Containing 5,412 Articles Spanning 369 Topics
Ex-Mormon News, Stories And Recovery
Online Since January 1, 2005
|
 | Alone: The Impact Of Anti-Mormonism
Friday, Jun 14, 2013, at 07:28 AM
Original Author(s): Birdsense
Topic: KERRY MUHLESTEIN -Guid- | ↑ | I watched the whole video, unfortunately.
See it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKtNBNX3UIc
"They had reasons to doubt and reasons to believe. They chose to believe."
The video is obviously designed to combat the oceans of young people who have access to new data in ways that previous folks could never have dreamed.
Midway through the video, doubts about the Church and specifically the Book of Abraham are are supposedly pseudo-tackled by inserting an appeal to authority; suggesting that Mormon Scholars and the great Kerry Muhlestein can help bring folks back to a place where they can then resolve their intellectual concerns and open back up to testing their concerns spiritually.
The film creates an archetype of an individual who left the Church, and paints him as unwilling or mostly uninterested in considering pro-Mormon sources to resolve his concerns.
Muhlestein's appearance paints the issues with the Book of Abraham as being so intrensically complex that only the most scholarly of historians and egyptologists could possibly tackle it.
Conclusion: Were we to believe the nonsensical conclusions put forward by the video, we would learn that we simply need to study ourselves back into a place intellectually that will allow us to test it all in the realm of spirituality. While nothing specific is proposed, it's suggested that doubters should spend more time researching the Mormon Scholars and accept that while Joseph was human and made some mistakes, there's plenty of reason to choose to believe.
Reality: This video oversimplifies issues and engages in fallacies designed to muddy the waters of inquiry. Sadly, much of it is so misleading as to come across as laughable. The archetype anti-Mormon who leaves the church doesn't return because he isn't willing to keep studying Mormon Scholars? The main character magically studies his way back to a place that logically dumps him to test the claims in the realm of spirituality?
Bonus: It isn't by accident that John Dehlin's voice appears in this joke. And while Muhlestein plays the "I know my stuff and it's my life's work to help people work through their issues on the Book of Abraham" card, you'll note that his peers at UCLA, as well as EVERY SINGLE EGYPTOLOGIST alive today all disagree with even the light conclusions he tries to pass off as pertains to the Book of Abraham and Mormonism.
|  | Homosexuality, The BSA, The LDS, And The BS Statement, "Sexual Orientation Has Not Previously Been-and Is Not Now-a Disqualifying Factor For Boys Who Want To Join Latter-Day Saint Scout Troops."
Wednesday, Jun 5, 2013, at 07:04 AM
Original Author(s): Mithryn
Topic: BOY SCOUTS -Guid- | ↑ | An address to the believing member:
April 19, 2013, the Boy Scouts of America announced a proposal to no longer deny membership to youth on the basis of sexual orientation, but maintain its ban on openly gay adult leaders. The LDS church released a statement in support of the proposal stating that "Sexual orientation has not previously been-and is not now-a disqualifying factor". This is bold faced revision of history.
Why this should matter to a current member of the church:
Because they are asking you to forget their crimes of bigotry and switch your brain to "they never discriminated" even when is good evidence that they did it readily available. This illustrates how the church manipulates history in order to paint itself differently as the morals of the world change.
It is no question that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), a longtime supporter of the Boy Scouts of America, teaches that homosexual activity is immoral.
The LDS Church is the largest single sponsor of Scouting units with over 30,000 units nationwide, which comprise about 13% of BSA's youth members http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scou...
In 2000, an attorney representing the LDS church stated that "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ... would withdraw from Scouting if it were compelled to accept openly homosexual Scout leaders". Now they still have not permitted homosexual leaders, just boy scouts. But where do scout leaders come from? oh yeah, they serve as boy scouts.
Tim Curran was an idea scout, leader of his patrol. When he tried to become a scoutmaster he was banned and sued the Boy Scouts over it. This idea that a boy is just fine until the day he gains his eagle, and then suddenly he is no longer fit to serve is unjustified. (more about Tim's case http://www.timcurran.com/scouting/ )
The BSA made the change to the regulations about homosexual scouts after conducting a survey the council sent to its members, four out of five Scout leaders and parents said they're opposed to lifting the ban on gays. About 4,700 adults responded to the survey, which the council shared with the Boy Scouts. Nearly half of the respondents said they would quit the Boy Scouts if the ban on gays is lifted.
Harold Brown, once spokesman for the church said: that no amount of press coverage or activism is going to influence God to change the rules about homosexuality. Brown said: "Being black is not a sin...Being immoral is."
What's interesting is the parallel. Once, being black was considered being a sin. General Authorities taught that the black man (and boy) was black because he had been less faithful prior to this earth life.
July 18, 1974, the Salt Lake Tribune reported: "A 12-year-old boy scout has been denied a senior patrol leadership in his troop because he is black", Don L. Cope, black ombudsman for the state, said Wednesday." See http://newspaperarchive.com/salt-lake...
Now the church states that "It is unknown when or why such a policy was put in place [Blacks not being worthy]." But that is just a demonstrably a cover for statements from leaders at that time such as:
"I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn't just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. It isn't that he just desires to go to the same theater as the white people. From this, and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, "First we pity, then endure, then embrace" -Mark E. Peterson
You see, it is the practice of the church to state they have never done a thing that it is easy to find they not only did, but to some extent still do. This kind of history rewrite is called "whitewashing" and according to current church manuals, it is dishonest
Active members know the five steps of repentance, they know that the church should feel remorse and try to make restitution to those it wronged. Further they know that if one takes to cover one's sins it is "Amen to the priesthood of that man". Perhaps to an organization, after all corporations are people
The LDS church claims that they have nothing against people who are gay as long as they live lives of celibacy, at the same time they also use fast offering funds to send gay boys to reformation camps supported by BYU commercials and the prophet in conference
The flagrant abuse of the LDS church in standing against homosexuals in the BSA is so obvious that even, Penn and Teller, magicians, discuss the involvement of the Mormon Church in the BSA and even quote Thomas Monson (warning: language) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndoP1Y...
The LDS faith is trying to put one over on its members with the above statement. It is as deceptive as the statements over blacks and the priesthood in the recent (2013) changes to the scriptures. It is as deceptive as their videos on the Prophet Joseph Smith, only showing him and Emma together.
It is a modern-day rewrite of history happening right now; where soon you, the active member, can find yourself opposing homosexuality, and on the wrong side of the church, because the church is sweeping members with beliefs like yours, beliefs taught by the church, away with broad generalized statements and revisions without telling the general membership what is really going on.
This IS that history that you may have said in times past, "I don't care about history, I have a testimony". That attitude could quickly end you up confused and wondering what happened. After all, those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
| My former belief that Mormonism was true was conditional if and only if the processes that produced this belief were reliable for determining Mormonism was true enough to develop faith in it.
As well, my environment in which this belief was formed was crucial for my determining whether Mormonism was true.
Are there no reliable processes regardless of environment such that if and only if these processes were used would result in the subject’s believing Mormonism and developing faith in it?
Mormons believe their Plan of Salvation is such a thing. But any faith that developed would be more in the processes and the environments that fostered it than in the process of developing it.
In short, a trial of faith is not needed for Mormons. If God can provide such processes God can determine the faithful in the following of divine, unchanging and unalterable processes towards the salvation God offers.
This is why Mormonism suffers in having Grace. It, like The Catholic Church places import on processes of faith instead of mere hope that Grace is sufficient.
Mormons are less justified in their beliefs than people who believe they are hoping to achieve God's Grace in the receipt of their god's salvation more than a payoff for the trials of their faith. This non-Mormon believer in God takes trials of faith as an environment possibly hostile to their finding grace in developing their faith.
In comes their savior in a person and not a process.
No wonder "Amazing Grace" is not a Mormon favorite.
|  | Photos Of Joseph's Dead Body Exist-Death Mask Mismatched With Hyrum's Skull
Tuesday, May 28, 2013, at 08:24 AM
Original Author(s): Steve Benson
Topic: STEVE BENSON - SECTION 15 -Guid- | ↑ | Photos of Joseph's Dead Body Exist-Death Mask Mismatched with Hyrum's Skull
The question is (with the answer provided below):
Where are those photos pf the dead Joseph Smith (which some on this board claim to have seen posted on unspecified internet sites).
What those photos show (with updated information since added) . . .
--Photographing the Dead Bodies of Joseph and Hyrum Smith Uncovers Some Basic Identity Problems
"In the Smith Family cemetery in the Community of Christ [formerly the RLDS Church] section of old Nauvoo, there is one large tombstone/monument that lists the names from left to right 'Hyrum Smith Joseph Smith and Emma Smith.' Joseph actually lies beneath Hyrum's name and Hyrum lies beneath Joseph's name; this in effect makes Joseph apart from Emma.
"Here is the rest of the story:
"A public viewing was held on 29 June 1844, after which empty coffins weighted with sandbags were used at the public burial. (This was done to prevent theft or mutilation of the bodies). The actual coffins bearing the bodies of the Smith brothers were initially buried under the unfinished Nauvoo House, then disinterred and reburied under an out-building on the Smith homestead. The exact location of the gravesite was soon lost to memory.
"In 1928, Frederick M. Smith, president of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and grandson of Joseph Smith, fearing that rising water from the Mississippi River would destroy the gravesite, authorized civil engineer William O. Hands to conduct an excavation to find Joseph and Hyrum's bodies. Hands conducted extensive digging on the Smith homestead and located the bodies. The remains--which were badly decomposed--were examined and photographed and the bodies were reinterred beside Emma Smith on higher ground. They did not notify Joseph Fielding Smith--who was the closest descendant of Hyrum--that they were doing this. It really made him mad when he found out.
"Anyway, one of the skulls had a missing facial area. The other skull still had much of the face intact. Since it was known that Hyrum had been shot just to the side of his nose, the RLDS assumed that the skull that was missing a facial area must have been Hyrum's, so when they reburied them they put the name of Hyrum over the skull with the missing facial bones.
