Monday, September 26, 2005

The Mormon Apostle Dallin H. Oaks Talk On Hofmann And My Analysis. Get The Barf Bag Ready For This One!!



------------------------------------------------------------
Here are some quotes from the Churches "official" and only "real" response to the Hofmann fiasco in a talk entitled, "Recent Events Involving Church History and Forged Documents." It was given at BYU on August 6,1987 By Elder Dallin H. Oaks Of the Quorum of the Twelve.

I suggest anyone interested in this whole Hofmann affair, read this whole talk. It is mind blowing!! The arrogance of Dallin H. Oaks is palpable. I also found many revealing things if you read between the lines of what he is saying.

Here are what I consider to be the best quotes from the article(my comments are in parentheses):

Here's the link


In some media coverage of this episode, there is evidence that religious prejudice is alive and well in many newsrooms and that Mormon-bashing is still popular and apparently profitable.

(Interesting that he would use the term Mormon-Bashing. He seems a little testy doesn't he?)

The Los Angeles Times Magazine used this same kind of phraseology in its “White Salamander” feature. Its summary states: “The church elders who accepted as authentic his startling ’discoveries’ soon found themselves mired in deceit, and in a scheme that would rock all Mormondom, culminating in a series of gruesome bombings.” (P. 1.) Note how this deft phrasing implies that “the church elders” were involved in the deceit and bombings perpetrated by Hofmann.

(No, they weren't involved at all, not at all!! They were innocent like Joseph Smith when he claimed that he wasn't a polygamist and that he was as innocent as he was years before.)

For a few weeks after the bombs went off in October 1985, the Salt Lake Tribune’s news coverage of the relationship of the Church and its leaders to the bombings was like a media feeding-frenzy. Although the Tribune news coverage became more cautious after a time, as I will note later, its Letters to the Editor section remained open, as usual, to the most extreme fulminations of religious ridicule and hatred.

(It's letters to the Editor remained open to the anti-Mormon people is what he was really saying. Is that a crime? Oh, so he means that they should have only printed Pro-Mormon comments, that would have been okay? I guess anyone that questions the Mormon Church is full of hatred? I hope it was a growing experience for him. This guy was on the Supreme Court of Utah? Seriously?)

While various newspaper writers were accusing the Church of suppression of historical documents, some of these same papers were actually involved in perpetrating a cover-up of their own.

(Is he serious? The Kings of cover-up, lies and deceit, the Mormon Church, is actually accusing newspaper writers of suppression and cover-ups? I'm surprised that he could say this with a straight face.)

The public is intensely interested when someone commits the horrible crime of murder by bombing.

(Yeah, especially when it involves the Mormon Church and forgeries by someone that President Hinckley and others had met with personally, without ever detecting, even a little bit, that he was a murderer and forger!! Yeah, I would say that would interest people!! What a dumb ass!!)

What interested me most was the fact that these forgeries and their associated lies grew out of their author’s deliberate attempt to rewrite the early history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and that so many persons and organizations seized on this episode to attempt to discredit the Church and its leaders.

(Nobody rewrites the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints more than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Give me a break!! They discredit themselves!!)

In the course of this episode, we have seen some of the most sustained and intense LDS church-bashing since the turn of the century. In a circumstance where The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints could not say much without interfering with the pending criminal investigation and prosecution, the Church and its leaders have been easy marks for assertions and innuendo ranging from charges of complicity in murder to repeated recitals that the Church routinely acquires and suppresses Church history documents in order to deceive its members and the public. In the hands of clever writers and cartoonists, the mythical salamander proved a most effective instrument to pique public interest and to blacken the reputation of faithful persons, living and dead.

("repeated recitals that the Church routinely acquires and suppresses Church history documents in order to deceive its members and the public." Yeah, you do, all the time, everyday in every way you can!!)

One week after the bombings, in an effort to answer public questions, he Church made known that it had acquired “forty-some documents” from Hofmann “by purchase, donation, or trade.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, remarks at 23 Oct. 1985 press conference.) The Church operates under a divine mandate to acquire and preserve the documents and artifacts that show its history, and these acquisitions were part of that effort. In succeeding weeks, an exhaustive inventory of the Church’s huge collections revealed the extent of Hofmann’s transactions with the Church. These follow-up details were immediately disclosed to the authorities making this criminal investigation.

