Thursday, March 08, 2007

The Live Mormon Truth Skypecast Begins In About 20 Minutes...I Hope To See Everyone There!!

*** Update*** The Skypecast has begun for those that are still around and want to participate. Here is the direct link. Sorry for the delay!!

The Skypecast will be at 6 PM Mountain Time, 5 PM Pacific, 7 Central or 8 if your in the east. Now for those in other countries....well, I'm still going to post time zones from all over the world on a post later tonight.

Anyway, for those that want to join the Skypecast and just listen in, you only need earphones or speakers. For those that want to actually participate, you need either headphones or speakers and a microphone. Headphones work out better for all of us. Also, high speed Internet connection or DSL works best if you want to talk. Also, USB headphones are far better than the standard ones.

Up to 100 people can participate at one time and it's the first hundred that get in. I think as we get through the next few weeks, it will be full every week, so get there early and don't miss out!!

You need to download Skype on your computer, which is completely free. It is also free, no matter where you are in the world, even if your on Kolob, to participate. I'm still hoping the Mormon God might join us tonight...Last week he was a no show...LOL!!

I would give you the direct link, for those that want to join tonight, but either some TBM Mormon or some asshole, nut-job fanatical Christians(Aaron and Eric?) took offense to my podcast description. I guess it was the part where I said: "Anyone is welcome, but I will have a very low tolerance for any of you die-hard, condemning, fanatical, Christian nut-jobs. I can always just mute you and then boot your ass out, which I'll do!!"

I guess they want their freedom to condemn all Mormons and the whole world to burn in hell and Skype supports that, but God forbid I say the truth and what I feel about them, right? Typical hypocrites!! And they attack Mormons? Amazing that Skype is now following on the heels of YouTube and attempting to silence me, isn't it? Of course Skype has masturbating and cybersex Skypecasts, but exposing Mormonism or fanatical Christians, is way out of line, forbidden and banned.

The message Skype left me was: "This Skypecast was removed as it was identified as inappropriate." Community Guidelines. I guess after exposing Eric Hoffman as a fraud and liar last week, they couldn't take it eh?

I will be recording all of these Skypecasts and releasing them as podcasts, so keep that in mind if you plan on participating and don't want your voice out there for the masses to hear.

I control who speaks and who doesn't and I'm probably gonna limit it to 2 people in addition to myself, that are in the speaking area at one time. If you are in the listening area and really have something you want to say, just Text message me and you can move into the waiting area.

Take care everyone and I hope to see you there in about 20 minutes. Just look up Skypecasts and search for Mormon and you should be able to find the Mormon Truth Skypecast, unless I'm permanently banned. I just have to start it right at the moment, since they deleted my set time for tonight. All I can say, for those behind getting my Skypecast canceled, is that payback is a bitch guys and I can play the game better than most.

Talk to you all soon,

Samuel the Utahnite

Labels: ,


At Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:37:00 PM, Anonymous Galatian said...

Hi Samuel,

ARURGHHGF! Feeling very frustrated right now. Just got back from work and I was hoping to catch the last of your Skypecast but I can't find it listed!!

I really hope everything worked out tonight and everyone's there (meaning I just happened to miss it) and those pricks didn't censor you. I hate unjust censorship! In today's radical-religious and political climate it is really getting to be quite bad ...

I look forward to hearing the podcasts, and with any luck I will make it next week!

At Thursday, March 08, 2007 6:43:00 PM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...

Hey Galatian, I haven't even started it yet, as I had some things come up after I realized it was canceled by Skype, so you are welcome to join it nd I'd love to have you, as I'm sure everyone else would. I'll be starting it in about 10 minutes, hopefully, if Skype hasn't banned me completely.


At Thursday, March 08, 2007 10:14:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I do not understand how the whole thing works, but I will try to figure it out because it would be fun to join in.

I do use Skype to call people on their phones or computers, so I kinda get it. But I gotta read up on Skypecasts.

Your last podcast was AWESOME! I loved it!!

At Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:55:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The ditty from the end of the podcast that I wrote and was read by Demon of Kolob goes:

Joseph Loves me this I know
Because moroni told him so
Little Gals to Joe belong
He is wearing Helen's thong

At Friday, March 09, 2007 9:16:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The above post is by Bond

At Friday, March 09, 2007 9:51:00 AM, Blogger Elder Joseph said...

I'd love to come in on the Skypecast but London UK time is approx 5 to 8 hours ahead of my USA friends . I look forward to anything I've missed on podcast .

This Mormon thing can get depressing and I've only investigated .I can't imagine the horror of having served a mission and all the rest of it only to find out its not true .

Jehovah's Witnesses shun you if you leave and you lose an entire congregation of friends and even family . At least Mormons aren't like this ( or not as a matter of church policy at least) , but still the psychological pressure must be very straining, and trying to discuss things with believing Mormons who just seem to ignore good evidence of fraudulent origins and reality and hide behind a testimony is quite mind boggling for me.

I commend you all for being so brave and kind in sharing your findings with the world.

There are many to be saved out of Mormonism and many can avoid it in the first place thanks to all your efforts and of course SamuelTheUtahnite who has brought Mormon Fraud to our attention !

Elder Joseph

At Friday, March 09, 2007 9:44:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...


Another interesting Skypecast. It seems that Christian nut cases everywhere are somehow getting the idea that we want to hear their nonsense.

"God loves you... God hates you... God wants to save you... God wants to burn you..." This is cog dis at it's finest.

Remember when you/we asked "How is god revealing himself?" And his pathetic answer, "He is saving people." That's about the lamest answer I've ever heard. How do you know god is saving people? How do you know it isn't Bart Simpson? How do you know that people are being saved at all?

Christianity is ridiculous! I can't believe I ever believed in all that crazy nonsense!

Looking forward to next week and I think I'm going to comment as soon as I get a mic!

At Saturday, March 10, 2007 6:41:00 AM, Anonymous Chris said...

Hey, Ray, hey other readers,
In case you have not yet read Ludwig Feuerbach's famous book "The essence of Christianity", I would highly recommend it to you.
In this book, Feuerbach who lived in the 19. century, explains why people believe in God and what a belief in God entails.
The main message is that God is the personification of human ideals.
Thus, whatever human beings think to be ideal, God is the personification of this.
Therefore, "God is love" simply means "Love is divine, love is ideal".
While Feuerbach deals with Christianity in General, the implications for Mormonism are important as well.

In Mormonism, God has a wife and ancestors. He sleeps with Mary, who then gives birth to Jesus.
This implies that family, childbearing, raising of children, all this is godly, divine, good.
God has a body => our body is something good.
(On the contrast, the Christian God doesn't have a body, because in the hellenistic culture of Paul's days, the body was frowned upon. The body as fallen, dirty, worldly, in contrast to the soul/spirit which is ideal, without impurity.)

Reading Feuerbach, I came to understand why people have different beliefs: because they have different values.
While many religions share core beliefs such as morality and charity, the differences in beliefs are due to differences in values (traditional family, individualism, personal responsibility, justice, forgiveness, etc.)
As God is only an projection of these values, different values lead to different Gods.
People who think that their flesh is dirty and sinful will invent a God without a body (by the way, as the hebrews didn't think so, God has a body in the old testament, as many verses prove).
As this ideal was not present in 19th century America (we know that Joseph Smith liked women, and he liked lots of them :-) ), God got his body back.

I think that reading this book, you will understand both Christianity and Mormonism (as well as other religions) better as to why they came into being and what is the essence of their beliefs.

Good luck on your journey, whereever it may lead.

At Saturday, March 10, 2007 9:35:00 AM, Anonymous ray said...

Hi Chris,

That was a very interesting comment and I am curious to read that book.

Basically what you are saying is that different people's belief in god, depends upon the circumstances in which they live and the views they have on themselves and the world. If I have understood you correctly, I have felt this way for a long time.

This shows me that god is not some dude literally floating in a cloud or living on Kolob, but is basically the ideal version of ourselves. Since each of us (individually or collectively) create our own gods, there is no one true and living god for everyone to worship and believe in.

In essence, people believe in whatever god they choose although the bottom line is that there is no god... at least not one who has literally revealed himself to the whole world.

Mormons believe that when Christ returns, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that he is lord. If this day ever comes, which it won't because Jesus is a myth, then there will be one big world wide Mormon religion (they wish).

Our Christian friend the other night believes that he is saved and only his god can save. I was confused because he kept saying that we all deserve to die, that god hates us, but then on the other hand, god loves us and wants to save us. WTF! Why would I want to believe in or worship a god who despises me, and who teaches me that I am worthless just for being alive?

They believe that god is perfect and god created us. Does a perfect being produce garbage? No. A perfect being will produce perfect work. And since we are made perfect, why does god teach us that we are worthless and need to be saved? It just doesn't make any sense.

They will say that the devil screwed everything up. But the devil is also a myth that was invented for explaining the "evil" side of human nature. There is no god and there is no devil; there is only the belief in them.

At Saturday, March 10, 2007 10:46:00 AM, Anonymous Chris said...

Hello again, Ray,
you complained that the Christian religion is schizophrenic, because "God hates us, but then on the other hand, god loves us and wants to save us".

What does "schizophrenic" mean, when God is a projection of our values? That there are TWO values which partly contradict each other.
And these two values are (absolutistic) justice, and forgiveness / love.

God is just => justice is one of the Christian ideals.
The problem is that if you create an absolute and ideal justice, people will inevitably fail it.
This is what happened in the old testament with the Mosaic Law. The standard of the law was raised and raised, and in the end, no one could ever pass it.

Let's read a verse:
"God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God...they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." (Ps.53:2-3)

Noone can pass the law, because, although we all have ideals, we all are not ideal and cannot live up to our ideals.
Isn't it good to be friendly?
But try to be friendly to anyone all the time. You won't.

God's condemnation is due to the difference between individuals and their common ideals and values.
One the one hand, we hold absolute values, on the other hand, we as individuals always fail our own values to some degree.

The old hebrew culture therefore invented a ritual of atonement, to conciliate between society as a whole and the sinful individual. It was the sacrifice of animals.

Sin deserves death, and instead of the human being, an animal was sacrificed, this was their argumentation.

Now, in 70 AD, this barbaric slaughter of animals came to an end with the destruction of the temple. People could not longer atone for their sins by burning animals.

Moreover, the famous wandering ascetic Jesus of Nazareth whom his followers hoped to be the Messiah talked about in the Scriptures (old testament) was executed by the Roman empire.

Here you have the ingredients for St. Paul's Christianity:
A need to reconciliate between the ideals of absolute justice and love/forgiveness, which makes it necessary to atone for any injustice ("sin"); the impossibility to continue the animal sacrifices; a person who was considered to be without blemish (this was one of the necessities for an animal to be sacrificed; you couldn't take an old, lame or crippled animal).
And Paul of Tarsus, who never knew Jesus personally, created a new theology around this theme: Christianity was born.

