Church Censorship Of Truthful History

[Bob Crockett]

Those in faith crisis who seem dismissed at times and feel alone

Those who are having a crisis in faith are naturally going to feel a conflict, alone, shunned.

I recently listened to a John Dehlhin podcast about a gathering in Virginia, I think. One of his most recent ones. John, who is in the church, kicked things off with a discourse about how he feels abandoned, alone and that nobody in the church is willing to address his concerns. He said it in an amusing way and drew chuckles.

The next speaker had resigned. In a sarcastic vein he complained about how he is not left alone. His bishop wants to meet him and address his concerns. He gets invites to ward events. "You can quit but they will never quit you.". Derisive laughter followed.

As to your premise, the Church is not in the business of publishing its history. The Church Historian has a divine mandate to keep a faithful history. There is no such mandate to publish it. For much of modern history the Church history the church has not had a staff of experts in history who could or could not say what was history. When I saw Rick Turley working on his MMM book I could see that he was trying to reconstruct knowledge about it from the same sources available to everybody else. There was no General Authority to go to with the answers.

You should run your posts through a spell and grammar check. Just saying. Sixth grade grammar and spelling is hard to believe and read. I guess when you teach your university level class on religion you don't have to write on the blackboard, right? (Please don't PM and chastise me. I can only take so much.)

Edited June 15, 2012 by Bob Crockett

[DBMormon]

You should run your posts through a spell and grammar check. Just saying. Sixth grade grammar and spelling is hard to believe and read. I guess when you teach your university level class on religion you don't have to write on the blackboard, right? (Please don't PM and chastise me. I can only take so much.)

Bob your welcome to ignore my threads anytime if My 6th grade grammar gets too tough. Maybe you would like "The Little Prince" by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry .... english of course http://en.wikipedia....e_Little_Prince

and here it is online http://home.pacific.net.hk/~rebylee/text/prince/contents.html

In seriousness I jump on in the morning before work for 15 minutes and during my lunch break. I type with two fingers. I try to respond to several threads each time due to the responses directed at me and I make mistakes... that will continue, so now you have the heads up. Grammar will not improve. So you can choose to point it out each time or you can ignore me and my threads or can enjoy the show.... either way no biggie. The class I teach is non credit for senior citizens and is a faithful presentaion on the church's doctrine and history and I do it by power point. It has spurned quite a bit of interest including a few referrals. It takes two days each time I teach it and I have done so at two local universities. each day is two hours. The first class on the history of the church and the second on the doctrine. But you already knew that, since I told you already, but obviously you feel it is your responsibility to mock me..... thank you.

Edited June 16, 2012 by reelmormon

[DBMormon]

As I investigated it more I realized that the sealings were paternal in nature.

Possible though in at least one to two of these sealings, intimacy is likely - Sylvia Sessions, Zina Huntington

He didn't do it for a sexual reason. The Lord would have destroyed Joseph if he was the sexual predator he is made out to be in some circles.

If one begins at the premise of the church's truth, perhaps but to say God destroys all sexual predators is of course not so. We also have bad apples in the church like any other walk of life and there have been Bishops, Stake Presidents, and even apostles caught doing similar things. http://blogs.standard.net/the-political-surf/2012/04/02/police-no-knock-raid-caught-an-lds-apostle-in-another-womans-bed/

Sexual sin will lead to the loss of the spirit and a stupor of thought.

many of the men found guilty of what they did, got away with it for years and were not suspected by members around them. While the spirit left, many can still becasue of education or charisma still be able to appear righteous and inspired.... but I will say sooner or later it catches up with them

For me it is illogical for Joseph to be a sexual predator. If he was he would have been unable to complete his calling and someone else would have been raised in his stead.

only if one assumes the church is true. Again this is more about those who are no longer are so sure.

[Bob Crockett]

I'm not sure it is mocking. Maybe. I have opined in the past that perhaps you should read some basic works in the area where you want to restate challenges to the way the church does things, and in doing so you might convey your doubts about the church in a more direct way.