"Then in 1993, a forensic team compared the death masks of Joseph and Hyrum to the photographs of their exhumed skulls and found that Joseph's death mask fit the skull with the missing facial bones. Apparently, 'when Joseph fell from the second-story window at Carthage Jail in June of 1844, he suffered facial fractures. Because death occurred only minutes after this event, the bones never healed together and as decomposition of the soft tissues progressed in the grave, the fragments fell from the face, leaving a void in the skull." Hyrum's skull is intact, except for the piece missing where he was shot."
("Title: Top 10 Things You Didn't Know about Joseph Smith's Death." posted in commentary section by "Hueffenhardt," 28 April 2006, at: http://forum1.aimoo.com/theviewfromthefoyer/category/Top-10-Things-You-Didn-t-Know-About-Joseph-Smith-s-Death-1-463255.html)
Another account, from which the above was apparently borrowed:
"Joseph and Hyrum Smith's bodies were returned to Nauvoo the next day [28 June 1844]. The bodies were cleaned and examined, and death masks were made preserving their facial features and structures.
"A public viewing was held on June 29, 1844, after which empty coffins weighted with sandbags were used at the public burial. (This was done to prevent theft or mutilation of the bodies). The coffins bearing the bodies of the Smith brothers were initially buried under the unfinished Nauvoo House, then disinterred and deeply reburied under an out-building on the Smith homestead.
"In 1928, Frederick M. Smith, president of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and grandson of Joseph Smith, fearing that rising water from the Mississippi River would destroy the grave site, authorized civil engineer William O. Hands to conduct an excavation to find Joseph and Hyrum's bodies. Hands conducted extensive digging on the Smith homestead, and located the bodies, as well as finding the remains of Joseph's wife, Emma, who was buried in the same place. The remains–-which were badly decomposed–-were examined and photographed, and the bodies were reinterred."
("Death of Joseph Smith," under "Internment," at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Joseph_Smith)
--More on the Joseph Smith Skull/Death Mask Mismatch
In an article entitled, "Forensic Evidence: A Closer Look," the claim is made that--based on archival material provided with the permission of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints--the death mask of Joseph Smith has actually been mismatched with the body of his slain brother, Hyrum:
"I opened up the hybrid image of the skull and jaw [of Joseph Smith] in Photoshop Image Editor and created a new layer to receive the death mask and pasted it into that layer. I had to work with the scale of the death mask so that it would correspond to the size of the skull images.
"The software I used allowed me to maintain exact ratios as I moved the scale up and down. I was thus able to keep the image in a correct aspect ratio to the original image as I worked with it. My first discovery was that Joseph's death mask needed to be tilted back more at the top. Joseph had a high, sloping forehead.
"In order to capture the full facial features, George Cannon apparently tilted the plaster cast down at the top of the head to cover the full detail. This would explain why Joseph's mask makes his chin look weak and recessed when the mask is laid flat on a table.
"When Joseph's mask is compared to Hyrum's, it is immediately clear that they were not cast at the same angle. Joseph's mask must be rotated upward at the bottom to be in the same plane as Hyrum's. I needed to rotate the image of Joseph's mask out at the bottom and back at the top to correct this discrepancy.
"I made the necessary adjustments of rotation and scale and moved the transparent image of Joseph's death mask over the image of the skull and jaw.
"They matched perfectly!
"The death mask lined up at almost every location of the front skull profile. In fact, the only adjustment needed was caused by eight-degree rotation of the skull photo from a perfect right angle. Once that was corrected, I had no doubts. This skull (the one the RLDS officers had identified as Hyrum's) belonged to Joseph's death mask. Joseph's skull [when aligned] with Hyrum's death mask [was] [n]ot a match." . . . "[A] 3D model of Joseph with skull [and] death-mask overlay [of Joseph Smith is a match]."
"The likeness itself was striking. I was looking at an image of Joseph based on physiological data never before used in examining his appearance. I believe this image to be more accurate than anyone had seen in over 150 years. I wasn't finished yet. Much would yet need to be done to prepare and present to the world an image of Joseph that was accurate in every respect. But I could see him before me now, on the screen of my computer, and I knew that we were going to have enough information to complete the work and allow people to see Joseph with more accuracy than he had been seen since 1844."
("Forensic Evidence: A Closer Look," at:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040406094315/http://home.fuse.net/stracy/forensic.htm)
--The Photographs, Along with Their Revealing Details, are in Possession of the RLDS Church/Community of Christ
The photographs taken by the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/Community of Christ of Joseph and Hyrum Smith's dead bodies are acknowldged to presently be in existence but are reportedly being kept confidential for privacy reasons.
In an article entitled, "The Skull: A Missing Link," the following is noted:
"While researching the death of Joseph Smith Jr., we came across information that he and his brother Hyrum were exhumed, examined and photographed in 1928 by the RLDS Church.
"Out of respect for the Prophet and the Smith Family, we will not publish the actual photographs.
"However, back in 1993 the authors received permission from the RLDS Church to have copies of these exhumation photographs studied by a team of experts in Forensic Pathology, This was first time the RLDS Church allowed the photographs to be taken from their vaults for study. Years prior to this, tracings of these photos were made by Utah artist William Whitaker.
"These will be used here to illustrate the findings of the experts.
"A study of the RLDS photographs shows that Joseph's skull is missing the facial area. That his facial bones were missing was made even more puzzling when we found that his brother Hyrum's facial bones were intact, even though he was shot in the face at the time of his death.
"We therefore considered that when Joseph the Prophet fell from the second-story window at Carthage Jail in June of 1844, he suffered facial fractures. Because death occurred only minutes after this event, the bones never healed together and as decomposition of the soft tissues progressed in the grave, the fragments fell from the face, leaving a void in the skull."
"[From] Fig. 6: The remains of the skull of Joseph Smith [as] traced by William Whitaker from the exhumation photographs taken by the RLDS Church in 1928: Notice that Joseph's skull is missing the facial bones. Previously it had been assumed that this void resulted from decomposition in the grave. Evidence reveals that there is more than just decomposition to the story these bones reveal.
[From] Fig. 6A . . . : The remains of the skull of Hyrum Smith, brother of Joseph, [as] traced by William Whitaker from the exhumation photographs taken by the RLDS Church in 1928. The fact that Hyrum's skull is intact, except for the piece missing where he was shot, proves that decomposition is not the reason for the void in Joseph's skull. Hyrum was buried right next to Joseph."
"This is not the end of this study, currently there are other experts and scientific analyses scheduled. We are confident that their findings will continue to add insight into the face, life and times of Joseph Smith."
--Originial, Follow-up and Expanded Research
For graphics and illustrations with accompanying text on Joseph Smith's skull, see:
--"The Skull: A Missing Link," at: http://comevisit.com/lds/CHAP3.HTM; update, "The Skull: Thie Missing Link," at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/The_Skulls.htm; and update, "Another Daguerreotype," at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/Appendix_D.html
For detailed examination of Joseph Smith's death mask, see:
"A Comparison with the Death Mask," at: http://comevisit.com/lds/CHAP2.HTM; update, "A Comparison with the Death Mask," at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/The_Death_Mask.html; and update, "Another Daguerreotype,"
at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/Appendix_D.html
For analysis of facial fractures found on Joseph Smith's skull, see:
--"Did Joseph Smith Receive Facial Fractures?," at: http://comevisit.com/lds/CHAP4.HTM; update, "Did Joseph Smith Receive Facial Fractures?," at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/Facial_Fractures.html; "Facial Fractures Explain the Differences Between the Death Mask and the JS Photograph," at: http://comevisit.com/lds/CHAP5.HTM; and update, "Facial Fractures Explain the Differences Between the Death Mask and the Photograph," at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/Differences.html
For access to and assessement of the research, see:
"How Can I Get the Graphic File?," at: http://comevisit.com/lds/CHAP6.HTM; and update, "Nearing Twenty Years.... A Perspective...," at: http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/Conclusion.html
For the overall, expanded site on the research per Joseph Smith's skull and supporting daguerreotype, see:
"Photograph Found: a 20-year Perspective," at:
http://www.photographfound.com/Photograph_Found/Welcome.html
For the death masks of Joseph and Hyrum Smith, displayed side-by-side, see:
"Death on a Thursday Afternoon: The Martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum Smith, June 27, 1844," at: http://www.woodlandinstitute.com/joseph/martyrdom.php
This puts a whole new face on Joseph Smith (which the Mormon Church--in its own, far less honest way--has been trying to do for years).
|  | Could Generations Of Lamanite DNA Just Disappear?
Tuesday, May 28, 2013, at 08:03 AM
Original Author(s): Simon Southerton
Topic: SIMON SOUTHERTON -Guid- | ↑ | The glaring lack of molecular ties between Native Americans and ancient Israelites has forced many Mormon apologists to resolve their cognitive dissonance by a change of tack. Many have decided that if you can't make the facts fit with scripture then make scripture fit with the facts. It is an uncomfortable fact for Mormons that American Indian DNA is unquestionably of Asian origin and if there were any Israelites among their ancestors then their Israelite genes appear to have disappeared. So some LDS apologists, desperate to salvage faith at any cost, are arguing that the Lamanite DNA has indeed disappeared. Putting aside the testimony-shattering reinterpretations of scripture this requires, is it true that Lamanite DNA could so easily be lost?
Human population geneticists have made tremendous progress in unravelling the origins of the human family and the routes our ancestors followed as they colonized the globe. Most of this progress has been made by studying the simple genetic configurations of Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA. Until now scientists have largely ignored the DNA that comprises the vast majority of our genome. This is the DNA that resides within our remaining 22 pairs of chromosomes, known as the autosomes. Together with the X and Y chromosomes it is known as genomic DNA.
Enter whole genome studies
Studying our genomic DNA is enormously challenging. Firstly, there is so much of it. Most of the three billion letters of DNA contained in the human genome resides in the chromosomes. Secondly, the pattern of inheritance of genomic DNA is less straightforward. Unlike Y chromosome DNA, which is passed from generation to generation largely unchanged from father to son, and mitochondrial DNA, which is passed largely unchanged from mothers to daughters, most of our genomic DNA gets shuffled every generation in a process called recombination. This is illustrated in the figure below.