What is interesting is that the same elements can also be found in other religions. If you study asian Mahayana Buddhism, you will find a figure called "Amithaba Buddha".
While Buddha (Siddharta Gautama) was a historic person like Jesus of Nazareth, Amithaba Buddha was an ideal, transcendent figure like the resurrected figure Paul talks about.(If you read Paul's letters, you won't find information about the historical Jesus, his death and alleged resurrection is the only thing Paul is interested in)
And most theological aspects of "grace by faith" can also be found in Amidism. How can this happen?
When people share the same values, they end up creating similar images of Saviors.

Moreover, the thought that people will be judged for their deeds can also be found in all kinds of Buddhism.
The only difference is that in Buddhism, the ideals are not personified into a God, but thought to be a natural law.
This law of nature naturally lets people be reborn according to their deeds. However, this law is not as dualistic as the Christian God, so in Buddhism there are more than two realms: while God judges people to either heaven or hell, in Buddhism, people are being reborn in one of six realms, ranging from hell (the really bad guys!) to the ghost realm, the animal realm, the human realm, the heavenly realm (the really good guys!) and a nonmaterial realm(the meditating guys!)

You can find the same concept im Mormonism: Joseph Smith found it odd that God would divide people in only two groups, as we are so gradually different in our moral behavior, and a division in only two groups would be injust.
Therefore he created more realms (ok, three is not that much more than two ;-) ) Here we find the difference between dualism and a more fine grained way of evaluation.

Ok, I suppose this is getting to long for a comment section.
Anyway, I hope you could get a glimpse at how religion came into being, and what its purpose behind its mythological facade is.


At Saturday, March 10, 2007 7:30:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...


Very fascinating, you have obviously done your homework. Do you have any other suggested readings?

At Saturday, March 10, 2007 10:48:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Ray, Samuel, Galatians, Elder Joseph, everyone else.... just a quick question.... something I've been thinking about today.... if you had simply one day woke up and discovered the church wasn't true and none of your family or friends had turned against you for quitting the church, and if you didn't have a bunch of idiot TBMs telling you you're going to hell (I promise, I'll never say that, I don't think it's anyone's place but the Lord's to judge) would you be as angry about mormonism as you are now? Did that make sense? I mean I was talking to my mom this evening, and I was telling her about this site, and some of the comments here and the anger from both sides, and yeah.... it was an interesting conversation. After everything I have read on this site, and all the comments about how mormons are told they can't look at antimormon materials, or participate in antimormon discussions, I half expected my Mom to freak out when I brought it up. Yeah, we might as well have been discussing why Britney shaved her head... she just jumped right in and started zealot-bashing and it was really kind of funny how much she got riled about it. Anyway, not all mormons in this world think you're evil, or going to hell, or have commandment issues, or some horrible sins you can't quit, or anything like that.... not that we agree with your opinions on mormonism, but.... well.... like I said, it's not my place to judge. Have a great weekend.


At Saturday, March 10, 2007 11:33:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Anon, good question. Would I be as angry as I am now? I am not happy that I wasted so many years of my life on a fraud and unhappy that my friends are sucked into the fraud. I see so many good people giving money, time, and tons of energy to this big fraud.

It is a disappointment to me that men in power take such a cavalier attitude towards the paying believing members.

I have come to see all religions as cults that suck money away from the members, but I believe that the LDS cult is one of the worst for perpetuating the lie that their whole life (not just merely money) is tied up in EVERY single thing the members say, do, and believe.

I know members usually do not see themselves as being taken advantage of. I see that and I feel so sorry for them. People on the inside would laugh at that and tell me not to worry or feel sorry for them. As they come to see the church as the fraud that it is, then they say, Oh NOW I get what you were saying".

For LDS people who may read this, I believe it may sound very offensive. You can have the pleasure of saying, Well, we feel sorry for YOU.

Yes, I may be wrong. Joseph Smith may have been everything he said he was--yes, Mormonism may be true--unicorns may exist, Elvis may live. But I truly believe that he was a con artist and that the organization known as the LDS church is a very large cult. If I had the least little doubt, even the teensiest little doubt, I would have stayed in it. I am 100% sure that he faked it all.

At Saturday, March 10, 2007 11:51:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

M.A., that's a difficult question to answer, but for me the answer would still be yes, I would be angry.

But I would not classify myself as 'angry'. Upset and passionate, yes. I have not personally had any family or friends shun me, so I am in a slightly different boat than Samuel who has been dragged over the rocks.

And TBM's who name call get me riled up, of course, but my/our beef is ultimately not with them but with the leaders who continue to declare that all is well and whatnot. The reason the idiot TBM's act the way they do is because of what the leaders have taught them. Sometimes I just have to take a deep breath and tell myself, "Forgive them, for they know not what they do." (Not that I'm Jesus or anything)

It was the discovery of certain things that made me realize the church is not true and most of those things, again, involved the leaders, not the average member. So my source of passion comes from the hidden secrets and lies.

If it was only the two factors, "no shunning" or "idiot TBM's" then I would have to say that my feelings would be exactly the same.

I watched the Matrix again tonight. I'll never get tired of that movie. The story is so true to Mormonism that it is downright scary. The part that stood out to me this time was when Morpheus and Neo are in the "agent training" program. Morpheus is telling Neo that most of the people still plugged into the Matrix (Mormonism) are so dependent on the system that, although it is their prison, they will fight to defend it, because it is the only thing they know.

The Matrix is a prison for your mind and so is Mormonism. I don't know if you've seen it or not, M.A., but if you haven't I would recommend it. It's so full of symbolism that I still learn new things each time I watch it. Not only that, but it's just a damn awesome kick ass movie with lots of action and an incredible story. Just like Neo, I can't go back...

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:20:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seen the Matrix, loved it. Haven't applied it to mormonism though.... I'll have to try that (all the original Star Wars movies and mormonism go together quite well too!). I do see where you're coming from though, and it's an interesting analogy. Not that I'd equate being a mormon with being imprisoned.... but interesting. Now I'll have to go watch the Matrix again....


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 12:44:00 AM, Anonymous Chris said...

Ray, another book I would recommend is Eric Hoffer, "The True Believer - Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements"

It deals with religions in particular, but also with other mass movements such as communism or national socialism in general. Hoffer points out that both of these movements share many attributes with religions.Consider e.g. that Hitler, who was mostly called "The Leader" by his followers, was regarded as some kind of messianic figure.

The book also contains some notes on Mormonism, especially the historical fact that its member moved to Utah, which was some kind of "Exodus" experience for them, an experience they share with the old testament Israelites.

While Feuerbach's book will deepen your understanding of religion in general, Hoffer's book will deepen your understanding about the mass movement aspect, and the term "cult" has a strong notion of a mass movement:
the masses follow what an elite few (church authorities) tell them.

I recommend both books for any LDS member or Ex-LDS member, because they can help you answer the question of why Mormonism is as it is, why its members behave like they behave.
Both books concentrate on the psychological aspects of religion (Feuerbach) and mass movements (Hoffer).

I hope my suggestions can help you.

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 1:04:00 AM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...

Hey M.A.,

Very interesting last comment and question!! First of all, how would somebody "simple wake up and discover the church isn't true", if they hadn't done any homework, research, etc, etc. You can't dumb it down to that point, where we just knew, without a doubt, that the Church was false, without all that we've done in order to reach that conclusion.

The fact is, that we did literally wake up one day and realize it was a fraud(Simon Southerton did actually go to bed, and wake up the next morning knowing it was false), but not until we had done a lot of research and for me, it was MASSIVE amounts of research.

I would estimate the first 4 months or so for me, consisted of 14-18 hours a day of study and research. I mean, hey, this was the "one and only true church" and I began with the initial desire of proving it correct and all of the statements, quotes, etc, as false and "lies from anti-Mormons." Once I discovered everything I was reading and researching was true....then everything else came up, I found more and it all literally crumbled like a house of cards.

I find it funny when people think that I just suddenly left the church, for whatever reason, without giving it some thought. I would estimate and this number is conservative, that I've spent 5,000-6,000 hours + dedicated to this cause over the last 21 months or so. In the beginning I was just researching and studying 16-18 hours a day, 7 days a week, but then as I cut back on the research, as I added my blogs, then my podcasts, then videos and then comments on my blogs, which took a ton of my time, in addition to my continual studies.

As far as family and friends condemning me and cutting me off and the TBMS telling me I was gonna burn in hell...that didn't come along until long after I decided that Mormonism was a fraud. Initially, I was posting on RFM and then Mormon Discussions, where most people agreed with me and weren't against me. I'd say the real opposition and hate-mail didn't come until after I started my blog and got hate-mails almost instantly, one after another, but still less than 1 out of 10 were condemning, while the rest were thanking me.

It wasn't until 2-3 months after my discovery, that I lost family, when I mentioned Joe's polygamy(they called me a liar, a disgrace, especially for an RM, etc) and that was that with them. Most all of my friends that I've lost have been over the last year or so. I did lose my best friend about the same time I lost the family, but the others have been in the last year and that best friend became 100% solid in the "lost" department, if there was any doubt.

So, to answer your question; I was outraged and furious long before I'd lost any family and friends and my angry/passionate writings began before I lost anyone from my life. I was outraged and furious at the lies, deceit, corruption and hypocrisy, once I learned the truth that I know the Mormon Hierarchy knows. Losing family and friends then, due to the lies, corruption, brainwashing, etc, did add fuel to my fire and anger, but more than anything, it just confirmed everything I thought, felt and was saying.

You say that: "not all mormons in this world think you're evil, or going to hell, or have commandment issues, or some horrible sins you can't quit, or anything like that" and that it's "not your place to judge", but I suggest that you tell that to your beloved Mormon Hierarchy, that you follow, revere and praise, because that is exactly what they not only believe, but teach the mindless, brainwashed cult members.

I'm glad that you are not so damn brainwashed, as to actually believe ALL of their teachings and sit there like a baby chick, with your mouth open, waiting for the next worm from Hinckley and co. Sadly, many TBMS just hang on and suck up every word they say and the number is much higher than you can imagine M.A. especially for Utah/Idaho/Arizona Mormons.

I'll recap; Ballard says to "run from us as fast as you can." BY says that "we are all anti-Christs" and "sons of perdition" and Boyd K. Packer says that "we are all disease germs" and "full of darkness", and that you can literally "see our darkness." I could go on, but why? If those words alone wouldn't piss you off M.A., insult you and your intelligence or stir up your anger, then I don't know what to say.

They are basically taunting us and saying "bring it on assholes", and we'll beat you down, destroy your character, reputation, etc and that is another reason why we are so damn pissed off about it. We are insulted about the blanket character assassinations and teachings by the Mormon hierarchy, both past and present. We are insulted that they are teaching all of the other Mormons about how evil, dangerous and awful we are and to basically condemn us, stay away from us and treat us like complete shit if we ever "DARE" to leave the damn cult. Is that fair? Do we have the right to defend our very reputations publicly, that are being destroyed PUBLICLY, by the Mormon Hierarchy? YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT WE DO!!

