Doctrine from the Book of Mormon

[Big ned]

Here is an interesting article on authenticity of a history of the first family mentioned in the Book of Mormon. Fascinating read.

http://www.meridianmagazine.com/gospeld ... nephi.html

[cerealkiller]

Most eloquent and poignant in todays world. The US could do (and has certainly done) much worse than Mitt Romeny as president. He is a man that solves problems and brings people together. If the US needs anything more than that, I don't know what it is.

I thought he handled it admirably and the way he should have. He doesn't have to explain his personal beliefs to anyone. They are on LDS.org for anyone to look at and study. He is running for President of the US, not pastor of the US.

No, he does not have to explain anything to anybody. Neither do the voters who do not vote for him because of his (weird) beliefs.
As a pathological liar he would fit nicely within the Washington power elite.

Well, again a day for celebration. Another racist bigot has kicked the bucket!
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/ ... 9520080128

After Jerry Falwell graced us with his departure last year, Gordon Hinckley (yes, the guy who had a direct line to god and told us that blacks are filthy, dirty human abominations) finally joined his equally idiotic buddy. A good day for humanity!

[Big ned]

Cereal, really, your childish name calling is beyond belief. I've seen pictures of you, so I know you are not a ten year old, but I wish you would quit acting like one.

You continue to throw out comments about something you have no idea about. You will find not one bigoted comment in any of Gordon B Hinkley's teachings anywhere.

If the church taught or believed the complete outright lie you just typed, they certainly wouldn't be sending millions every year to aid with the various crises that exist in Africa.

You know nothing about the Prophet (who, unlike Falwell) didn't not receive millions from serving as a leader of the church. He was a very decent loving man. I'm sorry you didn't take time to get to know him before you slandered him.

[cerealkiller]

You have seen pictures of me? Your point being....? I saw your pictures too, nanananana!

After the personal attacks, maybe you should read up a bit:

Does Gordon B. Hinckley Always Tell The Truth?
Article Archived: Jan 23, 2006, at 07:31 AM
Stored Under Topic: GORDON B. HINCKLEY - SECTION 2 (click Topic Name for More Articles)
Outside Link To Article: RIGHT CLICK - COPY LINK LOCATION
http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_gord ... tion2.html



Does Gordon B. Hinckley always tell the truth?
Gordon B Hinckley is president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Most of the time he speaks in vague generalities like "be good" or "isn't it wonderful?" or "I don't know." But sometimes he says specific things, and when you look closely they are often not true. Here are some examples of Gordon B. Hinckley statements that are not true.

1. Does the church teach that a man can progress to become a god? 1994: yes. 1997: no.
Gordon B. Hinckley in 1994, repeating perhaps the best known teachings in all Mormonism:

"On the other hand, the whole design of the gospel is to lead us onward and upward to greater achievement, even, eventually, to godhood. This great possibility was enunciated by the Prophet Joseph Smith in the King Follet sermon (see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 342-62) and emphasized by President Lorenzo Snow. It is this grand and incomparable concept: As God now is, man may become! (See The Teachings of Lorenzo Snow, comp. Clyde J. Williams, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1984, p. 1) Our enemies have criticized us for believing in this. Our reply is that this lofty concept in no way diminishes God the Eternal Father. He is the Almighty. He is the Creator and Governor of the universe. He is the greatest of all and will always be so. But just as any earthly father wishes for his sons and daughters every success in life, so I believe our Father in Heaven wishes for his children that they might approach him in stature and stand beside him resplendent in godly strength and wisdom." (Gordon B. Hinckley, Conference Report, Oct. 1994, reprinted in Ensign, Nov. 1994, p. 46)

Gordon B. Hinckley three years later, speaking to the press in 1997:

Don Lattin (San Francisco Chronicle religion editor, interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1): "There are some significant differences in your beliefs [from other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man?"
Hinckley: "I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about."

Quoted in Time Magazine, Aug 4, 1997: "On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once a man, [Hinckley] sounded uncertain, `I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it... I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it.'"

