I can't wait to read the transcripts. Six and a half hours is a long time.
Who is calling this case "bizarre"? This is actually a very serious
case. If the church is found guilty, it could have a huge impact on the church
financially and regionally on how they operate in England. If I was the church,
I would certainly put forth my best efforts to try and defend this case instead
of just writing it off as "bizarre" and "mischief".
Is this the fraud case?
This case should be dismissed forthwith. To require the head of an organization
to confront the public legal system regarding the sale of an alleged
non-existent product is absurd. If there is anything society should protect and
cherish, it's an individual's right and obligation to part with their
possessions in the noble cause of furnishing a palace in the afterlife and
pleasing a jealous deity. For our courts to deny an individual of that right,
whether it be directed at the FSM, yahweh, or Thor, is simply unbecoming of a
pluralistic society in which all of us want to live.
Seems to me, if this case were to prevail, the Queen of England would be subject
to the same guilt as well. After all the Anglican Church collects funds from its
parishioners based on its theological doctrine. And the Queen is the current
head of the Anglican Church. 'Tis truly bizarre mischief.
Hi Tommy1,Yes it is the fraud case. It went on for over six hours
today. The Church had six lawyers representing them in court. The court will
eventually release a transcript. I want to see how what is being reported on
blogs compares with the official transcript. A decision will be released by the
court next Thursday if this continues.
God never loses. And this will come out for the good of the Church in some way
and will be a great learning experience for those that care. For those
"disaffected" folks, it's all right, freedom of speech is in the
constitution. Poor guy, he really has a burr in his saddle though.
Average Human Being, you are right, but it would not be in a good way. If one
can successfully sue one church for fraud, it opens the flood gates for everyone
to sue a church for fraud, and that would not be good. Of course, it
could, in England, end state-sponsered religion. I mean, if someone sued he
Church of England, it could sent Her Majesty to jail, as she IS the
"defender of the Faith" is she not?
I think every group that is non profit should have to open their books for
Even if the case proceeds, the Church simply puts a reputable Egyptologist on
the stand to attest to the fact that the Book of Abraham was translated from the
Egyptian papyri - and case closed with respect to that allegation. And so forth
through each factual allegation.
No reputable Egyptologist would take the stand and purger himself/herself by
stating that the Book of Abraham is a translation from the Egyptian papyri. It
is common knowledge that the papyri is a common Egyptian text, often called the
book of the dead. Smith's "translation" was not even close. Even
the church acknowledges
Would be lovely if the article actually stated what he was suing about? Not just
whom and whether they had anything to say about the matter? Did the author
attempt to get a statement from the man bringing the suit?
To be honest, I agree with this criminal suit. I think the LDS church and
specifically the top 15 are guilty of fraud! I believe they know that the
several items mentioned in the lawsuit are not true like the book of Abraham was
not translated from Egyptian funerary texts, yet, they lie by omission by not
being open and honest to all Mormons about it!
Ultimately truth will prevail.Unfortunately for most people around here,
they don't understand that belief and truth are two very different
things.It may take a while, but truth will prevail.
The case in question is actually a criminal case, not a civil case. The guy
bringing the case is pursuing the LDS Church as a corporation, not a religion.
He claims Mirmon missionaries are "salesmen" knowingly selling a
fraudulent product. The seven claims of fraud made in the summons are:First, that the Book of Abraham is a literal translation of Egyptian papyri by
Joseph Smith.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.Third, that native Americans are descended from an
Israelite family which left Jerusalem in 600 B.C.Four, Joseph and Hyrum
Smith were killed as martyrs in 1844 because they would not deny their testimony
of the Book of Mormon.Five, the Illinois newspaper called Nauvoo Expositor
had to be destroyed because it printed lies about Joseph Smith.Six, there
was no death on this planet prior to 6,000 years ago.Seven, all humans
alive today are descended from just two people who lived approximately 6,000
Re: "No reputable Egyptologist would take the stand and purger [sic] himself
. . . ."Just so's you know, ThinksIThinks post was pure
snark, not actually intended as a serious suggestion.Like your post,
it's an attempt to disingenuously suggest that there is some unanimity
among people with a brain that the Book of Abraham's provenance is somehow
suspect.That's not true, of course. Scholars and knowledgeable
apologists have advanced several plausible theories explaining an honest
disconnect between Book of Abraham comments and that tiny surviving fraction of
a much larger collection of papyri that was available to the Prophet.But closed minds refuse to consider anything that threatens a favored, forgone
This is bizarre in the extreme. It is a quarrel about whether a church leader
believes in his cause or not. Of course he believes in it. Case closed. No one
can prove anything contrary. All he has to do is show his own tithing receipts.
