My "Letter" (First version, 7/2017)

OK, let me start off by saying; what follows is the exact letter that I gave to my family to announce that I was leaving the church. This all occurred in 2017, with me handing out this letter somewhere around the end of July (pioneer day-ish time period). Since that time, I have gone back through and separated each of my main 5 points, and have built upon them with more information that I have found, come across, or been taught. So the other blog postings immediately following this were originally direct copies of what is found here, but have also been (and continue to be) updated periodically. I will go through and at the beginning of each of them, state when they were last updated.

If anyone reading this would like to get in touch with me, I am happy to discuss nearly anything found within this blog. The fastest way to get in  touch with me is via Reddit- https://www.reddit.com/user/anyonehaveanswers. Or my email address- anyonehaveanswers@gmail.com. 

Thank you!

This last year (most especially since February) has been very trying for me, both mentally and spiritually. Since that time I have burned through the Book of Mormon twice. I have prayed more than I have in the last few years combined, and have been generally seeking answers from God and the Church, and am continuing to do so. After finishing the BOM for the second time, and not having any sort of answer to any prayer, I wanted something else to read for a bit, this is when I found the topic essays on the church’s website. That’s where things began to fall apart for me. That is what started me on the path that I am now on, a path of finding answers to the questions that I have had for a very long time. I understand that there are many things within the church that we are told to, “take with faith” at this time. But there are plenty of those things that do have answers, but for some reason the church is not very forthcoming with them. J. Reuben Clark stated, “If we have the truth, [it] cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.” I am searching for truth. As of right now, I no longer believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is correct. There are plenty of good things found within the church, but as a whole, I cannot continue along with as it now stands. There are things I have found and learned in my quest for knowledge that have shown me that, in many cases, that it does not even follow its own teachings. In any case, it is definitely not the church that I was raised in, and taught about for my whole life.
            Just for the record: I have not been offended by anyone in my ward or stake or in my family. I am not doing this because I have a desire to “sin.” I am making this choice because of what I have learned and told my entire life that I have found out to not be 100% true. I am making this choice because I have come to the conclusion that prophets in the LDS church today are not called by God, do not speak with God, or if they do, they do not convey his messages. I am making this choice because I believe that it is the best choice for me. This choice does not change who I am. I still have my own core beliefs, but I can’t say that I follow 100% with the teachings of the church. And since coming to this conclusion for myself, I am amazed at what a difference it has made in my outlook on life. My depression seems to have dropped dramatically. I feel like a new person, and I like the way that I feel right now.

            I feel like I have been lied too for most of my life. Worse than that, I have lied to others as I have taught them about this church, especially while on my mission. There were many things that people would bring up against us as we were trying to teach. To help us “combat this,” or as they put it, “Resolve concerns,” they gave us a document to help us find scriptures or quotes that explained different issues that had a likelihood of coming up. Come to find out, the things I was instructed to teach them are now disavowed by the church, or labeled as false teachings. These issues, along with other questions I have had, and those that I stumbled across as I was working to find my answers are the basis of this letter.

            My goal with this document is not to drive anyone away from the church, to start a fight, to tell others they are wrong, etc. My goal is to explain clearly what I found in my searching for answers, and why I have chosen to leave. This was not a decision made lightly. I understand the weight of this decision and the possible repercussions. I understand that most of you will be rather upset by this news. With all of this in mind, the decision I have come too is about me, what I believe to be true and my integrity.

            This all started due to questions that I have had, some for a very long time. I knew that there were answers out there, but no one seemed to have them, or I was told to “take it on faith.” If this is the true church of God, with the fullness of the gospel, then we should have answers to everything. That being said, I have spent a lot of time over the past few weeks searching for answers. I have spent a lot of time looking though the churches website, reading the scriptures, and reading accounts/experiences of other members and non-members alike, all on this search for answers or explanations that I have an issue with. As a result of this search and the answers and explanations that I have found, I have come to the conclusion that I cannot continue to be an active participant in this church.

            When it comes down to it, I do not hate either the church or those who are a part of it. I believe in being open and honest. I believe that we should know our history. And the more I have learned about science and discovery, the more I want to see those discoveries line up with the things taught within the church. If all good does indeed come from God, then our advancements in science and technology should both be able to be used for good, as well as help point us in the direction of God. Some of the answers and evidence below may come through sources labeled as “Anti-Mormon,” but I see them as providing factual evidence where the information received from the church may be lacking, non-existent, deceiving, or sometimes even downright wrong. And I don’t feel bad about this search for answers outside of the normal sources. That being said, I did try and keep as much as my searching within the churches resources as possible.

            The first thing I want to start off with are things that I had had pounded into my head for as long as I can remember. These are things that are paramount to the views taught by the LDS church. I actually had to go looking for references for these things, I have known them for so long that I wasn’t even sure where they originated in the church. As a number of my questions and issues relate back to these core views and teachings, I decided to lead off with them and will refer back to them repeatedly as I continue to explain my position.

1.      God is the same “Yesterday, Today, and Forever” and he is “Unchanging”

a.       Mormon 9:9-10

                                                              i.      9 For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and in him there is no variableness neither shadow of changing?

                                                            ii.      10 And now, if ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who doth vary, and in whom there is shadow of changing, then have ye imagined up unto yourselves a god who is not a God of miracles.

b.      Moroni 8:18

                                                              i.      18 For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.

c.       Thomas S. Monson: Stand in Holy Places, Oct 2011 GC

                                                              i.      Our Father in Heaven is the same yesterday, today, and forever. The prophet Mormon tells us that God is “unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.” In this world where nearly everything seems to be changing, His constancy is something on which we can rely, an anchor to which we can hold fast and be safe, lest we be swept away into uncharted waters.

2.      The Book of Mormon is the most correct of any book on earth.

a.       Introduction to the BOM by Joseph Smith

                                                              i.      “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book”

b.      Ezra Taft Benson: Flooding the Earth with the Book of Mormon, Oct 1988 GC

                                                              i.      “…the most correct of any book on earth—the Book of Mormon.”

3.      Prophet/Quorum of the 12 cannot lead the people contrary to the word of God

a.       M. Russell Ballard: Elder Ballard Urges Mission Presidents to Teach Missionaries the Worth of Souls. July 2017

                                                              i.      “This work is led by a prophet of God and apostles who will not and cannot lead this Church astray.”

b.      Gordon B. Hinckley: The Church is on Course, Oct 1992 GC

                                                              i.      “Now, in conclusion, do you believe this body of men would ever lead this Church astray? Remember whose church this is. It carries the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, who stands as its head. His is the power to remove any found remiss in his duty or who is teaching that which is not in harmony with His divine will.”

c.       James E. Faust: Called and Chosen. Oct 2005 GC

                                                              i.      “The President of the Church will not lead the people of the Church astray. It will never happen.”

Issue #1. The First Vision

We all know the story of the first vision; once again it is one of those things that we can recite nearly from birth. So, in the spring of 1820 we are taught that the first vision takes place. This was instrumental for a few points, first, that the true church was not on the earth, and second, that God and Christ are separate individuals.

            I started my readings on this topic when I saw an essay on the churches website about it. I found this odd, why would there be debate as to information surrounding this integral part of the church. Just as President Hinckley taught:

“Our whole strength rests on the validity of that vision. It either occurred or it did not occur. If it did not, then this work is a fraud. If it did, then it is the most important and wonderful work under the heavens.”

            So the essay on the churches website, right from the title I was slightly confused. First Vision Accounts; accounts, with an “s” at the end, as in, pleural. What do you mean “accounts?” There was THE first vision, the same one I still have memorized from my mission, the same one that President Hinckley is talking about. Ok, there are multiple accounts, why are there multiple, what is the difference between them, why did we chose the one we all know, and why have we never heard about the others?

            Ok, from the essay it lists 4 different accounts written by Joseph: 1832, 1835, 1838, 1842, and then also lists other secondhand accounts written by those around Joseph. Wait a second?! The first vision took place in 1820, but we have no record of it being written down until 1832, 12 years after the fact. I find that very odd. Especially when we consider that Joseph was a rather decent record keeper, and did keep a journal. Hey, wait, 1832, wasn’t the church organized in April of 1830? We don’t have any account of the first vision until 2 years after the church was even organized? That just seems a bit off to me, like really off.

