In the ongoing Mormon Apologist Wars on the location of the Book of Mormon lands, one advocate of the LGT (Limited Geography Theory) is Michael Ash. In February of this year, he published an article entitled, “How Moroni and the plates may have made it to Hill Cumorah.” He postulates that Moroni traveled from Mesoamerica to New York, and could have done it in under a year.
In fact, we are told that Moroni, while on his way to drop off the golden plates he lugged all the way to the Hill Cumorah in New York (named he says, after another hill of the same name located somewhere in Central America), Moroni stopped in Arizona, then went on to Salt Lake; afterwards going to Missouri (Independence & Adam-Ondi-Ahman) and then he journeyed to Nauvoo and Pike County in Illinois, and, before getting to New York, stopped in Kirtland Ohio!
Mr. Ash comes by this information from a map allegedly drawn by information that came directly from the Prophet Joseph Smith. Says Ash,
“If the map is genuine and accurately reflects the thinking of early Latter-day Saints and/or Joseph Smith, it supports the theory that Moroni traveled Northward along what became the El Camino, continued traveling north-northwest to Arizona, and then worked his way north through Utah (where we learn that he dedicated the spot for the Manti Temple as well as other temple sites) and eventually found his way to upstate New York.”
Fascinated by the idea of this map, I followed the link Mr. Ash provided in his article to another one, which was an article by H. Donl Peterson, called “Moroni, the Last of the Nephite Prophets,” where he provides a copy of the map. Here is a picture of the map (Figure 2 from Dr. Peterson’s article):
Actually, there are two maps, virtually identical to each other, with only minor differences that Dr. Peterson explains:
“Several years ago, I came across two copies of a map in the Archives Division of the Historical Department of the Church relative to Moroni’s North American journeys… On the back of the map in Figure 1 is written the following:
“’A chart, and description of Moroni’s travels through this country. Got it from Br. Robert Dickson. He got it from Patriarch Wm. McBride at Richfield in the Sevier and also from Andrew M. Hamilton of same place. And they got it from Joseph Smith the Prophet.’”
Dr. Peterson continues with a detailed description of both maps, included here to help readers better understand what the map depicts:
“On the map ‘land Bountifull [sic]’ is listed in ‘Sentral [sic] America.’ The cartographer wrote ‘starting point’ below the reference to Central America. Above the ‘land Bountifull’ is ‘Sand hills in south part of Arizona,’ and above it to the left is ‘Salt Lake.’ To the right is ‘Independens, Jackson Co, Mo.’ and above that is ‘Adam on Diamon, Davis Co, Mo.’ To the right of that is ‘Nauvoo, Hancock C.Ill.’ Below that is ‘Mound Kinderhook, Pick, Co, Ill, 6 Plates Bell shape were found’ (were was was on one copy). Then to the right and above that is ‘Kirtland, Ohio,’ and to the right of that is ‘Commorre [Cumorah], N.Y.’ Below this on the right-hand side of the map is written: ‘Moroni’s Travels starting from Sentral America to the Sand hills Arizona then to Salt Lake U[tah], T[erritory], then to Adam on Diammon Mo, then to Nauvoo, Ill, then to Independence Mo, then to Kirtland Ohio then to Cumoro NY.’
“The second map appears to have been drawn by the same hand and is quite similar to the first, though it twice spells Arizona as Arisony (one ‘y’ has an ‘a’ written over it); ‘eden’ is written near the circle identifying ‘Independense’; ‘where adam blessed his posterity’ is written near the circle identifying ‘Adam on Diammon’; the ‘missisipy river’ is listed near Nauvoo; Kirtland is twice misspelled ‘kertland’; and Cumorah is misspelled ‘Cunora’ and ‘Cumora.’”
Dr. Peterson writes this conclusion about the maps:
“It is interesting to note that the brethren mentioned on these documents were contemporaries of the Prophet Joseph Smith, and they credited him with the notion that the travels of Moroni began in the land Bountiful, which was in Central America, and went through the western New York. Why Moroni took the route he did is still without answers. These men stated that the Prophet Joseph believed Bountiful is in Central America while the Hill Cumorah, the burial place of the plates, is in New York State.”
Peterson references a comment Brigham Young made in 1875 on the day of the dedication of the Manti temple site. Young reportedly said, “Here is the spot where the prophet Moroni stood and dedicated this piece of land for a Temple site, and that is the reason why the location is made here, and we can’t move it from this spot…” Then Peterson states,
“That Moroni dedicated the Manti Temple site is one of the few statements the Brethren have made connecting a Book of Mormon figure with a specific current place and action. This aids us in documenting one of Moroni’s travels and priesthood assignments.”
I find it incredible that these same men, who discount statements by Joseph Fielding Smith, Oliver Cowdery and others, that there was only one Hill Cumorah, and it was in New York, would give credence to a statement by Brigham Young about Moroni going to Utah, and this map purported to have been drawn at the direction of Joseph Smith, while discounting the multitude of statements that locate the Hill Cumorah in New York.
What I found the most interesting about all of this was the side trip that Moroni took to Pike County Illinois. If anyone is familiar with Mormon History, they will remember that an interesting discovery was found there, known as ‘The Kinderhook Plates’. If this map is genuine, and Moroni went there, why would he go to a place where phony plates were buried in an attempt to fool Joseph Smith? And if this map was drawn at the direction of Smith, does this prove that he was taken in by the Kinderhook hoax?
We will now inquire in relation to the Saviour himself. From whom did he descend? From the house of David a polygamist; and if you will trace the names of the families through which he descended you will find that numbers of them had a plurality of wives. How appropriate it would have been for Jesus, descending as he did from a race of polygamists, to have denounced this institution of plural marriage and shown its sinfulness, had it been a sin! Can we suppose, for one moment, if Patriarchal marriage were wrong, that He would, under the circumstances, have been silent concerning it or failed to denounce it in the most positive manner? Then if plural marriage be adultery and the offspring spurious, Christ Jesus is not the Christ; and we must look for another.”