("The Church operates under a divine mandate." This statement right here proves that they claim divine inspiration and a divine mandate. What does divine mean? They do it for God with his inspiration, right? After all, it is supposed to be the Church of Jesus Christ, right? It also proves that they have no revelation, even though they claim it. If they had inspiration, they would "just know" if they had the documents or not, right? They wouldn't have had to do an exhaustive inventory!!)

On 11 April 1986, after months of searching through its records and collections, the Church published a complete list of the forty-eight documents and groups of court records then known to have been acquired from Mark Hofmann.

(This just simply proves to anyone that denies this whole thing, that they acquired at least 48 documents. This is rock solid proof for those doubting "TBMS!!")

But Hofmann handled many documents that were not specifically listed in the criminal charges and covered in the subsequent questioning. So, like most owners of Hofmann-handled documents, the Church is still unsure how many of such documents are forgeries and which are genuine.

(They are still unsure? Really? So, let me get this straight!! They are supposed Prophets, Seers and Revelators and have no clue which documents are forgeries and which are genuine?!! This my friends and all TBMS out there, is the proof you need to know, without a doubt, that these men are not inspired by God. First, they didn't know that Mark Hofmann was a forger/murderer and now, after everything was over, they still didn't know which documents were the forgeries. Thank you Dallin H. Oaks for being honest and telling the world that you and all of the other Apostles and Prophets are frauds!!)

“According to investigators, the church leaders purchased from Mr. Hofmann and then hid in a vault a number of 19th-century letters and other documents that cast doubt on the church’s official version of its history.”

(Yes, that's exactly what you did, thanks for bringing it up.)

This kind of character assassination attributed to anonymous “investigators” has been all too common throughout the media coverage of this whole event.

Hofmann’s claim that the Church possessed a damaging document acquired a life of its own because too many unsophisticated persons were quick to repeat and embellish sensational rumors hurtful to the Church, and too many newspapers and television stations were eager to trumpet the unauthenticated claims of an anonymous informant.

("too many unsophisticated persons were quick to repeat and embellish sensational rumors hurtful to the Church." Wow, that's pretty condescending isn't it?!! If we could only be so sophisticated like Mr. Oaks is!! How would it be?)

Are documents ever acquired by the Church and then closed to the public? Of course. This is true of most large archives, as any well-informed person should be aware. Like other archives, the Church Historical Department closes or restricts access to certain documentary materials it acquires from outside sources for such reasons as the following:

("Are documents ever acquired by the Church and then closed to the public? Of course." At least he admits it openly. I feel this is a very important quote!!)

1. The donor has directed that access be restricted or prohibited for a certain period.

2. The contents are confidential. When materials are written or statements are made with the understanding that the communication will not be available to the public for a certain period of time, the Church Historical Department respects that understanding.

3. The contents are private. The laws and ethics of privacy forbid custodians from revealing information that may invade the privacy of living individuals. Examples would include diaries or minutes that discuss the private affairs of living persons. In addition, our belief in life after death causes us to extend this principle to respect the privacy of persons who have left mortality but live beyond the veil. Descendants who expect future reunions with deceased ancestors have a continuing interest in their ancestors’ privacy and good name.

(Isn't that fascinating? Even though somebody is dead, as far as the Earth goes, the Mormon Church applies their Eternal principles to say that they are still alive and therefore can't reveal certain documents in order to "respect the privacy of persons who have left mortality but live beyond the veil." So basically, they will never ever reveal some things because everybody lives forever.)

These same considerations apply to official Church documents, such as the minutes of confidential meetings and Church courts.

As a result of Hofmann’s involvement in these interesting acquisitions, he was able to meet with President Hinckley on several subsequent occasions. As President Hinckley explained publicly, on these occasions Hofmann attempted to interest the Church in other acquisitions, but President Hinckley was not interested. During this same period, President Hinckley met in his office with hundreds of other visitors on scores of different matters related to the Church and its work. Hofmann’s occasional visits were only incidental to President Hinckley’s larger responsibilities.

(What do hundreds of other visitors have to do with Mark Hofmann? The fact is that Hinckley acted as if he didn't even know Mark Hofmann or remember who he was from all of those hundreds or thousands of people that came through his office. The fact is that he knew exactly who he was and it was even said that he had called Mark Hofmann to wish him a happy birthday one time. The fact is that Hinckley had met with Hofmann just days before the bombings. Hinckley is a liar, plain and simple and that's a fact. He was right in the very middle of all of this!!)