1.      1832 Account: From the essay from the church, ” the only account written in Joseph Smith’s own hand, is found in a short, unpublished autobiography Joseph Smith produced in the second half of 1832.”

            From this autobiography description of the event we learn that he was 15 years old when it took place. He also states that he had already come to the conclusion that all churches were wrong, and he was looking for forgiveness of his sins. Only Jesus appeared to him. Was told he was forgiven of his sins, but nothing was said about bringing the church back to the earth. It almost instantly the switches to when he was 17 and was again looking for forgiveness from his sins when an Angel appeared and told him about the Gold Plates that were written by Moroni and Mormon. But only states it was an angel, never giving a name for the messenger angel, but definitely leads you to believe that it was not Moroni.

2.      1835 Account: From the essay we read, “In the fall of 1835, Joseph Smith recounted his First Vision to Robert Matthews, a visitor to Kirtland, Ohio. The retelling, recorded in Joseph’s journal by his scribe Warren Parrish, emphasizes his attempt to discover which church was right, the opposition he felt as he prayed, and the appearance of one divine personage who was followed shortly by another. This account also notes the appearance of angels in the vision.”
            This time the goal of the prayer was to find the correct religion. It also now talks about not being able to speak for some reason (no darkness). Personage appeared (not named) in a pillar of fire, soon followed by another personage (also not named). It was this second personage who told Joseph that his sins were forgiven and testified that Christ is the son of God. Also noted that there were many angels too. Again it goes on to talk about the visions seen when he is 17, and again it just states that it was an unnamed angel that came to him.

3.      1838 Account: The essay states, “The narration of the First Vision best known to Latter-day Saints today is the 1838 account. First published in 1842 in the Times and Seasons, the Church’s newspaper in Nauvoo, Illinois, the account was part of a longer history dictated by Joseph Smith between periods of intense opposition. Whereas the 1832 account emphasizes the more personal story of Joseph Smith as a young man seeking forgiveness, the 1838 account focuses on the vision as the beginning of the “rise and progress of the Church.” Like the 1835 account, the central question of the narrative is which church is right.”
            Again the goal of this prayer is to find what church was correct. This time too something stopped him from speaking for a time, as well as a thick blackness appears around him. Light appears, 2 personages, with one of them calling the second one Jesus Christ. Was told this time that none of the current religious sects were correct. It does also continue to go on and talk about the night of September 21^st, 1823 when another being came to him. This time the messenger stated that his name was Nephi, then continued to give a similar accounting about the plates, but failed to state that they were in a nearby hill.

4.      1842 Account: This account accompanied what was to become, the articles of faith, in response to the “Wentworth Letter” that most of us have heard of. The essay from the church states that this, “account, intended for publication to an audience unfamiliar with Mormon beliefs, is concise and straightforward.”

            Here too he states that he was confused as to which religion to join. Here there is nothing about being unable to speak, or any darkness. He does state that he saw, “two glorious personages who exactly resembled each other in features, and likeness.” It doesn’t state that either of these personages were named in this account. They do tell him that all denominations were, “believing in incorrect doctrines,” and was thus told to not join any. It also continues and goes into the visit in September 1823 from an unnamed angel teaching that he was, “chosen to be an instrument in the hands of God.”

Another issue that I just now discovered is the fact that I always remember being taught that it was Moroni that came to Joseph in the 1823 vision where he learned about the Gold plates. After the readings that I just did, it only named the angel in one account, and the name given there was Nephi. From all of these early accounts the name of Moroni is only mentioned as one of the primary authors of the book. Why then are we taught that it was Moroni that appeared in this vision while all of the early evidence of it states otherwise?

Sorry for the tangent, back to the original thought. OK, we have multiple accounts of the First Vision that were either written by, or dictated by Joseph Smith himself. What of these “Secondhand Accounts?” There are accounts from multiple individuals, ranging from members of the early Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, to early church members, and even a newspaper editor who interviewed Joseph Smith in 1843. Again, these early accounts begin around 1840, with the last being from 1844. These accounts are similar in style, but just as the accounts from Joseph himself, there are differences in accounts. The only one that I will really look at deeper is the Journal account written by Levi Richards. The reason that I want to look deeper here is what is stated on the website by the church.

            Levi Richards, Journal, 11 June 1843. Following an 11 June 1843 public church meeting at which Joseph Smith spoke of his earliest vision, Levi Richards included an account of it in his diary.

“He went into the grove & enquired of the Lord which of all the sects were right— re received for answer that none of them were right, that they were all wrong, & that the Everlasting covena[n]t was broken” (directly copied from source with formatting left).

            This makes it sound as if this was the first time that Joseph talked about the first vision in a public setting. This occurred in 1843, 13 years after the church was organized. Yet in no other journal by other members do we seem to have found evidence of hearing about the first vision from Joseph in a public setting. This is 23 years after it was to have taken place. We already don’t have any record of it by Joseph until 12 years after the fact; and now we know that there doesn’t seem to be any indication that the population of the church heard about it from Joseph himself until 23 years after the fact, and 3 years after the church was organized.

            What of other early leaders of the church? We do have a few accounts.

Brigham Young: “The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven ... but He did send his angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, 1855, p.171)

Wilford Woodruff: “The same organization and Gospel that Christ died for ... is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God, out of heaven, who held converse with man, and revealed unto him the darkness that enveloped the world ... He told him the Gospel was not among men, and that there was not a true organization of His kingdom in the world ... Joseph was strengthened by the Spirit and power of God, and was enabled to listen to the teachings of the angel. ... The man to whom the angel appeared obeyed the Gospel.” (Journal of Discourses, vol.2, 1855, pp.196-197)

George A. Smith: “He [Joseph Smith] went humbly before the Lord and inquired of Him, and the Lord answered his prayer, and revealed to Joseph, by the ministration of angels, the true condition of the religious world. When the holy angel appeared, Joseph inquired which of all these denominations was right and which he should join, and was told they were all wrong.” (President George A. Smith, Journal of Discourses, 1863, vol.12, pp.334)

John Taylor: “How was it, and which was right? None of them was right, just as it was when the Prophet Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right that he might join it. The answer was that none of them are right. What, none of them? No. We will not stop to argue that question; the angel merely told him to join none of them that none of them were right.” (Journal of Discourses, 1879, vol.20, pp.167)

            I think that of all of these, the one from John Taylor is the most interesting. Here it is, 1879, now some 35 years after Joseph was killed, and we are still being taught that he saw only an angel during the first vision. Every single one of them states that it was an angle that appeared. These are four other men, prophets, and none of them agree with what has become cannon and taught by missionaries everywhere.

            So, overall concerning the topic of the first vision: here are my hang-ups concerning these multiple accounts. Why did it take 12 years before we see any accounts of this experience? Then, if this is something as paramount and world changing as this would be, why is there confusion and differences in who appeared in the vision? I would think if something that amazing were to happen, you would be able to remember right off the bat if there were 1 or 2 individuals, as well as who they were. It was from the first vision alone that we were able to answer a point of confusion for generations, were God and Christ 2 separate entities? If there were in fact two individuals that appeared, and that those two individuals were in fact Christ and God.

            Something that I also stumbled across, a talk given in the April General Conference, 1957 by S. Dilworth Young, First Council of the Seventy; it seems he too was confused by the multiple accounts. So I feel a little better, at least I am not alone, and a general authority no less. Another point made here is that it seems the truth of there being multiple accounts of the first vision was kept rather quiet well up until the mid 1900’s.

“I cannot remember the time when I have not heard the story … concerning the coming of the Father and the Son to the Prophet Joseph Smith. …I am concerned however with one item which has recently been called to my attention on this matter. There appears to be going about our communities some writing to the effect that the Prophet Joseph Smith evolved his doctrine from what might have been a vision, in which he is supposed to have said that he saw an angel, instead of the Father and the Son. According to this theory, by the time he was inspired to write the occurrence in 1838, he had come to the conclusion that there were two beings.

