Es Pura Mentira

3 out of 5 ain't bad

2008-03-01T08:52:00.000-06:00

I'm happy to report that I have now heard from 3 of the 5 family members I sent my letter to and they have all been surprisingly supportive. Obviously they do not understand my decision but they are willing to accept it. I'm sure there will be rough or awkward times and many questions in the coming months about the reasoning behind leaving the church so I will start to put my thoughts down here on the blog. Hopefully that will at least give them a glimpse into my mind so they can know where I am coming from.

"Let's start at the very beginning, a very good place to start."

2008-03-01T09:35:00.000-06:00

I know, singing songs from The Sound of Music entitles me to give up my man card but I have always loved musical and this one seemed to fit nicely into the theme of this post.

Last night I was trying to collect my thoughts regarding my disaffection with the Mormon Church and it became rather clear that what I need to do is start from the very beginning. Where is the beginning of the LDS Church? Joseph Smith, the First Vision and the books of scripture he translated. So, the focus of my next couple of posts will be on those subjects.

On my mission, one of the first things I learned in Spanish was the account of the first vision. For weeks it was the only thing I could say so I got really good at it. It has always been kind of special to me and I still have it memorized. While studying the topic of the first vision in the recent past, I was very surprised to find out that the official account we read in Joseph Smith History was written in 1838 but was not actually published until 1842 in Times and Season. I was always taught that the vision happened in 1820 so that would mean that 18 years passed before our version of the account was written and 22 years from when it was published. There were many accounts written before that and they all contradict each other in some way.

The fist time Joseph wrote about the account was in 1832.

"… thus from the age of twelve years to fifteen I pondered many things in my heart concerning the situation of the world of mankind...my mind become exceedingly distressed for I become convicted of my sins and by searching the scriptures I found that did not come unto the Lord but that they had apostatised from the true and living faith and there was no society or denomination that built upon the gospel of Jesus Christ…Therefore I cried unto the Lord for mercy for there was none else to whom I could go and to obtain mercy and the Lord heard my cry in the wilderness and while in (the) attitude of calling upon the Lord (in the 16th year of my age) a piller of fire light above the brightness of the sun at noon day come down from above and rested upon me and I was filled with the spirit of god and the (Lord) opened the heavens upon me and I saw the Lord and he spake unto me saying Joseph (my son) thy sins are forgiven thee. go thy (way) walk in my statutes and keep my commandments behold I am the Lord of glory I was crucifyed for the world that all those who believe on my name may have Eternal life (behold) the world lieth in sin and at this time and none doeth good no not one they have turned asside from the gospel and keep not (my) commandments they draw near to me with their lips while their hearts are far from me"

Joseph makes a few statements that are different then the "official" version we know. He states that he had already come to the conclusion that there were no denominations teaching the true gospel of Jesus Chris. He also says that he saw the Lord but there is no mention of him seeing God.

Another account was written in 1835 in Joseph Smiths diary.

"“being wrought up in my mind, respecting the subject of religion and looking at the different systems taught the children of men, I knew not who was right or who was wrong and I considered it of the first importance that I should be right, in matters that involve eternal consequ[e]nces; being thus perplexed in mind I retired to the silent grove and bow[e]d down before the Lord … I called upon the Lord for the first time, in the place above stated or in other words I made a fruitless attempt to p[r]ay … I called on the Lord in mightly prayer, a pillar of fire appeared above my head, it presently rested down upon me, and filled me with Joy unspeakable, a personage appeard in the midst of this pillar of flame which was spread all around, and yet nothing consumed, another personage soon appeard like unto the first, he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee, he testified unto me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; I was about 14 years old when I received this first communication."

In this account, he no longer knows that there was not a true church on the earth. He mentions that the personage testified that Jesus Christ is the Son of God but he does not say that he saw Jesus or God. He also talks about seeing many angels but that is not part of the "official" account.

Later in 1835, Joseph gave another account to Erastus Holmes that was published in Deseret News and History of the Church.

"This afternoon, Erastus Holmes, of Newbury, Ohio, called on me to inquire about the establishment of the church, and to be instructed in doctrine more perfectly. I gave him a brief relation of my experience while in my juvenile years, say from six years old up to the time I received the first visitation of angels, which was when I was about fourteen years old; also the revelations that I received afterwards concerning the Book of Mormon, and a short account of the rise and progress of the church up to this date.”

Again Joseph only talks about seeing angels and there is no mention of God and Jesus.

In 1844 Joseph wrote a chapter on Mormonism in a book called An Original History of the Religious Denominations at Present Existing in the United States.

"I retired to a secret place in a grove, and began to call upon the Lord. While fervently engaged in supplication, my mind was taken away from the objects with which I was surrounded, and I was enrapt in a heavenly vision, and saw two glorious personages, who exactly resembled each other in features and likeness, surrounded with a brilliant light, which eclipsed the sun at noonday. They told me that all the religious denominations were believing in incorrect doctrines, and that none of them was acknowledged of God as His Church and Kingdom. And I was expressly commanded to "go not after them," at the same time receiving a promise that the fullness of the gospel should at some future time be made known unto me."

As in other accounts, Joseph does not specifically say that he saw God and Jesus and only refers to them here as personages. i find Josephs accounts puzzling. When talking about an experience so important and great, why was he so vague? Would he not be more specific in telling who it was he saw? If this is such an important event in Mormonism, why then are there so many different accounts?
I think it is hard to believe that an event so important to the world and the center of the LDS Church could have been told in so many different ways. Why could they not get the story straight and which one am aI supposed to believe? The "official" account is obviously the one the Church teaches but it appears to only be a compilation of different facts from the various accounts.
A fellow blogger has a great blog about this as well that also has many quotes from Brigham Young and other church leaders that clearly state that the first vision was the visitation of Angles and not God and Jesus. You can read it here.

The accounts of the first vision were taken from a web site called Mormons in Transition and it has the sources listed there if you would like to research further.

Eating a piece of humble pie

2008-03-01T20:00:00.000-06:00

I have to say that the hardest thing I have had to deal with so far was spending time with my wife's family after we told everyone that we were leaving the LDS Church. She is the only member of her family and at the time of her baptism, her family was very opposed to the idea of her becoming Mormon. She showed great strength and courage to go against her family's wishes. It is because of that decision that we met several years latter. Had she backed out at the last minute, we would not have met.

Over the past 8 years, they have asked various questions about the church. Some were simple while others involved what members like to call, "deep doctrine". Since I met them, I have spent an enormous amount of time defending the church, trying to convince them that we believed in many of the same things they did and that Joseph Smith was a prophet and the Book of Mormon was a true book of scripture.

Talk about having to "eat crow"! About a week ago, we spent some time at her mom's house and the topic of religion came up. That was of course no big surprise. I could not help feel a bit embarrassed at the fact that I had spent so much time defending something that I now think is rubbish.

To their credit, they have been nothing but understanding and supportive. I have not heard one negative word come out of their mouths regarding the church or my repeated defense of what I then believed. I must say that I respect them so much more for the way they have handled the situation. They could have easily thrown all of my certainty back in my face but they have taken the higher road and that has made all the difference.

If some are of God, some are of men and some are of the Devil, then how do we know which is which?