That is why our fight is really with them and not you M.A., that is until you start to defend the very assholes we are fighting against; which is when the fight with you begins, because we can't even fathom why anyone would defend such scum and put their reputation and personal integrity on the line for these awful men, that pretend to be "Prophets of God." Make sense?

I love how all of the brainwashed, mindless sheep always say, "we don't condemn anyone", which is complete bullshit. I've been reading Joseph Smith's teachings, where he says all over the place that "Christians" will all "burn in hell." He was as bad as these asshole, fanatical Evangelicals that I've been dealing with and debating.

I mean let's be honest here...Mormonism teaches that all other religions are abominations with false professors, corrupt doctrines, and that there are save two churches only...the church of God and the church of the DEVIL/SATAN, RIGHT?

The BOM makes this crystal clear,over and over and over and calls all other Churches(especially the Catholic church-which Joseph Smith despised and trashed regularly in his personal teachings), the Mother of harlots, the whore of all the earth, etc.

So, in reality, the Mormons can't expect other religions to respect them and really don't deserve to be respected when you read what they've said about EVERY OTHER CHURCH ON THE PLANET. It's funny how they want to pretend to be so nice and loving and respecters of all other religions, when their hate-filled teachings and fairy tales, back to the 1820, do nothing but outright CONDEMN ALL OTHER CHURCHES AND EVERYONE THAT BELONGS TO THEM.

Now you have the asshole, fanatical Evangelicals condemning the shit out of Mormons and saying the same exact thing Joe did; "that they will all burn in hell forever." Sadly, most members aren't even aware of this and are taught lies by their leaders, that "we don't ever trash other churches like they do to poor old us."

The reason I say sadly, is because these Evangelicals are condemning ALL Mormons for the words of the Mormon Hierarchy, past and present and are basically condemning innocent victims in that regard(just as Joseph Smith and all other Prophets have). They just can't understand why anyone would condemn them, when they are so nice and they don't deserve it.

Truth is, many of the common true-believers, don't deserve it, because they aren't really even aware of their Hierarchy's open condemnation of all other churches, especially Joseph Smith, beyond the First vision and BOM, which they seem to ignore. Just because Hinckley says to "bring your good to the Mormon church and we'll see if we can add to it" bullshit, doesn't wash away the truth.

Just because Hinckley isn't publicly aware or doesn't claim to know much about(and is a damn liar) any doctrine, regarding God once being a man, on an earth just like us, doesn't mean it wasn't taught(by Joseph Smith himself) and isn't still official doctrine(When was it officially renounced?). Just because Hinckley says that "polygamy isn't doctrinal", doesn't mean that Joseph Smith didn't have 33 wives, Brigham Young 55, etc. You catching my drift? Just because they deny it or claim it isn't true, doesn't mean it isn't true and wasn't taught and has never been un-taught or denounced or repudiated!!

It doesn't matter what they teach now, even when claiming that past teachings were false or didn't exist, when they actually did, were clearly and openly taught by so called Prophets and Apostles of God and are for sale in Jesus' Deseret bookstore as we write. So, they can pretend, lie, deceive and throw out smoke screens all day long, but in the end; the truth is the truth and the facts are the facts. If these past teachings are really just bullshit and were never really taught and have been falsely printed and sold for over 100 years; where is the "special discernment" or ability to know it?

If the current Prophet and Apostles, along with all the past ones, have never renounced these things and have continued to allow them to be sold in Jesus' Deseret bookstore; I'd say that's a pretty strong sign that they are official, wouldn't you? If they can't discern what is really doctrine and what isn't, then nothing they say or do, or sell, or print in official church manuals has any validity whatsoever, right?

You just can't have it both ways M.A., as either it's all true or all false, as Hinckley says. Either every moment of Mormon history was inspired, or it wasn't, as Hinckley says. Either it's all true, or a complete fraud, as Hinckley says. There is no middle ground at all(as Hinckley says-your current Prophet), and I've taken him up on that challenge and proved it all a fraud. In fact, he's proved it all a fraud himself, with his very own words, when he said that any man who taught racism, couldn't be "worthy of the Priesthood", or a "true disciple of Christ", which would include Brigham Young for sure. Is it possible M.A. to have a Mormon Prophet, that isn't worthy of the Priesthood or a true disciple of Christ? I'm just curious.


So, you can question our research and the "official history" of Mormonism all day long M.A., and pretend it isn't true, that many things weren't actually taught or said, but that is just your cognitive dissonance/brainwashing rearing its ugly head. The fact is, if you actually believe what we are saying or believe that the quotes are accurate...then you have a big, huge, massive problem, which contradicts the "we can't ever lead you astray" and this is the "one and only true church on earth."

The bottom line is that the Mormon Hierarchy(especially guys like Hinckley, Monson, Faust, Packer, Ballard, Oaks, Nelson, etc), know damn well the entire past of Mormonism and they don't care one whit, what condemnation comes upon their flock of sheep, due to their past horrific teachings and condemnations of all other religions and people in them. The top dogs know they deserve it and don't care that the innocents don't deserve it, thus why they never issue apologies or corrections on themselves.

Look, if all of my family still loved me, none of my friends cut me out of their life; I'd still be pissed, doing what I'm doing, because of the wrong done to me and so many others. Those other events are just proof to me that what I'm saying and discovering is true. It shows me what Mormonism has done to literally fry the minds of these otherwise normal people(or so I thought).

The fact that the Mormon Hierarchy has lied to me, my family, friends and everyone else out there that is a Mormon, is plenty of fuel for my fire, believe you me. The fact that the Mormon missionaries(52,000 +) are out there recruiting and lying to more people everyday, telling a bogus fairy tale, which is destroying and dividing families, is enough for me to know that what I'm doing is not only necessary, but very needed and justified in every way.

As I've said before...maybe when they call home ALL of their missionaries...I can back off, but as Ballard says, it doesn't even matter if they are killed or injured, and that they won't come home until the great Jehovah says so, because that's what Joe that means NEVER and so as long as I have breath, I will do what I'm doing. I mean hey, let's face it, 52,000 missionaries supported by Jesus Christ himself, Versus 1 anti-Christ disease germ, full of darkness, supported by Satan; what are they so afraid of anyway...they should be able to crush me, right? LOL!!

I appreciate everyone's comments and participation both here and in the Skypecast, as it was quite enlightening and even shocking at times. I have much more to say, but this is it for now.

Take care everyone,


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 11:53:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Samuel, thanks for the response. I didn't mean to imply that it was as simple as just waking up and deciding you don't want to be a mormon anymore, sorry it came out that way. It does make more sense to me, the more I read, why you are angry. I don't agree with you at all, but I am understanding you more.

Hey, I looked into the other quote you gave me (the Brigham Young is a racist one), and isn't it possible that you (and others) could be misinterpreting him? Just before that quote, Brigham Young says,

"The rank, rabid abolitionists, whom I call black-hearted Republicans, have set the whole national fabric on fire. Do you know this, Democrats? They have kindled the fire that is raging now from the north to the south, and from the south to the north. I am no abolitionist. Neither am I a proslavery man; I hate some of their principles and especially some of their conduct, as I do the gates of hell. The Southerners make the negroes, and the Northerners worship them; this is all the difference between slaveholders and abolitionists. I would like the President of the United States and all the world to hear this.

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so. The nations of the earth have transgressed every law that God has given, they have changed the ordinances and broken every covenant made with the fathers, and they are like a hungry man that dreameth that he eateth, and he awaketh and behold he is empty.

The following saying of the prophet is fulfilled: "Now also many nations are gathered against thee, that say, let her be defiled, and let our eye look upon Zion. But they know not the thoughts of the Lord, neither understand they his counsel; for he shall gather them as the sheaves into the floor. Arise and thrash O daughter of Zion, &c." God rules in the armies of Heaven and does his pleasure upon the earth, and no man can help it. Who can stay the hand of Jehovah, or turn aside the providences of the Almighty? I say to all men and all women, submit to God, to his ordinances and to His rule; serve Him, and cease your quarrelling, and stay the shedding of each other's blood.

If the Government of the United States, in Congress assembled, had the right to pass an anti-polygamy bill, they had also the right to pass a law that slaves should not be abused as they have been; they had also a right to make a law that negroes should be used like human beings, and not worse than dumb brutes. For their abuse of that race, the whites will be cursed, unless they repent."

Isn't it possible that when he said, "the seed of Cain," Brigham Young was not actually referring to black people? That when he said, "in regard to the African Race," he was referring to the war between the North and South, what would happen to the blacks as a result of it, and which side the mormons would stand on? That by "the seed of Cain," he was referring to those evil WHITES, who were abusive and cruel towards the blacks? It really doesn't make any sense the way you (and others) have interpreted it. Why would Brigham Young be giving this whole speech about the government, the issue of slavery, and the politics of the time, and just throw in a, "by the way, if you marry a black person you'll drop dead..." right in the middle of his speech?

Just a thought. Anyway, I do appreciate you (and everyone else) answering my questions. I don't agree with the work you're doing here, strongly disagree with most of your views, but I am understanding it more, and it helps.


ps - what kind of missionary were you, if you don't mind my asking? There are those who strictly follow the handbook and every single rule, no matter what.... and there are those who lost the handbook before they even got out of the mtc.... and there are those who were somewhere in the middle. I was somewhere in the middle....

"lost the handbook" ---------------------------------me---------------------------------------------------------------------------"strict handbook follower"

Just curious....

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 1:16:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

One more thing.... you mentioned the church leaders telling the members to "run away" from antimormons and all the other things the leadership has said on the subject... the way I always interpreted that type of counsel was that a member should not pick fights with anti groups, or try to debate doctrine and such because the extreme intense feelings on both sides would only ignite anger on both sides, and invite contention and ugliness and fighting.... basically all the things that drive the spirit away. Personally, I don't offend easily, so I don't think anything of coming here and asking questions and occasionally trying to share my side of things.

I was once told that rules were made for those too weak to recognize their limits.... the catch being that on certain things (addictive things especially), we wouldn't know until it's too late, that we have a limit or a weakness. So since you don't know which rules you're exempt from, everyone follows the rules. Something like that anyway. It made more sense in my head! Anyway, I do think there is a huge difference between following the letter of the law, verses following the spirit of the law. A very simple example: You'll never catch me in the fast lane on the interstate doing exactly the speedlimit simply because we were taught to obey the laws of the land -- you'll get yourself killed if you try to do that! The spirit of the law would be to go with the flow of traffic, which means if everyone is doing 10-15 over, you go with it. Personally, I need the boundaries set by the speed limits, because I absolutely LOVE to drive fast, and I am prideful (and stupid) enough to believe that I am such a good driver, my driving 125 mph down the interstate couldn't possibly get anyone killed, so there was a time in my life when I was irrepsonsible and stupid and thought nothing of driving at excessive speeds. It was quite the adrenaline rush, and great stress relief at the time. Several tickets, a lot of money and a whole bunch of defensive driving classes (and many, many years) later, I finally learned the error of my ways and to avoid yet another ticket, I keep it right around 10 over. Am I being completely defiant and disobedient to my church leaders, who say to "obey the laws of the land," by going ten over the speed limit??? I guess that's up to each individual to decide for themselves.