“This rather shocked me. I can see no reason why the Prophet, with his brilliant mind, would have failed to remember in sharp relief every detail of that eventful day. I can remember quite vividly that in 1915 I had a mere dream, and while the dream was prophetic in nature, it was not startling. It has been long since fulfilled, but I can remember every detail of it as sharply and clearly as though it had happened yesterday. How them could any man conceive that the Prophet, receiving such a vision as he received, would not remember it and would fail to write it clearly, distinctly, and accurately?” (S. Dilworth Young, Improvement Era – general conference edition, June 1957)

            This is the entire beginnings of our church. This single event, if it happened, than the work that was to follow would be the greatest thing to happen on earth in well over a thousand years. And if it did not happen, than this whole work is a fraud. But now, with all of this knowledge, I am at a loss as to what I should believe. We have 4 separate accounts, 4 different versions, and little consistency. The version that I quoted endlessly on my mission doesn’t even line up with the teaching of four other prophets of this church, how should it line up with what I have been taught to believe?

Issues #2. The Book of Mormon

2.1- Method of translation

            As we all remember the pictures from primary showing Joseph reading straight from the golden plates as if they were a book. Then usually there was also a scribe, this individual should have been depicted as behind a sheet or otherwise unable to see the plates (but not always shown this way). But we were also taught about the Urim and Thummim, being made specifically for translating by the power of God. This item was included with the plates, very convenient, for just that purpose. Why are there so few pictures showing this? Hard to draw, we only have a rough description of the thing? That is beside the point. It turns out, that is not how the majority of the Book of Mormon was translated.

            From the churches essay about the translation of the Book of Mormon we learn; “Joseph Smith and his scribes wrote of two instruments used in translating the Book of Mormon. … One instrument, called in the Book of Mormon the “interpreters,” is better known to Latter-day Saints today as the “Urim and Thummim.” Joseph found the interpreters buried in the hill with the plates. … The other instrument, which Joseph Smith discovered in the ground years before he retrieved the gold plates, was a small oval stone, or “seer stone.” As a young man during the 1820s, Joseph Smith, like others in his day, used a seer stone to look for lost objects and buried treasure.”

            Wait a second, what is this about a stone he found in the ground? “Joseph Smith probably possessed more than one seer stone; he appears to have found one of the stones while digging for a well around 1822.” (Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism [Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1984], 69–70.)

“Like many other New Englanders, they were familiar with searches for lost treasure by supernatural means. Joseph Smith's father was reputed to be one of these treasure seekers, and Joseph Smith himself had found a stone, called a seer stone, which reportedly enabled him to find lost objects. Treasure-seekers wanted to employ him to help with their searches. One, a man named Josiah Stowell, hired Joseph and his father in 1825 to dig for a supposed Spanish treasure near harmony, Pennsylvania. The effort came to nothing, and the Smiths returned home, but the neighbors continued to think of the Smiths as part of the treasure-seeking company.” (http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Smith,_Joseph)

“By 1825, [19 yrs old – 5 years after the First Vision] young Joseph had a reputation in Manchester and Palmyra for his activities as a treasure seer, or someone who used a seer stone to locate gold or other valuable objects buried in the earth.” (Elder Steven E. Snow, Church Historian, Ensign, September 2015)

            So, a rock he finds 2 years after the first vision takes place, he keeps it, and it is what becomes a “seer stone” to help with translating the BOM? Turns out, the church still has this rock! They even have a picture of it for everyone to see. Now, what we know of the U&T, they were clear stones that you looked through. This rock however is a “chocolate-colored stone with an oval shape.” Not exactly something that you can look through and see out the other side.

           

So, how does this rock help with the translation of the Book of Mormon? Let’s go back to the essay:

“According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument.”

            So with this information, a more appropriate picture would look more like this, and not the gold plates on a table being read aloud. This brings up another interesting point, why did he need the plates at all? It’s not like he had them in the hat along with the seer stone did he? Another point could be brought up as well; could he have stumbled upon the plates while searching for other buried treasure? This actually has been addressed before it turns out.

“Rumors constantly swirled about hunter’s smiling fortunes, which excited still others to further digging. Smith family reportedly found objects as a cannon ball, a cache of gold watches and according to the viewpoint of some of their neighbors the golden plates which produced the book of Mormon. … Indeed in ways that are yet to be explored, money digging may have influenced two of the nineteenth century’s major social and religious movements Mormonism and Spiritualism. Its touch on American society was not light.” (Ronald W. Walker, The Persistent Idea of Treasure Hunting in America. http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol24/iss4/4/)

            I guess here I’m not so much claiming that this is all false. I think my biggest issue here is that the church seems to keep this under the radar. You have a kid claiming that God talked to him (or an angel, depending on the version), expecting us to believe that; but think we will get hung up on the fact that he translated the plates by placing a rock in a hat? OK, now that I type that part out, it would be a bit much to swallow that. None the less, why not be more straightforward with this information long before now? There are a few obscure references to “seer stones” in older ensign articles, but nothing about placing them in a hat. I find it odd, and disturbing, that all of this information is now being brought to light. All at the same time that we have the internet to be able to search these things out is when they release this essay. If there were no internet, no Google search, would they have ever opened the door to this one? I would love to have seen people’s faces on my mission, “Yeah, he stuck a rock in his had that he found while digging a well, then smashed the hat to his face, and it showed him the English words.” I don’t think that would have gone over well.

2.2- Source material for the Book of Mormon

            Now, if Joseph didn’t get the story for the Book of Mormon from the plates, then where did he get it? That is a solid question. Here is a place that I obviously had to search outside the churches realm for possible answers. Was Joseph Smith capable of writing the Book of Mormon himself? Could he have used other sources for its themes and stories?

First and foremost, the source. This source is not from within the church. This source goes over similarities between the Book of Mormon, and another book published in 1816 titled, The Late War Between the United States and Great Britain. This book was marketed “for the use of schools throughout the United states,” and was used extensively in schools of the time.

Needless to say, this book is large. There are hundreds of similarities. I do not see the need to go over every one of them, so I will use a quick summary from the website.

            OK, one more book from the same time period. This one is titled, The First Book of Napoleon. Thankfully, this one has a full scanned copy via google.

            Again, for the essence of time, I will not go into great detail of the similarities. I will only quote a few of the very first verses of the book.

1.      And behold it came to pass, in these latter days, that an evil spirit arose on the face of the earth, and greatly troubled the sons of men.

2.      And this spirit seized upon, and spread amongst the people who dwell in the land of Gaul.

3.      Now, in this people the fear of the Lord had not been for many generations, and they had become a corrupt and perverse people; and their chief priests, and the nobles of the land, and the learned men thereof, had become wicked in the imaginations of their hearts, and in the practices of their lives.

OK, that is literally the first 3 verses of this book. These few verses sound insanely close to what we see from the Book of Mormon. Similar speech patterns, and identical terms even. Again, this was a book that was published prior to the Boom of Mormon, this on in 1809.

The last topic I will go into for other possible sources of the BOM is a dream that Joseph Smith’s Father had in 1811. This dream was so profound to Joseph Smith Sr. that he shared it with his family. His wife recorded the following in her journal about the account.