2008-03-08T00:18:00.000-06:00

In my studies, one story that I read has constantly bothered me. The story is about how Joseph Smith received a revelation sending some of the brethren on a trip to sell the copyright of the Book of Mormon. They went as they were told but were not able to complete the task. The explanation they received from Joseph Smith as to why is what concerns me. It is better to hear the whole story from the source, so here is the account of the revelation as told by David Whitmer in a book he wrote in 1887 called, An Address To All Believers In Christ, by a witness to the Devine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon. I hope it is not too long for you to take the time to read it. The last part is important to the point I am trying to make.

“When the Book of Mormon was in the hands of the printer, more money was needed to finish the printing of it. We were waiting on Martin Harris who was doing his best to sell a part of his farm, in order to raise the necessary funds. After a time Hyrum Smith and others began to get impatient, thinking that Martin was too slow and under transgression for not selling his land at once, even if at a great sacrifice. Brother Hyrum thought they should not wait any longer on Martin Harris, and that the money should be raised in some other way. Brother Hyrum was vexed with Brother Martin, and thought they should get the money by some means outside of him, and not let him have anything to do with the publication of the Book, or receiving any of the profits thereof if any profits should accrue. He was wrong in thus judging Bro. Martin, because he was doing all he could toward selling his land. (Page 30)

"Brother Hyrum said it had been suggested to him that some of the brethren might go to Toronto, Canada, and sell the copy-right of the Book of Mormon for considerable money: and he persuaded Joseph to inquire of the Lord about it. Joseph concluded to do so. He had not yet given up the stone. Joseph looked into the hat in which he placed the stone, and received a revelation that some of the brethren should go to Toronto, Canada, and that they would sell the copy-right of the Book of Mormon. Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery went to Toronto on this mission, but they failed entirely to sell the copy-right, returning without any money. Joseph was at my father's house when they returned. I was there also, and am an eye witness to these facts. Jacob Whitmer and John Whitmer were also present when Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery returned from Canada. Well, we were all in great trouble; and we asked Joseph how it was that he had received a revelation from the Lord for some brethren to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right, and the brethren had utterly failed in their undertaking. Joseph did not know how it was, so he enquired of the Lord about it, and behold the following revelation came through the stone: "Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of men: and some revelations are of the devil." So we see that the revelation to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right was not of God, but was of the devil or of the heart of man. When a man enquires of the Lord concerning a matter, if he is deceived by his own carnal desires, and is in error, he will receive an answer according to his erring heart, but it will not be a revelation from the Lord." (Page 31)

Now, ok, first I have to comment briefly on the whole stone in the hat thing. For years, I heard non-Mormons talk about how Joseph received revelation by putting a stone in a hat and putting it over his face. This sounded so absurd that I could not bring myself to believe it, especially since I had never heard that in all my years in Sunday school and other church classes. Some might ask if that is a significant omission and I have to say that it is. My reason for thinking that it is something that the church leaders do not want to talk about is the topic of my next blogs where I will talk more about the early life of Joseph and the translation of the Book of Mormon.

To the point I would like to focus on. When Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery returned from Toronto empty handed and disillusioned, questioning the revelation. The answer they received from Joseph was one that should have been alarming to them and one that should send up a red flag to everyone that hears it. "Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of men: and some revelations are of the devil."

What I find so troubling about this statement is that at this point in his life; Joseph Smith already had many “experiences” with revelation and visions and was the prophet. He claimed to have seen God, Jesus, Moroni, John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John amongst others, not to mention the revelation needed to actually translate the golden plates. If all that is true, then how is it that he, as the prophet, could not tell the difference between a revelation from God or Satan? Shouldn’t he know the difference by now? If he could not tell one from the other, then how can we trust that anything he claims to be revelation actually came from God and not the devil?

My wife reminded me of this scripture that I thought was appropriate for this situation.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15
13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

I also found this one…
2 Nephi 9:9
9 And our spirits must have become like unto him, and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of lies, in misery, like unto himself; yea, to that being who beguiled our first parents, who transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light, and stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness.

I can’t help but question Joseph’s ability to discern revelation from God from that of Satan. If he himself had been deceived by the devil on something relatively small like the Toronto revelation, how do we know he was not deceived on other occasions as well?

Some of his visions and revelations relate to these scriptures. He refers to the first vision as seeing an angel in a pillar of light and Moroni was surrounded by light. Could these possibly be the “angel of light” spoken of in these passages? Could the “secret combinations” be what is practiced in the temple? What about the “murder” and “secret works of darkness” mentioned in 2 Nephi? I can find many accounts in early Mormon history that speak of these types of things. The Meadow Mountain Massacre, Blood Atonement and others are documented proof that Mormon leaders sanctioned and condoned these types of practices. Is it possible that Satan, disguised as the “angel of light”, used Joseph Smith to lead away millions of people and destroy the salvation of their loved ones for generations to come?

These questions have plagued my mind for a while now and I don’t expect I will get an answer for them any time in this life. I remember being taught, “By their fruits you shall know them.” Personally, I have seen all the fruits I need to see from Joseph Smith to know that he was nothing close to what he claimed to be.

Don't drink don't smoke - what do you do?

2008-03-12T22:30:00.000-05:00

D&C Section 89
1 A WORD OF WISDOM, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom

I was doing some reading about the Word of Wisdom and came upon something interesting. Before I get to my main point, I feel the need to give a little back story.

Now, after I graduated high School, I went to live with a former bishop of mine whose family had moved to Seattle. It was a chance to get away from Texas for a while and hopefully point my life in the right direction. While living up there, I was asked to speak at a fireside where different topics were being addressed. My topic was the WoW. In preparation, I asked Bishop for some insight on the subject. He asked me one question…”Is the WoW a commandment?” I thought about it for a second then I replied, “Yes”. He opened to section 89 and had me read the passage I quoted above. I was surprised to see that it says in very clear language, “not by commandment or constraint”. He explained to me how the revelation came about and that it was, at the time, a suggestion to the brethren. He left it at that and let me formulate my own opinions about it. I decided to ask his question to the group of youth there and they answered just like I had. I explained to them the same thing as best I could and then got into the traditional aspects of the revelation.

Over the years since, I have thought about that experience a lot. I could feel at the time how uncomfortable the leaders in the room felt when I told them that it was not a commandment. No one spoke to me about it but I always ask myself if I was right in saying that. After all, in the church today, you are asked very specific questions regarding the WoW and you must follow it to be considered a “member in good standing”.

Now, back to my current reading on the topic. I was again asking myself if I was right in teaching that so I began to read in Mormon Doctrine to see what McConkie had to say about it. I found what I expected. He states that it was not originally a commandment but was made one by Brigham Young. I then stumbled upon a quote by Joseph Smith made on April 7, 1838. The quote reads:

“No official member in this Church is worthy to hold an office after having the Word of Wisdom properly taught him, and he, the official member, neglecting to comply with and obey it.” (Teachings of The Prophet Joseph Smith p117)

The reason this quote struck me is because I read an account from History of the Church where, even up to the night before he was killed, Joseph Smith did not obey the WoW. The following account is from the night before his murder at Carthage Jail.

"The guard immediately sent for a bottle of wine, pipes, and two small papers of tobacco; and one of the guards brought them into the jail…Dr. Richards uncorked the bottle, and presented a glass to Joseph, who tasted, as also Brother Taylor…" (History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 616)

At the time, the use of wine as part of the Sacrament was generally accepted but this was not the use here as confirmed by john Taylor.