Hinckley claimed he was misquoted:

"I personally have been much quoted, and in a few instances misquoted and misunderstood. I think that's to be expected. None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine. I think I understand them thoroughly, and it is unfortunate that the reporting may not make this clear. I hope you will never look to the public press as the authority on the doctrines of the Church. (1997 October General Conference)"

But you can check the quotes for yourself - even on the original video. And he said the same things on more than one occasion. See http://www.lds-mormon.com/hwtd.shtml or http://www.lds-mormon.com/lkl_00.shtml for details. The first quotation, where Hinckley says he does know and believe the doctrine, is from a conference talk called "Don't Drop The Ball." Did he drop the ball when he was faced with non-Mormon questions and forgot to stand for what he believed? You decide.

2. Does the church publish its budgets for its members to see? Hinckley says yes.
Every other major church makes its accounts public. Every one. They consider it a question of honesty and openness. Yet the Mormon church keeps its accounts secret. Before the Salt Lake Olympics, a German reporter asked Hinckley about this and other things. A transcript of the full interview is here.

Reporter: "In my country, the…we say the people's churches, the Protestants, the Catholics, they publish all their budgets, to all the public.
Hinckley: [agrees]
Reporter: "Why is it impossible for your church?
Hinckley: "Well, we simply think that the…that information belongs to those who made the contribution, and not to the world. That's the only thing. Yes."

This is a very strange thing to say, because no church member ever gets to see the church budgets or accounts. Ever. Most people would say his answer was highly misleading to the German reporter.

3. Is the DNA evidence against Lamanites in North America unproven? Hinckley says it is.
[ From the German reporter's interview:]

Reporter: "Now, Mr. President, one of…one question which is a little bit complicated for me to understand, but I heard it and one colleague asked me to ask it. What will be your position when DNA analysis will show that in the history never have been an immigration from Israel to the North…to North America? It could be that the scientists will find out…"

Hinckley: "Well, it hasn't happened. That hasn't been determined yet. All I can say is that's speculated. No one really knows the answer to that, not at this point."

This is a very strange thing to say because Hinckley has spent most his life in church public relations of some sort, so he should be aware of the facts. He was specifically asked about North America. The reporter was being kind, as if the question had not yet been proven. Yet the DNA evidence against North America as the Book of Mormon location is devastating. Even the apologists, FARMS, have accepted that, and they will not try to defend a North American setting for the Book of Mormon.

Even if we allow the FARMS theory that the Lamanites were hiding in some remote corner of Central America, the DNA evidence is not "speculated" as Hinckley said. It has been established beyond reasonable doubt by the highest standards of scientific enquiry in peer-reviewed journals. DNA destroys the Book of Mormon as a historical record. To say that the issue "hasn't been determined" is like saying the earth is still flat because a few people still believe it.

4. When did polygamy start in the church? Hinckley says it was after 1847.
On Larry King Live (September 8, 1998, after Hinckley was asked about polygamy): "When our people came west they permitted it [polygamy] on a restricted scale."

This is very strange, because polygamy began much earlier than "when our people came west." It was practiced secretly by Joseph Smith since about 1833, when he "married" his first "plural wife," sixteen year old Fanny Alger. Alger is listed by official Mormon sources as Joseph Smith's first plural wife. By 1844 it was practiced by many LDS leaders. It is very strange that Gordon B. Hinckley does not remember this.

5. How many Mormons were "involved in polygamy"? Hinckley says just 2 to 5 percent.
Again from Larry King Live, September 8, 1998: "The figures I have are from -- between two percent and five percent of our people were involved in it [polygamy]. It was a very limited practice"

This is very strange, because before moving to Utah, of the leaders who knew about polygamy, 75 percent practiced it. See D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: [Volume 1] Origins of Powers, Appendix 6, and the discussion by Packam. After moving to Utah, church elders urged ALL good Mormons to practice it. Numerous sermons say it was essential to salvation. Every president of the church was polygamous until George Albert Smith, who became president in 1945. It is very strange that Gordon B. Hinckley presents it as a very limited practice.]

6. Do we oppose other churches? Hinckley says no.
Speaking on Larry King Live, September 8, 1998: "I say this to other people: you develop all the good you can. We have no animosity toward any other church. We do not oppose other churches. We never speak negatively of other churches."

