Thursday, January 26, 2012

Got a prophet? NO BIBLE REQUIRED!

When investigating Mormonism, one is often confronted with conflicting and contradictory information.  One such area of contradiction is regarding the Mormon view of the Bible.  

The LDS Article of Faith #8 states:  "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly (emphasis added)."  In accordance with this Article of Faith, many Mormons do read the Bible and hold it in a place of esteem.

However, the church's founder, Joseph Smith taught that the Bible had been corrupted and was full of errors (History of the Church, Vol. 1, pg. 245).  The Bible is not in any way viewed as the final authority on matters of faith but is merely the first of the church's standard works.  And the multitude of translations are not to be trusted unless properly interpreted by LDS church doctrine.  Listen to this quote from Apostle James E. Talmage from the book "The Articles of Faith," page 237:

"There will be, there can be, no absolutely reliable translation of these or other scriptures unless it be effected through the gift of translation, as one of the endowments of the Holy Ghost.  The translator MUST have the spirit of the prophet if he would render in another tongue the prophet's words; and human wisdom alone leads not to that possession.  Let the Bible then be read reverently and with prayerful care, the reader ever seeking the light of the Spirit that he may discern between truth and the errors of men."

In Talmage's treatment of the Bible, he makes the Scriptures sound like a mine field of danger that have to be carefully navigated to avoid the many errors of men.  Wary and suspicious, he cautions the faithful to read reverently and to trust - not in the Scriptures - but in the prophet's gift of translation.  Translation does not come by mere natural means (the systematic study of foreign language and translation).  Reliable scripture translation can only come by the power of a spiritual gift.  This is the only type of translation that can be trusted.

This belief explains why Mormons place equal or more trust in the Book of Mormon and their other Standard Works than in the Bible.  However, this fails to explain why Mormons don't openly use the version of the Bible translated by Joseph Smith (The Inspired Bible).  They use to give away free copies of the King James Version of the Bible but you've never seen the church giving away free copies of the Inspired Version. 

Why on earth would Mormons continue to use and promote the King James Version of the Bible (which is allegedly corrupted, missing parts and full of errors) when they have a more reliable version of the Bible translated for them by inspiration of their founding prophet?  LDS general authority Bruce McConkie stated: 
"The Joseph Smith Translation, or Inspired Version, is a thousand times over the best Bible now existing on earth" (The Bible, a Sealed Book,” in A Symposium on the New Testament, 1984, 5 - quoted by Andrew C. Skinner, Ensign Magazine, June 1999).  Yet, a close examination of the Inspired Bible reveals that Smith's translation still lacks many of the plain and precious doctrines that are taught in Mormonism.  That's something to really think about.  

In any case, Mormons use the Bible, read the Bible and even believe the Bible - to a degree.  But is the Bible really absolutely required for Mormonism?  The answer, according to Mormon authorities, is NO.  This is because Mormonism is, admittedly, not based on the Bible.  It is based primarily on "prophetic revelation."  And as long as the church as a prophet to lead it, the church does not have to fully rely on the written word of God.  The Bible is more of a reference manual instead of the final authority.  In Mormonism, the final authority rests with MAN says, not with the word of God.  Listen to what Mormon leaders and authorities have said and taught over the years (emphasis added):   

"The position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormon Church, will be discussed from the point of view that it is the only Christian church that does not depend entirely upon the Bible for its teachings."  (LDS Apostle LeGrand Richards, "A Marvelous Work and A Wonder," pg. 1).

"This true knowledge of God and of his Son, Jesus Christ, has come again to the world in this dispensation, not through a study of the Bible, but through the actual appearance of these heavenly personages to the young Joseph Smith..." Ibid, pg. 23

"This makes it easy to understand why the everlasting gospel could not be discovered through reading the Bible alone..."  Ibid, pg. 40

"Joseph Smith learned this great truth, not by reading the Bible..."  Ibid, pgs. 88, 89

"He did not get, neither could he have gotten it, by reading the Bible only."  Ibid, pg. 69

"As we have already pointed out, Joseph Smith did not get this information from reading the Bible or any other book written on this subject, but by the revelations of the Lord to him."  Ibid, pg. 100

"The knowledge of all these things, as the reader will note, does not come to us primarily through reading the Bible..."  Ibid, pg. 128

"The biblical account of the responsibilities and functions of the deacon is almost wholly lacking in detail.  Except for meager references... we would have known nothing... if we were compelled to rely upon the Bible alone for guidance."  Ibid, pg. 155

"While the Bible makes plain most of the offices that should be in the church of Christ, it fails to explain the duties of the various offices."  Ibid, pg. 160

"We therefore received it by revelation and not by reading the Bible."  Ibid, pg. 184

"The glorious principle of eternal marriage did not come to the Prophet Joseph Smith by reading the Bible..." Ibid, pg. 190

"Had the Bible, therefore, been correctly translated, much of the present confusion would have been eliminated."  Ibid, pg. 336

"Joseph smith, or any other man, could not have obtained all this information by reading the Bible... It came from God."  Ibid, pg. 411

"Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible.  ...Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written." (2 Nephi 29:6, 10)
[Note: This verse in 2 Nephi is inferring that those who believe in, trust in, adhere to only the Bible... are FOOLS.]  