"Sometime after dinner we sent for some wine. It has been reported that this was taken as a sacrament. It was no such thing; our spirits were generally dull and heavy, and it was sent to revive us." (History of the Church, vol. 7, p. 101)

Based on this account as well as others, and the quote by Joseph Smith in 1838, he himself should not have been worthy to hold the calling and office of Prophet.

This is just another example of the hypocrisy of Joseph Smith and the Mormon Church. I find it odd that in “worthiness interviews”, the only aspect of the WoW spoken of is abstaining from coffee, tea, and tobacco. They completely ignore the revelation that speaks of the good and healthy foods to eat and put no importance in being healthy as a requirement of worthiness. They choose to only follow/require the part of the revelation they want to enforce and the rest is just an afterthought in the last 2 minutes a Sunday school lesson. I have found that this is a typical practice of the church. They change their own doctrine to suit their needs at the time or to rationalize a behavior and then change it back at their convenience, acting as if nothing ever happened.

Modern Day Prophets

2008-03-22T17:40:00.000-05:00

The other day I was mowing my lawn and began to think of all of the latest revelations given to us by a “modern day prophet” I could think of in my life time. I could not really think of very many.

Let’s see, you have the revelation that states that you should only have 1 set of earrings and no tattoos. Then you have the re-confirmation that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world set out in “The Living Christ: The Testimony of the Apostles. Then you have the revelation that marriage should be between a man and a woman, we should have many children and homosexual relationships are bad in “The Family: A Proclamation to the World”. None of these were a big surprise and already commonly believed by the members.

The big one of course was made when I was only a few months old. In that one, “all worthy male members” became eligible for the priesthood and temple blessings. Now, I’m not a rocket scientist or anything but even I could tell you that black men should have the ability to hold the same authority and positions as any other men in the LDS church. What I really find interesting about this one is the manner in which it was received. President Kimball “received” it after much prayer and meditation but then took it to 3 different levels of the priesthood leadership and had them vote on and approve the revelation before he would make the formal announcement. That sounds more like a CEO going to the Board of Directors of a major corporation to have his new business plan approved before it could be implemented. I can’t recall ever reading where the early LDS prophets had revelations voted on before they were given to the general membership. In fact, I could not see Joseph Smith and many of the early prophets putting the “revelations” they received up for a vote. What the prophet Joseph said in those days was considered concrete revelation from God and no one second guessed it.

What would have happened if there were enough people who voted against the revelation to let Blacks have the priesthood? Would that have rendered the revelation false? Could the general authorities of the church really override the prophet? If they in theory could, then would that infer that the prophet could in fact lead us astray if he did not allow others to review his revelations before they are made public?

The major question I have regarding modern day prophets is what is the point of having them if they only tell us what we already know with the use of common sense? All I hear about is how bad the world is getting and how we need a prophet to guide us who can talk to God in these troubled times but there does not appear to be much of anything coming down from on high. It seems that the church focuses on “personal revelation” because those who should be able to receive revelation for the entire church have not been able to for quite a few years now.

For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none

2008-04-01T18:12:00.000-05:00

So, for years I defended the idea of early Mormons practicing polygamy by saying that they only did it to take care of those poor pioneer women whose husbands died on the plains. Or that it was something that was practiced by those in the Bible as well so why not now. After all, God does not change, right? These were ideas that I was taught by various church leaders but they never seemed to sit too well with me. I was reading yesterday and came upon an interesting passage in the Book of Mormon that talks about those who practiced it in the early days.

Jacob 2:22-28
22 And now I make an end of speaking unto you concerning this pride. And were it not that I must speak unto you concerning a grosser crime, my heart would rejoice exceedingly because of you.
23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

Now, I think I probably read this section 20+ times in my life but never really stopped to think about how it relates to Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and many other men in the early days of the church. Joseph himself “translated” the BoM so you would think he would know about how God felt concerning the idea of having more then one wife. After all, it was the translation work that brought up questions about baptism and the priesthood so why would he have just skipped over this part?

I have not found a passage that states so clearly the disdain God has towards those who have more then one wife and take away the chastity of women. Now, why then would God command Joseph to implement the principle of plural marriage if he was so displeased with David, Solomon and the Nephites for doing the same thing? If there is a God, I do not think he would. I especially don’t think he would have compelled Joseph to do it by sending an angel with a flaming sword to him threatening to take his life. I also do not think that God would command his prophets to take other men’s wives for their own while they are still married and even pregnant. If what Joseph claims is true about plural marriage, then his God is not one I care to believe in. I believe that Joseph, thinking of his own need for power, did this knowing it was wrong. Why else would he have hid it from Emma, his first wife, as well as others for so long? Why would he send men off on missions and then only months later, take their wives as his own? That practice, in any time in history, would not be looked upon with favorable eyes.

For those of you who doubt that Joseph practiced polygamy and polyandry, go to familysearch.org yourself, just like I have done, and do a search for Joseph Smith marriage records from 1827 and on. I will make it easy on you, just…click here. What will you find? On a church run website, you will find the records of the majority if not all of his marriages, including those women he married while they were still faithfully married to another man.

D&C 132:61-63
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—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.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed…

So, according to the revelation given above, as long as the second wife is a virgin and the first wife gives her consent, the marriage is ok. While I disagree with the principle, I am willing to give Joseph the benefit of the doubt up to this point. The problem for me comes next. If the woman is not a virgin and or is vowed to another man, the one trying to marry her is not justified. By that note, anyone who Joseph and others married that were previously married, they did unjustly and committed adultery because of it. Now, it is believed by those brethren that they were not committing adultery but what of the women how already had a husband? According to verse 63, they did commit adultery by being espoused but also being with another man. That is quite the double standard.

I leave you with the words of one of the late Apostles of the LDS church…

"I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow." - Apostle Heber C. Kimball, The Twenty Seventh Wife, Irving Wallace, p. 101.

I think that statement just about sums it all up. Now I think I’m going to be sick!

The story of Bishop Warren Snow

2008-04-02T00:46:00.000-05:00

There is a story that stands out above the rest in when looking at the horrible practices of coercion and unrighteous dominion of the leaders in early church history.

Warren Snow, who was a bishop in Manti, already had a few wives but a young woman caught his eye. He had a problem though in that she was already promised to a young man. He told her that it was the Lord’s will that she leave her man and marry him. She respectfully declined his proposal a couple of times. Not willing to take no for an answer, Bishop Snow then approached the man she was promised to, telling him to break off their engagement. Staying true to his love for her, he also told the Bishop that he could not leave her. Snow then met with some of the brethren and decided to call a meeting with the young man to discuss his unwillingness to follow their council. The unthinkable then happened. When the young man arrived, he was taken, beaten, and strapped to a bench. Bishop Snow, himself, took out a bowie-knife and castrated him. His severed parts were then nailed to the schoolhouse for all to see. He was left there, bleeding with no one to help. After struggling for a while, he managed to free himself and crawl to where someone would find him. He was used as an example and warning to all, showing what could happen if they did not obey the leaders of the church. The young woman was later forced to marry Warren Snow.

There is evidence that shows that Brigham Young supported this action…

“In the midsummer of 1857 Brigham Young also expressed approval for an LDS bishop who had castrated a man. In May 1857 Bishop Warren S. Snow's counselor wrote that twenty-four-year-old Thomas Lewis 'has now gone crazy' after being castrated by Bishop Snow for an undisclosed sex crime. When informed of Snow's action, Young said: 'I feel to sustain him...' In July Brigham Young wrote a reassuring letter to the bishop about this castration: 'Just let the matter drop, and say no more about it,' the LDS president advised, 'and it will soon die away among the people.' "(The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power, Vol. 2, pp. 250-251)

Wilford Woodruff spoke about a meeting he was in with Brigham Young where the topic came up as well.