In last General Conference (October 2005, quoting a poem): " 'I would not sit in the scorner's seat, Or hurl the cynic's ban; / Let me live in a house by the side of the road / And be a friend to man.' That is the way I feel. [I wish] that men might live together in peace without war and contention, argument and conflict."

This is a strange thing to say since Hinckley leads a church that says that no non-Mormon will go to heaven. He divides people from the world intot he rightous (Mormons and those who will one day become Mormons) and the unrighteous (everyone else).

This was the very first thing "revealed from God" in the "First Vision": "the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were all corrupt." (Joseph Smith - History 1:18-19) The whole reason for a restoration was that every other church was so corrupt that it was beyond any hope of reformation.

1 Nephi 14:10 says "And he [God] said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the *bleep* of all the earth." (See also 1 Nephi 13:6, 14:3, 9; Alma 5:39.)

Until 1990, the temple ceremony included a non-Mormon minister, a representative of all other churches, and he was being paid by Satan.

Mormons say they "never speaking negatively of other churches" but say that other churches are corrupt and inspired by Satan. Things that make you go "hmmm..."

7. Is the church run by only men? Hinckley says no.
Mike Wallace ('Sixty Minutes' TV interview): ''Why must only men run the Church?''
Hinckley: '' 'Only men' do not run the Church. Men have their place in the Church. Men hold priesthood offices of the Church. But women have a tremendous place in this church. They have their own organization. It was started in 1842 by the Prophet Joseph Smith, called the Relief Society, because its initial purpose was to administer help to those in need. It has grown to be, I think, the largest women's organization in the world with a membership of more than three million. They have their own offices, their own presidency, their own board. That reaches down to the smallest unit of the Church everywhere in the world.''
Wallace: ''But they don't have the power.''
Hinckley: ''They have office. They have responsibility. They have control of their organization.''
Wallace: ''But you run it. The men run it. Look, I'm not being . . . ''
Hinckley: ''The men hold the priesthood, yes. But my wife is my companion. In this Church the man neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side. They are co-equals in this life in a great enterprise.''

This is very strange because clearly men do run the church. It is true that women run some parts of the church, but only if they get permission from the men to do so.

8. Does the church get involved in politics? Hinckley says no.
From an interview broadcast on Compass in Australia, November 9th 1997

DR: "Finally, in Australia as in the US, I understand you ??? government on social issues. Especially in the name of protecting the family. What sort of things would you like to change as far as Australian society is concerned?"

Gordon B. Hinckley: "I don’t know much about er your social structure here. I’m only... I only come as a visitor and so I can’t say very much, but I was sorry to read that the great emphasis being put on gambling down in er ..Victoria? Victoria, yes. Institutionally the Church speaks out on moral issues. Other than that we draw a strict line of separation of Church and State. The Church institutionally does not get involved in politics. Does not endorse candidates, does not endorse parties. We encourage our people as citizens of the land to exercise their franchises individuals. And to be active in these things, but as an institution the Church maintains a strict line of separation of Church and State speaking out only when there is a moral question at issue."

Those who remember the Equal Right Amendment Act, or follow the millions being spent attacking gay marriage proposals, or all the other examples where the church gets involved in politics, will know that this "strict line of separation between church and state" is not the case. D.Michael Quinn's book "Extensions of Power" goes into great detail about the church's political work.

9. Do the church's doctrines change? Hinckley says no.
From the same Australian interview:

President Gordon B. Hinckley: "Yes, sir. We are. We have fundamental, basic doctrines which have held fast through more than a 150 years of time. We don’t bend with every wind of doctrine that comes along. Our doctrine is stable, it’s secure. Programmes change, we make adaptation according to the circumstances. But the basic doctrine remains the same and that becomes a solid unshifting foundation to which people can cling in this world of instability and drifting values."

Those who have followed the Adam-God doctrine, or the role of polygamy, or blood atonement, or blacks in the pre-existence, will know that the doctrine is anything but stable. In my own time, the church has shifted significantly. Hinckley's own statements on this page show that the doctrine regarding the doctrine of the purpose of life (to become like God) is still changing.

Well, anybody who defends a racist, bigoted doctrin is a racist and bigot him/herself!