“I thought,” said he, “I was traveling in an open, desolate field, which appeared to be very barren. As I was thus traveling, the thought suddenly came into my mind that I had better stop and reflect upon what I was doing, before I went any further. So I asked myself, 'What motive can I have in traveling here, and what place can this be?' My guide, who was by my side, as before, said, 'This is the desolate world; but travel on.' The road was so broad and barren that I wondered why I should travel in it; for, said I to myself, 'Broad is the road, and wide is the gate that leads to death, and many there be that walk therein; but narrow is the way, and straight is the gate that leads to everlasting' life, and few there be that go in thereat.' Traveling a short distance farther, I came to a narrow path. This path I entered, and, when I had traveled a little way in it, I beheld a beautiful stream of water, which ran from the east to the west. Of this stream I could see neither the source nor yet the termination; but as far as my eyes could extend I could see a rope running along the bank of it, about as high as a man could reach, and beyond me was a low, but very pleasant valley, in which stood a tree such as I had never seen before. It was exceedingly handsome, insomuch that I looked upon it with wonder and admiration. Its beautiful branches spread themselves somewhat like an umbrella, and it bore a kind of fruit, in shape much like a chestnut bur, and as white as snow, or, if possible whiter. I gazed upon the same with considerable interest, and as I was doing so the burs or shells commenced opening and shedding their particles, or the fruit which they contained, which was of dazzling whiteness. I drew near and began to eat of it, and I found it delicious beyond description. As I was eating, I said in my heart, 'I can not eat this alone, I must bring my wife and children, that they may partake with me.' Accordingly, I went and brought my family, which consisted of a wife and seven children, and we all commenced eating, and praising God for this blessing. We were exceedingly happy, insomuch that our joy could not easily be expressed. “While thus engaged, I beheld a spacious building standing opposite the valley which we were in, and it appeared to reach to the very heavens. It was full of doors and windows, and they were filled with people, who were very finely dressed. When these people observed us in the low valley, under the tree, they pointed the finger of scorn at us, and treated us with all manner of disrespect and contempt. But their contumely we utterly disregarded. I presently turned to my guide, and inquired of him the meaning of the fruit that was so delicious. He told me it was the pure love of God, shed abroad in the hearts of all those who love him, and keep his commandments. He then commanded me to go and bring the rest of my children. I told him that we were all there. 'No,' he replied, 'look yonder, you have two more, and you must bring them also.' Upon raising my eyes, I saw two small children, standing some distance off. I immediately went to them, and brought them to the tree; upon which they commenced eating with the rest, and we all rejoiced together. The more we ate, the more we seemed to desire, until we even got down upon our knees, and scooped it up, eating it by double handfuls. After feasting in this manner a short time, I asked my guide what was the meaning of the spacious building which I saw. He replied, 'It is Babylon, it is Babylon, and it must fall. The people in the doors and windows are the inhabitants thereof, who scorn and despise the Saints of God because of their humility.' I soon awoke, clapping my hands together for joy.” (Lucy Mack Smith, Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet, and His Progenitors for Many Generations, Harold B. Lee Library, BYU, March 2004, pp 58-59)

            So this dream, which undoubtedly Joseph Smith Jr. would have grown up hearing, sounds awfully similar to that dream that Lehi has about the Tree of Life in the BOM. With the striking similarities between both his fathers’ dream and the two book previously mentioned, all he would need is a good imagination to finish writing the Book of Mormon.

2.3- Anachronisms

An anachronism is, per dictionary.com “something or someone that is not in its correct historical or chronological time, especially a thing or person that belongs to an earlier time.” And as it turns out, the Book of Mormon is full of these. This again is something that I have wondered about for a very long time.

Ether 9:18-19 –

18 And also all manner of cattle, of oxen, and cows, and of sheep, and of swine, and of goats, and also many other kinds of animals which were useful for the food of man.
19 And they also had horses, and asses, and there were elephants and cureloms and cumoms; all of which were useful unto man, and more especially the elephants and cureloms and cumoms.

            So from 18 and 19 it talks about cattle, oxen, cows, sheep, swine, goats, horses and donkeys. We have solid scientific evidence that horses, domesticated or wild, were not found prior to the Spanish conquests. Again, evidence is found for swine as well stating that there were no native species found in the Americas, and were not found until European explorers came to this area. The story is the same for sheep, nothing prior to Columbus.

            So from 19 it talks specifically about elephants. Elephants, mastodons and mammoths evolved from a common ancestor about 10-20 million years ago. While elephants stayed in Africa and Asia, mastodons and mammoths migrated into America across the Bering Strait during the last Ice Age. Mastodons and mammoths were hunted to extinction during the Pleistocene era, about 13.7-14.8 thousand years ago. While the fossil record shows contact early humans, these animals disappeared long before the Jaredite story begins. Source from Scientific American.

2.4- DNA evidence

            Here is a subject I found specifically interesting, DNA, the basic proof of everything living. Over the years, prophets, apostles, and missionaries have preached an ancestral link between the ancient Hebrews and Native Americans.

“As I look into your faces, I think of Father Lehi, whose sons and daughters you are. I think he must be shedding tears today, tears of love and gratitude.... This is but the beginning of the work in Peru.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, God’s Holy Work in Peru, Ensign, February 1997, p.73)

“We also bare testimony that the Indians of North and South America are a remnant of the tribes of Israel; as is now made manifest by the discovery and revelation of their ancient oracles and records.” (Proclamation of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, April 1845)

“Central America, or Guat[e]mala, is situated north of the Isthmus of Darien and once embraced by several hundred miles of territory from north to south. The city of Zarahemla, burnt at the crucifixion of the Savior, and rebuilt afterwards, stood up on this land as will be seen from the following words from the Book of Alma: ‘And now it was only the distance of a day and a half’s journey for a Nephite, on the line Bountiful, and the land Desolation, from the east to the west sea; and thus the land of Nephi, and the land of Zarahemla was nearly surrounded by water: there being a small neck of land between the land northward and the land southward.’” (Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, October 1, 1842, vol.3, no.23)

            We know from the BOM that Lehi was a decedent of Joseph who was sold into Egypt, whose family ended up settling in Jerusalem. The BOM confirms that Lehi came from Jerusalem. So it should stand to reason, that if Lehi and his family is the primary (or even a portion of) the ancestry of the Native Americans, then they should be able to trace their DNA back to a similar line to those found in and from the Israel area.

            So, what does the data say? Information from the international Human Genome Project shows some fantastic finding on the movement of DNA lineages.

“Lying at the intersection of what is today Russia, Mongolia, China and Kazakhstan, the region known as the Altai. The Altai region has played a critical role in the peopling of northern Asia as an entry point into Siberia and a possible homeland for ancestral Native Americans. It has an old and rich history because humans have inhabited this area since the Paleolithic. To untangle Altaian genetic histories, we analyzed mtDNA and Y chromosome variation in northern and southern Altaian populations. Based on these data, we noted differences in the origin and population history of Altaian ethnic groups. Moreover, high-resolution analysis of Y chromosome haplogroup Q has allowed us to reshape the phylogeny of this branch, making connections between populations of the New World and Old World more apparent and demonstrating that southern Altaians and Native Americans share a recent common ancestor. These results greatly enhance our understanding of the peopling of Siberia and the Americas”. (The American Journal of Human Genetics, 10 February 2012, vol.90, issue 2, pp.229-246, in association with the University of Pennsylvania and the American Society of Human Genetics, Matthew C. Dulik, et al.)

“A comparison of Native Americans, Siberians and Asians reveals that the same mtDNA lineages in all groups share mutations in the control region that are specific to the haplogroups. The simplest explanation is that the control region mutations arose in Asia in the founding mtDNA lineages and were carried to the New World by the ancestral Native Americans.” (Theodore G. Schurr, Mitochondrial DNA and the Peopling of the New World, American Scientist -The Scientific Research Society, May-June 2000)

            Looking at both of these studies, it is rather definitive that after having taken DNA samples from every known tribe of Native Americans, there was not a drop of middle eastern blood found. Everything appears to have originated from Asia, nothing from the Middle East or Jerusalem at all. Thomas W. Murphy, chair of the Department of Anthropology at Edmonds College in Washington, wrote:

“Now that quantitative scientific methods can indeed test for an Israelite genetic presence in ancient America, we learn instead that virtually all Native Americans can trace their lineages to the Asian migrations between 7,000 and 50,000 years ago. While molecular anthropologists have the technological capability to identify descendants of ancient Hebrews, no traces of such DNA markers have appeared in Central America or elsewhere among Native Americans. . . .From a scientific perspective, the Book of Mormon's origin is best situated in early nineteenth-century America, . . . The Book of Mormon emerged from an antebellum perspective, out of a frontier American people's struggle with their god, and not from an authentic American Indian perspective” (Thomas W. Murphy, Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics, in American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon, 2002, p.68)

            So, how do we take all of this data? Joseph Smith stated that, “We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites of the descendants of Joseph. … The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.” (Joseph Smith, The Went Worth Letter. www.lds.org/ensign/2002/07/the-wentworth-letter?lang =eng)

            So while this is what is being taught, the current scientific evidence is saying the exact opposite. There appears to be no DNA to support that any of the Native Americans share any similarities with those from the area of the Tower of Babel or of Jerusalem.