Note how the father has a blue and a red copy of each chromosome, one derived from each of his parents. Similarly, the mother has a chromosome derived from each of her parents. But the parents don't pass on chromosomes that came from only one of their parents. Each of the 22 chromosomes they pass on will contain fragments derived from each of their parents. This happens in every generation, consequently the chromosomes that we inherit from our parents contain fragments of DNA from a vast number of our paternal and maternal ancestors. This is illustrated in the four generation pedigree chart below. Note that the son carries the blue Y chromosome of only one of his four great grandfathers and the red mitochondrial DNA of only one of his four great grandmothers. Yet he carries fragments of chromosomal DNA from all eight of his great grandparents.
Tremendous advances in DNA technology in the last decade are now making it feasible for scientists to look much futher into the human genome to unlock some of the deepest secrets of our ancestors. Most of those secrets are buried in the 3 billion base pairs of DNA contained on our chromosomes But how is it possible to make sense of this vast amount of DNA sequence data? Most scientists studying the human genome focus their attention on what's different between genomes rather than what's the same. That reduces the information they have to deal with by roughly a thousand-fold. By far the most common difference observed when the entire genome sequence of two different people are compared, are single base pair substitutions known as Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs, pronounced SNiPs). The word "polymorphism" simply means different forms.
SNPs are random variations that have arisen in a single human genome in the past and then subsequently passed on to future generations (we typically pass on about 50 or so new mutations to our children). Since mutations are arising all the time human tribes that became separated soon began to accumulate large numbers of SNPs that are unique to their population.
SNPs have revealed some surprises in our family tree
Several ground-breaking discoveries using whole genome SNP analysis have been made in the last few years. It has long been known that humans co-existed in Europe with the closely related Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) about 30-40,000 years ago. Scientists have speculated for many years that humans and Neanderthals may have interbred but the evidence was largely inconclusive. In 2010 scientists at the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig, Germany led by Svante P„„bo succeeded in isolating DNA from Neanderthal bones and sequencing some of the Neanderthal genome. The German team that made the original discovery has recently published the full genome sequence, making it freely available to the scientific community.
The first things scientists did after sequencing the Neanderthal genome was to look for differences between the Neanderthal and human genomes. This study revealed many thousands of DNA sequence differences, or SNPs, between the two species. They also found that every human who is descended from "non-Africans" has a little Neanderthal in them - between 1 and 4 per cent of their genome. It appears humans and Neanderthals had sex and offspring. Neanderthals never lived in Africa, which may explain why contemporary sub-Saharan Africans have no trace of Neanderthal DNA in their genome.
While some scientists have challenged this finding, the prevailing opinion is that interbreeding between these two closely related species is extremely likely. And it didn't just stop there. Scientists now believe that our ancestors fraternized with other distant relatives. In 2012 Svante P„„bo's team published the entire genome sequence of Denisovans, a species more closely related to Neanderthals than humans. They had been able to isolate sufficient DNA for sequencing from a finger bone found in the Denisova cave in the Altai region of Siberia. Remarkably, when the Denisovan genome sequence was compared to the genomes of humans from all around the world, it was found that Papua New Guinea highlanders, Melanesians and Australian Aboriginals shared a little (~5%) Denisovan DNA.
The Denisovan discovery fits perfectly with widely accepted views of human colonisation of the world. The very first humans to migrate out of Africa travelled around the coast of India, reaching New Guinea and Australia about 50,000 years ago. The two groups are likely to have interbred when they first met and the Denisovans subsequently died out.
Lamanite DNA: Nowhere to Hide
The research on Neanderthals and Denisovans clearly illustrates that if ancestors of other ethnic backgrounds are hiding unnoticed in our family trees, traces of their DNA can be found in our genomes. Even after many thousands of years. It is no longer reasonable to claim that Lamanite DNA cannot be found. The recent advances in whole genome sequencing and analysis have changed the research landscape. Genetic tests are now so sensitive, that it is possible to detect a tiny fraction of a percent of mixed ancestry in a person's DNA.
Scientists are beginning to explore the origins of Native Americans using what they call Ancestry Informative Markers or AIMs. These are SNPs that have been shown to be specific to a particular indigenous group. In 2007 a group of scientists at the University of California, Davis, led by Dr Michael F. Seldin, identified 8,144 AIMs found only in the genomes of the Pima and Maya. These SNPs are distinguishable from equally population-specific SNPs found among Europeans. The scientists demonstrated that their panel of AIMs can distinguish between chromosomal segments of Amerindian or European ancestry. The goal of their study was to determine the ancestral origins of indigenous diseases, but their conclusions have profound implications for those interested in Book of Mormon studies.
Using ancestry informative SNPs it is possible to estimate how long ago foreign DNA entered a population. You will recall that most of our genome gets shuffled every generation as sister chromosomes undergo recombination. After foreign DNA enters a population random recombination events that occur every generation fragment the foreign DNA. The longer the DNA has been in a population the shorter the fragments of foreign DNA become. The AIMs SNPs can be used to determine the average length of the fragments of foreign (e.g. European) DNA.
Using this approach Seldin's team was able to determine quite accurately the number of generations since European DNA entered Mexican American populations. In the table below you will observe the estimates they obtained for all 22 chromosomes using two methods (STRUCTURE and ADMIXMAP). They were able to determine that the European DNA in 24 Mexican Americans originated within the last 10-25 generations. The average for all the chromosomes was 16 using the STRUCTURE method and 13 using the ADMIXMAP approach. These estimates align very comfortably with the known history of European admixture with Native American populations within the last 500 years.
If these individuals had Middle Eastern DNA in their genomes that arrived over the last 2-3,000 years, the scientists would have noticed something surprising in the results. Since Middle Eastern DNA is relatively closely related to European DNA, and they are likely share many AIMs, they would have detected it with their European AIMs. Having been through up to 6 times as many generations of recombination this DNA would have caused the estimates of the number of generations since admixture to be larger.
About a decade ago I made the following observation.
"In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites, say less than thirty, entered such a massive native population, it would be very hard to detect their genes today. However, such a scenario does not square with what the Book of Mormon plainly states and with what the prophets have taught for 175 years. The Book of Mormon records that soon after their arrival in the Americas, the descendants of Lehi "multiplied exceedingly and spread upon the face of the land" (Jarom 1:8). By about 46 BC, after which time they had joined with the Mulekites, they had multiplied until they "covered the face of the whole earth, from the sea south to the sea north, from the sea west to the sea east (Hel. 3:8). By the time of the final conflagrations around 400 AD, the Israelite populations numbered in the many hundreds of thousands if not millions. There is not a single mention in the text of groups of people living in ancient America, other than the Jaredites, Lehites and Mulekites. All three population groups had very large populations. It is hardly surprising then that Joseph Smith and all other church leaders have regarded Native Americans to be the descendants of the Lamanites. The God speaking to Joseph Smith in 1830-31 referred to the "borders of the Lamanites" when talking about missionaries being sent to teach Native Americans who had been relocated to Missouri (D&C 28: 9; 54: 8).
-- Simon Southerton.
Mesoamerican apologist Daniel Peterson immediately seized on the bolded comment, proclaiming widely in apologetic circles that Southerton has conceded that DNA is unlikely to ever be able to detect Lehite DNA. My comment was a reasonable observation at the time (2006) given the limitations of the mitochondrial and Y-DNA studies, but it is no longer correct. If a small family of Middle Eastern Jews mixed with American Indians 2-3,000 years ago, the Jewish nuclear DNA would spread throughout the adjacent populations like a drop of ink in a bucket of water. It would have spread through neighbouring populations, be very unlikely to go extinct and scientists exploring the genomes of Native Americans would stumble on it....if it was there.
http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com.a...
|  | When Their Loyalties Are To Their Royalties: General Authorities Cashing In On Book Deals
Tuesday, May 21, 2013, at 07:18 AM
Original Author(s): Steve Benson
Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES -Guid- | ↑ | In another thread, RfM poster, "thematrix," posed the question:
"Book deals and General Authorities--Is it big business?"
That question was prompted by an episode from "thematrix's" own personal experience, as he explained:
"My wife was given a copy of a president Uckdorf book by my parents for Mother's Day. It got me thinking about the financial side of book deals for these guys.
"I'm just curious if anyone knows the financial side and gain that these guys receive for 'writing' their pieces. When I was a TBM I believed that they wrote these books with all profits going back to the Church.
"Silly Matrix, profits are for Prophets.
"Anyway, perhaps [oosters here] might have some insight into this. I know an individual that recently wrote a pretty popular piece that made about 300k off of his book and he didn't have the name power that a top 12 does. I just wonder if part of the 'contract' of the Twelve is to write for-profit books by the prophets."
("Book Deals and General Authorities--Is It Big Business?," posted by "thematrix," on "Recovery from Mormonism" discussion board," 20 May 2013)
The answer, of course, is a big, fat YES.
When it comes to Mormon General Authorities and their lucrative LDS Church-book royalties, we might as well start with Church-arranged book deals for its two most recent presidents.
--Proof of Profits: Thomas S. Monson and His Money-Making Church-Book Gig
Earlier this year, RfM poster "Oh Tommy Boy" posed a specific question about Monson's worker relationsship with the Mormon Church and how that might play out in sales of his books:
"[Is] Thomas S. Monson . . . an employee (i.e. salary)?" That question was followed by details surrounding Monson's actual book-deal earnings:
"Below is the info from the Library of Congress from one of Thomas S. Monson's book.
"As an author myself, I am aware that a 'work for hire' does not require an employer-employee relationship, but an 'employer for hire' on a copyright application often (not always) does.
"It's interesting to note that he doesn't hold the copyright, but TSCC [The So-Called Church] does through its IP arm. Typical book deals have the author holding the copyright, and they license it to the publishing house or whatever for a period of time.
"There are other books that Monson has written where he holds the copyright and Deseret Book published it, so he, like other GAs, probably still draws royalties from said books. But for this project below, it appears he was acting as an employee.
?Nothing earth-shattering here, but it was intriguing to me as I know this process from registering my own works with LOC.
"'Type of Work: Text
Registration Number / Date: TX0005330861 / 2001-05-29
Title: Three gates to open / by Thomas S. Monson.
Description: 1 v.
