Yesterday (5 February 2014) The Arizona Republic reported:
“The leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been ordered to appear before a magistrate in England on fraud charges filed by a disaffected ex-Mormon who disputes fundamental teachings of the religion, according to documentation obtained by The Arizona Republic.”
Thomas Monson has been summoned to appear in a British court on 14 March 2014 to “answer accusations that key tenets of the LDS faith are untrue and have been used to secure financial contributions.” This is a criminal complaint filed by ex-Mormon atheist Tom Phillips. The Arizona Republic reports,
“Phillips’ complaint is based on the Fraud Act of 2006, a British law that prohibits false representations made to secure a profit, or to cause someone to lose money. “Conviction may carry a prison sentence of up to 10 years.
“The summonses were signed on Friday by Judge Elizabeth Roscoe. A court official in London confirmed to The Republic on Tuesday the issuance of the paperwork, which directs Monson to answer allegations that untrue religious precepts were used to obtain tithes comprising 10 percent of church members’ incomes.”
According to the summons, these “representations” that were made to the victims (i.e., things that the Church knew were “untrue or misleading”) include:
- The Book of Abraham as a literal translation of Egyptian papyri
- The Book of Mormon as an ancient historical record, the most correct book on earth, translated from ancient gold plates
- Native Americans as descendants from an Israelite family that left Jerusalem in 600 B.C.
- Joseph and Hyrum Smith killed as martyrs because they would not deny their testimony of the Book of Mormon
- The Nauvoo Expositor was necessarily destroyed because it printed lies about Joseph Smith
- No death on earth prior to 6,000 years ago
- All humans alive today descended from two people who lived 6,000 years ago
President Monson must make this court appearance. The summons warns, “Failure to attend may result in a warrant being issued for your arrest.”
As The Arizona Republic reported, Tom Phillips wrote,
“These are not statements of mere ‘beliefs’ or opinions or theories. They are made as actual facts and their truthfulness can be objectively tested with evidence.”
Most people think that this case will not get very far. Indeed, it may not go any further than this summons before it is dismissed. The Mormon Church seems to see it as nothing more than a nuisance:
“’The Church occasionally receives documents like this that seek to draw attention to an individual’s personal grievances or to embarrass Church leaders,’ said Eric Hawkins, a spokesman at Church headquarters in Salt Lake City, who said he had not seen the legal document. ‘These bizarre allegations fit into that category.’”
But a comment posted at exmormon reddit suggests that Mr. Phillips might have something very specific in mind by instigating this lawsuit.
“As an attorney, I would be very surprised if Phillips’ legal team hasn’t already thought several more steps down the road. If I were in their shoes, I wouldn’t care what any church official said about whether they truly believed the church’s claims, or whether they claim the freedom of religious belief. That doesn’t matter. That wouldn’t be the goal. Document discovery would be the goal. This case involves claims of historical fact that are falsifiable. So the question would be, did the Brethren have access to internal information showing those claims to be false, or likely to be false? In a civil suit against a corporation, executives can claim ignorance, but that opens the door to internal records and communication to see whether the executives are being truthful, or whether they should have known of wrongdoing given the internal information that they had access to. This kind of discovery is done all the time.
“So what could they conceivably go for? Oh, just all of the First Presidency’s correspondence, meeting minutes, diary entries, archives, records, writings, studies, etc. Pretty much anything in the First Presidency’s vault. The argument to get access and make the church produce it is easy: there might be information showing either that a) Monson and the Brethren and their predecessors knew that the claims weren’t true, or b) should have known that their claims weren’t true, or c) withheld factual information that could have materially altered the decision-making of converts and members if that information had been disclosed. It’s obviously relevant to the question of what information they had through the years to either support or weaken their claims to the church’s veracity. At this moment, I can’t imagine a strong argument to protect it from discovery. I don’t see a relevant privilege at issue. The church could claim that it is sensitive material, but they would then have to explain why. The ‘why’ would have to be an argument that the disclosure of such evidence might be embarrassing or damaging to the church or its membership, but that goes to the fraud claim (i.e., if there’s something so embarrassing or earth shattering that the First Presidency has been hiding because it could damage members’ belief in the enterprise, that is fraud by concealment). Moreover, the argument would be made that if the Brethren truly believe it all, then the material in their possession should support their belief and they should be happy to disclose it to the world…
“In my mind, the document discovery is the banquet they’re going for. This personal summons to Monson is just setting the table…”
While it is unlikely that the Mormon prophet will, in the end, actually be questioned under oath in an open court on these historical claims, that scenario is not without precedent. In 1904 LDS Prophet and President Joseph F. Smith was questioned during the senate hearings for Mormon senator Reed Smoot. During the three days he was interrogated, President Smith admitted to several surprising facts including: the violation of federal laws in the continuation of the practice of polygamy by Church leaders, years after the Manifesto supposedly discontinued it; President Smith’s own disregard of both the Manifesto and the law, demonstrated in his fathering of eleven children by five wives since 1890; and that he, though a prophet, had not received any revelations up to that point in his life.
However, during these hearings President Smith’s testimony also included “false statements” and
“evasive answers, half-truths, and responses wherein he claimed not to remember some of his own statements, meetings he had had with church leaders, the words of fellow LDS authorities, and documents circulating throughout the church. He even denied knowledge of the beliefs and practices of LDS missionaries and elders.” (Richard Abanes, One Nation Under Gods, 338)
It will be interesting to see how this British summons plays out. Though people are divided on whether anything will come of it, most agree that the world will not see a “restoration” of the way ancient prophets answered their accusers. The attorney’s comment from exmormon reddit that I quoted above concluded:
“Peter stood in front of the Sanhedrin and declared with boldness that ‘by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.’ Paul stood before King Agrippa and declared ‘I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner.’ But now, in the dispensation of the fullness of times, the ‘prophets, seers, and revelators’ of God’s alleged one true church will send their lawyers to object, deny, tie legal knots, and build a trans-Atlantic wall of weasel words.”