2.5- Locations and archeology finding

The Book of Mormon chronicles two major civilization-ending battles at the Hill Cumorah: With the first being the Jaredites. In the book of Ether (the story of these people) chapter 15, right from the chapter heading we read:

“Millions of the Jaredites are slain in battle—Shiz and Coriantumr assemble all the people to mortal combat—The Spirit of the Lord ceases to strive with them—The Jaredite nation is utterly destroyed…”

            So here we have listed “Millions” of individuals all killed in a single battle (that yes, took place in more than one day). All in the same area. As it says in the eleventh verse of chapter 15, the will was called “Ramah; and it was that same hill where my father Mormon did hide up the records unto the Lord, which were sacred.”

            The next group of people to find this area were the Nephites and Lamanites. In the 6^th chapter heading in the book of Mormon it reads:

“The Nephites gather to the land of Cumorah for the final battles—Mormon hides the sacred records in the hill Cumorah—The Lamanites are victorious, and the Nephite nation is destroyed—Hundreds of thousands are slain with the sword. About A.D. 385.”

General authorities confirm that both these battle took place on the Hill Cumorah, the same hill in upstate New York where Joseph retrieved the plates. 

"The great and last battle, in which several hundred thousand Nephites perished was on the hill Cumorah, the same hill from which the plates were taken by Joseph Smith, the boy about whom I spoke to you the other evening." (Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, February 11, 1872, vol. 14, p. 331)

“Both the Nephite and the Jaredite civilizations fought their final great wars of extinction at and near the Hill Cumorah or Ramah as the Jaredites termed it, which hill is located between Palmyra and Manchester in the western part of the state of New York ... Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and many early brethren, who were familiar with the circumstances attending the coming forth of the Book of Mormon in this dispensation, have left us pointed testimony as to the identity and location of Cumorah or Ramah.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 175).

So what exactly is here? The Hill Cumorah in Palmyra, New York occupies less than half a square mile. The last Nephite battle had casualties in the hundreds of thousands as recently as 385 A.D., only 1,630 years ago. But the largest battle, in Ether, recounts casualties of at least 2 million people. For perspective, that is roughly three to four times as many deaths than occurred during the entire American Civil War, which was spread across 26 states.

The Civil War’s more than 5 thousand separate battles claimed the lives of over 600 thousand soldiers across half the country. Collected from these battles, and still being found to this day, are an enormous amount of skeletons, bullets, weapons, clothing, and various military paraphernalia. The Hill Cumorah, at only 110 feet tall and less than a half a mile in area, is supposed to contain the bodies of nearly 3 million casualties from less than 2,000 years ago, yet not a single Jaredite, Nephite or Lamanite remain has ever been found.

Dr. John E. Clark, professor of Archaeology at BYU, comments on the Book of Mormon’s archaeological remains in the Hill Cumorah,

“If any place merits archaeological attention, it is Cumorah. The very word elicits a series of empirical questions that can only be addressed through archaeology. […] When we pay attention to time and to cultural context, it becomes clear that the events described in the Book of Mormon did not occur in New York. […] In accord with these general observations about New York and Pennsylvania, we come to our principal object— the Hill Cumorah. Archaeologically speaking, it is a clean hill. No artifacts, no walls, no trenches, no arrowheads. The area immediately surrounding the hill is similarly clean. Pre- Columbian people did not settle or build here. This is not the place of Mormon’s last stand. We must look elsewhere for that hill.” (John E. Clark, Archaeology and Cumorah Questions, Journal of Mormon Studies, 2004.  http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1412&index=15)

2.6- Translation errors in the Book of Mormon

            The Book of Mormon includes what appears to be mistranslated biblical passages that were later changed in Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible. These Book of Mormon verses should match the inspired JST version instead of the incorrect KJV version that Joseph later fixed. Here is one example of those differences between the BOM, the KJV, and the JST:

3 Nephi 13:25-27:

25: …Therefore I say unto you, take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?

26: Behold the fowls of the air, for they sow not, neither do they reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

27: Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

Matthew 6:25-27 (from the King James Version Bible – not the JST):

25: Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?

26: Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

27: Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

            The above Sermon on the Mount passages are identical between the KJV and the BOM, which is makes sense as Christ should have said the same thing to both groups of. Below is what we find in the JST version of the above identical scriptures:

Joseph Smith Translation of the same passages in the LDS Bible for Matthew 6:25-27:

25: And, again, I say unto you, Go ye into the world, and care not for the world: for the world will hate you, and will persecute you, and will turn you out of their synagogues.

26: Nevertheless, ye shall go forth from house to house, teaching the people; and I will go before you.

27: And your heavenly Father will provide for you, whatsoever things ye need for food, what ye shall eat; and for raiment, what ye shall wear or put on.

            If the Bible is wrong, and needed to be corrected, why does it have the same thing in the BOM? We are taught that the Bible has errors due to translations, omissions, and additions; that is why the JST was needed. But the BOM shouldn’t have any of those problems, right? It was only translated once, by a prophet, with the power of God.

2.7- The Witnesses

Ok, so there is some crazy stuff going on with the translation of the BOM, what about the witnesses to the plates and how do their testimonies lend credibility to the entire narrative. But again, research turns up issues of their own. These included the fact that no scribe ever saw the plates, the 3 and 8 witnesses only saw the plates with their spiritual eyes, the printed testimony did not reflect literal events, and nearly all the witnesses left the Church.

During the translation process, Joseph was either behind a curtain or the plates sat on a table underneath a cloth in another room. No scribe to the translation process (Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris or Emma Smith) was ever allowed to see the plates. Emma only felt the plates through a cloth on the table. Why wouldn’t Joseph want anybody to see the plates? (By the Gift and Power of God, Elder Neal A. Maxwell January 1997 Ensign quoting David Whitmer Interviews: A Restoration Witness, ed. Lyndon W. Cook, [1991], p173) and (Joseph Smith III, "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," pp289–90).

The 3 Witnesses

The History of the Church records the event where Martin Harris, David Whitmer and Oliver Cowdery became the first witnesses to the gold plates after Joseph Smith. Joseph describes how the men gained their witness of the plates in a purely visionary setting.

“Not many days after the above commandment was given, we four, viz., Martin Harris, David Whitmer, Oliver Cowdery and myself, agreed to retire into the woods, and try to obtain, by fervent and humble prayer, the fulfilment of the promises given in the above revelation—that they should have a view of the plates. We accordingly made choice of a piece of woods convenient to Mr. Whitmer’s house, to which we retired, and having knelt down, we began to pray in much faith to Almighty God to bestow upon us a realization of these promises.
According to previous arrangement, I commenced by vocal prayer to our Heavenly Father, and was followed by each of the others in succession. We did not at the first trial, however, obtain any answer or manifestation of divine favor in our behalf. We again observed the same order of prayer, each calling on and praying fervently to God in rotation, but with the same result as before. Upon this, our second failure, Martin Harris proposed that he should withdraw himself from us, believing, as he expressed himself, that his presence was the cause of our not obtaining what we wished for. He accordingly withdrew from us, and we knelt down again, and had not been many minutes engaged in prayer, when presently we beheld a light above us in the air, of exceeding brightness; and behold, an angel stood before us. In his hands he held the plates which we had been praying for these to have a view of. He turned over the leaves one by one, so that we could see them, and discern the engravings thereon distinctly. He then addressed himself to David Whitmer, and said, ‘David, blessed is the Lord, and he that keeps His commandments;’ when, immediately afterwards, we heard a voice from out of the bright light above us, saying, ‘These plates have been revealed by the power of God, and they have been translated by the power of God. The translation of them which you have seen is correct, and I command you to bear record of what you now see and hear.” (History of the Church, vol.1, pp.54–55)

Joseph Smith, David Whitmer, and Oliver Cowdery saw an angel and the plates after Martin Harris withdrew from the group. Joseph goes on to tells how he, “…left David and Oliver and went in pursuit of Martin Harris, whom I found at a considerable distance fervently engaged in prayer.” Then they both joined in prayer, and according to Joseph, “the same vision was opened to our view.” Remember, the word “vision” is another word for dream, hallucination not necessarily reality.