–JD 13:42, George Albert Smith, October 8, 1869–
In relation to Father Jacob, it is true he had four wives, and they bore him twelve sons, and their descendants are the twelve tribes of Israel. We are told by the Apostle John that the names of Jacob’s twelve sons—the sons of a polygamist and his four wives—will be written upon the gates of the holy Jerusalem; and there are none of us who expect to enter in through those gates but will have to acknowledge the truth of that doctrine. It is true that the principle of plurality of wives was adopted by the Church of Latter-day Saints in consequence of the revelation and commandment which God gave to Joseph Smith, and which, through him, were laid upon the heads of this people; and we quote the passages that we do quote, in relation to the principle of celestial marriage from the Old and New Testament, to prove that God is consistent with himself;
that if he revealed to his Saints in the last days, the doctrine of plurality of wives, it was in fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah and others of the Prophets, and in accordance with the example which was set by Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and by holy men of ancient days.
In relation to the word “reproach” in our text, I will make another reference. In the first chapter of Luke’s Gospel, verses 23 and 24, we find Elizabeth rejoicing because God had taken away her reproach. She though she had been barren, became the mother of John the Baptist.
These passages tell in so many plain words why it was that seven women wished to be called by the name of one man—it was that they might have the privilege of bearing children.
Now, if God brings to pass this prophecy in the glorious day which our text speaks of, when holiness and righteousness are to rule, and when truth is to have dominion, and peace dwell in the earth, although all the world may have been opposed to it, we can not be responsible. Until some person can find a passage in the Old or New Testament that definitely forbids a plurality of wives, with the many incidents of history, items of law, and declarations of Prophets in relation to the practice by the ancient Saints of that doctrine, we are able to assert that the Bible is a polygamous book, and that no man can believe it without believing plurality of wives, under some circumstances to be correct. I know it has been said that the Old Testament permitted plurality of wives, but the New forbids it.
The Savior said he came not to destroy the law but to fulfil it, and that not a jot or tittle of the law or Prophets should pass away, but all should be fulfilled. The new dispensation did not annihilate the principles of law and right, as revealed in the Old. Both John the
page 29
Baptist and the Savior denounced all sins with an unsparing hand, and especially adultery, fornication and divorce; and not a sentence is found in the New Testament which prohibits plurality of wives, though the Savior and his Apostles lived in a country where it was practised; and it is impossible to believe that if it were a sin it would have escaped definite rebuke and absolute condemnation.
[Helen, please provide source references in future comments. This and the quotes of the previous 2 comments by Helen are found in JOD 15:28-29, President George A. Smith, May 19, 1872.]
grindael,
A shout out to you for your tremendous documentation in the posts above and your defense of my efforts on MC. Now you and I both know that it won’t make one bit of difference to our TBM poster Helen, but it will to those questioning Mormons who come here looking for information. I’m sure for those of you who have made that journey out of Mormonism into faith in Christ, there’s a level of understanding into the mind-set of the Molly Mormons like Helen that those of us who’ve never been there don’t get. I’m trying to figure out if she’s in the “denial” stage or the “rationalization” stage none the less she’s lost.
Personally, I can’t imagine being so taken in by something that I couldn’t recognize the obvious. But then the Jewish leaders didn’t recognize Jesus either and they were studying the Scriptures looking and waiting for the Messiah. They missed the time of their visitation. We can only hope that Helen isn’t one of those whose heart is so hardened that she misses what God has lovingly placed right before her.
Falcon stated, “The “Joseph Smith fraud” allegation is just one such instance.
I rest my case with his own words, ” ALLEGATION”.
Allegations remain assertions without proof Falcon. I see the game of words, but too actually correct me you would need to go the reality route. 🙂
Helen/Louis. 🙂
Helen,
So we’re back to playing word games this time with “allegation”. Smith was convicted Helen in a court of law. I can see where your faith in the glass-looker, as he was referred to in the proceedings, is starting to falter when you have to strain at gnats in order to avoid the camels. Helen what difference would it make in your life if you did come to the correct understanding that Smith was convicted in a court of law for his unlawful activity? You’d just come-up with some lame excuse anyway. Your whole life is wrapped-up in Mormonism. It’s easier to lie to yourself then ever think about the possibility that you’re following a false prophet.
OK, I’m going to help you out a little bit. It goes against my policy of you finding it for yourself. It’s a little tease for you.
Text from the 1826 trial record:
“…he had a certain stone, which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth…”
“…the Prisoner could tell and possessed the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone…”
“Josiah Stowel sworn, says that, prisoner had been at his house, something like 5 months, had been employed by him to work on farm part of time—that he pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were by means of looking through a certain stone…”
“… that Smith arrived at Spot first, was in night, that Smith looked in Hat while there and when very dark, and told how the chest was situated…”
“… And therefore the Court find the Defendant guilty.”
Glass Looking / Treasure Seeking Arrests & Conviction
Joseph Smith Jr. hired himself out to land owners, offering to find buried treasure on their property, for a fee, by looking into a hat that contained one or more ‘seer stones’ inside it. Did he actually find treasure? Did the people who trusted him to find treasure ever recover treasure on their property? There is no record of Joseph Smith Jr. ever finding buried treasure.
Helen,
Here’s a little more to wet your appetite. I’m not going to source it because why bother. It will never be enough, the right kind, you weren’t there at the time, it’s all made up lies by enemies of the church, there were lots of prophets in the Bible who were sinners, my favorite restaurant is not serving it’s usual Saturday pot roast special. It really doesn’t matter to a true believer.
Your counting on going to the Celestial Kingdom where you will be a goddess and rule along with your man-to-god husband and you will have a forever family and that’s the end of it.
Not only was he arrested four times in the mid 1820’s, he was ultimately convicted of a misdemeanor.
He was convicted, and whether or not you think this was training for his future role in life, the activity was patently against the law, it was considered to be on par with fraud or what we might call con-artistry. This type of behavior was then and is now considered to be socially unacceptable. Was Joseph Smith Jr. participating in activity that was socially unacceptable — even against the law? He was in fact taken to court and convicted of the misdemeanors; disorderly conduct and being an imposter. Does this make him more or less trustworthy?
[Falcon (and everyone else), please do include source references for material you quote. Thank you.]