As stated by another commenter elsewhere, with a Mormon twist and perhaps a bit more succinctly,
“I do not think we will see Abinidi boldly standing before King Noah this time. God uses lawyers in the latter days.”
—
Find continuing information on this news story at MormonThink.com.
So FoF, when is the payed “unofficial” apologetics face of the Corporation going to be allowed to update Monson’s Wikipedia page with this information without them removing these fraud charges when others update it? Why is it that every time someone updates the Wikipedia article this information gets removed?
I think Mormons having “AH-HA” moments is directly related to the fraud perpetrated by the LDS church.
For example from a blog dealing with this topic:
“I was innocently browsing church-type websites, when a popup ad asked, “Questioning Mormonism?” And promised to reveal things about the church. In my arrogance I clicked on it thinking I knew everything possible about Mormonism in my 40 yr active membership. WRONG!!”
“It led me to the YouTube video about the Book of Abraham, which shocked me badly so I kept following links. That day I also read every wive’s profile from the website, wivesofjosephsmith. Tears were falling down my cheeks at what these poor women suffered through. At that moment, I had an epiphany, “There is no way Joseph Smith could be the prophet.” and it was like a felt a shield cracking and falling away from my brain, thin like eggshells. Suddenly I could see things I never had before and it drove me on a study frenzy to learn everything possible. As painful as it was to learn the truth, I am grateful to be reborn with true vision.”
So why do Mormons have to stumble into the information that proves that Joseph Smith is not a prophet, that the BoM and the LDS church are not true, and that the current prophet hasn’t a clue? It’s because the LDS church does its best to put forth a narrative that has no relationship to the truth. The LDS church has created an environment where by fear and intimidation, they control the members.
Falcon,
I have asked a few LDS family members why I had to find out information online. Why was I taught very different things about these subjects at church. They thew up a wall and told me I was just losing my faith, one even told me that I was just being hateful toward the church. Since when is asking questions about church doctrines being hateful? Since when is truth hateful?
Old Man,
I’m not sure if you know the answer to this but what happens to the corporation over there if Monson doesn’t show? Will the church still be allowed to operate in the UK? Also, what happens to the next president of the church, will he have to answer allegations of fraud or does it end with Monson?
Kate
“Since when is truth hateful?”
Since that false prophet declared that the truth is not always useful? Or words to that effect.
Moving on to your questions I’ll do my best to answer them but please bear in mind that I’m not an expert in legal matters so I could be wide of the mark although I do try to research any problem areas before I commit myself to a reply.
I can’t say for sure if it’s imperative that Monson appears but as the summons is issued against his name then in all likelihood he will have to. It’s possible, providing the Magistrate agrees & an acceptable reason is given for his not appearing, that someone will be allowed to represent him. All this talk about Monson (who because of the LDS corporate sole status actually IS the Church) ignoring the summons is quite frankly, absurd. Should he not appear or if the church simply ignores the summons then it’s almost certain that the hearing will be adjourned & a warrant for Monson’s arrest will be issued then Monson will have to appear before a Crown court for trial by Jury. One ‘peculiarity of English Law is that should a defendant not appear
Without giving good cause the hearing can go ahead without him, evidence can be heard in his absence & a decision reached on that basis.
It’s extremely unlikely that the LDS will be prevented from ‘operating in the UK it’s far more likely, should the church be found guilty, that a custodial sentence not exceeding 10 years or a hefty fine will be given, possibly both.
Finally, as the church is a corporate sole it would mean that, in the rather extreme event of Monson’s death during the trial the next in line, I believe that’s Boyd K. Packer will automatically assume the presidency in which case he would also have to take Monson’s place at the trial. However, there seems to be some confusion over this, even among the lawyers, so I won’t say it is absolutely certain.
I trust that helps a little but please remember I’m not a lawyer so I could be wrong. J
Old Man,
Thank you for the reply. I personally don’t want to see Monson put in jail given his age and health. I would like to see Document discovery though. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
I’m also looking forward to your wife participating here. How things have changed since you first started posting on this site!
Kate
I agree with you & I doubt if any caring person would want to see an old man imprisoned, but I think it’s important to remember that he put himself in this position. I’m not at all sure what would be a just punishment taking into account the misery that the organizationb he runs has caused to the enormous number of people taken in by LDS deception. On a personal level the best punishment I could think of would be a public recantation of church doctrine up to January this year & an apology to all those who have been decieved. We know that’s not going to happen so perhaps the next best thing would a fine commensurate with the amount obtained through deception plus a public apology. Anyway, best to just wait & see, no one has been found guilty yet.
Regarding my ex, her Pc has gone doolally, I suspect the M/b is faulty, it will be several weeks before I can head south to sort it out so we’ll be well into March before she can get anything posted.
I will let her know that people are looking forward to her participating so thanks to all who have mentioned it over the last few months.
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since I first came in here a year ago. I remember arguing with Shem about LDS tax evasion on that first occassion & one year on it’s still being investigated, I’ll let everyone know as soon as I hear anything new.
Things have greatly changed on the ex wife front & I suspect that’s what you were referring to when you mentioned change. Coincidentally we were talking about that just a couple of hours ago, she went from being a steadfast Mormon to a Bible believing Christian in a couple of months. It happened so suddenly I still find it hard to believe. 🙂
It’s been interesting following the links leading to Tom Phillips. I actually ended up listening to an interview in which he and Tal Bachman participated on an internet broadcast. The link is on Mormon Think.
When he went through the ritual for the second anointing, I believe he said that he expected that Jesus would show up. That he would see Jesus I believe was thought to be a possibility. So it’s obvious that Tom Phillips was really into the Mormon experience hook, line and sinker.
Think of what it must have been like to go from that expectation to figuring out it’s all just a costume party.