It is important to note that Joseph never claimed to have carried the plates into the woods where they prayed. Did the angel go and get them from Joseph’s house and bring them into the woods? Praying to see the plates in the woods seems rather odd if Joseph actually had the physical plates. Why was prayer necessary to see the plates if they were in fact, a physical object? Martin Harris’ behavior also seems strange if the plates actually existed.

On March 25, 1838, Martin Harris testified in public that none of the 3 or 8 witnesses saw or handled the physical plates. This statement caused apostles Luke S. Johnson, Lyman E. Johnson, John F. Boynton, high priest Stephen Burnett and LDS Seventy Warren Parish to leave the church. A letter on Josephsmithpapers.org dated April 15, 1838, Stephen Burnett wrote the following to Lyman Johnson:

“I have reflected long and deliberately upon the history of this church and weighed the evidence for and against it — loth to give it up — but when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver [Cowdery] nor David [Whitmer] and also that the eight witnesses never saw them and hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way, in my view our foundations was sapped and the entire superstructure fell a heap of ruins, … I was followed by W. [Warren] Parish, Luke Johnson and John Boynton, all of who concurred with me. After we were done speaking, M[artin] Harris arose and said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city through a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight was false, if it had not been picked out of air but should have let it passed as it was.” (http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/letterbook-2?p=69)

On April 5, 1839 member of the Church, Theodore Turley, challenged John Whitmer, one of the 8 witnesses, to either affirm or deny his testimony regarding the gold plates. Whitmer responded by saying “I now say, I handled those plates...they were shown to me by a supernatural power.” (History of the Church, vol.3 p307). Why would a supernatural power be necessary if the plates actually existed? Couldn’t Joseph just invite the men he wanted to be witnesses over to his house, take the plates out of the box where he kept them and pass them around? Why are visions and supernatural means necessary to see these plates?

Josephsmithpapers.org published the original source document for the statements by the 3 and 8 witnesses that are printed in the beginning of the Book of Mormon. Half way down the first page marks the beginning of the testimony of the 3 witnesses and concludes on the top of the second page with their signatures. The second page then contains the entire testimony of the 8 witnesses and their signatures.

Josephsmithpapers.org states that both statements and all signatures are in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery. The official statements printed in the Book of Mormon are not dated, signed with original signatures, or given a specific location where the events occurred. These are not 11 legally sworn statements; rather it seems possible that they are simple accounts pre-written and agreed upon at some later time.

Consider this fact in conjunction with the statement by Martin Harris:

“…and also that the eight witnesses never saw them and hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it.”

Reportedly this source document is printer’s manuscript and the original was partially destroyed; however no remains can be found. But there was another individual to have written something similar. A one Warren Parrish wrote in August of 1838 the following:

“Martain Harris, one of the subscribing witnesses, has come out at last, and says that he never say the plates, from which the book is purported to have been translated, except in a vision and he further says that any man who says he has seen them in any other way is a liar, Joseph [Smith] not expected.”

            So, none of the witnesses saw the plates with their “natural eyes.” Everything had to be done via a vision. I find this very troubling. Why could they not just take a walk over to the house, have a cup of whatever drink they were allowed to have at the time, and Joseph just pull the cloth off of the plates? Maybe it was because moving the plates would have taken an extremely strong man. The plates are described as being around 6 inches wide, 8 inches long, and around 6 inches thick, this equals 1/6^th of a cubic foot. Gold weighs 1,206 lbs per cubic foot, leading the plates to weigh in at right around 200 lbs. I would let the angel be the one to carry them around too I guess.

Issue #3. Polygamy

            OK, we all know that polygamy was practiced early in the church. We have D&C 132 telling us the rules about it. And now we also have 2 different essays from the church on the topic. The first one is a general essay on plural marriage, and the second is more focused on plural marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo.

            Growing up, as well as on my mission, I was taught that the point of these plural marriages was to help raise up children, as well as the fact that many of the men had died or been killed along the way, and that is what was taught in D&C 132. I don’t even know where to start with this chapter in the D&C, there is so much just strange stuff. I guess I will take them one by one and pick out some key points or issues:

1.      God justified Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon in having multiple wives as well as concubines

3.      “…for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.”

4.      Either live polygamous or be dammed

8.      “Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.”

15.  Married for time is earth only, not bound by the same after this earth life.

16.  So, if you are not married by God (sealed) you can only be an angel in heaven and a servant of “those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.” Also, you can’t get married in heaven.

20.  Man becoming Gods, and having the angels from verse 16 being subject unto them.

37.  “Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness.”

38.  “David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.”

39.  David only sinned with Uriah and his wife (the woman washing on the roof).

51.  This one lost me. Apparently God had Joseph offer something to Emma, now he is saying to not partake of it, it was to “prove you all, as I did Abraham.”

54.  Emma is told to cleave unto Joseph and none else.

56.  Emma is told to forgive Joseph of his trespasses.

61.  If a man is married, and wants another wife, she must be a virgin. It also shows that the first wife has to consent to him taking a second wife.

62.  Again, as long as each wife is a virgin upon the marriage, there is no problem.

63.  The whole point of the polygamy is to multiply and replenish the earth.

64.  A wife “shall believe and administer unto” her husband.

Sticky points:

            1 & 37-39. God allowed and even gave all these Old Testament prophets multiple wives and concubines. The only time this was a problem is when David also had a married woman (Uriah’s wife). Other than that, all of these extra marriages were condoned and blessed of God.

            My biggest issue here is the complete contradiction that we find with these verses and those found in Jacob 2:24- “Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.” Right here it says literally the EXACT opposite as what we find in the D&C. So in my mind, we have either an error in the “most correct book, or an error in a direct revelation that was given to, and written by a prophet of God.

Continuing on in that same chapter in Jacob starting in verse 26:

            26. Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them                    of old.
            27. Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there                    shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have      none;
            28. For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an                                    abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

Again, this states rather clearly that God is against having multiple wives. If God truly is unchanging, why does this seem to be a point of difference between two modern day scriptures (BOM and the D&C)?

OK, back to other sticky points brought up from D&C 132:

            3-4. So are we all damned since we don’t live that way anymore? Again, if God is the       same yesterday, today and forever, shouldn’t we all be in trouble?

39. David only sinned when he was with a married woman? But other than that, everyone else was alright.

            54. Why is Emma told to cleave unto her husband, while her husband get sealed to other women who are already married?

            56. What is it that Joseph has done that would require Emma to forgive him?

            61. So, the second wife must be a virgin. Another key point, the first wife needs to           consent to him taking another wife(s).
                        We have record of Joseph being sealed to 11 women who were already married                             (thus likely not virgins). Also, records show that Emma was not informed, nor                               happy with him having multiple other wives.

            There is also an account of Joseph not wanting to follow the initial revelation of polygamy. “During the third and final appearance, the angel came with a drawn sword, threatening Joseph with destruction unless he went forward and obeyed the commandment fully.” This message, or threat, was then forwarded on to the women that Joseph ended up being married too; he told them that if they didn’t marry him, the angel with a flaming sword would kill him. This sounds like blackmail to me. Now it is on her head that she didn’t agree to marry him, so he would die and it would be her fault?

There is also the account of the 14 year old bride, Helen Mar Kimball, being told that if she were to marry Joseph that it would, “…ensure your eternal salvation and exaltation & that of your father’s household & all of your kindred.” That is a huge amount of pressure to place on the head of a 14 year old. This seemed to happen an number of other times as Joseph proposed to other women, “Joseph Smith’s to Helen resembles others recorded by the Prophet’s wives; each reported that he couched his proposal in the language of revelation, obedience to God’s law, and the promise of eternal rewards. Joseph Smith’s proposals, in other words, mirrored the 1843 revelation on celestial marriage, which highlighted law, obedience, and afterlife blessings.”