“my favorite restaurant is not serving it’s usual Saturday pot roast special.”
hahahaha
So Helen,
At least bump yourself over to the final question that the author above asks? But in order to get to that question you have to at least face reality. Smith was a glass-looker. He was convicted in a court of law of the activity. It’s a fact. Now you have to find some sort of spin in order to keep the Mormon ruse going in your own mind. What’s the excuse going to be Helen?
Maybe it’s that the keyboard I’m typing on here isn’t quite right. I should be using the ergonomically designed one located on the shelf under my desk. You remind me of John Dehlin with the presentation he has on Mormon stories “Why People Leave the LDS Church”. John presents the whole truckload of evidence and then says something like “But that doesn’t mean the Church isn’t true.” or “That’s no reason to leave the Church.”
I’m thinking, “You have to be kidding me!” But that’s part of the mental/emotional process that people go through on their way out the LDS door. Incidentally, John recently ended up leaving the church himself. I’ve read enough exit testimonies of exLDS folks to know that the process is excruciating for many because of the loss that’s involved. But the good news is for those who come to Christ, everything they lost is counted as rubbish in light of what they gain in the Lord.
Falcon,
I can see it now, Helen dies and stands before God, God says JS was a fraud and liar, Helen will say, Nope, he was never convicted.
God will say everything you believed was lies.
Helen, will say, Nope, I am correct not you.
Regarding Joseph Smith’s trial in Bainbridge, New York, in 1826, Fraser’s Magazine (February, 1873, pp. 229-230) published the court record from the trial. At the bottom it states: “And therefore the Court find the defendent guilty.” The Mormons disupute this, of course. I also have a full-page copy Justice Albert Neely’s bill for the trial and his costs charged ($2.68). On the court blodder it states: “Joseph Smith, The Glass looker, March 20, 1826; Misdemeanor.” I can’t post copies on this blog, but if one wanted to search it out they could find it. It’s also on page 33 of Sandra Tanner’s “Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?”
It is also interesting to note that in 1828 this same charge got Joseph Smith expelled from the Methodist Church where Emma was attending. Emma had been nagging Joseph about attending the Methodist Church with her. He finally relented, but when the church elders found out about Joseph’s folk magic fascination and participation, he was promptly given the boot for engaging in divination which is an abomination before God (Deut 18:10-12).
Joseph Smith speaks of his involvement with the Methodists in Joseph Smith History 1:8. Later in JS History 1:19 supposedly Joseph is told by the Father and the Son: “I was answered that I must join none of them [Christian churches], for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creedsd were an abomination in his sight”. I guess Joseph forgot all about this in his church shopping endeavors just a few years later in 1827-1828 shortly after his marriage to Emma. The Methodists were only one of several stops for poor Emma in her hopes of trying to have somewhat a life of normality.
Lucy Smith, Joseph’s mother, was supposedly attending a Presbyterian Church at the time of Joseph Smith’s supposed trot and adventure in the woods at Palmyra. If Lucy Smith would have been told what the Father and the Son said to Joseph and believed it, she would not have joined the Presbyterian Church with several of her children. I guess she wasn’t convinced of Joseph’s declaration upon returning from the woods as recorded in JS History 1:20 – “…I went home…I then said to my mother, ‘I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true’.”
Now, picture this for yourself. Joseph claims in this record to have seen and spoken with the Father and the Son. He goes home and he “leaned up to the fireplace” and has a calm chat with his mother. All he has to report is something about Presbyterianism. Compare that reaction to those who had seen the risen Savior after the resurrection. What was Moses reaction coming down from Mt. Sinai after having received the Law and a passing glimpse of God’s glory? Yeah, I smell a rat (bogus story) and the teller of it is Joseph Smith. A mother knows her son.
Lucy Smith: “During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them” (History of Joseph Smith, p. 83).
I’d now like to call Richard Bushman (LDS historian) to the witness stand to see what he writes of Smith’s involvement in magic/glass-looking in his book “Rough Stone Rolling” which is a biography of Joseph Smith:
“The firsthand accounts of treasure-seeking necessarily came from people who had gone on expeditions themselves and were participant observers. In exposing the Smith, the neighbors inadvertently described a culture of magic in which they and many others in nineteenth century New York were involved.” (p. 49)
“The Smiths were as susceptible as their neighbors to treasure-seeking folklore. In addition to rod and stone divining, the Smiths probably believed in the rudimentary astrology found in the ubiquitous almanacs. Magical parchments handed down in the Hyrum Smith family may have originally belonged to Joseph Sr.” (p. 50)
“Lucy’s [Smith] point was that the Smiths were not lazy – they had not stopped their labor to practice magic – but she showed her knowledge of formulas and rituals and associated them with ‘the welfare of our souls.’ MAGIC AND RELIGION MELDED IN SMITH FAMILY CULTURE…Joseph Jr. NEVER repudiated the stones or denied their power to find treasure. REMNANTS OF THE MAGICAL CULTURE STAYED WITH HIM TO THE END.” (pp. 50-51)
“He [Joseph Smith] may still have been involved in magic, but he was sincere when he told Emma’s father that his treasure-seeking days were over. Magic had served its purpose in his life. In a sense, IT WAS A PREPARATORY GOSPEL.” (p. 54)
“Joseph looked backward toward folk beliefs in divine power communicated through stones, visions, dreams, and angels.” (p. 57)
From Richard Bushman’s “Rough Stone Rolling” continued:
“Neither his [Joseph Smith] education nor his Christian upbringing prepared Joseph to translate a book, but THE MAGIC CULTURE MAY HAVE. Treasure-seeking taught Joseph to look for the unseen in a stone. His first reaction when he brought home the Urim and Thummim was delight with its divining powers. ‘I can see any thing,’ he told his friend Joseph Knight. He knew from working with his own seerstone what to expect from the Urim and Thummim: he would ‘see.’ Practice with his scrying stones carried over to translation of the gold plates. In fact, as work on the Book of Mormon proceeded, A SEERSTONE TOOK THE PLACE OF THE URIM AND THUMMIM as an aid in the work, BLENDING MAGIC WITH INSPIRED TRANSLATION.” (p. 131)
Helen and other TBM’s: You can buy Richard Bushman’s book where I did: Deseret Books (an LDS bookstore). Bushman’s book won him many awards over the years and was at that time of publication one of Deseret’s bestseller books. Bushman is a beloved and highly respected Mormon. It amazes me and many others who are not Mormons who have read this book that Bushman didn’t get his hand and face slapped by the Mormon GA’s. Others who did write on similar subjects were eventually excommunicated. Anyway, don’t take Joseph Smith’s involvement with magic, the occult, glass-looking and seer stone gazing from the non-Mormons. For once, please learn your own history within Mormonism and that of its founder, Joseph Smith, from one of your own – Richard Bushman. I give him cudos for having the guts to tell the truth as painful as it must have been.