So given that, I think it’s clear why he filed this action charging fraud. From reading the material on Mormon Think, it’s obvious that Tom’s motivation is not to shut down the LDS church but to force them to come to a place where they will provide people with honest and forthright information.
Think about if the LDS church had to change the picture they show of Joseph Smith “interpreting” the golden plates to what he actually did. They would have to show Joseph Smith putting his magic rock into his hat and then sticking his face (into the hat). The picture that the LDS church promotes is a fraud.
https://www.google.com/search?q=picture+joseph+smith+face+in+hat&client=firefox-a&hs=4Xy&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=P8H2Uo-oLuOYyAH56IGABw&ved=0CCkQsAQ&biw=1320&bih=695
You know there’s a history of fraud by the LDS church in England. There are some excellent articles out there about the expectations of English converts as they traveled to Utah and the stark reality of what they found. Here’s an excerpt from an article on the current fraud legal case that mentions these English converts.
Myths aside, the LDS Church was indeed in the business of bringing people from the U.K. to Utah in order to fortify its fledgling base. According to David M. Morris, co-founder of the [European Mormon Studies Association], by 1852 there were 32,894 Mormon converts in Britain, “more than the rest of the worldwide Church combined.” By 1900, that number had shrunk to 4,183. “A large portion of these migrated to America to be with the main body of the Church in Utah.”
Some recent British converts grew disillusioned with the coarse settler existence in Utah, and with LDS teachings and polygamy. When they returned to the U.K., they became some of Mormonism’s most vocal opponents. “Basically, they felt that they had been lied to and they were going to reveal all to the public as a way of warning,” said Foster. He sees a similar attitude in Phillips, the church’s current accuser.
On the positive side for the LDS church:
But it’s unlikely that the suit will do much to shake the standing of the LDS church in the U.K. Mormonism’s reputation in the U.K. changed for the better in the 1940s, after the church donated food and supplies to war-torn European countries. In the 1950s, the first two temples were erected in Europe, one in London and one in Switzerland. Today, Holt said, second and third generation Mormons experience little religious discrimination from other British civilians. “I meet people and they tend to know one other member of the church. That breaks down myths.” Still, he said, “It’s not like living in Utah, where it seems every other person is a member of the church.”
http://news.yahoo.com/britain-puts-mormonism-trial-032850824–politics.html
FoF, I have noticed a recurring theme in your posts. Basically, you do not seem to understand the nature of the concerns that the bible-believing Christian has with respect to the Mormon Church. I will try to restate the primary issues, as I see them, so that you might better understand our perspective:
1. The LDS Church teaches a false god, thereby leading sincere, well-intentioned people into idolatry.
2. The LDS Church proselytizes a Jesus other than the Jesus of the Bible, thereby prompting the unsuspecting to place their faith in a false Christ that cannot save them, who, instead, serves as major obstacle to their coming to a regenerating relationship with the real Jesus of the Bible.
3. The LDS Church’s “Plan of Salvation” or “Restored Gospel,” is, actually, a hopeless system of works-based righteousness that purports to transform sinful man into almighty god(s). This is blasphemy of the highest order, the same despicable lie foisted on Eve in the garden, and, hence, no gospel at all, but rather a passport to an eternity in Hell, separated from the one true God of the Bible.
4. The truth claims of the LDS Church are demonstrably false, from both an evidential and a Biblical perspective. Consequently, the LDS Church, via its leadership hierarchy, is, and has been since its inception, engaged in a monstrous financial and spiritual fraud under the cover of protections of “religious freedom.”
Bible-believing Christians do not hate you and your Mormon brothers and sisters, FoF. We do not wish to rob you of your faith. Instead, we genuinely care for you and want desperately to reach you with the saving Gospel of the Biblical Jesus.
Faith alone cannot save us; it’s the object of our faith that can save us. This is why truth matters. And this is why, when the LDS Church is openly challenged on its verifiably false truth claims and fraudulent practices, as appears to be the case with the British legal proceeding addressed in Sharon’s article, the Bible-believing Christian watches hopefully and prayerfully.
I was speaking with Mike Marquardt this week and we spoke about the lawsuit. He said that due to age, Monson will never appear in court. It just won’t happen. I agree. As for jail time, that’ll never happen either. Personally, I think the lawsuit is frivolous. Saying that it will “damage” other religions is ridiculous (even if it was somehow won), and is only a desperate attempt to turn it around on others. Tithing though, is a FORCED Regulation, as is the Word of Wisdom and lots of others. Will this force the Church to be more open and honest in it’s proselyting efforts? I doubt it, it’s not their style. They can’t even be open and honest about their racism in the new essays they just posted.
I wonder if anyone here read the article in USAToday at – http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/04/mormon-president-ordered-to-court/5216645/
In it it states
Phillips is also challenging the whole of Christianity and Judaism because he says that Genesis is not true because science and anthropology do not concur with it.
I think he is just disgruntled about something and is attacking where he thinks is a soft spot to go for.
Ralph
I’m attempting here to clear up certain misconceptions regarding this case but first let me make it clear that this is not a lawsuit brought for personal gain it is a criminal charge being brought against the LDS & its President. Most people fail to understand what this case is about, in part because of the LDS propaganda machine & partly because they do not understand English law. I have no idea how the legal system in the United States functions & its not my concern, but I do know something about the Law in this country. So-called experts are being brought out of the LDS closet; journalists are quoting verbatim the opinions of people who know either nothing of UK law or nothing about the case. The plaintiff is being called a ‘disgruntled ex-Mormon, an excommunicated ex-Mormon & that is simply not true He cannot be excommunicated & he has never resigned so he remains a member of the church.
Lack of knowledge is being used to belittle a man who lost his wife, his kids & his home because he could no longer believe in a lie is & that in my opinion, is contemptible behaviour.
I know Tom Philips though corresponding with him over a long period concerning tax evasion (illegal) by a corrupt & false religious organization. He is an honourable & decent man, his religious beliefs are neither here nor there & this is purely & simply an attempt to bring to heel a wealthy & corrupt Corporation that effectively cares nothing for its members, an organization that FRAUDULENTLY & DECEPTIVELY uses the Christian religion & vulnerable people to become ever more wealthy.
