Friday, June 6, 2008

Missionaries Being Taught to "Lie for the Lord"

This is a clip of Robert Millet who is a professor of ancient scripture and emeritus Dean of Religious Education at Brigham Young University. He is speaking to a group of soon to be missionaries. He has some very telling comments regarding how to answer questions from non-members and the idea of “milk before meat”. This is something I was also taught while on my mission.

The full un-cut video can be found here

In my opinion, this is a way to not only keep non-members from knowing about the real doctrine of the church but to also keep it's members from seriously looking at the more controversial parts that might bring about other questioning. Converts are baptized not having any real idea of what Mormons believe in because of this attitude toward teaching and the fact that many are baptized after only weeks of speaking to missionaries. They know LDS people believe in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, the Word of Wisdom, Tithing and a few other things like baptism but I think we all know that is just the tip of the Mormon iceberg. How can these investigators really know what they are getting into when the only information they have is this? They don't, and they are even asked to attend separate classes called Gospel Principles that makes sure that they only get "milk" for at least the first year they are members. This kind of stuff makes me regret ever teaching others about Mormonism. I hate the fact that I was part of something so misleading.


  1. Good video!

    Just a correction in something you mentioned though- don't the new members to go gospel PRINCIPLES? Not gospel DOCTRINE? Correct me if I'm wrong.

    Good post though. I enjoyed it.

  2. You are correct, I have made the change. Thanks for the second set of eyes.

  3. This angers me. As a convert this angers me. Everyone has a right to know about the truth. I have to know if mormons as a whole are so insecure about their beliefs that they manipulate the answers in their favor. And I guess having read most of your blog you would agree. Lie of omission is what is being praticed and people who are not very familiar with their heavenly creator and His real plan for their lives are being fooled. I wonder if they think all converts are idiots just taking the phony bate. Your comment about gospel principles class makes so much sense. You get put in a room separate from the rest of the ward and made to feel ever so special. Then voila you find this out. I don't think so. I am appauled.

    Are there any pro-mormons who have an opinion about this out there?

    No wonder we as mormons always say someone got offended. Converts do get offended by being fed the watered down version. And by the time they start chewing on the meat it doesn't taste right, smells funny, and doesn't seem to go down the right tube. Only they have gotten too far to turn back. They have gotten into the groove socially and there is no escaping the trap. Wow! My eyes have so been opened and I have see the exit lit up.

    Thank you for this post. Incredible to say the least. I mean I know so many friends who went to BYU and sat through all this indoctrination. I am so glad I never attended.

    This is quite the ramble. Lots on my mind after watching that misleading clip.

  4. this is so sobering -- i applaud you for "uncovering" yet again another arrogant tale of LDS balderdash -- i just thank God that you all are out from under such puffed up rhetoric!



  5. In other words, do not give the actual answer to a direct question. Skirt around the issues.

    Is this teaching knowledge or passivity of actually being able to tell the truth of what they believe?

    If they are so proud of what they believe in, why would they want to separate it out like oil and water?

    This is yet another piece of food for thought- or should I say meat? Thanks for throwing out the milk.

  6. Wow. I have to say I'm rather shocked that the missionaries are being taught that. I don't even know what to say...

    From someone who was BIC, I always thought that missionaries were supposed to ANSWER the QUESTIONS, not answer "what should have been asked".

    On a different note, I thought it was interesting how sparsely populated that auditorium was...

  7. This is actually not that uncommon of a practice. It is called I think framing the question or framing the issue.

    If you listen to politicians they rarely answer a question directly unless it is a real softball. They use the question to "frame" the issue and then use it as a springboard to talk about what they want to talk about.

    This of course is not meant to be a defense of the practice, but it is very common. I think that you have it in the business world quite a bit as well.

    Of course many people think that mormonism is basically a business. From being on the outside looking in it seems to me to be that way.

