The Latest Anti-Mormon Deception: "Futuremissionary.Com"

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I

 

  The Church has essentially lied to it members because it didn't want them to know that Smith translated the BOM the same way he hunted for buried treasure using folk magic, using his seer stone in his hat. 

What a load. This has been addressed so many times. It is about as bad a reason to leave the church because JS had a gun at Carthage and you didn't know about until you went on the internets*.  Essentially your narrative is false. The church hasn't lied and they have not hidden how JS translated the BoM. If you want to have any credibility as a newby around here I suggest that you don't start with posts that contain such blatant untruths.

 

 

* spelled that way on purpose.

[nrnowlin]

A deception is defined as an attempt to deceive or trick someone into believing something that is not true.  A factual statement of truth is not a deception.  For instance, it is a fact that Joseph Smith was convicted of fraud in a court of law.  The attemp of Mormon apologists to make it appear that Smithg was not convicted, or to make it seem that the conviction was meaningless, is a deception.  It is a fact that the Book of Mormon has been changed over 100,000 times since its original publication is a fact.  The attempt of Mormon apologists to insist that only minor grammatical and punctuational have been made in the BOM is a deception.  It is a fact that Joseph Smith had wine to refresh himself an hour or so before he was lynched at the Carthage Jail, and that he died with wine on his breath.  It is a deception when Mormon apologists insist that he didn't, or that the wine was used for sacrament.  It's a fact that Brigham Young introduced the Adam-God Doctrine into Mormonism as ex cathedra revelation and scripture in 1851, and placed the Adam-God Doctrine in the Mormon Temple liturgy in 1877, and that it remained in the Mormon Temples until around 1905, and was called the Lecture at the Veil. Before th advent of the Internet, Mormon apologists feverishly denied the Adam-God Doctrine.  Now they are trying to say that, even though it is true, it just didn't matter.  That is a deception.  They say that the exalted-man father god that they worship, and to whom they pray, changed and changed to become a Mormon father god.  The facts are that he supposedly handed down the revelations to Joseph Smith that became the Book of Commandments, in 1832, and then changed his mind again, two years later, about every one of those commandments when they were changed by Smith to become the Doctrine and Covenants in 1835.  The Mormons claim that their god stopped changing when he became their exalted-man god.  This is a deception.  Their god remains a very changeable false god. The Mormons want their people to believe that God almighty has approved their genealogy doctrines, when Paul told, both,Timothy and Titus in the New Testament not to indulge in genealogy, endless, or otherwise.  This has been an ongoing deception by the Mormons, defended by Mormon apologists.  In essence, every aspect of Mormon doctrine that are Christian heresies, which are defended by Mormon apologists, are deceptions.
 

[Danzo]

  For instance, it is a fact that Joseph Smith was convicted of fraud in a court of law.  

 

Call for reference

[nrnowlin]

Hey, Mola Ram, I've been in five temples, in hundreds of Mormon chaples (ward buildings and stake centers), and I sat through Primary programs, Sunday Schools, and gospel doctrine classes from 1970 until 2011, and I have never seen a picture, or illustration, showing Smith looking into a hat to translate the golden plates.  All of the 'approved' pictures show him sitting at a table with that Urim and Thummin, before his golden plates.  It is true that the fact about the hat was written into several books, but it has never been presented truthfully to Mormon investigators by the full-time Mormon missionaries.

[nrnowlin]

The fact about Smith's conviction is on the Internet, if you are willing to do some research.  Just plug into Google, "Joseph Smith convicted of fraud in 1827," and about 100 websites will come-up verifying the same facts.  Gerlad and Sandra Tanner have done some great research into Joseph Smith's history, which the Mormon Church has been trying to hide for well-over a hundred years.  Did you know that Smith wore a Jupiter Talisman around his neck, and he had it on the day he was shot.  That fact has been well-documented on the Internet.  You see, Mormons can't go into public libraries any more any steal the books that tell the truth about Mormonism. Even if they do, the truth from the books has been published on the Internet,

[Kevin Christensen]

It's not just a matter of documenting facts that speak for themselves. It's a matter of context and interpretation. As Jesus pointed out, the same "seeds" (words in the parable) can offer dramatically different yields depending on the care and nurture given.

Earlier on in the thread on the Letter to a CES director, in a few posts, I disputed the fundamental mindset of the Letter to a CES Director. FAIR has offered direct responses to many points.

Jeff Lindsay's site would actually have been a very helpful resource for Jeremy Runnells to consider, before uncritically squatting at Mormonthink.

