My Analysis Of Newsweek's New Article On Mormonism, Written By BYU Grad Elise Christenson Soukup!!

First of all, thanks again go to Polygamy Porter for doing the research and leading us to this article with her picture and more information. I just thought I'd post the other information that they wrote about here on the previous page from the link to her picture. It just gives us a clearer insight into who this chick is. Here were polygamy Porter's comments and links:

The author of the Newsweek article about Mormons:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9630255/site/newsweek/

Is a Molly Mormon BYU grad.

http://magazine.byu.edu/byumagpic.tpl?picnum=43-Fa04

So she better watch herself for publishing such LIES about Mormonism!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I read the article last night, I found myself wondering who this lady was that wrote the article. I couldn't imagine for a second that it was a non-member with no affiliation to the Mormon Church, it was just too obvious in certain parts and too accurate. There are several "TBMS" that I wanted to send this too but I thought that they would find it too offensive.

Now that I know who wrote it, that she is or used to be a "TBM Molly", a BYU Grad and I have the link to the article on BYU Magazine, thanks to PP, I'm sending it out today to everyone. Most of these people deny that Polygamy ever existed and that Joseph was ever with any woman other than Emma. This will truly shock them for sure.

Now I realize that there were a million things that she didn't mention; Mountain Meadows Massacre, the racist remarks of past Apostles and Prophets, blood atonement, everything that Grant Palmer talks about, etc. However, my focus is on what she did say, instead of what she didn't say. I find that quite revealing!! Many of you may strongly disagree with me on this but you can't discount all of the very controversial "Mormon taboo subjects" that she brought up. She deserves credit for that at least!!

If any of us went public discussing all of these things that she has, we'd be exed in a heartbeat. It will be interesting to see how the Church responds due to the fact that she is now going to be well known publicly and has the backing of Newsweek, which the Church has generally supported. Also, the fact that the Church brags about her in BYU Magazine, puts them in a quandary. Even Hinckley did another interview or Q & A, for this edition of Newsweek.

It's pretty shocking to me that she would refer to the almighty Joseph Smith as "Prophet and polygamist, mesmerizer and rabble-rouser, saint and sinner." She brought up the fact that the Church opposes gay marriage, the differences between Orrin Hatch and Mitt Romney on stem-cell research. She talked about Joseph Smith's Grandfather prophesying that a family member would revolutionize the world of religion. I had never heard that before. She brought up the struggle he had with Satan right before the first vision occurred.

She also mentioned a quote that I had never heard before from Joseph Smith, shortly before he died, "If I had not experienced what I have, I could not have believed it myself." I mean, this is a pretty damning quote. Again, I've only been in "the light" now for about 4 months and maybe most of you have heard this quote before but I never had. How could anyone be expected to follow Joseph Smith and his fantasies when even he himself, admitted that "he could not have believed it if he hadn't lived it?" Amazing!!

She calls the Mormon Church "a sect" which causes Mormon Hierarchy to cringe, I'm sure. She mentions that he was commander of the local militia in Nauvoo. She definitely softens and her "TBM mentality" kicks in when talking about the printing press that was destroyed and then his death. She falls short on explaining why he was really killed by the mob but thank goodness she doesn't actually use the word "martyred" as the Mormon Church always does.

She brings up plural marriage at least 4 different times throughout the article. She mentions that we can't carbon-date Moses' burning bush but only in the context that "Smith and his followers left behind documentation that can be subjected to modern historical analysis."

She then talks about what a complicated man Joseph Smith was and the shock that people felt when they met him in person. She mentions that "people found him to be uneducated, that he lost his temper and that he enjoyed power" and that "what most startled some converts, was that his ventures, on occasion failed." (Like the bank fiasco for one). She quotes Mark Scherer, church historian for the Community of Christ(reorganized LDS) as saying, "Either you thought the guy walked on water or you thought the guy was a huge fraud." Gee, that statement sounds eerily exactly like what Hinckley has been saying for years!!

She then says that Smith was involved in dozens of lawsuits and that by the end of his life, "he had accrued some 30 wives, massive debt and hundreds of enemies."

Then she talks about Simon G. Southerton, his book and DNA studies. She mentions that he was a "former LDS Bishop", without ever mentioning that he was excommunicated for adultery, which I give her great credit for. She left out what didn't matter and what we all know was a farce of a witch hunt anyway, and stuck to the real substance of what he had to say. This will really piss off the Mormon hierarchy!!

I was also shocked that she would mention while LDS scholars rejected Simon's conclusions, that they "are re-examining common theories about the Book of Mormon's geography, suggesting that it takes place near an isthmus in southern Mexico instead of across the Western Hemisphere, as many readers assumed." Yeah, "readers" thought that because it's all over the Book of Mormon and they have been taught that for their entire lives, in Church, in Seminary, in Conference, in Institute classes and General Conference since 1830.

It has been taught since the very beginning that they filled this land from sea to sea. The Book of Mormon itself, is by far, the best and most damning reference regarding this subject.So what about the ruins in Guatemala that are supposed to be from the Book of Mormon and every year, there are "Book of Mormon tours" to Guatemala? Oops!! Just another money making scam.