[Big ned]

Every one of those points that you have brought out can be disputed quite easily. Most you wouldn't undertstand because you are really very poorly versed in religion (as we have discovered in your other forays into debating religious doctrine). It doesn't matter what I say to you cereal, you don't care because you are just out to slander, but for those who are curious... I will explain the doctrine that a few people have questions about.

(By the way, my point in saying that I have seen pictures of you was to point out that you are not ten years old (chronologically speaking)).


Does the church teach that man can progress to become God?

As the scriptures teach in several areas... yes. Man can progress to become a god. Can he become God the Father? No... So it depends on what you are actually asking.

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?


Man has been told he will inheret all that God has... does that not make him then a god? Simple doctrine... "be ye therefore perfect" is Christ's admonition to all mankind... "even as you Father in Heaven is perfect".

Next
Does the church publish it's budget. The answer again is yes... Each congregation is given a budget every year depending on the size (which is divided up geographically). That budget is know. The church also publishes and makes public how much charitable work it does.

Again, what are you asking? Don't call Pres. Hinkley a liar because he answers one question one way and when asked a completely different question... he answers it another way.

3. DNA evidence against the Book of Mormon. This has been torn to shreds so many times, that it isn't even funny. If you want the technical answer, go to http://www.fairlds.org and it can answer this so called "unquestioned scientific evidence" again cereal with his generalizations. The only ones who use that kind of language are the antimormons who have never studied DNA markers. One question everyone can understand. Did the study cover every indiginous population in America? (including south and central america ?) No

Gotta go.
The church doesn't teach No non lds will get into heaven either cereal.

All a bunch of garbage (as usual) and the polygamy thing has been dead for 150 years... Hinkley's account is accurate.

Get a life and do something constructive.

[Mr Danksworth]

Here's some 'doctrine" for you.

The LDS Church is the only true church. The Lord told Joseph Smith personally that all other churches are an "abomination." Any non-Mormon church is automatically part of the "church of the devil." No other church has the valid priesthood. The devil has even made a pact with many Christian pastors to teach Christian doctrines about the Trinity and salvation by grace. But in public we say that all religions are good and have some truth.

There are many gods. We deal with three of these distinct gods from the council of the gods: Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost.
God, the Father,was once a man like us. His name is Elohim, and he had a literal father before him. (That means there is a god even higher than God the Father!)

We can progress to become gods of our own worlds just like the god Elohim.

Jesus is the brother of the devil, not his creator.

Jesus was not born of a virgin. Elohim had sexual relations with his daughter, Mary, to bring about the conception of Jesus. (Not all Mormons are familiar with this teaching.)

We are not permitted to pray to Jesus, but only to another god named Elohim.

Celestial heaven is near a star called Kolob.

The Bible contains doctrinal errors.

Polygamy is an eternal principle. Mormons still believe in polygamy, but just can't practice it right now.

Black people were cursed with their black skin because of their inferiority in the pre-existent life.

Native American Indians are really Israelites who were cursed with red skin because of their sin.

The current prophet, Gordon B. Hinkley, is a prophet in exactly the same sense as Moses or Ezekiel in the Bible. He has authority to write new scripture.

The first LDS prophet, Joseph Smith, saw God the Father in the flesh.

Adam did not sin when he ate of the forbidden fruit, but was merely choosing to obey a contradictory command from Jehovah.

Jesus shed his blood to offer us the potential to be forgiven if we successfully stop our sins permanently.

We cannot be saved (forgiven) by grace alone through faith alone.

Secret temple rituals where one learns secret names and secret handshakes contribute to one's exaltation in the celestial kingdom. No non-Mormon is worthy to go inside a dedicated temple.

No one who pays less than 10% of their income to the LDS Church is allowed inside a functioning temple.

It is possible to eventually become perfect by progressing a little bit at a time through eternal progression.

[Big ned]

Got some of them right soulra... most of them wrong though. Try going to http://www.lds.org to get actual teachings of the church. I know you guys like getting it from antimormon sites, but they just aren't accurate.

Don't have time to go through all of them because I don't have a cut and paste answer waiting for your cut and paste websites.