"...for behold they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.  And all this have they done that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men" (1 Nephi 13:26-27)

Next, we will share a few other interesting quotes about the Bible from other LDS sources:

"There is not that person on the face of the earth who has had the privilege of learning the Gospel of Jesus Christ from these two books, that can say that one is true, and the other is false.  No Latter-day Saint, no man or woman, can say the Book of Mormon is true, and at the same time say that the Bible is untrue.  If one be true, both are; and if one be false, both are false."  (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 1:39).

[Note:  This attitude towards the Bible may sadly explain why those ex-Mormons who discover the truth about the LDS church stop believing in the Bible all together.] 

"We are informed in the Book of Mormon that the Hebrew scriptures when "forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God," and after they went forth from the Jews many changes were made, and "many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away."  (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:191).

"Many important points touching the salvation of men, had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled." (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Volume 1, page 245 )

"Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 327).

"... who in his right mind could for one moment suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide?  Who knows that even one verse of the Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?" (LDS Apostle Orson Pratt, Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon, pg. 47).

"The most reliable way to measure the accuracy of any biblical passage is not by comparing different texts, but by comparison with the Book of Mormon and modern-day revelations." (Church News, June 20, 1992, pg. 3, quoting a letter from the First Presidency [Presidents Benson, Hinckley and Monson] dated May 22, 1992, to all the Church).

"That is why our original statement is consistent: that this is the only Christian church in the world that did not have to rely upon the Bible for its organization and government and that if all the Bibles in the world had been destroyed we would still be teaching the same principles and administering the same ordinances as introduced and taught by Jesus and the prophets."  (LeGrand Richards, A Marvelous Work and A Wonder, pg. 40).

In sharing these historical quotes and statements from LDS authorities, we are not asserting that Mormons do not believe in the Bible.  It is very obvious that they do - BUT in a limited capacity.  This is by their own admission.  They must believe that the Bible is corrupt and lacking the fulness of the Gospel because this is how they justify an open canon of on-going revelation.

They can continue to receive ongoing revelations and scriptures because they believe their church is led by a living prophet of God.  And according to Mormon teaching, what the current prophet says IS the final word, regardless of the scriptures or what past prophets have said.  

Below we share several excerpts of the first 4 of the "14 Fundamentals" in following THE PROPHET as given in an address by former church president Ezra Taft Benson on February 26, 1980 at BYU (with emphasis added):

"First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything...

Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the Standard Works.

...Brother Joseph [Smith] turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, ‘Brother Brigham I want you to go to the podium and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.’ Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: ‘There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now,’ said he, ‘when compared with the living oracles THOSE BOOKS ARE NOTHING TO ME; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation.  I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.’ That was the course he pursued.  When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; ‘Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.’” (Conference Report, October 1897, pp. 18–19.)

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

...the most important reading we can do is any of the words of the prophet contained each month in our Church Magazines. Our instructions about what we should do for each six months are found in the General Conference addresses which are printed in the Church magazine.

Beware of those who would set up the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray..."  [end quote]

Click here for more information from the LDS church on the 14 Fundamentals of following the prophet.

We can clearly see that when it comes to Mormonism, the Bible is useful but not completely trustworthy and definitely not required.  The Latter-day saints are dutifully instructed to place more trust in the current prophet than in anything else.  

Christians on the other hand place their full trust in Christ and in the Scriptures.  Christians consider the Mormon's allegiance to a prophet to be foolish and cultish.  Although Mormons are doing their best to redefine Christianity, placing one's full trust in the redemptive work of Christ and following Him (and not another man) is what defines Christianity. 

The Bible says: 

"Thus says the LORD:  “Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength..." (Jeremiah 17:5)

"And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of MEN."  (Matthew 15:9)

"Jesus said to him, “I AM THE WAY, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except THROUGH ME."  (John 14:6)

God doesn't place any prophet above His Word; on the contrary, He judges all prophets by His Word (Deuteronomy 18:22).  He has magnified His word above His name (Psalm 138:2).  His word is inspired and profitable for doctrine, correction and instruction (2 Timothy 3:16).  God's Word is living, powerful and is sharper than any two-edged sword (Hebrews 4:12, Ephesians 6:17).  His Word will NEVER pass away (Matthew 24:35).   

Christians can take great confidence and comfort in the everlasting Word of God!  All things are subject to judgment by the word of God (John 12:48) and the Scriptures cannot be broken (John 10:35, Luke 24:44).  Christ upheld the Word of God for in the Gospel of John we learn that in the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was GodThat Word became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14).  Later in the New Testament we read:

"His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God."  (Revelation 19:12-13)

Mormons believe that God was not able to preserve His precious Word for all generations.  However, Bible-believing Christians reject such a notion; we believe in an all-powerful God who is able to preserve His Word and His plan of salvation for all generations.  We don't worship the Bible, but in embracing Christ we embrace His Word.  Within the Bible are the words of eternal life; it is not a corrupted addendum.  And our Jesus Christ alone is our Prophet, High Priest, Savior and King.  

"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son..."  (Hebrews 1:1-2).