Bam! Done! And what a mistake to put standard beliefs of other Christian faiths
into the indictment against a single religion.As for the Book of Abraham,
I am still waiting for the other 30 feet of the scroll to be discovered.Until
then everything is arguable. That is ALWAYS the case with the disaffected and
the dissident. They NEVER close the door of possibility for faith. They
can't. They should first doubt their doubts.
The case is "bizarre" for a number of legal reasons. The case was
brought to the judge by a private citizen who has no right of audience to a
judge (i.e. he was not a lawyer). Also, to sue somebody because you don't
agree with their beliefs would be, in effect, trying to get the law to decide
what is true. Also, this is not actually a "civil" case - a lawyer can
ask a judge to summon an individual if someone can show they have committed a
crime. However, if there was a crime committed then it should be investigated
by the police. In this case the police have had no involvement. The
complainant is, therefore, seeking to by-pass due legal process in order to
satisfy a personal grudge using obscure and rarely used legal proceedings.
Of course no reputable egyptologist would take the stand to defend the Book of
Abraham, but not for the reason given by those who wish to discredit Joseph
Smith with partial truths. The actual reason is that the papyrus from which it
was said to have been translated was destroyed in a fire.Calumny: an
untrue statement that is made to damage someone's reputation.The case is absurd and should be tossed, but given that we live in the
post-rational age who knows what will happen.
Dear Sunstoned:the common mistake that detractors of the Book of
Abraham make is to promote the false notion that the book was taken from the
papyri that surfaced at the museum in New York a few years back. IT WAS NOT.
The Book of Abraham was translated from a much larger (at least 40 feet long)
papyri that was later lost in the Chicago fire. THIS IS AN INDISPUTABLE FACT!
BTW, new research by Egyptologists shows that Joseph Smith's
translation of the facsimiles that are depicted in the Book of Abraham was also
correct. That is also a fact and there are respected Egyptologist who will
support that. John Gee is a Yale-educated Egyptologist who proclaims this.There are new discoveries almost daily and you really need to get up on
the latest research.
Hi SamLThe 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
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.
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?
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
@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.
The most bizarre part is the fact that a judge is even listening to this absurd
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
runnerguy50Virginia Beach, VaI 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.
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.
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.
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
>>Thomas Phillips just isn't any "disaffected member."
He's a former Stake President.
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!
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?
genbug47It isn't a court case against god, it is a court case
against the Mormon church.I don't believe the theology the
Mormons teach, but I used to. At the time I decided to give my money to them.
Now that I know it isn't true, I don't give them my money anymore.
This is a ridiculous lawsuit - if you can sue the Mormon church for fraud then
you could sue every church for the same thing. No church can prove that it is
true, and I don't believe that any of them are. But people believe they are
and therefore give their money. procuradorfiscalBy the
way - there is no credible explanation for the disconnect in the book of Abraham
and the papyrus. Most of the time, the most simple explanation is the most
plausible. In this case the most simple explanation in the disconnect is that
the papyrus has nothing to do with the book of Abraham. It isn't his book,
and it isn't scripture.
The Pope is understood by Catholics to be The Vicar of Christ and to be
infallible regarding doctrine/teachings. Will the next step be taking the Pope
to court (after all, some of those changes in Vatican II still don't sit
well with some)? Of course he has diplomatic immunity as the head of Vatican
City.A criminal case against the Queen of England would be
interesting. As the sovereign of England and the Supreme Governor of the Church
of England, she would essentially be prosecuting herself. I suppose she could
let the case proceed and then claim sovereign immunity.I would guess
that there are a lot of philosophers that might take a drubbing from the courts
To those who think that the top leadership of the church are disingenuous.