Those Christians who say this case is frivolous, that it will fail, that it’s an attack on religious freedom are falling into the LDS propaganda trap & as an example let me use the assertion that denial of the Adam & Eve story is an attack on ALL Christianity. If people cared enough to check the facts they would find this is simply NOT SO, Tom is attacking the LDS claim that Adam & Eve lived in Jackson county Missouri, a claim that is demonstrably false & can be used to prove fraud.
This case is NOT frivolous; Tom had to appear before a well-respected Judge in this country to persuade her there was a case to answer. It would never have gone to court if she had not been satisfied that the LDS did have a case to answer.
This case is unlikely to fail because most if not all of the claims made by the LDS are easily proven to be false, in fact they have pretty much admitted dishonesty by the recent publication of the so-called essays, by so doing they have shown clearly that previous accounts were misleading & that is what this case is about.
Of course the LDS would have you believe this is an attack on religious freedom but the truth is, it’s the LDS who are USING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM & peoples desire to have something to believe in, for financial gain. Is anyone here aware that here in UK the LDS has been given taxpayers money (under the gift aid scheme) to the tune of three hundred million dollars, almost all of which has disappeared into the coffers of the LDS in Salt Lake City? And one final point worthy of mention, it is only the relatively well off who benefit from that, the less well off, as usual, get nothing.
Old Man
WHAT??? The Garden of Eden was not in Jackson County, Missouri? Well that’s a bummer!
The LDS church was founded on fraud and it continues on the same fraud. But as many have pointed out, the point is that the LDS church needs to at least be honest with those it is trying to recruit if not also with its own members.
Didn’t the LDS leadership lies about/deny their practice of polygamy? Doesn’t the LDS church do the same today with its lame explanation regarding the practice? The LDS church lies regarding how Joseph Smith supposedly translated the golden plates. What about all of the practices and beliefs that were apart of the LDS standard doctrines which are now said to be an apostles opinion or folklore?
We could go on.
The case is not about religious doctrine, it is about fraud. The doctrine is just a tool that is used to extort ten percent of members income to obtain the religious experience. It would be the same as if liturgical churches required their members to pay ten percent of their income for a couple of years previously before they could eat the body and blood of the Lord, or for Catholics to ever enter Vatican City. These examples are very inadequate though because Christians don’t have the Temple experience like Mormons. Think about all the areas of life that revolve around the temple for Mormonism. Then look at the doctrine raised in the case. There is some overlap with Christian doctrine but the majority of the points raised address the unique Mormon doctrines that are demonstrably false. This fraud case is not about false doctrine, it is about false doctrine that is used to extort money from their members. Also, a judge issued this summons after reviewing the evidence presented and agreeing that fraud appears to be occurring so it is very unlikely that the judge will revoke the summons prior to the court date. But even if the judge revokes the summons today, the Mormon religion is already on the decline without this. I just feel really sorry for all those poor souls who are still stuck in this system without the true Christ in the world.
And in Mormonism worthiness rests in ability rather than Christ. An antichrist religion driven by fear, shame and despair, where pride in self awareness is the only antidote. Disgusting.
Old man,
“Is anyone here aware that here in UK the LDS has been given taxpayers money (under the gift aid scheme) to the tune of three hundred million dollars, almost all of which has disappeared into the coffers of the LDS in Salt Lake City? ”
I Googled gift aid tax scheme and I’m just curious, was the extra money added to the member’s tithing or was it other donations made to the church? Interesting stuff! It wouldn’t surprise me that the money was sent to SLC instead of staying in the UK to help the poor and suffering there.
“This case is NOT frivolous; Tom had to appear before a well-respected Judge in this country to persuade her there was a case to answer. It would never have gone to court if she had not been satisfied that the LDS did have a case to answer.”
I agree with this. I don’t think it’s frivolous either. In fact I’m thankful that a court will stand up to this church. I don’t think we would ever see this in the States. They hide under freedom of religion.
Welcome to our news media! I’m amazed that the only News Station who reported this in Utah was KUTV. It was a very short mention and they did call Mr. Philips a disgruntled ex mormon. No more has been said here on local News stations that I’m aware of. You would think they would be all over this! I guess they aren’t wanting to bring much attention to it.
It’s not that I think this is frivolous, but I think that when the rubber hits the road on this the powers-that-be will do nothing. I fear more the weakness of those who have the power to do something. I am not familiar with British law, but I don’t know what burdens of proof must be established in these cases. Here in the states it is generally a preponderance of the evidence, or more likely so than not. It’s not especially high. 51/49 in favor.
Old man,
i know nothing about law in england, neither do i know anything about law in america, i am born and bred aussie. If you read the article i referred to it quotes mr phillips as saying that the book of genesis is fraudulent, nothing about the garden of eden being in jackson county missouri or other lds claims about adam and eve. So if he were to have been in a different Christian religion would he try a similar thing? I am just going on the facts presented here.
But since religion is a choice and people accept their religious beliefs as fact (including everyone here) despite not being able to be reconciled with science, archaeology or anthropology, i cannot see this going far. If it does then it opens a whole new can of worms into religion and politics mixing together.
Kate
“was the extra money added to the member’s tithing or was it other donations made to the church?”
Sorry, I should have made it clearer Under the gift aid scheme a person can pay a given amount in tithing & the tax payer, via the government will make up the rest, It’s not that the church gets any extra money it simply means that the UK taxpayer subsidises not only LDS tithing but all other forms of donations. The amount I mentioned in my post was an estimate based on membership numbers & as you will see the wealthier a person is the greater the subsidy he/she will get. As an example lets say that person A. has to pay £20 a week in tithing he/she will actually pay £16 & the other £4 will be given to the church from general taxation. If person B pays a large amount, e.g. £100 a week then the UK taxpayer subsidises the tithe to the tune of £20 a week..
