Has Mormon Prophet "Gordon B. Hinckley" Ever Lied, Deceived or Connived? Of Course He Has And Once Again, Here Is The Incontrovertible Proof!!

Hey Mormon Truth readers/listeners, I came across this great post today, that brilliantly sums up all of the points that I have been making here on my blog since I started it, on July 31st of last year, 2005. It covers all of the ground that I've covered over and over in various post but combines it all into one. I just felt that he did a great job and I strongly agree with his opinions as well. I just felt that you guys would enjoy and appreciate this.

It's pretty amazing stuff, when you look at it all together in one body of work. This is only 10 of his 17 points and included in the post below, is a link to the full post of 17 items for those that want to check it out.

I've been doing nothing but beating that drum of Hinckley is a "lying, deceiving, conniving, cold-hearted con-artist and vicious fraud", for many months now. To be honest, all of these points are just the tip of the iceberg as there is so much more to the story. I just honestly can't believe that it is so hard for people to see.

Anyway, I'm sure that this will be a walk down memory lane for many of you that have been reading my blog or studying the Mormon Church on a regular basis, but for those that haven't, it just may be educational. Again, I appeal to those that are on the fence; Please read and strongly ponder these things, then open up your mind and ask why did he say them. Could it actually be that the Mormon Church isn't true and a fraud? The answer is a resounding YES!!

Now, onto this great post:

Does Gordon B. Hinckley always tell the truth?

Gordon B Hinckley is president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Most of the time he speaks in vague generalities like "be good" or "isn't it wonderful?" or "I don't know." But sometimes he says specific things, and when you look closely they are often not true. Here are some examples of Gordon B. Hinckley statements that are not true.
longer version of this page - 17 points of the false church

1. Does the church teach that God was once a man? Hinckley says no.

Joseph Smith said this was the first principle of the gospel:

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!...........It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God........yea, that God himself, the father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did; and I will show it from the Bible...." (from Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith and History of the Church, 6:302-17. This has also been reprinted in various manuals and church magazines over the years. Truman Madsen, in his popular tapes "Joseph Smith the Prophet" said the church has published this sermon more than any other.)

President Kimball said this a concentrated summary of numerous scriptures:

"You and I--what helpless creatures are we! Such limited power we have, and how little can we control the wind and the waves and the storms! We remember the numerous scriptures which, concentrated in a single line, were stated by a former prophet, Lorenzo Snow: 'As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.'" (President Spencer W. Kimball in "Our Great Potential" from the April 1977 Priesthood Session of General Conference)

Just to drive home the point here are a few more quotations:

"Mormon prophets have continuously taught the sublime truth that God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man who passed through a school of earth life similar that through which we are now passing. He became God - an exalted being - through obedience to the same eternal Gospel truths that we are given opportunity today to obey." (Milton R. Hunter, The Gospel Through the Ages, p 104)

"...God...is a personal Being, a holy and exalted man..." (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966 ed p 250)

"God is an exalted man. Some people are trouble over the statements of the Prophet Joseph Smith ... that our Father in heaven at one time passed through a life and death and is an exalted man..." (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation 1:10, 1954, cited from 21st printing 1975):

"President Brigham Young taught ... that God the Father was once a man on another planet who 'passed the ordeals we are now passing through'" ... "The doctrine that God was once a man and has progressed to become a God is unique to this church." ("The Teachings of Brigham Young," Official LDS Lesson Manual, 1997, pages 29,34, )

That last quotation was from the 1997 manual for both Priesthood and Relief Society. What did Gordon B. Hinckley say the same year?

Don Lattin (San Francisco Chronicle religion editor, interviewing Gordon B. Hinckley, April 13, 1997, p 3/Z1): "There are some significant differences in your beliefs [from other Christian churches]. For instance, don't Mormons believe that God was once a man?"

Hinckley: "I wouldn't say that. There was a little couplet coined, "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." Now that's more of a couplet than anything else. That gets into some pretty deep theology that we don't know very much about."

Quoted in Time Magazine, Aug 4, 1997: "On whether his church still holds that God the Father was once a man, [Hinckley] sounded uncertain, `I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it... I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I don't know a lot about it, and I don't think others know a lot about it.'"