Please think about what most do prior becoming apostles.They give
15-20 hours (maybe more) weekly to the church for free as Bishops, Stake
Presidents, etc. They do this all at their own expense and with NO clear path
toward ever making the leap to become a general authority.If they do
become general authorities, they then travel constantly and their time is hardly
their own. Then, and only then - after years of sacrifice, a very few of them
will become apostles. Then, they travel more.Note that most had
careers prior to becoming general authorities that were very lucrative. Most
would have done much better by just having stayed in their chosen careers and
then retired in ease. As it is, most of them will work in the church they love
until they die.If you believe the gospel of not true, fine. But
understand that these men believe it to be true. Their actions make zero sense
To DoloresCruz1982,Well, yes, the labels are wrong...but it would
also be pertinent to note that it would have been considered "uncouth"
to suggest that Abraham was getting the priesthood from a female in the 1800s.
Still is. Therefore...Pharaoh, and Prince of Pharaoh must be
male...despite...uh, other indicators.
1.96 Standard DeviationsWhy would one assume that if %15 of the
papyrus has nothing to do with the book of Abraham, then the other %85 does have
relevance to it? That makes no sense. Odds are if %15 of the papyrus have
nothing to do with the book of Abraham then the rest doesn't either. The
book of Abraham is nothing more then an extension of the book of Mormon - which
quotes the bible and adds in a few things here and there... It isn't
@BrahmabullI don't think you looked deeply enough into the
issue. One of the missing artifacts is a complete and separate roll of papyrus,
not a piece of the fragments that remain. What's left has never been
thought to be any part of what became the Book of Abraham except in the minds of
Re: ". . . there is no credible explanation for the disconnect in the book
of Abraham and the papyrus."Saying it don't make it so.The statement simply ignores or dismisses the research and ruminations
of a number of scholars and apologists, including Gee, Hauglid, Brown,
Muhlestein, Rhodes, Smoot, Tvedtnes and others.It is intended to
suggest that we poor, benighted Mormons steadfastly and unjustifiably reject
some universally-accepted consensus or "proof" that the Book of Abraham
and the Prophet Joseph are demonstrably fraudulent.In reality,
though, it's such anti-Mormon assertions that constitute the actual
fraud.While it's clear that the facsimiles appended to the Book
of Abraham as illustrations, primarily by W.W. Phelps, are very similar to other
known instances of the Book of the Dead and the Document of Breathings made by
Isis, it is not at all clear that they have any relation or relevance to the
text of the Book of Abraham.The validity of the Book of Abraham
remains as much a matter of faith to Mormons as does "M" Theory to
physicists [some of whom are also be Mormons].
@Average Human Being:"If the church is found guilty, it could have a
huge impact on the church financially and regionally..."It would
also have a huge impact on the Church of England which is the country's
national religion.@runnerguy50:"I think every group that
is non profit should have to open their books for public scrutiny."So, when will you be opening your books?@2close2call:"I
believe they know that the several items mentioned in the lawsuit are not true
like the book of Abraham was not translated from Egyptian funerary
texts..."How can they know that? They weren't there when
it was written. If the plaintiff wants to sue someone he should go after the
author... who is dead.@Kalindra:"The guy bringing the case
is pursuing the LDS Church as a corporation, not a religion."The
LDS Church is a religion, not a corporation. The Corporate entity is the first
presidency which limits personal liability... just like any corporate
business."He claims Mormon missionaries are 'salesmen'
knowingly selling a fraudulent product."Missionaries can't
be salesmen... they're self supporting receiving no pay or benefits from
@lindasdf:"Many consider this extortion."How can it be
considered extortion when no one is required to do any of it?@Twin
Lights:I suppose she could let the case proceed and then claim sovereign
immunity."She could also put plaintiff in the Tower of London
and have an executioner, perhaps a descendent of the executioner that dispatched
Queen Mary, have at him.Brahmabull"Why would one assume
that if %15 of the papyrus has nothing to do with the book of Abraham, then the
other %85 does have relevance to it? That makes no sense. Odds are if %15 of the
papyrus have nothing to do with the book of Abraham then the rest doesn't
either. The book of Abraham is nothing more then an extension of the book of
Mormon - which quotes the bible and adds in a few things here and there... It
isn't scripture."Ar you kidding? The mummy was Abraham,
himself. Prove otherwise. 4 standard deviations.If you wanna take
issue with scripture do it to the Old Testament.
