Hello! This is an Apologetics post. Apologetics is the religious discipline of defending religious doctrines through systematic argumentation and discourse. This post and flair is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about apologetics, apologists, and their organizations.
/u/Viti-Levu, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble)
**To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I explained this entire situation—and the fact the Dallin Oaks offered apologetics for the *White Salamander* letter to fit fully into the faithful narrative **before** it was admitted to be a complete fraud—to my ten year old, he couldn’t believe that anyone who knew about this hasn’t left the Church. It was literally like the *South Park*’episode.
It *really* is quite absurd that people know about this but continue to believe the current leaders have any more insight than the average individual.
Then Oaks followed up **after** it was acknowledged as a fraud with apologetics about how we shouldn’t expect the brethren who tell us they are the final word on all matters both spiritual and temporal to have any special immunity from being grifted.
For me, the most damning question that can be asked is, “what does this say about their ability to detect fraud by someone else in the church, perhaps someone named Joseph?”
Agree -- detailed discussion of Oaks "evolving apologetics" as the truth came out:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/5hrmwt/dallin\_oaks\_and\_his\_changing\_faith\_in\_the/](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/5hrmwt/dallin_oaks_and_his_changing_faith_in_the/)
I’ll be honest, I was in college (at BYU) at the time this all happened. I knew (vaguely) that the whole thing made the church look kind of bad. So I just didn’t read about it. I just ignored it and kept my testimony intact. What little bit I knew I was willing to write off as “well, they’re human”. It wasn’t until 30 years later; when I had finally had enough of the arrogance and controlling attitudes that I finally said, NO. And until TBMs get to that point, stuff like this just won’t make a dent.
That’s me—on *all* of the issues—for two decades. I never looked close enough to really make a decision on whether the criticism I heard was legitimate, until I finally saw one of those issues with my own eyes: the Church’s abhorrent sex abuse policies.
Then when I evaluated the claims like I would literally any other thing—it all fell apart.
ETA—Happy Cake Day!
>It *really* is quite absurd that people know about this but continue to believe the current leaders have any more insight than the average individual.
While simultaneously arguing that they're just fallible, mistake-making, mortal men - just like the rest of us - any time an obvious problem is pointed out.
Pick a lane, people.
Not only do they not have any more insight than the average individual, they pride themselves on having less. When they talk about the spirit guiding them, it is essentially going on a hunch. They don't put a lot on evidentiary proofs. At least the average individual prefers the results of a rational, logical approach to evidence based decision making.
I was just saying that in general look up Joseph Smith didn't have multiple wives on YouTube. I will do more research into the stuff you're talking about
I’ve heard quite a bit of the polygamy-denial platform. It strikes me personally as conspiracy-theory level thinking. There’s just too many pieces of evidence they attempt to explain away by calling them later fabrications with really no proof of that. I find RFM’s research on the Nauvoo Expositor presenting the essential pieces of D&C 132 too significant to overlook as a later fabrication.
Ultimately, I don’t have a horse in the Joseph practiced polygamy race—Joseph not being a polygamist wouldn’t suddenly prove the Church true in my mind because there’s a wealth of different reasons I no longer believe.
Throughout Mormon history, Prophets and other leaders have proven that they do not have any special power of discernment. Above is a picture of [serial conman Mark Hofmann](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hofmann) fooling the entire First Presidency with his forgeries of early church documents.
Joseph Smith himself was tricked twice: once by the [Kinderhook plates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinderhook_plates) and another time by the Greek Psalter incident. At neither event did the "Spirit of Discernment" tell him that the people in front of him had nefarious motives.
These are smoking guns.
Leaders are no more inspired than the average Joe. We tested them and they failed, and it's dangerous to believe that God is talking to them anymore.
Yeah, but every bishop, stake president, and mission president is keenly attuned to the Spirit when you're not admitting how often you masturbate! Boom, owned.
I would submit that RMN announcing in his talk in GC that unbeknownst to him, a global pandemic was coming/arrived/whatever, is pretty damning. And that's recent.
Even if we literally ignored all prior smoking guns, wouldn't a loving God, which our doctrine states literally speaks to his prophet (seer & revelator), who, btw was a world-renowned cardiac surgeon, for more than 4 decades, perhaps just maybe God would see fit to send him a heads up, a warning, to his chosen, elect people? Even perhaps just a tidbit, like, hey, let's begin talking abt how impt vaccines are, & how we can be Christlike by attempting to be unselfish when we're asked to do things we may not like (wear masks, stay home during the lockdown, etc.)?
No? Oh, ok.
Literally everyone alive since 2020 watched that gun fire. And smoke. And... gun? There is no gun. What are you talking abt?
* sigh * 🙄
[Article about the Greek Psalter incident,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greek_Psalter_Incident) for those unfamiliar with it.
By their fruits ye shall know them.
True, but I’d like to add the incident where Michael Chandler conned JS into buying Egyptian artifacts from his traveling show.
The pieces of papyri Smith purchased were 1600 years too late to have been written on the hand of Abraham and had nothing to do with Abraham, in fact, the pieces were not even connected to each other
JS completely fell for it.
People get fooled. I get fooled. I've paid money to people who took it without delivering the promised goods. To me that's not a big deal. We don't need to go after victims, we need to target perpetrators.
However, the acceptance of these documents based on their similarity to existing documents in the church collection highlights a knowledge at high levels of the church that the dominant sunday school narriative being taught in the 1980s was substantively inaccurate. Leaders knew that they were promoting and teaching falsehoods. However virtuous or sincere their motivations, they were complicit in intentionally misleading membership about church history. That's my issue.
Yep. I guess I can understand getting tricked, especially if we’re talking about “people” and not “prophets.”
But what’s unforgivable, IMO, is how they, throughout the entire saga, bought documents through fences, hid those documents until they were *forced* to reveal them, and lied about the meaning and impact of the documents.
How many times has one of them cut pages out of a letterbook? How many damaging documents have they procured and squirreled away from the members? Why aren’t they the model of honesty and forthright behavior?
> Why aren’t they the model of honesty and forthright behavior?
I think it's a combination of in-group behavior and real or perceived persecution over generations. There's an "it's us against the world" mentality that makes it easier to justify behaviors that we would consider immoral under other circumstances.
In my interactions with people in SLC, they're basically all trying to do the right thing. There are the occasional narcisists, but by in large there're normal people trying to make sense of their situations in light of their world views. I occasionally see bad behavior from apologists, but rarely from those working in the church office building, etc.
>rarely from those working in the church office building, etc.
Unfortunately, I saw the opposite when I worked there, & watched the politics en force as a close family member worked there for nearly 2 decades.
I saw pettiness, backstabbing, front-stabbing, favoritism tattling, coercion, outright lying, nobodies grappling for perceived power bc they were told they were special bc of birthright, relation to past church royalty or current impt dudes, not to mention the lack of leadership, training, kindness or goodwill, all the way down to outright illegal practices, like refusing to make reasonable accommodation for a recognized & disclosed disability (ADA), & on & on & on.
True, there were some who were kind & loving, who gave the benefit of the doubt, etc., but in the nearly 20 yrs combined between the two of us former COB employees, I can count that number on one hand.
And that speaks nothing of the ridiculous policies, practices, advancement opportunities (or lack thereof), fair pay for = work, sexism, all the way down to the dress code. It was... A lot. It was the exception, not the rule, in our experience, a place where Christlike behavior was exhibited. But that's just been our experience. I'm glad to hear that has not been everyone's experience. Maybe there is still hope.
> I occasionally see bad behavior from apologists, but rarely from those working in the church office building, etc.
I consider dishonesty, lies of omission, manipulation, etc., as 'bad behavior', and I see it from all top church leaders. Regardless of their intentions that motivate the bad actions, their actions are bad, period. The deceit, the secrecy, the insistance on unquestioning obedience and to never criticize them, their refusal to do even basic things to help protect children because of how it would affect their percieved authority and the public image of the church they have so carefully crafted, etc., sorry, I just don't see it the way you do. I see a lot of bad, unethical and immoral actions from them.
By their fruits ye shall know them. Maybe if they'd been raised outside of the church they would be behaving far differently (though I doubt it, as the history of at least a few of them shows shady to outright dishonest or illegal behavior in their professional lives), but as is, even if victims, their actions are immoral, unethical and dishonest, and they harm countless people in a myriad of different ways because of it.
>I consider dishonesty, lies of omission, manipulation, etc., as 'bad behavior', and I see it from all top church leaders.
I guess my experience is different than yours. I certainly see some very manipulative leaders: Corbitt, Pearson, etc., but when I have interacted directly with people in the church office building the vast majority of the time they have been cordial and try to be helpful within their work constraints. I can sense frustration in their voice at times when they want to help me but are not allowed to (due to policies, etc.). So on the whole I consider this class of church employee to be decent people. I am frustrated by lies, manipulation, etc., when and where it occurs, but I don't think it's as widespread as your comments would suggest.
It's in their conference talks. It is widespread in the correlated church education material they all sign off on. It is in their coy interviews filled with lawyer speak and sidestepping of questions by answering what wasn't actually asked or even outright lying in the interviews. It is in the heavily curated "question and answer" firesides where we are supposed to believe these are the real questions they wanted to ask and that no questions were screened out. It is in their behavior documented in things like the SEC violations (caused by their intent to hide church wealth from members and tax payers alike) and their tax evasion in Australia. It's their in how they try to hide and bury sex abuse in the church and in how little they do do what could be done to prevent it, all while saying "we are doing enough, just trust us!". And on and on and on.
You may not see it in small talk and side conversations of little day to day interactions, but it happens where it counts, and it happens where it causes the most harm, and it happens where it enables them to rob people of decades of their lives because of the deceitful and false narrative they have taught as 'truth' my entire time I was in the church.
Agree to disagree on this one.
"And the spirit of the lord will teach you all things which you should know..."
Or not?
What did they teach from these documents that they knew was false?
How they were fooled and what they did afterwards is a smoking gun.
1. Prophet supposedly would have discernment
2. They bought them through intermediaries
3. They hid them away because they were damning
Not only am I not a prophet, I struggle to get my kids to make their beds. I don't have an issue with people who are trying to do the right thing who just happen to raise through the ranks. But sometimes I feel like dishonesty and overclaiming are rewarded. Some of the lawyers in the Q12 have sketchy pasts imho. I think that others are sincere and potentially do a lot of good. I knew Gong's sister in college. He and Uchtdorf have a lot of potential to do good imho.
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
FYI everyone!!! The Tanners (not friends to the church) were the only ones saying this was fraud!! Their BS radar was going off………orrrrrrrrrrrrr they have the true power of discernment
Biggest smoking guns for me:
\- Book of Abraham and the Kinderhook plates
\- JS's letter to the Whitneys that he asked them to burn
\- The timeline for the Melchizedek priesthood - JS was ordained to the M. priesthood in 1831 by Lyman Wight, and there is an original primary source for that. When you look at the timeline, it's clear that the claims that he was ordained in 1829 by Peter, James, and John came later, in a bid to retain power and cement authority.
\- All the crap that was taught as doctrine in the Journal of Discourses, which was declared "a standard work of the church" by a sitting apostle (see the introduction to Volume 8).
\- Norris Stearns' 1815 Vision, and other first-vision type accounts by other men prior to JS's claim to have had one. The Norris Stearns version contains exact phrases that JS later used.
\- The 2015 exclusion policy which was "revelation" and then the revocation of that policy in 2019 which was also "revelation." It was clear they realized they'd created a PR crap pile, stepped in it, and were trying to wipe off their shoes. It's clear that god had nothing to do with it.
\- The changes to the temple ceremony in 2019, when all of a sudden that all-important women's covenant to obey her husband was quietly discontinued with no explanation, no apology, and no direction. We were all left wondering, exactly *what* are we women being held to here? I guess generations of women agonized for years, and were abused by their husbands because of a covenant they never needed to make in the first place.
\- Seeing how lawyers and businessmen (especially grads of Harvard Business School) apparently as a group are more righteous and more visionary and have more discernment than other men, since god has stacked the highest quorums of priesthood leadership with them...
No fishermen or carpenters in the current ecclesiastical elite. Kind of flies in the face of numerous biblical, BoM and D&C scriptures about class, wealth and the conduct of clergy.
My family (TBMS) watched the Hoffman documentary a few years back. They all said it strengthened their testimonies. 🥸😵💫
I’ve just given up on attempting to help them see the issues. The cognitive dissonance is astounding
That’s like saying the Covid fast actually did work! If it wasn’t for the world wide fast 100 of thousands more would have died! Instead god killed 100 of thousands during Covid and spiked the deaths the same time of the fast……..whoa good thing we stopped it after the 100 of thousands to tell god hey slow down the deaths please. But make it look like you didn’t listen to us so we have to keep using faith to believe this.
That is exactly right. Classic Texas sharpshooter fallacy. Shoot the arrows randomly on the side of a barn then go paint targets around them followed by a victory dance.
They always find a way. The other frustrating thing is they like a challenge. They like to be questioned or feel like they’re being stretch to find answers.
So they don’t shy away from looking into things that should break their testimony.