Let’s have a little fun, click on this link
http://web.archive.org/web/20120301122842/http://www.lds.org.uk/member-area/gift-aid/
Enter into the relevant boxes, starting with your salary, the amounts of money you would have given while you were a member, include all donations not just tithing. Specify weekly/monthly or annual payments. When you’ve done that click ‘calculate’ & you be able to see how much money the taxpayer is giving to the church. As an example a man on £30,000 a year paying a full tithe & giving £500 annually to fast offering & the same amount to humanitarian aid would pay in total £3200 the taxpayer would pay £800. Add it all up over the years & it’s easy to see that the LDS has taken huge amounts of money from the British taxpayer.
Now, the gift aid scheme was introduced to help genuine charities with their charitable work a person would give whatever they could afford, no matter how little & the taxpayer would also make a contribution of 20-25% this is a great help to those charities who raise funds for genuine causes. Where it all breaks down is when a corporation such as the LDS, posing as a church claims charitable status in order to gain money to which they are not entitled. I’m sure you must be aware that although no one knows for sure the amount taken in tithing by the LDS in the States alone has been estimated as upwards of 5 billion dollars annually & of that amount around 0.7% is used for charitable work. I’m pretty sure that the LDS cannot be defined as a charity by any stretch of the imagination. As my ex says, it’s sickening.
One more fact; an amount in excess of £500,000 was raised in the UK by LDS members for Tsunami relief in 2005, £32,000 went to projects in Europe & the rest is unaccounted for, would anyone like to hazard a guess as to where it went?
I’m very familiar with the facts of the case. The problem with trying to disprove that the Garden of Eden was NOT in Jackson County, Missouri is that no one can PROVE that there ever was a Garden of Eden or where it was. (This has nothing to do with BELIEF, but everything to do with EVIDENCE). If you don’t know where the original Garden of Eden was, you can’t prove fraud. As far as I know, there has only been speculation about it, not actual proof. I’m not falling into any “LDS Propaganda Trap”. That generalization is simply naive. That almost makes what FOF says about critics seem true, that because you agree with something that the Mormons agree with, somehow you just can’t do that without being deceived. I don’t know Tom, and would never ever speak about his personal integrity or question his reasons for doing what he is doing. However, I feel that the lawsuit is frivolous, simply because it can’t be PROVED. I don’t know English Law, but USA Today reported,
So, there is already disagreement about the case by those familiar with UK Law.
I disagree. One judge obviously does not, but other legal experts do agree that it is. But let’s wait and see where it goes, and what the outcome will be. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. And just for clarification, I mean frivolous in that the case has no chance of being won. I don’t believe that it has any chance of being won at all.
I disagree again, for many reasons that will take too much time to go into. Again, it’s only my opinion.
Actually, it is an attack on someone’s religious freedom. I disagree with those that say that it will spill over to Christianity, because I don’t think it will get anywhere at all. As for the Church and its financial dealings, I’ve made myself very clear here numerous times how I feel about that. Is their tithing regulation un-Biblical? Sure. But is it a purposeful fraud being perpetuated on unwary people? I don’t think that can be proved by the evidence they are presenting.
Ralph,
Really? You are going to speak for the entire world here? And me? You have no idea what I believe, so please don’t make generalized statements about me that you can’t back up. I don’t think it will open any “can of worms”. Not this case, at any rate.
Ralph,
There is a wide variety of belief in Christianity concerning the scientific origins of the world. You’re argument is irrelevant. And the issue of these origins has been addressed many times in the US, at least. What’s your point?
Ralph
I did read the article along with many others following a similar line so let me make it clear that Tom Phillips in order to make a case, had to concentrate on those things that could be proven. Of course you won’t read about that in the press because they’re more interested in headlines than facts but let me assure you of this, it can be proven that Adam & Eve, much to Falcons surprise 😉 did NOT live in Jackson County Missouri & that will be part of Tom Phillips provable assertions.
Yes I agree with you that religion is a choice just as paying tithing to the LDS insofar as ‘if you don’t pay you won’t see your family in the afterlife’ is a choice, but as I & others have explained over & over this is not about religious freedom, it’s about fraud & the only question to be answered in this case is a very simple one.
‘Did President Monson know or have reason to know that the claims made by the LDS church were or could have been untrue’?
As I said previously Ralph, I’m not an expert on law but the experts in this country & the US, those who DO know something about fraud cases are agreed that it has every chance of success. So I guess we’ll just have to wait & see.
This does not prove INTENT. Did Monson seek to perpetuate fraud just to gain tithing donations? Can this be PROVEN? How can one speak to intent, when it comes to belief? That is very hard to do, especially when the mantra of the Mormon Leadership has been for the last 100 years, “we simply don’t know”. For example a British reporter interviewed Jeffrey Holland about the BOA, and he said he “didn’t know” how Joseph translated it. So, how can you absolutely PROVE intent? Especially if people WANT to believe that Smith was a prophet? This will be far more difficult than it is being put forth by some, this is what my common sense tells me.
For me the question is, “Are they knowingly hiding or misrepresenting Mormon doctrines, teachings or information to get people to convert and pay tithing?” Read the statement put out by Mr. Ralph and Mr. Bloor, this seems to be more of what they are talking about. We can speculate all we want to but I’m sure we don’t even know half of what’s going on. We don’t know what evidence will be brought out in court (if it goes that far). If UK law says the defendant doesn’t have to show up for the case to go forward, then how can Monson not showing up put an end to it all? I think Mr. Philips’ has a stronger case than some give him credit for. I don’t think accusations of fraud are going to magically disappear just because it’s a religious corporation that is being called out.