Hinckley claimed he was misquoted:

"I personally have been much quoted, and in a few instances misquoted and misunderstood. I think that's to be expected. None of you need worry because you read something that was incompletely reported. You need not worry that I do not understand some matters of doctrine. I think I understand them thoroughly, and it is unfortunate that the reporting may not make this clear. I hope you will never look to the public press as the authority on the doctrines of the Church. (1997 October General Conference)"

But you can check the quotes for yourself - even on the original video. And he said the same things on more than one occasion. See www.lds-mormon.com/hwtd.shtml or www.lds-mormon.com/lkl_00.shtml for details.

The next year, 1998, the plain doctrine was again taught in the Ensign - click here to read the whole article on the official church web site. Note that being resurrected implies that a person was once mortal.

"God the Father and His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, are glorified, exalted, resurrected beings, and from the moment of the appearance of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith, we have known their true nature." (M. Russell Ballard, “Building Bridges of Understanding,” Ensign, June 1998, 62)

The teaching is plain and simple, perhaps the plainest and simplest in all of Mormondom. Yet Hinckley says "I don't know that we teach it." It seems that this church says one thing to its own members and a different thing to the world's media..

2. Does the church publish its budgets for its members to see? Hinckley says yes.

Every other major church makes its accounts public. Every one. They consider it a question of honesty and openness. Yet the Mormon church keeps its accounts secret. Before the Salt Lake Olympics, a German reporter asked Hinckley about this and other things. A transcript of the full interview is here.

Reporter: "In my country, the…we say the people's churches, the Protestants, the Catholics, they publish all their budgets, to all the public.

Hinckley: [agrees]

Reporter: "Why is it impossible for your church?

Hinckley: "Well, we simply think that the…that information belongs to those who made the contribution, and not to the world. That's the only thing. Yes."

This is a very strange thing to say, because no church member ever gets to see the church budgets or accounts. Ever. Most people would say his answer was highly misleading to the German reporter.

3. Is the DNA evidence against Lamanites in North America unproven? Hinckley says it is.

[ From the German reporter's interview:]

Reporter: "Now, Mr. President, one of…one question which is a little bit complicated for me to understand, but I heard it and one colleague asked me to ask it. What will be your position when DNA analysis will show that in the history never have been an immigration from Israel to the North…to North America? It could be that the scientists will find out…"

Hinckley: "Well, it hasn't happened. That hasn't been determined yet. All I can say is that's speculated. No one really knows the answer to that, not at this point."

This is a very strange thing to say because Hinckley has spent most his life in church public relations of some sort, so he should be aware of the facts. He was specifically asked about North America. The reporter was being kind, as if the question had not yet been proven. Yet the DNA evidence against North America as the Book of Mormon location is devastating. Even the apologists, FARMS, have accepted that, and they will not try to defend a North American setting for the Book of Mormon.

Even if we allow the FARMS theory that the Lamanites were hiding in some remote corner of Central America, the DNA evidence is not "speculated" as Hinckley said. It has been established beyond reasonable doubt by the highest standards of scientific inquiry in peer-reviewed journals. DNA destroys the Book of Mormon as a historical record. To say that the issue "hasn't been determined" is like saying the earth is still flat because a few people still believe it.

4. When did polygamy start in the church? Hinckley says it was after 1847.

On Larry King Live (September 8, 1998, after Hinckley was asked about polygamy): "When our people came west they permitted it [polygamy] on a restricted scale."

This is very strange, because polygamy began much earlier than "when our people came west." It was practiced secretly by Joseph Smith since about 1833, when he "married" his first "plural wife," sixteen year old Fanny Alger. Alger is listed by official Mormon sources as Joseph Smith's first plural wife. By 1844 it was practiced by many LDS leaders. It is very strange that Gordon B. Hinckley does not remember this.

5. How many Mormons were "involved in polygamy"? Hinckley says just 2 to 5 percent.

Again from Larry King Live, September 8, 1998: "The figures I have are from -- between two percent and five percent of our people were involved in it [polygamy]. It was a very limited practice."