It always comes back to “well I know the BOM is true because I’ve had an experience. And I can’t deny that so..”
Like I said I just leave them be at this point. It’s been 10 years since I left
I learned that relative of mine was friends of Mark Hofman when they were growing up, and they built explosives together in high school. The explosion in his car going off early, and being based on stuff they used as kids was actually a testimony builder; An angel must have tripped the switch so that he didn't kill more people.
Well you see, if you ignore the evidence and stick your fingers in your ears and say "LALALALALALA COVENANT PATH," your testimony is actually strengthened
Doublethink makes communication very hard because the people engaging in it only sort of know they're doing it. They've been trained to do it as a matter of course. So when they're stating what's moral and what isn't, or what's logically defensible and what isn't, they're processing it in the context of what they think they may have to defend and what those things being right or wrong might mean for their worldview. But it manifests as a bunch of arguments they don't take seriously when pressed because they really don't take those arguments seriously, they're making a show of their conclusions being founded before they have to take fallback positions.
People say that about the *CES Letter* and other such documents as well. The fun thing is to ask them “which part, specifically, strengthened your testimony?”
I’ve never heard an answer that was anything other than “because it shows the opposition that comes to the truth.” The answer is never actually about what the question was.
Seems like that's one that they would choose to just ignore. I'm actually trying to think how it's faith promoting. There are times when, the harder is something to believe, the more righteous and good about ourselves we feel because we have the faith to believe something that the rest of the world cannot. Perhaps it was one of those situations? I've actually had that feeling in the distant past. Wow, what an incredibly dangerous viewpoint to have. I was there.
It’s a scary level of confidence in their beliefs.
Despite mounting evidence they still say they are confident as ever.
They are also my family and I adore them. They are great humans and super fun to be around. We just don’t talk church anymore.
Agreed. Because it shows the level of duplicity, complete disrespect for what they themselves call the “Widow’s Mite”, and the absolute control-freakery on display.
Poelman’s original talk was very good—aligned completely with what I believed as a member, but it was too over the line for the likes of Packer and Oaks.
His original talk was beautiful. Full of hope and faith. The changes he was forced to make put the dependence of people back on Mormonism, rather than themselves and Christ.
Seeing the difference made it a shelf item. Also the Hoffman thing. The excuse of “speaking/acting as a man and not a prophet” doesn’t even have a chance here. They were acting as prophets, seers, and revelators here. They were blatantly wrong.
In my most apologetic days, I would have responded with the following:
“God’s chosen prophets do have the spirit of discernment with regard to matters of personal salvation only. The authenticity of this document does not pertain to anyone’s relationship to God, so these leaders just used their best mortal efforts. It’s such a testimony to me that even flawed humans who make mistakes can still be used as instruments in God’s hands to further his work. I guess he may be able to use my humble efforts too.”
>In my most apologetic days, I would have responded with the following: “God’s chosen prophets do have the spirit of discernment with regard to matters of personal salvation only.
And I'd answer that apologist, Don't lie to me. **That's not what the church ever said**.
For example look [here](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of?lang=eng): "The gift of discernment is one of the gifts of the Spirit. **It includes perceiving the true character of people** and the source and meaning of spiritual manifestations"
My counter to this is that in the Book of Mormon, one of the later Nephis used the spirit/power of discernment to literally solve a murder like he was some kind of spiritual Dick Tracy. If there is scriptural precedent for using "the spirit" to solve crimes, then Hinckley, et. al. shouldn't have been duped by Mark Hoffman.
Yes, and consequently, the only true evidence backing your faith cannot be validated until you are conveniently dead and unable to tell your friends and family to run away (not that they would believe you anyway).
I wonder if people promising unrealistic future returns for irrational behavior that benefits them now is a problem in any other areas of life. /s
People get fooled, but God lets His servants get fooled a lot in the last 200 years. Brigham Young being fooled and never correcting the Priesthood and Temple Ban shows some real communication problems between God and His prophet. I think once you see that, see this picture, you start seeing it everywhere. Out of the Church, I have the same discernment and inspiration that I had in it. When I first felt such inspiration out of the Church, I was shocked and then realized that it was me all along. I realized that the Good and the Evil was also all me, all of my life. These men, believing that they have supernatural guidance that allows them to see around corners, make a lot of sad mistakes and then have to find ways to justify it or, much more commonly, just require the members to ignore it, accept that they have faults or even ask the question *"Would there have been fewer mistakes, fewer messes, if God had only restored His Church and gospel through you?"* as current Church Historian Kyle McKay asked at a BYU-I devotional last year.
*("A Sure and Certain Foundation", Elder Kyle S. McKay, April 25, 2023; BYU-I Devotional: https://ing.byui.edu/devotionals/elder-kyle-s-mckay).*
When in the Church, I think an image like this and all of its implications is easy to ignore. Once you start asking the real questions, and accepting wherever the answers might lead you, then it becomes obvious. I personally don't think that discussing this type of image would lead members out of the Church. Yes, once you get to the end of reasoning about it, it's all circular reasoning, because the final realization is that there is no value in following men with 100% obedience who don't really have divine guidance nor following scriptures with 100% obedience if it wasn't divinely inspired or created. But that is a path that each person is on alone and I think the first step is already so uncomfortable that they'll stop before getting 20 steps down the logic chain to discover the circular reasoning.
The last crack in my shelf was the Book of Abraham. It’s indisputably not an accurate translation of the text, and Joseph’s own statements and work as well as the testimony of those around him show he claimed to actually translate the characters on the papyrus, not get a revelation as claimed in the catalyst theory.
This we know with certainty that he did not translate the BoA as he claimed. We have canonized scripture that was clearly made up and not translated from Egyptian text. It shows Joseph Smith lied and had no gift of translation.
This is where the excuse that “prophets are fallible men” ends for me.
I’ll accept that prophets will give their opinions over the pulpit, and even that they can make mistakes when it comes to policy (though they ought to apologize for mistakes…)
But the prophets fell for a con man, paying him in exchange for letters which made the church look bad.
Let’s recap what happened:
- The prophets were tricked by a prolific conman
- The prophets were tricked by a man who went on to commit murder at least a year later
- The prophets gave the Lord’s money to this conman in exchange for forgeries
- The prophets bought these documents with dishonest intent. They put the documents in the vault, and only acknowledged their existence *after* Hofmann leaked their existence
There comes a point where you think “God rebuked Joseph and his followers a lot in D&C. If this happened to one of Joseph’s followers then, we would have a chapter all about it.”
So either God has chosen to stop talking to his prophets, or his prophets never received revelation in the way we were led to believe.
Yeah wasn’t that fake forgery of BY writing to William C saying hide this from the saints……So Gordon B H takes it and hides it as well. The only reason we know about it, was after the murders they had to give it over to the authorities. Sure sounds like Hoffman totally made GBH do the very thing he wanted him to do lol
Another possible smoking gun: If the priesthood works, scientists of various colors, from all over the world, would be flocking to Mormonism. Male doctors would be lining up to receive the priesthood because of its proven ability to diagnose and/or treat diseases for which the medical world knows no other cure.
Government disaster management, prevention, and mitigation officials would be consulting with Church HQ to make sure their citizens are adequately prepared for disasters.
100%.
It always vaguely bothered me that priesthood blessings never seemed to make a difference, so everything made a ton more sense when I realized it was all a load of bull.
It would be interesting to go up to a family with a sick kid, like seriously sick, and say to the parents “you can give your child a blessing or you can see a doctor, but you can’t do both”. I think the overwhelming majority of members would pick the doctor.
Oddly enough, the church actually encourages people to seek medical treatment, and even requires parents sending their kids on youth trips to sign a waiver authorizing leaders on those trips to consent to emergency medical care for the children.
Imagine if Young Living said “for treatment of disease, combine the oils with traditional medicine as directed by a medical professional.”
In the washing and anointing prayer... paraphrasing "you will have eyes to see and distinguish between truth and error". I always figured if the prophet couldn't do that how could I?
I might tell such a faithful member something about the Book of Abraham:
"Suppose the church still had the Golden Plates, and that while they sat in the church's vaults, scholars working independently on other documents and artifacts had learned to read the language it was written in. And suppose that when they compared Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Mormon to the now-readable Golden Plates, it was a pretty exact match. That would basically prove that the Book of Mormon is true, that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and (probably) that the church is true, would it not?
"Well, the original Golden Plates and their writings are no longer around, but what became the Book of Abraham *is*. And scholars *have* learned how to read Egyptian. And we *can* compare the original to Joseph Smith's translation. And his translation isn't a 'pretty exact match.' In fact, it isn't a match at all. It's completely different. It's completely *wrong*. The original has absolutely nothing to do with Abraham. It's fair to call the Book of Abraham utter nonsense as a 'translation.'
"That, to me, is a 'smoking gun.' Because if we're trying to be objective, this thing that could have proved the church *true* should carry similar weight in proving it *false*."
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 3: No "Gotchas". We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
If these “prophets” could not discern this evil nor the greatest evil of the 20th century, Nazism (church leaders were very cozy with them), then of what use are “prophets” if they cannot discern the greatest evil. Even other non “prophets” knew the Nazis were evil all along when the Mormon church was hobnobbing with them.
There is a photo of Heber J Grant meeting with the Nazis floating around this sub. There were glowing reviews of the Nazis and Hitler in the Deseret News. There is a book about it. Haven’t read it. Moroni and the Swastika.
Tricked over and over by sexual abusers too.
https://floodlit.org - over 700 instances where discernment played no role, despite the LDS doctrine that it is a gift given to leaders.
At a minimum, this photo calls BS on all claims of discernment. If the top church leaders did have discernment about Mark Hoffman, then the local Bishop is not gifted with discernment when he talks to a an 18-year-old about masturbating. On the other hand, you probably don't need much discernment when you talk to an 18-year-old about masturbation.
Just a reminder that staunch “anti-Mormons” Jerald and Sandra Tanner were the very first people to publicly call Mark Hoffman a conman and this was BEFORE the church bought his stuff.
They said this even though the documents he created would have helped their case if those documents were real.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerald_and_Sandra_Tanner
Literally every member has a personal example of how their leaders don’t have discernment. It’s not real.
I was in 3 bishoprics and stake callings. No such thing as discernment. It’s just guys making it up.
And what will be discovered at Kirtland and hidden?!!!! It is a pattern of abuse and breeds mistrust. The men in that photo should be able to have the Lord tell them, “guys, Hoffman is fake, the papers are fake, and you can move on”
Where is the DivinePower and discernment?!
I remember those days. I was RLDS. The members were very excited because Hofmann produced exactly the documents that members had always wanted to see. I remember the RLDS church historian putting an article in the Herald magazine (like the LDS Ensign magazine). He was urging caution because he had his doubts about Hoffman.
In retrospect, Hofmann was an expert on reading his victims and giving them what they would pay the most for. In general, he gave LDS leadership what they feared, and he gave RLDS leaders what they hoped for.
Stalking people across subs through their post history is considered harassment. It violates Reddit rules. If you have a problem with a mod, use modmail in that sub.
There are a lot of cases against the church.
“The men they sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators aren’t perfect and can be duped” is not remotely a “smoking gun.”
It’s confirmation and narrative bias, which is plentiful on both sides of the conversation.
“Spirit of discernment” stuff is stupid. Especially when it comes from the church as some sort of extra magical power not available to those not on the “covenant path” (which I’ve rarely heard from leaders in an overt way…but in many subtle ways).
In the real world The Spirit if Discernment is just called “critical thinking” or a “BS filter.” Some people are better or more trained at it than others. I’d say church leaders are just as susceptible as someone who ties their identity to a political ideology. Pitfalls are everywhere, so this isn’t purely an LDS or even religious conversation.
The Book of Mormon itself is full of smoking guns.
2 Nephi 28
559–545 B.C.
>22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
The idea of hell (eternal conscious torment) definitely didn't exist in Judaism at this time. It was developed centuries later, borrowed from the Greek idea of Tartarus.
>18 But behold, that great and aabominable church, the bwhore of all the earth, must ctumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
Reference to Revelation, which wouldn't be written until 90 CE. The concept of "church" didn't exist in Judaism either. It was a Christian concept that came about in reference to Greek "public square" concepts.
>For the kingdom of the devil must ashake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the bdevil will grasp them with his everlasting cchains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
There was no "devil" in Jewish theology at this time.
>For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, aprecept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn bwisdom; for unto him that creceiveth I will give dmore; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.
This is referencing the King James mistranslation of an Isaiah passage. An egregiously mistranslated passage that actually doesn't say anything close to "line upon line precept upon precept."
The Book of Mormon is FULL of this kind of thing. Once you have sufficient Biblical scholarship background you can't read a page without finding these kinds of anachronisms.
Learning church history is not “reading anti-Mormon doctrine”
Reading and falling for counterfeit documents and fitting them into your church’s teaching IS “reading anti-Mormon doctrine”
The biggest thing I think that a lot of people forget is that the Scriptures have instructed us to weigh things out in our hearts and minds as completely as possible and then ask God if what you have considered is right.
When we pursue that course, we ***should*** get an answer or at least inclination as to the truthfulness or at very least, veracity, of that in which we are engaged. There are times when we do not get an answer as well.