Grindael,
OK, let me ask a series of questions – Do you believe that Jesus walked on water? Do you believe that He changed water into wine? Do you believe that He was resurrected? Do you believe that He raised Lazarus from the dead? Do you believe that Moses was a real person? Do you believe that the Exodus was a real event and lasted for 40 years? Do you believe these and teach them as factual – including in church to other believers? Or do you regard them as good stories until they can be proven scientifically, historically and anthropologically and teach them that way?
I know that most atheists believe and teach evolution as fact, that is their ‘religion’. Muslims also teach their religion as factual, that is why the hard line Muslims are eager to die for their beliefs because their afterlife is factual to them and they teach it that way.
There are many comments made on here about Christianity (not LDS beliefs but general Christianity) which cannot be proven but are stated as fact – for example many of you say you are already saved. That cannot be proven until the Final Judgement so really for me that is just a good story to keep you and others like you in that false belief. So yes, I believe that I can make a general statement like that.
MJP,
Regardless of how people want to view the creation from what is written in Genesis, Mr Phillips is the one that has called it fraudulent and has stated why he believes it is so. So that does attack the Christian and Jewish faiths as they both believe in Genesis, so if they believe in a fraudulent book then follows that they are also fraudulent in their faith.
Old Man,
I can’t even imagine the uproar that American tax payers would be in if our tax dollars were given to the LDS church. Or any church for that matter. Churches here are tax exempt but I don’t see that as the same thing.
Ralph,
The BoA and the BoM are also on that list. Are you going to tell us that those are authentic, historical and completely factual? What about the American Indians? Crazy how essays concerning these very doctrines and beliefs are just all of a sudden appearing on LDS.org. It would seem that the church is scrambling after years of silence.
For additional information and clarity on this case, read David Twede’s February 9th blog post, “Theocorpocrisy,” at Mormon Disclosures: http://mormondisclosures.blogspot.com/2014/02/theocorpocrisy.html
Ralph said
Speak for your own religion and your own self. Christianty is NOT A RELIGION.
Here is what people dont understand and are always getting wrong. Religion is people trying to work their way to God. Thats what Mormonism is.
If you married and have a wife, do you tell people, I have a religion, it’s me and my wife? Are you tring to work to make her happy, make her love you, or working to impress her? That what religion is and does.
When it comes to Christianty, it is a real and personnal Relationship with the true and living God. It is not a religion.
I have stated before, as far as archaeology goes, Their is over whelming evidence for the Bible, not for the BoM. I have been to Isreal twice now, and now as I write this, My daughter is over their. We have pictures of the evidence and saw it and meet the people. Like I said, we cannot visit BoM lands, meet the people eat the Food etc.
Ralph said
Yes I believe them all and yes they can be proved, But this topic is not about them.
But let me ask this, if you dont believe them, then why do you claim to be a mormon, if these things are taught in the Bible and you to some degree believe they happend.
Thanks for the link Sharon!
So technically, yes they are getting the extra from Brtish tax payers on top of the 10%. I think there is more at play here than just Tom Phillips, or the two men mentioned in the summons. We all know of the fraudulent practices of the LDS corporation, maybe it’s time they answer for it. At the very least, maybe it will make them more honest in their dealings with their fellow man. How any of these leaders hold a temple recommend is beyond me. If I were to interview for a recommend, I would have to answer that I am honest in my dealings with my fellow man. With the LDS leaders, it’s do as I say not as I do.
How people reconcile Bible “miracles” with science is up to the individual, Ralph, and people have different views on how to do this. What is important to Christians, is what the Bible teaches. You are not justified in making generalized statements to cover “all Christians”, because you don’t know what they all believe or how they reconcile the Bible to their world view. I’m saved, because the Bible says that if you believe in Jesus, you are. It’s as simple as that. As for Jesus miracles and all the other “supernatural events” of the Bible, it makes no difference what I believe, only what the Bible teaches. You call it a “false belief”, but it is only false TO YOU.
Ralph said
Do you believe these and teach them as factual – including in church to other believers? Or do you regard them as good stories until they can be proven scientifically, historically and anthropologically and teach them that way?
I say,
I believe these things and teach them as factual if you mean by them what I think you mean .
If it could be proven that they did not occur I would hope that I would quit believing them. I want to believe the truth. Since I believe that Jesus is the Truth I believe that science and history and anthropology are on my side.
Now I fully acknowledge that individuals and groups of scientists and historians anthropologists can be deceived and wrong but science and anthropology and history are not to be feared they are to be embraced and eventually brought under the Lordship of Christ who is the Truth.
I agree with Grindael that this lawsuit will not go far but as I said before… If your organization finds itself in a position that a single person is considered to be in charge and can be brought before a judge and a case can be made that he knowingly mislead folks to get money you are doing it wrong
peace
Grindael
I spent a long time typing out a defence of the things I said but rather than cause any dissension in here I’ll let it go, I know I was correct & that’s good enough for me. I will however respond to your final dig at me when you responded to what I said here,
“‘Did President Monson know or have reason to know that the claims made by the LDS church were or could have been untrue’?”
You seem determined to prove that this case is a non-starter when you said:
“This does not prove INTENT. Did Monson seek to perpetuate fraud just to gain tithing donations? Can this be PROVEN? How can one speak to intent, when it comes to belief?”
I don’t know about US law but I do know that under English law Intent does not have to be proven. Intent may be inferred through the hearing of evidence. There are two kinds of intent, direct intent & Oblique intent, the latter applies in this case. The following is taken from an online resource for those studying UK law. My comments appear in Parentheses.
“Oblique intent is said to exist where the defendant embarks on a course of conduct to bring about a desired result, (in this case causing a person to join the LDS) knowing that the consequence of his actions will also bring about another result”(another known result would be the paying of tithes.)
Subjective or objective test
A subjective test is concerned with the defendant’s perspective. In relation to oblique intent it would be concerned only with whether the defendant did foresee the degree of probability of the result occurring from his actions.
An objective test looks at the perspective of a reasonable person. I.e. would a reasonable person have foreseen the degree of probability of the result occurring from the defendant’s actions.