This is very strange, because before moving to Utah, of the leaders who knew about polygamy, 75 percent practiced it. See D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: [Volume 1] Origins of Powers, Appendix 6, and the discussion by Packam. After moving to Utah, church elders urged ALL good Mormons to practice it. Numerous sermons say it was essential to salvation. Every president of the church was polygamous until George Albert Smith, who became president in 1945. It is very strange that Gordon B. Hinckley presents it as a very limited practice.]

6. Do we oppose other churches? Hinckley says no.

Speaking on Larry King Live, September 8, 1998: "I say this to other people: you develop all the good you can. We have no animosity toward any other church. We do not oppose other churches. We never speak negatively of other churches."

In last General Conference (October 2005, quoting a poem): " 'I would not sit in the scorner's seat, Or hurl the cynic's ban; / Let me live in a house by the side of the road / And be a friend to man.' That is the way I feel. [I wish] that men might live together in peace without war and contention, argument and conflict."

This is a strange thing to say since Hinckley leads a church that says that no non-Mormon will go to heaven.(The Celestial Kingdom) He divides people from the world into the righteous (Mormons and those who will one day become Mormons) and the unrighteous (everyone else).

This was the very first thing "revealed from God" in the "First Vision": "the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were all corrupt." (Joseph Smith - History 1:18-19)

The whole reason for a restoration was that every other church was so corrupt that it was beyond any hope of reformation.

1 Nephi 14:10 says "And he [God] said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth." (See also 1 Nephi 13:6, 14:3, 9; Alma 5:39.)

Until 1990, the temple ceremony included a non-Mormon minister, a representative of all other churches, and he was being paid by Satan.
Mormons say they "never speaking negatively of other churches" but say that other churches are corrupt and inspired by Satan. Things that make you go "hmmm..."

7. Is the church run by only men? Hinckley says no.

Mike Wallace ('Sixty Minutes' TV interview): ''Why must only men run the Church?''

Hinckley: '' 'Only men' do not run the Church. Men have their place in the Church. Men hold priesthood offices of the Church. But women have a tremendous place in this church. They have their own organization. It was started in 1842 by the Prophet Joseph Smith, called the Relief Society, because its initial purpose was to administer help to those in need. It has grown to be, I think, the largest women's organization in the world with a membership of more than three million. They have their own offices, their own presidency, their own board. That reaches down to the smallest unit of the Church everywhere in the world.''

Wallace: ''But they don't have the power.''

Hinckley: ''They have office. They have responsibility. They have control of their organization.''

Wallace: ''But you run it. The men run it. Look, I'm not being . . . ''

Hinckley: ''The men hold the priesthood, yes. But my wife is my companion. In this Church the man neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side. They are co-equals in this life in a great enterprise.''

This is very strange because clearly men do run the church. It is true that women run some parts of the church, but only if they get permission from the men to do so.

8. Does the church get involved in politics? Hinckley says no.

From an interview broadcast on Compass in Australia, November 9th 1997

DR: "Finally, in Australia as in the US, I understand you ??? government on social issues. Especially in the name of protecting the family. What sort of things would you like to change as far as Australian society is concerned?"

Gordon B. Hinckley: "I don’t know much about your social structure here. I’m only... I only come as a visitor and so I can’t say very much, but I was sorry to read that the great emphasis being put on gambling down in er ..Victoria? Victoria, yes. Institutionally the Church speaks out on moral issues. Other than that we draw a strict line of separation of Church and State. The Church institutionally does not get involved in politics. Does not endorse candidates, does not endorse parties. We encourage our people as citizens of the land to exercise their franchises individuals. And to be active in these things, but as an institution the Church maintains a strict line of separation of Church and State speaking out only when there is a moral question at issue."

Those who remember the Equal Right Amendment Act, or follow the millions being spent attacking gay marriage proposals, or all the other examples where the church gets involved in politics, will know that this "strict line of separation between church and state" is not the case. D.Michael Quinn's book "Extensions of Power" goes into great detail about the church's political work.

