Quantcast

Comments about ‘British judge hears arguments in case LDS Church calls 'mischief'’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, March 14 2014 10:49 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Charlie8
Albany, NY

Hi SamL
The difference is that with most Christian churches like Cof E, is that all you have to do is accept Christ as your Savior to be saved and all sin is equal. Money is voluntarily donated often in anonymity in these churches. The Queen does not demand money for salvation. The LDS church requires obedience to the law of tithing (10% gross income) and regular annual interviews with the Bishop (and Stake President) to verify obedience to tithing and other laws before being found worthy for a temple recommend to receive the ordinances necessary for the Celestial Kingdom/ Kingdom of Heaven. Many consider this extortion.

AT
Elk River, MN

Thomas Phillips just isn't any "disaffected member." He's a former Stake President. He's had his second anointing (he did an interview with "Mormon Stories" where he described the experience in detail). This guy has serious issues with the Church. Very interesting.

1.96 Standard Deviations
OREM, UT

sunstoned:

The papyri that was recovered actually represents approximately less than 15% of what Joseph Smith had in his possession at the time. The other 85% was not found!

Also, the re-discovered papyri were in poor condition and did not contain all the characteristics that early church members mentioned. For example, some of the papyri Joseph Smith had spanned the length of entire rooms, was noted as "perfectly preserved", and even had some red ink. None of these characteristics matched the papyri that was re-discovered later. Obviously, the small portion of papyri that were rediscovered would not necessarily be the Book of Abraham.

How come whenever someone brings up this subject, especially LDS antagonists or disaffected members, they always omit these key details? It is absurd to discount Joseph Smith as the prophet, or the Book of Abraham as inspired, based on the 15% of papyri fragments that were found! Why do they always omit that 85% of the papyri was not recovered?

LittleStream
Carson City, NV

Prophets are used to unwarranted prosecution. Members of the LDS church from the time it was formed have had to live with persecution and the death of Joseph Smith at the hands of non-members. An Extermination order was issued. I hope this "disaffected member" remembers who he is before it is too late for him. President Monson is going to handle this in the most righteous way he knows how.

scotchipman
Lehi, UT

@Mchenry, Do a google search for "monson fraud mormonthink" for the details of the case. There is a lot of confusion, the case is NOT about religious freedom and beliefs but rather about corporate fraud. When a corporation spreads untruths for financial gain it is fraud according to the 2006 fraud act in England.

wer
South Jordan, UT

The most bizarre part is the fact that a judge is even listening to this absurd rant.

bj-hp
Maryville, MO

Sunstoned: What you fail to mention is that all of the papyri is actually available. All they need to do is have one of the apologist like Peterson and it is all over for the plaintiff. This is all about theology and it is disgraceful that any court would go this far. It shows the attempt by Satan to stop the work of the Lord. However, it will continue and in the end The Book of Abraham will be found as true.

Laura Arroyo
Salt Lake City, UT

Well, bizarre is kind of an interesting word. In the United States...it can mean "odd, extravagant, or eccentric in style or mode"...or "involving sensational contrasts or incongruities" (Merriam Webster) but in Britain...it's a little different. There it means "Strange, Suspicious or Unnatural" (Cambridge Dictionaries). So, there it's got a slightly different, and very pertinent meaning. The same with "mischief". It is very difficult to find words that are not just mutually intelligible...but actually retain the same subtext "across the pond". That's what they're trying to do. So, it's not as stupid as it seems. I think that "mischief" is actually a very good translation for what is going on. Having spent some time in Europe many, many years ago...I understand first hand how the meanings change and even retain some of the "European" definitions in my own language. Some words are even reversed in meaning...which I think is actually a cultural slight...if when two groups were interacting they didn't like each other very well. It's funny. Language is...funny. And by that I mean, language is strange...odd. But not, in most cases, suspicious or unnatural.

1aggie
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

I did the Google search and read the materials suggested by scotchipman above. Very interesting and informative. Although the "Corporation Sole" form of organization has some advantages, it seems to have left the head of the corporation open to this kind of (fraud) claim in the UK.

It sounds like the Church is arguing that they can claim what they want about anything because it is all "belief" and none is claimed to be "fact", while the plaintiff is arguing that aside from subjective claims regarding belief, objectively verifiable claims (i.e., that Joseph Smith translated the BofM from golden plates rather than using stones in a hat) that the corporation (sole) knows is false are being made to induce people to join the Church and pay tithing.