In other words should it be decided by the court that the LDS used deception & misleading statements to bring people into the church KNOWING that membership would result in an increase in church revenue it can almost certainly be inferred that there was Oblique intent.
Kate
“I think there is more at play here than just Tom Phillips, or the two men mentioned in the summons.”
Your instincts do you proud Kate, there is more going on than people realise but I can’t say anything more than that at the moment. So, before heading to bed I’ll leave you with a simple phrase that Tom Phillips used to sign off a mail last week.
“The truth will prevail”
@old man
ooh baby! (rubbing hands gleefully)
Old Man,
How could you go to bed with the fiftieth anniversary of the Beatles first appearance here on our side of the pond; special on TV? OOPS time difference. However tomorrow you will be required to travel to Liverpool and visit the Cavern. Maybe I should come over sometime and we can go there together.
Personally, all I’m interested about in this case is that people hear what the LDS church is all about and are at least fore warned.
I think what current LDS members should be aware of is that what the FLDS sects teach and believe about the “restored” gospel is the real deal Mormonism. That’s really Brigham Young Utah circa 1850 Mormonism. It’s all about tradition. Ask the FLDS members if they thought BY was just giving his opinion about such fan favorites as the Adam-God doctrine. In the tradition of the FLDS is where we find Mormonism.
Ralph,
So you think we have to wait until the Final Judgement to know if we have eternal life? In Mormonism, as we know, there are two levels of salvation. The one everyone who has ever lived gets and then the LDS earned godhood program. This latter one you are referring to, I guess.
As Christians we know we have our salvation made sure through faith in Jesus Christ and His perfect sacrifice for sin.
First John 5:13 says, “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life.”
Get that, “that you may know”. If you want to “know” that you have eternal life right now Ralph, what I’d suggest you do is come to the place in your life where you “know” who God and His Christ are.
As a LDS believer, you don’t know God and you don’t know Jesus. The LDS church has you on the wrong path. I don’t care if you think you’ve had some spiritual experiences, if you don’t know Jesus, you’re lost.
Falcon
Thanks for lightening the mood. Following your instructions on travelling to Liverpool I’ve just been on the cavern site to see what’s going on, to be honest I thought it had closed several years ago. Reading some of the stuff on there is a real trip down memory lane. One thing that struck me was an item advertised as ‘Saturday night with the Beatles’ Tickets £17.50 I remember seeing the Beatles in their early days, late in ’64 I believe & paying the princely sum of £0.10 That price even included a local supporting group.
Things were quite a bit different back then, e.g. no drinking allowed Coke & Pepsi only, but all in all pretty good value for a fantastic evening of pop music. Looking back I suppose there was a certain innocence to it all compared with the music scene of today, but maybe I’m just an old cynic now. J
Ps. should you ever come over to the UK, I would love to welcome you to dear old Blighty You could even bring johnnyboy with you as he seems to be something of a musician, perhaps we could even teach him a little about real music. Just kidding johnnyboy. 😉
I would also extend that invitation to anyone here having plans to visit the UK all are welcome. Don’t leave it too long though. My walking frame is definitely the worse for wear.
I have spent the better part of an hour reading many of these comments, as I am new to this blog.
FoF,
I could be wrong, but I think that “freedom of religion” is one of the most misunderstood phrases of our time. Freedom of Religion was about protecting the people from the government appointing an official religion for the country. It was never intended to protect religions from the government. Because of freedom of religion, people are free to be mormon. But the mormon church is NOT free to lie to people and teach misleading/false history.
As has been said many times in the other comments: This case has nothing to do with religion; it’s about fraud. This does not diminish “freedom of religion” because it has nothing to do with it.
@old man
Ive probably mentioned it before.. but I have played the cavern. Twice actually. I was even featured on BBC liverpool (radio merseyside) with Spencer Leigh. I also shut down the M6 when my car broke down on the way to the gig. I had to pay two guys in a vw bug to get me to the show. I literally was running across liverpool as my band was standing on stage to play. I ran down the steps just in time.
johnnyboy,
Yea like you think anyone is going to buy the “My car broke down” excuse. That’s right up there with “My dog ate my homework”. You were probably hiding outside in an alley just timing a dramatic entrance. BTW I took up the guitar (again) when I retired. I now have “gear acquisition syndrome” also known as “GAS”. Of course guitar wasn’t enough of a challenge so then I picked-up the bass. In fact I just smuggled a Gretsch (orange of course) hollow body electric bass into the house this past Wednesday. It’s guns and guitars. There’s a reason I continue to work even though supposedly “retired”.
Back to the real topic although a little diversion now and then releases some tension.
We seem to be swerving into a discussion regarding strategy and tactics in exposing the lie that is LDS sect style Mormonism. It’s sort of like discussing whether or not those people who stand outside of Mormon gatherings shouting, “You’re all going to hell!” is all that effective. Not that the lawsuit is a similar tactic, but I think you get my drift.
I’m sure the Tom Phillips legal action will be seen as a mean spirited attempt by a former member (although he’s still a member) to attack the LDS church.
Here’s the thing, as Kate has pointed out, growing-up Mormon she knew little or nothing about Christianity. It was when she began looking into the BoA that she became more curious and eventually walked away from the LDS church and Mormonism.
This lawsuit is causing a lot of discussion so I think that, at least, is good.
Hey Ralpf,
We just had the topicabout, who are real christians.
Not trying to change it to that, but if you or any one here says, How can you really know if your saved?
You must not be a christian, or if you are, you must be a real newborn baby in Christ.
It boils down to this, Can we trust the scriptures?
Can we trust God did not and will not Lie to us?
If we are not sure, or we say no to either or both of those, then we have more serious problems, and why call yourself a Christian?
Many of us why have been christians for years, and have read over and over the Scriptures, know their true, But not from some Burning in the bosom. Lots of evidence to prove it. But thats could be another topic down the road.