I don't criticize you for being a doubter. I don't intend to ignore you. I don't think it fruitful to ignore somebody with whom I disagree.

But if there are weaknesses in your assumptions, statements or means of communication which reveal the possibility that maybe you haven't really paid the price by reading (and thus being able to write) I hope you don't see it as a personal attack if I raise questions.

[Calm]

Possible though in at least one to two of these sealings, intimacy is likely - Sylvia Sessions, Zina Huntington

Have you read this article:

The historical documents currently available do not conclusively describe the timetable or dynamics of Sylvia’s marriages to both Windsor Lyon and Joseph Smith.60 However, the best evidence indicates that Windsor and Syl- via experienced a religious and practical divorce after his excommunication and that she ceased living with him after that point. Her sealing to Joseph Smith also occurred after that date. These observations combine to suggest that Sylvia’s case should not be categorized as polyandrous, but polygynous, and should not be grouped with the other ten polyandrous marriages identified by Compton and other researchers. Importantly, no evidence of polyandrous sexuality is identified in Sylvia’s marital relationships.

http://www.mormonhistoricsitesfoundation.org/publications/studies_spring2008/4-MHS_spring2008_Joseph-Smith-Sylvia-Sessions.pdf

[SamIam]

It feels like the church is not being totally honest in some respects when it doesn't give the full picture on polygamy. Like when we study the prophets in rs/ph class, and when it's Joseph Smith & Brigham Young, and no mention of any other wives. Had someone told me about Joseph practicing I might still be the strong, faithful, true- blue- thru-&-thru that I use to be. Just sayin. But I had to have it come at me on the internet while looking up some geneology sights.

I wonder where you grew up that polygamy was such a mystery...anyway. Perhaps all you really needed was a perspective adjustment. If a church claimed to be a restoration of the ancient church and that it was going to restore all of the ancient practices don't you think that the ancient practice of polygamy would be on the agenda. Perhaps reading Deuteronomy 21:15 would help.

Deuteronomy 21:15

15 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated:

16 Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:

17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.

I'm not hoping that is going to solve your whole issue. There is an awful lot to study and know FROM THE SCRIPTURES that would have prepared you. Polygamy is a somewhat complex issue however, what I want to point out is that the ignorance that prompted your shock was also a lack of knowledge of the scriptures, and or a lack of testimony of the Bible as the word of God. The law of Levirate marriage - Yibbum are addendums to the law that also shed light on current practices in the church. The point is I suspect the depth of your knowledge base if more informed would have made the transition easier. That problem is readily resolved however. Start studying right away the principles of the OLD and New Testaments, toss back into the mix the Book of Mormon, pray about it and rekindle that old testimony with a little depth this time and then you won't be surprised about what the concept of restoration means. Pretty , soon you will be hopping and skipping your way to church and all will be mended, of course that's only if you are serious.

[sweetpotatoh]

Possible though in at least one to two of these sealings, intimacy is likely - Sylvia Sessions, Zina Huntington

If one begins at the premise of the church's truth, perhaps but to say God destroys all sexual predators is of course not so. We also have bad apples in the church like any other walk of life and there have been Bishops, Stake Presidents, and even apostles caught doing similar things. http://blogs.standar...her-womans-bed/

many of the men found guilty of what they did, got away with it for years and were not suspected by members around them. While the spirit left, many can still becasue of education or charisma still be able to appear righteous and inspired.... but I will say sooner or later it catches up with them

only if one assumes the church is true. Again this is more about those who are no longer are so sure.

reelmormon,

I understand where you are coming from. I simply disagree with your conclusion. There was a time where I questioned everything about the church. I realized that every piece of history we have concerning the church is filtered thru a lens. Whos lens is it filtered thru and what are their intentions?

I hope you find peace in your journey.

[Scott Lloyd]

reelmormon,

I understand where you are coming from. I simply disagree with your conclusion. There was a time where I questioned everything about the church. I realized that every piece of history we have concerning the church is filtered thru a lens. Whos lens is it filtered thru and what are their intentions?