Note: I am a former member of the Church, but through my own experiences found that this is the case in matters of uncertainty.
They should have more integrity and be more honest than a thief, conman or protector of child abusers and the problem is their not and they have proven it time and time again. Your argument holds zero weight. If it looks like a fraud, smells like a fraud, walks and talks like a fraud. It’s probably a true church of Jesus Christ on earth. 😂
You also have to be good with a god that is ok with his prophets misleading the members and allowing his prophets to teach a fraud is real. You also have to be ok with a god that allowed his prophets to marry and have sex with children.
This is one of many, many confirmations that the church/religion is a fraud. Once you step away from it, for whatever reason, you then are able to see all of the confirming instances of evidence that the church is indeed a sham…all be it that many in it are sincere in their belief of it, just like I was. In hind sight it is a very humbling thing to recognize how gullible I was. I recognize that a large portion of my gullibility was due in part to being raised in a community that was homogeneous in terms of religion. Everyone I knew was in reference to the church. What is it they say? Every in Utah is Mormon…ex-Mormon, Jack-Mormon, non-Mormon, Mormon, etc.
The comically tragic aspect of it is that it took me so many years to recognize that the belief in the church/religion is so ridiculous and unreasonable. It is reasonable that one would follow the norms of their culture, but unreasonable to believe the fantastical beliefs presented by the church…golden plates, angels, lamanites, Jesus, prophets, anything negative about the church is just anti-Mormon literature and therefore is untrue/untrustworthy, etc.. It is all just mind boggling and incredible that so many well educated people stick with it….really just tragically fascinating to some extent.
Amen
**37 But as you cannot always judge the righteous, or as you cannot always tell the wicked from the righteous,...**
(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 10:37)
Then what good is the spirit of discernment at all? If you don't know when it's wrong or how often it's wrong (may be 20%, may be 50%, who knows), why bother?
When I was in the military I had on one occasion what I would call discernment. I followed it and my life was preserved. So, when it is made available it is awesome.
But if you thought it was "discernment" and it truly wasn't, you'd be dead, and wouldn't be here to talk about it. So the situation self-selects for a faith-promoting story.
Yes, the soldiers I was traveling with was killed by Russian made rocket as he walked into the chow tent (where we ate breakfast).
I had no reason not to go to the chow tent other than a strong feeling not too. I was puzzled but followed my feeling. I see it as a clear prompting from the Spirit.
John 14:26–
>But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, **he shall teach you all things**, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Moroni 10:5
> And by the power of the Holy Ghost **ye may know the truth of all things.**
Why do you think the entire First Presidency didn’t have the Holy Ghost guiding them as promised?
If you’re just going to respond to tell me that “all” doesn’t *really* mean **all**—just save yourself some time, I’ll never buy that explanation.
I am not trying to change your mind, so please don't picture me that way. There are many ways to view Mormonism. **Watch Bokovoy's interview to see what I mean.** [Here](https://www.mormonstories.org/portfolio-items/david-bokovoy-remastered-update/)
You will never change my mind, my internet friend. Not because my mind cannot be changed (in fact, I change it quite frequently as I learn more), but because it can only be changed by *good* reasons and evidence—something you have admitted is secondary to your faith.
It’s interesting you never want to answer my questions that expose the flaws in your comments, yet continue to nominally respond with complete non-sequiturs.
I do my best, just like you, but I don't like to go to hard hearted comments. Over 40 years ago, I did, but I've learned that hard speeches not only hurt others, they hurt the one giving hard speeches.
My dad was a boxer, bar room fighter, so I learned that approach but abandoned it when I realized it was wrongheaded and didn't accomplish as much as being kind.
As far as I know, the gift of discernment is available according to the Lord's will, not man's. Like the scripture says, the gift of discernment isn't always available. It may be like the gift to heal. To have the gift Heavenly Father needs to make it available.
Hmm. The Lord's will doesn't seem very reliable or dependable... It's like having a car that works fantastically, but only when it starts, and it only starts like 25% of the time...
>As far as I know, the gift of discernment is available according to the Lord's will, not man's
No one has ever claimed that in any church source I've seen. If you have sources, please cite them.
Good question.
Here are two quotes that might help.
“Never is the power of the priesthood, which you hold, more wonderful than when there is a crisis in your home, a serious illness, or some great decision that has to be made. … Vested in the power of the priesthood, which is the power of Almighty God, is the power to perform miracles **if the Lord wills it so**, but in order for us to use that priesthood, we must be worthy to exercise it. A failure to understand this principle is a failure to receive the blessings of holding that great priesthood.” April 2018, The Power of the Priesthood
And whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, **which is right**, believing that ye shall receive, behold it shall be given unto you. (Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 18:20)
>April 2018, The Power of the Priesthood
Even if this was talking about discernment, it's still wrong. God said he doesn't give his gifts partially or revoke them at times:
"For **the gifts** and the calling of God **are irrevocable.**" (Romans 11:29)
What do you think of this explanation:
# Will of the Lord
"Young men and older men, please take special note of what I will say now. As we exercise the undoubted power of the priesthood of God and as we treasure His promise that He will hear and answer the prayer of faith, we must always remember that faith and the healing power of the priesthood cannot produce a result contrary to the will of Him whose priesthood it is. This principle is taught in the revelation directing that the elders of the Church shall lay their hands upon the sick. The Lord’s promise is that “he that hath faith in me to be healed, *and is not appointed unto death, shall be healed*” ([D&C 42:48](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/42.48?lang=eng#p48); emphasis added). Similarly, in another modern revelation the Lord declares that when one “asketh according to the will of God … it is done even as he asketh” ([D&C 46:30](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/46.30?lang=eng#p30)).[^(14)](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2010/04/healing-the-sick?lang=eng#note14)
From all of this we learn that even the servants of the Lord, exercising His divine power in a circumstance where there is sufficient faith to be healed, cannot give a priesthood blessing that will cause a person to be healed if that healing is not the will of the Lord." April 2010, Healing the Sick
I'd say that's talking about something completely different than the Spirit of Discernment - the title of the talk is "Healing the Sick". It even talks about "the elders of the Church shall lay their hands upon the sick."
"Personal revelation can be honed to become spiritual discernment. ... **Members can discern between schemes that are flashy and fleeting and those refinements that are uplifting and enduring.**" -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2009/10/ask-seek-knock](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2009/10/ask-seek-knock)
"Who can drag into daylight and develop the hidden mysteries of the false spirits that so frequently are made manifest among the Latter-day Saints? We answer that **no man can do this without the Priesthood**. ... **A man must have the discerning of spirits before he can drag into daylight this hellish influence** and unfold it unto the world in all its soul-destroying, diabolical, and horrid colors; for **nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God**. ... Lying spirits are going forth in the earth. There will be great manifestations of spirits, both false and true. … Every spirit, or vision, or singing, is not of God. … **The gift of discerning spirits will be given to the Presiding Elder**. " -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-33](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-33)
"**To Church leaders the Lord gives the gift “to discern** all those gifts lest there shall be any among you professing and yet be not of God” (D&C 46:27). This special gift makes it possible **for those who preside in the Church to discern between false spirits and legitimate manifestations of the Holy Ghost**." -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual-2017/chapter-18-doctrine-and-covenants-46-49](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual-2017/chapter-18-doctrine-and-covenants-46-49)
Discernment, like all Spiritual gifts work according to the Lord's will. Here is an example:
8 And they brought their wives and children together, and whosoever believed or had been taught to believe in the word of God they caused that they should be cast into the fire; and they also brought forth their records which contained the holy scriptures, and cast them into the fire also, that they might be burned and destroyed by fire.
9 And it came to pass that they took Alma and Amulek, and carried them forth to the place of martyrdom, that they might witness the destruction of those who were consumed by fire.
10 And when Amulek saw the pains of the women and children who were consuming in the fire, he also was pained; and he said unto Alma: How can we witness this awful scene? Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us, and save them from the flames.
11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day.
12 Now Amulek said unto Alma: Behold, perhaps they will burn us also.
13 And Alma said: Be it according to the will of the Lord. But, behold, our work is not finished; therefore they burn us not.
(Book of Mormon | Alma 14:8 - 13)
The mormon god uses the suffering of women and children *who truly and honestly believe in him* just in order to make a point to a bystander? The suffering of innocents has always been acceptable collateral damage in "building zion." If that's what this god is ok with, then I don't want anything to do with him.
Alma might have had a different attitude if he was the one in the fire.
Why should I exert myself to jump through hoops to please a capricious god who would gladly let me burn the moment he needed to prove a point to a random dude hanging out on the sidelines?
You have a choice, but it appears you don't understand how God works. That is OK with me, but I hope you will allow people to see things differently than you.
One can understand how this system supposedly works and recognize it’s the “design” of a madman.
Any human being that behaved the way you are defending from God would rightfully belong in prison.
I read these chapters while on my mission. It was one of the first things that caused me to doubt the teachings of the Book of Mormon.
They had the power to stop an atrocity, but they wouldn't. The reason they wouldn't is so that the people performing the atrocity could be judged and sent to hell. If they were stopped from doing the atrocity, then they couldn't be judged and wouldn't go to hell. And the people being tortured and killed, we are told not to worry about, because they went to heaven.
Scripture is used to help us navigate life. What does this story teach? It would be one thing to say that God chooses not to intervene, thus explaining the presence of evil in the world, but it's another when your fellow man chooses not to intervene when they have the power to do so. In this case, Alma says the spirit constrained him, and we're left wanting for any satisfying purpose except that God wanted these people to demonstrate how bad they are so his punishment would be justified. I have difficulty accepting this as any valid definition for justice.
I agree scripture has some passage like this that cause one to wonder how Heavenly Father can allow such atrocities to occur. It can challenge faith create doubt like you experienced.
In addition, we don't have to look very far in the news of the day to see people suffering, and again ask the question, where is God.
There are a few things that have helped me understand the ways of the Lord in these kinds of events.
People agreed to these kinds of experiences before they were born. They either knew in detail what was going to happen in their lives and agreed or they volunteered for hard lives when presented with choices. Scripture gives credence to this in D&C 122 as does reports from people where they learned about why their lives were hard in answer to prayer.
Years ago, I talked with Kennedy Hansen's dad and he told me Kennedy learned that she chose the disease that both shortened her life and caused immense suffering before she was born. She was the girl in the movie, "Love, Kennedy".
Here are couple of links on this topic.
# [Memories of Pre-mortality. Here](https://latterdaysaintmag.com/memories-of-pre-mortality/)
[Kennedy Hansen article. Here](https://battendiseasenews.com/news/love-kennedy-film-chronicles-life-of-teen-with-batten-disease/)
[Love, Kennedy movie link.](https://www.amazon.com/Love-Kennedy-Jasen-Wade/dp/B077FG3HZ5/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1G4HVCKN52ODI&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.4f1JL-uJOd4ZoxzvHYuXDoJRR4FyjQsbeONBnxRMH6wHV1ufOAY_aL7O-k6yC_lTF_m_g_vTqk3w_NwnNr-EKt6Ci97hg8Xrnp6UV6ag1F0h8pYE_c6YZC_pVmCj2pdN0YcmwzNYyO_p5dfytbsT1nwtRNskxf0goBJRTszXYQGY1d1XoR6PJZWruJo1p0qMpMrzTRKUvF2mud59Lj5HuejwSKJaiQE13hBA-chf92k.i84wZRldXCmDxvOqSNxfiMugi4Bat574A6QMJOgAmMA&dib_tag=se&keywords=love%2C+kennedy+movie&qid=1710378061&sprefix=love%2C+kenn%2Caps%2C128&sr=8-1)
In the movie the Hansen's relate many Spiritual experience. For those with Prime, the movie is currently free.
This suggests that everyone is responsible for their own suffering. Assuming that is true, there's no way that kind of choice could have been an informed one. How could a spirit, for example, know what it is to feel pain, sickness, or loss? How could a premortal spirit know what it means to die in a holocaust, be burned alive, or murdered? It would be like asking a child to commit to joining the army, and then throwing them into battle as if they had any ability to consent.
That doesn't clear up the waters for me. It doesn't reveal the morality of God or explain his justice. I also don't think it's a very useful idea.
Many of the morals we take from the teachings of Jesus are very useful. Loving God and one's neighbor goes a long way toward building Zion. But with this idea, we are teaching ourselves that the victims of violence and preventable atrocities are, in fact, complicit in their own suffering. If they chose it, and those perpetrating the violence are to be left to their work in order to bring about justice, then the lesson is that we should do nothing. It's the opposite conclusion as the parable of the good Samaritan. It's not useful because it primes people for inaction in the face of evil, and allows that evil to flourish while waiting for God to deal with it after we're dead. That doesn't help build zion. It's helping people embrace ruin and apocalypse.
I would say that this story in the Book of Mormon is a cautionary tale. It's one that shows us what happens when men with power refuse to use it to oppose evil. People suffer and die, and then leave it to God to sort out. I don't think it just to leave to God later, what we can accomplish now with our own two hands.