"I then went into the president office & spent the evening. Bishop Blackburn was present. The subject Came up of some persons leaving Provo who had Apostatized. Some thought that Bishop Blackburn & President Snow was to blame. Brother Joseph Young presented the thing to president Young. But When the Circumstances were told President Brigham Young sustained the Brethren who presided at Provo…
"The subjects of Eunuchs came up…Brigham Said the day would Come when thousands would be made Eunochs in order for them to be saved in the kingdom of God." (Wilford Woodruff's Diary, June 2, 1857, Vol. 5, pp. 54-55)

The idea that prophets knew about and encouraged such things really makes me wonder what kind of men they really were. I see them as greedy, power hungry men, who only looked after the desires of their hearts and cared nothing for the actual will of God or the salvation of those who so willingly followed them.

Many Mormons find peace in the idea that God will never let a prophet lead away the members of the church. My question to them is how many examples do you need before you begin to see that the Mormon prophets have, many times over, lead their followers down paths that only lead away from God? Is this something that the God you believe in would approve of?

I didn’t think so.

A quote about leadership

2008-04-02T14:39:00.000-05:00

I read this quote today and thought that is fit in well with the topic of my last few blogs.

"Ethics must begin at the top of an organization. It is a leadership issue and the chief executive must set the example."
~Edward Hennessy

Who gets into heaven?

2008-04-02T19:23:00.000-05:00

Just to add a little humor to the blog. This video is funny yet true to Mormon teachings. Enjoy!

Which one of these is not like the others?

2008-04-03T20:40:00.000-05:00

Let’s play a game!

Which one of these is not like the others?

Having a hard time? I’ll give you a hint. It is the picture featured in most church magazines and lesson manuals. The correct answer is, picture number 3.

Why is it so out of place in this line-up? Well, it is the one that does not depict how the Book of Mormon was actually translated. For years, the church has shown images like this, leading its members and investigators to believe that this was how Joseph translated the golden plates. They depict Joseph intensely focused on the plates themselves, taking the translated words directly from them. This is what the church wants you to believe but it is not in synch with actual accounts of the translation process.

Emma Smith was the first person to act as a scribe for Joseph and she had the following to say about it.

“In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."

David Whitmer offered up the use of his house for the translation and this is his account:

"I will now give you a description of the manner in which the Book of Mormon was translated. Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear."

He also said that:

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation."
~An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer

Of course, this brings us to the question of why is the church not forthcoming with the true method used to translate the plates. I would imagine that they are rather embarrassed by it. Try to put yourself in the shoes of an investigator. When the missionaries tell you about the coming forth of the BoM, instead of showing you a nice picture of Joseph using the plates in the translation, they tell you that he put a stone in a hat and then covered his face with it to make the words appear to him. Which account would you be more likely to believe?

Book of Abraham Sounds Like a Sham

2008-03-19T09:44:00.000-05:00

It is common knowledge that Joseph Smith claimed that the Book of Abraham came from his translation of some papyri acquired along with some mummies from a traveling show that passed through his town. What I think is not very well known are the details of that translation.

At the time in which Joseph Smith lived, there was very little knowledge regarding Ancient Egypt and everything that surrounded it was a mystery that intrigued many in the US. There was at that time, no real expert in reading Egyptian hieroglyphics but some were beginning to make small strides in understanding that civilization. When Joseph Smith saw the scrolls he had some of the members put together enough money to buy the mummies and scrolls for the sum of $2,400 which was a very large sum at the time. Joseph began translating the writings but it would take him many years to finish it.

As science has progressed, our knowledge of the Egyptians has increased substantially since the 1830’s. The discovery of the Rosetta Stone helped linguists discover the true meaning of Egyptian hieroglyphics. With the knowledge of today in both ancient writings and time dating, scientists have been able to evaluate the scrolls Joseph Smith used to create the Book of Abraham. The scrolls were believed to have been destroyed in the “great Chicago fire” of 1871 but in 1966 they were found in the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

Many experts in Egyptology, from various parts of the world, have since inspected and reviewed the scrolls along with the three facsimiles found in the Pearl of Great Price and they have come to a very different conclusion regarding their origin and content. For the sake of time, I am not going to go into great detail on the specifics because they are too numerous to put here and I do not want to bore you all to death. There are many great books and web sites that do a good job of putting all of the information together for you. With a quick click on one of the links found on this blog you can read bout it in greater detail. 20 Truths About Mormonism has a very good accout of this and it also has the Mormon response to the issues surrounding the BoA.

Joseph claimed that the BoA was the writings of Abraham but according to those that have since reviewed the scrolls; the name of Abraham is not mentioned. The conclusion they all came to was that the scrolls were actually common Egyptian funerary documents for a man named Horus and that Joseph’s interpretations were far from accurate. The BoA has been identified as the Book of Breathings and time dating of the scrolls puts their creation at around the time of Christ which was approximately 2,000 years later then the time of Abraham. What Joseph Smith claimed to be the Book of Joseph was actually the pagan Egyptian Book of the Dead which dates to at least 1,500 years after the time of the biblical Joseph so it is not possible that he wrote it.

After reading all of the facts regarding the Book of Abraham, I have come to the conclusion that Joseph Smith did not know how to translate Egyptian hieroglyphics nor did he ever think that others would be able to, so he made up his own translation because no one would know the difference. His interpretation of the scrolls has been found to be no where close to the actual text by the scholars of today. Joseph has deceived the church regarding the Book of Abraham and the current leaders of the church choose to ignore the evidence against it.

If the Book of Abraham has been found to be a fraud, then could that same thing be said about the Book of Mormon? Unfortunately, without the actual plates, it would be impossible to make that assumption based on actual translation records alone but there are other issues in the Book of Mormon that I will get into later that lead me to believe it is no more accurate then the Book of Abraham.

My source for the story of Bishop Snow

2008-04-07T08:56:00.000-05:00

I have had some people request my source for the story regarding Bishop Snow and the young man he castrated due to disobedience. The account appears in a book written by John D. Lee who was part of the Mountain Meadow Massacre and was a good friend to Joseph Smith and part of the leadership of the church. He was also an alleged member of the Danites. The Danites were a group of men who were the enforcers of the laws. They would protect the leaders of the church and quietly take out those who opposed them. Many acts of Blood Atonement in the early church were also attributed to the Danites. There are different historical views on the extent of the actions of the Danites but none deny that they did in fact exist.

The full text of his book is available on-line by clicking the link below. This story is found on page 284-286.
Confessions of John D. Lee, Photo-reprint of 1877 edition

A few random thoughts

2008-04-08T12:21:00.000-05:00

One thing this blog has done is show me who my real friends are and that alone makes it worth it. I have seen a wide range of reactions to what I am doing here and those reactions have given me a very good look into the heart and mind of each person.

I think there is a misconception as to the tone of this blog. Many see anger towards the LDS church in my posts which I can assure you is not the case. Am I angry? The answer is a resounding YES! But that anger is directed toward me and no one else. I am angry at myself for letting others dictate how I live my life. I am angry because I failed to properly educate myself and know more about the religion I claimed to be part of and even defended using what I now know to be half truths and smokescreens. I’m pissed off that I spent two years teaching people in Spain the same things I now see as manipulative and dishonest. The mere idea that I had a hand in the conversion of the people I taught makes me cringe. I hope they will forgive me for being part of the facade.