A wise attitude indeed.

I would add here that there is a fuzzy line between having questions and doubts and engaging in public faultfinding. The former is excusable; the latter potentially injurious, both to the person engaging in it and to others affected by it, both the object of it and to others who hear it.

[DBMormon]

A wise attitude indeed.

I would add here that there is a fuzzy line between having questions and doubts and engaging in public faultfinding. The former is excusable; the latter potentially injurious, both to the person engaging in it and to others affected by it, both the object of it and to others who hear it.

Agreed - I see that now. So how does one find a format to discuss all their issues and get help with them. Who is willing to have a 4 hour one on one fireside with me?

Edited June 20, 2012 by reelmormon

[maxrep12]

In my personal experience, I was never taught such a thing, either at home or at Church. The closest I have seen to such a thing coming from a Church source is Elder Ballard's admonition to "give the Lord equal time." That seems reasonable to me.

So, I guess my anecdotal evidence cancels out yours.

lds.org contains a broad database of curriculum. Perhaps you can find something on there that supports the notion that the Church tells its members not to read anti-Mormon material.

That strikes me as an understatement.

I rarely see content on this board that inaccurately describes something as anti-Mormon. Perhaps you can cite a more-or-less recent example.

Here is my anecdotal 2 cents. "Reading anti mormon material is spiritual pornography".

Not faith promoting = off limits. I could read between the lines.

Edited June 20, 2012 by maxrep12

[Log]

Agreed - I see that now. So how does one find a format to discuss all their issues and get help with them. Who is willing to have a 4 hour one on one fireside with me?

I would be - but I may not have all the answers you are seeking. You might also consider going to the FAIR conference.

[DBMormon]

I live in ohio. but I think I got a two minute answer that was just as good if not better.

LOG - for the record... your awesome

Edited June 20, 2012 by reelmormon

[HiJolly]

I live in ohio. but I think I got a two minute answer that was just as good if not better.

LOG - for the record... your awesome

I was just going to ask were you reside(I am in the SLC valley). I think we could both enjoy some time together.

HiJolly

[Calm]

I live in ohio.

You might consider writing to FAIR if you want to talk face to face to someone. I know of some members who live in the general area.

[DBMormon]

I was just going to ask were you reside(I am in the SLC valley). I think we could both enjoy some time together.

If you want to visit Kirtland, I could give you a tour.

[Deborah]

Potential members need to learn more about the doctrine and even the culture of the LDS church in order to make educated decisions.

If the purpose were to get people to simply join the organization that might be true. But the purpose of missionary work is to find those who are waiting (even if they don't know it) for the gospel message and are converted by the spirit. Once one is converted by the spirit and has received the Gift of the Holy Ghost they can continue to learn and hopefully discern the true from the false and the important from the unimportant. But without that spiritual conversion it doesn't matter what "facts" one teaches.

[Deborah]

I feel sorry for those who did not have such an upbringing, and wish that all parents were as careful as my mother in teaching these things to their children.

I was a convert at age 14 and so did not have such advantage. When issues like Polygamy or the Priesthood came up (and this was in the 60's) I of course was disturbed, but because of my spiritual conversion and the experiences I had I could table these issues until I could learn more.

That opportunity didn't come until I was able to go to BYU 3 years later and discovered the church section in the library. Funny how all these books were freely available and no one told me I couldn't read some of the more "controversial" stuff. Needless to say I spent hours there and that is where I was truly converted not only in heart but in mind. But this is why I said previously one must be converted by the spirit and if there are things that are challenging they can be put aside until understanding comes.

[Storm Rider]

I was a convert at age 14 and so did not have such advantage. When issues like Polygamy or the Priesthood came up (and this was in the 60's) I of course was disturbed, but because of my spiritual conversion and the experiences I had I could table these issues until I could learn more.