This is big stuff that a lot of us EXMOS know but very few people that haven't studied the Church deeply are unaware of, especially "TBM's."

She talks about the "September Six", and that "authorities do not accept those who publicly doubt and actively preach against church doctrines and leaders. She then talks about their punishments and how "in the late 70's, LDS leaders limited access to church records, prompting charges that they were discouraging unauthorized accounts of church history." She then quotes Leonard J Arrington, the then director of the church's historical department as saying, "Some authorities apparently preferred that we have no history except that kept by public-relations writers." This is very damning stuff to be sharing with the world in my opinion!!

She then talks about this years celebrations(Joseph Smith) and how a church-sponsored art exhibit made no mention of Joseph's polygamy. She does incorrectly talk about now it's okay to talk openly about this stuff in the Church and that the reins are looser. That couldn't be further from the truth and we all know that. That's why they continue to "whitewash" practically everything, like Joseph Smith's new website for example.

Then she brings up polygamy again and in greater detail!! she talks about how "no single Mormon doctrine or practice has been more controversial than polygamy." "Smith said he was commanded of God to take plural wives like Abraham and other Old Testament figures." She talks about his first wife, a 16-year-old who worked in his house and that it was about 1833 and then some 30 more over the next decade. Wow!! That 1833 date certainly causes a lot of problems doesn't it?

Joseph Smith denied that he was a polygamist his entire life and publicly, right before he died. D&C 132 wasn't recorded until 1843 but it says that Joseph was aware of the revelation since 1831. Gee, that's very convenient!! So, if that was the case, why did the Book of Commandments of 1835 and the Book of Mormon condemn polygamy? Also, that section in the Book of Commandments, stayed in there for decades. I can't recall the year offhand when it was removed but I think it was like 1858 or something like that.

Then, she said the following, "Not everyone believed God sanctioned the marriages. His associate Oliver Cowdery called the first plural marriage "a dirty, nasty, filthy affair" (Cowdery later rejoined the church). Though the LDS Church stands by polygamy as a divine—albeit revoked—revelation, others are suspicious of Smith's motives. "He committed ministerial abuse," says Scherer, whose church long denied that Smith practiced polygamy. "He figured out a way to commit adultery and to do it sacramentally."

Call me crazy, but I'm 100% positive that Hinckley and his cronies would rather that this quote by Oliver Cowdery, not be printed in a mainstream, worldwide magazine by an active Mormon/BYU Grad that they brag about in BYU Magazine. She mentions that the Church stands by polygamy as a divine-albeit revoked-revelation. I found that laugh out loud funny. Divine but revoked....Ha Ha!! But that quote by Scherer saying that "he committed ministerial abuse" and that "he figured out a way to commit adultery and to do it sacramentally", really blew my mind. AMEN DUDE!!

Hinckley reports that it was like 1-2% of people practiced polygamy but in this article, she quotes that "at least 25% of adults in some communities were members of polygamous households. She then talks about the "Intense pressure" from federal authorities and that Wilford Woodruff issued a "manifesto" forbidding the practice. No mention that it was revealed from God, just that it came from "intense pressure from federal authorities."

She talks about how the LDS church adamantly opposes the practice of polygamy, while at the same time, LDS doctrine holds "that some polygamist marriages will exist in the celestial kingdom." Then she completely screws Hinckley by repeating that "those in the highest degree will dwell with God, their families will be eternal and they'll even become gods themselves-as God did. Then she quotes Lorenzo Snow's famous saying(now couplet..LOL), "As man is, God once was;as God is man may be."

Remember now, Hinckley has publicly stated that he doesn't know much about this and that nobody does. Joseph Smith clearly taught it in the History of the Church volume 6 and then Lorenzo Snow confirmed it, now Hinckley doesn't know what we are talking about. Oops!!

Then she tackles the whole "are Mormons Christian" problem and why others feel that they aren't. My favorite quote of the article was from Elder Jeffrey R. Holland regarding this subject. "I am devastated when people say I am not a Christian, particularly when generally that means I am not a fourth-century Christian."

One thing that I found fascinating and didn't really know, was that "many of Smith's most committed followers-among them future prophets Young and Woodruff-joined the Church without ever having met him." They "would go to the ends of the earth for that idea." Interesting!! They loved the idea but it had nothing to do with Smith himself since they had never met him. That would also explain why they would call him on the carpet for his sins. They loved the idea so much that they felt that he was going to ruin it and destroy it through his adultery, fornication and child rape, among his many sins!! I had just never really thought of that before, in that way.

Then she seems to soften and once again, talk about how wonderful the Church and Joseph Smith are in her candy coated summary.

I have to admit that I'm now a little bit more shocked by some of the things that she brought up in the article, knowing that she's a "TBM Molly." She could indeed have jeopardized her membership in the Mormon Church by writing this article. Is she a Molly? She protected the Church a lot by leaving out quite a few things or not expounding where she could have but wow, she did mention a lot of the forbidden things, like polygamy, over and over, in detail, for starters. I honestly believe that she will be in big trouble and maybe, in her personal life, she's on the fence right now. Maybe somebody else within Newsweek, forced her to put in certain things that she normally wouldn't have.