Let’s see Andy.
The conclusion for what you’ve shared above, from a Mormon would be, “Therefore the Church is true!” Right?
People believe what they want to believe because they want to believe it. Who was it in the Mormon Church that said if evidence was ever found regarding Smith’s glass looking, it would be curtains. But when the evidence was found it was basically “Ho hum, no big deal.” These folks just keep moving the goal post.
It’s like the woman whose husband yells at her and she says, “OK, he yelled at me but he better never grab me.” Then he grabs her and she says, “OK, he grabbed me but he better never hit me.” So he hits her and on and on it goes and she never leaves until she ends up dead.
Some Mormons are merely sleep walking through their religious life without ever asking any questions. Some, when faced with evidence that the whole thing is a sham, deny the obvious. Others rationalize and still others conclude rightly that the LDS Church isn’t true and leave.
Remember Thomas Ferguson, the dude that was heavy into archeology, trying to find evidence for the truth about Mormonism. After a time he concluded the Church was bogus but he just kept attending because he thought the church did a lot of good (?).
For Mormons like Helen, that’s the bottom line; that someone not leave the Church. In their world being in the club is the important thing. You don’t even have to believe it. Just don’t talk openly about it, but stay in the club.
LOL Falcon,
1). Smith was a glass-looker. He was convicted in a court of law of the activity. It’s a fact.
False, check the records friend. The charge was for disorderly conduct.
1. The date of the trial was July 1, 1830.
2. The charge was being a disorderly person.
3. Twelve witnesses were called.
4. Joseph Smith was held for one day and was fed three meals.
5. Ten subpoenas were issued.
The bills contain no testimony or verdict. The bills verify that:
a). Smith was before the court on an unspecified misdemeanor charge.
b). The Justice’s fee was $2.68.
c). The court appearance was on March 20, 1826.
d). Smith was held for two days and one night.
e. Twelve witnesses were subpoenaed.
f). Two justices were notified.
g). The sheriff had a mittimus.
So Falcon, no testimony or verdict is recorded
Falcon’s fallacy: Not only was he arrested four times in the mid 1820’s, he was ultimately convicted of a misdemeanor.
Joseph Smith went to court 40 plus times if not more, not one conviction for fraud and the best you come up with is a misdemeanor? wow. Was Joseph charged with being disorderly? Yes, was he acquitted yes. This does nothing to prove or disprove the claim that he was reputed to be a glass
looker it simply means that he was found guilty of no crime. So Falcon, show the Court Records for a misdemeanor, but please don’t quote some witness that can only claim this to be true. Evidence Falcon, you Evangelicals are all about evidence.
Helen/Louis 🙂
Rick B says:
July 9, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Falcon,
I can see it now, Helen dies and stands before God, God says JS was a fraud and liar, Helen will say, Nope, he was never convicted.
God will say everything you believed was lies.
Helen, will say, Nope, I am correct not you.
Sorry Rick, but I imagine God will ask me who Jesus Christ is, and I will answer my Lord and Savior.
So even though a Mormon, I will be saved by the Grace of God. Right?
Helen/Louis 🙂
Helen, yes we know that Jesus descended from the house of David and that David was a polygamst. We also know that Jesus descended from Rehab and that she was a prostitute. Therefore should the mormon church now institute prostituion as part of their chruch doctirine?
Well Helen,
Is that the best you can do? Why was he taken to court Helen? Did he get drunk and shoot off a gun? Did he get in a fist fight in a saloon? Why was he hauled in and convicted of disorderly conduct? What was he actually doing. Man you’re blind. The guy was conning people into thinking that he could find buried treasure in the ground by the use of his magic seer stone. He was a flim flam man. He was up to his eye balls in folk magic. He put the same rock in his hat, shoved his face in the hat and that’s how he claimed he got the BoM.
Helen, honestly. Have you read a thing that Andy Watson, for example, has posted here today? How in the world can you be so blind? You’re following a guy who was a false prophet and you can’t even see it. I guess the promise of becoming a goddess in your own planetary system is just too seducing as it has led you to reject God.
And Helen…………provide some documentation for what you have written above. I want to know where you got the information.
But just answer this one question: Why was Smith in court on the disorderly charge in the first place? You’re just playing games Helen.
So Helen,
Joseph Smith gets taken to court FORTY times? I have no way of knowing that since you don’t provide a source for your information, but I don’t know anyone who’s gotten hauled before a judge FORTY times. I don’t know, how many times did John Gotti or Al Capone get charged with crimes, get hauled into court and all they could get Capone on was the measly charge of income evasion? What a bunch of fine guys these gangsters were to just get convicted one itsy bitsy teenie weenie time just like Joseph Smith.
And why did Joseph Smith get convicted of disorderly conduct? Well because he was scamming people into thinking that he could find buried treasure by looking into his magic rock. In fact he’s referred to as the glass looker. What’s the big deal, right? Isn’t it just a coincidence that this convicted glass looker, oh excuse me, disorderly person, switches from gold treasure buried in the ground to gold plates and by use of same peek stone, in a hat no less, he gets inspiration to write a fantasy novel. Oh brother!
And this is the guy, Helen, that you are counting on to let you into the fictitious Celestial Kingdom where you and your husband can have spirit babies to populate your planetary system that the two of you rule over as god and goddess?
Helen aren’t you just a little embarrassed by this? It’s right in front of your nose and you don’t see it. You’ve played these games for days demanding evidence, it’s supplied to you and, as I knew you would, claim it’s no big deal. Typical Mormon game!