That opportunity didn't come until I was able to go to BYU 3 years later and discovered the church section in the library. Funny how all these books were freely available and no one told me I couldn't read some of the more "controversial" stuff. Needless to say I spent hours there and that is where I was truly converted not only in heart but in mind. But this is why I said previously one must be converted by the spirit and if there are things that are challenging they can be put aside until understanding comes.

No, you are supposed to say that the Church had complete control over every book on Mormonism ever written and hid them in a deep, dark hole in the ground. It makes me want to smack people up side the head. Do they hear what they are actually saying? What the facts are is that if anyone wanted to learn anything all they had to do was read the bloody books! Now, after rejecting their beliefs because they are not "intellectual" or "enlightened" they must find a scapegoat for their own laziness and stupidity. The Church "hid" it from me; they censored material.

Well, DUH! Show me one Christian church on the earth that before it shares a message on the resurrection of Jesus Christ also admits to the paltry evidence for such; as in zero evidence? Or when talking about the Old Testament the church begins by saying there is no evidence whatsoever for any of the first five books? Who does this? Who should do this? Does Islam begin with a declaration of the melding of different religions into a new context called Islam?

It is like these people crawled out from under a rock and want everyone else to act differently then they do. Everyone else must be held to a standard that they could not keep in their wildest dreams. Frankly, these type of people bore me to tears and their complaints, their innuendos, their ignorance don't merit a tin can of spit. What annoys me is to see the number of negative titles on this forum. Of course, the good side is that at least these individuals come here to spout their tired arguments that have been around since.....Howe. Yes it is good that we respond to them; yes it is good they can come here to talk again about the same old things. I wonder when they might have an original criticism or when they might actually begin by finding something positive in life, in the gospel, in the Church, in the leaders, in anything except their own overblown sense of self?

Today has been a tough day and this is my rant, or second rant; heck it could be by fiftieth. I am a craggy old man that just like to rant.

[DBMormon]

Storm Rider, I agree the information is out there, and when you consider it with other events like the resurrection and 5 books of moses, it makes sense. Good post

[Scott Lloyd]

Here is my anecdotal 2 cents. "Reading anti mormon material is spiritual pornography".

Not faith promoting = off limits. I could read between the lines.

What is the source of your "spiritual pornography" quote, and who told you that it's off limits if it's "not faith promoting"?

[CV75]

That is hiding truth. That is not being forthright. That is not telling the whole truth. *** They do keep people in the church quiet about publishing troubling factual info. unless you want to call Mr. Bitton liar, one must come to terms with that.

When I see these threads about what the big, bad Church has done, I remember how much I’ve learned from Helaman 16:14-23 Indeed, the Book of Mormon was written for our day (and any other!)!

20 But behold, we know that this is a wicked tradition, which has been handed down unto us by our fathers, to cause us that we should believe in some great and marvelous thing …therefore they can keep us in ignorance, for we cannot witness with our own eyes that they are true.

21 And they will, by the cunning and the mysterious arts of the evil one, work some great mystery which we cannot understand, which will keep us down to be servants to their words, and also servants unto them, for we depend upon them to teach us the word; and thus will they keep us in ignorance if we will yield ourselves unto them, all the days of our lives.

22 And many more things did the people imagine up in their hearts …for Satan did stir them up to do iniquity continually; yea, he did go about spreading rumors and contentions …that he might harden the hearts of the people against that which was good…

23 And notwithstanding the signs and the wonders which were wrought among the people of the Lord, and the many miracles which they did, Satan did get great hold upon the hearts of the people…

[DBMormon]

CV75 - I have come to terms with some of the things I said that iwish I had conveyed better. I am sorry

[CV75]

CV75 - I have come to terms with some of the things I said that iwish I had conveyed better. I am sorry

No apology necessary--I was experimenting with the art of provocation without contention!

[DBMormon]

was that sarcasm or humor? either way have an awesome day!

[CV75]

was that sarcasm or humor? either way have an awesome day!

Neither! It was an actual experiment. I wish you every happiness in your new-found freedom!