@DoloresCruz1982Kerry Muelestein is a professor of ancient scripture
at BYU, as well as an Egyptologist. There are a series of YouTube videos in
which Professor Muelenstein gives clear, reasoned answers concerning the Book of
Abraham. They can be found on the FAIR Mormon YouTube channel and each video is
only a few minutes long. One specific video I would point is entitled, "The
Three Facsimiles Translated Wrong? Book of Abraham Challenge 3" No doubt some people will say, "Well he works at BYU so he's
biased." To which I say, okay, so if he's biased you can watch the
videos and easily find the holes in his arguments, correct?@BrahmabullYour explanation about the Book of Mormon sounds almost
as if you have never read it. Yes, there are many scriptures from Isiah and
Matthew which are also found in the Book of Mormon, but to dismiss the remainder
of the Book of Mormon is to dismiss a whole lot of amazing, wonderful words.
Here are just a few examples - 2nd Nephi 4, 31, 33; Jacob 2 and 3; Enos; Mosiah
2-4 Alma 32 and 34. Ether 12.
To Twin Lights, Re: "A criminal case against the Queen of England would be
interesting". Why do people try to compare this case to prosecuting the
Queen or suing the Anglican Church. The Church of England (CofE) does not
require it's communicants to believe in a virgin birth or literal
resurrection (Bishop of Durham-David Jenkins) to enter the "Celestial
Kingdom" and any baptized Christian from any church can go to the CofE
alter for communion (sacrament) "It is the LORD"S table and not our
own". No one is required to give 10% of their gross income in the CofE to
receive ordinance for entrance into Kingdom of heaven, thus no fraud for money.
@Cats;You have completely bought the bridge.
PopsSo let me recap... The book of Abraham scrolls are missing...
The golden plates from which the book of Mormon was translated are missing. Do
you see a trend here? It is too convenient that both items that could prove
authenticity are... missing. Clark hippoI have read the
book of Mormon over 10 times... it reads like 19th century, not like 600 b.c.
writings. There is a reason for that - it wasn't translated, it was
Why have only 51 posts on this subject made it throughout the moderators?If you want some real perspective on this issue, I suggest you
investigate "Studies of the Book of Mormon", written by LDS General
Authority B.H. Roberts (1857–1933) at the beginning of the 20th century,
which concerns the validity of the Book of Mormon.
@Twin Lights, “most of them will work in the church they love until they
die.” True,Catholic "nuns",1 Cor 7:34, "...an unmarried
woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord's affairs: Her aim is to be
devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned
about the affairs of this world — how she can please her husband."
They serve the Lord.i.e… Some Nuns the dedicate their lives
to caring for the sick, poor. During the Vietnam war they were running
orphanages in villages and feeding the poor and in harms way. In NKP Thailand
1970 they came through our perimeter(AF infantry) to feed the starving Laotian
Montagnards. @,It stands or falls on, Joseph Smith taught that the
thief on the cross was to be with Jesus Christ "in the world of spirits"
(he did not say paradise or heaven). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Wrong,"Today shalt thou be with me in “*paradise”. (Luke 23:43 NIV,
NET)i.e... The LORD(YHWH) God planted a garden(paradeisos, G# 3857)
eastward in Eden;(Gen 2:8 LXX). … God walking in the garden
(paradeisos,...(Gen 3:8 LXX)..
DoloresCruz1982:Who told you this? You've missed out on a lot
of research! Joseph Smith nailed so many bulls-eyes when it came to the
translation -- especially the facsimiles. Do a Youtube search for
"The Three Facsimile Translations Wrong? Book of Abraham Challenge 3."
It should be the first result and the clip is 5 minutes 23 seconds long. The
video was published on April 2, 2013. I just wanted to post this to re-confirm
what ClarkHippo said.Watch it and be amazed!Brahmabull:It makes no sense to make this assumption. You
essentially said, "Since 15% isn't the Book of Abraham, the other 85%
isn't either." What? Very poor logic. I would have expected a lot
better argument from you. Witnesses and Joseph Smith indicate the
Book of Abraham came from the longer of the scrolls -- which scroll was
eventually destroyed in the Chicago fire. It makes no sense to say the Book of
Abraham is a sham since the other 15% of fragments discovered were not the Book
of Abraham. You're talking oranges and apples. The Book of Abraham was on
the other 85%!Critics always omit this -- they love to twist the
truth and deceive.