Anyway, just some more thoughts I had today.

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 3:08:00 PM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is THE FLAT NOSE AND BLACK SKIN. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race-that they should be the "servant of servants;" and they will be, until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree. How long is that race to endure the dreadful curse that is upon them? That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof. Until the last ones of the residue of Adam's children are brought up to that favourable position, the children of Cain cannot receive the first ordinances of the Priesthood. They were the first that were cursed, and they will be the last from whom the curse will be removed. When the residue of the family of Adam come up and receive their blessings, then the curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will receive blessings in like proportion."(Remarks of Brigham Young, made in the Salt Lake City, Utah Tabernacle on October 9, 1859.)

Any doubt now that Brigham Young was referring to blacks as the "seed of Cain?" The other quote was given on March 8, 1863, was about 31/2 years later. Brigham Young clearly believed that blacks were the "seed of Cain" and you know it and we all know it. To try to deny it is absolutely ridiculous and laughable and you know it M.A. This doctrine was taught by many, especially Brigham Young.

Briggy may have rambled on and mixed some subjects with others, but he said exactly what he meant, whether it was in context with whatever else he said. I could go on all day long with comments made in the tabernacle by Briggy and others regarding blacks being the "seed of Cain." Are you really, seriously going to try and deny it M.A.? Do you actually need more quotes? Is this quote "taken out of context" too? Give me a break!!


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 3:51:00 PM, Anonymous Galatian said...

It's sickening how cognitive dissonance works. We could go on and on all day long about the racist quotes from Brigham Young and the church about Blacks, Natives, Chinese, etc. I could pull up a dozen quotes right now ... but I'm too damn tired, and obviously the TBM "research" was done on a bias of making Young look good - not getting at the truth. It even says in the POGP that the Blacks are descended from Cain.

I mean ... is that quote ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO MAKE BRIGHAM YOUNG LOOK GOOD? He calls them "rank, rabid, abolitionists and blackhearted republicans" ... so what if he mixes in a few other things. He claims to not be pro-slavery, but really it's either one or the other. Either you are ANTI-SLAVERY (an abolitionist)or you are PRO-SLAVERY in the fact that you don't detest it or fight against it. You can't be both. You can only be one or the other.
And he calls abolitionists rabid, rank, blackhearted who are widening the divide in America .... where's the "inspiration"??? Where's God telling him slavery is wrong and to help end it?

Brigham Young essentially taught that Blacks were cursed, inferior, disgusting, and that inter-racial marriage was FORBIDDEN and anyone doing it would die. He was anti-abolitionist and he wasn't anti-slavery, it's just that he thought that the Blacks should be treated better as slaves ... because they were cursed to be slaves (the curse of Cain and Ham) and to be the 'servant of servants' therefore it was God's will and it was their proper place in society ... but we must still treat them as humanely as possible (for a slave) because they too, could know the gospel eventually ... a long time from now when the curses had been lifted, although they certainly could never have the priesthood.

Do some ACTUAL research ... REAL reserach that isn't purely apologetics ... and that is what you will find. Of coure, BY was a lot more disgusting than that ... I'm just trying to put it as politely and nicely as I can so that your TBM mind might actually believe me and go research for yourself!

Brigham Young was a disgusting, vile, dispicable man and murderer. Meanwhile, while we're on this topic ... can you justify/explain his killing squads???

How do you explain this:

“I am here to answer. I shall be on hand to answer when I am called upon, for all the counsel and for all the instruction that I have given to this people. If there is an Elder here, or any member of this Church, called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who can bring up the first idea, the first sentence that I have delivered to the people as counsel that is wrong, I really wish they would do it; but they cannot do it, for the simple reason that I have never given counsel that is wrong; this is the reason.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 16, page 161.)


“I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them into the celestial kingdom…I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 95.)

So when Brigham Young was talking about murdering a cheating wife (javelin through the heart), blacks being the seed of Cain, cursed, and his false prophecies, blood atonement, Adam-God theory (which he preached from the pulpits and which the main-body practiced/believed) ... since Brigham Young was ACTING AS A PROPHET, SPEAKING AS A PROPHET, and declaring just as much ---- we can assume, since he's obviously a prohet of God - that all those teachings, doctrines, theories, lessons and sermons were correct???!!!

Wow ... that's some real 'mental gymnastics' for the TBM mind!!!

How do you explain this to me??? You claim that you aren't whitewashing or justifying anything, or in cog-dis ... yet ... Brigham Young had killing squads, ordered (or at least condoned) the MMM, preached Blood-Atonement, taught that Adam was God, taught that Adam, God and Jesus all had polygamous wives, taught that no man could enter the Celestial kingdom unless he practiced polygamy, taught that blacks were cursed to be slaves and the descendants of Cain ... and he claimed that this was all true, that he spoke as a prophet of God and that his scripture (printed, approved sermons) were as good as scripture "in the Bible" ... so obviously you believe BY is a prophet of God, was inspired, was speaking as a prophet .... and is telling the truth, since this is God's church ....

wow. Do you really believe that Adam was God? That he had multiple wives and that they came from another planet??? Do you truly believe that black people (particularly Africans) are the cursed seed of Cain?? Do you believe that Blood Atonement (and the people BY ordered murdered) were truly atoning for their sins in an act of righteous principle???
If yes ... you are beyond help and I suggest you seek medical attention and therapy right away. If NO, that means these doctrines were false ... and that Brigham Young preached falsehood (calling it scripture, stating it was of God, and that he was not wrong and speaking as a prophet of God) and therefore your precious psychopath Brigham Young was NOT a prophet, was not inspired, and was a liar.

So which is it?

Tell me ... I'd love to hear how you're going to justify this, twist this around, and find excuses for this ... it should be more amusing than ever!!!

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:10:00 PM, Anonymous Galatian said...

I just thought I'd put this on as well:

That's the link to an incredibly brave woman and her story, from a note she left me on my blog.
Also, someone mentioned to me that my story got posted on, and when I checked it out there was another LDS adoption story on there ... it amazed me how similar our stories were - even though this woman gave her child up for adoption 15 YEARS AGO!

It just goes to show the church hasn't changed one bit, and never will. Only some surface stuff will they change ... from social pressure, laws, and the need to conform to get more converts ... but truly, most stuff will never change, they will never renounce it or apologize or anything ... it will just remain "deep doctrine" still taught in the church after years of indoctrination. Sad.

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:27:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

No doubt, we need limitations. But to what extent should our every thought and action be dictated for us? I feel exactly the same way about rules. Even as a TBM, I seriously felt that the mission rules were in place because all the Elders were stupid and couldn't function without being told exactly what to do every minute of the day. I always thought that missionaries relied on the spirit to make decisions, but my mission experience taught me otherwise. Screw the spirit... just follow the hand book. I seriously felt that following the spirit was discouraged on my mission. I was right around where you were on the "lost the hand book - strict handbook follower". This was because I knew, even though I was told many times that the rules were "inspired", that they were just control tactics. I never once, believed that they were inspired and that I was rebelling against the prophet for not strictly following them. That is because the whole concept contradicts every thing that Mormons teach... follow your feelings.

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:09:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh great.... ADAM is God??? Dang, and all this time I thought Joseph Smith was! Or is Joseph Smith supposed to be the Savior? I always get confused....

Galatians, you admonished me to do some REAL research, but how and where? If you want to find negative things about the church, you "research" antimormon sites and literature. If you want to find positive things about the church, you "research" LDS based sites and literature. But where's the middle ground???

I just decided to read the entire talk (speech, whatever) Brigham Young gave when he made the racist remarks, and those were the conclusions I came to. While we're on the subject, when Brigham Young said, "The rank, rabid abolitionists, whom I call black-hearted Republicans...." I understood that he was referring to a particular group of abolitionists, not abolitionists as a whole.

For the record, I have agreed from the beginning, that the church does have a racist history.

I have a very close friend who is black. She is smart, funny, successful, and just amazing all around. She's not a member of the church, by the way, but we have had many discussions on the subject. She remarked to me one day, when the subject of blacks being cursed came up, that doesn't it seem like maybe they are? That they have had to work a lot harder to succeed, there is a huge majority of them living in horrible violent circumstances, they're constantly feeling like they have something to prove.... it was interesting to hear her spin on it. My understanding of what the early leaders of the church meant regarding the cursing of blacks, fits more into this category. That yeah, things are going to be a whole lot harder for them, but not impossible. I've never considered (or been taught that) a person to be inferior, or lowly, or less of a person, simply because of the color of their skin. This woman I mentioned, she's my hero. I would be grateful to be even half the person she is. Anyway, don't know if that helped you guys understand more where I'm coming from, but I tried.

Please tell me the source of the Adam-God teachings, because I have heard it before, and would love to look into it (so I can give my apologist white washed version of it, of course!). And the one about the killing squads too, cause I've never heard of that one before. Also, do any of you know if there is a middle ground concerning mormon history? Because you've got to at least admit that some (but not ALL) of your research has been done through sites and literature that are kind of biased against the church, which really makes it hard for people like myself to believe it all.

Anyway, I know it's hard for you to believe that I'm sincere, given the crap you've had to listen to from others - so thanks again for taking the time to answer my questions.


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:13:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ps - Ray, did you ever just want to smack your companions upside the head with your handbook????? I can't even begin to tell you how many times I had to bite my tongue, give a vacant look, and big smile, and just say "Okay Sister Cheese, whatever you say." Because it was either that, or I was the DEVIL!!!! But not all my comps were like that.... just the chosen few sent to make me NUTS!!! LOL!

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:46:00 PM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...

"Galatians, you admonished me to do some REAL research, but how and where? If you want to find negative things about the church, you "research" ANTIMORMON sites and literature. If you want to find positive things about the church, you "research" LDS based sites and literature. But where's the middle ground???"

How and where? Are you that clueless? So M.A. you CLEARLY consider "The Journal Of Discourses" to be anti-Mormon literature and where they are posted on the web, to be an anti-Mormon website. That's amazing!! I wonder why Jesus' Deseret book sells anti-Mormon literature and quotes so often from it in General Conference? A little strange, isn't it? 99% of the things we quote come from "official Mormon sources", so get your facts straight and quit embarrassing yourself and looking so uneducated on the matter. Are you just playing dumb?

The following statement appears in the preface to volume 8, page iii:

"The Journal of Discourses deservedly ranks as one of the STANDARD WORKS of the Church, and every rightminded Saint will certainly welcome with joy every Number as it comes forth from the press as an additional reflector of "the light that shines from Zion's hill."

Please provide the quote that repudiates the above statement, that the JOD are "STANDARD WORKS" OF THE MORMON CHURCH.