Jeff, by the way, is an amateur apologist, not a professional. See his bio here:

http://www.jefflindsay.com/

 

In Shanghai, China, I serve as Head of Intellectual Property for a growing Asian company, APP-China (Asia Pulp and Paper). My previous dream job was as an innovation and IP consultant at Innovationedge, where I got to work with some of the world’s largest companies as well as small startups, lone inventors, and everything in between. I especially loved working with bright, innovative people who were out to deliver breakthrough products and services to the world. Experiences ranged from helping world-class teams develop IP strategy for new products to helping new technologies get connected with partners for licensing and commercialization. I had four years of fun and adventure at Innovationedge and loved it. Great firm! Will always be grateful for the privilege I had of working there and learning from such good people.

Before that, I was Corporate Patent Strategist at Kimberly-Clark Corporation, a terrific consumer products company. I was at K-C for nearly 14 years in the research community there. My work there included working with about 20 IP committees around the company to help guide our IP strategy and tactics; driving IP generation to cope with the threats and opportunities of disruptive innovation (topics like RFID, emerging IT tools, virtual reality, etc.); guiding design-around activities and applying other tools to strengthen our patents; and leading an aggressive effort to use defensive publications as an important tool in our cost-effective IP strategy.

Jeff's LDS FAQ has been around well over a decade. Before the Letter to a CES Director appeared, Jeff had already addressed all of the issues raised. There is a reason why Jesus says, "Seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you," and not "Blessed are they who sit like lumps, for they shall be spoonfed, and never caught off guard, and never, ever disappointed by anyone."

http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/index.html

The Letter to a CES Director is, from my perspective, a simple demonstration of the law of the harvest in action.

I notice that if I compare the actions and attitudes demonstrated in the Letter to a CES Director, and the actions and attitudes demonstrated in Jeff's LDS FAQ with this list of Bible scriptures that describe what a person ought to do to find truth, it becomes obvious why the difference in the harvest, in comparing Jeff's conclusions with Jeremy Runnells's conclusions.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets/Seeing_the_truth

By this standard, Jeff demonstrates exactly what to do. And Jeremy demonstrates exactly what not to do.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Edited March 13, 2014 by Kevin Christensen

[Danzo]

The fact about Smith's conviction is on the Internet, if you are willing to do some research.  Just plug into Google, "Joseph Smith convicted of fraud in 1827," and about 100 websites will come-up verifying the same facts.  Gerlad and Sandra Tanner have done some great research into Joseph Smith's history, which the Mormon Church has been trying to hide for well-over a hundred years.  Did you know that Smith wore a Jupiter Talisman around his neck, and he had it on the day he was shot.  That fact has been well-documented on the Internet.  You see, Mormons can't go into public libraries any more any steal the books that tell the truth about Mormonism. Even if they do, the truth from the books has been published on the Internet,

 

Humor me and give me a reference.

[Tacenda]

I think apologists are probably leary of some of the essays coming out, because they might have defended against some of them. For instance blacks not holding the PH, and it not being doctrine but maybe policy or not from God. This has been a real thorn in some TBM's side, to see the back pedaling.

It's time for the church to take back that responsibility. Mormon apologists need a break. Church leaders, it's about time.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Tacenda

[Kevin Christensen]

The fact about Smith's conviction is on the Internet, if you are willing to do some research.  Just plug into Google, "Joseph Smith convicted of fraud in 1827," and about 100 websites will come-up verifying the same facts.  Gerlad and Sandra Tanner have done some great research into Joseph Smith's history, which the Mormon Church has been trying to hide for well-over a hundred years.  Did you know that Smith wore a Jupiter Talisman around his neck, and he had it on the day he was shot.  That fact has been well-documented on the Internet.  You see, Mormons can't go into public libraries any more any steal the books that tell the truth about Mormonism. Even if they do, the truth from the books has been published on the Internet,

See Gordon Madsen on the Legal Setting of the 1826 Trial.

https://byustudies.byu.edu/showtitle.aspx?title=5978

And on the career of Jerald and Sandra Tanner, a non-LDS assessment here:

https://dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V17N02_37.pdf

And D. Michael Quinn's response to their work here:

http://www.lds-mormon.com/mo2.shtml

There are also several detailed responses at the Maxwell Institute.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[nrnowlin]

The Internet is a virtual library, and just like in a traditional library, you have to do your research properly.  Jeremy put links into his letter to the various websites.  Read the letter, check-out the websites, and then, cite what you believe is not fact. 

[Calm]

I think apologists are probably leary of some of the essays coming out, because they might have defended against some of them.