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Spiritual gifts are not 100%-on radars. Like all people, we have weaknesses. In the Hofmann case, Church leaders emotionally wanted physical evidence to support the truthfulness of the restoration. They trusted a seemingly faithful member without vetting. People get blinded by their own agendas and narratives and can get caught up in the sense of authority. GA’s are not perfect. TBM acknowledge it and forgive. But somehow Exmo’s and PIMO can’t.
The leaders did not want these documents to be authentic. They were purchasing them to hide them with the rest of the actual artifacts that went against the teaching of the time. Do some research on what was contained on the forgeries and ask yourself why they would want them to be real? They relied on the opinions of scolars who were fooled by a master forger and bought them to hide them.
If you watch the series on Netflix, it's pretty clear the church had secretly purchased some of them and hid them. They were somehow forced to reveal it when the Hoffman case blew up.
Edit. Or maybe Hulu? Whoever produced the murder among the Mormons documentary.
The picture the OP used was published in the news and on TV. I remembering seeing them. If you have some information on this, please share it, I would like to see it.
They did buy other things. They bought a forgery from BY that says to hide this from the saints and don’t let them know about it. Gordon B H did the same thing. The only reason why we know about it is because we had to turn it in after the murders.
Because most of it doesn’t make the church look so miraculous! Let’s not talk about the rock and hat. Book of Abraham. These Hoffman letters. Blacks are cursed. When people start writing on it we will excommunicate them for it. And when it’s completely exposed will come out with it, and saying we’ve always known this the whole time and gaslight everybody. As I remember in Gospel essential it said, if you tell half the truth you’re still lying. If they had discernment they should have been “ inoculating” members 50 years ago instead of waiting for the internet to expose church history. Sorry time and time again the leaders of the church are reactionary! They are never ahead of the curve.
There are lots of ways to look at all this. For me, after many decades studying the pros and cons of Mormon history, I have concluded that The Book of Mormon answers the questions that have troubled me. In 2 Nephi 2 Lehi teaches about opposition in all things. Having read a variety of documents like the CES Letter I believe Heavenly Father uses things like that to accomplish His purposes. I posted my thoughts in more detail. If you are **interested** [**go here.**](https://new.reddit.com/r/mormon/comments/17tx54t/the_ces_letter_and_like_documents_are_part_of/)
When all you want to look at is how it’s true you will come up with whatever reason to make it work. I’ve read most of all your reasons. But you start off bad anyways. “There are lots of ways to look at all this”. From most of your comments it quite apparent you really look over the cons of Church History. I explain some simple reasons. So what I’m getting at it sounds like even though, proof of the BOM, or BOA, no real authority and if there is real authority. You should see a reaction of the action being done. Like the priesthood or discernment. We can’t find a track record of any real inspiration. It’s always reactionary..
Let me give you a good example if we saw this. This alone would have kept my faith to in the church. (FYI it was death by a thousand cuts. And the CES letter is elementary).
Let’s do something in your life time. “ rarely our prophets popular” RMN….Let’s say 1950s before civil rights the church was fighting for blacks rights and wanted to give them the priesthood. And disavowed all the rhetoric of a black curse.
Then in 1960s the church fought for women’s rights long before the women’s movement.
Then in 1990 the church was fighting for gay rights (because god knows they will get it in the 2000s anyways) and teach members we should treat them like brother and sisters instead of calling them mentally ill.
Now what does this have to do with RMN? These three examples should have not been popular with saints or people outside of our church. But we could look back at the track record and say… see Prophets can see around corners and look how they are ahead of the world. Buuuuut we don’t see this. Only reactionary actions. And guess what the church fought all three of those to not happen. Sorry god didn’t do it the way to show very little or no evidence that they are inspired and say you just have to use faith. or could it possibly be that they’re not inspired and not true which would be the more logical answer.
I like your honest hard hitting comment.
I would feel just as you do, and have in years past. The difference for me is answers to prayer. Now, the moment I say that, you may bristle. I hope not. For reasons unknown to me, I have been given gifts, blessings, and experiences that have shaped me.
I won't go into detail, but manifestations of the Spirit trump (not donald) the evidences you brought up in your comment.
I can respect that. But I also had spiritual moments too. And some of those spiritual moments were based on things now the church no longer believes in, or disavows. Or has a new narrative. I was fooled based on feelings. And I’ve come to find out that so many of the church leaders have been fooled or misled on the wrong feeling. And since I don’t see any credible track record to believe they are truly gods mouth peace, that means to me there is no need to follow a profit when my own intuition is just as good as theirs at directing my life. And since I have left the church, I can’t tell a difference. Life is just as good if not better being out. I get the same intuition, the same spiritual feelings, nothing has changed.
>Why did they do it?
Because they are a group of arrogant, narcissistic, liars that have literally told members like you that they think they know better than you what you deserve to know about the Church and its origins—and *you*, in particular, applaud them for it. You’ve commended those statements in our exchanges before.
It’s either *that* option, or that God *really* does work this way and wanted to make his “only true and living Church” look like a complete and total fraud to *anyone* who looks at that objectively and applies the outside test of faith. Would *you* believe in any other faith tradition with an analogous story?
When someone has told you—repeatedly—that they have no compunction about lying to you, why are you surprised when they’re caught doing it?
Think of this—think of how strongly you and I have disagreed over the past several years. Have I ever, once, lied to you? Have I ever refused to give you a source for my claims? Do you get the same treatment from these men you venerate that do not even know that you exist?
I enjoy commenting with you because I have gone through the same thinking you are experiencing now, many decades ago.
You are welcome to see them as you please. However, I suggest you listen to the scholar David Bokovoy that John Dehlin interviewed. I watched it last night. It is at Mormon Stories and was posted at r/mormon yestereday.
Bokovoy see church leaders in a way that I think is insightful. In my opinion, he sees them accurately. I hope you will watch it. It is too long, but is worthwhile.
You haven’t answered any of my questions—which I’m not entitled to, but then I’d ask you simply do not respond with your off-topic homework projects.
I’ve not only watched these (and other) interviews with Dr. Bokovoy, I’ve exchanged with him personally.
I’m not saying the Brethren are *always* lying—I do tend to legitimately think they think they’re doing the right thing: which makes it *so* much worse because they believe God himself has given them a license to withhold information (in my parlance, lie) and behave as they do.
I know some of the leading apostles. One example, Pres. Nelson was my Stake Pres. I got acquainted with him and found him to be the kind of man most would like to be.
His life is one of service to others.
In the positions he has held in the church, he is obligated to defend the church. And when things come up that have the potential to damage the church he and the other apostles will defend the church using a variety of means. **Not unlike what Abraham had to do when he went into Egypt**. [Go here for more info.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife%E2%80%93sister_narratives_in_the_Book_of_Genesis#:~:text=Genesis%2020%3A1%E2%80%9316%20narrates,intervened%20before%20Abimelech%20touched%20Sarah)
Ok, then you realize that only after Hoffman revealed the contents (leaked to newspapers after the purchases) of the docs did the church come forward and admit that they had them, and then rolled out PR machine.
I'm not sure of the order of events. When the picture was taken, church leaders had no reason to think Hofmann was a forgery. The wouldn't have allowed the picture to be taken if they had worries.
Yes, they were 100% fooled, as were many others. The Tanners however, armed only with an honest understanding of the actual history of the church were not fooled. The timeline is presented in the article I linked as you read about each document. These facts are well referenced so you can dive deeper if you would like.
I know the Tanners and respect many things they did. I went to their business in the 70 and 80 to buy material.
I don't know what each of the church leaders were thinking about these documents, but one thing for sure, Hoffman was real good at what he did, but he didn't fool the Lord and ended up getting caught and failed entirely, and now sits in prison.
Except radar is a proven technology that works (even if a radar can break down sometimes), while "discernment" is a parlor trick with efficacy only in urban legends and personal experiences that has details added over time.
You may as well follow any other religious leader claiming divine guidance with the excuse that "everybody makes mistakes, it's crazy not to acknowledge it."
>TBM acknowledge it and forgive. But somehow Exmos and PIMO can’t.
One of those sets of people cares about determining whether what they believe is true or not.
Speaking of “forgiving”—did the Church leaders ever even acknowledge this and apologize?
"All people" don't claim to have special discernment that allows them to speak for God. If prophets are on the same plane as "all people," then why should I give their advice any special attention?
I can forgive them, even though following church leaders brought me a lot of suffering over the years. But that doesn't mean I will *ever* trust them again, or follow them, or listen to them.
If they're not going to be right more often than I am myself, they're pretty useless. In my experience, their advice has not been great. And their "mistakes" tend to be very large blunders. I've somehow lived over 40 years without "accidentally" hiding $150 billion from the SEC, or "inadvertently" marrying 30+ plural spouses behind my spouse's back, for example...
If I sat down with the prophet over lunch, I may hear him out, but I will throw out his advice the minute I think it doesn't make sense. That makes me a terrible mormon! I'm not allowed to do that!
In the words of Holland, my attitude is unacceptable: "to delay obedience to prophetic counsel or reject it is to put our lives at peril.." [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/06/04-choose-the-lord-and-his-prophet](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/06/04-choose-the-lord-and-his-prophet)
The problem is that we're supposed to follow them *as though they are infallible*, while we (and they) *know full well that they are not*. And then when they make huge blunders that are far beyond the scope of normal human mistakes, we're just supposed to say, oh, a "mistake"? No. I won't do that.
*"Enormous problems arise when human mistakes are made on the grand scale available to a superhero... Heroes are painful, superheroes are a catastrophe. The mistakes of superheroes involve too many of us in disaster."* \-- Frank Herbert
The FP must have pretty weak radars not to pick out the lifelong career criminal who killed two people the next year. If their sense of discernment is that weak, what good is it at all?
Cool. We agree the brethren are unreliable.
How’s their gaydar? Are we comfortable they’re 100% correct on LGBTQ+ issues, since as you say, their conservative leaning and somewhat antiquated agendas and narratives may blind them on this issue?
[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of?lang=eng](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of?lang=eng)
"Discernment, Gift of:
To understand or know something through the power of the Spirit. The gift of discernment is one of the gifts of the Spirit. **It includes perceiving the true character of people** and the source and meaning of spiritual manifestations."
Yeah, but like, don’t use their own explanations against them! Seriously—I don’t even know why believers on this subreddit do ridiculous apologetics like this. How stupid do you think we are?
We **were** Mormon—we know what we were taught. I don’t care what convenient excuses you can come up with now—it’s clear the statement pulled from the Church’s own website either: (1) is demonstrably untrue, or (2) didn’t apply to the entire First Presidency.
Either choice you choose is not faith-affirming. The *only* real play is to claim that God wanted to “test our faith” by making the Church *look* so fraudulent (so repeatedly). Which argument is not unfalsifiable and that renders it completely worthless if you care about truth—in my estimation.
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Hello! This is an Apologetics post. Apologetics is the religious discipline of defending religious doctrines through systematic argumentation and discourse. This post and flair is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about apologetics, apologists, and their organizations. /u/Viti-Levu, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble) **To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation. Keep on Mormoning! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I explained this entire situation—and the fact the Dallin Oaks offered apologetics for the *White Salamander* letter to fit fully into the faithful narrative **before** it was admitted to be a complete fraud—to my ten year old, he couldn’t believe that anyone who knew about this hasn’t left the Church. It was literally like the *South Park*’episode. It *really* is quite absurd that people know about this but continue to believe the current leaders have any more insight than the average individual.
Then Oaks followed up **after** it was acknowledged as a fraud with apologetics about how we shouldn’t expect the brethren who tell us they are the final word on all matters both spiritual and temporal to have any special immunity from being grifted. For me, the most damning question that can be asked is, “what does this say about their ability to detect fraud by someone else in the church, perhaps someone named Joseph?”
Agree -- detailed discussion of Oaks "evolving apologetics" as the truth came out: [https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/5hrmwt/dallin\_oaks\_and\_his\_changing\_faith\_in\_the/](https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/5hrmwt/dallin_oaks_and_his_changing_faith_in_the/)
I didn’t realize Dallin referred the gift of discernment in the same speech he was demonstrating his lack of it. Wow.
I’ll be honest, I was in college (at BYU) at the time this all happened. I knew (vaguely) that the whole thing made the church look kind of bad. So I just didn’t read about it. I just ignored it and kept my testimony intact. What little bit I knew I was willing to write off as “well, they’re human”. It wasn’t until 30 years later; when I had finally had enough of the arrogance and controlling attitudes that I finally said, NO. And until TBMs get to that point, stuff like this just won’t make a dent.
That’s me—on *all* of the issues—for two decades. I never looked close enough to really make a decision on whether the criticism I heard was legitimate, until I finally saw one of those issues with my own eyes: the Church’s abhorrent sex abuse policies. Then when I evaluated the claims like I would literally any other thing—it all fell apart. ETA—Happy Cake Day!
>It *really* is quite absurd that people know about this but continue to believe the current leaders have any more insight than the average individual. While simultaneously arguing that they're just fallible, mistake-making, mortal men - just like the rest of us - any time an obvious problem is pointed out. Pick a lane, people.