I like to refer to myself as a "Hopeful Agnostic" because I have a natural tendency to want to believe but have lost all trust and faith in religion. You see, I have spent the large majority of my life living a religion that hid truths from me. The discovery of those truths has affected my loyalty to them and God. It is a horrible feeling realizing that you have been deceived by someone who claimed to be a man of God. It destroys everything you have built your life around. The moment I realized that the LDS church is not what it claims to be, my faith came crashing down. I was left holding the pieces, having to rebuild my belief system but not knowing where to begin.

I enjoy going to church with my family now more than I ever have in my life. However, I cannot bring myself to the point where I can let go and put my trust in another church and to me that also makes it impossible to put my faith in God because that is where I am supposed to learn about Him. I see all of this as a process and it is going to take time to find solid ground to stand on. In the end, will I find a belief in God? I don’t know, but I do know that, regardless of where I land, I will be better off for having gone through all of this. Knowledge is power and the truth will set you free.

The FLDS church and mainstream Mormonism

2008-04-09T22:33:00.000-05:00

Unless you live under a rock, you have either heard of or read about the raid on the polygamist compound in Texas. Over 400 kids were taken, many of whom were sexually abused. Any time something like this happens, everyone I know asks me about it and I have always wondered why. Having put distance between me and the Mormon church, I am beginning to understand.

When Mormons hear about the FLDS practices, they usually dismiss them because they do not consider that religious group part of Mormonism. I know that because I did it myself for many years. My canned response to such questions would always go something like this.

“While the LDS church once practiced polygamy, they no longer condone it and anyone that is found practicing it is excommunicated. So, the “Mormons” spoken of in this case are not really Mormon and have nothing to do with the church I belong to.”

That would be the end of the conversation and I would think nothing of it. Since then, I have become a bit more enlightened on the subject and have realized that this kind of attitude is dangerous. LDS members seem to ignore the fact that those in the FLDS religion are actually following the teachings of Joseph Smith very closely. They believe that he was a prophet, and they follow the Book of Mormon and other revelations, just like mainstream Mormons do. They have the same roots and their basic tenets come from the mouths of early LDS leaders. They have chosen to stay with those doctrines while mainstream Mormonism has, in many cases, gone in a different direction.

If Joseph Smith lived today, would Mormons think the same way about him as they do Warren Jeffs? If you compare the actions of the two men, they are very similar. They both forced women and underage girls, through coercion, to marry them. They provided the same service to other men who proved their loyalty to them. They both had sex with those women against their will and held their victims hostage through threats of eternal damnation and physical punishment if they were not obedient.

While the church stopped the practice of polygamy back in 1890, there were actually still other plural marriages that were permitted by the prophet up until around 1904. The belief in plural marriage still exists in the Morg and it is my contention that if they had not received so much social and political pressure to change, they would still be practicing it today.

Here’s the question that comes to mind when I think about this topic. If the Mormon church had not stopped the practice of polygamy, would I have ended up like one of those poor kids? As a grown man, would I have been a participant in something so degrading and hurtful to women and children? It is a question worth thinking about because it is my opinion that most Mormons don’t understand how close they were to being put into the same situation.

Paint Chips- author unknown

2008-04-10T14:24:00.000-05:00

Being a part of the Mormon church is like having your whole body painted with many layers. First you get the lessons...there are several coats of doctrine. Then you get baptized and confirmed; two more thick coats of paint. The "paint" is intended to refurbish you as a member, to make you more acceptable to the church, to "God," to others. With each Relief Society or Priesthood lesson, another coat is applied. With each meeting, each interview, the layers of paint build. A trip to the Temple takes several coats and is inspected after each year. Then one day, you realize, you can't move! When you question about your lack of movement, the inspector tells you that your foundation is just fine. You try and sit still and remain the representation of a church "remodeled" member. But the questions come from within.

Then you hear something. A crack. A deep crack begins from the inside out. You doubt yourself because you know if you don't keep quiet, someone will hear! Someone will SEE that your appearance is now damaged. Someone might question if you have been properly taking care of your foundation, etc. Then one day, it happens. Just a small patch breaks away. You see something unusual. You touch it and are surprised. "Is that my skin?" you ask. It feels so alive and real. You begin to gently pick it away, then in a fervor you are scraping as much as you can off. Paint chips are everywhere! Soon you are standing there uncovered. You feel free. You breathe. Your body aches from the release of all that weight. You sigh and do not worry that other "painted folks" will see you without your so called "protective shell" You start the clean up job. Quickly and efficiently you sweep up all the chips and flakes. There are so many of them! It seems overwhelming at first, but then the job is done. All the mess is tossed out. You love your clean house; the way your body can breathe and move and LIVE! You are rearranging your life and then BAM you find a paint chip under the rug. Somehow you missed it...or did you save it? One day you go to get a coat and a few missed chips fall from a sleeve. Little reminders of what used to be. "It may take a while to get rid of all this residue" you say. But that is ok.

Letter to my family

2008-02-27T13:53:00.000-06:00

Below is a letter that I sent to my family today regarding my recent decision to leave the Mormon Church.