Series: CES fireside for young adults
Copyright Claimant: Intellectual Reserve, Inc.
Date of Creation: 2001
Date of Publication: 2001-01-14
Authorship on Application: Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, employer for hire.'"
("Thomas S. Monson is an Employee (i.e. Salary)?,," by poster "Oh Tommy Boy," on "Recovery from Mormonism" discussion board, 10 January 2013)
Monson certinaly makes his money through the Church.
Next.
--Hiding the Financial Facts: Gordon B. Hinckley Fudges on the Extent of General Authority Living Allowances (including GA earnings from Church book sales)
Premier contemporary historian on Mormon matters, D. Michael Quinn, provides details on the big business of General Authority writing royalties in his book, "Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power" (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1997):
"Speaking of LDS Church-owned businesses and stock-portfolios in 1985, First Presidency Counselor Gordon B. Hinckley said that 'the living allowances given the General Authorities, which are very modest in comparison with executive compensation in industry and the professions, come from this business income and not from the tithing of the people. However, tithing was the source of these 'living allowances' from the 1830s until the Church's corporate success in recent years.
"Moreover, President Hinckley's description of the hierarchy's income as 'very modest' depends upon one's own concept of wealth.
"For example, when Joseph Fielding Smith died at age 95 in 1972, he had worked nearly all his adult life at LDS headquarters, first as a paid employee in the Historian's Office and then as a General Authority with a Church living allowance. At his death, President Smith had $245,000 in bank deposits, $120,000 in cash, $120,574 in stocks/bonds, and $10,688 in uncashed checks (INCLUDING DESERET BOOK ROYALTIES OF $9,636). Even 25 years after his death, few rank-and-file Mormons have such 'modest' amounts of cash and liquid assets available to them in old age."
(pp. 210-11, emphasis added)
--General Authority Cash Cow: The Regular (Albeit Informal) LDS Church Money-Making System of Book-Sale Earnings
Quinn reports:
"Although not a formal salary, General Authorities can also receive significant income from the books they publish.
"When he published 'The Way To Perfection' in 1931, Joseph Fielding Smith specified that all its future royalties would go to the LDS Genealogical Society. However, he was not as generous with the royalties from his dozens of other books. For example, when President Smith died in July 1972, his royalties from Deseret Book Company totaled $9,636 for the previous six-month period.
"Presiding Bishop (and later Apostle) LeGrand Richards set a remarkable example by accepting no royalties for his 'Marvelous Work and a Wonder' which had sold 2 million copies by the time of his death in 1983.
"However, a president of the LDS Church's publishing company has observed that very few General Authorities have declined royalties for their books. Mormons purchase books written by General Authorities primarily because of the Church office the author holds, rather than for the book's content. Although many General Authorities do not write books, such royalty income is a direct consequence of being an LDS leader."
(Quinn, "Extensions of Power," p. 210)
--Accruing Inflated Book-Sales Revenue: The Mormon Church Use of Foreign Entities
As RfM poster Jim Huston reports:
"There [are] a number of ways that the Morg can shift income away from foreign subs to the main Corporation or vice versa. The information reported in foreign countries is most likely manipulated to show what TSCC [The So-Called Church] wants to show.
"By selling books, temple clothing, magazines and equipment to the foreign entity at inflated or deflated prices, the income can be managed and changed significantly."
("Mormon Finances and Charity," posted by Jim Huston/aka "nao crer," at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&...
Finally, cases of other General Authorities and their royal-book royalty treatment.
--Disgraced General Authority and War-Story Fabricator, Paul H. Dunn: How He Prospered in Forced Church Retirement through Book Royalties
Jerald and Sandra Tanner, in their article "Dunn in the Name of God," report on Dunn's rake-in of signficant Church book royalties, even after Dunn had been exposed as a whopping liear and put out to pasture for having notoriously manufactured false claims about his life and career:
". . . [A]fter the [Mormon] Church had terminated Lynn Packer's teaching contract at Brigham Young University for pursuing the story [of Paul H. Dunn's phonied-up World War II exploits], he [Packer] provided information he ha[d] collected over the past four years to 'The [Arizona] Republic.'
"Despite Dunn's 'retirement,' his grandfatherly demeanor and down-home, self-deprecating storytelling style continue[d] to make him a popular public speaker and author. 'He also remain[ed] the most prolific author among [then-]current and former Church leaders. He receive[d] royalties from 23 inspirational cassette tapes and 28 books . . . . They [were] among the more popular items in LDS bookstores. . . ."
("Dunn in the Name of God: Confessions by Emeritus General Authority of the Mormon Church Raises New Questions about the Origins of Mormonism," by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Thhttp://nowscape.com/mormon/dunn.htme "Salt Lake City Messenger," Issue No. 78, June 1991, at: http://nowscape.com/mormon/dunn.htm)
--Mormon Book Royalties for Members of the Seventies: An Insider's Report from a Mormon General Authority Relative
The claim is made as follows:
"OK, [on] [t]he wonderful topic of GA salaries, or as they call them: a modest living allowance.
"I have a relative who is a GA. During my exit from the church he flew out to meet with me with the specific purpose of saving my eternal salvation and during our conversation we discussed the hallowed living allowance.
"Here is what I remember from our conversation as well as research I have conducted on my own.
"The Seventies receive the equivalent of 70% of the average of their previous 5 years earnings. This allows them to maintain the same standard of living that they are used to while working in their career field. They also receive perks such as business class travel which can be upgraded to first class due to their frequent flier status on various airlines. Also, they are encouraged to write books or have their journals/thoughts published and they are paid a premium in royalties for book sales."
("Mormon General Authority Salaries," by "TheDrive," 23 July 2010, at; http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Greater...)
So, you can close the book on questions about GA royalty-earnings from their Mormon-Church writings.
Speaking of books, book 'em, Danno.
| Is it me or does there seem to be a new person nearly every day that reveals to you that they don't really believe?
When I opened up on FB and decided that I wasn't going to just slink away in the darkness but instead speak out regarding the lies that are being perpetrated I didn't expect to 'de-convert' anyone. I was just doing what I felt was right and moral, revealing all the facts to allow for an informed decision. Personally I felt that I hadn't been given that opportunity. Once I discovered true historical facts and the discord with what I learned in primary I needed to tell others.
So spending time watching the threads here and on FB. I have seen what looks to me like an accelerating curve of understanding sweeping through the membership. just a few months ago I met maybe one new person that whole month that had gone through what I had. now it is averaging twice a week. about 1/2 the time people are becoming open about it and about 1/2 the time they are staying silent (so as to not offend family or risk a job etc) but they let me know that they are more inclined to see the falsities that I have as well.
What this all means is the biggest thing that kept people from leaving after learning the truth was/is fear. fear of family judgement fear of being alone and without social support fear of losing their support group. but now with social media allowing connections all over the planet these small clusters abate that fear. It helps a person to know that there is another out there like them that sees the situation the way they do.
It emboldens them to speak up and that in turn lets others know they are not alone. The church is facing an apostasy like it has never seen. relatively small right now, but the growth rates are comparable to the early church beginnings. if there are say 1000 truth seekers on this board and each of you know of 100 people every year that question in secret or leave outright, that is 100,000 per year. that kind of loss rate is going to be obvious with in 5 years or so no matter how hard you try to fudge the numbers, there is going to be real attrition.
I personally think we are going to see dramatic efforts to retain the membership, changes in policy that will trip up stalwart members (ie gay marriage or women priesthood for example) thing is the amount of time that in the past could be allowed to go by for the next generation to adjust just won't work anymore, information moves to fast now. So personally I think the policy changes will back fire over and over again. We have already seen this happen in just the last few years.
Prop 8 is an example.
releasing the charitable contribution stats is another example. the put out the info to say 'see how charitable we are!' then people do the math and go 'what?' then the church pulls the info all embarrassed.
FB is a huge tipping point driver IMHO. thats because the whole concept is a natural magnet for the type of people that are believers.
other drivers are the fact that there are groups as a whole now organizing to get the real truth out there, that drives people to look at places like FAIR and see the illogic for themselves.
Looking at it from a fairly informal, anecdotal viewpoint I think the tipping point of losing more members than it gains is just around the corner, less than 5 years out.
|  | Consequences Of The Licked Cupcake
Wednesday, May 8, 2013, at 07:42 AM
Original Author(s): Steelhead
Topic: OBJECT LESSONS -Guid- | ↑ | The church only provides lip service to the atonement of Jesus they so publicly tout.
Elizabeth Smart wrote:
"I thought, 'Oh, my gosh, I'm that chewed up piece of gum, nobody re-chews a piece of gum, you throw it away.' And that's how easy it is to feel like you know longer have worth, you know longer have value," Smart said. "Why would it even be worth screaming out? Why would it even make a difference if you are rescued? Your life still has no value."
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dis...
Examples. I'll dig out the quote, if someone asks, but SWK in the miracle of forgiveness says that rape victims need to repent. Repent of what?
When I was remarrying I had to fill out a paper asking me to delineate all of my past sins, even those resolved via priesthood authority. Jesus may remember your sins no more, but the church wants to know. They make a mockery of what they teach.
The most insidious and damaging of the virginity object lessons: the nail and the board. Because no matter what miracles Christ may perform in your life, once that hymen is torn there is no getting it back.
Forgiveness lds style? What a crock of crap.
| | | The TSCC Decision Makers
Thursday, May 2, 2013, at 11:40 AM
Original Author(s): Moreevilthanhitler
Topic: GENERAL AUTHORITIES -Guid- | ↑ | After reading through and commenting on GetTheLedZepOut excellent post on "Countering the Growing Discontent.will the `15' double down?" I wondered exactly who is going to be make this important decisions for the TSCC's future?
Here are the decision makers:
Pres Thomas Monson
Age: 85
Mission: None (Served in U.S. Navy)
Degrees earned: Business Mangement (Utah), MBA (BYU)
Church hierarchy positions: Mission President, Apostle, First Presidency Counselor, President
Career: Ad executive, sales manager, general manager (all with church owned Deseret News, Newspaper Agency Corp, and Deseret News Press)
Notable for: Being a good story teller, speaking in triplicate
MoreEvilThan's opinion: suffers from insecurities.he knows he'll never be as popular as his predecessor, is creepy.
