word. The minute you don’t, you allow yourself to be yanked around by the fallible. I struggled with the Trinity (before I got much into scripture), but when I read all the verses that could pertain to the triune God, it made a lot of sense and I made a decision to believe in that as His nature. I didn’t believe it just because some creeds put it into words.

  42. falcon says:

    Ahhhhhh,
    Where to start? God is unchangable. He’s the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. And yes, in our walk we become more like Christ in character. Pilgrim’s Progress is a great reference.
    I would also say that as Christians we are taught to be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. To that end we are to put on the full armor of God, that we can stand firm against the schemes of the devil. We know that our struggle isn’t against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, powers and world forces of darkness, against spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. We do battle, in the spiritual realm as well as in the natural world. It is a battle because there are those that would love to defraud people of the free gift of eternal life that God offers. They follow prophets who are inflated in their fleshly minds taking stands on visions they have seen and in the worship of angels.
    There is a basic standard of doctrine within the Christian faith. Christian denominations get the doctrine of the nature of God right. They understand who Jesus and the Holy Spirit are. Yea, there have been some very public knock down, drag out fights over the centuries, but the basic doctrine of the Christian faith remains and is subscribed to by the various denominations.
    But my concern is for the salvation of souls. An imitation, counterfeit Jesus can’t save. If people claim to be Christian but don’t get the nature of God right, then they are dealing with a false religion.

  43. sweetieabbott says:

    How is it that you all feel justified in showing your anger to a religion that you truely do not understand. I do not know where you get all of your “facts” but they are most definatly not true. As an LDS member I have not been tricked into any of my beliefs. I have actually met quite a few people who were anti-mormon who got out of this pit of anger that you are all in and was able to search for the truth, not lies that are a dime a dozen out there in the world. If you ask some one who hates Mormonism why, there is bound to be plenty of fabrication on our beliefs. Just the other day someone said to my husband “did you know that there were mormon canabals?” It is lies like this that are being circulated and unfounded. We later found out by searching where he may have heard this ther is a wholemusical that was sick and very fictional. His reply was “that’s funny because I was just making that up on the spot” There are peole out there constantly trying to tear us down. If you all are serching for the truth about Mormons you need to look into our actual doctorine and not the lies circulating by people who have been hurt by those around them. We are all human and so by default we make human error. The wonderful thing is that we are able to repent of our sins and strive to live after Christs example and become better. The majority of people that I know who have left the LDS faith have done so because they have been offended by a person, not by the religion. Or by someone miss speaking. Whoever it was that said that we are discouraged to read along in our scripture during our meetings is not speaking of any doctorine. I have never heard of anyone discouraging following along in scripture. I have been in plenty of Wards in different areas including Utah as I am connected with the military. In fact I would say that it is encouraged. Please get your facts straight so you are not authoring lies.

  44. Jeffrey says:

    sweetieabbott,

    Instead of making blanket statements that all our “facts” are unfounded and not true, pick one and let’s discuss. This ad-hominem attack by you doesn’t help prove your point.

    I never heard that Mormons are cannibals, and with all the study I have done so far, that hasn’t shown up so if that exists, it probably isn’t well documented. That person who said that is probably ignorant.

    Let me let you in on a secret.. I too greatly dislike when people who haven’t done any real studying say things about Mormonism that are completely out of left field.. Why? Because it makes Mormons even more defensive about honest study and just write it off as “untrue like the rest of it.” It gives truth seekers a bad name..

    As for not following along in your scripture, the First Presidency has issued that statement. If you have an issue with that, then write Mr. Monson and tell him so. It is in sacrament meeting only that it is now discouraged.

    I have attended an LDS ward for the past 5 years up until recently so I know exactly what goes on in each of the 3 meetings, (except for relief society of course, because I’m a dude). But on that I can take my wife’s word for it.

    The topics we bring up on here are factual and written in your very own manuals found throughout your history. In fact, it is the LDS church’s very history that made my wife leave.. Not some random “Mormon’s are cannibals” statement by an uninformed person.

  45. jackg says:

    sweetieabbot,

    I understand your passion and defense of your faith. I have stood in your shoes know where you’re coming from. I, for one, am not trying to tear down Mormons. As for knowing the truth of Mormon doctrine, I think I’m qualified since I was a member, a missionary, and a member of the bishopric. I was married in the temple and, like you, believed I was doing what the LORD wanted me to do. It is not out of anger that most former Mormons speak out against the heresies of polygamy, blood atonement, and Adam/God doctrine, but out of love. It might be difficult for you to understand this because you feel as if you are being attacked. Regrettably, there have been attacks spawned by passion and some walking in the flesh; however, that does not diminish the fact that every former Mormon posting on this site is doing it because we believe we have been called to the ministry of reaching out to Mormons. I admit that even though our motives are perfect, sometimes our words and actions aren’t. Personally, I don’t believe this topic to be much of an issue when measured against the bigger picture of LDS leaders teaching and perpetuating doctrines that defy logic and which go against biblical Christianity. I know this sounds harsh to you, but it is the reality of the situation. Hope you understand. Grace and peace, Jack.