Dear Family,
As I am sure many of you have heard, Amy and I have decided to officially leave the Mormon Church. This is a decision that we made through serious thought, study and prayer and it is a choice that we do not take lightly.
Growing up in the Mormon Church has taught me many valuable lessons which I am very grateful for. It has been the vehicle through which I learned to be the best person I can be, to serve others and love everyone unconditionally. It has taught me to be a leader and gave me the opportunity to learn the Spanish language which has been pivotal to my career. It also brought me my wonderful wife and daughter, whom I would not have were it not for the Church.
My purpose for writing this letter is to help you understand our reasoning for leaving a church that has been a part of our lives for many years. I do not wish to go into too many specific details in this letter as that is not the point. I also do not wish to dissuade you from believing as you wish since that is a principle and right that I take very seriously.
Despite all of the good that has come into our lives by being members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, we have come to the realization that the church is not all that it claims to be and is not “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth.” (D&C 1:30) Through our studies of church history, we have found many inconsistencies that we can not accept as something that would be part of God’s “true” church. Our studies consisted of official church publications as well as journals of prominent leaders and members. The history and doctrine that we have been taught over the years is quite different then what was practiced and taught from the beginning of its organization and even through modern times. The lesson manuals of the church today fail to mention many of the unpopular or embarrassing teachings of the early leaders of the church such as polygamy and polyandry. In addition to that, many of the key points in church doctrine have been disproven as science, intellect and knowledge has progressed to the point where it can test them. Examples of this would be the translation of the Book of Abraham, the Kinderhook plates, the lack of historical facts regarding the Book of Mormon and the fact that people are living on the moon (which was taught by Joseph Smith & Brigham Young).
This has been a very long and difficult process for me. As I sifted through countless pages of information, I found my self with very mixed feelings. I had not been comfortable in the church for many years but with no real explanation as to why. This lead to my inactivity for the better part of two years. Despite my indifference to the church at the time, as I began to study its history, I could not help but feel a deep sadness that what I grew up learning was not what I thought it was. That lead to a feeling of confusion as to why I did not already know the things I was reading. I came to the conclusion that that information was, in some way, withheld from me for a reason I could not understand, which led to anger.
I began to ask myself questions. Why would the leadership of the church feel a need to not be upfront and honest with its members regarding the actual teachings of the prophets of the restoration? What else could they be hiding? Why do they not trust me to take the information and come to my own logical conclusion? These are questions that have consumed my mind and notwithstanding my efforts, I have not found a suitable answer to any of them. The only explanation I can come up with is that the leaders do not value knowledge and intellect. They preach about the need for education but they only put forth the information they want you to see. The truth is obscured from the eyes of the members and many of them (like me) do not even know it exists until they have reason to search it out. They do not want members to find this information out of fear that they will discover the truth that they have been trying to conceal all these years.
Can a church that is not open and honest with its members be what it claims to be? To that question, I have to answer, no. I recently read a quote that touched my soul and took away the confusion I was experiencing. The quote is as follows:
"Each of us has to face the matter-either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing."
- President Gordon B. Hinckley. "Loyalty," April Conference, 2003.
To me, that statement helped me make my choice. President Hinckley did not leave any room for ambiguity. Through my studies, I no longer believed that Joseph Smith worked under divine inspiration. So, if I did not believe Joseph Smith was a prophet and that he translated the Book of Mormon or the Book of Abraham, then in my mind, the church could not possibly be true.
With that said, after much consideration, we have decided to have our names removed from the records of the church and have sent the appropriate resignation letter this week. Continued association with an organization that we no longer believe to be true and that does not act in the best interest of its members is something that we can not, in good conscience, do.
I want you to know that our opinion regarding the church does not in any way change our feelings for you. We believe the church can be a positive place to raise a family and that its members try very hard to live their lives according to the teachings of the Savior. We have many friends in the church and know them to be good people. We love and respect each and every one of you and hope that this decision does not affect our relationship. The reasons listed in this letter are but a small portion of what we have found to be in contradiction to our core beliefs. Should anyone have questions regarding anything written here or our reasons for leaving, I am open to talking with you in a spirit of love and understanding.
We are at peace with our decision and are exploring our faith outside of Mormonism. As we search for another church, we are continually blessed to find people who have opened their hearts to us without exception. Amy’s relationship with God is stronger then ever and Megan has developed a greater desire to learn about Jesus and follow his example. I am trying to redefine God’s role in my life and find myself going between being Agnostic and Christian. I have opened a new world of possibilities and I know it will take time to find my path. I can honestly say that we have never been happier as a family and we feel closer then ever.
It is my hope that you will all have peace and happiness in your life. I love you all and can not wait to see you during the Easter holiday.
Love, Doug

It is my hope that they know that this letter was sent out of love and a desire to be upfront and open with them about my belief in the religion of my childhood.

Why did I not see this before?

2008-02-27T11:31:00.000-06:00

For so many years, I plodded along in the Mormon Church because it was where I was "supposed" to be. I finally got tired of that and two years ago, I chose to go inactive to give myself a need break from the culture of the church, which I hate. During that time, I began to read about the history of the church and found some things that opened my eyes to a completely different side of the church then I had ever seen before. My whole life, I believed in the basic teachings of the church but never had a great "with every fiber of my being" testimony. I always though something was not right about the Golden Plates and some of the visions Joseph Smith had. It seems that my doubts were valid. I have found so many things that go against what I have always been taught. The purpose of this blog is to give me a forum in which I can express my views of the church and its doctrine. This is not an anti-Mormon blog. I remain respectful of the church and those in it and I think they do tremendous good throughout the world. It is however a place for me to point out valid points of conflict I have found through my studies. I believe in looking at both sides of an argument and letting people come to their own conclusions. I hope you find what I write insightful and informative. Please feel free to comment and share with me your thoughts.

Why I Blog

2008-03-16T22:57:00.000-05:00

Many wonder why I “waist” my time writing my thoughts on this blog, and I am happy to explain my reasoning for it. To me, it is not a waist of time since ultimately this is the medium I choose to express my thoughts and feelings regarding the Mormon Church and what I have gone through on my path to resignation. Many people who comment and read my blog also maintain their own. So to them I ask, why a blog instead of a personal journal or diary? I know from reading your blogs that most of you use yours as a type of journal or a way to let others know what is going on in their lives and it is a great way to communicate with a large number of people. It is a part of the web based era we live in. The only difference with mine is that I am probably more open with my thoughts then most. I have nothing to hide and see no point in sugar coating anything. What you read here is nothing but pure and raw emotion and it come from the organ behind my eyes that I like to call a brain.

Typically, the brain is what is used to sift through data and it uses past experiences as well as intellect to decipher what information is valid and what is not. I do not claim to be the most intellectual person around but I do know how to think for myself. I have been reading books regarding the history of the church and its doctrine and it has opened my eyes to so many beliefs that contradict each other. The books I have been reading are Teachings of The Prophet Joseph Smith, Mormon Doctrine, Journal of Discourses, Times & Seasons, History of the Church, and others. These are Church publications and I have no reason to doubt that they reflect accurate church beliefs and teachings since they are used on any given Sunday and by church leaders. When speaking on a topic, I will always quote my source so that anyone who doubts my information can look for themselves and come to their own conclusion about the same passages.

The purpose of this blog is not to persuade anyone to leave the Mormon Church. It is not the result of misplaced anger, but rather a vehicle for me to express the hurt and distrust associated with leaving a church that I have spent all my life serving and from my point of view, has lied to me. I acknowledge the fact that many of the things I write about will come off as harsh or shocking to those who believe in Mormonism but I do not and will not apologize for any of it.

Some have asked why I spend my time researching the problems in the Mormon Church instead of focusing on my current beliefs. For the most part, my research has already been finished. My posts are the result of that study but it is impossible for me to write everything in one day. In fact, I started with what in my mind were the more simple issues and am working my way up to the ones that were the main cause of my disaffection. Due to the response I am getting, I will push this week to get more of my thoughts posted. It takes a considerable amount of my time to do this due to the fact that I am the kind of person that speaks only after much thought and I try to be very careful not to speak out against the members of the church, but rather the doctrine, how it has changed and those who work to keep the truth from those that put so much faith in them.

It has been stated that I should spend my time focusing on my current beliefs rather then those I so recently left. In order to understand where I am now spiritually and where I want to go, I must first understand where I have been and what affect that has had on me. To do that, I feel the need to educate myself on the LDS church to find both the positive things that I can take from it and the negative things that I want to make sure do not follow me. At this point, I consider myself an Agnostic. I am uncertain of the existence of God. I am also at the point where I can not trust any religion. It is my belief, that the LDS church betrayed the trust I gave it for more then 25 years and that realization has made it impossible for me to put my trust in another “man of God”. I believe that Mormons do not have a monopoly on morals and righteousness and that I can be a great husband, father and person without it or any other church. I have begun to focus more time and energy into Eastern Philosophy. I have found peace in practicing Yoga and reading and pondering the teachings of Taoism. It quiets my soul and brings peace to my mind.

To those who choose to read the thoughts coming from behind my eyes, Welcome! I honestly appreciate the fact that you have chosen to spend some of your precious time today reading what I have to say. I encourage everyone who feels the need, to please comment. There is no need to be shy. If you choose to stay anonymous, I understand. Your comment is welcome either way. All that I ask is that you follow standard blog etiquette and refrain from personal attacks pointed towards those who also share their religious thoughts and beliefs. I encourage open, intelligent and respectful discussion here. If in your comment, you make reference to a certain quote or doctrine, please note your source so we can also read it and expand our knowledge on the topic at hand. If you would rather send me an email, you can do so knowing that I will not share your comments or identity with anyone else.