In any case, I'm sure that the Mormon Church will be very pissed, unless this is their way of getting out the truth, little by little over time, but I seriously doubt that. Especially in this time of great hemorrhaging of the Church Membership. In my opinion, this article couldn't have come at a worse time for the Mormon Church. They just had a General Conference, assuring the world that the Fairy Tale is real and lives on and then this article comes out a week later.

I think that this article is incredibly damaging to the Church by simply writing about "forbidden subjects" publicly that are not to EVER be publicly discussed by Mormon Hierarchy. The Mormon Church absolutely forbids members to do what she just did. I would say that she will most likely end up in a Church court very soon for this article.

I would imagine that the Mormon Church will have a public response to this article and try to call some of the things discussed, lies or mis-truths. I also imagine that most members will think that it is a biased Newsweek printing this article without knowing that it was written by a BYU graduate. Most TBMS will just dismiss this article as anti-Mormon propaganda by an anti-Mormon magazine.

Anyway, here was the more information that I promised on Elise Soukup, from that article given to us by Polygamy Porter, from BYU magazine. Thanks again Polygamy for your help!!

Before heading to Newsweek for an internship in fall 2001, Elise Christenson Soukup, ’02, had already had two internships, but interning at Newsweek, she says, “literally got me my job.” After spending a semester sorting mail, editing, and writing captions and headlines, Soukup’s internship was extended before she was offered a full-time position in the Periscope section of the magazine. While she still does much the same thing as she did as an intern, she’s now doing so with a salary. “I don’t know a better way to get a job than through an internship,” she says.

Soukup says the key to turning her internship into a career was making herself indispensable. She took on the menial tasks around the office that nobody else wanted to do. She also took the initiative to find a specialty. Since Newsweek didn’t have a religion writer, she tried to focus on writing about religious subjects and, specifically, on Latter-day Saints. She interviewed Donny Osmond and wrote about LDS comedy films. In the midst of this, she found she really enjoyed her work environment. “I think I fit in really easily with the office culture and with the work. It was just a nice fit for me.”

Marcus Mabry, chief of correspondents at Newsweek, says that while they hire very few interns for full-time positions, Soukup was hired because she went beyond just being honest and hard working. She showed creativity, intelligence, and initiative. Not to mention the question of fit. “She was a font of ideas; she showed she can write and report stories and conceive them. And finally, the X-factor was her personality, the fact that she fit in really well with the Periscope crew and there’s a camaraderie there; that’s really important to us.”

Here is a direct link to that page:

http://magazine.byu.edu/article.tpl?num=40-Fa04

Here is a link to the Newsweek article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9630255/site/newsweek/

Here is the link to yet another interesting, yet revealing Hinckley interview(they call it Q & A, this time by Newsweek. The title alone makes me sick, 'Solid, Strong, True':

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9630256/site/newsweek/

Hey, KSL is doing a story on it right now and here's the official statement by the Mormon Church regarding the article: "The depiction of the First Vision on the cover of one of the world's best-known news magazines is a noteworthy acknowledgment of Joseph Smith as the Prophet of the Restoration at the approach of his 200th birthday. We appreciate Newsweek's effort to bring this remarkable story and its implications to the attention of their readers."

Yeah, we'll see, depending on how the overall public response goes, especially in Utah. It's kind of like Grant Palmer's book; they sell it for almost 2 years and then condemn it and disfellowship him for writing it. From what I read, this Newsweek Article doesn't put the Church in a good light at all. Sure, it has it's moments where it paints the Mormon Church as this wonderful thing, but also paints the opposite picture. I'm going to go buy the magazine because it has other things in there about the church and Church growth that aren't online. Anyway, just thought I'd add this at the end when it came on TV. Here's a link to KSL's story:

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=117052

Also, something pretty funny, check out this picture from KSL. It's a picture of the current Newsweek but check out the Headline of the Magazine to the left..LOL!! Hinckley will be pissed!!

http://media.bonnint.net/slc/0/53/5337.jpg

I also wanted to include Simon Southerton's official response and opinion to this article, which ironically, is very similar to mine. Even the Ex-Mormons/Anti-Mormons think I'm out in left field in my opinions, but I'm thankful that an intelligent, well studied man like Simon Southerton, happens to see things pretty much the way I do. I guess I look at it as the glass is half full and any truth escaping to the world that helps validate my views and the truth of the fraud of Mormonism, is great!!

The majority of the things above, that Elise Soukup mentioned in the article, I have mentioned to many friends and family in the past 6 months and I was promptly called a liar and accused of reading Anti-Mormon literature and also, being deceived by the Devil. I guess you could say that I felt vindicated, especially when the Mormon Church put the link up on the front page of their website under newsroom, therefore, showing the world, that they too approved of the article.

The Mormon Hierarchy lies so bad and so often, while covering up their true history or never discussing it, that I'm grateful for anything or anyone, that can tell the truth and then have it validated, "officially" by the Mormon Church.

I still don't fully understand why the Mormon Church approves of this article?

All I can say is, THANK YOU!!

Samuel the Utahnite