For a detailed refutation of the LDS claims that the Bible is corrupted, please visit this helpful article at CARM (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry):  

(c) 2012 Mormon & LDS Facts

Sunday, January 22, 2012


While reviewing this month's Ensign magazine, an interesting claim appears.  It says:

"One of the common themes of the gospel of Jesus Christ is that God has a plan.  It is described with various names reflecting its various parts - the plan of happiness, the plan of mercy, the plan of redemption, the plan of salvation (see Alma 42:5-31).  Nowhere is the plan more clearly defined and taught than in the Book of Mormon."  - Elder Stanley G. Ellis (of the Seventy), Pg. 32, Jan. 2012 - emphasis added.

However, in reviewing Alma 42:5-31 and it's "clearly defined" explanation of God's plan of salvation, one should be immediately struck by what is NOT there: the mention of Jesus Christ!   

There are many problems with Alma's "clearly defined" explanation of the gospel.  But this one is the biggest.  Christ's atonement is implied but not expressly stated.  With regard to God's plan of salvation, the most important person (Christ) and the most important act (Christ's death & shed blood) is completely absent from this "clear" explanation.  One reason apparently, is because the Book of Alma was supposedly written before Christ was born - around 73 B.C.  Another reason, we believe, is because the Book of Mormon is not truly inspired of God - as is the Bible. 

Instead of bringing total clarity, the passage is actually confusing and poses several problems.  For instance, Alma 42:5 says that if Adam had eaten of the tree of life to live forever, the word of God would have become VOID and the great plan of salvation would have been frustrated.  The verse basically teaches that Adam's actions had the power to nullify God's word!  It also gives foundational support to the LDS teaching that the fall of Adam was actually a GOOD and necessary part of God's plan of salvation. 

In contrast, the Bible teaches God's word is forever settled in heaven, will not return to Him void and will never pass away (Psalm 119:89, Isaiah 55:11 and Matthew 24:35).  The Bible teaches that the fall was BAD and resulted in sin and death (Romans 5:12-14).  It teaches that God takes no pleasure in death (Ezekiel 18:32) and that the remission (forgiveness) of sins could only come, regrettably, through the shedding of blood (Hebrews 9:22).

(For more detailed information about the view of man's fall in Mormonism, we recommend the following article: 

The next verse, Alma 42:6, is also contradictory to the Bible.  It says:  "But behold, it was appointed unto man to die - therefore, as they were cut off from the tree of life they should be cut off from the face of the earth - and man became lost forever, yea, they became fallen man."

In the Bible, we learn that the fall of man caused death and a separation from God, and that this fall would be eventually be remedied by the woman's future seed who would bruise the head of the serpent aka Satan (Genesis 3:15).  The Bible never teaches that just as man was cut off from the tree of life he should likewise be cut off from the face of the earth and lost forever.  Likewise, verses 8-10 also reveal confusing statements about "reclamation from temporal and spiritual death" being necessary so that the plan of happiness would not be destroyed.

Alma 42:15-16 also presents confusing ideas about God himself providing world-wide atonement to appease the demands of justice that He might be a "perfect God."  But the Bible reveals that God is already perfect and has always been perfect.

Verse 16 says that repentance could not come to men except there be a punishment as eternal as the life of a soul -"affixed opposite the plan of happiness."  Repentance could not come except there be eternal punishment?  Sorry, but that makes no sense at all.  The chapter goes on to describe the necessity of sin, law & punishment so that men might be able to repent and satisfy the justice of God. 

If you didn't know any other scriptures about salvation but this chapter in Alma, you would never even know that Jesus Christ or His death had anything to do with salvation at all.  And why would you?  Alma's "plan of happiness" was written before the coming of the Lord!  Also predating the time of Christ, in the Jewish Bible (the Old Testament), you never come across the concept of a "plan of happiness".  Yes, obedient living brings blessing and happiness but the focus of the Law was not happiness.  The focus of the Law was blood covenant and redemption from sin.

The Law was a covenant with the people of Israel to sanctify them (set them apart) from all the other people on the earth.  They were to be a people, holy for the Lord, who would honor God with sacrifices and obedience to his commandments and ordinances.  This understanding still permeates Jewish thinking to this day.  The idea that God himself would atone for the sins of the world (Alma 42:15) AND reveal that part of His plan BEFORE the Messiah was even born simply sounds like an idea that the author of Alma "borrowed" from the New Testament quite frankly.  It just doesn't make sense.      

Mormonism claims that the most clearly defined explanation of the gospel in all of scripture is found in the Book of Alma.  However the Apostle Paul states that the true gospel of Christ was HIDDEN as a mystery until his time - after Christ's death & resurrection (Romans 16:25-27, Ephesians 6:19). 

"Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began but NOW made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith— to God, alone wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen."  (Romans 16:25-27 NKJV)

Also to the Corinthians he mentions the mystery of God:
"However, we speak wisdom among those who are mature, yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.  But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, which NONE of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.  But as it is written:

      “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
      Nor have entered into the heart of man
      The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”

But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit.  For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God."  (1 Corinthians 2:6-10)

According to Paul and the other writers of the New Testament, the good news that Christ's death fulfilled the law of Moses and provided full salvation for the repentant Jew and Gentile alike was astonishing and revolutionary!  Coming from an Old Covenant mindset, it was actually hard for many of them to understand and receive at first (see Acts 10 & 11).  This concept, this mystery, this good news of salvation was not clear before and during the time of Christ.  It was a mystery that was revealed in the process of time.    