Helen,
This is what will go down. You will say Lord, Lord, Jesus will reply with. I never knew you.
Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
Matthew 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
You have a different jesus and he is a false jesus, so the real Jesus will not know you.
Laughing at your gullibility. You take the word of one of the witnesses who stated JS was convicted of disorderly conduct, this was not the verdict handed down by the Court, which really was no more the a fact finding court to begin with. Evidence Falcon, I asked for evidence of a conviction and you come back with Conviction of disorderly conduct stated not by the judge but by one of the witnesses, wow.
A. W. Benton, the man who filed the disorderly person complaint against Smith, also wrote an account of this 1830 trial. Benton also relates Stowell’s testimony:
“Did Smith ever tell you there was money hid in a certain place which he mentioned? Yes. Did he tell you, you could find it by digging? Yes. Did you dig? Yes. Did you find any money? No. Did he not lie to you then, and deceive you? NO, the money was there, but we did not get quite to it! How do you know it was there? Smith said it was.”
What about the verdict? Smith says he was acquitted. Benton does not provide a verdict.
Since neither Benton nor Noble provides a verdict, their statements provide no evidence for the trial outcome. They merely state that Smith was “condemned,” which may simply mean, as it does in the case of the 1830 trial, that there were no grounds for finding him guilty, but the court, disbelieving his account of his religious activities, gave him a tongue-lashing and dismissed the case. In support of this view, it should be noted that eyewitness Purple states that Smith was acquitted in 1826, which statement directly contradicts the alleged court record.
Rick B. incorrectly replies:
Helen,
This is what will go down. You will say Lord, Lord, Jesus will reply with. I never knew you.
Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Correction, I said that when God asks me if I believe in His Son, my reply will be yes, He is my Lord and Savior, a sinless Man who payed for my sins. I will then be saved by the Grace of God.
He will say what have you done, and I will reply the will of my Father which is in Heaven.
Faith, Repentance, Baptism and received the Holy Ghost, all Biblical teaching and doctrine.
So you are now corrected again Rick B.
Helen/Louis 🙂
Helen,
Talk about flim flam. You carry on the fine Mormon tradition of equivocation and obfuscation. We’ve piled up enough evidence here to bury your pathetic attempts to rescue your lying deceitful prophet and even at that, you can’t even see that Smith was hood winking people into believing he could find buried treasure with his magic rock. In order to maintain the lie you’ve bought into, you totally ignore the fact that Smith was a treasure seeking scoundrel who took advantage of gullible people for his own gain.
I knew you’d pull this because Mormons always do. When faced with clear evidence that Smith was convicted in court as a result of his fraudulent activities, you choose to parse words and throw up pathetic arguments to distract from the real issue. That issue is that Smith was a fraud when he was leading people around the country side with his treasure seeking magic rock and he continued his fraud with the fantasy fable BoM.
Helen you’d have been one of the people following him around at night looking for buried treasure and even when he didn’t find anything, you’d had made excuses for the charleton. Instead of seeking the truth, you’ve become party to Smith’s scam.
You do provide a great service here however on MC. Those questioning Mormons who come here and read can see the length that hard core Mormons will go to in joining Smith in his ruse. There is more than a current of dishonesty that runs through Mormonism and you demonstrate it every time you post.
Falcon articulates: “There is more than a current of dishonesty that runs through Mormonism and you demonstrate it every time you post.”
Falcon dear, get back to me when you actually have any bit of little evidence of a conviction of either Fraud or Glass looking. Your failure or your lack of will to do so will only be more evidence that you will run from your own misrepresentation claiming again that you don’t have to prove anything, a very wonderful out for those who know already they are walking on a slippery slope of using character assault hoping no one will call them out for having to provide one shred of proof. 🙂
Helen/Louis 🙂
Helen,
Here’s why you are so desperate.
The Mormon writer Francis W. Kirkham just could not allow himself to believe that the 1826 court record was authentic. He, in fact, felt that if the transcript were authentic it would disprove Mormonism:
“A careful study of all facts regarding this alleged confession of Joseph Smith in a court of law that he had used a seer stone to find hidden treasure for purposes of fraud, must come to the conclusion that no such record was ever made, and therefore, is not in existence…. had he [Joseph Smith] made this confession in a court of law as early as 1826, or four years before the Book of Mormon was printed, and this confession was in a court record, it would have been impossible for him to have organized the restored Church. (A New Witness For Christ In America, vol. 1, pages 385-387)
“If a court record could be identified, and if it contained a confession by Joseph Smith which revealed him to be a poor, ignorant, deluded, and superstitious person — unable himself to write a book of any consequence, and whose church could not endure because it attracted only similar persons of low mentality — if such a court record confession could be identified and proved, then it follows that his believers must deny his claimed divine guidance which led them to follow him…. How could he be a prophet of God, the leader of the Restored Church to these tens of thousands, if he had been the superstitious fraud which ‘the pages from a book’ declared he confessed to be?” (Ibid., p. 486-487)
(Issue 68-Salt Lake City Messenger)
Helen,
This is the sad state of affairs of your current situation living under the delusion of Mormonism. The record is there. It has been produced. It has been verified, but like all deceived Mormons, you run to the spin produced by FAIR/FARMS for comfort and support.
The reader should note that Helen has deliberately left out any sort of documentation. The reason is that Mormons know what’s at stake here. Specifically the proof that Joseph Smith was hauled into court and convicted of being a disorderly person because he was engaged in the practice of glass looking to find buried treasure. Thus he was proven to be a fraud at about the same time he claimed to have found gold plates buried in the ground to produce the fantasy BoM.
Poor Helen, we should pity you however your desire to become a goddess on the planet of your choosing has caused you to dispense with credulity and live a life of fantasy.
For the Mormon truth seeker, the ones questioning Mormonism and the veracity of the faux prophet Joseph Smith, visit this site linked below and you will be able to see how the Mormon spin machine has been working over-time to deny the obvious. There is a way out.
http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no68.htm#TRANSCRIPT%20VERIFIED
Falcon does try: “The Mormon writer Francis W. Kirkham just could not allow himself to believe that the 1826 court record was authentic.”