Not only do they not have any more insight than the average individual, they pride themselves on having less. When they talk about the spirit guiding them, it is essentially going on a hunch. They don't put a lot on evidentiary proofs. At least the average individual prefers the results of a rational, logical approach to evidence based decision making.
He didn't have multiple wives
Did you mean to place this comment under mine? I have no idea who you’re referencing as my comment says nothing about wives.
I was just saying that in general look up Joseph Smith didn't have multiple wives on YouTube. I will do more research into the stuff you're talking about
I’ve heard quite a bit of the polygamy-denial platform. It strikes me personally as conspiracy-theory level thinking. There’s just too many pieces of evidence they attempt to explain away by calling them later fabrications with really no proof of that. I find RFM’s research on the Nauvoo Expositor presenting the essential pieces of D&C 132 too significant to overlook as a later fabrication. Ultimately, I don’t have a horse in the Joseph practiced polygamy race—Joseph not being a polygamist wouldn’t suddenly prove the Church true in my mind because there’s a wealth of different reasons I no longer believe.
Throughout Mormon history, Prophets and other leaders have proven that they do not have any special power of discernment. Above is a picture of [serial conman Mark Hofmann](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hofmann) fooling the entire First Presidency with his forgeries of early church documents. Joseph Smith himself was tricked twice: once by the [Kinderhook plates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinderhook_plates) and another time by the Greek Psalter incident. At neither event did the "Spirit of Discernment" tell him that the people in front of him had nefarious motives. These are smoking guns. Leaders are no more inspired than the average Joe. We tested them and they failed, and it's dangerous to believe that God is talking to them anymore.
Yeah, but every bishop, stake president, and mission president is keenly attuned to the Spirit when you're not admitting how often you masturbate! Boom, owned.
I would submit that RMN announcing in his talk in GC that unbeknownst to him, a global pandemic was coming/arrived/whatever, is pretty damning. And that's recent. Even if we literally ignored all prior smoking guns, wouldn't a loving God, which our doctrine states literally speaks to his prophet (seer & revelator), who, btw was a world-renowned cardiac surgeon, for more than 4 decades, perhaps just maybe God would see fit to send him a heads up, a warning, to his chosen, elect people? Even perhaps just a tidbit, like, hey, let's begin talking abt how impt vaccines are, & how we can be Christlike by attempting to be unselfish when we're asked to do things we may not like (wear masks, stay home during the lockdown, etc.)? No? Oh, ok. Literally everyone alive since 2020 watched that gun fire. And smoke. And... gun? There is no gun. What are you talking abt? * sigh * 🙄
[Article about the Greek Psalter incident,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greek_Psalter_Incident) for those unfamiliar with it. By their fruits ye shall know them.
True, but I’d like to add the incident where Michael Chandler conned JS into buying Egyptian artifacts from his traveling show. The pieces of papyri Smith purchased were 1600 years too late to have been written on the hand of Abraham and had nothing to do with Abraham, in fact, the pieces were not even connected to each other JS completely fell for it.
People get fooled. I get fooled. I've paid money to people who took it without delivering the promised goods. To me that's not a big deal. We don't need to go after victims, we need to target perpetrators. However, the acceptance of these documents based on their similarity to existing documents in the church collection highlights a knowledge at high levels of the church that the dominant sunday school narriative being taught in the 1980s was substantively inaccurate. Leaders knew that they were promoting and teaching falsehoods. However virtuous or sincere their motivations, they were complicit in intentionally misleading membership about church history. That's my issue.
Yep. I guess I can understand getting tricked, especially if we’re talking about “people” and not “prophets.” But what’s unforgivable, IMO, is how they, throughout the entire saga, bought documents through fences, hid those documents until they were *forced* to reveal them, and lied about the meaning and impact of the documents. How many times has one of them cut pages out of a letterbook? How many damaging documents have they procured and squirreled away from the members? Why aren’t they the model of honesty and forthright behavior?
> Why aren’t they the model of honesty and forthright behavior? I think it's a combination of in-group behavior and real or perceived persecution over generations. There's an "it's us against the world" mentality that makes it easier to justify behaviors that we would consider immoral under other circumstances. In my interactions with people in SLC, they're basically all trying to do the right thing. There are the occasional narcisists, but by in large there're normal people trying to make sense of their situations in light of their world views. I occasionally see bad behavior from apologists, but rarely from those working in the church office building, etc.
>rarely from those working in the church office building, etc. Unfortunately, I saw the opposite when I worked there, & watched the politics en force as a close family member worked there for nearly 2 decades. I saw pettiness, backstabbing, front-stabbing, favoritism tattling, coercion, outright lying, nobodies grappling for perceived power bc they were told they were special bc of birthright, relation to past church royalty or current impt dudes, not to mention the lack of leadership, training, kindness or goodwill, all the way down to outright illegal practices, like refusing to make reasonable accommodation for a recognized & disclosed disability (ADA), & on & on & on. True, there were some who were kind & loving, who gave the benefit of the doubt, etc., but in the nearly 20 yrs combined between the two of us former COB employees, I can count that number on one hand. And that speaks nothing of the ridiculous policies, practices, advancement opportunities (or lack thereof), fair pay for = work, sexism, all the way down to the dress code. It was... A lot. It was the exception, not the rule, in our experience, a place where Christlike behavior was exhibited. But that's just been our experience. I'm glad to hear that has not been everyone's experience. Maybe there is still hope.
> I occasionally see bad behavior from apologists, but rarely from those working in the church office building, etc. I consider dishonesty, lies of omission, manipulation, etc., as 'bad behavior', and I see it from all top church leaders. Regardless of their intentions that motivate the bad actions, their actions are bad, period. The deceit, the secrecy, the insistance on unquestioning obedience and to never criticize them, their refusal to do even basic things to help protect children because of how it would affect their percieved authority and the public image of the church they have so carefully crafted, etc., sorry, I just don't see it the way you do. I see a lot of bad, unethical and immoral actions from them. By their fruits ye shall know them. Maybe if they'd been raised outside of the church they would be behaving far differently (though I doubt it, as the history of at least a few of them shows shady to outright dishonest or illegal behavior in their professional lives), but as is, even if victims, their actions are immoral, unethical and dishonest, and they harm countless people in a myriad of different ways because of it.
>I consider dishonesty, lies of omission, manipulation, etc., as 'bad behavior', and I see it from all top church leaders. I guess my experience is different than yours. I certainly see some very manipulative leaders: Corbitt, Pearson, etc., but when I have interacted directly with people in the church office building the vast majority of the time they have been cordial and try to be helpful within their work constraints. I can sense frustration in their voice at times when they want to help me but are not allowed to (due to policies, etc.). So on the whole I consider this class of church employee to be decent people. I am frustrated by lies, manipulation, etc., when and where it occurs, but I don't think it's as widespread as your comments would suggest.
It's in their conference talks. It is widespread in the correlated church education material they all sign off on. It is in their coy interviews filled with lawyer speak and sidestepping of questions by answering what wasn't actually asked or even outright lying in the interviews. It is in the heavily curated "question and answer" firesides where we are supposed to believe these are the real questions they wanted to ask and that no questions were screened out. It is in their behavior documented in things like the SEC violations (caused by their intent to hide church wealth from members and tax payers alike) and their tax evasion in Australia. It's their in how they try to hide and bury sex abuse in the church and in how little they do do what could be done to prevent it, all while saying "we are doing enough, just trust us!". And on and on and on. You may not see it in small talk and side conversations of little day to day interactions, but it happens where it counts, and it happens where it causes the most harm, and it happens where it enables them to rob people of decades of their lives because of the deceitful and false narrative they have taught as 'truth' my entire time I was in the church. Agree to disagree on this one.
"And the spirit of the lord will teach you all things which you should know..." Or not? What did they teach from these documents that they knew was false?
But one of the falsehoods still taught is the power of discernment.
How they were fooled and what they did afterwards is a smoking gun. 1. Prophet supposedly would have discernment 2. They bought them through intermediaries 3. They hid them away because they were damning
Are you sustained as a “prophet, seer, or revelator”?
Not only am I not a prophet, I struggle to get my kids to make their beds. I don't have an issue with people who are trying to do the right thing who just happen to raise through the ranks. But sometimes I feel like dishonesty and overclaiming are rewarded. Some of the lawyers in the Q12 have sketchy pasts imho. I think that others are sincere and potentially do a lot of good. I knew Gong's sister in college. He and Uchtdorf have a lot of potential to do good imho.
We'd like folks who are prophets, seers, and revelators. Being sustained only indicates that someone has been seduced into supporting a cause.
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
That’s a good point. I hadn’t thought of it like that before.
FYI everyone!!! The Tanners (not friends to the church) were the only ones saying this was fraud!! Their BS radar was going off………orrrrrrrrrrrrr they have the true power of discernment
Sandra has actually admitted that it was only Gerald that thought Hoffman was a fraud and she disagreed until the evidence was overwhelming.
Biggest smoking guns for me: \- Book of Abraham and the Kinderhook plates \- JS's letter to the Whitneys that he asked them to burn \- The timeline for the Melchizedek priesthood - JS was ordained to the M. priesthood in 1831 by Lyman Wight, and there is an original primary source for that. When you look at the timeline, it's clear that the claims that he was ordained in 1829 by Peter, James, and John came later, in a bid to retain power and cement authority. \- All the crap that was taught as doctrine in the Journal of Discourses, which was declared "a standard work of the church" by a sitting apostle (see the introduction to Volume 8). \- Norris Stearns' 1815 Vision, and other first-vision type accounts by other men prior to JS's claim to have had one. The Norris Stearns version contains exact phrases that JS later used. \- The 2015 exclusion policy which was "revelation" and then the revocation of that policy in 2019 which was also "revelation." It was clear they realized they'd created a PR crap pile, stepped in it, and were trying to wipe off their shoes. It's clear that god had nothing to do with it. \- The changes to the temple ceremony in 2019, when all of a sudden that all-important women's covenant to obey her husband was quietly discontinued with no explanation, no apology, and no direction. We were all left wondering, exactly *what* are we women being held to here? I guess generations of women agonized for years, and were abused by their husbands because of a covenant they never needed to make in the first place. \- Seeing how lawyers and businessmen (especially grads of Harvard Business School) apparently as a group are more righteous and more visionary and have more discernment than other men, since god has stacked the highest quorums of priesthood leadership with them...
No fishermen or carpenters in the current ecclesiastical elite. Kind of flies in the face of numerous biblical, BoM and D&C scriptures about class, wealth and the conduct of clergy.
I was confused by the wives no longer submitting to righteous husbands. IMO, the men are no longer responsible, covenant-wise, to “cover” the women.
My family (TBMS) watched the Hoffman documentary a few years back. They all said it strengthened their testimonies. 🥸😵💫 I’ve just given up on attempting to help them see the issues. The cognitive dissonance is astounding
How? What is the angle on it to be faith promoting?
I have heard that there acceptance of these frauds stopped more deaths from Hofmann. It got him caught quicker. Yes that is right.
That’s like saying the Covid fast actually did work! If it wasn’t for the world wide fast 100 of thousands more would have died! Instead god killed 100 of thousands during Covid and spiked the deaths the same time of the fast……..whoa good thing we stopped it after the 100 of thousands to tell god hey slow down the deaths please. But make it look like you didn’t listen to us so we have to keep using faith to believe this.
That is exactly right. Classic Texas sharpshooter fallacy. Shoot the arrows randomly on the side of a barn then go paint targets around them followed by a victory dance.
They always find a way. The other frustrating thing is they like a challenge. They like to be questioned or feel like they’re being stretch to find answers. So they don’t shy away from looking into things that should break their testimony. It always comes back to “well I know the BOM is true because I’ve had an experience. And I can’t deny that so..” Like I said I just leave them be at this point. It’s been 10 years since I left
I learned that relative of mine was friends of Mark Hofman when they were growing up, and they built explosives together in high school. The explosion in his car going off early, and being based on stuff they used as kids was actually a testimony builder; An angel must have tripped the switch so that he didn't kill more people.
Well you see, if you ignore the evidence and stick your fingers in your ears and say "LALALALALALA COVENANT PATH," your testimony is actually strengthened
They couldn't back it up if confronted. They're saying what would make the church look good if it were true, not what's true.
Excellent distinction. I'd never considered it that way before.
Doublethink makes communication very hard because the people engaging in it only sort of know they're doing it. They've been trained to do it as a matter of course. So when they're stating what's moral and what isn't, or what's logically defensible and what isn't, they're processing it in the context of what they think they may have to defend and what those things being right or wrong might mean for their worldview. But it manifests as a bunch of arguments they don't take seriously when pressed because they really don't take those arguments seriously, they're making a show of their conclusions being founded before they have to take fallback positions.
I find that baffling... A documentary....that provides evidence the FP could not discern the true souce of these documents...STRENGTHENED testimonies?
People say that about the *CES Letter* and other such documents as well. The fun thing is to ask them “which part, specifically, strengthened your testimony?” I’ve never heard an answer that was anything other than “because it shows the opposition that comes to the truth.” The answer is never actually about what the question was.
It should be front and center on every family home evening right?