Some have asked, how was Mark Hofmann able to deceive Church leaders?

(Here's the question we all have)

As everyone now knows, Hofmann succeeded in deceiving many: experienced Church historians, sophisticated collectors, businessmen-investors, national experts who administered a lie detector test to Hofmann, and professional document examiners, including the expert credited with breaking the Hitler diary forgery. But why, some still ask, were his deceits not detected by the several Church leaders with whom he met?

(What does all of the other people that Hofmann deceived have to do with Hinckley and other General Authorities being deceived?)

In order to perform their personal ministries, Church leaders cannot be suspicious and questioning of each of the hundreds of people they meet each year. Ministers of the gospel function best in an atmosphere of trust and love. In that kind of atmosphere, they fail to detect a few deceivers, but that is the price they pay to increase their effectiveness in counseling, comforting, and blessing the hundreds of honest and sincere people they see. It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly suspicious.

(Once again, this entire paragraph basically screams the fact that they have no discernment or revelation whatsoever. Also, the price that was paid as he puts it was two people got blown up and killed because of their lack of discernment. What a BS response when he says, "It is better for a Church leader to be occasionally disappointed than to be constantly suspicious.")

The Church is not unique in preferring to deal with people on the basis of trust. This principle of trust rather than suspicion even applies to professional archives. During my recent visit to the Huntington Library in Pasadena, California, I was interested to learn that they have no formal procedures to authenticate the many documents they acquire each year. They say they consider it best to function in an atmosphere of trust and to assume the risk of the loss that may be imposed by the occasional deceiver.

(Again, he is deflecting their inability to discern an evil man, a forger and murderer by talking about the security of "professional archives" specifically the Huntington Library in Pasadena, California. Who gives a rats ass what they do? The question is, why do you what you do and why do you not have any inspiration to help you no to be in these situations. After all, you are an Apostle and special witness of Jesus Christ, right? Apparently not or he would talk to you once in a while and help you out before completely embarrassing yourself and his Church.)

Did the Church seek to obtain the so-called McLellin Collection in order to keep it from public scrutiny?

(This is incredible!!)

No! At the decision-making level, Church authorities consistently made clear that the Church was not interested in purchasing the so-called McLellin Collection or in loaning money for its acquisition by another person. In the circumstances that prevailed in June 1985, to have the Church involved in the acquisition of the papers of a prominent opponent of the Church would simply fuel the then-current speculation that the Church was seeking to acquire the McLellin Collection in order to suppress it.

In his interviews with the prosecutors, Mark Hofmann has recited conversations he said he had with President Hinckley, claiming the President asked him to help the Church purchase the McLellin Collection directly or indirectly. President Hinckley has denied this. I urge everyone to be thoughtful about whom they will believe in conflicts of this nature—General Authorities whose statements about this whole episode have been confirmed by all subsequent investigations, or Mark Hofmann, who is renowned for his record of deceit and his efforts to discredit the Church and its leaders.

(Wait, isn't Hinckley also renowned for his record of deceit and his efforts to discredit and lie about the Church's history and its leaders? It's a tough call, Hofmann or Hinckley? Who would I trust? I put them on equal ground.)

In subsequent communications, Hofmann told Elder Pinnock and Steven F. Christensen on 28 June 1985 that he (Hofmann) intended to acquire the McLellin Collection in order to give it to the Church. As revealed in public statements shortly after the bombings, Hofmann told Elder Pinnock some time in September that in order to settle debts he was being forced to sell the McLellin Collection and therefore would not be able to give it to the Church. Elder Pinnock thereupon brought the purported collection to the attention of David E. Sorensen, president of the Church’s Canada Halifax Mission, to see if he would be interested in acquiring it as an investment that could possibly be donated to the Church at some future time.

David E. Sorensen telephoned me to find out what I knew about the McLellin Collection. I told him I had never seen the collection, but if there was a collection of the papers of this man, it would probably have items of significant historical interest to the Church. I said that it would be desirable for such a collection to be in the hands of someone friendly to the Church, who would consider giving it to the Church at some future date. I also told David Sorensen that if he wanted to acquire the collection, he would be acting on his own, without warranties, financing, or representations of any sort by the Church.