Many of the Jews were expecting the Messiah to deliver the people of Israel from Roman rule and domination.  They were looking for the former glory of Israel to be restored and expecting the world-wide peace as the prophets foretold.  However, Christ did not fulfill the Scriptures in the way they expected.  Even His closest disciples did not understand - even after His resurrection.  The risen Christ had to take time to explain the Old Testament prophecies and "open up" their understanding of the Scriptures (Luke 24).  They were further commanded to WAIT for the promise of the Holy Spirit in Jerusalem so that they could be empowered to preach the good news with confirming signs & wonders (Acts 1 & 2, Mark 16:15-20). 

Yet the gospel in Alma was supposedly revealed and recorded about 70 years before Christ was even born.  The contradicting doctrines and views present a serious problem as to which is true and trustworthy:  The Bible or the Book of Mormon.  And apparently Mormons put more faith in the Book of Mormon than in the Bible (see Article of Faith #8).  Even while flipping through this month's edition of Ensign magazine, there was article after article about the Book of Mormon with very little attention given to the Bible.  We, on the other hand, believe the Bible should be the main course and that anything contradictory should be cast aside and rejected (Galatians 1:8-9).     

We understand that Mormons who teach or believe that the Book of Mormons shares the clearest explanation of the gospel believe so sincerely, but we sincerely disagree.  Not only does the passage in Alma present theological problems that contradict the Bible, how can any clear definition of salvation be completely devoid of CHRIST and, in particular, and the mention of his redeeming death for the sins of the world?  Alma 42:5-31 tries to come close, but it does not come close enough. 

How can Alma 42:5-31 be considered clearer than John 3:16?

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Than Ephesians 1:7?

In Him [Christ] we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace;

Than Romans 5:8-11?

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.  Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.  For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.  And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

We could go on and on citing more encouraging passages of Scripture that clearly define God's plan of salvation - apart from the Book of Mormon.  Additionally, the Biblical gospel is so simple & succinct that even a child can understand it and embrace it for full salvation.  The Bible's message has been unchanged for thousands of years and what you see is what you get.

Mormonism, on the other hand, actually has additional doctrines and requirements which are not included in the Book of Mormon, which cannot be revealed upfront ("milk before the meat") and cannot be fulfilled until one is of the proper age and worthiness (i.e. the requirement of celestial marriage, etc).

In conclusion, we find it expedient to confront the false teachings of Mormonism so that all may know and understand the true gospel of God.  The Book of Mormon does NOT contain the most clearly defined plan of salvation.  The most clearly defined explanation of God's salvation for mankind always was and always will be in the Bible. 

(c) 2012 Mormon & LDS Facts

Sunday, January 8, 2012


We believe that the doctrine of blood atonement & the following statements about it, do not belong in any church that claims to follow Jesus.  It was never taught by Jesus or His Apostles.

"Vengeance is mine ... and I have taken a little..."

In 1978 a Lawyer contacted Bruce McConkie to ask him if Blood Atonement was a doctrine of the Church, and this was McConkie’s reply:

“If by blood atonement is meant the shedding of the blood of men to atone in some way for their own sins, the answer is No.” (Thomas McAffee Letter, 1978)

Three paragraphs later, McConkie qualifies the statement with this comment:

“In order to understand what Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Charles W. Penrose and others have said, WE MUST MENTION that there are some sins for which the blood of Christ alone does not cleanse a person. These include blasphemy against the Holy Ghost (as defined by the Church) and that murder which is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice. However, and this cannot be stressed too strongly, this LAW has not been given to the Church at any time in this dispensation.” [Yeah, and that’s what Smith said about Polygamy when he was practicing it] There are two crucial points that Mr. McConkie makes and it is that there ARE some sins for which the blood of Christ does not ‘pay in full’ & that this law has not been given to the Church at any time in this dispensation. He then goes on:

“There simply is no such thing among us as a doctrine of blood atonement that grants a remission of sins or confers any other benefit upon a person because his own blood is shed for sins. Let me say categorically and unequivocally that this doctrine can only operate in a day when there is no separation of Church and State and when the power to take life is vested in the ruling theocracy as was the case in the day of Moses. From the day of Joseph Smith to the present there has been no single instance of so-called blood atonement under any pretext.”

He then says this, which is an outright lie & it is sad that those that call themselves Apostles of the Lord Jesus feel the need to have to stoop to such deception in order to deny something in the light of ‘Mainstreaming’ their Church.

“Brigham Young and the others were speaking of a theoretical principle that operated in ages past and not in either their or our day. As I recallBrigham Young’s illustrations were taken from the day of Moses and the history of ancient Israel and could not be applied today.” (source above)

How long did it take him to come up with this totally flimsy and deceptive statement? Why did he put ‘As I Recall' in the sentence? Did he not have every statement and diary in the Church Historians Office at his disposal? I find it hard to believe that the ‘Scripture King’ of the Mormon Church could not know about the following quotes. Keep in mind that this is what McConkie said:

1. There is no DOCTRINE in the Mormon Church about ‘the shedding of the blood of men to atone in some way for their own sins.