The judge is set to rule regarding whether the proceedings will continue on March 20th.

scotchipman
Lehi, UT

15% of the papyri is more than enough to see that the Book of Abraham translation is not correct. Do a google search for "The Lost Book of Abraham documentary" for a eye opening look into the Book of Abraham.

John Gee is a Mormon opologist and his interpretation of the papyri is his opinion. There is still not one egyptologist in the world with no ties to the Mormon church that thinks any part of the papyri translation into the Book of Abraham is correct.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

This lawsuit is nonsense. Every religion has things in it that are not provable and even things that are not true. (Don't put your trust in the arm of flesh). If religions are going to get sued for untruths or false doctrines, they all ought to get sued.

Charlie8
Albany, NY

Yes, Ernest T. Bass, as we quoted as LDS Missionaries in the 80's (don't know if it is still quoted in discussions today) "Only if you are unafraid of truth can you find it", and, "The truth shall set you free!"

michael.jensen369
Lethbridge, 00

I've spent the last few weeks studying what the critics say about the Church, with their claims against the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham, Joesph Smith and the like. I've studied what they say, then I've studied what FAIR says and what the historical record says. This is what I've found. In most cases, the critics don't present the whole truth. They twist it, take many things out of context, and graft 21st century amoral perspectives onto 19th century men and women. I watched one anti video where one guy basically said:"We Mormons just need to admit that we've been lied to and stop coming up with plausible answers" To that I laughed. There may be room for doubt, but there is far more room for faith. God lives. Joseph Smith was a prophet. And the Book of Mormon is true. Personally I think the 2900+ stake presidents who are still faithful to be more compelling than a few apostates who want nothing other than to destroy the Church, no matter what ecclesiastical positions they may have held.

lindasdf
Columbus, OH

runnerguy50
Virginia Beach, Va
I think every group that is non profit should have to open their books for public scrutiny.

If it's not your money, then why would you even care? If some greedy pastor wants to rob little old women, that's not my problem. He will have to pay at some point.

mhenshaw
Leesburg, VA

I think everyone is missing the point. The Church has been sued before on similar grounds and the plaintiffs always lose; surely the plaintiff in this case knows this. But winning such a court case isn't really the goal of such critics. They're far more interested in bringing attention to their cause and slandering the Church than they are in winning a legal case. If this plaintiff wins, it's just icing on the cake; but win or lose, he's still been given a public stage on which to attack the Church.

What he doesn't realize is that the Church isn't worried about him. It will litigate the case, sure, but the Lord's work will just roll on no matter what. Anti-Mormon critics like this plaintiff are always forgotten over the years while prophets and apostles go on helping to inspire and change lives by the thousands and are fondly remembered and loved by millions for years to come after they're gone.

People like this plaintiff really need to find something more constructive to do with their lives.

lindasdf
Columbus, OH

Charlie8

>>The LDS church requires obedience to the law of tithing (10% gross income) and regular annual interviews with the Bishop (and Stake President) to verify obedience to tithing and other laws before being found worthy for a temple recommend to receive the ordinances necessary for the Celestial Kingdom/ Kingdom of Heaven. Many consider this extortion.

JM
Lehi, UT

It is bizarre that anyone would be so hateful that they would try to pull President Monson away from serving millions of people and making the world a better place. I would gladly go in his place, it would be nice to help the anti-mormon leader (Thomas Phillips) see (even more) the vanity of his claims against the Church of Jesus Christ. I'm sure he's only picking on President Monson because Phillips knows Pres. Monson spends his time in service and not on studying the silliness of anti-mormon bigotry, so Phillips probably thinks he has a chance, but he really doesn't, unless he has found an anti-mormon magistrate.

lindasdf
Columbus, OH

>>Thomas Phillips just isn't any "disaffected member." He's a former Stake President.

Charlie8
Albany, NY

Kalindra,
Re: "Second, the Book of Mormon was translated from ancient gold plates by Joseph Smith and is the most correct book on earth and is an ancient historical record. ", which edition are you talking about as being the "most correct"? Is it the first edition, or the one we currently use, because the Trinity is different in both editions!

DoloresCruz1982
BOULDER, CO

Even if there happens to be another 2 miles of lost papyrus that the Book of Abraham could have come from, all we have to deal with are the facsimiles printed in the Pearl of Great Price. And we know enough about the ancient Egyptian language to know that the facsimiles and the English text have no relationship, and that the labels on the facsimiles are wrong.

There is NO "new research" showing that anything Joseph Smith produced was translated correctly. None. Nada. Zero. Why are some people saying this?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments