ex Mormon: A Mormon Church Translator for 15 Years and Her HusbandA Mormon

Church Translator for 15 Years and Her High Councilman Husband

Available in Finnish

Note: The authors' e-mail is at the bottom of this story

About us: Dennis grew up in a LDS family. He was a sixth generation Mormon. His

parents were always active, temple going Mormons and the same was expected of

him. He never had a problem of believing the Mormon story and he was very happy

when he was called on a mission to Finland. He served faithfully there two and a

half years. After his mission, he married Rauni in the Salt Lake LDS Temple and

started serving in the ward and stake. He was called to be an Elders Quorum

president when he was still in his early 20's and he held teaching and

leadership positions from there on. He was only in his early 30's when he was

ordained a High Priest and called to serve on the Stake High Council. Being busy

in the Church and its activities, doing a lot of temple work in addition to his

ward and stake positions, took all the free time he had. It was Rauni who

started to point out that there were problems with Mormon claims and that they

should check them out.

Rauni was a convert to the LDS Church in Finland where she also served a full

time mission before coming to the States. She started working as a translator

for the Finnish language in the Church Offices almost immediately after her

arrival in Salt Lake City. This translation work gave her an opportunity to

study Mormon history from many books not generally available to the membership

of the Church. She started to wonder, because she saw so many changes in the

Church doctrines and contradictions between its scriptures and writings of the

prophets and the high leadership of the Church. She was concerned, because it

was obvious to her, that the Church was hiding a lot of important information

from its membership. She worked as a translator for the Church almost fifteen

years. She had teaching positions both in Sunday School and in Relief Society.

She also served on the Stake Relief Society Board. But when these problems in

the Church doctrine became too much for her to accept, she suggested to Dennis,

that they should check them out once and for all and compare Mormon doctrine to

the doctrine of the Bible to see if they matched.

This was a serious question, because IF Mormonism was not the truth, then their

eternal life and salvation was in danger.

Below we present briefly some of the problems we found that caused us to

eventually separate ourselves from the LDS Church.

President Joseph Fielding Smith (President of LDS Church in the early 1970's)

stated:

"Mormonism must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a

Prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned or he was

one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no middle ground.

If Joseph was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead people, then he

should be exposed, his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be

false..."

("Doctrines of Salvation," vol. 1 pp 188-189.)

When one reads the above statement, an investigation - through a study of the

pertinent documentation - is called for. Historically, the Mormon story is a

young one and for that reason alone is relatively easy to investigate.

So let's begin in the year 1820.

Joseph Smith claimed he had a visit from God the Father and His Son, Jesus

Christ, in 1820. He said that they told him that all churches were wrong and

were an abomination to God and that he should not join any of them. He said that

when he told his community about God's visit, that it initiated his fierce

persecution. Later he said that he received visits from the angel Moroni, who

Joseph Smith said was a resurrected being who had died close to Smith's area in

New York state about 1400 years earlier. Moroni, Joseph Smith asserted, had

buried in New York in the Hill Cumorah a record of his people who had lived on

the American continent from about 600 B.C. to about 421 A.D. That record, Joseph

Smith was told, would be given to him to translate. Then, a few years later

Joseph Smith said that he received the record, written on gold plates in

"reformed Egyptian" language that no one but he could understand. He was also

told not to show these gold plates to anyone, but that some time later a few

selected people would be given the privilege to view them. He said that he then

translated the plates and published the material as the "Book of Mormon" and

gave the gold plates back to the angel Moroni.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims that the name of the

Church was given to Joseph Smith by revelation. However, when Smith first

organized the Church in 1830, it was called the "Church of Christ," then four

years later the name was changed to the "Church of Latter-day Saints," then in

1838, it was changed again, this time to the "Church of Jesus Christ of

Latter-day Saints", as it is known today. Joseph Smith claimed that he received

many revelations from God, and he began to introduce many new doctrines to his

new Church; one of the doctrines was polygamy, a practice that Smith denied

publicly but practiced secretly. That doctrine was the obvious downfall of

Joseph Smith, and he was killed in 1844 as a result of the polygamy controversy.

 

Now let's go back and look at this above information a little closer and in

detail.