9. Do the church's doctrines change? Hinckley says no.

From the same Australian interview:

President Gordon B. Hinckley: "Yes, sir. We are. We have fundamental, basic doctrines which have held fast through more than a 150 years of time. We don’t bend with every wind of doctrine that comes along. Our doctrine is stable, it’s secure. Programs change, we make adaptation according to the circumstances. But the basic doctrine remains the same and that becomes a solid unshifting foundation to which people can cling in this world of instability and drifting values."

Those who have followed the Adam-God doctrine, or the role of polygamy, or blood atonement, or blacks in the pre-existence, will know that the doctrine is anything but stable. In my own time, the church has shifted significantly. Hinckley's own statements on this page show that the doctrine regarding the doctrine of the purpose of life (to become like God) is still changing. (Lets not forget about the many changes in the Temple ceremony, just since 1990.)

10. Does Hinckley accept the scriptures as they stand, or twist them to mislead us?

Finally, Gordon B. Hinckley often quotes from scripture. Some of these scriptures make dramatic claims. If he accepts them as they stand, they are simply not true. But if he has some symbolic meaning in mind, is it not dishonest not to say so? The first example, if literally true, is contradicted by mountains of scientific evidence. The second example, though more easily taken as symbolic, does not apply to the Mormon church unless you twist its meaning violently. Here is the first example:

"There was the great Flood, when waters covered the earth and when, as Peter says, only "eight souls were saved" (1 Peter 3:20)." (A quote from October 2005 conference.)

Discover after discovery has proven that this cannot have happened as the Bible describes. As prophet, Hinckley claims the right to reveal new truths about scripture, but shouldn't he tell us? Many of his listeners will come away believing in a literal global flood, and that would be highly misleading.

Here is the second example: Since the days of Joseph Smith, church leaders have identified the church with the "stone cut without hands" from Daniel 2. Hinckley is no exception.

"The little stone which was cut out of the mountain without hands is rolling forth to fill the earth (see Dan. 2:31–45; D&C 65:2)." (Gordon B. Hinckley, “The State of the Church,” Ensign, Nov. 2003, 4)

This comes from Daniel 2:21-45 which says, in part:

"Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold [the nations of the world], broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. ... And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." (Daniel 2: 34,35, 44)

Hinckley knows enough about church history to know that the church is not fulfilling this prophecy.

First, it does not break in pieces other nations. Whenever the nations of the world have confronted the church (most famously in the troubles in Nauvoo or the Utah war or the polygamy issue) the church has either run away or lost. Today the church tries very hard to be friends with all governments - it shows no interest in breaking them in pieces.

Second, church growth is slowing. While it grew at a reasonable pace up until the mid 1980s, for the past twenty years growth has been slowing. Even before the 1980s it was not like a stone rolling down and gathering speed. After 150 years it was still largely insignificant to non-Mormons. The context of Hinckley's talk shows he means "filling the earth" in the sense of having a peaceful presence in every country. So it is highly misleading for him to use Daniel 2, which speaks of the church growing to a huge size and breaking the other nations into pieces.

And so it goes on. These are just ten examples of Gordon B. Hinckley's teachings. Does he say things that aren't true? Did he just make a poor choice of words? Is he ill-informed? Does he accidentally forget things? Are these all innocent mistakes? You decide.

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

Well, hopefully you guys enjoyed reading that post as I did!! The biggest mistake that Hinckley ever made, was opening himself to the ridicule and scrutinly of the press. Basicially, he embarrassed himself and his Church, but I'll be forever grateful that he did it, since it greatly helped lead me to my freedom that I now enjoy.

He raised many questions in my mind that I had never, ever had, which led me to research the answers, which led to more questions and deeper study and well, here I am, now a sworn enemy of the Mormon cult and fraud. I will dedicate a portion of my time and my life, for as long as I live, to espose this fraud while hopefully being able to help millions to escape it's grasp. The Mormon Hierarchy are an enemy to humanity and all that's good and the truth must be told.

So, like I've said, over and over, thank you Mr. Gordon B. Hinckley, that through your blatant egotism, arrogance, pride and ultimately stupidy, you've exposed your fraudulant cult, which you call a Church. Everything that you do is done in the name of some God(and $$$, of course) but not any God that the rest of the Christian world is familiar with. Your God and your Jesus, have nothing to do with any reality that may exist on the other side of our existence.

Samuel the Utahnite