William D. Purple took notes at the trial and tells us, “In February, 1826, the sons of Mr. Stowell, …were greatly incensed against Smith, …saw that the youthful seer had unlimited control over the illusions of their sire… They caused the arrest of Smith as a vagrant, without visible means of livelihood.”
Whereas the Pearsall account says: “Warrant issued upon oath of Peter G. Bridgman, [Josiah Stowell’s nephew] who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an imposter…brought before court March 20, 1826”
Why do the critics use this event?
Interestingly, critics of Joseph Smith’s time ignored the 1826 trial.
They didn’t bring it up in another trial in the same area in 1830.
It was not mentioned in any of the affidavits collected by Hurlbut in 1833, even though he was diligently looking for every piece of dirt he could find.
Although the trial was briefly mentioned in 1831, it was not mentioned again in a published record for 46 years.
What records exist?
We have five records of the 1826 trial. And these were published in eight documents.
1. Apr. 9, 1831 – A W. Benton in Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate
2.Oct. 1835 – Oliver Cowdery in Latter-day Saints Messenger and Advocate
3.1842 letter from Joel K. Noble (not published until 1977)
4.Record torn from Judge Neely docket book by Miss Emily Pearsall (niece)
Feb. 1873 – Charles Marshall publishes in Frazer’s Magazine (London)
Apr. 1873 – Frazer’s article reprinted in Eclectic Magazine (N.Y.)
1883 – Tuttle article in New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge
Jan. 1886 – Christian Advocate vol. 2, no. 13 (Salt Lake City, UT)
5. May 3, 1877 – W. D. Purple Chenango Union
Glad you used Francis W. Kirkham a great supporter of the Book of Mormon as a witness that it was another witness that Jesus is the Christ.
Sorry Falcon, but I gave a reference, not a article by FAIR.
Source: AN ANALYSIS OF WESLEY WALTERS’
“JOSEPH SMITH’S BAINBRIDGE, N.Y., COURT TRIALS”
By Malin L. Jacobs
He was a glass looker Helen. Read the article.
State of New York v. Joseph Smith.
Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an impostor.
Prisoner brought before Court March 20, 1826. Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowel in Bainbridge most of time since; had small part of time been employed in looking for mines, but the major part had been employed by said Stowel on his farm, and going to school. That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally looked at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times, and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them. That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania, and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes, making them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always rather declined having anything to do with this business.
(read above linked article in previous post)
Questioning Mormons. Take courage, there is a way out and it’s through Jesus Christ.
I give up, I ask for a conviction and all I get is warrant. If this is how one answers the question of showing docs of a Conviction for Glass looking or Fraud then I guess this is the best can expect.
Don’t bother replying since your not a serious person to get any information other then what you glean from the wonderful world of net checking. 🙂
Anyone else out there who is seriously interested in my challenge to show that Joseph Smith was ever and I mean ever convicted for FRAUD or being a Glass Looker. 🙂
Helen/Louis
The reason that Helen is fighting so hard to undermine the validity of the court record concerning Joseph Smith’s being brought into court as a disorderly person because of his treasure hunting escapades with his magic rock, is that it undermines the entire foundation of Mormonism. Joseph Smith went for what is known as the “long con”. There are “short cons” like he pulled with the treasure hunting scheme and then there are those that go on longer and have a larger pay day at the end.
Mormonism is a “long con”. It’s been going on since the early 19th century and is perpetuated today by a whole new generation of con men. It steals people’s time, money and energy but worst of all, it steals their souls.
There is hope through Jesus Christ. Jesus came to set men free from the tyranny of false religious system.
Finally here’s another excerpt from the above linked article.
“Once we accept the validity of the documents concerning Joseph Smith’s trouble with the law, we are forced to admit that he was engaging in magical practices at the very time he claimed he was being tutored by the Angel Moroni to receive the gold plates of the Book of Mormon.
More important than this, however, is the fact that the Neely transcript undermines the whole story of the divine origin of the Book of Mormon. A careful examination of Joseph Smith’s story of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and even the text of the book itself reveals that it is just an extension of the money-digging practices so clearly portrayed in the transcript. For example, the court record shows that Joseph Smith had used a stone placed in his hat to find treasures “for three years” prior to 1826.”
Falcon, please CFR. 🙂
Helen,
you never corrected me, I told you what will go down, not what you will say. And I know you wont answer my question because thats what you do, you dont answer questions.
But just putting some info out. No mormon that I have ever spoken to can or has answered this question.
The Bible speaks of false teachers and wolves in sheeps clothing. What exactly do these false teachers teach according to you LDS. Where do the wolves come from and what makes them a wolf.
then Paul said in Gal 1:8-9 even if an angel teaches another gosepl, Funny how JS was given another gospel from an “Angel” and that gospel is different than what Paul teaches.
Plus what do LDS define as another gospel, other than what Paul taught. The problem is, you guys cannot answer these questions, because it will then expose you as the wolves and false teachers.
Rick B. states —
The Bible speaks of false teachers and wolves in sheeps clothing. What exactly do these false teachers teach according to you LDS. Where do the wolves come from and what makes them a wolf.
Then Paul said in Gal 1:8-9 even if an angel teaches another gosepl, Funny how JS was given another gospel from an “Angel” and that gospel is different than what Paul teaches.
Plus what do LDS define as another gospel, other than what Paul taught. The problem is, you guys cannot answer these questions, because it will then expose you as the wolves and false teachers.
Correct the Bible speaks of wolves in ships clothing. I take it that he is talking about members of the Kingdom of God during the NT times.
He mentions teachers, those who have been called of God, held the Priesthood and deceived members of the Church with false doctrine.
They are wolves because the are enemies of the sheep and hide amongst them as faithful members of Christ true Church but they have evil intentions to corrupt the flock while the shepherd is gone.
The true gospel, as taught by Paul (as well as Peter, James, John, the other disciplines, and even the Lord Jesus Christ himself) is the same one that is taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
So Rick, who was Paul writing too? was he not writing to the Galatians? what was the problem?
Paul perceived a problem within the membership of the Church. Some were attempting to mislead.
What were they teaching?
The brethren from Jerusalem wanted all male converts, Jewish and Gentiles alike, to comply with the requirement of circumcision and to make a commitment to keep the Law of Moses.