Henry Eyring
Age: 79
Mission: ?
Degrees earned: Physics (Utah), MBA (Harvard), DBM (Harvard)
Church hierarchy positions: Commissioner of Education, Counselor Presiding Bishopric, Seventy, Apostle, First Presidency Counselor
Career: Professor (Stanford), College President (Ricks)
Notable for: Crying
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Someone this smart should know better, and he probably does. Does the guilt make him cry?
Dieter Uchtdorf
Age: 72
Mission: ?
Degrees earned: Studied engineering in Germany
Church hierarchy positions: Seventy, First Presidency Counselor
Career: Luftwaffe fighter pilot, commercial pilot, instructor pilot, SVP Flight Ops, Chief Pilot
Notable for: Aviation stories. Having an impressive career outside of the church. Leapfrogging over a bunch of older guys with more seniority.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Probably thinks most of the other 14 are a bunch of dumb Americans asleep at the yoke while the airplane is on a collision course with reality. I'm not gay, but admit this guy is easy on the eyes.
Boyd Packer
Age: 88
Mission: None (Served in Army Air Forces)
Degrees earned: B.S. (Utah State), M.S. (Utah State), DEd (BYU)
Church hierarchy positions: Mission Pres, Q12 Assistant, Apostle
Career: Bomber pilot, teacher, administrator
Notable for: Hating anyone attempting to lead a happy life. Unravels millions of dollars spent on public relations with a just a single talk.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Envy prevents him from sharing pilot stories with Uchtdorf. Is probably gay.
Tom Perry
Age: 90
Mission: Northern States (Also served as U.S. Marine)
Degrees earned: Finance (Utah State)
Church hierarchy positions: Counselor Stake Pres, Stake Pres, Q12 Assistant, Apostle
Career: Treasurer for retail companies
Notable for: He is tall. Seems to be rather blunt. I like people who tell it like it is.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: If one of these guys had to be my grandpa, it would be him.
Russell Nelson
Age: 88
Mission: ?
Degrees earned: B.A. (Utah), M.D. (Utah), PhD (U of Minnesota)
Church hierarchy positions: Stake Pres, Gen Pres Sunday School, Regional Representative, Apostle
Career: Heart Surgeon, Research Professor, Director of Residency, Chairman of Thoracic Surgery LDS Hospital
Notable for: Looking forward to polygamy in the next life.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Clearly a brilliant driven individual. Either compartmentalizes very well, is deluded, or in on the scam. A family member had the chance to work with Nelson's son, also a doctor. Said he was a ball of hyper-activity and had a "Don't you know who my father is?" attitude.
Dallin Oaks
Age: 80
Mission: ?
Degrees earned: Bachelor (BYU), University of Chicago (J.D.)
Church hierarchy positions: Apostle
Career: Lawyer, law professor, College President (BYU), Justice of the Utah Supreme Court
Notable for: Convincing millions (okay, maybe thousands) that a white salamander is also a synonym for an angel, or, "a mythical being thought to be able to live in fire."
MoreEvilThan's opinion: I humbly submit that a white salamander leading J Smith Jr to buried treasure is analogous to a snake tempting Eve to eat The Fruit. Too bad the document that needed his agile legal mind to work around was 100% fake. Why would the church, thinking this document was real, want to suppress it? I hate lawyers with their gifts of persuasion and complete lack of intellectual integrity.
Russell Ballard
Age: 84
Mission: England
Degrees earned: ? (attended Utah)
Church hierarchy positions: Mission Pres, Seventy, Apostle
Career: Automotive, real estate, and investment businesses
Notable for: Making MoreEvilThan sleeping when hearing him talk.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Who were we talking about again?
Richard Scott
Age: 84
Mission: Uruguay
Degrees earned: Mechanical Engineering (George Washington)
Church hierarchy positions: Mission Pres, Seventy, Apostle
Career: Nuclear Engineer
Notable for: Even through the TV, he can stare deep into your soul. Evidently doesn't agree with polygamy, widower since 1995. Only apostle not called because of nepoti..wait. Nevermind, his late wife is related to six General Authorities.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Anyone that could work for Admiral Hyman Rickover for 12 years has to be emotionally detached from their own feelings, or impervious to criticism.
Robert Hales
Age: 80
Mission: ? (served in U.S. Air Force)
Degrees earned: Bachelors (Utah), MBA (Harvard)
Church hierarchy positions: Mission Pres, Counselor Sunday School Pres, Apostle
Career: Fighter pilot, business career, executive for three different corporations
Notable for: Cannot make himself cry, so the voice cracking will have to do.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: I imagine his peers in the Air Force though he was as exciting as a Cessna.
Jeffery Holland
Age: 72
Mission: ?
Degrees earned: English (BYU), Religious Education (BYU), PhD American Studies (Yale)
Church hierarchy positions: Seventy, Apostle
Career: Academics, Academic Administrator, College Pres (BYU)
Notable for: Jowls. Getting owned by a well spoken apostate with an authoritative English accent. Which makes me wonder, how do US citizens sound to Brits? Bland? Unread?
MoreEvilThan's opinion: The cog-dis has to be eating this guy from the inside-out
David Bednar
Age: 60
Mission: Germany
Degrees earned: Bachelors (BYU), Master (BYU), Phd Organizational Behavior (Purdue)
Church hierarchy positions: Regional Rep, Seventy, Apostle
Career: Academics, College Pres (BYU-I)
Notable for: Looking good sir after 6 decades. The pickle talk.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: A hardliner that arrived too late. He will be beside himself after unsuccessfully convincing his peers what the church needs is some good old fashioned purges.
Quentin Cook
Age: 72
Mission: Great Britain
Degrees earned: Poly Sci (Utah State), J.D. (Stanford)
Church hierarchy positions: Seventy, Apostle
Career: Lawyer, board member, CEO of a California HMO
Notable for: Hmmm, a lawyer and C-level manager. What would a religious organization want with such an individual?
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Great, another lawyer.
Todd Christofferson
Age: 68
Mission: Argentina
Degrees earned: Bachelor (BYU), J.D. (Duke)
Church hierarchy positions: Stake Pres, Seventy, Apostle
Career: Lawyer
Notable for: By 2008 I had stopped paying attention, so I have no comments.
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Yet another lawyer, and General Counsel for banks. I knew there was a reason I should not trust this guy.
Neil Anderson
Age: 61
Mission: ?
Degrees earned: Bachelor (BYU), MBA (Harvard)
Church hierarchy positions: Mission Pres, Seventy, Apostle
Career: Business interests in advertising, real estate development, health care
Notable for: Knowing multiple languages: French, Portuguese, and Spanish
MoreEvilThan's opinion: Finally, someone who isn't an attorney. Then I saw real estate developer.sigh.
A few things did surprise me while going through their bios on lds.org. Often there is no mention of a mission. I assume if this is omitted, they did not serve a mission. I understand the older generation's mission years were interrupted by WWII, but what about people like Anderson?
They are all obviously intelligent driven individuals, most of whom rose to the top or near to the top of their chosen vocation, or made a ton of money as a businessman or lawyer. Only one is what I consider to be a theologian, and even that is a stretch. I'm sure heading a wealthy powerful organization with its fingers in all sorts of business ventures is very rewarding for people like this, as is the rock star status given to them by members.
The members need the church less than the church needs them (or their money). This has to be disconcerting to these A-type who are used to getting their way and having subordinates respond to their orders. When dealing with a mass of people with many different viewpoints, desires, and backgrounds has to be a little exasperating. And these differences are only increasing as younger generations are exposed to more and more ideas that their parents never had access to.
They are all so alike: well educated, white, wealthy, conservative, old, and revered. They have a lot to lose. And I can't see them checking their egos at the door and doing what is best for the organization. I of course am assuming something can be done.
|  | Being Sent To Impoverished And Terrorism-Plagued Peru In The Mid-1980s At 19 Was Difficult Enough
Thursday, Apr 11, 2013, at 12:53 PM
Original Author(s): The 1st Freeatlast
Topic: MISSIONARIES - SECTION 6 -Guid- | ↑ | Factoring in the parasites I picked up while in-country, chronic malnutrition in the slums I was put in, lingering effects of spinal meningitis (contracted in my first area, a filthy shantytown on the north side of Lima, the capital), and almost being murdered (in another ghetto where I was assigned to live and proselytize), it took me about a decade and a half post-mission to fully recover from my stint marketing the 'message' of the 'one, true' corp. of Je$u$ Christ (a.k.a. TSCC).
In my stake, a guy in another ward who was roughly my age was sent to Haiti to 'preach the Go$pel' during some of its more violent years. There, he witnessed a man being 'necklaced' (a gasoline-covered tire put over his torso and arms and set alight). The trauma of seeing that extreme violence in conjunction with the grinding poverty deeply psychologically wounded him. TSCC didn't care, really. There were missionary discussion (lesson) and baptism quotas to be met.
Of course, Mormon 'Profits' running the show at LD$ Inc. from their comfortable, air-conditioned offices at church HQ in SLC were arrogantly convinced - and still are - that even poverty-afflicted Latter-day Saints in Third World nations like Peru and Haiti should pay tithing in order to be 'worthy' of Mormon-imagined 'blessings'.
LD$ Inc. has never given members who struggle to survive on the local currency equivalent of a few dollars per day (or considerably less, in many cases) a break on tithing. But it's been quite willing to take their meager funds and spend billions of $$$ on a shopping-mall-and-condos project in SLC, for starters. The thinking inside the Morg is obscene, really, but LD$ 'Profits' don't care, not when more multi-million-dollar McTemples are being built or their construction planned.
As we've learned during the past decade or so thanks to govt. requirements for registered charities in certain countries, LD$ Inc. has reserves of hundreds of millions of dollars in its accounts in the UK and New Zealand alone. But it won't give even 2% of its multi-billion-dollar annual income to help the poor and others in need of humanitarian assistance, according to its filed reports.