May you find peace and happiness in whatever path you choose.

Here’s a quarter, call someone who cares

2008-03-29T00:53:00.000-05:00

One thing I don’t think I will ever understand is why some members of the LDS church feel the need to call and preach to those who have chosen a different path. Why do they call to tell me that they are worried and concerned about me and how they “know” the church is true and that I am making a huge mistake with eternal ramifications? I was a member for 29 years and know what Mormons believe regarding those who leave and I don’t need you to tell me. I don’t prescribe to those beliefs and am confident that I won’t be struck down by lightning nor will my soul be damned for eternity for resigning my membership.

I have recently had friends call with the sole purpose of “witnessing” to me. They shove their beliefs in my face and expect me to listen but they are unwilling to return the favor and hear to what I have to say. Why is that? Why do you feel that it is ok for you to preach to me but the second I start to explain myself you claim that I am attacking you and not respecting your rights? Are you really that insecure about your beliefs? Are you afraid that what I have to say will make you doubt that which you have believed for so many years? If you are, I can understand but I cannot help but feel sorry for you.

I make it a point to not talk about my issues with Mormonism unless I am asked directly to share my thoughts. I put my ideas and experiences on this blog and open it to all who care to read it as a way of sharing what I have found in a non confrontational way. Those who want to read my blog are free to, but no one is forced into it. I have never preached to anyone nor do I plan to. It is my hope that my family and I will be treated the same way.

So, if you are contacting us to be a true friend then we welcome you, but the next time you feel the need to call or email us to share your thoughts on Mormonism, don’t bother. I’m sure your time could be better spent magnifying your calling or better yet, having some nice quality time with your family.

The First Big Debate

2008-03-27T23:52:00.000-05:00

So, my sisters were in town over the Easter holiday and I suppose it was inevitable that the topic of my disaffection would come up at some point. Every time we would get together, the topic loomed over us but it was never talked about until Sunday night when I actually decided to bight the bullet and say something. What ensued was a 3 hour argument/conversation. I’m still not too sure what to think of it all but here are some highlights.

The conversation started by me asking my oldest sister why she was the only one in our family who chose not to make some kind of contact with me after my letter was sent to the family explaining that I had decided to leave the Morg. She quickly went down the testimony rout and said that I was making a huge mistake and that she “knows” that the church is true. I have heard that phrase so many times in my life that it has lost all meaning for me. What does that even mean? She then said that she had nothing good to say so she chose to say nothing.

Various aspects of my decision to leave were discussed including my decision to go on a mission due to the pressures and stigma attached to someone who does not go and how that affected me. I told them in very tactful but blunt ways that I never really had a testimony and that I only went through the motions for many years. I tried not to get into actual doctrinal issues too much because I did not want to upset them.

The conversation turned to how I believe the church has changed its policies over the years to conform to social pressures. Examples I brought up were the repeal of polygamy, allowing blacks to hold the priesthood and the release of the proclamation of the family. Much to my surprise, my mom actually agreed with me that some were the result of social and political pressures but refuted my claims that the change in who could hold the priesthood had to do with that. My younger sister found the rational that the change to let the blacks hold the priesthood was like unto the church not letting people cook in the church anymore, and that neither one had a huge affect on the truthfulness of the gospel. I of course, had to respectfully disagree.

This same sister told me that I just have to have faith. In response to that I decided to test the waters and I broke out some historical discrepancies. I presented the information regarding the different first vision accounts and asked which one I was supposed to have faith in; the first ones that Joseph’s Myth wrote in 1832 and 1835 or the one that appears in the PoGP which was written in 1838 but not published till 1842? I don’t recall receiving a good answer to that. My mother, with tears welling up in her eyes looked shocked at the information I had just lain down in front of her and she made a point to ask that I not bring up any more information like that claiming that I was attacking her faith.

After a while, they turned their attention to my wife and began to focus their question on her and how a convert could possibility go back on the testimony they had when they were baptized. They held her to a higher standard then me for whatever reason and they could not really understand that you don’t know everything about the church when you are baptized so as you learn, you either gain a greater testimony of the gospel or your belief is torn down. I was then blamed in part for her loss of testimony because I became a negative influence on her.

For me the all-time highlight of the night was when the topic of the Word of Wisdom came up and how I was a bad influence on their kids who were present because I mentioned that I had some tea the other day. In the conversation, my sister actually said that drinking tea was just as bad as molesting a child. When she said that, my jaw dropped to the floor. I don’t understand how anyone could make such a claim. She went on to try to clarify her statement by saying that both are equally bad because they both keep you from being able to enter the temple. What kind of messed up thinking is that? That is like saying it is just as bad to lie to someone then it is to kill them. The church teaches that there are different degrees of sin. Otherwise, there would not be unpardonable sins such as denying the Holy Ghost or murder. Also, if her statement was correct, then you could be excommunicated for the smallest of infractions. I kind of feel sorry for her because that seems like a really crappy way of looking at life. She was even willing to completely disassociate from us if we ever spoke about drinking tea or alcohol around her kids again.

In the end, the night was a mix of both good and bad moments and overall, it was probably a healthy conversation. I was glad that I was finally able to get the issue out in the open and get the first major discussion over with. It is sad to me that they are so closed minded regarding the church. I wish there was some way I could make them open their eyes for just 30 minutes so I could show them the hypocrisy found in the church, especially my mom. I think that if she was really honest with herself she would say that she is not happy in the church but she is in too deep to let that happen.

I am the second of her four kids to leave the church and I am sure she feels like it is her fault in some way but really, she should not feel too bad. Even God lost 1/3 of his kids so why should she think she would fare any better?

Resignation Day

2008-03-03T22:23:00.000-06:00

Well, today we made it official. We drafted our resignation letter and sent it to our Bishop. It is a rather liberating experience but I can't help but feel a bit sad. This closes a very long chapter in my life and opens a new one. It will take time to navigate through the uncharted waters outside of Mormonism but I am anxious to get started. It will be nice having my wonderful wife by my side as we work together to write our new story.

The church has taught me many valuable things and I owe a lot to those that have helped teach me the values and principles I try to live each and every day. Without them, I'm not sure what kind of a person and where I would be today.

I want to express my appreciation to my Bishop and Stake President. They are both great men and they mean a lot to me. I hope that they will be able to accept and understand our reasons for leaving. They have been tremendous examples to me and I hope that I can be like them in many ways.

This by no means puts an end to the feelings of resentment I have regarding the parts of the church that have been hidden from me for some many years. I know the process of getting over those feelings will take time. I am still researching the church's history as I am more intrigued by it then ever. I will continue to express my thoughts on what I find here on this blog as I find it somewhat cathartic.

You might be on your way out of Mormonism if....