            I am really at odds with all of this information. If it clearly states in D&C that the whole point was to raise up righteous seed, and that the first wife needed to approve prior to the second marriage, and that the subsequent wives need to be virgins. It seems that Joseph Smith didn’t even follow his own rules! There is a theory that all of these marriages by Joseph was just for the linking of the multiple major families in the church, to create a “family web” as it were. If that was the case, then we would expect Joseph to have been sealed alone, and not “consummate” the marriage. This was not the case, “Latter-day Saints marshaled convincing evidence that at least some of the plural marriages had been consummated.” So again, what was the need for Joseph to be married to 40+ women?

            The next problem on this topic is the timing of the whole thing. D&C 132, with the rules and orders to live this way, was recorded in 1843. Right in the chapter heading is says that there was, “evidence indicates that some of the principles involved in this revelation were known by the Prophet as early as 1831.” Joseph was married to Fanny Alger in 1833, 10 years prior to recording the chapter in D&C. This was even prior to the restoring of the keys from the prophet Elijah in April of 1836. So again I ask, if there was no power to be sealed to a spouse until 1936, why was Joseph married to multiple women well before that time? And why did it take even longer to come out with the revelation about polygamy until 1843?

When it boils down to it, yes, I knew polygamy existed in the church. Where my problems lie is with the fact that it didn’t seem to follow the law as given in the D&C. If the Lord took the time to lay out the parameters and rules that should be followed, why did they not do that? And it wasn’t like Joseph started once he first caught wind, then stopped the general sealings and then followed the letter of the law when it was given; he continued to marry whomever he chose, virgin or not, married or not, underage or not, and with or without the approval of Emma.

            The practice of polygamy was finally stopped in 1890, following the dispatch known as the Official Declaration 1 as sent forth from Wilford Woodruff. This was reaffirmed by Gordon B. Hinckley when he stated, “More than a century ago God clearly revealed unto His prophet Wilford Woodruff that the practice of plural marriage should be discontinued, which means that it is now against the law of God.”

Issue #4. Blacks and the Church

            For over 150 years the Church has taught and sustained racially prejudiced doctrines; while attributing these teachings to God’s will. These teachings include a ban on black members from holding the priesthood and participating in the temple, and went as far as preaching death as a consequence for inter-race marriage. Recently, the Church has tried to clean up this part of its image by disavowing these past teachings.

            Racist Doctrines

President Brigham Young

   “Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.10, p.110)

“How long is that race to endure the dreadful curse that is upon them? That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof. Until the last ones of the residue of Adam's children are brought up to that favourable position, the children of Cain cannot receive the first ordinances of the Priesthood. They were the first that were cursed, and they will be the last from whom the curse will be removed.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol7, pp.290)

“You may inquire of the intelligent of the world whether they can tell why the aborigines of this country are dark, loathsome, ignorant, and sunken into the depths of degradation ...When the Lord has a people, he makes covenants with them and gives unto them promises: then, if they transgress his law, change his ordinances, and break his covenants he has made with them, he will put a mark upon them, as in the case of the Lamanites and other portions of the house of Israel; but by‑and‑by they will become a white and delightsome people. (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, pp.335-338)

“You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, pp.282-291)

President George Albert Smith

“The negro is an unfortunate man. He has been given a black skin. But that is as nothing compared with that greater handicap that he is not permitted to receive the Priesthood and the ordinances of the temple, necessary to prepare men and women to enter into and enjoy a fullness of glory in the celestial kingdom. What is the reason for this condition, we ask, and I find it to my satisfaction to think that as spirit children of our Eternal Father   they were not valiant in the fight.” (George Albert Smith, General Conference, April 1939)

“The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time… The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the pre-mortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality.” (George Albert Smith, Statement by the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on the Negro Question, August 17, 1949)

President Joseph Fielding Smith

“That negro race, for instance, have been placed under restrictions because of their attitude in the world of spirits, few will doubt. It cannot be looked upon as just that they should be deprived of the power of the Priesthood without it being a punishment for some act, or acts, performed before they were born.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, 1984, p.43)

“Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin and have been denied the privilege of Priesthood and the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel. These are the descendants of Cain.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, 1984, p.101-2)

Elder Bruce R. McConkie

“Negroes in this life are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. The gospel message of salvation is not carried affirmatively to them…Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow there from, but this inequality is not of man’s origin. It is the Lord’s doing, is based on his eternal laws of justice, and grows out of the lack of Spiritual valiance of those concerned in their first estate.” (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966, pp.527-528)

President David O. McKay

“The seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God… Revelation assures us that this plan antedates man's mortal existence, extending back to man's preexistent state. (Pres. David O. McKay, Hugh B. Brown, N. Eldon Tanner. Letter of the First Presidency Clarifies Church’s Position on the Negro – Dec. 15, 1969. Printed in The Improvement Era, Feb. 1970, p.70-71)

            Along the lines of black and the Priesthood there is also the topic of Civil Rights. As a church claiming to be led by Jesus Christ himself since God loves all of his children, and is “no respecter of person”; I would expect it to be on the front line fighting for equal rights for all people, and instead the Church did nothing. In fact, they actually tried to prevent it.

            In January 1964, member of the Quorum of the 12 Apostles, Delbert L. Stapley, wrote to Michigan Governor George Romney. Governor Romney would later campaign to be President of the United States, as did his son, Mit Romeny. In his letter, Elder Stapley urged Governor Romney not to support the Civil Rights Act as it would bring the integration of blacks into society.

“I am sure you know that the Prophet Joseph Smith, in connection with the Negro   problem of this country, proposed to Congress that they sell public lands and buy up the       Negro slaves and transport them back to Africa from whence they came. I am sure the     Prophet, with his vision and understanding, foresaw the problems we are faced with          today with this race, which caused him to promote this program.

"When I reflect upon the Prophet's statements and remember what happened to three of our nation's presidents who were very active in the Negro cause, I Ch 8 – Blacks and the Church 55 am sobered by their demise. They went contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith unwittingly, no doubt, but nevertheless, the prophecy of Joseph Smith, "... those who are determined to pursue a course, which shows an opposition, and a feverish restlessness against the decrees of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do His own work, without the aid of those who are not dictated by His counsel," has and will continue to be fulfilled." (Delbert L. Stapley, Letter to Gov. George Romney, January 23, 1964. https://archive.org/stream/DelbertStapleyLetter/delbert_stapley_Letter# page/n0/mode/2up)

            In this letter Elder Stapley warned Governor Romney that support for civil rights was against the will of the Lord as revealed through Joseph Smith. Stapley further cautioned that punishments are in store for those who seek equality in such ways. As evidence for such dire warnings, Stapley wrote that three U. S. Presidents who had fought for equality and civil rights met an untimely death; Lincoln and Kennedy by assassination and Grant by cancer. In February of 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act prohibiting discrimination according to race, religion, or sex. Four years later, Dr. Martin Luther King was martyred for his role as a leader in the movement. After his death, black preachers continued to call for full integration of blacks into white restrooms, buses, schools, jobs, and neighborhoods. A full ten years passed after King’s death until the priesthood, eternal marriage, and temple endowments were offered to the few black church members.

“Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood.... This negro, who, in the pre-existence lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa—if that negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the preexistent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory.” (Elder Mark E. Peterson, lecture at BYU, 1954)

Prior to 1978, blacks could only be servants in the Celestial kingdom.

            President Ezra Taft Benson gave a talk in general conference after the passing of the Civil Rights Act and before the Church changed its stance on the issue:

“There is no doubt that the so-called civil rights movement as it exists today is used as a Communist program for revolution in America." (President Ezra Taft Benson, Trust Not in the Arm of Flesh, General Conference, October 1967)

            The Civil Rights Act brought equal treatment for all people in this country and effectively ended legal segregation. To refer to it as “the so-called civil rights movement” is to take away the importance of the issues. Remember, this was at the height of the Cold War between the U.S. and Russia and to refer to someone or something as communist during this time was a very derogatory statement. President Benson does not sound like the Lord’s prophet bringing a message of love. It seems that the basis of these prejudice doctrines may have begun with the culture of racism held by early general authorities and perpetuated by the following leaders until the direction the nation was moving forced the hand of the Church.