Then again, who gives a shit, right? I mean there is nothing uninspired that has ever left the lips of a Mormon GA, because they CAN'T EVER lead you astray without GOD REMOVING THEM, RIGHT?

Brigham Young also said, regarding Joseph Smith:

"If he acts like a devil, he has brought forth a doctrine that will save us, if we will abide it. He may get drunk every day of his life, sleep with his neighbor's wife every night, run horses and gamble, I do not care anything about that, for I never embrace any man in my faith. But the doctrine he has produced will save you and me, and the whole world; and if you can find fault with that, find it."( - Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, p.77 (November 9, 1856)

I'm assuming that those words would accurately and perfectly sum up your opinion on Joe, Briggy, Hinckley and every other GA that has ever lived, right? I'm basing that on your pathetic attempts to excuse every bad word or thing they've ever done. Who gives a shit what they do, say or preach as doctrine, because hey, the church is true and your bosom is on FIRE BABY!! Right?!!

I feel sorry for you, I really do!!


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 5:57:00 PM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...

Oh yeah and thanks Galatians for your comments!! I second you and everything you said, 1000%!!

It's a complete waste of time to try to penetrate the deep layers of Mormon brainwashing. I think M.A. is far beyond help at this point and has no desire to understand us at all and so I ask; what the hell is he doing here, other than trying to piss us off and just be an ass in defending and justifying every single horrific word and teaching of the Mormon Prophets and Prophets.

If he wants a pro-Mormon lovefest...he ain't gonna find it here...then he gets offended at our outrage...what a joke!! I think you belong over on the FARMS and FAIR sites, don't you M.A.? Yeah, I'd be so shocked if I went into FAIR and found people angry and passionate against me. GIVE ME A BREAK!! I wouldn't last one post!!


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 7:39:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Samuel, Samuel, how I adore you! Here's me, sincerely asking if you know of a non biased source to look at mormon history, and here's you turning it into something completely not what I said.... again. Of course the Journal of Discourse is mormon based literature, and if you read it on antimormon sites, it's negative mormon literature. If you read it on mormon sites, it's positive mormon literature. My question was if you know of OTHER sources to look. As my three year old would say, DUH!

You never cease to amuse me with your ability to make everything I say fit into your little mold of brainwashed cult worshippers. It's a gift, I tell ya! Hey, have you ever considered politics??? I think you'd be good at it (maybe you could team up with Mitt! LOL!). So what exactly did I say that made you think I'd gotten offended??? I can assure you, you can't possibly offend me. That wasn't a challenge or anything.... it's just one of the reasons I like coming here. I find it fascinating to hear your side of things. And the research into the church's history is so interesting. Again, the problem I am having is finding a NON-BIASED source. So again, I'll ask, do you (anyone here) know of any NON-BIASED sources to look??? Thanks again for your time (and the laughs!).


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 7:47:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ps - Just so you don't read more into it than what was meant.... when I said you couldn't possibly offend me, I was NOT saying anything about YOU personally.... I just don't offend easily. I was a teacher for several years, and had some of the meanest nastiest kids you'd ever meet in my classes, and I learned quick not to get offended by things. That was all I meant by that.... absolutely said nothing about superiority, nothing about you're all going to hell.... absolutely don't believe either of those.... I only meant that I don't offend easily.

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 8:08:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

You can't even know how bad I wanted to punch a few companions square in the nose. Although I disagreed with the rules, I always used to tell myself that one day I would understand why they were there and why certain companions acted a certain way. As I look back, the only thing I understand is that I was right and my comps were nothing but control freaks and completely dependent on the system. One of my "favorite" companions prophesied that I would eventually leave the church. My other "favorite" companion told me I had a $10 testimony.

The problem with a religious debate of any kind is that it is nearly impossible to find an un-biased source. For example, it is impossible to not be biased when talking about Joseph Smith. Either people adore him or despise him. Even someone who tries to give a neutral evaluation will tend to lean one way or the other.

It's like a court hearing. You have two lawyers. One tries to convince the jury why the defendant is innocent and one tries to prove why he is guilty. There is no neutral ground. The jury has to take the two extreme cases presented to them and make a decision. Both lawyers will provide valid arguments that strongly support their claim.

Gotta go for now

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 8:54:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Ray,
You know, it's funny, but every single person I knew at the end of my mission kept saying I'd be married within three months of going home (six months was the longest anyone gave me). I had this huge big ego and was really thinking I was hot stuff. Then when I had my last mission president's interview, he said something like, "Not everyone gets married right away. You should focus on your education right now." Talk about a slap in the face! I figured he was just saying that because he was new (only been president for about 4 months I think) and he didn't like me because I didn't strictly follow the rules. Needless to say, I didn't follow his counsel, and played around for a few years before I realized he might actually have been inspired.... (I was 28 when I got married). Anyway, isn't it funny how some people just know things??? Maybe coincidence, maybe not.... You know, I didn't really disagree with most of the rules, I actually do see the wisdom in most of them.... but there were some that were just obviously put there for the completely stupid. Those were the ones easiest to find the loopholes in! How were your baptisms? Not asking for numbers, just curious about the members you met and taught and baptised. Did they become/remain active? Just curious.

I hadn't really considered it before, but it makes sense what you said, about a religious debate being like a court hearing. I guess for me, I don't really want to try to PROVE my side, and don't really expect anyone here to ever agree with anything I say.... ever.... but I do want people to know that not all mormons are the same. Anyway, you've given me more to think about.


At Sunday, March 11, 2007 9:14:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

I won't disclose where I went on my mission, but I will say it was in the eastern US. I had a grand total of ONE convert and I got transferred before he got baptized. The last time we were in contact, which was about 2 years ago, he was still active.

I had to end my last comment because I had an unexpected visitor...

So, you have to evaluate the good stories about Joseph Smith vs. the negative stories and make the decision for yourself. If you ever find a source that really is unbiased, please let me know as I would love to see it.

On top of the negative dirt on JS, I am very logical minded. Is it really possible that three dead guys (Peter, James, & John) appeared and gave him the priesthood? Most likely no. Just think about how many natural laws are violated by that story and many others like it.

Why would god create the world and set up the natural laws that govern it, only to break those laws? God is perfect and follows his own laws so dead people can't come back to life, no one can walk on liquid water, no one can command the elements and move mountains... it just doesn't happen and that is why it is so clear to me that not only is Mormonism false, Christianity is false too.

Yes, Brigham Young taught the Adam-God theory, not once, not twice, but for many, many years and even incorporated it into the temple ceremony. Now if you ask me, that is serious false doctrine. So putting two and two together, I come up with 4 which means that since BY taught false doctrine he was a false prophet. It's simple.

There is no mental gymnastics. There is no confusion. There is no making excuses for this and that... it is just simple logic: if the cake is brown, it is probably chocolate.

And that is where I am coming from.

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 9:58:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks Ray, I appreciate your comments. What exactly is the Adam-god theory? I've heard of it, but have never looked into it.... I'd like to though.

I actually can see where you're coming from with the whole logic thing. But doesn't it get depressing? I mean, if you take God out of it, what the heck are we here for? Note: I did NOT say if you take the mormon God out, I said God, meaning, a general all knowing omniscient being.... And sorry if I read too much into what you said (maybe I've been hanging out here too long! LOL!).


ps- you totally made me hungry for chocolate cake!

At Sunday, March 11, 2007 11:03:00 PM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...


How clear do I have to be for you to comprehend it? The site I'm using to show the quotes from the JOD, is not anti-Mormon, it is just a site with all of the volumes of the JOD scanned in. I have personally verified every Goddamn quote I've posted, at my local library, in the "OFFICIAL" JOD. If you think we are just posting made-up, fabricated, anti-Mormon bullshit, from an anti-Mormon site, wake up and smell your hot chocolate!!

The quotes are real, they are 100% accurate and factual, so either deal with them and accept them as they are, or reject them with reasons why they are false, along with the ramifications. If these type of "OFFICIAL" sources don't work for you, than NOTHING will and we are just wasting our time.

M.A., why don't you tell us your real purpose for being here, since you claim to not want to defend your cause and cult, yet that's all you are doing. Just be honest or get lost!!

Brigham Young also said:

"For unbelievers we will quote from the Scriptures - 'Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.' Again - 'Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God.'

I will now give my scripture -'Whosoever confesseth that Joseph Smith was sent of God to reveal the holy Gospel to the children of men, and lay the foundation for gathering Israel, and building up the kingdom of God on the earth, that spirit is of God; and every spirit that does not confess that God has sent Joseph Smith, and revealed the everlasting Gospel to and through him, is of Antichrist, no matter whether it is found in a pulpit or on a throne, nor how much divinity it may profess, nor what it professes with regard to revealed religion and the account that is given of the Saviour and his Father in the Bible. They may say that they acknowledge Him until doomsday, and he will never own them, nor bestow the Holy Spirit upon them, and they will never have visions of eternity opened to them, unless they acknowledge that Joseph Smith is sent of God. Such people I call unbelievers. They tell about believing in Jesus Christ, but they might as well talk about birds understanding the Hebrew language. This statement is no more positive than true.'"(JOD 8:176 September 9, 1860)

You've never heard of Adam-God? Really? I don't believe you for a second, but I'll humor you and play along anyway, because maybe it will enlighten somebody reading this, that truly doesn't know.

Brigham Young said, regarding Adam being God:

"The question has been, and is often, asked, who it was that begat the Son of the Virgin Mary. The infidel world have concluded that if what the Apostles wrote about his father and mother be true, and the present marriage discipline acknowledged by Christendom be correct then Christians must believe that God is the father of an illegitimate son, in the person of Jesus Christ! The infidel fraternity teach that to their disciples. I will tell you how it is. Our Father in Heaven begat all the spirits that ever were, or ever will be, upon this earth; and they were born spirits in the eternal world. Then the Lord by His power and wisdom organized the mortal tabernacle of man. We were made first spiritual, and afterwards temporal.

Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, ONE OF HIS WIVES, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken - HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the ONLY GOD with whom WE have to do. Every man upon the earth, professing Christians or non-professing, MUST HEAR IT, and WILL KNOW IT SOONER OR LATER. They came here, organized the raw material, and arranged in their order the herbs of the field, the trees, the apple, the peach, the plum, the pear, and every other fruit that is desirable and good for man; the seed was brought from another sphere, and planted in this earth. The thistle, the thorn, the brier, and the obnoxious weed did not appear until after the earth was cursed. When Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, their bodies became mortal from its effects, and therefore their offspring were mortal. When the Virgen Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession. I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and over-righteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone. I have heard men preach upon the divinity of Christ, and exhaust all the wisdom they possessed. All Scripturalists, and approved theologians who were considered exemplary for piety and education, have undertaken to expound on this subject, in every age of the Christian era; and after they have done all, they are obliged to conclude by exclaiming "great is the mystery of godliness," and tell nothing.