(Okay, okay, lets cut through the crap. Oaks says, "Did the Church seek to obtain the so-called McLellin Collection in order to keep it from public scrutiny? No!"
Well, the facts are as I see them, that the Church did want the collection, desperately. What was it again that he said in the 3rd paragraph? Oaks said, "I told him I had never seen the collection, but if there was a collection of the papers of this man, it would probably have items of significant historical interest to the Church. I said that it would be desirable for such a collection to be in the hands of someone friendly to the Church, who would consider giving it to the Church at some future date." Oaks is such a bad liar that he contradicts himself within 3 paragraphs. So the Church wasn't interested in the collection but they would like a friendly person to have the collection to donate to them at a later date? What a liar!! They wanted it more than anything.
Plus, he leaves out the fact that Steven Christensen was put in charge of the project and of searching and finding Church Historical documents and that he was given an expense account of I think $250,000 that was accessible to him at any time, no questions asked. Oops, I guess that wasn't significant. Nor was it significant that it was Hinckley that set this account up for him!!)

What of the allegations of Joseph Smith’s involvement in folk magic?(Yeah, how about that Oaks?)

Hofmann’s forged documents and some of the critical commentary on their significance have the apparent purpose of persuading members and nonmembers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that the Church is based on superstition instead of divine revelation.

(Superstition? The Mormon Church? Let's see, Angels, seer stones, gold plates, treasure hunting, sword wielding, homicidal angels that would slay Joseph if he didn't screw other women? No, I don't see any superstition here, there clean!! LOL!!)

It should be recognized that such tools as the Urim and Thummim, the Liahona, seerstones, and other articles have been used appropriately in biblical, Book of Mormon, and modern times by those who have the gift and authority to obtain revelation from God in connection with their use. At the same time, scriptural accounts and personal experience show that unauthorized though perhaps well-meaning persons have made inappropriate use of tangible objects while seeking or claiming to receive spiritual guidance. Those who define folk magic to include any use of tangible objects to aid in obtaining spiritual guidance confound the real with the counterfeit. They mislead themselves and their readers.

(I wonder if Oaks has ever used a seer stone and stuck his head in a hat to receive revelations from God? By the way, when is that other 2/3's of the Book of Mormon coming out? Oh, I forgot, we're not ready yet. Okay, but I hope it's soon!! Trust me, it will never happen!! Can you imagine how that book would be scrutinized today. They could never pull it off, never, especially considering that the Book of Mormon has already been proved to be a complete fraud!!)

In his own history, Joseph Smith related his employment by Josiah Stowel [also spelled Stoal] to search for treasure. Joseph wrote:

“He had heard something of a silver mine having been opened by the Spaniards in Harmony, Susquehanna county, state of Pennsylvania; and had, previous to my hiring to him, been digging, in order, if possible, to discover the mine. After I went to live with him, he took me, with the rest of his hands, to dig for the silver mine, at which I continued to work for nearly a month, without success in our undertaking, and finally I prevailed with the old gentleman to cease digging after it. Hence arose the very prevalent story of my having been a money-digger.” (History of the Church, 1:17.)

(Hmmm...what about the recent Joseph Smith arrest and court records that just came out? He wasn't working for someone as a job. He was purposely defrauding people out of their money while looking and promising them bogus, non-existent treasure, thus one of many reasons why he was arrested and hated. You have the record too of Joseph Smith promising Emma's Dad that he would give it up in order to marry his daughter. Once again, Oaks is a liar, plain and simple.)

Treasure-seeking was a cultural phenomenon of that day. It was indulged in by upright and religious men such as Josiah Stowel. Young Joseph Smith accepted employment with Stowel at fourteen dollars a month, in part because of the crushing poverty of the Smith family. Joseph and his older brothers had to scour the countryside for work in order to construct their home and make the annual payment on the farm, which they were in imminent danger of losing and finally lost for nonpayment shortly after this period.

Some sources close to Joseph Smith claim that in his youth, during his spiritual immaturity prior to his being entrusted with the Book of Mormon plates, he sometimes used a stone in seeking for treasure. Whether this is so or not, we need to remember that no prophet is free from human frailties, especially before he is called to devote his life to the Lord’s work. Line upon line, young Joseph Smith expanded his faith and understanding and his spiritual gifts matured until he stood with power and stature as the Prophet of the Restoration.