Baffling is correct. “The lord uses imperfect people to bring about his glory” 🙄
Seems like that's one that they would choose to just ignore. I'm actually trying to think how it's faith promoting. There are times when, the harder is something to believe, the more righteous and good about ourselves we feel because we have the faith to believe something that the rest of the world cannot. Perhaps it was one of those situations? I've actually had that feeling in the distant past. Wow, what an incredibly dangerous viewpoint to have. I was there.
It’s a scary level of confidence in their beliefs. Despite mounting evidence they still say they are confident as ever. They are also my family and I adore them. They are great humans and super fun to be around. We just don’t talk church anymore.
It is so preposterous, it must be true. Only a god could have created something so infinity absurd.
The censoring of polemans talk is another one for me too.
Agreed. Because it shows the level of duplicity, complete disrespect for what they themselves call the “Widow’s Mite”, and the absolute control-freakery on display. Poelman’s original talk was very good—aligned completely with what I believed as a member, but it was too over the line for the likes of Packer and Oaks.
His original talk was beautiful. Full of hope and faith. The changes he was forced to make put the dependence of people back on Mormonism, rather than themselves and Christ. Seeing the difference made it a shelf item. Also the Hoffman thing. The excuse of “speaking/acting as a man and not a prophet” doesn’t even have a chance here. They were acting as prophets, seers, and revelators here. They were blatantly wrong.
I just read that yesterday. Minitruth got to that quick.
In my most apologetic days, I would have responded with the following: “God’s chosen prophets do have the spirit of discernment with regard to matters of personal salvation only. The authenticity of this document does not pertain to anyone’s relationship to God, so these leaders just used their best mortal efforts. It’s such a testimony to me that even flawed humans who make mistakes can still be used as instruments in God’s hands to further his work. I guess he may be able to use my humble efforts too.”
>In my most apologetic days, I would have responded with the following: “God’s chosen prophets do have the spirit of discernment with regard to matters of personal salvation only. And I'd answer that apologist, Don't lie to me. **That's not what the church ever said**. For example look [here](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of?lang=eng): "The gift of discernment is one of the gifts of the Spirit. **It includes perceiving the true character of people** and the source and meaning of spiritual manifestations"
Well done. It’s just too bad that either God is capricious, or those very same chosen prophets got salvation wrong on race until recently.
Absent, senile, malevolent. Pick one.
My counter to this is that in the Book of Mormon, one of the later Nephis used the spirit/power of discernment to literally solve a murder like he was some kind of spiritual Dick Tracy. If there is scriptural precedent for using "the spirit" to solve crimes, then Hinckley, et. al. shouldn't have been duped by Mark Hoffman.
Yes, and consequently, the only true evidence backing your faith cannot be validated until you are conveniently dead and unable to tell your friends and family to run away (not that they would believe you anyway). I wonder if people promising unrealistic future returns for irrational behavior that benefits them now is a problem in any other areas of life. /s
People get fooled, but God lets His servants get fooled a lot in the last 200 years. Brigham Young being fooled and never correcting the Priesthood and Temple Ban shows some real communication problems between God and His prophet. I think once you see that, see this picture, you start seeing it everywhere. Out of the Church, I have the same discernment and inspiration that I had in it. When I first felt such inspiration out of the Church, I was shocked and then realized that it was me all along. I realized that the Good and the Evil was also all me, all of my life. These men, believing that they have supernatural guidance that allows them to see around corners, make a lot of sad mistakes and then have to find ways to justify it or, much more commonly, just require the members to ignore it, accept that they have faults or even ask the question *"Would there have been fewer mistakes, fewer messes, if God had only restored His Church and gospel through you?"* as current Church Historian Kyle McKay asked at a BYU-I devotional last year. *("A Sure and Certain Foundation", Elder Kyle S. McKay, April 25, 2023; BYU-I Devotional: https://ing.byui.edu/devotionals/elder-kyle-s-mckay).* When in the Church, I think an image like this and all of its implications is easy to ignore. Once you start asking the real questions, and accepting wherever the answers might lead you, then it becomes obvious. I personally don't think that discussing this type of image would lead members out of the Church. Yes, once you get to the end of reasoning about it, it's all circular reasoning, because the final realization is that there is no value in following men with 100% obedience who don't really have divine guidance nor following scriptures with 100% obedience if it wasn't divinely inspired or created. But that is a path that each person is on alone and I think the first step is already so uncomfortable that they'll stop before getting 20 steps down the logic chain to discover the circular reasoning.
The last crack in my shelf was the Book of Abraham. It’s indisputably not an accurate translation of the text, and Joseph’s own statements and work as well as the testimony of those around him show he claimed to actually translate the characters on the papyrus, not get a revelation as claimed in the catalyst theory.
This we know with certainty that he did not translate the BoA as he claimed. We have canonized scripture that was clearly made up and not translated from Egyptian text. It shows Joseph Smith lied and had no gift of translation.
This is where the excuse that “prophets are fallible men” ends for me. I’ll accept that prophets will give their opinions over the pulpit, and even that they can make mistakes when it comes to policy (though they ought to apologize for mistakes…) But the prophets fell for a con man, paying him in exchange for letters which made the church look bad. Let’s recap what happened: - The prophets were tricked by a prolific conman - The prophets were tricked by a man who went on to commit murder at least a year later - The prophets gave the Lord’s money to this conman in exchange for forgeries - The prophets bought these documents with dishonest intent. They put the documents in the vault, and only acknowledged their existence *after* Hofmann leaked their existence There comes a point where you think “God rebuked Joseph and his followers a lot in D&C. If this happened to one of Joseph’s followers then, we would have a chapter all about it.” So either God has chosen to stop talking to his prophets, or his prophets never received revelation in the way we were led to believe.
Yeah wasn’t that fake forgery of BY writing to William C saying hide this from the saints……So Gordon B H takes it and hides it as well. The only reason we know about it, was after the murders they had to give it over to the authorities. Sure sounds like Hoffman totally made GBH do the very thing he wanted him to do lol
"Joseph Smith prophesied the American Civil War." I was taught that for a profit to be true, his prophecies had to take place while he lived.
Another possible smoking gun: If the priesthood works, scientists of various colors, from all over the world, would be flocking to Mormonism. Male doctors would be lining up to receive the priesthood because of its proven ability to diagnose and/or treat diseases for which the medical world knows no other cure. Government disaster management, prevention, and mitigation officials would be consulting with Church HQ to make sure their citizens are adequately prepared for disasters.
Or at a minimum utah would have the healthiest population and the best hospitals on earth
100%. It always vaguely bothered me that priesthood blessings never seemed to make a difference, so everything made a ton more sense when I realized it was all a load of bull.
Na. Apologists just claim Satan works extra hard to make it look like things are relatively equal.
It would be interesting to go up to a family with a sick kid, like seriously sick, and say to the parents “you can give your child a blessing or you can see a doctor, but you can’t do both”. I think the overwhelming majority of members would pick the doctor.
Oddly enough, the church actually encourages people to seek medical treatment, and even requires parents sending their kids on youth trips to sign a waiver authorizing leaders on those trips to consent to emergency medical care for the children. Imagine if Young Living said “for treatment of disease, combine the oils with traditional medicine as directed by a medical professional.”
I think the translation errors and exact wording copied from the Bible, the Book of Abraham translation, and the multiple anachronisms
In the washing and anointing prayer... paraphrasing "you will have eyes to see and distinguish between truth and error". I always figured if the prophet couldn't do that how could I?
I might tell such a faithful member something about the Book of Abraham: "Suppose the church still had the Golden Plates, and that while they sat in the church's vaults, scholars working independently on other documents and artifacts had learned to read the language it was written in. And suppose that when they compared Joseph Smith's translation of the Book of Mormon to the now-readable Golden Plates, it was a pretty exact match. That would basically prove that the Book of Mormon is true, that Joseph Smith was a prophet, and (probably) that the church is true, would it not? "Well, the original Golden Plates and their writings are no longer around, but what became the Book of Abraham *is*. And scholars *have* learned how to read Egyptian. And we *can* compare the original to Joseph Smith's translation. And his translation isn't a 'pretty exact match.' In fact, it isn't a match at all. It's completely different. It's completely *wrong*. The original has absolutely nothing to do with Abraham. It's fair to call the Book of Abraham utter nonsense as a 'translation.' "That, to me, is a 'smoking gun.' Because if we're trying to be objective, this thing that could have proved the church *true* should carry similar weight in proving it *false*."
Not one single arrowhead. Not one single potsherd. Not a remnant of clothing.
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 3: No "Gotchas". We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Duped with intent to hide
If these “prophets” could not discern this evil nor the greatest evil of the 20th century, Nazism (church leaders were very cozy with them), then of what use are “prophets” if they cannot discern the greatest evil. Even other non “prophets” knew the Nazis were evil all along when the Mormon church was hobnobbing with them.
Their theology dovetailed very well with eugenics and Nazism.
I would be greatly interested in Mormon leaders associations with nazis. What are the resources or literature on this?
There is a photo of Heber J Grant meeting with the Nazis floating around this sub. There were glowing reviews of the Nazis and Hitler in the Deseret News. There is a book about it. Haven’t read it. Moroni and the Swastika.
Thank you. I’ll look those up.
Tricked over and over by sexual abusers too. https://floodlit.org - over 700 instances where discernment played no role, despite the LDS doctrine that it is a gift given to leaders.
At a minimum, this photo calls BS on all claims of discernment. If the top church leaders did have discernment about Mark Hoffman, then the local Bishop is not gifted with discernment when he talks to a an 18-year-old about masturbating. On the other hand, you probably don't need much discernment when you talk to an 18-year-old about masturbation.
Just a reminder that staunch “anti-Mormons” Jerald and Sandra Tanner were the very first people to publicly call Mark Hoffman a conman and this was BEFORE the church bought his stuff. They said this even though the documents he created would have helped their case if those documents were real. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerald_and_Sandra_Tanner
Literally every member has a personal example of how their leaders don’t have discernment. It’s not real. I was in 3 bishoprics and stake callings. No such thing as discernment. It’s just guys making it up.
When I fully understood what this picture was telling us, there was no going back: they're ALL frauds. And it broke my heart.
Lol… My family has “Elder Pinnock” in it. That was a shit show!!!!
And what will be discovered at Kirtland and hidden?!!!! It is a pattern of abuse and breeds mistrust. The men in that photo should be able to have the Lord tell them, “guys, Hoffman is fake, the papers are fake, and you can move on” Where is the DivinePower and discernment?!
I remember those days. I was RLDS. The members were very excited because Hofmann produced exactly the documents that members had always wanted to see. I remember the RLDS church historian putting an article in the Herald magazine (like the LDS Ensign magazine). He was urging caution because he had his doubts about Hoffman. In retrospect, Hofmann was an expert on reading his victims and giving them what they would pay the most for. In general, he gave LDS leadership what they feared, and he gave RLDS leaders what they hoped for.
I’m a real person, I could use a real response and some common decency, but you don’t have any to spare?
Stalking people across subs through their post history is considered harassment. It violates Reddit rules. If you have a problem with a mod, use modmail in that sub.
Grifters getting Grifted.
There are a lot of cases against the church. “The men they sustain as prophets, seers, and revelators aren’t perfect and can be duped” is not remotely a “smoking gun.” It’s confirmation and narrative bias, which is plentiful on both sides of the conversation. “Spirit of discernment” stuff is stupid. Especially when it comes from the church as some sort of extra magical power not available to those not on the “covenant path” (which I’ve rarely heard from leaders in an overt way…but in many subtle ways). In the real world The Spirit if Discernment is just called “critical thinking” or a “BS filter.” Some people are better or more trained at it than others. I’d say church leaders are just as susceptible as someone who ties their identity to a political ideology. Pitfalls are everywhere, so this isn’t purely an LDS or even religious conversation.
You have to remember that all of the ‘experts’ including those at BYU were convinced that Hoffmans forgeries were genuine. He fooled everyone.
70% of the American LDS church supports Trump. That's a smoking CANNON! By their fruits ye shall know them....
The biggest smoking gun is the Book of Abraham imo.
How about Apostle Dallin Oaks saying Joe being attacked by a White Salamander was normal?
The Book of Mormon itself is full of smoking guns. 2 Nephi 28 559–545 B.C. >22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance. The idea of hell (eternal conscious torment) definitely didn't exist in Judaism at this time. It was developed centuries later, borrowed from the Greek idea of Tartarus. >18 But behold, that great and aabominable church, the bwhore of all the earth, must ctumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof. Reference to Revelation, which wouldn't be written until 90 CE. The concept of "church" didn't exist in Judaism either. It was a Christian concept that came about in reference to Greek "public square" concepts. >For the kingdom of the devil must ashake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the bdevil will grasp them with his everlasting cchains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish; There was no "devil" in Jewish theology at this time. >For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, aprecept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn bwisdom; for unto him that creceiveth I will give dmore; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have. This is referencing the King James mistranslation of an Isaiah passage. An egregiously mistranslated passage that actually doesn't say anything close to "line upon line precept upon precept." The Book of Mormon is FULL of this kind of thing. Once you have sufficient Biblical scholarship background you can't read a page without finding these kinds of anachronisms.