2. There are some sins for which the blood of Jesus ALONE does not cleanse a person.

3. He says there is no such thing as a doctrine of blood atonement that grants a remission of sins or confers any other benefit upon a person because his own blood is shed for sins.

4. This DOCTRINE (didn’t he just say there was none?) can only operate in a day where there is no separation of Church & State.

5. From the day of Smith to the present there has been no instance of blood atonement under any pretext, also concerning blood atonement, there “has no application in any dispensation when there is a separation of Church and State”.

6. Any statements made by leaders pertains to a theoretical principle that was neither revealed of practiced by the Church.

7. Blood Atonement is only a synonym for Capital Punishment. Well that should be the end of it, the ‘Apostle’ has spoken. But is it? Is McConkie lying? Let's see.

1. There is no doctrine: A). False. McConkie himself said there was, three paragraphs after he said there was none.

2. McConkie gets this right. A). True. There IS a Doctrine on Blood Atonement.

3. There is no such doctrine that grants a remission of sins because his own blood is shed…A). Really? Read these quotes, and this is by no means ALL of them:

“if they are covenant breakers we need a place designated, where we can shed their blood.” -Jedediah Grant, JOD:4:50 (1856)

Speaking of covenants, you can include the Temple Ceremony under Blood Atonement, for it was taught (before they changed it) that if you thought you might babble about what you learned there, you would voluntarily have your throat slit. ( I can see 'em lining up for that one!)

"Let me suppose a case. Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case; & under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands… There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt.The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it;... (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p. 247)

Gee, looks like it's a few more sins than murder..but these guys were just bloodthirsty, cause they list more:

“… if men turn traitors to God and His servants, their blood will surely be shed, or else they will be damned, and that too according to their covenants” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, p.375).

“If you want to know what to do with a thief that you may find stealing, I say kill him on the spot, & never suffer him to commit another iniquity. I will prove by my works whether I can mete out justice to such persons, or not. I would consider it just as much my duty to do that, as to baptize a man for the remission of his sins.” – Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 1, pp. 108-109

What did Jesus say about if some one stole your coat from you? KILL HIM ON THE SPOT? I don't think so. He said give them your cloak too. But then, Young was pretty rich when he died, wasn't he?

I swore by the Eternal Gods that if men in our midst would not stop this cursed work of stealing & counterfeiting their throats should be cut” (“Manuscript History of Brigham Young,” Feb. 24,1847).

Notice the rhetoric here. They are not talking about past dispensations, they are talking about the current one.

I know, I know, it was the old west, they were worried about food, yeah that sure justified the rhetoric (& subsequent actions) from followers of Jesus. Sure. You bet.

4. Blood Atonement can only operate where there is no separation of Church and state. A). False. See this quote:

“The people of Utah are the only ones in this nation who have taken effectual measures… to prevent adulteries and criminal connections between the sexes. The punishment, for these crimes is death to both male and female. And this law is written on the hearths and printed in the thoughts of the whole people.” – Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p. 223 (I know SOME things in the SEER were said to be ‘false doctrine’ but this is not one of the ones mentioned in the Rebuke of 1865)

We would not kill a man, of course, unless we killed him to save him…” – Apostle Jedediah M. Grant, Deseret News, July 27, 1854

5. No instances of Blood Atonement Under ANY circumstances…or in ANY dispensation where there is a separation of Church & State:

A. False. Here is one (according to Heber C. Kimball) that took place at the time of Christ:

“Jesus said to His disciples, `Ye are the salt of the earth, and if salt loses its saving principle, it is then good for nothing but to be cast out.’ Instead of reading it just as it is, almost all of you read it as it is not. Jesus meant to say, `If you have lost the saving principles, you Twelve Apostles, and you believe in my servants the Twelve, you shall be like unto the salt that has lost its saving principles: it is henceforth good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under foot of men.’ Judas lost that saving principle, and they took him and killed him it is said in the Bible that his bowels gushed out, but they actually kicked him until his bowels came out.” (Heber C. Kimball, JOD:6:125,126) Wasn't that in the Temple Rituals too? The disembowelment procedure? (And the Israelites were living under Roman law.)

Here is a chilling account by Mormon Bishop John D. Lee of Blood Atonement in action:

“Rasmos Anderson was a Danish man who came to Utah… He had married a widow lady somewhat older than himself… At one of the meetings during the reformation Anderson and his step-daughter confessed that they had committed adultery… they were rebaptized and received into full membership. They were then placed under covenant that if they again committed adultery, Anderson should suffer death. 

Soon after this a charge was laid against Anderson before the Council, accusing him of adultery with his step-daughter. This Council was composed of Klingensmith and his two counselors; it was the Bishop’s Council. Without giving Anderson any chance to defend himself or make a statement, the Council voted that Anderson must die for violating his covenants.

Klingensmith went to Anderson and notified him that the orders were that he must die by having his throat cut, so that the running of his blood would atone for his sins.Anderson, being a firm believer in the doctrines and teachings of the Mormon Church, made no objections… His wife was ordered to prepare a suit of clean clothing, in which to have her husband buried… she being directed to tell those who should inquire after her husband that he had gone to California.