(Well, Oaks, we now know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Joseph Smith used a seer stone in seeking for treasure. In the paragraph before, you said, "Treasure-seeking was a cultural phenomenon of that day. It was indulged in by upright and religious men such as Josiah Stowel" and now you say that "we need to remember that no prophet is free from human frailties, especially before he is called to devote his life to the Lord’s work." So what are you saying there Oaks? Was it okay to do this or not? Was he upright or did he have human frailties? What a joke? Once again, his arrest and court records tell us the truth. Joseph Smith was a scumbag, through and through!!)

President Gordon B. Hinckley repeatedly cautioned that the Church did not know whether these documents were authentic.

(Once again, proving his lack of any divine revelation whatsoever and that he isn't a Prophet of any God.)

As a result, the news media are particularly susceptible to conveying erroneous information about facts, including historical developments that are based on what I have called scientific uncertainties. This susceptibility obviously applies to newly discovered documents whose authenticity turns on an evaluation of handwriting, paper, ink, and so on. Readers should be skeptical about the authenticity of such documents, especially when there is uncertainty where they were found or who had custody of them for 150 years. Newly found historically important documents can be extremely valuable, so there is a powerful incentive for those who own them to advocate and support their authenticity. The recent spectacular fraud involving the so-called Hitler diaries reminds us of this, and should convince us to be cautious.”

(Once again, it's the owners responsibility to support their authenticity, not the buyer. This just proves again, that they have no divine power or inspiration.)

I am pleased to note that the Joseph Fielding Smith Institute for Church History at Brigham Young University is about to publish three volumes of extraordinary importance to LDS Church history. Edited by Dean C. Jessee, these volumes will contain all of the known diaries and autobiographical writings of Joseph Smith in their earliest versions. Those published for the first time will include all of the “diary” portions of the early manuscript known as The Book of the Law of the Lord.

And so we are, hopefully, at the end of this tragic episode. After exhaustive investigations by law enforcement authorities and a host of media investigators, the charges against the Church and its leaders have been shown for what they are. Vicious lies have been exposed. Innuendos of Church or Church-leader involvement in the crimes of Mark Hofmann have been demonstrated to be groundless. In fact, Hofmann has admitted that his documentary crimes were at least partly motivated by his desire to change the history of the Church in which he no longer had faith. Everyone who believed and repeated his lies and used his forged documents was at best an unwitting servant of his efforts to discredit the Church. This description refers to Hofmann’s crimes against reputation. In his crimes against person and property, he had many victims, the Church being only one among many.

("Vicious lies have been exposed." Yeah, that you Oaks, Hinckley, etc, are not men of God and never have been all the way back to Joseph Smith. Funny isn't it how he discredits Hofmann and says earlier, who would you trust, Hinckley or a know forger, murderer, etc? Then above, when it is convenient to what he wants to express, he uses Hofmann's words to support his point when he says, "In fact, Hofmann has admitted that his documentary crimes were at least partly motivated by his desire to change the history of the Church in which he no longer had faith." So again, which is it Oaks? Can we trust Hofmann or not? If we can't then that statement above is also irrelevant and worthless as everything else is according to your own words.)

When it comes to naiveté in the face of malevolence, there is blame enough to go around. We all need to be more cautious. In terms of our long-run interests in Church history, we now have the basis, and I hope we have the will, to clear away the Hofmann residue of lies and innuendo. With that done, we should all pursue our search for truth with the tools of honest and objective scholarship and sincere and respectful religious faith, in the mixture dictated by the personal choice each of us is privileged to make in this blessed and free land.

(Now Oaks wants to move on and "clear away the Hofmann residue of lies and innuendo." Meanwhile, two people are dead because of them and their inability to discern what Hofmann was and what he was about to do. In my opinion, if they were really Prophets, Seers and Revelators, then the blood of those people is on their hands for not preventing two murders.)

The fact is that they have no more Godly knowledge or discernment than anyone else on the planet. They are just common men that have inherited their hierarchy positions through bloodlines, etc. They are frauds, plain and simple and this entire Hofmann fiasco just confirms this point with an exclamation point!!


Samuel the Utahnite

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 License.

border=0

Get your own map at hit2map.com