  8. I think we all know that politicians are good at skirting the issues and because of that, we kind of expect it. I don't think many expect to see that same behavior from a church.

    I agree that the LDS church looks like a business more then a church. Their leaders are called President first and then their secondary title is "prophet, seer and revelator". They are the CEO's of Mormon Inc. With the way they like to hide things, they could be the next Enron.

  9. grammar!!!!! than than than it's not more then anything than than than ;) you do it alot

  10. In John 8:7 Jesus said, “He that is without “grammatical error” among you, let him first cast a stone”.

    I certainly do not claim to have the most correct of any blog on earth, but if the only thing you can legitimately poke holes in is my grammar, then I must be doing something right.

  11. Someone who knows you are wrongJune 19, 2008 at 2:50 PM

    What I find interesting is the several places that the clip was cut. I think important parts of the explanation are cut out. Can you post the entire video, uncut?
    It is true, that you cannot teach Algebra before you teach addition. Christ taught in parables so that people could learn from them at the spiritual plain that they are one. There is progression, it is part of learning. It is not trying to trick someone, it is starting with the basics. Do you really think that everyone who asks a question about Mormonism is really wanting to learn about the answer? Some are doing it to be contentious. I would hope that you would admit that at this point in your life, as you ask questions to someone who is a Mormon, you are not asking to learn?

  12. I did some searching and the complete video can be seen here…

    After listening to him ramble on for about 40min. He really did not say much of significance. He uses backwards logic to state that if something faces persecution or opposition then that must mean that it is true. Applying that logic to something like radical Muslim terrorists saying, well since people oppose terrorism, it must be valuable and true is obviously a ridiculous claim yet that is the same thing he is doing with the Book of Mormon. Falsehoods should be opposed and revealed as such. The effort to do so does not validate its claims. You could even use this same logic in terms of something the church opposes like same sex marriage. Does the fact that the LDS church fights against and opposes same sex marriage make it correct or validate it? Opposition neither validates nor discredits something.

    Christ did teach in parables, but that does not mean he did not reveal deeper truths. The great thing about parables is that the simplest person could gain from the message but the most knowledgeable could look and find deeper meanings. His teachings were made for all and he did not shy away from truth. I think the lessons missionaries teach are designed to be less then honest. The best example for this, and I’ve said it before, is when they teach about the translation of the Book of Mormon. They tell investigators that it was translated by “the gift and power of God” but that is all they say. At the same time, they show a picture of Joseph Smith sitting at a table reading straight from the plates. Now, it has been written in many places including the journals of those involved in the translation process and more recently in the Ensign, that Joseph did it by putting his peep stone into his hat and then putting it over his eyes. If that is true, and the church has now (in select places) admitted to it. Why not show a picture of Joseph with his face in his hat and the scribe writing? Why are they not honest and up-front with potential investigators? I think they aren’t because people would immediately dismiss then as crazy.

    Personally I don’t actively pursue members of the LDS church to ask them questions. I will discuss it if I am approached but I do not feel comfortable doing what I did as a missionary. If they are curious to know what I think about Mormonism, they know they can come here and read about it. I’m not going to push my beliefs on anyone. I do think that even if someone asks a question that might be considered contentious, it should be answered honestly. If you are not ashamed of your beliefs, then answering questions about it should not be something you should avoid. If you are embarrassed by the true answer, then maybe that is cause to look deeper at what the LDS church teaches/believes.

    I started asking difficult questions to learn, but the answers I got where much like what Robert Millet taught in this video. No real answers to a very real and sincere questions. I quickly realized that getting a straight answer from someone in the church is near impossible so I took it upon myself to find out why they would not tell me what I wanted to know. I found out the answers, written by their own hand, and then I knew why they were and still are so hesitant to be honest with those seeking the truth about Mormonism. That is the basis for this blog. To help others who question like I did.

  13. that dude is a nimrod. he says that people investigating the church "only need to learn a little bit and pray a whole lot"

    I can honestly say I did something right!