            Now it looks like the church is trying to distance itself from the past teachings. Published in 2013 on LDS.org is an article named, Race and the Priesthood.

“Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life; that mixedrace marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else.” (Race and the Priesthood, December 6, 2013. https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng)

            This latest manifesto is shocking for the rejection of teachings by past prophets. Contained in this statement, the Church blatantly contradicts itself when disavowing:

1. “…that black skin was a sign of disfavor or curse…” “A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with a black skin and have been denied the privilege of Priesthood and the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel. These are the descendants of Cain.” (President Joseph Fielding Smith)

2. “…that it reflects actions in a premortal life…” “The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality.” (President George Albert Smith)

3. “… that mixed-race marriages are a sin…” “If the white man belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the of God, is death on the spot.” (President Brigham Young)

4. “…that blacks…are inferior in any way to anyone else…” “…some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.” (President Brigham Young)

            Time and time again the Church reminds us to give strict obedience to the prophet for the sole reason that he speaks for God and is incapable of misconduct.

“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty.” (President Wilford Woodruff, General Conference, October 1890)

“Keep your eye on the Prophet, for the Lord will never permit his Prophet to lead this Church astray.” (President Ezra Taft Benson, General Conference, October 1966)

“Follow your leaders who have been duly ordained and have been publicly sustained, and you will not be led astray. (Elder Boyd K. Packer, General Conference, October 1992)

“Follow the prophet, follow the prophet, Follow the prophet; don't go astray. Follow the prophet, follow the prophet, Follow the prophet; he knows the way.” (Children’s Songbook)

            Since when are statements made in the name of the Lord by presidents of the Church considered just “theories”? Applying the idea that the priesthood ban on blacks was just a theory also doesn’t make much sense when considering what Pres. David O. McKay stated, “…discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God.” Now it appears that the Church is trying to have the best of both worlds by disavowing its racist past while simultaneously insisting that leaders will never lead the Church astray and hoping no one notices this rather large contradiction.

            If prophets claim to speak Heavenly Father’s will when their words can be later disavowed, then how was it that they were prophets at all? This completely undermines the prophet will never lead us astray principal. What doctrines currently attributed to God by today’s prophet can be discredited as just “theories” by future general authorities?

            I think this is one of the hardest problems for me to swallow. This is something that I came up against on my mission incredibly regularly. I remember that this was one of those key issues that they made sure that we had plenty of information to help people understand. We had scriptures, we had quotes. Many of the “reasons” that we were told to teach the people when they asked about this are now those “theories” that the church no longer teaches. Those, “theories” as the essay says, were taught from the pulpit. In my mind, anytime that something is said by a prophet from the pulpit, it is the word of God, and not the word of that man. And now I am learning that according to the church now, everything that I taught those people is wrong, when it was the same church that told me to teach those things as the prophets had taught. This bears down on my very credibility as not only a missionary, but as a person. Because of this essay, whatever I taught was a lie. This burns me up, knowing that I lied. Having served in the South, these were the primary people that I taught, and now I’m being told that I taught them a giant lie. A lie that I was told to teach them, that I had learned as doctrine, but now have been informed it is nothing more than a theory. So again I will ask, what is stopping future prophets’ from coming out and stating that what we are being right now is only a theory, and considered wrong?

Issue #5. Blood Atonement

            There is another topic that was taught by early prophets of the church that has now been disavowed as a theory and is labeled as not doctrine now. This is the subject of the blood atonement. It’s easiest to explain this one by just going to some of the teachings.

“Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine, and is taught in all the standard works of the Church.” (President Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1954, vol. 1, pp. 135-136)

            Brigham Young took the doctrine of blood atonement even further. While Joseph might have emphasized the practice of blood atonement against sinful Mormons, Brigham inspired his followers to murder in God’s name, both Mormons and non-Mormons alike. Brigham Young stated:

“Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them. You would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the Kingdom of God. I would at once do so, in such a case; and under the circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands.... There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.1, pp.108-109)

“All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers and sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, pp.219-220)

“There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world…I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, p.53)

“This is loving your neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, p.220) 

            This is horrifying. I couldn’t even imagine living under such conditions. President Young acknowledges that elders in the church have murdered, in the name of God, those assumed to have sinned. Imagine if Thomas S. Monson were to preach this at general conference and tasked local authorities to follow through with this council. Who of our neighbors would be killed? Would they have a special hit squad for the church? The old jokes of the Mormon Mafia are starting to come to mind.

            As it turns out, again it seems that what Brigham started, other prophets followed along. So the horror can continue.

Heber C. Kimball

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

“Judas lost that saving principle, and they took him and killed him. It is said in the Bible that his bowels gushed out; but they actually kicked him until his bowels came out.... Judas was like salt that had lost its saving principles—good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under foot of men.... It is so with you, ye Elders of Israel, when you forfeit your covenants.... I know the day is right at hand when men will forfeit their Priesthood and turn against us and against the covenants they have made, and they will be destroyed as Judas was.” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol.6, pp.125-26)

“These are my views, and the Lord knows that I believe in the principles of sanctification; and when I am guilty of seducing any man's wife, or any woman in God's world, I say, sever my head from my body.” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol.7, p.20)

Jebediah M. Grant

“I say, there are men and women that I would advise to go to the Presidency immediately, and ask him to appoint a committee to attend to their care; and then let a place be selected, and let that committee shed their blood. We have amongst us that are full of all manner of abominations, those who need to have their blood shed, for water will not do, their sins are too deep a dye... I believe that there are a great many; and if they are covenant breakers we need a place designated, where we can shed their blood... Brethren and sisters, we want you to repent and forsake your sins. And you who have committed sins that cannot be forgiven through baptism, let your blood be shed, and let the smoke ascend, that the incense thereof may come up before God as an atonement for your sins, and that the sinners in Zion may be afraid.” (Apostle Jebediah M. Grant, 2nd counselor to Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol.4, pp.49-51)

Joseph Fielding Smith

“Joseph Smith taught that there were certain sins so grievous that man may commit, that they will place the transgressors beyond the power of the atonement of Christ. If these offenses are committed, then the blood of Christ will not cleanse them from their sins even though they repent. Therefore their only hope is to have their blood shed to atone, as far as possible, in their behalf. This is scriptural doctrine, and is taught in all the standard works of the Church.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1954, vol.1, pp.135-136)

            To recall the words of Dallin H. Oaks, “…our policies are determined by the truths God has declared to be unchangeable.” Many terrorist organizations around the world commit terrible acts in the name of God. Should they get a free pass for their actions? Should our Church? It is obvious why the Church would not want this part of the history to become common knowledge. Does the Church acknowledge that this practice was truly taught by inspired prophets? As it turns out, they have confirmed that they were indeed taught. In the essay titled, “Peace and Violence Among the 19^th-Century Latter-Day-Saints” it does address that this subject was at least taught. Again though, this subject that was taught by multiple prophets, from the pulpit, has now been disavowed by the church. It is no longer considered doctrine. This topic though has had an interesting history, particularly as noted in the New Era in 1972. Here it is trying to pass off these teachings as something that was possibly said in passing, then used by Anti-Mormons to spread lies. But when it truly boils down to it, this was a topic taught and preached by multiple prophets, and from the pulpit.

            So, this document is by no means everything that has gotten me to the point that I am. I decided to make a list and find the top five things that really bothered me. I wanted to make sure that I had this ready to go to share it.

            Again, I’m not looking for a fight. I’m not trying to persuade anyone away from the church. I just want to show that those items that I have found that are making it near impossible to continue on with the church are real, true reasons. I still do believe in God, or a Higher Being in any case. But what I do not believe in is that this church receives direct revelation. There are too many instances where things are not taught the same way twice, too many times where something that was doctrine is no longer. If God truly is the same yesterday, today, and forever, than his church should be the same. If the Book of Mormon is truly the most correct book on the earth, then there shouldn’t be any issues with it, or in finding some sort of scientific evidence to back it up. And if God will not allow the leaders of the church to lead the church astray, then why are principles and doctrines taught by prophets later disavowed by later prophets?