It is interesting to read these comments. I have read the Book of Mormon over 30
times. It has completely transformed my life. Spiritual things are discerned
spiritually, and God provides evidence when and how he sees fit. What if this
lawsuit had occurred in say 1850, when Joseph Smith had claimed that tobacco was
not good for the body? Today we all know the dangers of tobacco. Joseph Smith
knew that in 1833. If they had successfully sued the Church in 1850 would they
have had to pay them back over 100 years later when science confirmed what the
Church already knew? Someday we will all have the answers, probably not in this
life. If the gold plates and the Egyptian papyri were both on display at the
Church History Museum, do you really think that would change people's
minds? I don't. We all have to come to the Lord on his terms, not our own.
He is no respecter of persons.
MormonUte you are absolutely correct. Even if Jesus Christ came down to many of
the critics and told them that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
is the only true and living Church upon the Earth, that the Book of Mormon is
True, that Joseph Smith is a prophet the same individuals would deny it because
they would ultimately deny the Christ himself.The problem with this
is that the Lord, Jesus Christ, has said this through his modern day prophets
and through the revelations given to them. As many know apostates are the
largest, most vocal group against the Church as has been cited in the scriptures
over and over again.Laman and Lemuel saw and heard an angel yet they
fell away. Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer and Martin Harris all state they saw
and angel and handled the gold plates yet all three fell away saying Joseph
Smith was a fallen prophet. Yet in the end Oliver and Martin would return and
die in full fellowship of the Church. David would die but even on his death bed
never deny his testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.
This is a horrible case and hopefully will get rejected very soon. It violates
all aspects of freedom.The oddest part is the connection between the
doctrines and tithing is so weak that the claim of fraud would never hold up.
Reputable Egyptologists will point out that we do not know what text Joseph
Smith was translating from, and that most of the papyri was destroyed. Before we
get to that point, one would have to demonstrate an actual connection between
belief in the Book of Abraham and paying tithing.
Many writers have pointed out that representations can have multiple
meanings.On the issue of tithing. None of these attacks address
tithing at all. None of the attacks relate in any clear way to tithing. This is just a naked attempt by the self-serving apostates involved to
get more publicity, and has no relevance to law at all. This is the most
disturbing misuse of legal procedures I have seen in a long time, and a
text-book case of using the law to persecute others.
Donn,I agree. Nuns do great work. But I did not realize you were
Catholic.As to paradise. Are you saying the thief went to the
Garden of Eden?I searched a few non-LDS christian sites. There is a
bit of variance on what paradise consists of.
Archeology and translation of documents from the middle east ("Bible
Lands") are agreed upon by Catholics, Christians, Jews and Atheists who have
training in the respective languages and disciplines. All the Mormon
Church has to do is find some respected non-Mormon archeologists and linguists
who agree with the Church position on the Book of Abraham. If it is a real
translation, then it isn't a matter of faith, the historicity of the text
can be confirmed by study. The same can be said of the Book of
Mormon. Either it is a historical text that can be confirmed by scholars
regardless of their religious views or it isn't. Producing a
handful of respected experts to settle the matter in a British court should be a
slam dunk win for the Church.
It's sad AND bizarre that someone would be hateful enough to try to
distract Pres. Monson from serving and making the world a better place. I'm
sure Thomas doesn't have a chance, unless the Judge or Magistrate is
incredibly anti-mormon, but he (Thomas, reportedly a founder of an anti-mormon
group that actually pretends NOT to be antagonistic...and many of them leave
their names on record, perhaps so they can claim to be members, or Brothers
& Sisters or??) might think that he has a chance if he sticks with trying to
bully President Monson, since Pres. Monson spends his time serving and not
worrying about the silliness that is anti-mormonism.
if he felt that the teachings of the church were wrong - no one forced him to
pay tything. No one forced him to except the calling as stake president. He
could have not paid tything and then he propably never would have been called to
be stake president.It could be that his suing the church is his way
of getting money for his time, effort and the tything that he gave the church.