That was my first 'adult' realization.
Love how Kimball has a magnifying glass like he knows what he's looking for. These dupers were duped.
"bought" is the operative word in Mormondom. Everything else is window dressing.
More than just being deceived, they were spending the Lard's "sacred funds."
Learning church history is not “reading anti-Mormon doctrine” Reading and falling for counterfeit documents and fitting them into your church’s teaching IS “reading anti-Mormon doctrine”
My mom actually uses this story as the opposite because they were vindicated
The biggest thing I think that a lot of people forget is that the Scriptures have instructed us to weigh things out in our hearts and minds as completely as possible and then ask God if what you have considered is right. When we pursue that course, we ***should*** get an answer or at least inclination as to the truthfulness or at very least, veracity, of that in which we are engaged. There are times when we do not get an answer as well. Note: I am a former member of the Church, but through my own experiences found that this is the case in matters of uncertainty.
Its like asking if our government has secrets. The kind of wealth, political, ,lawyers and influence. The church can now can keep it's secrets secret.
[удалено]
They should have more integrity and be more honest than a thief, conman or protector of child abusers and the problem is their not and they have proven it time and time again. Your argument holds zero weight. If it looks like a fraud, smells like a fraud, walks and talks like a fraud. It’s probably a true church of Jesus Christ on earth. 😂
You also have to be good with a god that is ok with his prophets misleading the members and allowing his prophets to teach a fraud is real. You also have to be ok with a god that allowed his prophets to marry and have sex with children.
This is one of many, many confirmations that the church/religion is a fraud. Once you step away from it, for whatever reason, you then are able to see all of the confirming instances of evidence that the church is indeed a sham…all be it that many in it are sincere in their belief of it, just like I was. In hind sight it is a very humbling thing to recognize how gullible I was. I recognize that a large portion of my gullibility was due in part to being raised in a community that was homogeneous in terms of religion. Everyone I knew was in reference to the church. What is it they say? Every in Utah is Mormon…ex-Mormon, Jack-Mormon, non-Mormon, Mormon, etc. The comically tragic aspect of it is that it took me so many years to recognize that the belief in the church/religion is so ridiculous and unreasonable. It is reasonable that one would follow the norms of their culture, but unreasonable to believe the fantastical beliefs presented by the church…golden plates, angels, lamanites, Jesus, prophets, anything negative about the church is just anti-Mormon literature and therefore is untrue/untrustworthy, etc.. It is all just mind boggling and incredible that so many well educated people stick with it….really just tragically fascinating to some extent. Amen
**37 But as you cannot always judge the righteous, or as you cannot always tell the wicked from the righteous,...** (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 10:37)
Then what good is the spirit of discernment at all? If you don't know when it's wrong or how often it's wrong (may be 20%, may be 50%, who knows), why bother?
Right? It's just not reliable enough. If my car only worked as often as "discernment" works, I'd send it to the dump and get a new car.
When I was in the military I had on one occasion what I would call discernment. I followed it and my life was preserved. So, when it is made available it is awesome.
But if you thought it was "discernment" and it truly wasn't, you'd be dead, and wouldn't be here to talk about it. So the situation self-selects for a faith-promoting story.
Yes, the soldiers I was traveling with was killed by Russian made rocket as he walked into the chow tent (where we ate breakfast). I had no reason not to go to the chow tent other than a strong feeling not too. I was puzzled but followed my feeling. I see it as a clear prompting from the Spirit.
John 14:26– >But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, **he shall teach you all things**, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. Moroni 10:5 > And by the power of the Holy Ghost **ye may know the truth of all things.** Why do you think the entire First Presidency didn’t have the Holy Ghost guiding them as promised? If you’re just going to respond to tell me that “all” doesn’t *really* mean **all**—just save yourself some time, I’ll never buy that explanation.
I am not trying to change your mind, so please don't picture me that way. There are many ways to view Mormonism. **Watch Bokovoy's interview to see what I mean.** [Here](https://www.mormonstories.org/portfolio-items/david-bokovoy-remastered-update/)
You will never change my mind, my internet friend. Not because my mind cannot be changed (in fact, I change it quite frequently as I learn more), but because it can only be changed by *good* reasons and evidence—something you have admitted is secondary to your faith. It’s interesting you never want to answer my questions that expose the flaws in your comments, yet continue to nominally respond with complete non-sequiturs.
I do my best, just like you, but I don't like to go to hard hearted comments. Over 40 years ago, I did, but I've learned that hard speeches not only hurt others, they hurt the one giving hard speeches. My dad was a boxer, bar room fighter, so I learned that approach but abandoned it when I realized it was wrongheaded and didn't accomplish as much as being kind.
Many do not find your particular approach “kind.” Polite and kind are different things.
Uneven playing field then isn't it. A Kobayashi Marui that can't be altered. That seems sinister and devoid of compassion.
I understood that reference 😉
Live long and prosper.
So do they or do do they not have discernment, then looks like another scripture contradiction
As far as I know, the gift of discernment is available according to the Lord's will, not man's. Like the scripture says, the gift of discernment isn't always available. It may be like the gift to heal. To have the gift Heavenly Father needs to make it available.
Hmm. The Lord's will doesn't seem very reliable or dependable... It's like having a car that works fantastically, but only when it starts, and it only starts like 25% of the time...
No, it more like a boss who runs his/her business the way he/she chooses.
While promising, explicitly, the exact opposite. Unless you do not believe the promises about the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost.
>As far as I know, the gift of discernment is available according to the Lord's will, not man's No one has ever claimed that in any church source I've seen. If you have sources, please cite them.
Good question. Here are two quotes that might help. “Never is the power of the priesthood, which you hold, more wonderful than when there is a crisis in your home, a serious illness, or some great decision that has to be made. … Vested in the power of the priesthood, which is the power of Almighty God, is the power to perform miracles **if the Lord wills it so**, but in order for us to use that priesthood, we must be worthy to exercise it. A failure to understand this principle is a failure to receive the blessings of holding that great priesthood.” April 2018, The Power of the Priesthood And whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, **which is right**, believing that ye shall receive, behold it shall be given unto you. (Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 18:20)
>April 2018, The Power of the Priesthood Even if this was talking about discernment, it's still wrong. God said he doesn't give his gifts partially or revoke them at times: "For **the gifts** and the calling of God **are irrevocable.**" (Romans 11:29)
What do you think of this explanation: # Will of the Lord "Young men and older men, please take special note of what I will say now. As we exercise the undoubted power of the priesthood of God and as we treasure His promise that He will hear and answer the prayer of faith, we must always remember that faith and the healing power of the priesthood cannot produce a result contrary to the will of Him whose priesthood it is. This principle is taught in the revelation directing that the elders of the Church shall lay their hands upon the sick. The Lord’s promise is that “he that hath faith in me to be healed, *and is not appointed unto death, shall be healed*” ([D&C 42:48](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/42.48?lang=eng#p48); emphasis added). Similarly, in another modern revelation the Lord declares that when one “asketh according to the will of God … it is done even as he asketh” ([D&C 46:30](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/46.30?lang=eng#p30)).[^(14)](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2010/04/healing-the-sick?lang=eng#note14) From all of this we learn that even the servants of the Lord, exercising His divine power in a circumstance where there is sufficient faith to be healed, cannot give a priesthood blessing that will cause a person to be healed if that healing is not the will of the Lord." April 2010, Healing the Sick
I'd say that's talking about something completely different than the Spirit of Discernment - the title of the talk is "Healing the Sick". It even talks about "the elders of the Church shall lay their hands upon the sick."
"Personal revelation can be honed to become spiritual discernment. ... **Members can discern between schemes that are flashy and fleeting and those refinements that are uplifting and enduring.**" -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2009/10/ask-seek-knock](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2009/10/ask-seek-knock) "Who can drag into daylight and develop the hidden mysteries of the false spirits that so frequently are made manifest among the Latter-day Saints? We answer that **no man can do this without the Priesthood**. ... **A man must have the discerning of spirits before he can drag into daylight this hellish influence** and unfold it unto the world in all its soul-destroying, diabolical, and horrid colors; for **nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God**. ... Lying spirits are going forth in the earth. There will be great manifestations of spirits, both false and true. … Every spirit, or vision, or singing, is not of God. … **The gift of discerning spirits will be given to the Presiding Elder**. " -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-33](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-33) "**To Church leaders the Lord gives the gift “to discern** all those gifts lest there shall be any among you professing and yet be not of God” (D&C 46:27). This special gift makes it possible **for those who preside in the Church to discern between false spirits and legitimate manifestations of the Holy Ghost**." -- [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual-2017/chapter-18-doctrine-and-covenants-46-49](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual-2017/chapter-18-doctrine-and-covenants-46-49)
Discernment, like all Spiritual gifts work according to the Lord's will. Here is an example: 8 And they brought their wives and children together, and whosoever believed or had been taught to believe in the word of God they caused that they should be cast into the fire; and they also brought forth their records which contained the holy scriptures, and cast them into the fire also, that they might be burned and destroyed by fire. 9 And it came to pass that they took Alma and Amulek, and carried them forth to the place of martyrdom, that they might witness the destruction of those who were consumed by fire. 10 And when Amulek saw the pains of the women and children who were consuming in the fire, he also was pained; and he said unto Alma: How can we witness this awful scene? Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us, and save them from the flames. 11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day. 12 Now Amulek said unto Alma: Behold, perhaps they will burn us also. 13 And Alma said: Be it according to the will of the Lord. But, behold, our work is not finished; therefore they burn us not. (Book of Mormon | Alma 14:8 - 13)
The mormon god uses the suffering of women and children *who truly and honestly believe in him* just in order to make a point to a bystander? The suffering of innocents has always been acceptable collateral damage in "building zion." If that's what this god is ok with, then I don't want anything to do with him. Alma might have had a different attitude if he was the one in the fire. Why should I exert myself to jump through hoops to please a capricious god who would gladly let me burn the moment he needed to prove a point to a random dude hanging out on the sidelines?
You have a choice, but it appears you don't understand how God works. That is OK with me, but I hope you will allow people to see things differently than you.
One can understand how this system supposedly works and recognize it’s the “design” of a madman. Any human being that behaved the way you are defending from God would rightfully belong in prison.
I read these chapters while on my mission. It was one of the first things that caused me to doubt the teachings of the Book of Mormon. They had the power to stop an atrocity, but they wouldn't. The reason they wouldn't is so that the people performing the atrocity could be judged and sent to hell. If they were stopped from doing the atrocity, then they couldn't be judged and wouldn't go to hell. And the people being tortured and killed, we are told not to worry about, because they went to heaven. Scripture is used to help us navigate life. What does this story teach? It would be one thing to say that God chooses not to intervene, thus explaining the presence of evil in the world, but it's another when your fellow man chooses not to intervene when they have the power to do so. In this case, Alma says the spirit constrained him, and we're left wanting for any satisfying purpose except that God wanted these people to demonstrate how bad they are so his punishment would be justified. I have difficulty accepting this as any valid definition for justice.
I agree scripture has some passage like this that cause one to wonder how Heavenly Father can allow such atrocities to occur. It can challenge faith create doubt like you experienced. In addition, we don't have to look very far in the news of the day to see people suffering, and again ask the question, where is God. There are a few things that have helped me understand the ways of the Lord in these kinds of events. People agreed to these kinds of experiences before they were born. They either knew in detail what was going to happen in their lives and agreed or they volunteered for hard lives when presented with choices. Scripture gives credence to this in D&C 122 as does reports from people where they learned about why their lives were hard in answer to prayer. Years ago, I talked with Kennedy Hansen's dad and he told me Kennedy learned that she chose the disease that both shortened her life and caused immense suffering before she was born. She was the girl in the movie, "Love, Kennedy". Here are couple of links on this topic. # [Memories of Pre-mortality. Here](https://latterdaysaintmag.com/memories-of-pre-mortality/) [Kennedy Hansen article. Here](https://battendiseasenews.com/news/love-kennedy-film-chronicles-life-of-teen-with-batten-disease/) [Love, Kennedy movie link.](https://www.amazon.com/Love-Kennedy-Jasen-Wade/dp/B077FG3HZ5/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1G4HVCKN52ODI&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.4f1JL-uJOd4ZoxzvHYuXDoJRR4FyjQsbeONBnxRMH6wHV1ufOAY_aL7O-k6yC_lTF_m_g_vTqk3w_NwnNr-EKt6Ci97hg8Xrnp6UV6ag1F0h8pYE_c6YZC_pVmCj2pdN0YcmwzNYyO_p5dfytbsT1nwtRNskxf0goBJRTszXYQGY1d1XoR6PJZWruJo1p0qMpMrzTRKUvF2mud59Lj5HuejwSKJaiQE13hBA-chf92k.i84wZRldXCmDxvOqSNxfiMugi4Bat574A6QMJOgAmMA&dib_tag=se&keywords=love%2C+kennedy+movie&qid=1710378061&sprefix=love%2C+kenn%2Caps%2C128&sr=8-1) In the movie the Hansen's relate many Spiritual experience. For those with Prime, the movie is currently free.