Not any apologists I know. We are all quite happy.

[Danzo]

The Internet is a virtual library, and just like in a traditional library, you have to do your research properly.  Jeremy put links into his letter to the various websites.  Read the letter, check-out the websites, and then, cite what you believe is not fact. 

 

So you don't have any references.

 

Who is being deceitful now?

[Calm]

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Occultism_and_magic/Jupiter_talisman

[Kevin Christensen]

The Internet is a virtual library, and just like in a traditional library, you have to do your research properly.  Jeremy put links into his letter to the various websites.  Read the letter, check-out the websites, and then, cite what you believe is not fact.

Facts like the actual year of Joseph Smith's first trial? Or the facts of the legal context that Gordon Madsen points out? Or how to spell Jerald? Or whether Jeff Lindsay is a professional apologist? Those kinds of facts?

For the record, I read Jeremy's Letter. I responded to it on another thread. FAIR has responded. I may do a further response, if I get the time. I pointed out that Jeff Lindsay had already responded to all of the issues raised. Try finding the name of specific LDS discussions in Jeremy's letter. Not unnamed apologists with bad habits, but specific works and specific authors who have written on specific issues. For example, Jeremy complains about Book of Mormon theology. Where does he discuss Brant Gardner's 203 presentation at FAIR on that very topic?

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2003-fair-conference/2003-monotheism-messiah-and-mormons-book

I've even published on the topic myself, but you wouldn't know from reading Letter to a CES Director.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Edited March 13, 2014 by Kevin Christensen

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Hey, Mola Ram, I've been in five temples, in hundreds of Mormon chaples (ward buildings and stake centers), and I sat through Primary programs, Sunday Schools, and gospel doctrine classes from 1970 until 2011, and I have never seen a picture, or illustration, showing Smith looking into a hat to translate the golden plates.  All of the 'approved' pictures show him sitting at a table with that Urim and Thummin, before his golden plates.  It is true that the fact about the hat was written into several books, but it has never been presented truthfully to Mormon investigators by the full-time Mormon missionaries.

So if it is not a picture or an illustration it didn't happen. Surely you are trolling us? Look they address (IE, the talked about it) the stone in the hat at conference a few years back. It also appeared in print by official LDS sources.  No one is hiding how JS translated the BoM. And what the crap does having been to five temples and hundreds of Mormon Chapels have to do with any of your BS claims? Are you seriously trying to appeal to that as some type of authority? It sounds like it.

 

Its like those tools that come to this site and say "I have pioneer stock in me". So what I say means something. You are free to have your own opinions you are not free to have your own facts.  I am well aware of the pictures the church issues. And that has been addressed too. You might want to do a search and you might learn something.

 

It is also a lie that it has never been presented to investigators. I talked about it on my mission with quite a few investigators. Sorry but your narrative is falling flat on it's face. The only thing that you have right is the illustrations that are used. But I never once thought that illustrations represent doctrine. Artistic lisence is used, I thought everyone knew that.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The fact about Smith's conviction is on the Internet, if you are willing to do some research.  Just plug into Google, "Joseph Smith convicted of fraud in 1827," and about 100 websites will come-up verifying the same facts.  Gerlad and Sandra Tanner have done some great research into Joseph Smith's history, which the Mormon Church has been trying to hide for well-over a hundred years.  Did you know that Smith wore a Jupiter Talisman around his neck, and he had it on the day he was shot.  That fact has been well-documented on the Internet.  You see, Mormons can't go into public libraries any more any steal the books that tell the truth about Mormonism. Even if they do, the truth from the books has been published on the Internet,

He was never convicted.  Now I know you are trolling us.

[nrnowlin]

Here goes, regarding the trial and conviction of Joseph Smith:

 

 

 

http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech4.htm

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Legal_issues/Trials/1826_glasslooking_trial

 

http://www.lightplanet.com/response/1826Trial/facts.html

 

http://sidneyrigdon.com/criddle/Smith-ConMan.htm

 

http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon430.htm

 

You will notice that I didn't include any Mormon sources.  Why?  Sophistry is defined as using words, like Michael Griffith, Jeff Lindsay, Hugh Nibley, John Sorenson, Bruce R. McConkie, and many other Mormon apologists who use words to confuse rather than to enlighten and illuminate.  When Mormon defenders of JS try to gloss-over the truth of what actually happened in 1826-27, they do it using inflated diction, an erudite vocabulary, and without saying anything credible, and at the end of their spiel, just say that JS was as pure as the driven snow and expect rank-and-file Mormons to accept their gobbly-gook.  I have included some sources that are not typically anti-Mormon.