"new research by Egyptologists shows that Joseph Smith's translation of
the facsimiles that are depicted in the Book of Abraham was also
correct."Fact: Absolutely no non-Mormon Egyptologists agree or
ever have agreed with Joseph Smith’s interpretations of the existing
papyri or facsimiles, nor do they agree with any LDS apologists'
reasoning.Dr. Robert Ritner, Professor of Egyptology at the
University of Chicago, is probably the most prominent Egyptologist to have ever
examined the BOA papyri in depth. And every single non-LDS Egyptologist that has
ever examined the papyri or facsimiles since 1856 has essentially come to the
same agreement with the basic translations of Professor Ritner.Professor Ritner is not a critic of the church...he is a scholar. He has this,
however, to say about LDS apologists Michael Rhodes and John Gee's attempts
to defend the existing papyri and facsimile interpretations:"Such interpretations are uninspired fantasies and are defended only with
the forfeiture of scholarly judgment and credibility."
Charlie 8, "many consider this extortion". Yea, and so what? You
don't have to play ball if you don't want to. Tithing, last I looked
was voluntary. I want to stay in God's good graces so I pay, happily I
might add. I have received some tangible blessings as a result of paying
tithing. Obviously, you haven't read Malachai in a while. I believe
tithing is talked about there in Chapter 3. There are other places in the Old
and New Testament that mention it.Frankly, I don't care what
other churches teach or say. They can believe what I want and I'll believe
what I want and we'll see in the after live who was right.Southpark says it is the Mormons. Mr. Bean says it is the Jews.
Oh by the way all you nay-sayers. Remember what happened to Korihor. I agree
FlashbackNice to see that the 'believe or else' mentality
is alive and well.
I am surprised that people are impressed because the plaintiff was once a Stake
President. I'm sure most Stake Presidents recognize their own shortcomings
and weaknesses. When faith fades, so does much of the spiritual knowledge that
once was precious.I do not think that Judas was a credible witness
in his last days.
Twin lights, (Abraham 1:16) my name is *Jehovah…=poor KJV translation(s/b
YHWH). See Tetagrammaton.Jer. 16:21…my name is The
LORD*(YHWH).Isaiah 43:3… I am the LORD(YHWH) your God=(elohim).Joseph Smith said,“Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God is singular
number; and by adding the word heim ,it renders it Gods.” ( H of C,
1844),Wrong.In Hebrew the form of the word Elohim, with the ending
-im, which normally indicates a masculine plural, however with Elohim the
construction is usually grammatically SINGULAR, (i.e. it governs a singular verb
or adjective) when referring to the Hebrew God, but grammatically plural (i.e.
taking a plural verb or adjective) when used of pagan divinities (Psalms 96:5;
97:7).#430 Strong’s Hebrew concordance translates Elohim to God in the
(KJV)Abraham 3:26=(Jude 1:6 KJV) …kept not their first estate=
(*achre, Grk 746) but left their own habitation,….*first place, rule,
authority, Poor KJV translation, i.e…(Jude 1:6 NIV)
“… did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own
home…”. Fallen angels(devils) Nothing to do with Ante-mortal being.
Donn,I am aware of all of this. I think you you (likely) know the
LDS responses.I was just asking a simple question about your prior
post on the thief and what you think it means for him to go to paradise. I
noted that there is some variance on this subject in non-LDS Christian sites on
the web.Just looking for that one answer.
It is amusing that those who do not believe spend so much of their time
researching the church.
@DocHolliday: "... those who don't believe spend more time researching
facts ..."I think it could more accurately be described as
"researching allegations from limited facts." Spiritual things cannot
be examined accurately physical tools. Your spirit has to experience it. It is
like trying to determine flavor using the sense of touch.I take
every chance to examine the facts about the restored gospel, but I don't
ignore chances to "taste" it for myself on a daily basis.
The reality of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is learned via the spiritual and in
the trenches serving.Otherwise, the "facts" can become
sterile and meaningless.
gmlewisI tasted it for many years... it isn't real. It is in
the minds of those who believe it.Semi-StrongYou are
right. The facts are meaningless if you ignore them. And ignoring them is the
only way one could continue to believe in it after discovering these
DocHolliday,I am no historian, but I am fairly familiar with the
"facts" that get slung around on this and other LDS related boards.
Further, I was not raised in the church so I came at the gospel with a critical
eye.There are good answers for most (though not necessarily all) of
the issues raised. I assume you are familiar with Fair Mormon.In
the end, the Holy Ghost is something I can't ignore. Again, the power of
the gospel is found in prayer and in service.