Earlier, Paul had been upset when Peter entered Paul’s mission field teaching “another gospel”–a gospel of circumcision, while Paul advocated the gospel of uncircumcision (Gal. 2:7). It was Peter who received the vision to widen the ministry to all people, including the Gentiles. This was a marked change from the ministry of Christ, who took his message only to the House of Israel. Yet Peter still wasn’t convinced, as evidenced in Galatians 2, that there should be full fellowship with the uncircumcised Christians. Paul therefore referred to what Peter was teaching as another gospel–the gospel of circumcision.
Source, Stephen R. Gibson
He continues:
Students of the Bible know that circumcision was a divisive issue in the New Testament church for many years, even after Peter’s vision of the “unclean” animals when he was told “what God hath cleansed, that call not thou common” (Acts 10:15-35). This controversy over the gospel of circumcision (Gal. 2:7) caused so much of a disruption in the church that the Apostles once gathered in Jerusalem to resolve the issue and to determine and write their unified position (Acts 15).
But back to Galatians–Paul was upset with Peter, who had beet dining with the Gentile Christians until some of the Jewish Christian–came into the area. Peter then separated himself from the Gentiles which was so upsetting to Paul that he “withstood him to the face,” or in other words, discussed it openly with Peter at Antioch (Gal. 2:11).
Paul continued to be angered by Peter and certain others who were still preaching the gospel of circumcision to the uncircumcised Gentile Christians. Noted Christian theologian F. F. Bruce adds his comments on the issue Paul was addressing in Galatians chapters 1 and 2:
If God’s redeeming grace was to be received by faith, and not conformity with the Law of Moses, then it was available on equal terms to Jew and Gentile and to make a distinction in practice between Jewish and Gentile believers, as Peter and the others were doing, was in practice to deny the gospel (Paul: Apostle of the Heart Set Free, p. 178).
Galatians 1:6-9 has to do with a specific doctrinal problem confronting the early Christians. To apply this scripture to any other doctrine with which detractors disagree is to wrest the scriptures.
Helen/Louis 🙂
Looks like I missed a lot! I’ve read through all the posts and I’m just shaking my head at Helen. Great job everyone for putting the information out there for those Mormons who are seriously trying to figure out the truth behind the 1826 arrest of Joseph Smith. It looks like it doesn’t matter how much proof you show Helen, she loves to play semantics. I would say Helen, that it is you who should be proving to the rest of us that Joseph Smith was an upstanding guy with impeccable morals and that he was never charged or convicted of anything. It’s up to you to prove this. Prove to me that Joseph Smith was never called a “glass looker” or a “fraud.” Until you prove it, I’ll just go on believing the overwhelming evidence against him. I know you are going to say that “he was never CONVICTED of those things.” I say he was, you were given evidence that he was. I would ask that if it were you that Joseph Smith conned with his magic rock and you lost money, would you not think him a fraud? If he didn’t deliver the goods after you paid him? Isn’t that fraud? Even if there were absolutely no evidence of a conviction, that doesn’t mean he wasn’t guilty of fraud. I’m cracking up at your comment to falcon about how Joseph Smith was in court forty times. That should be your first clue! There’s an old saying, “If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.”
For someone who just stated they were catching up on all the post, why don’t you just quote one of those post that showed a conviction of fraud or glass looking? I doubt you will since you think all your peers are infallible. I love people who say, ” well he was accused of such and such” and how does that relate in any way to a conviction by trial or Court Judge. Nice try.
Helen/Louis 🙂
So are we to believe that all of the epistles in the NT were only meant for those specific churches? Nothing in them is meant for future generations? The OT was only meant for Jews? The same standards, teachings, doctrines, etc don’t still apply to us today? 2 Timothy 3:16-17 tells us that “ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness…” The Galatians verses are extremely clear. If a leader or even “an angel” came down and preached an alternate gospel (something different from the one they’d already heard… which none of the “gospel” of the BoM is ever referred to in the NT), they were to be condemned. He was SO emphatic about this that he repeated it. Are you seriously saying that this (I think very prophetic) declaration was only meant for a small church in a specific place in a specific time??
Isaiah 40:8 “The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”
And really, the evidence against JS being a treasure hunter is astounding. The fact that this is even in the records should be enough for you to raise an eyebrow. Forget the debate of if he was convicted or not. If you have to even have this conversation, trying to convince people your prophet isn’t crazy or a fraud, then something is off.
Oh Helen, who cares if he was or wasn’t convicted of fraud? That doesn’t mean he wasn’t guilty of it. There is plenty of evidence in the previous posts by others that show that clearly he was a glass looker and a fraud. You just love to play the semantics game. It’s old. I noticed that you didn’t show me any proof that he wasn’t a glass looker or a fraud. You can’t prove it. You also didn’t answer my questions about you being the one that was conned. Why is that? I have a request too, please stop with all the smiley faces at the end of your rude posts. They don’t fool anyone. I don’t think my peers are infallible. See that’s the difference between my peers and yours, mine will admit when they are wrong, yours won’t, they just twist and spin or lie by omission.
@Kate… exactly. OJ, anyone?? 🙂
marriedamormon states: “the evidence against JS being a treasure hunter is astounding. The fact that this is even in the records should be enough for you to raise an eyebrow. Forget the debate of if he was convicted or not. If you have to even have this conversation, trying to convince people your prophet isn’t crazy or a fraud, then something is off.
Can you quote me the law that stated it was against the law to be a treasure hunter? or even a glass looker? What you don’t seem to get is that if someone was in business of a glass looker to commit fraud we would have a very good case for conviction. My point which none of you seem to address is the false witness by some that JS was convicted of Fraud, if you can’t provide any evidence to make this claim, then what are you? Correction, Joseph Smith was charged and given a warrant for his arrest based on being a vagrant. Not for committing fraud or for being a glass looker, if you don’t believe me check out the facts for yourself. You and other seem to connect glass looking with committing a fraud, wish someone could explain how that works.
No one is denying the treasure hunting, looking for buried gold or treasure or even looking into glass to find it. Joseph Smith did this and so did many others during this time, I myself have used water dowsing to find water, guess what it works. So am I bad or evil for using a Diviner’s Rod to find water, have I now committed somevkind of fraud? get real please.