  46. sweetieabbott says:

    I’ sorry that I miss read that comment following in scriptures during sacrament meeting. Just to make that clear the reason being is that during sacrament it is a time to bear one’s testimony. While the person giving the talk is speaking it is not like you will get in trouble or dirty looks if you do decide to follow in your scriptures. It is just a recommendation and I stand by what I said that it is not doctorine. I’m sorry to say that there is plenty in this blog that is untrue about the mormon religion. And so you should still get your facts straight. For example Joseph Smith did not translate the Book of Mormon by looking into his hat. That was actually started by the creators of South Park who were members of this church and were excommuncated. It saddens me to hear that someone who served in the bishopric got to point to that they fell away for the truth. And to correct you I am not feeling personally attacked but I am feeling like something that is very persnol and special to me is. Nothing that we teach goes against the bible in fact it is to be used hand in hand with the bible. There are so many misconseptions of our faith. There are some ho lose there faith because they have researched into other religions and find similarities and are appauled because those things should only be tied with our religion. That is very ignorant to say because our practices go way back and of course will have been melded into other religions. What makes our so different and wonderful is that we hold all of the keys that the Lord meant for the true Church of Christ to hold. I hope you will take my words to heart and look a little harder for the truths in our religion.

  47. sweetieabbott, please consider the words of BYU professor and Mormonism-defender Daniel Peterson:

    “We know that Joseph didn’t translate the way that a scholar would translate. He didn’t know Egyptian. There were a couple of means that were prepared for this. One was he used an instrument that was found with the plates that was called the Urim and Thummim. This is a kind of a divinatory device that goes back into Old Testament times. Actually most of the translation was done using something called a seer stone. He would put the stone in the bottom of a hat, presumably to exclude surrounding light. And then he would put his face into the hat. It’s a kind of a strange image for us.” (>>)

  48. Jeffrey says:

    Sweetieabbot, here is another reference from an LDS source on the “hat trick” –

    David Whitmer (one of the witnesses shown within the very first couple pages of the BOM), Book entitled: An Address to All Believers in Christ – pg. 12
    “I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.”

    Even scholars don’t dispute these facts, as doing so would be like throwing bleach on a dark blue shirt. There are even more LDS references out there for this.

    This troubles me greatly, Sweetieabbot. One can conclude that you never even looked into this for yourself and developed your belief on this subject simply through what you heard in church or saw in one of the paintings in your ward (i.e. Joseph Smith staring at some gold plates, looking as though he is translating) – If this doesn’t raise a red flag for you, then I’m sad because it is as though you’re purposely covering your eyes.

    So if you have another subject that is “untrue”, feel free to share and perhaps some light can be spread on it. More often than not, an LDS reference is used.

    I hope you take my words to heart AND mind, and look a little harder for the truths in your religion.

  49. ambassador25 says:

    As a long time reader but new to “comments” I wanted to take a moment to thank everyone that works so hard to provide material on the blog and MRM as well as to all of you who provide comments. Thank you to all of you who take the time to provide material for those of us who are still learning about Christianity and the LDS faith.

    I wanted to take a moment to respond to reference to the history of racism in parts of Christianity particularly the SBC. I also want to mirror Aaron’s sentiments as his point is something to keep in mind.

    As a Protestant Christian living in Utah this is something I’ve heard a lot of in recent weeks from my LDS friends and neighbors. They are quick to point out to me that the Southern Baptists were basically started as a result of the slavery issues, hence, pointing to its racist past. Well indeed slavery was, in fact, one of several political/economic issues that prompted the split of the Baptist denomination prior to the civil war. But the SBC has publicly apologized for its role in perpetuating the sin of slavery and racism. Moreover, it is one of the most ethnically diverse Protestant denomination today. I hope that diversity is the fruit of repentance. But never in the history of the Baptist Church was there any additional revelation to either promote or refute slavery. Baptists have consistently gone to what Protestant Christians consider the finished revelation of God, the Bible, to address issues of faith and practice. There may have been wide disagreements as to interpretation of Scripture, but sola scriptura was the only basis for the debate.

    So yes there has been racism in our past, but this is something for which public repentance and apology was given, specifically by the Southern Baptists about 15 years ago if I remember correctly. Again, I believe this has been mentioned before but I wanted to reiterate the point. As a Southern Baptist I hope our denomination is more Christ like in this arena.

  50. jackg says:

    sweetieabbot,

    I appreciate your concern, but don’t be saddened over the fact that I left the Church. It was the greatest thing to happen to me because God led me out of the LDS Church. What should be personal and special to all of us is Christ Jesus Himself–no one else and nothing else. Contrary to what you think or believe, the truth is that the LDS teaches lots of doctrine that goes against biblical truth. One teaching that I’d like to point out to you has to do with the temple ritual that teaches that a woman cannot enter God’s presence (salvation) without her husband calling her by her new name; basically, she is dependent on her husband for salvation. Here’s what the Bible teaches: “Neither is salvation found in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12, KJV). That name is Jesus Christ. In truth, the only misconceptions of the LDS faith are held by its members.

Comments are closed.