It is true that the earth was organized by three distinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah, and Michael, these three forming a quorum, as in all heavenly bodies, and in organizing element, perfectly represented in the Deity, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Again, they will try to tell how the divinity of Jesus is joined to his humanity, and exhaust all their mental faculties, and wind up with this profound language, as describing the soul of man, "it is an immaterial substance!" What a learned idea! Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the SAME character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they WILL PROVE THEIR SALVATION OR DAMNATION.

I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told. Now, remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ WAS NOT begotten by the Holy Ghost.(JOD 1:50-51-April 9, 1852)

He also said:

That reminds me that brother Joseph B. Nobles once told a Methodist priest, after hearing him describe his god, that the god they worshipped was the "Mormons'" Devil - a being without a body, whereas our God has a body, parts, and passions. The Devil was cursed and sent down from heaven. He has no body of his own; therefore he is constantly endeavouring to obtain possession of the tabernacles belonging to others. Some have grumbled because I believe our God to be so near to us as Father Adam. There are many who know that doctrine to be true. Where was Michael in the creation of this earth? Did he have a mission to the earth? He did. Where was he? In the Grand Council, and performed the mission assigned him there. Now, if it should happen that we have to pay tribute to Father Adam, what a humiliating circumstance it would be! Just wait till you pass Joseph Smith; and after Joseph lets you pass him, you will find Peter; and after you pass the Apostles and many of the Prophets, you will find Abraham, and he will say, "I have the keys, and except you do thus and so, you cannot pass;" and after a while you come to Jesus; and when you at length meet Father Adam, how strange it will appear to your present notions. If we can pass Joseph and have him say, "Here; you have been faithful, good boys; I hold the keys of this dispensation; I will let you pass;" then we shall be very glad to see the white locks of Father Adam. But those are ideas which do not concern us at present, although it is written in the Bible - "This is eternal life, to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."(JOD 5:331-332-October 7, 1857)


"I do not marvel that the world is clad in mystery, to them He is an unknown God; they cannot tell where He dwells nor how He lives, nor what kind of a being He is in appearance or character. They want to become acquainted with His character and attributes, but they know nothing of them. This is in consequence of the apostacy that is now in the world. They have departed from the knowledge of God, transgressed His laws, changed His ordinances, and broken the everlasting covenant, so that the whole earth is defiled under the inhabitants thereof. Consequently it is no mystery to us that the world knoweth not God, but it would be a mystery to me, with what I now know, to say; that we cannot know anything of Him. We are His children. [...summary of the history of the human race...] Thus you may continue and trace the human family back to Adam and Eve, and ask, "are we of the same species with Adam and Eve?" Yes, every person acknowledges this; this comes within the scope of our understanding.

But when we arrive at that point, a vail is dropt, and our knowledge is cut off. Were it not so, you could trace back your history to the Father of our spirits in the eternal world. He is a being of the same species as ourselves; He lives as we do, except the difference that we are earthly, and He is heavenly. He has been earthly, and is of precisely the same species of being that we are. Whether Adam is the personage that we should consider our heavenly Father, or not, is considerable of a mystery to a good many. I do not care for one moment how that is; it is no matter whether we are to consider Him our God, or whether His Father, or His Grandfather, for in either case we are of one species - of one family - and Jesus Christ is also of our species."(JOD 4:217-218-February 8, 1857)

Digest those "ANTI-MORMON" quotes(from the Mormon APPROVED JOD), that I've provided(since you're too lazy to look them up yourself and supposedly know nothing about it), regarding the Adam-God doctrine and teaching, if you even care to, and then get back to us.

Then again, your bosom is on fire, the church is true, horny Joe was a Prophet and none of this even matters to you or was ever really said, so I'll ask again; what the hell are you doing here?


At Monday, March 12, 2007 12:04:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So are the skypecasts going to be at 8 Eastern Time or 10 or what time?

I actually liked the later start time (10 PM Eastern Time or whatever). I'm in the Eastern timezone by the way and the later time allows me a chance to hear it (of course if they're going to be 5 hours long I guess it doesn't matter).

So what's the scoop on a time for the live podcast?


At Monday, March 12, 2007 12:50:00 AM, Anonymous Galatian said...

Really, it can't get much more simple than it is. Nothing will be good enough for M.A. or any other TBM.

Firstly, there's the Journal of Discourses ... a church-approved book, sold at Deseret bookstores and available online.

Secondly, there are researchable scanned documents that can be viewed/looked up online - pertaining to the mormons in the 1800's/1900's and their legal disputes, court records, etc.

Thirdly, there are non-bias LDS and non-LDS parties with mountains of evidence regarding: The Abraham book (papyri), Kinderhook plates, Mountain Meadows Massacre and a huge variety of other topics. All one has to do is read the research, view the evidences, studies and conclusions drawn by the experts -- and make a logical opinion.

Nextly, there are LOADS of old books that can be downloaded online for free ... written by mormons who were alive during Joseph Smith and Brigham Young's era - who were part of the church and interacted with the leadership.
Good examples are "Mormonism Unveiled" the confessions of John D. Lee (a hitman, murderer for Brigham Young) and "Brigham's Destroying Angel: the life, confessions and disclosures of Bill Hickman" ... another one of Briggy's henchmen who murdered on his orders.
Then there's the "address to all believers in Christ" by David Whitmer. As well as a slew of other terrifically written books by researchers, former members, current members etc., of the EARLY CHURCH when these things took place.

All you have to do is type in the information on google and you can look up the J of D, these online books and more. Or documents, records, etc. On my blog I have listed a handful of excellent free, online books that I encourage and URGE everyone to read.

But of course ... it's all "anti-mormon" material ... therefore you won't actually bother to truly view it or research it. How are the bad quotes in the Journal of Discourses "anti-mormon" or cherrypicked? They are in the CHURCH APPROVED BOOK!!! I don't deny any good teachings or sermons or better passages in the book ... and yet why do others deny/ignore/justify the ugliness in the book? How would it profit me to disprove mormonism if I only quoted the fluffy flowery things? of course I am going to show the AWFUL SKELETONS to PROVE MY POINT that the church is false!!! That's why i know it's false -- because of fake prophets and heretical teachings!!! WHICH ARE PROVEN IN THE JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES!

Then we have the testimony of men who knew and interacted with JS and BY firsthand - but oh, you won't believe them! It's all "anti-mormon" and they must be "lying" or something right???! God forbid they say anything bad or TRUTHFUL about your precious Briggy or JOE SMITH!!!!!

The truth is, it really doesn't matter what endless records, quotes or information is at your disposal - or even if we spend hours, days, weeks researching and give you all the evidnece ... you will simply dismiss it.
Samuel is right - why bother trying to penetrate your TBM brainwashed skull?? At least most people haven't heard this stuff, and when they do, common sense KICKS IN and they realize the OBVIOUS TRUTH.

Some, such as yourself -- know most of the facts (if not all) but justify, ignore, live in denial, and excuse everything in the past... even knowing THE TRUTH OF THINGS! That is truly sick. For someone who knows the facts and continually visits this blog and reads the truth ... to continue in this Cog-Dis is just sickening, and in my opinion, at this moment ... you are beyond help.

And I think it is absolutely DISGUSTING AND REPULSIVE the example you used with your friend. It's not that "maybe the black community TRULY IS CURSED ... because look at all the bad things that have befallen them" -- that's just your sick, brainwashed, indocrinated SUBTLE RACISM TBM MIND kicking in!

The reason blacks suffer ... starvation, poverty, AIDS in Africa, ghettos and unequal treatment in the USA, etc. .... is a history of abuse, neglect and a downtrodden and suppressed people because of SLAVERY, RACISM, INJUSTICE, INEQUALITY, SEGREGATION ... on and on. It's not a divine "cursing" from God!!! It's because of sick, twisted EVIL BASTARDS like Brigham Young, like the slave owners, like those that have hurt and condemned these people for hundreds of years! THAT IS THE TRUE CAUSE OF THEIR SUFFERING ... not a curse by the Almighty! SICK!!!!

It's truly a sad statement that your black friend might have even considered it for a moment (guess that is our modern society's values seeping into the mindset)and that you would even have dared to write it in here ... as if a comment by your black friend somehow gives you more credibility in your defense/justifying/apologetics!!

Maybe if people hadn't spoken to your friend (like the church does) and if society didn't act the way they do towards black people - in all parts of the world - she would be more proud of her heritage and never think/believe/muse/consider/think-aloud that this "curse" could even be theoretically possible! Shame on you for using this poor example ... it's just another subtle example of your own racism (even if you don't consciously realize it) and the CHURCH's racist influence on those that would try to make excuses, become apologetics, or somehow downplay its significance.


SO yeah, there are tons or resources out there ... and anyone that studies them should come to an OBVIOUS conclusion ... if they can't ... there is probably no help for them.

And yes, Brigham Young (as shown perfectly in the Journal of Discourses) was a racist, murdering psychopathic bastard who literally makes me nauseous to think about!

You want to learn more about the Adam-God theory? READ THE JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES! Take it out at your church library!

Want to learn about THE DANITES and other killing squads??? READ THE BOOKS WRITTEN BY MEN WHO RAN THE SQUADS AND CONFESSED EVERYTHING! Read the research by historians ... actually STUDY!

But I think that Samuel is right ... you are making excuses. You are being intellectually dishonest and cowardly by not facing the facts, not facing the truth, not doing genuine research and claiming ignorance on matters which this blog has repeated on NUMEROUS OCCASSIONS.

Do whatever you please. But by playing the nice guy and apologist and trying to appear reasonable and making excuses for church history in your own little TBM way ... you're not fooling anybody here. Not ex-mormons, not soon-to-be-ex-mormons, and not even real mormons who can plainly discover the facts for themselves. NICE TRY.

This is the new breed of TBM mormon apologist ... nicer, politer, slicker, greasier ... still the same mentality, still the same excuses, still the same beliefs ... just a different apologetics aproach and smoother style of defense. It ain't fooling me, and it still makes me as sick as the crazed, yelling swearing TBM's. There's really no difference in my eyes.

At Monday, March 12, 2007 3:34:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

"I actually can see where you're coming from with the whole logic thing. But doesn't it get depressing? I mean, if you take God out of it, what the heck are we here for?"

Someone else asked me that very same question yesterday and this is what I told them...

When you are a Mormon, you think you know everything (no offense) but you really do feel that you have the answers to all the questions that man has been asking for thousands of years.

At first, yes, it was depressing, at least for me. I had based my life and everything I did and believed on the idea that god was there. People cling to religion because it is comforting, even if it is just an illusion, it is a wonderful illusion.

So now that I am out, I have realized that it is okay for me to say, "I don't know". I believe in a higher power but not necessarially "god". I just realized that I should not be counting on some dude who lives on another planet to save me and solve all my problems for me. I have everything I do because I worked for it; I earned it.