Helen/Louis
So this is what we know for sure based on substantiated evidence.
1. Joseph Smith was a practitioner of folk magic which included “glass looking”.
2. He used his “skill” with a magic rock to look for treasure buried in the ground.
3. He conned some poor dupes into parting with their money so that he might find buried treasure for them with his magic rock.
4. He was hauled into court because of this scam, admitted it, and was convicted as a disorderly person. Joseph Smith’s activities were fraudulent and he was a fraud.
5. The Mormon church apologists have tried to spin this episode every which way possible because they know the stakes involved.
The stakes involved are the religion itself. Joseph Smith combined his interest and practice of folk magic with his interest in religion and developed a hybrid religion combining these different elements. He used his magic rock extensively in his new religious venture.
For the questioning Mormon I’m going to link once more to the article that dissects Smith’s court appearance and the outcome. The article examines the LDS church’s attempt to make this all go away. It’s clear. Joseph Smith was a practitioner of folk magic including scrying with a magic rock and was convicted in a court of law for his activities related to this.
I know it’s really tough coming out of the fog bank of unreality that is Mormonism. Many have and are continuing on a daily basis to leave the Mormon church and Mormonism behind.
Jesus is the truth, the way and the life and nobody gets to the Father accept through Him. A religious system won’t get the job done, especially one that is built on fraudulent claims and practices. May God bless and keep you as you find your way to Him.
http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no68.htm
Excellent Falcon, 1 and 2 are correct but you incorrectly stated number 3 —- ” He conned some poor dupes into parting with their money so that he might find buried treasure for them with his magic rock.”
Now if you can show that your perceived misrepresented fact is nothing more then pure speculation, you just might have a case of fraud.
Who did JS con? was he convicted for taking someones else’s money fraudulently? What is your source for stating it was a magic rock when in fact you accused him of being a glass looker?
For all your huffing and puffing it seems that you are just so convinced that your agenda driven
hatred will win over others to actually believe you are on to something factual.
Another incorrect statement which is attributed too Falcon: “It’s clear. Joseph Smith was a practitioner of folk magic including scrying with a magic rock and was convicted in a court of law for his activities related to this.
State of New York v. Joseph Smith.
Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an impostor.
We all agree a warrant for his arrest is factual. Warrant is specific in identifying him as a disorderly and a impostor. Ron Jackson, a Mormon historian from Bountiful, Utah, appeared on KSL-TV in Salt Lake City and claimed that the 1826 justice of the peace bill had been altered.
“Wesley Walters made a photocopy of it and then altered it to read “Joseph Smith.”
Whether this was altered by walters or not we might never know. One thing is beyond dispute, however, and that is that Walters tore the page out of the record book in the archives and stole it! He returned it only when the sherrif threatened him with jail.
What Walters did with it during the time it was in his posession we will probably never know, but it is certain that the fact that he needed to steal it and remove it from its place has seriously compromised its reliability.
In any event, the document in any form is not the disposition of a court or a ruling of a court, but only an entry that Smith was before the court. No sentence and no punishment is recorded.
The description of him as a ‘glass looker’ is merely a description of his occupation as interpreted by the clerk of the court.
http://www.answerway.com/vq/Mormonism/642/0/51791
Helen,
You said: “No one is denying the treasure hunting, looking for buried gold or treasure or even looking into glass to find it. Joseph Smith did this and so did many others during this time, I myself have used water dowsing to find water, guess what it works. So am I bad or evil for using a Diviner’s Rod to find water, have I now committed somevkind of fraud? get real please.”
LOL! “Well we know he was a glass looker, but he was never CONVICTED of it!” I think it’s you who needs to get real! Yes many people were doing this during his time. You don’t deny that he was a treasure seeker and a glass looker. Listen to yourself. He used a ROCK to con people into believing he could find treasure on their property, knowing full well he couldn’t and he charged them money for it. That is FRAUD! If someone came up to you today and told you that they have a magic rock and for $500 (or any price) he could go out into your backyard and find it for you, would you do it? Or would you tell him to take a flying leap?? Just because it was 180 years ago doesn’t make a difference as to how weird and unbelievable it is! Oh and by the way, the magic rock is what he used to “translate” the Book of Mormon! Seriously???? If someone came up to you and said they had a magic rock and they are going to use it to translate the Word of God, would you believe it? It’s all just too strange for words! As for you using a divining rod, maybe you should check the real Word of God concerning it’s use:
King James Version (KJV)
Deuteronomy 18:9-12
9When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.
10There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.
11Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
12For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.
Well I knew if we stayed with it long enough, the truth of the matter would come out.
We have a practitioner of folk magic, defending a fellow occultist!
Ladies and gentlemen, do we need any further information regarding the spirit by which Helen operates?
Mormonism is built on the occult. Mormon temples are adorned with occult symbols. The magic underwear that Mormons wear has occult symbols. Joseph Smith had a Jupiter Tailsmen. The temple rituals are borrowed from the occult based Free Masonry. I could go on.
Christian posters,
Now you get it regarding our poor deceived and diluted friend Helen. We aren’t dealing with flesh and blood here in our spiritual battle. We are dealing with a spiritual influence that explains the bizarre, evasive and totally illogical posts.
I think that it’s a total waste of time to try and engage someone under this type of spiritual influence. It’s really a waste of time.
falcon,
I agree. I have had an ugly feeling since I read the post on divination from Helen. Kind of creepy. I bet most LDS don’t realize that using the magic rock for anything (including translation) is from the occult. I’m blown away by this. It’s OK to use a divining rod I guess, but don’t you dare use face cards. I was brought up to believe that face cards are evil and of the occult. Really? But magic rocks, Jupiter Talismans, symbols of the occult plastered all over the LDS temples and their garments etc.. are all just great? This is not from the Lord. Makes me want to run in and put on my Cross necklace. Yes, I wear one, right in the middle of Momoville! I will take the symbol of the Cross any day over the occultic symbols of Mormonism. Funny how Mormons don’t want anything to do with the symbol of the Cross. It truly shows where the heart of Mormonism lies.