“Klingensmith, James Haslem, Daniel McFarland and John M. Higbee dug a grave in the field near Cedar City, and that night, about 12 o’clock, went to Anderson’s house and ordered him to make ready to obey Council. Anderson got up… and without a word of remonstrance accompanied those that he believed were carrying out the will of the “Almighty God.” They went to the place where the grave was prepared; Anderson knelt upon the side of the grave and prayed.

Klingensmith and his company then cut Anderson’s throat from ear to ear and held him so that his blood ran into the grave..

“As soon as he was dead they dressed him in his clean clothes, threw him into the grave and buried him. They then carried his bloody clothing back to his family, and gave them to his wife to wash… She obeyed their orders…. Anderson was killed just before the Mountain Meadows massacre. The killing of Anderson was then considered a religious duty and a just act.

It was justified by all the people, for they were bound by the same covenants, and the least word of objection to thus treating the man who had broken his covenant would have brought the same fate upon the person who was so foolish as to raise his voce against any act committed by order of the Church authorities.” (Confessions of John D. Lee)

May 25, 1861: While on a trip to the southern settlements with Brigham Young, we visited the Mountain Meadow Monument put up at the burial place of 120persons killed by Indians in 1857. The pile of stone was about 12 feet high, but beginning to tumble down. A wooden cross was placed on top with the following words: Vengeance is mine and I will repay saith the Lord. President Young said it should be "Vengeance is mine and I have taken a little." (Wilford Woodruff Diary)

6. Theoretical Principle never revealed or practiced by the Church. A). False. See quotes above.

7. Blood Atonement ONLY a synonym for capital punishment. A). False. As shown above there were many other sins covered under the doctrine. This statement is really partially true, & a smokescreen to hide what Blood Atonement really is.

These are all quotes by Mormons. But again, I will say, there is NO REASON for ANY statements like the above to be made by any ‘so-called’ followers of Jesus. HIS teaching was clear: Turn the other cheek. It is interesting that both Bishop John D. Lee & another murderer, Bill Hickman BOTH had the ‘Restoration of Blessings’ ordinance done for them. This shows that the Church condones the murders they committed, and wanted to make sure they would ‘get their blessings’ and wives in the world to come. _johnny

*This article was shared for educational and informational purposes only.  It is not directed against any one person or group.  We as a Christian organization do not believe in personal blood shed or personal blood atonement and are against all forms of religious violence.  - The Admin Team

(c) 2011 Mormon & LDS Facts Ministry

Friday, January 6, 2012

If you can't beat the Facts - JOIN THEM!

Just when you think a Mormon apologist can't stoop any lower, they pull out stunts that never cease to amaze:  Like taking the name of a well-known Christian ministry organization and creating a copy-cat page complete with inflammatory hate-speech (i.e. apostate, anti-Mormons).

Facebook has already removed plagiarized word-for-word content that he stole from the original Facts page to his copy-cat page.  We can't help but wonder what he might do next?  Steal Johnny Stephenson's online identity to make him a spokesman for his church?  Sadly, we wouldn't put it past him. 

Is this what they teach Mormon apologists to do in order to harass or silence the opposition?  Why would someone steal another organization's name if it were not for the purpose to harass and deceive?  The name of his church doesn't incorporate the terms Mormon or LDS.  And aren't there enough pro-Mormon sites on Facebook and the internet?

For almost 2 years, Mormon & LDS Facts has been the working name of a Christian non-profit organization comprised of ex-Mormons and concerned Christians with the mission of sharing our understanding of LDS facts & history, as well as the testimonials of former members. We've always told everyone upfront who we are and what our mission is.  Our official home base is located in the state of New York.  We are not richly funded like the Mormon church; we ask for no donations and work free of charge.  Our official website is currently being re-designed and we are currently working on publishing several literary works - all by the volunteers of our organization. 

Mormons like Berman may think that we are being deceptive by using "Mormon" lingo as a part of our name.  However the same can be said about the organization he represents.  We believe that their church is deceptive and misleading in many ways.  However, this is not why we chose that name; we chose the name because it describes the niche of our Christian ministry and outreach.  We seek to explore, examine and expose the FACTS about Mormonism that the public deserves to know but are often hidden or suppressed.  

If someone does not like who we are or what we do, we are fine with that; we don't have to engage them and are quite happy to pursue our mission in peace.  We do not engage in or support hatred or violence against anyone of any other beliefs and do not seek to infringe upon the rights of others.  However, we have come under attack by those who wish to silence us and slander us with false information and accusations.  It is for this purpose we feel the need to publicly respond. 

Timothy Berman is currently the most outspoken critic of our ministry and those who support us.  He has even dedicated pages of his "apologist" blog in effort to discredit us.  He has openly admitted to "reporting abuses" while at the same time denies any involvement.  He also claims that he did not "steal" private Facebook conversations for malicious purposes and that is a LIE.  Perhaps Timothy Berman doesn't know the difference between private and public but the comments that he used for his blog were NOT part of a public conversation.

He further believes it's OK to publicly publish the private conversations of others, but asserts that it is against Facebook privacy rules to make copies of truly public information.  We have to wonder if he's really ever READ the Facebook rules regarding what's public and what's private.  Based on his confused and misleading assertions, we can only guess he has not or is making up his own set of rules.  So we're attaching what Facebook really says about what is public and what is private.  Private posts are not intended for public visibility.  Public posts can be seen by potentially anyone on the internet.