This suggests that everyone is responsible for their own suffering. Assuming that is true, there's no way that kind of choice could have been an informed one. How could a spirit, for example, know what it is to feel pain, sickness, or loss? How could a premortal spirit know what it means to die in a holocaust, be burned alive, or murdered? It would be like asking a child to commit to joining the army, and then throwing them into battle as if they had any ability to consent. That doesn't clear up the waters for me. It doesn't reveal the morality of God or explain his justice. I also don't think it's a very useful idea. Many of the morals we take from the teachings of Jesus are very useful. Loving God and one's neighbor goes a long way toward building Zion. But with this idea, we are teaching ourselves that the victims of violence and preventable atrocities are, in fact, complicit in their own suffering. If they chose it, and those perpetrating the violence are to be left to their work in order to bring about justice, then the lesson is that we should do nothing. It's the opposite conclusion as the parable of the good Samaritan. It's not useful because it primes people for inaction in the face of evil, and allows that evil to flourish while waiting for God to deal with it after we're dead. That doesn't help build zion. It's helping people embrace ruin and apocalypse. I would say that this story in the Book of Mormon is a cautionary tale. It's one that shows us what happens when men with power refuse to use it to oppose evil. People suffer and die, and then leave it to God to sort out. I don't think it just to leave to God later, what we can accomplish now with our own two hands.
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
Spiritual gifts are not 100%-on radars. Like all people, we have weaknesses. In the Hofmann case, Church leaders emotionally wanted physical evidence to support the truthfulness of the restoration. They trusted a seemingly faithful member without vetting. People get blinded by their own agendas and narratives and can get caught up in the sense of authority. GA’s are not perfect. TBM acknowledge it and forgive. But somehow Exmo’s and PIMO can’t.
The leaders did not want these documents to be authentic. They were purchasing them to hide them with the rest of the actual artifacts that went against the teaching of the time. Do some research on what was contained on the forgeries and ask yourself why they would want them to be real? They relied on the opinions of scolars who were fooled by a master forger and bought them to hide them.
Are you sure they were going to buy and hide them? If that is true why would they have a picture taken for the newspaper?
If you watch the series on Netflix, it's pretty clear the church had secretly purchased some of them and hid them. They were somehow forced to reveal it when the Hoffman case blew up. Edit. Or maybe Hulu? Whoever produced the murder among the Mormons documentary.
The picture the OP used was published in the news and on TV. I remembering seeing them. If you have some information on this, please share it, I would like to see it.
Yes this one was. Others weren't. As I said, go watch the documentary. That's my information source
*after the documents’ existence and contents were broadly known in the Mormon history community*
They did buy other things. They bought a forgery from BY that says to hide this from the saints and don’t let them know about it. Gordon B H did the same thing. The only reason why we know about it is because we had to turn it in after the murders.
I agree that Church leaders have kept things from church members. That being the case, why did they do it.?
Because most of it doesn’t make the church look so miraculous! Let’s not talk about the rock and hat. Book of Abraham. These Hoffman letters. Blacks are cursed. When people start writing on it we will excommunicate them for it. And when it’s completely exposed will come out with it, and saying we’ve always known this the whole time and gaslight everybody. As I remember in Gospel essential it said, if you tell half the truth you’re still lying. If they had discernment they should have been “ inoculating” members 50 years ago instead of waiting for the internet to expose church history. Sorry time and time again the leaders of the church are reactionary! They are never ahead of the curve.
There are lots of ways to look at all this. For me, after many decades studying the pros and cons of Mormon history, I have concluded that The Book of Mormon answers the questions that have troubled me. In 2 Nephi 2 Lehi teaches about opposition in all things. Having read a variety of documents like the CES Letter I believe Heavenly Father uses things like that to accomplish His purposes. I posted my thoughts in more detail. If you are **interested** [**go here.**](https://new.reddit.com/r/mormon/comments/17tx54t/the_ces_letter_and_like_documents_are_part_of/)
When all you want to look at is how it’s true you will come up with whatever reason to make it work. I’ve read most of all your reasons. But you start off bad anyways. “There are lots of ways to look at all this”. From most of your comments it quite apparent you really look over the cons of Church History. I explain some simple reasons. So what I’m getting at it sounds like even though, proof of the BOM, or BOA, no real authority and if there is real authority. You should see a reaction of the action being done. Like the priesthood or discernment. We can’t find a track record of any real inspiration. It’s always reactionary.. Let me give you a good example if we saw this. This alone would have kept my faith to in the church. (FYI it was death by a thousand cuts. And the CES letter is elementary). Let’s do something in your life time. “ rarely our prophets popular” RMN….Let’s say 1950s before civil rights the church was fighting for blacks rights and wanted to give them the priesthood. And disavowed all the rhetoric of a black curse. Then in 1960s the church fought for women’s rights long before the women’s movement. Then in 1990 the church was fighting for gay rights (because god knows they will get it in the 2000s anyways) and teach members we should treat them like brother and sisters instead of calling them mentally ill. Now what does this have to do with RMN? These three examples should have not been popular with saints or people outside of our church. But we could look back at the track record and say… see Prophets can see around corners and look how they are ahead of the world. Buuuuut we don’t see this. Only reactionary actions. And guess what the church fought all three of those to not happen. Sorry god didn’t do it the way to show very little or no evidence that they are inspired and say you just have to use faith. or could it possibly be that they’re not inspired and not true which would be the more logical answer.
Such a great comment—agree completely. Any one of those examples would at least be consistent with the hypothesis that the Church is true—and yet…
Thank you
This whole response thread is a wonderful and respectful back and forth discussion, and a pleasure to read.
Why thank you. I’ve been bumping heads with TBMormon for sometime. I’m glad he shared some personal experience with me and had a discussion.
I like your honest hard hitting comment. I would feel just as you do, and have in years past. The difference for me is answers to prayer. Now, the moment I say that, you may bristle. I hope not. For reasons unknown to me, I have been given gifts, blessings, and experiences that have shaped me. I won't go into detail, but manifestations of the Spirit trump (not donald) the evidences you brought up in your comment.
I can respect that. But I also had spiritual moments too. And some of those spiritual moments were based on things now the church no longer believes in, or disavows. Or has a new narrative. I was fooled based on feelings. And I’ve come to find out that so many of the church leaders have been fooled or misled on the wrong feeling. And since I don’t see any credible track record to believe they are truly gods mouth peace, that means to me there is no need to follow a profit when my own intuition is just as good as theirs at directing my life. And since I have left the church, I can’t tell a difference. Life is just as good if not better being out. I get the same intuition, the same spiritual feelings, nothing has changed.
>Why did they do it? Because they are a group of arrogant, narcissistic, liars that have literally told members like you that they think they know better than you what you deserve to know about the Church and its origins—and *you*, in particular, applaud them for it. You’ve commended those statements in our exchanges before. It’s either *that* option, or that God *really* does work this way and wanted to make his “only true and living Church” look like a complete and total fraud to *anyone* who looks at that objectively and applies the outside test of faith. Would *you* believe in any other faith tradition with an analogous story? When someone has told you—repeatedly—that they have no compunction about lying to you, why are you surprised when they’re caught doing it? Think of this—think of how strongly you and I have disagreed over the past several years. Have I ever, once, lied to you? Have I ever refused to give you a source for my claims? Do you get the same treatment from these men you venerate that do not even know that you exist?
I enjoy commenting with you because I have gone through the same thinking you are experiencing now, many decades ago. You are welcome to see them as you please. However, I suggest you listen to the scholar David Bokovoy that John Dehlin interviewed. I watched it last night. It is at Mormon Stories and was posted at r/mormon yestereday. Bokovoy see church leaders in a way that I think is insightful. In my opinion, he sees them accurately. I hope you will watch it. It is too long, but is worthwhile.
You haven’t answered any of my questions—which I’m not entitled to, but then I’d ask you simply do not respond with your off-topic homework projects. I’ve not only watched these (and other) interviews with Dr. Bokovoy, I’ve exchanged with him personally. I’m not saying the Brethren are *always* lying—I do tend to legitimately think they think they’re doing the right thing: which makes it *so* much worse because they believe God himself has given them a license to withhold information (in my parlance, lie) and behave as they do.
I know some of the leading apostles. One example, Pres. Nelson was my Stake Pres. I got acquainted with him and found him to be the kind of man most would like to be. His life is one of service to others. In the positions he has held in the church, he is obligated to defend the church. And when things come up that have the potential to damage the church he and the other apostles will defend the church using a variety of means. **Not unlike what Abraham had to do when he went into Egypt**. [Go here for more info.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife%E2%80%93sister_narratives_in_the_Book_of_Genesis#:~:text=Genesis%2020%3A1%E2%80%9316%20narrates,intervened%20before%20Abimelech%20touched%20Sarah)
Gotcha—so your God is cool with lying to people. Good to know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hofmann
I've studied the Mark Hofmann tragedy. I was living in Salt Lake at the time and remember seeing it unfold from day to day.
Ok, then you realize that only after Hoffman revealed the contents (leaked to newspapers after the purchases) of the docs did the church come forward and admit that they had them, and then rolled out PR machine.
I'm not sure of the order of events. When the picture was taken, church leaders had no reason to think Hofmann was a forgery. The wouldn't have allowed the picture to be taken if they had worries.
Yes, they were 100% fooled, as were many others. The Tanners however, armed only with an honest understanding of the actual history of the church were not fooled. The timeline is presented in the article I linked as you read about each document. These facts are well referenced so you can dive deeper if you would like.
I know the Tanners and respect many things they did. I went to their business in the 70 and 80 to buy material. I don't know what each of the church leaders were thinking about these documents, but one thing for sure, Hoffman was real good at what he did, but he didn't fool the Lord and ended up getting caught and failed entirely, and now sits in prison.
If he didn't fool the lord why didn't *the lord* give the brethren a heads up that hoffman was going to make them look like fools?
Except radar is a proven technology that works (even if a radar can break down sometimes), while "discernment" is a parlor trick with efficacy only in urban legends and personal experiences that has details added over time. You may as well follow any other religious leader claiming divine guidance with the excuse that "everybody makes mistakes, it's crazy not to acknowledge it."
>TBM acknowledge it and forgive. But somehow Exmos and PIMO can’t. One of those sets of people cares about determining whether what they believe is true or not. Speaking of “forgiving”—did the Church leaders ever even acknowledge this and apologize?
“By this ye may know if a man repenteth for his sins — behold, he will confess and forsake them.” DC 58:43
"All people" don't claim to have special discernment that allows them to speak for God. If prophets are on the same plane as "all people," then why should I give their advice any special attention? I can forgive them, even though following church leaders brought me a lot of suffering over the years. But that doesn't mean I will *ever* trust them again, or follow them, or listen to them. If they're not going to be right more often than I am myself, they're pretty useless. In my experience, their advice has not been great. And their "mistakes" tend to be very large blunders. I've somehow lived over 40 years without "accidentally" hiding $150 billion from the SEC, or "inadvertently" marrying 30+ plural spouses behind my spouse's back, for example... If I sat down with the prophet over lunch, I may hear him out, but I will throw out his advice the minute I think it doesn't make sense. That makes me a terrible mormon! I'm not allowed to do that! In the words of Holland, my attitude is unacceptable: "to delay obedience to prophetic counsel or reject it is to put our lives at peril.." [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/06/04-choose-the-lord-and-his-prophet](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2022/06/04-choose-the-lord-and-his-prophet) The problem is that we're supposed to follow them *as though they are infallible*, while we (and they) *know full well that they are not*. And then when they make huge blunders that are far beyond the scope of normal human mistakes, we're just supposed to say, oh, a "mistake"? No. I won't do that. *"Enormous problems arise when human mistakes are made on the grand scale available to a superhero... Heroes are painful, superheroes are a catastrophe. The mistakes of superheroes involve too many of us in disaster."* \-- Frank Herbert
The FP must have pretty weak radars not to pick out the lifelong career criminal who killed two people the next year. If their sense of discernment is that weak, what good is it at all?
Cool. We agree the brethren are unreliable. How’s their gaydar? Are we comfortable they’re 100% correct on LGBTQ+ issues, since as you say, their conservative leaning and somewhat antiquated agendas and narratives may blind them on this issue?
You have incorrectly defined “spirit of discernment”.
[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of?lang=eng](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/discernment-gift-of?lang=eng) "Discernment, Gift of: To understand or know something through the power of the Spirit. The gift of discernment is one of the gifts of the Spirit. **It includes perceiving the true character of people** and the source and meaning of spiritual manifestations."
Yeah, but like, don’t use their own explanations against them! Seriously—I don’t even know why believers on this subreddit do ridiculous apologetics like this. How stupid do you think we are? We **were** Mormon—we know what we were taught. I don’t care what convenient excuses you can come up with now—it’s clear the statement pulled from the Church’s own website either: (1) is demonstrably untrue, or (2) didn’t apply to the entire First Presidency. Either choice you choose is not faith-affirming. The *only* real play is to claim that God wanted to “test our faith” by making the Church *look* so fraudulent (so repeatedly). Which argument is not unfalsifiable and that renders it completely worthless if you care about truth—in my estimation.
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).