I feel sorry for the 18-year-old. The sooner he gets out of the dishonest, cultic, and money-obsessed LD$ Church, the better.
| It's apparently run by four master's level therapists. Their model is apparently based on the assumption (not well clarified, mind you), that unwanted same-sex attraction can be treated. Or even more insidious, the "goals and needs" of each client can be met through therapy toward "wholeness". A quick look at the experiences of the therapists and populations they have served reveals that they are strongly on the side of pray-the-gay-away.
See their website: genderwholeness.com/lds/
Unwanted same-sex attraction? What the fuck does that mean? How many GLBT people have you known that truly wanted same-sex attraction when they began to realize they were so? Y'know, since their life, family, job, religion, friends were all going to be so affirming and celebratory of their same-sex attraction.
It's bad enough that they are selling snake oil. It's worse that they market themselves in a way toward those most vulnerable.
These are not experts (I know I'm speaking to the choir, here, but hear me out). They are blinded by their beliefs and lack of ability for self-reflection. They are severely lacking in ethics of counseling, scientific inquiry, and humanistic outlook. Although they are not beholden to APA, they are to their own professional organizations and ethics board. I believe the main counselor's national organizations fall in line with APA on this topic.
I know that I'm an arrogant and narcissistic fuck (I'm a psychologist. we all are). I have absolutely nothing against master's level therapists. I've worked with some incredible MAs and MSWs. But, training at the doctoral level of psychology is long, arduous, and highly competitive. The history of doctoral level psychology training is strongly within the academic and research communities. It tends to weed out a lot of this type of shit.
Please. For your sake. Seek out highly trained and credentialed therapists that focus on mental health as science first and foremost.
Here's just a sampling of the many bizarre claims and dangerous tips provided on the site. (Note: All of the resources are geared toward male homosexuality, because "the Center for Gender Wholeness does not have expertise in working with female homosexuality.")
- Gay people are more likely to have a history of experiencing trauma and emotional and psychological problems.
- Among the supposed "causes" of homosexuality are unhealthy childhood relationships with females, distorted concepts of gender, feeling incongruent with one's own gender, problems in relationships with other males, sexual conditioning, sexual abuse, certain biological and physical issues, and certain emotional and psychological problems. [Obviously, this approach completely conflates transgender identities, despite gender identity being a completely independent variable from sexual orientation.]
- People trying to help their gay friends should ask about how they have acted on their attractions, but should be careful not to give them ideas of behaviors they haven't tried.
- Therapy is "necessary" if an individual "reports unsuccessful attempts to diminish their same-sex attractions."
- Mormons should encourage (opposite-sex) marriage as a solution to same-sex attractions.
- Mormons should recognize "the hope window," when people with same-sex attractions are most optimistic about change.
- Therapy can help resolve the "issues that underlie unwanted same-sex attraction."
- Treatment can include an addiction recovery program and medication.
- The therapists apparently use "brainspotting" to determine "where a person is holding trauma or other negative experience in their brain."
| As we all know by now, the new flagship journal of the Maxwell Institute will be known as, The Mormon Studies Review. It will, reportedly, focus on serious scholarship that has wide-ranging applicability. Whereas the old Review--per its former Editor-in Chief--was devoted mainly to apologetics, and sought to have a wide, "popular" appeal, the new Review seems to be aimed at gaining wider credibility. Indeed, unless I'm mistaken, the new Mormon Studies Review will start over with a completely new numbering system. It will not be, "Vol. 23, No. 1," in other words; it will be "Vol. 1, Issue 1."
Of great interest to students of Mopologetics, though, is the fact that the Review, which was indeed called the Mormon Studies Review for Vol. 23, Issue 1, has now be re-named the FARMS Review. In other words, the entire, "classic-FARMS" corpus of publications, has bee "demoted" back to its original, rather unfortunate name. A disclaimer on the MI website explains things nicely:
Quote:
For twenty-three years the FARMS Review published review essays to help serious readers make informed choices and judgments about books and other publications on topics related to the Latter-day Saint religious tradition. It also published substantial freestanding essays that made further contributions to the field of Mormon studies. It will be superseded by the new Mormon Studies Review.
Well, I suppose that's one way of putting it. Of course, in doing this, the Maxwell Institute is ensuring that future generations of 4H students and various hog and soil researchers will stumble upon this site, only to find page upon page of polemical invective. Then again, you never know when an alfalfa scientist will find use in the fact that, according to "Text and Context," argument ad hominem is actually a legitimate form of civil analysis and argumentation. Maybe the trash-talk about some authors' "lack of credentials" will inspire new forms of crop rotation.
Regardless, in spite of everything, I'm sure the "classic-FARMS" crew is pleased that the MI leadership was kind enough to restore their old journal's original name.
|  | FAIR Journal: Prop 8
Friday, Mar 29, 2013, at 07:38 AM
Original Author(s): Bazooka
Topic: SCOTT GORDON -Guid- | ↑ | From Scott Gordon on Fairblog.org:
FAIR, as an organization, has no official position on the causes of homosexuality or on the treatment--or non-treatment of it, as we leave that to the professionals who study it.
--Scott Gordon, President of FAIR
Mr Gordon, does FAIR have an official position on the causes of heterosexuality or on the treatment -- or non-treatment of it, or is that also left to the professionals who study it?
Why on earth do people think homosexuality is something that needs 'treatment'?
Do people suffering from Mormonism need 'treatment'?
What about those members suffering from SSS (Single Sisterhood Syndrome) do they also need 'treatment'?
Is everyone who doesn't implicitly believe in all the official positions of the Church suffering from something that needs 'treatment'?
What a jackass statement.
| This article in the April Ensign has my LDS, nonmo, and exmo friends on the warpath.
http://www.lds.org/ensign/2013/04/equ...
It's filled with blatant lies, tries to redefine equal and preside, and is a work of deception. The church is going to regret they published this.
Spin:
"Equality is all too often mistaken to mean that if two things are equal, they must be identical to each other."
This is not even remotely true. Equality isn't 'all too often seen as identical'. To me, equality means equal opportunity and not being told you shouldn't do something because of your gender!
""The Family: A Proclamation to the World" teaches that gender is "an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."
And saying it in the article as though it's even remotely authoritative...! What the heck about all the people that don't fit into one gender or the other?! It's so essential that some people aren't biologically one gender or the other...?
The entire thing about Eve is just BS. I've never even heard it focused on, talked about, lessons planned around it, talks about it, or Ensign articles about it. Yay for you TSCC - it's such a big deal that you never talk about it.
The only good bit I saw: "Spouses are to enter their marriage relationship convinced of each other's equality." And the stuff about parenting as a team.
Priesthood does NOT equal motherhood. It's unfortunate that so often in TSCC Priesthood is equated with a particular role in church office.
It's beyond annoying that they spin it to make it sound like women have any sort of ACTUAL leadership authority at all.
Who did the authors of the article quote?
On the men's side (names and titles as quoted in the article)
Elder Earl C. Tingey, formerly of the Presidency of the Seventy
Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
Elder Bruce C. Hafen, formerly of the Seventy
Elder Richard G. Scott of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
President Boyd K. Packer, President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
Elder L. Tom Perry of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
President James E. Faust (1920–2007)
Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
On the women's side (names and titles as quoted in the article)
His wife, Marie.
|  | Lest Boyd K Packer Forget; "For The Blessing Of The Lamanites"
Thursday, Mar 28, 2013, at 07:29 AM
Original Author(s): Villager
Topic: BOYD K. PACKER - SECTION 2 -Guid- | ↑ | Some excerpts from his article published in the 1964 Relief Society Magazine:
"A growing number of Indian boys and girls are accepting calls to serve on full-time missions. At the time of this writing there are more than thirty Indian missionaries laboring in the two Indian missions. An added number are serving in other missions throughout the world. The Muddy River Stake with a membership of fifty-five, has three missionaries in the field.
" If one were to visit the Pomo Indian Branch in the Santa Rosa Stake, the Omaha-Winnebago Branch in Nebraska, or the Cattaraugus Branch in New York, he would find capable Indian members serving as Relief Society presidents, Sunday School superintendents and branch leaders.
......"more than six thousand Indian boys and girls are attending special Seminary classes which are being conducted across the Nation from New York and North Carolina to California and Oregon.
....."but the work is only beginning. There is a great deal yet to be done, and all of us share in the responsibility. Brigham Young charged the membership of the Church in his day to press forward with the work of redeeming Indian Israel.
....."The work in behalf of our Lamanite brothers and sisters must go forward. They have waited long years for their restoration to the blessings of the gospel. The Lord has placed a direct responsibility upon the members of the Church to see that the great work of redemption does not falter. Every Latter-day Saint should be a friend and a champion of the Indian people. We must be certain that blessings are not withheld because of indifference or intolerance on our part. Our patient labor in behalf of Lehi's seed can help them to reclaim their inheritance in this land."
(From "For the Blessing of the Lamanites", Elder Boyd K Packer
Aug 1964.)
|  | Just Another Coat Of Whitewash On The Fence
Monday, Mar 25, 2013, at 11:16 AM
Original Author(s): Anagrammy
Topic: CHANGING DOCTRINE -Guid- | ↑ | We don't know what "vehicle" was used to "translate" the Book of Abraham
We don't know that Joseph was conviced in a court of law for using his seer stone to con people into thinking he could find treasure (Holland says he knew nothing about it in the BBC interview)
Gordon Hinckley said to Larry King when asked if man can be come a god "I don't know that we teach it". I remember Gospel Principals manuals (approved by Hinckley) that explicitly stated that "we can become gods."
These so-called prophets should be able to find out...
Just like the establishment of correlation was the end of ward creativity and fun, the above televised statement established the fog that now envelopes the Mormon church.
They are closely following the Catholic template after staunchly opposing the Whore of All the Earth up to the day before they realized they needed a mentor. That was the day they backpedaled on banning "the Negro" from holding the priesthood.
They handled that so badly and had so many similar challenges ahead, that the only solution was to mimic the most successful surviving church.
The first indication of the acolyte status of Mormonism was when they announced for the very first time that the Mormon prophet had spoken at times "as a man." Which was the very explanation taught to me in the fifties in Catholic grade school for why there was once three popes.
FAIR is on the way out, explanations based on historical facts are definitely out, GA's won't answer your letters and you are referred to your local bishop (who was a plumber before he was called a week ago to be your theological and psychological advisor).