I think my answers to cereal will show what kind of misinformation you are working with.

[Big ned]

If you want a true view of President Hinckely and what a good man he was, here is a link for you.

http://www.meridianmagazine.com/churchu ... saway.html

[Mr Danksworth]

Some more good stuff...

The Book of Mormon claims the following tools existed in ancient MesoAmerica: chariots, steel swords, bellows for blacksmithing, and silk. None of these were in the Americas until the Columbian exchange.

The BoM describes a vast civilization of millions who inhabited cities for hundreds of years, yet no ruins from even a single BoM city have ever been identified. No BoM place-names were in use when Europeans arrived in the New World.

The BoM peoples had a seven-day week, but no Mesoamerican calendar matches this.

The BoM refers to animals and crops that did not exist in America until Columbus arrived: *bleep*, bull, calf, cattle, cow, domestic goat, horse, ox, domestic sheep, sow, swine, elephants, wheat, and barley.

The BoM says that the Native Americans descended from Hebraic (Semitic) origins. However through archaeology and DNA testing, we know that Native Americans descend from Asiatic origins.

There are no examples of "reformed Egyptian" in Mesoamerican history. And no Native American language is related to either ancient Egyptian or Hebrew, whereas a relationship does exist between Native American languages and Asian (Siberian) languages.

A woman stole a "translation" from Joseph Smith, and demanded that he replace it with an exact copy saying, "If this be a divine communication, the same being that revealed it to you can easily replace it." Smith refused, and wrote the same manuscript from a different point of view.

Joseph Smith was given real egyptian from an ancient Egyptian burial to translate (this was pre-Rosetta stone, and Egyptian could not be read). Modern day scholars agree that his translation is entirely manufactured and incorrect.

[Big ned]

soulra,
YOu had better go to some more up to date sites for your antimormon stuff. Much of what you have stated there is inaccurate and I know that you guys that like to tear things down are concerned about accuracey.

Take a look at http://www.fairlds.org and you will see that just because it wasn't found there 100 years ago (which is how old some of the stuff you are quoting is) that much of the evidence has been turning up as archeologist get access to more and more regions.

sorry to burst your bubble.... actually (and I don't have the link at my fingertips) the library of congress in the US did a big lecture on the church. ONe of them showed how many "inaccuracies" in the book of mormon as to what is mentioned (steel swords, etc etc) have infact been found recently. Most have been discovered... an those that haven't? Well, if the others have been found perhaps the rest will. Doesn't really matter... it;s a great book with alot of nifty doctrine in it.

[Mr Danksworth]

Answers from a mormon apologetics page...i think not.

[cerealkiller]

Isn't it bizarre that so many people can be persuaded to buy into such obvious fabrications?
I knew of most of the points you posted soulra, but never have I read anything about Jesus being the incestious product of a father daughter relationship. If true, it just adds to the weirdness of this cult.
Then Jesus would be an inbred who's father was also his grandfather, his mother was also his sister...
What throws me completely is the number of people in the here and now who actually believe all this and live their lives accordingly! I could understand a fringe group, especially vulnerable and/or needy and superstitious would have had reason to join 200 years ago, but in the 21st century this sort of thing should be way behind us! I even sympathize with the men joining in droves during the 19th century because they wanted multiple wives. But please shake your heads; this is 2008!

[cerealkiller]

Answers from a mormon apologetics page...i think not.

That's all you'll get here.....

[Big ned]

Yawn... More than willing to go to antimormon sites, but not the church site itself? You biase and bigotry is showing. Keep throwing out inaccuracies and I"m sure everyone will believe you.

[Mr Danksworth]

ONe of them showed how many "inaccuracies" in the book of mormon as to what is mentioned (steel swords, etc etc) have infact been found recently. Most have been discovered... an those that haven't? Well, if the others have been found perhaps the rest will.

Are you referring to the knife found in a tree in California in 2004? It's been exposed as a hoax. Or maybe you are referring to to the 797 objects that the lds donated to the Michigan Natural History museum? Debunked also.
Anything else?

Doesn't really matter... it;s a great book with alot of nifty doctrine in it.

So are you saying one does not have to believe in order to believe?