Facebook clearly says for all users:  "When you publish content or information using the PUBLIC SETTING, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture)."  (emphasis mine)

When they changed a privacy setting from everyone to public - they made it clear that the "public" includes everyone on the internet.  

We don't need to get permission to access and use the information that Berman shares publicly.  However, Timothy Berman misappropriated (stole, hacked, whatever you want to call it) a PRIVATE conversation and used it for public slander.  He doesn't seem to understand the difference between private and public content and he doesn't seem to be able to understand basic Facebook rules.  Why should we listen to Timothy Berman (seeing how he is running thin on integrity) about the supposed protocol of cutting & pasting quotes when a picture is worth a thousand words?

Unlike Berman's actions, every screen shot here of Berman's activities (and those which will be forthcoming) are copies of comments, posts and activities that were made PUBLICLY on the internet.  Google his name and see for yourself.  As of right now, Timothy Berman has his personal Facebook wall set to PUBLIC for a number of his posts.  How do we know?  Because anyone on Facebook (and possibly the internet) can click on his name and what he's saying publicly.  The choice to make wall posts public or private belongs to every adult on Facebook and is managed in their privacy settings.

The authors of this blog post are not Facebook friends with Timothy Berman and never want to be.  However we were able to go to his personal profile and see his public comments which include the announcement that he just created a new "Mormon & LDS Facts" page.  This infringement is apparently celebrated by other Mormons and copy-cat pages.

He claims that we are not willing to have a decent conversation but the evidence is clear (from his personal comments and the comments he has on his Facebook pages) that he is the one who wishes to SILENCE those who hold a different view and does not want them to speak. 

It appears that Timothy Berman has one agenda:  Destroy the press.  ...And if you can't beat them, steal their name.  ... And apparently he does all this in the name of Jesus Christ?!   

He invites us to answer his allegations one by one but we will decline.  After slandering us, stealing our ministry name, and violating our last agreement by re-publishing his slanderous blog post, he has already proven that he lacks the decency and character of one claiming to be a representative of Christ.  Going back and forth to answer Timothy Berman at this point does not appear to be the best use of our time and certainly we have better things to do.  Nevertheless, we are praying for Timothy Berman.  We believe he sincerely needs it.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Historical Mormon Quotes on the Black Race (Part 1)

In 1978, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints finally opened their priesthood to all worthy males without respect to race or color.  But prior to that time, for about 130 years, members of the Negro race or others with colored skin were generally denied the ability to hold the priesthood.  This was due to a belief that Black skin represented a curse and were subsequently unworthy to hold the keys of the priesthood.  Even though removing the "ban on Blacks" is viewed as a step in a positive direction, the church has never formally reversed it's teaching or position that Black skin is cursed due to a lack of valiance or performance in the LDS pre-existence.  

At this time we would like to share some of the teachings and quotes that supported the church's ban on Blacks followed up with several verses from the Bible to contrast the Biblical view of race to the historical Mormon view.

This post is shared for education and information purposes only and is not intended to be directed against any one person or organization.  Furthermore, as a Christian ministry, we are against racial discrimination and do not support it, encourage it or condone racism in any way.    

The Admin Team,
Mormon & LDS Facts Ministry

From Joseph Smith, prophet and founder of the LDS Church:
“Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization.” ( History of the Church, Volume 5, pages 218-219)

Mormon Scriptures:  God curses bad races with black skin

"And the Lord had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."  (2 Nephi 5:21)

"For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people."  (Pearl of Great Price, Moses 7:8)

Other commentary and quotes by LDS authorities:

"THE NEGROES ARE NOT EQUAL WITH OTHER RACES where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, ...but this inequality is not of man's origin. IT IS THE LORD'S DOING, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the LACK OF SPIRITUAL VALIANCE OF THOSE CONCERNED IN THEIR FIRST ESTATE [the Mormon pre-existence]."  (LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 527 - 528, 1966 edition, emphasis added).

"Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty."  (LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 527, 1966 edition).

"Is there reason then why the type of birth we receive in this life is not A REFLECTION OF OUR WORTHINESS or LACK OF IT IN THE PRE-EXISTENT LIFE? ...[C]an we account in any other way for the birth of some of the children of God in DARKEST AFRICA, or in FLOOD-RIDDEN CHINA, or among the STARVING HORDES OF INDIA, while some of the rest of us are born here in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that BECAUSE OF PERFORMANCE IN OUR PRE-EXISTENCE some of us are born as CHINESE, some as JAPANESE, some as Latter-day Saints. ...A CHINESE, BORN IN CHINA WITH A DARK SKIN, and with all the HANDICAPS OF THAT RACE seems to have little opportunity. But think of the mercy of God to Chinese people who are willing to accept the gospel. IN SPITE OF WHATEVER THEY MIGHT HAVE DONE IN THE PRE-EXISTENCE TO JUSTIFY BEING BORN OVER THERE AS CHINAMEN, if they now, in this life accept the gospel and live it the rest of their lives they can have the Priesthood, go to the temple and receive endowments and sealings, and that means they can have exaltation. Isn't the mercy of God marvelous? Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood.... THIS NEGRO, WHO, IN THE PRE-EXISTENCE LIVED THE TYPE OF LIFE WHICH JUSTIFIED THE LORD IN SENDING HIM TO EARTH IN THE LINEAGE OF CAIN WITH A BLACK SKIN, AND POSSIBLY BEING BORN IN DARKEST AFRICA.... IN SPITE OF ALL HE DID IN THE PRE-EXISTENT LIFE, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. IF THAT NEGRO IS FAITHFUL ALL HIS DAYS, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. HE WILL GO THERE AS A SERVANT, but he will get celestial glory." LDS "Apostle" Mark E. Petersen, "Race Problems - As They Affect the Church," Address delivered at Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, August 27, 1954, as quoted in Jerald and Sandra Tanner's book entitled "The Changing World of Mormonism," p. 294. Note: Allegedly, even "if that Negro is faithful all his days," he will never achieve equality with his "white and delightsome" Mormon brethren. Instead he allegedly will go to the celestial kingdom "AS A SERVANT!"  (Via