And really, since I kicked god out of my life, nothing is different. I have a fairly happy family, I am getting good grades in school, there is enough money to pay the bills. I really can't explain it but it is liberating when I realize that I can take the credit for all the good things that happen to me because of my choices, not god. I've waited long enough for god to speak to me. And since he never has spoken to me, I can only assume that either he isn't there, or I'm supposed to find my own path.

So, yes, at first it was depressing but now it is exhilirating. Whatever god is, it is the force that gives me life and intelligence. That would be my new definition of god.

As far as the after life, I have no idea. I'll just find out when I go. I believe there is something but I'll just have to wait and find out what it is. If we were meant to know, then life would really have no purpose or meaning. Just live for the now.

Samuel and Galatians, I view M.A. as a sincere TBM who is asking serious questions. She asks the questions and I answer them. She has been respectful so I don't see the need to get all riled up. I could be wrong, like I was with Jose, but I believe in trusting a person until they give me a reason not so, and M.A. has never given me a reason. Are we not here to help TBM's, answer their questions, and support them if they are on the fence? I do not believe she has been disrespectful to anyone in anyway.

At Monday, March 12, 2007 4:42:00 PM, Blogger Samuel the Utahnite said...

Ray, I'm going to have to disagree with you completely on M.A.(after all, we can't agree on everything). I do not believe that he/she(I didn't realize that M.A. had identified herself as a woman-I guess I missed that post) is sincere at all, rather playing a game with us and trying to stir us up.

I agree with the last paragraph of Galatians last post:

"This is the new breed of TBM Mormon apologist ... nicer, politer, slicker, greasier ... still the same mentality, still the same excuses, still the same beliefs ... just a different apologetics approach and smoother style of defense. It ain't fooling me, and it still makes me as sick as the crazed, yelling swearing TBM's. There's really no difference in my eyes.".

AMEN TO THAT Galatians!!

Ray it's fine that you two have gotten along so well and I'm guessing future comments will be mostly between you and M.A., going forward, as I at least, no longer have any desire to explain very basic things that M.A. pretends to not know about or is too damn lazy to look up for themselves.

"Are we not here to help TBM's, answer their questions, and support them if they are on the fence?"

At what point Ray did M.A. express that they are on the fence? I'm not aware of any comments that would have given us this idea, rather the contrary. M.A. keeps saying that NOTHING could affect their testimony, whether it be horrific racism, polygamy, etc, etc and then they go on to defend it, twist it into something else or justify it, which makes me SICK!!

There's no difference to me in talking with Jose vs. M.A. other than M.A. isn't as offensive and accusing us of being professional masturbators. Anyone that can defend or justify the things that M.A. does is not someone that I want to be associated with.

It's all good Ray, I just disagree with you on this one. I do remember that most of you thought I was up the night about Jose too, but maybe I'm just more jaded, realistic and had more experience with the deceptive practices of these TBM apologists, especially after dealing with them for 6 months on YouTube. I used to give them the benefit of the doubt too, but not anymore.

I just don't see any point in repeatedly slamming my head on the wall, trying to explain things to somebody who couldn't give a rat's ass about any of it, because "the church is true" and "Joey was a Prophet." It's a waste of time for me, but have fun and remember that nothing you say about the Mormon church, whether it's true or not, will matter one iota to M.A. or any of the "MORMON APOLOGISTS."

I encourage you Ray, if you need the reminder, to re-read the posts and all of the questions that M.A. completely ignores regularly, just to comment about me personally and my attitude and detract from the real questions that I or Galatians have asked. But that's what Mormon Apologists do best....throw up smoke screens and not answer the questions.

I honestly don't know or understand Ray, how someone defending and justifying what M.A. does, doesn't get you "riled up." I personally find it outrageous as does Galatians and many others out there. There is NO EXCUSE whatsoever, for a lack of human decency and defending the horrific racism of Mormon teachings and history, just to use one example.

Take care,


At Monday, March 12, 2007 5:38:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...


You could be totally right. You've got a lot more experience in this area than I do, and I'll give you that right up front.

I've always said that I expect Mormons to defend their faith, as anyone should. Some people read the quotes in the JOD and it just doesn't strike them as strongly as it does us.

I am not defending M.A. or siding with her against you. I just have seen no hostility on her part and have no reason to believe that she is not sincere in her questions.

She hasn't outright said she was on the fence but she has admitted that many of my comments make very good, convincing points and are thought provoking. She has stated that she still believes in the church and is here asking questions so that she can understand us better. How is that a bad thing? I think we need more understanding between TBM's and ex-Mormons.

I'm not finished but I have to go for now.

At Monday, March 12, 2007 9:04:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey to all of you.... busy day. Interesting posts here. Haven't had a lot of time to read everything, but wanted to take a second and say, Samuel and Galatians, you're wrong about me, my coming to this site has always been with sincere intent to better understand the church, your feelings about it, and why you left. I really don't think you are bad people at all. I do think you have a tendency to read into the things I say and jump to conclusions, but maybe you have to in order to defend yourself against all the other mormons who are so hateful and judging. So whatever.

Ray, just to be clear, I do question the whole history of the church, but I have a lot of doubts as to the validity of the history given here. I'm looking into it though. Life happens and slows me down a lot (I have toddlers who just never stop moving!!!), but I really do want to know. Thanks for what you said. Anyway, life is happening again.


At Monday, March 12, 2007 11:20:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey M.A,

I see that you've fallen foul of Samuel and angels: "since you claim to not want to defend your cause and cult, yet that's all you are doing. Just be honest or get lost!!" ...‘cult’ –how insulting.

You see, as I've said before, you will never convince or help these folks understand anything about the church and its beliefs or how to find a testimony of anything related to the church because they all part from the premise that the church is a fraud, a massive con job for peoples tithing; then everything that comes after this is part of the false world of Mormonism. They will recognize a good thing here and there that Mormons do but at the root of their very existence is this war against the church and especially the prophets and apostles (you can count hundreds of insults to them... liars, thieves etc)

If it weren't so they would just walk away from it, maybe even study Mormonism like maybe a D. Michael Quinn does. Maybe Ray is the closest to the type of honest academic study that Quinn follows, but Samuel is very much a higher ranking member of Lucifer's army now. (And probably for ever)



At Monday, March 12, 2007 11:34:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

I can gurantee one thing, M.A. Samuel's research is very thorough and accurate. He just exposes the 'stuff' that you will never hear in church. If the Mormon church was just honest about it's past, Samuel would have no need to write the things he does. You're just hearing the other half of the story.

So do the research for yourself. Look up the references that Samuel provides. Read it in context and make the decision for yourself. I won't hold it against you at all if you choose to stay Mormon, although I don't understand how anyone can know about all these things and still believe it's all true. That's totally beyond me, but we all have our own views and outlook, and I can't dictate the way you see and intrepret things.

Just let me give you one piece of advice. Be honest with yourself. If you do that, you will find the path that is right for you.

If you prefer to take our conversation private, you can email me at Or if you wish to keep commenting here, that is fine too.

Thank you once again, Samuel, for everything you do.

At Monday, March 12, 2007 11:59:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

Hi John,

You forget one thing... that all of us here were true faithful members of the church for many years and we understand it perfectly. We understand the doctrine (probably better than Hinckley does); we understand the beliefs. We have all given years of service, thousands of tithing dollars, and in most cases, a mission. So it's not like we're all just ignorant morons who know nothing about how the church works. We probably understand it better than you do. Although I was never a teacher (other than my mission) I was, and still am, very knowledgable about the gospel. I could blow people away with answers and expound on things in ways that no one else ever though of. I could quote scriptures and give references right out of my memory. Even as a child, I could answer gospel questions that none of my sunday school classmates could. Not trying to brag here, but just want you to know what you're up against. I am no idiot and neither are any of the regular visiters and posters here.

John, since everyone here pretty much knows what they are talking about, it will be pretty difficult for you to get the upper hand in any debate. If you can prove any of us wrong and back it up with good evidence, then do so. We are all willing to be corrected if we have ever mis-spoken. But you know what? Calling us servants and angels of the devil is not going to give you any credibility. All that crap is just a fairy tale and holds no validity, whatsoever. The more you call us those things, the more it makes you look like a brainwashed fool and a raving lunatic. Do you have proof that there is a devil and a hell? If not, then don't waste your time using it as your argument. The bottom line, is that you have no argument. Almost everything bad we know about the church came from church records, so what argument do you have? Name calling will get you nowhere, buddy, and neither will your little rants about how stupid we all are.

At Tuesday, March 13, 2007 1:35:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yea Ray, whatever.

But how does one 'prove' a testimony? I think no one could; the very definition of testimony would disavow a proof. And that testimony is what separates you, Samuel and the others from the true believers, the TBM's as you put it.

I'm sure you know about the church and it’s probably true that you served a mission, so you're really an insider but so was Judas! And please, I'm not calling you a 'judas' here. It’s an example to illustrate a point only. And I wasn't actually debating you just pointing something out to the M.A poster (I guess its McKay): that is that no person (as far as I can see) has ever being able to come here to this blog and help change someone; help them back to TBM ranks by discussing and arguing doctrine. Maybe Jose's techniques of just insulting you guys was the right way to go! (And please, I'm not justifying him in any way, just commenting. Please don't put words in my mouth)

But hopefully you will remember from your mission that doctrine and arguing about it doesn't convert anyone. It’s that testimony part that works for active members. But I won't bore you with that since you have obviously gone too far out to look for that testimony now.


At Tuesday, March 13, 2007 8:27:00 AM, Anonymous ray said...

A testimony and the 'spirit' are certainly something that no one can take away or define for someone else. That's why Mormons use it and that is why it is so effective. Each person has their own feelings and so you're right, you can't prove a testimony. Again, that is why many people blindly believe in spite of mountains of evidence to the contrary.

I've always believe that if people are truly happy being Mormon then great. I just feel that they should be made aware of the other half of the story so they can at least be given a chance to make an informed decision. I just can't imagine living my entire life blindly following someone elses rules and obeying and fulfilling every calling and assignment. Not that I mind helping and giving service; in fact I love helping people. But the church is relentless in the demands and expectations and that is one of the reasons I initially became inactive. I had to take a break and recharge my batteries.

At Tuesday, March 13, 2007 8:46:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello John,
I get what you are saying, but that isn't why I'm here. I have said many times here that I don't have any delusions about reconverting anyone here. A lot of exmormons come from communitites of mormons who are extraordinarily overzealous in the religion and I think it makes for even more bitterness towards the church. I hope to show that not all mormons are like that. I have family who have left the church, and we did have to work hard at first, not to let it affect our relationships with those individiuals. NOT because we who hadn't left thought those who left were doomed to go to hell, or were working for the devil, or whatever..... but because those who left simply could not fathom why the rest of us stayed. It didn't take long though, for us to recognize that it was better to agree to disagree, because it was more important to keep our family together and happy.