Do you hear the Catholic church answering any questions about the Inquisition of the burning of witches? Any accepting of responsibility? Any memorials or information centers? I would like to view the residence in France where the pope lived in exile? Good luck finding that.
Religions allow their massacres and their scandals to go into a fog, burying the facts and artifacts to languish in vaults. It works.
I posted earlier this year about the Mormon Fog. We are seeing it more and more. Being respected for scientific accuracy is not worth loss of tithing dollars, so familysearch.org is becoming an arm of the PR department. They comb it regularly, removing anything embarrassing.
The church also is very active in removing Wiki information that is accurate but unflattering. I have googled items which appeared in my search and then turned out to have been completely removed.
The church has determined that the best scenario for them is not to handle issues one by one (too many and too many contradictions). Rather than issue a new book "Mormon Doctrine," they are gradually distancing themselves from their history (irrelevant to your salvation).
The next to go will be the literal view of their unique scriptures. Each one of them in the future will be viewed as "inspirational" rather than "literal." I predict they will treat the Book of Abraham as inspired Mormon literature, uniquely created on our modern day especially "for us." When asked to explain offensive or conflicting passages, the answer will be the same that they are currently using for the temple:
"The more you read it, the more your will get out of it. The more you pray and obey, the clearer the symbology and meaning will be as a doorway to your own spiritual progression. It's very personal. The Book of Abraham can mean one thing to one member and another to a different person. That's the beauty of it.
Study groups will not be allowed. Sunday School classes will change from "What did Joseph SMith mean?" to "What does this question mean to you?
And that distant sound you hear will not be angels singing, rather cash registers ringing "Holy, holy, holy."
|  | Oops, She Did It Again
Monday, Mar 25, 2013, at 05:54 PM
Original Author(s): Bridget Jack Jeffries
Topic: VALERIE HUDSON -Guid- | ↑ | | Valerie M. Hudson [1] has co-authored a new article in the April 2013 Ensign arguing for her usual egalitarian take on Mormon patriarchy. I have mixed feelings on Hudson. I think her heart is in the right place in that she seems to genuinely want what she regards as egalitarian relationships within Mormonism. What she says in her article about social science supporting the efficacy and satisfaction of egalitarian relationships over hierarchical ones is spot on; I might have written it myself. However, I also regard her as an impediment to true feminist reform of Mormonism, because she apologizes for patriarchal structures within the church that disenfranchise women, and does so by wrapping those structures in a pretty faux-feminist doily, thus maintaining that said structures are empowering to women and in no need of serious change. For example, her 2010 FAIR presentation essentially came down to arguing that women do not need the priesthood because they can give birth. It was the most poetic and well-written rendition of "women don't need priesthood because they can have babies" that I have ever heard, but in the end, it was still "women don't need power/authority XYZ because they can be mothers"-which is one of the oldest and most trite anti-feminist arguments on the books.
The Hafens' Translation
This blog post is not primarily a critique of Hudson's "feminist" (if you can even call it that) religious philosophy. Rather, it is about her serial abuse of the Hebrew language. Namely, this:
God also provided that Adam and Eve would rule together, as Elder Bruce C. Hafen, formerly of the Seventy, and his wife, Marie, explained:
"Genesis 3:16 states that Adam is to `rule over' Eve, but this doesn't make Adam a dictator. . Over in `rule over' uses the Hebrew bet, which means ruling `with,' not ruling `over.' ." [2]
Except that it doesn't. When the Hafens published their original Ensign article in 2007, Nitsav of Faith-Promoting Rumor blogged this critical analysis of their claims regarding Hebrew:
The claim is that the preposition bet (the letter b) should be translated as "with" not "over." This is problematic for several reasons.
First, bet has many translational values in English- "in" "into" "at" "on" "by means of" "when" "among" and also "with." However, "with" is fairly rare and somewhat indirect. Most often when the Hebrew writers wanted to say "with" or "in the company of" they use `et or `im (the consonantal inverse of Arabic ma'a, the typical Arabic word for "with").
Second, as in many other languages, some verbs have a fixed preposition for governing objects. In English, for example, one listens, but one listens to something. When the verb "to listen" has an object, the preposition used between the object and the verb must be to. Similarly, the Hebrew verb "to rule" in the Genesis passage is mashal. When mashal governs an object, the mediating preposition is always bet. It is clear from all other occurrences of this verb that the meaning is one of ruling, governance, authority etc.. A king mashals b- his people. Joseph mashaled b-Egypt in Gen. 45:8. There are lots of other examples establishing this.
Nitsav calls the Hafens' translation (which Hudson relies on) "indefensible from a scholarly perspective." He goes on for several more paragraphs about why mashal b- in Genesis 3:16 cannot be translated "rule with" (it's really worth it to click and read his article in full). And note that the Hafens do not teach that "rule with" is one possible alternate translation; they teach that "rule over" is completely wrong and that "rule with" is the only correct translation (!).
I have but a paltry undergraduate minor in Hebrew myself, but I have done a little bit of legwork on this. I would add to what Nitsav writes that "rule with" makes little sense thematically. In Gen. 3:14-19, YHWH lays out a series of negative consequences for the serpent, the woman, and the man (respectively) on account of what the three of them have done. The consequences are as follows:
- The serpent is cursed above all other livestock, will crawl on its belly and eat dust, and will experience conflict with the woman, its offspring in turn experiencing conflict with her offspring.
- The woman will experience severe toil in labor and childbirth, her desire will be for her husband, and he will rule over her.
- The man will only be able to draw food from the ground via severe toil and will experience a return to the dust from which he was formed, i. e. death.
Most of those things are overwhelmingly and obviously negative. There may be a ray of light for the serpent in that it will "strike the heel" of the woman's offspring (v. 15), and some would argue that for the woman to desire her husband isn't a bad thing (v. 16). (I'll come back to that in a second.) Still, why would YHWH stop in the midst of all that foreboding news to declare glorious egalitarian partnership between husband and wife? And if egalitarianism is the result of the Fall, what was the pre-Fall order between husband and wife? Patriarchy? If so, shouldn't that be what Christian men and women should seek to emulate? It should be clear by now that superimposing a positive prescription for egalitarian marriage in the middle of all that does violence to the narrative.
Let's go back to "desire" in v. 16 though, because I think Nitsav fails to mention a very important occurrence of mashal b-. The Hebrew word for "desire" in v. 16, teshuwqah, is uncommon, appearing only 3 times in the entire Hebrew Bible (Gen. 3:16, Gen. 4:7, and SoS 7:10). Its proximity to Gen. 4:7 is not accidental. Let's compare the two:
Gen. 3:16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire (teshuwqah) shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you (mashal b-)." (NRSV)
Gen. 4:7 "If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire (teshuwqah) is for you, but you must master it (mashal b-)." (NRSV)
The two verses are intentionally parallel, similar in meaning. So if Gen. 3:16 means that Adam and Eve are supposed to rule jointly in egalitarian partnership, what does Gen. 4:7 mean? That Cain is supposed to have egalitarian partnership with his sin? The only thing that makes any sense for either of these verses is "rule over," not "rule with." The verses predict a struggle for power between the two parties in question (woman and man, sin and Cain).
As a final note, I consulted 26 English translations of the Bible prior to publishing this article (ASV, BBE, CEB, CJB, Darby, DR, ESV, GNT, GWT, HCS, HNV, KJV, NASB, NCV, NIV, NIrV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, TNIV, TMB, WEB, Webster, Wycliffe, YLT). I also consulted the Joseph Smith Translation, which had this verse at 3:22. Number of Bibles that translated Gen. 3:16 with a hierarchical clause (rule over, be lord of, have dominion over, master, be subject to, etc.):
27
Number of translations that translated Gen. 3:16 with an egalitarian clause (rule with, etc.):
0
Number of translations that listed an egalitarian clause in the footnotes as an alternative translation:
0
There is only one correct way to translate Gen. 3:16, and that is with a hierarchical clause. It does not mean "rule with" in any way, shape or form. It is not even a minority variant translation of the text.
Hudson's Abuse
The Hafens are not Hebrew scholars. As far as I'm aware, they are not scholars or academics of any sort. Bruce has a BA in political science from BYU and a law degree from the University of Utah, and I can't find any biographical information or academic publications for Marie. Their 2007 article claims that "Donald W. Parry, Brigham Young University professor, helped with the Hebrew translations." Dr. Parry was one of my Hebrew professors at BYU, and I do not know the specifics of what his "help" consisted of in this case. I only know that the Hafens' Hebrew is very wrong. I also know that I can forgive a few well-meaning ecclesiastical leaders for fudging their Hebrew in one publication.
Valerie Hudson is another story, because Hudson is a respected scholar and academic-albeit in political science and not Hebrew. Regardless, she should know better than to cite ecclesiastical leaders with no training in Hebrew to contest a point of Hebrew grammar. I would not let a freshman undergraduate get away with that sort of authority fallacy in his or her term paper, let alone a woman with a doctorate and accolades for her work in another scholarly field.
On top of this, Hudson has been made aware of the severe problems with the Hafens' claims, and yet she continues to cite the Hafens as authoritative on the subject completely absent of qualification. On April 15, 2009, she left the following comment on Nitsav's FPR post:
Hi, Nitsav, Elder Bruce C. Hafen obtained his translation from Professor Don Parry of BYU, renowned Hebrew scholar who is working on the Dead Sea Scroll translation. His email is donald_parry@byu.edu . I have a feeling he has very good reasons for his translation.
Does Hudson truly not understand that the private and unpublished theory of single scholar at a single university does not undo the entire corpus of Hebrew grammar that applies to this verse? Or the extensive translation work that has been done on it? Until her favored translation is published in a peer-reviewed journal and gains widespread acceptance among Hebrew scholars, Hudson has no business telling unsuspecting Mormons that "rule over" translations of Gen. 3:16 are incorrect. These people are putting their trust in her academic expertise, and she is disingenuously misleading them.