"And after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham's wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that THE DEVIL SHOULD HAVE A REPRESENTATION UPON THE EARTH as well as God... (LDS Prophet John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 22, p. 304, 1881, emphasis added).

You see some classes of the human family that are BLACK, UNCOUTH, UNCOMELY, DISAGREEABLE and LOW in their habits, WILD, and seemingly DEPRIVED OF NEARLY ALL THE BLESSINGS OF THE INTELLIGENCE that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been KILLED, and THAT WOULD HAVE PUT A TERMINATION TO THAT LINE OF HUMAN BEINGS. This was not to be, and the Lord put A MARK upon him, which is THE FLAT NOSE AND BLACK SKIN. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race -- that they should be the "servants of servants;" and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree." (LDS Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 290, emphasis added).

Ham will continue to be servant of servants, as the Lord decreed, until the curse is removed. Will the present struggle [the U.S. civil war] free the slave?  No.... Can you destroy the decrees of the Almighty? You cannot.  (LDS Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p. 250, 1863).

Shall I tell you the LAW OF GOD in regard to the AFRICAN race? If the WHITE MAN who belongs to the CHOSEN SEED mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is DEATH ON THE SPOT. This will ALWAYS be so."  (LDS Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, p.110, 1863, emphasis added).

"Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest kind of education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it.  I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world.  But let them enjoy these things among themselves."  (LDS Apostle Mark E. Petersen, "Race Problems - As They Affect The Church," Address delivered at Brigham Young University, August 27, 1954)

"Though he was a rebel and an ASSOCIATE OF LUCIFER IN PRE-EXISTENCE, ...Cain managed to attain the privilege of mortal birth.... [H]e came out in open rebellion, fought God, worshiped Lucifer, and slew Abel.... AS A RESULT OF HIS REBELLION, CAIN WAS CURSED WITH A DARK SKIN; HE BECAME THE FATHER OF THE NEGROES, and THOSE SPIRITS WHO ARE NOT WORTHY to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage.  (LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp. 108-109, 1966 edition, emphasis added).

Church Publications Offer Commentary on Racist LDS Scriptures

"The Book of Abraham is rich both in doctrine and in historical incidents. Of the latter the fact of the large influence (if not identity) of Egyptian religious ideas in Chaldea in the days of Abraham is established; the descent of the black race, Negro, from Cain, the first murderer; the preservation of that race through the flood by the wife of Ham--"Egyptus," which in the Chaldean signifies "Egypt," "which signifies that which is forbidden"--the descendants of "Egyptus" were cursed as pertaining to the priesthood--that is, they were barred from holding that divine power; the origin also of the Egyptians--these things, together with the account of Abraham migrating from Chaldea to Egypt, constitute the chief historical items that are contained in the book."  (Comprehensive History of the Church, Vol.2, Ch.47, Pg.128)

"History and common observation show that these predictions have been fulfilled to the letter. The descendants of Ham, besides a black skin which has ever been a curse that has followed an apostate of the holy priesthood, as well as a black heart, have been servants to both Shem and Japheth, and the abolitionists are trying to make void the curse of God, but it will require more power than man possesses to counteract the decrees of eternal wisdom."  (Times and Seasons, Vol. 6, Pg. 857)

What the Bible says:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.  (Galatians 3:28)

"...He (God) gives to all life, breath, and all things. And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings;"  (Acts 17:25-27)

"Yet to ALL who received Him, to those who believed in His name, he gave the right to BECOME CHILDREN OF GOD -- children born NOT OF NATURAL DESCENT, nor of human decision or a husband's will, BUT BORN OF GOD."  (John 1:12)

"For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to ALL men."  (Titus 2:11)

"This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to ALL who believe. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE, for ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."  (Romans 3:22-24)

"But he who does wrong will be repaid for what he has done, and there is no partiality."  (Colossians 3:25)

"Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality.  But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him."  (Acts 10:34)

We hope each reader will decide for themselves but, in our opinion, we believe the evidence is clear:  The historical teachings of Mormonism does not agree with the Bible when it comes to the Black race and does not represent a restoration of the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

(c) 2012  Mormon & LDS Facts  (Photo Credit:  africa)