The only thing I was hoping to change here was the views that people here have about ALL mormons being overzealous brainwashed cult members who blindly follow the church leadership simply because they're told to. I never believed the church to be "The Church of President.....(whomever the prophet is at the time)." I've always believed it to be the Church of Jesus Christ, and it is HIS example I follow (or at least try really hard to!). And I like the story of Alma the Younger. He was working hard to turn people against the church, but how did his father treat him? Does the story ever talk about Alma going and condemning Alma the Younger? Telling him he was a "son of perdition," or "ranking member in Lucifer's army," as you put it? No. Alma prayed constantly for his son, and loved him unconditionally.

Anyway, that's my feelings on it all. The one thing I have seen that is completely obvious, is that Samuel and the rest here really feel in their hearts that they are right. Who am I to judge them for that? Who are YOU to judge them for it? We don't know what they've experienced in their dealings with the church. We don't know the people around them. It's easy enough to spout off about how your testimony should be strong enough to withstand the very fires of hell and all that, but the reality is, we're all human. I don't know what started Samuel and Ray down this path, but it's pretty obvious why Galatians is here (did you read her story???). If I went through what she went through, I can't say that I wouldn't be right here with her, fighting against the church. I'm not saying it's right, but it's certainly understandable.

There needs to be more understanding on both sides here. That's what I'm trying to do.


At Tuesday, March 13, 2007 11:03:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Samuel,
Question: do you skim through all the comments, and instantly go all hostile on ALL the active mormons, or am I just special? LOL! Cause from the time I started posting here, your responses to me tell me that you're skimming through my comments, picking out a few things here and there, and making them fit your cause.

Here's what I said, "Of course the Journal of Discourse is mormon based literature, and if you read it on antimormon sites, it's negative mormon literature. If you read it on mormon sites, it's positive mormon literature."

I was referring to the INTERPRETATION of the JoD being negative or positive depending on what sites you go to. When I said, "...if you read it on [whichever] sites, it's [whichever] mormon literature..." I meant if someone quotes it on whichever site, they interpret it whichever way their site goes. And that is why I wanted other sources. I have read from anti sites which use the same quotes and they give volumes of negative interpretation, where on mormon sites, the exact quotes are interpreted very differently. I thought I told you already, that I'd gone and looked up the JoD online, and read the entire text from the quotes you gave me, and my interpretation of the quotes were very different from yours. Again, that's why I was looking for unbiased sources.

Samuel, I haven't put the same amount of time into this as you have, because I only started looking at this just over a week ago. I put in what free time I have, but it's limited. You can't jump all over me simply because I don't instantly agree with you and leave the church after looking into one or two quotes. How long did it take you to decide the church wasn't true????? Your writing me off as someone who is just, "... playing a game with us and trying to stir us up," is just as unfair as a TBM coming here and calling you a, "higher ranking member in Lucifer's army." To use an example from your missionary days, you can't give meat before milk, a baby has to crawl before he can walk, a seed needs nourishing before it can become a tree.... etc....

Just to be clear, I'm not here looking to prove anything about the church. I'm not here to debate you on doctrine. You asked me what I thought of certain things, I looked into them, and I gave you my point of view. And by that, I mean, I looked up the JoD online, and read the entire text from the quotes you gave me, and drew my own conclusions, based only on what I read there in the JoD, without the aid of any anti or pro-mormon sites. I only gave my point of view, because you asked what I thought.

Now, you do need to read my comments a little closer....
Here's what I said concerning the Adam-god theory, "Please tell me the source of the Adam-God teachings, because I have heard it before, and would love to look into it." And later I said, "What exactly is the Adam-god theory? I've heard of it, but have never looked into it.... I'd like to though."

Here's your interpretation of what I said, "You've never heard of Adam-God? Really? I don't believe you for a second, but I'll humor you and play along anyway, because maybe it will enlighten somebody reading this, that truly doesn't know."

Another example.... I've mentioned having a military husband in several comments now, and unless the church has changed drastically and I just don't know it, having a husband and being a mormon, obviously makes me a woman. But somehow you missed that?

You can see where I might draw the conclusion that you're skimming through and twisting my words to fit your cause. You know, you already get that mindset of "Oh here's another brainwashed apologist mormon response." So you read the comments, but your mind is already interpreting it as, "blah blah blah, I'm a mormon apologist, blah blah blah, the church is true, blah blah blah, Joseph Smith is my hero, blah blah blah, Samuel is the devil, blah blah blah...." You know what I mean? In all fairness, I've probably done the same thing to you. Come to think of it, I know I have, because I didn't get far reading your comment before I decided you are skimming and twisting all my words.... sorry about that. Here's me not practicing what I preach! Well now that I feel like a complete hypocrite, I'll go back and read your comments a little more closely!!!

You've given me a lot of things to read and learn about, and I'm reading and learning about them. We're probably never going to agree about most things, but I do agree that the history of the church isn't all it claims to be. This isn't an excuse, and I'm sure you'll find a million things wrong with this example, but how many times have you told a story about yourself, and smoothed over the ugly parts to make your story a little nicer? I'm sure it happened with the church's history, just as I'm sure it's happened with most histories. That doesn't make it right, but it happens. Now how far it's gone, is something different entirely. You can't completely change history when you smooth out the ugly parts, or it isn't history anymore, it's just a story, or a fairytale. From what you say here, I'd guess you feel that most of the church history reads more like a fairytale. I'm not so sure.

Listen, I teach preschool twice a week, when I have time for the internet, I'm researching cancer cures (my dad has stage iv cancer, we're trying to save his life), I'm trying to finish school, I have wonderful children whom I adore, but they're TODDLERS, I have a husband who is in the military and isn't always around, and oh yeah, life happens everyday too. When I get burnt out from all the confusing medical terms I read, I take a break from it and sometimes come here. I don't have all the time in the world to go through the millions of mormon-related sites on the internet, but it doesn't make me any less sincere. I want to understand your point of view. I do think I can achieve understanding without necessarily agreeing with everything you say. If you don't like my point of view, stop asking me what I think. If you're really trying to HELP people, stop being so hostile - even if they don't agree with everything you say. I'm going to re-read your last comment to me now, so I can stop feeling like such a hypocrite!!!

Anyway, life is happening.... again.....


At Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:18:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

ps - I read your latest blog about the Evangelicals, and the comments you made afterward. I love the righteous indignation you show when you feel that something is wrong or someone is being wronged. That wasn't sarcasm, either. It's interesting that you'll stand on the side of mormons (not mormonism, just mormons) when you see that they are being treated unfairly. In my opinion, that shows strength of character, and I think it's cool. I've read your responses to the other people here too, and when you're not being openly hostile, you really seem like a decent guy. I may have said this before, but you remind me so much of my brother. That's another reason I keep coming back here.

In your latest blog, you said that you, "...think that any "real" Christian that comes along and says "hey, we don't need to hate each other and need to find some common ground to build on", is a great thing and person."

Well, are you going to actually live up to those words and give me a chance, Samuel???

At Tuesday, March 13, 2007 11:12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, just saw a ps from misfit marie, and she said something about BY saying the moon was inhabited? Dying to know about that one! Is it in the JOD???


At Wednesday, March 14, 2007 8:31:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi M.A,

Yes, I can see what you're trying to do here. And that's OK but I honestly don't think it will really work. But the Alma example is a good one, even if its really for family members and not this unknown Samuel (who won't give his real name).

As to who am I to judge them: just a person, a human, and we are all judging others, constantly -how they dress, grooming, language used, and yes their beliefs and activities. And what I see from this place is that Samuel is simply out to fight the mormons and I feel defensive about that. And he'll insult a lot of inocent people along the way, like Pt Hinkley, Donny Osmond, Romney, Ballard, Packer...and more. I'm tempted to talk actual doctrine and try to correct myths and some obvious lies, but I see that this too is useless with him. And like I said, maybe Ray is different but not Samuel.

So calling them 'Samuel and his Angels' is, in my judgement, the best option. Arguing doctrine is time wasted, at least for me.


At Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:31:00 PM, Anonymous ray said...

Hi John,

As you can hopefully see, from current events, Samuel is not just out to fight Mormons. If you care to do some past reading of this blog, you will see that Samuel has DEFENDED Mormons on several different occasions.

The current issue with the project 316 DVD giveaway is just one example. Sure, Samuel is bitter against the church, but it is not against the regular members. When people come along and condemn all Mormons to hell, Samuel will boldly defend them.

It's like me accusing you of just wanting to fight against ex-Mormons. I don't know if that's really true or not, but I do know that you disagree with us and you are not afraid to say so. Samuel disagrees with the church and is not afraid to say so. So it's not like he's possessed with the devil; no, it's just that he has an opinion and chooses to share it here.

Samuel is just a no-nonsense, take no shit, common sense type of guy. I have defended him in many occasions because when a wrong is done, any type of wrong against any group of people, Samuel will defend them.

Very rarely do Samuel and I disagree on anything. And it's not because I am kissing his ass and just happily going along with whatever he says. No, it is because we think alike, and I take great pride in my ability to think and reason.

Never again will I let an outside source do my thinking for me. John, I respect you and your right to believe as you do. I've said it many times. I just want to show people the world as I now see it. I've often compared it to living your entire life with a box on your head. Since you never take the box off, you have no idea what is out there or how far you can actually see. When someone tries to help you take the box off, you scream and yell and cling to the box with all your might. You are afraid of the outside world. But if you would just take a peek outside, you would see a whole new world that is exciting and beautiful.

And that is why we do what we do. Thanks for letting me interject again.

At Friday, March 16, 2007 12:58:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've never read anything here that had Samuel defending mormons, to the contrary.

Please show me where that happened

And honestly I just can't agree with your assertion that he just disagrees with the church and that he isn't possessed. If he isn't possessed then he is definitely guided by lucifer because of everything he has done in this site. Sure he'll defend homosexuals right to live peacefully, and that's fine, but he goes a lot further than that. He is constantly attacking the church as a cult, Joseph Smith as a rapist and pedophile, Hinkley as a liar .... and on and on it goes. He is definetly anti church and an enemy of the church, and then of God (for us who believe the church to be true)


At Friday, March 16, 2007 9:41:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

John, the Savior has taught us to love our neighbor. He also said we need to love our enemies and pray for them. Why would the example from Alma be just for family members? Are we not ALL children of God?

Who is it helping when you come here and call names and say these people follow Satan? Do you think Samuel is going to read your comments and suddenly think "oh gee what I terrible sinner I am, I'm going back to church!" Or that an investigator is going to read your comments and think, "Well these people are so passionate about mormonism, it must be true!" Or that someone who might be thinking about leaving the church will read your words and think, "Well of course the church is true, why would I ever want to leave???" I'm pretty sure the opposite happens.

Sorry John, this subject has been bothering me for awhile now. I should have addressed this to ALL the members who come here. And to be fair, the comments I've read from you so far haven't been as bad as others.

If you want to defend the church, then do it. But do it without the name calling and ugliness. You don't have to agree with anyone here, but be respectful. If you can't do that, then listen to your church leaders and stay away from antis.



Post a Comment

<< Home

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


Get your own map at