Ordinarily people might think funds that go to tithing end up in the leaders
pockets, but Tom knows pockets are not padded by contributions to tithing and
other funds. The LDS are unique that way. Tom is just looking to hurt the church
any way he can. What he will discover is that he is adding another life to the
incredible MORMON MOMENT that has been thriving since before the election and
before the BofM Musical. Members will think him and he will become a sad, bitter
man.The Church does not require obedience to tithing. I know of
several people who are happy to be members but who do not pay tithing. They can
still attend weekly Sunday services and do all of the same things allowed in any
other denomination in the world. But the temple is a different place than any
other religion has access to. It requires a higher standard if the person wants
admittance. That is just another reason tithing is voluntary.
The reality of the gospel of (insert anything here) is learned via the spiritual
and in the trenches serving.The world is full of people who believe
in (insert the name of any religion, Christian or not, here) with all their
heart. It seems incredibly naive and shallow for people here to think they are
the only ones with a monopoly on the truth. The lack of humility is astonishing.
Anotherview,I never said we had a monopoly on truth. But having
been raised in another religion, I did not find therein the spiritual power
@DocHolliday - "I tasted it for many years ... it isn't real. It is in
the minds of those who believe it."When a person begins to
reject what the Holy Ghost has testified to him, he forgets the reality of his
former spiritual experiences.Matthew 13:12 "For whosoever hath,
to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not,
from him shall be taken away even that he hath."Alma 26:21
"21 And now behold, my brethren, what natural man is there that knoweth
these things? I say unto you, there is none that knoweth these things, save it
be the penitent."I believe you that you tasted it for years, and
that you have lost that sense of taste and are no longer conscious of your
spirit within you.
1.96 -Your argument is that since the %15 doesn't contain the
book of Abraham, then the remaining %85 must contain it? Remember, the %15 we do
have is not what Joseph Smith said it was. All of his 'translations'
on the figures and the rituals were wrong. If they were wrong, why would you
assume that the rest is right? That, my friend, is poor logic.Bj-hpIt us a small, obscure church like many others in the world.
Nothing more. Your opinion that it is true doesn't change the reality that
it isn't. David whitmer and Martin Harris later said that they saw the
plates in spirit... in a field they had to pray to see the plates... Meanwhile
the plates were still sitting in Joseph's house while they were in the
field praying to see them... It doesn't add up
It would seem we have a straw man argument here. Assume that Joseph Smith
translated the Book of Abraham from fragments found at the New York Museum and
Church archives and then show that they don't match what he wrote. The
amount of papyri that Joseph Smith had was voluminous. The Book of Abraham is
short. The fragments would represent only a tiny portion of the original
Most of these posts are arguing the truth or non-truth of the Church.
Interesting discussion, but it misses the point of the lawsuit. At its most
basic level, it is about frededom of religion. Do I have a right to believe in
a religion that most people don't believe in? Do I have a right to
voluntarily pay tithing (a practice as old as the Old Testament)? If I feel I am
being defrauded by voluntarily paying tithing, my first recourse should be to
decide to stop paying it. No bishop or stake president, in my many decades of
paying tithing, has ever taken the slightest step toward "verifying"
that I am telling the truth. I say I pay a full tithing, they say OK, and there
is not the least bit of arm-twisting or verification. Oh, and not a penny of
that tithing goes to those bishops or stake presidents. They also pay, same as
I do. Some may not like this, but it does not constitute fraud.
The case was rejected. The judge said it never should have made it to court.
TomP might fit better with haters of the past, but he's not unique. He uses
bogus claims to try to jail prophets etc. and to take millions from charitable
LDS. He prophesies that he'll bring all LDS down, perhaps hoping others
will fall for the same old hate-promoting rumors? He claims he is doing ALL this
FOR those that he seeks to harm, but I think he's completely aware that he
is dishonest and knows even the best of anti-mormon claims are simple fallacious
repeats, and that the evidence indicates the BofA is translated correctly
(including the facs (does Doc believe the BofA now that he knows that and since
Whitmer and Harris etc. made it clear that the plates, Moroni, etc were VERY
REAL? :) And overwhelming evidence also indicates that the BofM is
ancient, historical, etc. And Native Americans are related to Levites, Jews,
etc. (peoples of the Middle East)in MANY detailed ways (impossible to be just
chance), including: religion, DNA, etc. So, what's he thinking?