2008-04-11T14:30:00.000-05:00

• Your heart rate increases dramatically every time you buy a coffee.
• The word "apostate" doesn't sound scary anymore, but instead fills you with a sense of pride.
• The word "endowment" makes you cringe far more than any curse word you know of.
• You realize that viewing bits of history that aren't "always helpful" has gone from being troublesome to fascinating.
• You receive nastygrams left by members in the middle of the night.
• 10% of your gross income goes to Fidelity.
• You stop including middle initials when referring to general authorities.
• You smirk when the latest temple dedicatory prayer in Latin America refers to the locals as "the children of Lehi."
• You start finding ways to use temple endowment language in everyday speech.
• You know who Fanny Alger is.
• The merest glance at the Book of Abraham facsimiles causes you to giggle.
• You declare the proverbial oxe to be in the mire from here on out, and start shopping and seeing movies on Sundays.
• You actually like Sundays.
• You watch a movie without even knowing or caring what it's rated.
• The waitress asks if you'd like a margarita, and rather than being offended by the question, you're offended by the low-quality liquor they use.
• If your temple recommend interview doesn't get past the first question.
• You refer to the former church president as "Gordo."
• If you suddenly find all the truth to be "useful."
• You think that girl's tattoo and extra earrings look pretty hot, actually.
• You no longer consider ice tea to be a "hot drink."
• You've actually inquired as to whether you could get a tithing refund.
• TBMs suddenly stop acknowledging you exist.
• You find that when discussing Mormonism online you write "the church" rather than "the Church".
• You walk shamelessly into Starbuck's, hold your head up high, and proclaim "I'll have a grande americano". Then when they ask "Room for cream?" you boldly affirm, "Yes!"
• You've had a few drinks and found that afterwards you curiously didn't turn into an abusing raving lunatic with no self-control.
• You've got a warm feeling inside. This means you either just drank something alcoholic, or you've been fantasizing about life without Mormonism.
• You think it's more important to be a good person than a good Mormon.
• You discover that most people are not looking for "the one true church."
• You wonder just how in the name of all that's holy they got you to believe that God cares what kind of underwear you wear.
• You feel more sympathy for the missionaries than you do pride.
• a relative says what you're doing will impact the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of others including those not yet born
• Another asks what kind of hideous sin you are covering up with this "concern" about church history
• you've met with your bishop and you ask him what he would do if he was bishop of the Nauvoo 4th Ward in 1842 and Joseph Smith asked for his wife or daughter for plural marriage
• you come to the conclusion that the teachings of the LDS church amount to no more than THE PHILOSOPHIES OF MEN MINGLED WITH SCRIPTURE
• Various forms of the word "offend" start appearing in proximity to your name during ward gossip sessions

This list was taken from www.mormoncurtain.com. Some of the information there is not worth a hill of beans and some Mormons will find parts a bit offensive, but there are some sections that are very well done.

The whole armour of God

2008-04-13T22:36:00.000-05:00

Tonight I was at an adult group where there was a small worship service. During the sermon, the pastor talked about putting on the whole armour of God. This is a topic I had heard a million times as a youth growing up and also as a missionary. Tonight, I noticed something that I had never seen before. Truth is the first thing needed when combating Satan.

Ephesians 6:13-18
13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.
14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place,
15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.
16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one.
17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
18 And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints.

This passage sets out the way we are supposed to prepare for battle against the evil in the world. The first thing we are to do is arm ourselves with truth. Then righteousness is needed, followed by the gospel of peace. The fourth thing is faith. The last few items you need are the helmet of salvation and the word of God (sword of the Spirit).

The order of preparation is very important here. It is common belief that Satan is constantly waging war against us so at any moment, we could be called upon to fight. This would mean that a fight might come even if we are not fully clothed and protected. Keeping this in mind, the first items we are told to put on must be the most vital for our survival. Now, I don’t know anything about biblical warfare and the importance of each article of clothing but I’d venture to guess that without the first item, the rest will not function properly. Ideas were taught in the Bible in terms that the people would understand so I am pretty sure the order of things made sense to those being spoken to.

This part of the sermon tonight really spoke to me. I am in my own search for the truth, not only about Mormonism, but about God in general.

I have been trying to think about times when I was taught that truth was this important and I can not thing of any. Pretty much all of the LDS teachings or sayings seem to put faith first.

Articles of Faith

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

D&C 4:5-6 (A scripture recited on a daily basis by all missionaries and also used to prepare young men to serve)

5 And faith, hope, charity and love, with an eye single to the glory of God, qualify him for the work.
6 Remember faith, virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, brotherly kindness, godliness, charity, humility, diligence.

Young Women Theme – recited each Sunday

We are daughters of our Heavenly Father, who loves us, and we love Him. We will “stand as witnesses of God at all times and in all things, and in all places” (Mosiah 18:9) as we strive to live the Young Women values, which are:

Faith
Divine Nature
Individual Worth
Knowledge
Choice and Accountability
Good Works and
Integrity

We believe as we come to accept and act upon these values,
we will be prepared to
strengthen home and family,
make and keep sacred covenants,
receive the ordinances of the temple,
and enjoy the blessings of exaltation.

Relief Society Declaration

We are beloved spirit daughters of God,
and our lives have meaning, purpose, and direction. As a worldwide sisterhood, we are united in our devotion to Jesus Christ, our Savior and Exemplar.

We are women of faith, virtue, vision, and charity who:
Increase our testimonies of Jesus Christ
through prayer and scripture study.

Seek spiritual strength by following the
promptings of the Holy Ghost.

Dedicate ourselves to strengthening
marriages, families, and homes.

Find nobility in motherhood
and joy in womanhood.

Delight in service and good works.

Love life and learning.

Stand for truth and righteousness.

Sustain the priesthood
as the authority of God on earth.

Rejoice in the blessings of the temple,
understand our divine destiny,
and strive for exaltation.

In all of these mottos and creeds, are the Mormon values that they are supposed to strive for and are models for proper living. In each example, faith comes first. While I know that faith is important, I think having faith in false teachings is extremely harmful. Faith must be anchored in truth if your testimony is to remain calm in troubled waters. The anchor must latch onto a strong and immovable rock, which is truth, so you do not drift away from the protection of God’s harbor.

A follow-up post about TRUTH (Part 1)

2008-04-16T10:02:00.000-05:00

I have been thinking about the need to find truth and found quotes from both early and current LDS leaders that address the subject. I have grouped them in two parts. This first post will show what early leaders said about truth.

I think a full, free talk is frequently of great use; we want nothing secret nor underhanded, and for one I want no association with things that cannot be talked about and will not bear investigation.
John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, V20 Ch1 p265

In the early days of the church, the leaders were very bold in their statements and did not shy away from discussion of doctrine.

Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds.
Orson Pratt, The Seer, Ch17 p15-16

I love this statement! I love it because it plainly states that logic and reason are valid ways to truth, not just the warm fuzzy feeling you get from the spirit. My approach to this blog is very similar to this. I try to put logic, reason and church history/doctrine together. When they are laid out, side by side, it becomes very easy to see where they contradict one another. Orson Pratt welcomed this added insight and encouraged such discussion for the betterment of the church and its members.

I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon a false foundation. They are the fanatics; and however ardent and zealous they may be, they may reason or argue on false premises till doomsday, and the result will be false. If our religion is of this character we want to know it; we would like to find a philosopher who can prove it to us.
Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v13 p271

Can I get an Amen?

Thank you Brother Brigham for making my point. A road made of false principles and ideas will always lead to a dead end. He must have been looking in a mirror when he wrote this sermon.

All of these quotes promote some type of discussion and truth. I see them as challenges to believers and non-believers alike to examine and think about all of the teachings they present and then take any issues to the leaders and they will listen with an open mind.

Do current leaders and members feel the same way?