Well, Ralph, its LDS who are being questioned now. And as far as I know, no official stance has been taken by any church concerning the date of earth’s creation. So, you’re argument is irrelevant and only distracts from the issue: has the LDS church committed fraud in England by stating as truth things it may not know as truth.
Typical LDS reply.
Anyone who says, look behind the LDS curtain to see whats really going on,will in turn have LDS running any saying, no, look at all these other groups and what they believe.
Honestly, I dont care of anything ever comes from this or not, I will use this whole issue when speaking to Mormons coming to my door, and say, do you guys really want to know the truth and are you really seeking the truth?
Do you believe your God is real and speaks to your prophet?
Do you really believe your church is the true church and that you have the truth?
If they say yes to these questions, then I will ask, whats your church afraid off?
eveytime something like this happens, you church trys as hard as possible to keep it out of the news, remove articles from the WIKI website, wont tell LDS in church what going on.
Seems a church that is lead by Christ, and full of people who claim to be believers who read the Bible and desire truth, sure seem to remove fatcs, avoding answering questions and are not very open and honest.
Maybe I’m just a rare breed or crazy, But since I have given my life to Christ, something like 20 years ago, I have desired to lead my life in such a way, that everyone knows who I am and what you see is what you get.
I know some here have been turned off by that, or disagree with what I say or how I say it, but you know where I stand and what I believe.
I also am more than willing to give out info, Like my email address, phone number, home address, etc.
I understand why many dont, and I dont bother them over that, but for me, I have nothing to hide, Believe if someone wanted my info to harm me, be it really showing up to my house, and hurting my family, or trying to ruin me by using my info in some other way, I still dont care and will put it out. I believe God has and will use me by putting this info out, and will proctet me, and if He does not and allows something to happen, so be it.
I choose to live in such a way, that I’m not afraid to touch any subject or any question.
I have told many people, I will discuss any issue under the sun, except me and My wifes, sex life. Otherwise anything goes, and I have had many people from Athiests, to co-workers, to strangers on the street hearing me talk ask questions.
I figure, How hard is it for the LDS church to be this open and honest, if they teach in a public manner what they do in the church and post it on line, then they should not be afraid of questions that come. If they are, they need to shut down all website and anything else that posts info in a public way and stop sending out Missionarys.
Old Man,
Don’t understand why you take disagreement as something negative, or a “dig”. It wasn’t intended that way. I’m not trying to PROVE anything, I’m giving my opinion and the reasons why. Whether it is oblique intent, or direct intent, it is still intent. And proving that, will be extremely difficult in these circumstances. For example, the Mormons can say that their oblique intent was to save people’s souls. Obeying God’s commandments does that. Tithing is only one of those commandments. Why FOCUS on the tithing? How do you know that is the FOCUS of the intent? Remember you are trying to prove INTENTIONAL FRAUD. I don’t see how this can be proved in this circumstance.
If I have offended you, apologies.
Thanks for that FMM. Thanks a lot.
I have been reading this article and the comments. I thought this site was realiable. I dont understand how this list of points as given in the article above can possible be taken seriously. They all seem to be Mormon beliefs. Similar beliefs are had with most churches. The part that worried me was this whole trojan horse law thing that seems like just a low blow way to get to other Mormon religious documents. The part that got me a RED flag in my mind was that this guy and his accomplices seem to be using this as an excuse to find what they really want which apparently are these documents that were mentioned in the article. My question, I am a searcher for truth and I am willing to listen to anyone that is honest about the real truth, is why aren’t these people being honest about their rural intentions? And if they aren’t honest about those intentions, it only seems logical to anyone who is actually honest with themselves that they are also not being honest with anything else they are claiming. So it see to this truth seeker that Mr. Phillips as well as anyone else who supports this dishonesty is a fake. I want to know what is really going on. Below I quote the two parts of the article I am referring to. I would like to know what others think as well.
“So what could they conceivably go for? Oh, just all of the First Presidency’s correspondence, meeting minutes, diary entries, archives, records, writings, studies, etc. Pretty much anything in the First Presidency’s vault.
“In my mind, the document discovery is the banquet they’re going for. This personal summons to Monson is just setting the table…”
@TheHorusOrionRa
Actually this statement about most churches having similar beliefs is quite untrue. The article reads this way*:
Let’s look at some falsifications that other churches do not do:
1. The Nauvoo Expositor was necessarily destroyed because it printed lies about Joseph Smith
2. Joseph and Hyrum Smith killed as martyrs because they would not deny their testimony of the Book of Mormon
3. The Book of Mormon as an ancient historical record, the most correct book on earth, translated from ancient gold plates
4. The Book of Abraham as a literal translation of Egyptian papyri
Just on these 4 points, we have obvious or attempted falsification or alteration of facts to ‘smooth’ over the official account. Certainly you may argue that these points may be in common with certain churches:
5. No death on earth prior to 6,000 years ago
6. All humans alive today descended from two people who lived 6,000 years ago
And this is unfortunate, TheHorusOrionRa – because you’ve missed the point the complainants in the UK have made. They do not wish to disturb or go against any religion. They only want the truth. If any clergy purposefully falsified such details, then they would be in the same club as the allegedly accused LDS Prophet. Yet we find that the majority of churches today do not falsify anything.*
I believe it’s extremely difficult to prove 5 and 6 are false, but the evidence will show points 1 to 4 have been falsified. (This of course if it goes to court).
Those named in the criminal complaint (Steve Bloor and Chris Ralph) brought against Thomas Monson have explained why they have taken this step. Read what they say here: http://journeyofloyaldissent.wordpress.com/joint-statement-concerning-summonses-served-on-thomas-spencer-monson/
Grindael.
Admittedly I was a little ‘miffed’ at just one of your comments, which could possibly have been interpreted as a personal attack, but I see now that I was being was being oversensitive. I was wrong to react in that way so there is really no need to apologise my friend.
As we say over here ‘the proof of the pudding is in the eating so it’s probably better to sit back & see what happens. 🙂