 

A professional Mormon apologist is a person, or persons, supported financially by the Mormon Church in their efforts to undermine valid criticisms of Mormonism.  FARMS, at BYU, is a group of professional apologists.  Jeff Lindsay also receives payments from the Mormon church for his apologetic services. 

 

 

[volgadon]

A professional Mormon apologist is a person, or persons, supported financially by the Mormon Church in their efforts to undermine valid criticisms of Mormonism.  FARMS, at BYU, is a group of professional apologists.  Jeff Lindsay also receives payments from the Mormon church for his apologetic services. 

 

Where do I sign up?

[Calm]

FairMormon is not a Mormon source?

[nrnowlin]

Give me an official Church website showing a picture of Smith using his hat to translate.  Or guide me to a an official Church publication, readily available to all members, showing Smith using his hat.  I have researched what the MTC tells its missionaries what to say and do during discussions.  Since 1980, it has been very structured, and the only approved statement about JS translating those golden plates has been that he used the Urrim and Thumim, and the good old Oliver Cowdery was his scribe.  I used to give those discussions, too.  The missionaries were told not to say anything else.  Since 1990, most of the young men and women who go out as missionaries have no idea that JS used the seer stone to claim he translated.  You know all of those colorful pictures of JS translating the golden plates, in the ward libraries?  You won't be able to find any pictures of him using his hat.  You know why?  It relates to folk magic.  If the Church has mentioned in an official book that JS translated out of his hat, why not display pictures of it?  They can't afford to do that..

[Danzo]

Here goes, regarding the trial and conviction of Joseph Smith:

 

 

 

http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changech4.htm

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Legal_issues/Trials/1826_glasslooking_trial

 

http://www.lightplanet.com/response/1826Trial/facts.html

 

http://sidneyrigdon.com/criddle/Smith-ConMan.htm

 

http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon430.htm

 

You will notice that I didn't include any Mormon sources.  Why?  Sophistry is defined as using words, like Michael Griffith, Jeff Lindsay, Hugh Nibley, John Sorenson, Bruce R. McConkie, and many other Mormon apologists who use words to confuse rather than to enlighten and illuminate.  When Mormon defenders of JS try to gloss-over the truth of what actually happened in 1826-27, they do it using inflated diction, an erudite vocabulary, and without saying anything credible, and at the end of their spiel, just say that JS was as pure as the driven snow and expect rank-and-file Mormons to accept their gobbly-gook.  I have included some sources that are not typically anti-Mormon.

 

A professional Mormon apologist is a person, or persons, supported financially by the Mormon Church in their efforts to undermine valid criticisms of Mormonism.  FARMS, at BYU, is a group of professional apologists.  Jeff Lindsay also receives payments from the Mormon church for his apologetic services. 

 

We know there was a trial.

 

However you said he was convicted.

 

Convictions by courts of law are Always recorded (they are not kept secret)

 

It seems you have a little trouble with the truth yourself. Once you learn to be honest, we can start taking you seriously

Edited March 13, 2014 by Danzo

[Calm]

After all, Mormons only look at the pictures so actual text doesn't count.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

After all, Mormons only look at the pictures so actual text doesn't count.

Right. That is why he keeps saying "Show me a picture". What a red herring.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

We know there was a trial.

 

However you said he was convicted.

 

Convictions by courts of law are Always recorded (they are not kept secret)

 

It seems you have a little trouble with the truth yourself. Once you learn to be honest, we can start taking you seriously

Yeah, we do know that. But you see don't let actual facts get in the way of his narrative. JS was never convicted of any crimes. He was put on trial a few times though.

[nrnowlin]

You people amaze me.  I produce credible history from Gerald and Sandra Tanner that has been extolled by professional historians at several universities, and you get personal and talk about Gerald's and Sandra's personalities, early life, and religious devotion.  It's just like Mormon apologists!  The facts are the facts.  Smith was arrested, tried, and convicted of fraud.  There are many more websites than the ones I provided that show the court records and the testimonies.  Joseph Smith also proclaimed false prophecies, he was an adulterer, many times over, if not a pedophile, and was very vengeful when the truth was published about him.  I hope that Thomas Monson is cited with a contempt charge by the Wetminister Magistrates Court in the UK, if he doesn't honor the summons issued against him and the Church.  The British are pretty stern about the law, and if Monson doesn't show-up to answer charges of fraud, the British government just might confiscate and attach the properties of the Mormon Church to pay the plaintiffs in a default judgment.