Hudson has not merely done this once or twice though; she seems to do it in every article that she writes or presentation that she does arguing for her egalitarian take on Mormon doctrine. For example:
The list goes on. Always the same citation of Hafen or the Hafens, always without any kind of qualification. And now, Hudson has perpetuated this mistranslation of Gen. 3:16 into the Ensign for the entire LDS church to consume (again).
Conclusion
I need to be clear that I am a member of and have published some articles with Christians for Biblical Equality. I believe in the ordination of women and advocate for them to be able to exercise their full range of spiritual gifts in the Body of Christ. Since we see the Bible as our ultimate authority on matters of faith, we often write essays arguing for egalitarian understandings of passages that seem to limit women's roles in the church or subject them to men. We're the people who argue things like "`head' in 1 Cor. 11 can carry the sense of `source'" and "1 Tim 2:12 can mean `to usurp authority' or `to assume authority,' not just `to hold authority.'" If there were any legs at all to this theory-if it were at all a valid minority translation of this verse-you would have found avid supporters in our ranks decades ago.
But we are also in a constant sparring match with other evangelical scholars, i. e. the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. If we published such an irresponsible argument concerning the translation of Gen. 3:16, it would be Christmas come early for CBMW. We would hear no end of how we're manipulating the biblical text to support our own agenda, and they would have a slam-dunk case against us. I've discussed this Hafen/Hudson/Parry translation with several scholars affiliated with CBE, and they agree. There is just no merit to it whatsoever.
The 8th Article of Faith states that Mormons believe the Bible to be the word of God "as far as it is translated correctly." Does Valerie Hudson believe in the 8th Article of Faith?
--
[1] Some articles and blog posts refer to Valerie Hudson as "Valerie M. Hudson," "Valerie Hudson," or "Valerie Hudson Cassler." I do not know which she prefers. I've chosen to refer to her here as "Valerie Hudson" since it's easiest and "Cassler" is absent from the byline of her most recent Ensign article. Though the Ensign article is co-authored by Richard B. Miller along with Hudson, and he certainly bears some of the blame in this case for not checking his co-author's sources or questioning her authority fallacy, I am treating this argument as exclusively Hudson's because I know it to be one of her staples.
[2] Hudson is citing Bruce C. and Marie K. Hafen, "Crossing Thresholds and Becoming Equal Partners," Ensign, Aug. 2007, 27.
http://www.withoutend.org/oops/
| Many Mormons may be unaware that they and their church are disregarding many commandments given in earlier years by revelation to their leaders, even many which appear in their own scriptures. The following is a listing of some of the commandments that the Mormon church or its leaders do not obey:
When blessing the sacrament, the congregation is to kneel with the elder blessing sacrament (Moroni 4:2; see also D&C 20:76)
When blessing the sacrament, the elder or priest is to take the cup (i.e. hold it) Moroni 5:1, D&C 20:78
An elder, if present, should bless sacrament, not a priest. D&C 20:46, 50
In both the New Testament and the Book of Mormon, Jesus told his followers how to pray, and gave them the prayer commonly known as "The Lord's Prayer." Mormons almost never use this prayer, or many of the ideas in it.
Missionaries are to go alone, not in pairs. On March 30, 1836, Joseph Smith said (HoC 2:431): "...the Elders would go forth, and each must stand for himself, as it was not necessary for them to be sent out, two by two, as in former times..." (This contradicts a previous revelation given February 9, 1831: At D&C 42:6 God commands missionaries to go "two by two" when preaching the gospel ; see also 52:10. This follows the pattern set by Jesus in sending out his seventy at Luke 10:1).
Missionaries are to carry neither purse nor scrip D&C 84:86, 91 says: "Therefore, let no man among you ... from this hour take purse or scrip, that goeth forth to proclaim this gospel of the kingdom... And he that doeth not these things is not my disciple; by this you may know my disciples." (See also v 78 and D&C 24:18; also Matt 10:9-10, Luke 10:4)
When preaching, you should not prepare your talk, but rely on the spirit. D&C 84:85 says: "Neither take ye thought beforehand what ye shall say [when preaching].
Only a virgin could be a polygamous wife. D&C 132:61 "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else."
Polygamous marriage required the first wife's consent D&C 132:61 "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent,..."
Mormons are to use tobacco as a poultice and for sick cattle. (D&C 89:8)
Mormons are to make their own wine for use in the sacrament . (D&C 20:75, 89:5-6)
The true church should not try to be a popular church. If it does, it is of the devil. (1 Nephi 22:23)
When fasting, Christ's followers are to ritually anoint the head and wash the face. (3 Ne 13:17)
The temple is to be a "house of fasting." (D&C 109:16)
The salutation in the temple should be with uplifted hands. (D&C 109:19)
D&C 88 directed the establishment of a "School of the Prophets," which was the forerunner of the later temples. Certain rituals were prescribed for those entering the school, including the precise wording of the greetings (v 127-137) and the washing of feet (v 139-141). All of these have now been abandoned in the present temples.
The "Word of Wisdom" (D&C 89) was specifically said not to be a commandment (v 2).
Joseph Smith instructed Mormons not to proselytize non-Mormon children without parents' consent. "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith" pp 86-87:
Mormons disregard the New Testament direction about head covering while praying:
"Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved" (1 Cor. 11:4,5.) but Mormon men have their heads covered in temple for the "true order of prayer"
Teaching as doctrine anything more than faith, repentance and baptism is of the devil. ( 3 Nephi 11:31-40, D&C 10:67-68, Mosiah 18:18-20)
| From LDSMag:
With oral arguments scheduled to be heard at the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of California's Prop 8 and also the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), it is time to stand for marriage by celebrating it. You and your family are invited to a Celebration of Marriage on Tuesday, March 26 at 7:00 p.m. at Utah State Capitol Rotunda. Scot and I will be there for the celebration because we believe that marriage is worth celebrating and that every child deserves a mother and a father.
http://ldsmag.com/blogs/editors-blogs...
"having similar celebrations to cheer for marriage--an institution that is becoming an endangered species." HUH?!?!???
I cannot believe they have the nerve to spin it like this. Divorce is at nearly 60% in this country I believe, which the heterosexuals have done all on their own. Gay marriage can only give the institution a boost, not endanger it further.
The real threat to marriage is that many people just don't feel the need to be married--gay or straight. Many people have realized you can have a great life with or without it.
If marriage is endangered, it is because of selfishness, immaturity, recklessness, and good old fashioned incompatibility-- not because two people of the same sex wish to have equal rights. News bulletin: straight people can still get married even if gay people can too.
White men can still hold the priesthood even if black men can too.
Even worse, the mormon church uses marriage as a weapon. They put the marriage, especially the temple marriage and the church ahead of the two people who are in it. A lot of the men are stressed out of their minds and the women are on prozac, bitter from forfeiting careers and education and yet still expected to show the world that they are the happiest people on earth.
Not one of those people in the save marriage rallies ever does anything but twist words and put a selfish spin on it. They will never discuss the truth: Marriage is a legal contract between two people. It has nothing to do with religion. You can tack religion on, but when you go to court for a divorce, is will be about legalities, not green aprons--proving it is a legal right.
The ignorance of this stance is classic Mormon. No facts, no reason, just, "this is what I want and God says I am right" mentality.
| Here is the evidence-
URL to Dan's post: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/6...
Text of Dan's post:
There's always "Everybody Wang Chung," I suppose. He claims to be a currently serving bishop. He also claimed that his wife surprised him with a tour to Israel this past April/May, led by me. He was, he promised, going to go and to report back to his apostate buddies on all my silly Mopologist antics there. Later, when asked, he claimed to have actually gone, and again, under prodding, promised to provide a chronicle of my ridiculousness while he was with me in the Middle East. So far as I can tell, he's never done so. Finally, just the other day, I got out a list of all of the people who accompanied me on that tour, and I had a friend who is a bishop cross check it against the Church's leadership directory. There were no currently serving bishops on that tour. I suppose Everybody Wang Chung's claim could still somehow be true, but I very much doubt it. It seems far and away most likely that he isn't a currently serving bishop, despite his assertions (he doesn't seem to believe much of anything, and is contemptuous of those who do, often in pretty foul language), and that he didn't go to Israel with me. In other words, if I had to bet, I would bet that he's a fraud.
Screen Shot of Post: http://postimage.org/image/yk9qma3t3/...
Here it is in relevant part, from Section 13.8 entitled "Confidentiality of Records" in Handbook 1 (2010) (emphasis added):
Quote:
The records of the Church are confidential, whether they exist on paper, in computers, or in other electronic media. These include membership records, financial records, notes of meetings, official forms and documents (including records of disciplinary councils), and notes made from private interviews.
Leaders and clerks are to safeguard Church records by handling, storing, and disposing of them in a way that protects the privacy of individuals. Leaders ensure that information that is gathered from members is (1) limited to what the Church requires and (2) used only for approved Church purposes.
Information from Church records and reports may be given only to those who are authorized to use it.
Information that is stored electronically must be kept secure and protected by a password (citation omitted). Leaders ensure that such data is not used for personal, political, or commercial purposes. Information from Church records, including historical information, may not be given to individuals or agencies conducting research or surveys.
| |
|
|
Fri, Jun 14, 2013:
Wed, Jun 5, 2013:
Mon, Jun 3, 2013:
Tue, May 28, 2013:
Tue, May 21, 2013:
Wed, May 15, 2013:
Wed, May 8, 2013:
Thu, May 2, 2013:
Thu, Apr 11, 2013:
Tue, Apr 2, 2013:
Fri, Mar 29, 2013:
Thu, Mar 28, 2013:
Mon, Mar 25, 2013:
Fri, Mar 22, 2013:
Thu, Mar 21, 2013:
| |
Articles posted here are © by their respective owners when designated.
Website © 2005-2013
Compiled With: Caligra 1.121
HOSTED BY
 |
| |
AvoBase is a light-weight robust point of sale software tool.
If you sell Avon, Stampin-Up, Scentsy, Mary-Kay? AvoBase is for you.
AvoBase can sell from any of them - and even sell from ALL of them at the same time.
And not just Avon, AvoBase can sell nearly ANYTHING.
Sell your product, track your customers and your taxes - all in one easy to use application.
Download FREE today at AvoBase.com.
|
|
|