Joseph Smith claimed that after he had seen a vision of God the Father and Jesus

Christ, he said that he told it first to a Methodist preacher and that it

started the entire community, "all men of high standing" and "the great ones of

the most popular sects," to persecute him bitterly, him being only a boy of 14

years of age. Wouldn't you think that kind of commotion would have caused

someone somewhere to write about it? - At least the Palmyra Newspaper would have

written something, since Joseph Smith claimed that "all men" were united to

bring a "bitter and reviling persecution" against him. Not many important events

took place in that little town, and even unimportant gossip was printed. But one

searches in vain from 1820 on to find an account about a young boy's vision or

persecution, or to find a story regarding the revival excitement that Smith

later claimed was the reason why he went to the grove to seek God in prayer and

received this fantastic vision. Joseph Smith said that he was told twice in this

vision not to join any of the religions (see "Pearl of Great Price" 2:5-26), but

it is interesting to note that in 1823, Joseph's mother, sister and two brothers

joined the Presbyterian Church, and later Joseph himself sought membership in

the Methodist Church, where his wife was a member. Records show that Joseph was

expelled in 1828, because of his belief in magic and also because of his

"money-digging activities."

Joseph's newly organized church started to publish its history as events took

place. This publication was called the "Messenger and Advocate." Oliver Cowdery

was the main writer and its accuracy was checked by Joseph Smith himself. In

this publication Joseph tells how, after his brother Alvin's death, and after

his mother, sister and two brothers had joined the Presbyterian Church, he

started to seek religion and pray "if some Supreme Being existed" (vol. 1 p.

79). IF HE HAD HAD A VISION OF GOD THE FATHER AND HIS SON, JESUS CHRIST IN 1820,

HE MOST CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE KNOWN BY 1823 OR 1824 THAT A SUPREME BEING EXISTED.

By reading diaries, records, newspapers, etc., one seeks in vain to find any

mention of this so-called "First Vision" story until 1842, when it was published

in "Times and Seasons," 22 years after this vision supposedly took place. It

becomes quite obvious that this report was an after-thought, since the Vision

story talks about two separate gods and the Book of Mormon says that there is

only one God; and that Jesus, God the Father and Holy Ghost are this one God.

Examples: Alma 11:26-33; 18:26-28; Mosiah 15:1, 2, 5, etc. "The Book of

Commandments" (now called "Doctrine and Covenants") was published in 1835 and it

included lectures given in the School of the Prophets. Lecture 5 says God is a

Spirit, and the Son only has the body of flesh and bones. (The lectures have

later been removed from the "D&C" but they are available as a separate small

book.) There is now an added footnote to this lecture 5, which says that Joseph

received further light and knowledge in 1843 and THEN knew that God the Father

also had a body of flesh and bones. That statement alone tells that there was no

vision of the Father and the Son in 1820. Had there been a vision, he wouldn't

have needed this "further light and knowledge" about the Father having a body of

flesh and bones. It was not until 1844, that Joseph started to preach about a

god who was once a man and progressed into godhood, and how men can also become

gods. (See "Teachings by Prophet Joseph Smith" pp. 345-347). Thus, there is

absolutely no evidence for the first vision as it appears in the Pearl of Great

Price, or that the vision was known to Mormons or non-Mormons prior to 1842 or

thereabouts. It was not until the 1880's that this story was accepted by the

Church. Prior to that time, we were able only to read denials about it. For

example, in "Journal of Discourses," vol. 2, p. 171, in 1855, Brigham Young

preached a sermon in which he said:

"LORD DID NOT COME TO JOSEPH SMITH, BUT SENT HIS ANGEL TO INFORM HIM THAT HE

SHOULD NOT JOIN ANY RELIGIOUS SECT OF THE DAY, FOR THEY WERE ALL WRONG..."

John Taylor later said the same thing, see J. of D. vol. 20, page 167, on March

2, 1879. Heber C. Kimball in vol. 6, page 29, said:

"DO YOU SUPPOSE THAT GOD IN PERSON CALLED UPON JOSEPH SMITH, OUR PROPHET? GOD

CALLED UPON HIM, BUT DID NOT COME HIMSELF..."

George A. Smith told the same story in the Journal of Discourses, vol. 12, pp.

333-334. One wouldn't really even have to dig deeper than that to find out that

the claims of the Church today regarding Joseph Smith's so-called First Vision

are not true, according to documentary evidence of the time, and Joseph Smith

should - and these facts should - be exposed, just as Joseph Fielding Smith said

they should.

Now let's look at the Book of Mormon. Early Mormon apostle Orson Pratt made a

statement concerning the Book of Mormon:

" 'The Book of Mormon' must be either true or false. If true, it is one of the

most important messages ever sent from God... If False, it is one of the most

cunning, wicked, bold, deep-laid impositions ever palmed upon the world,

calculated to deceive and ruin millions... The nature of the "Book of Mormon" is

such, that if true, no one can possibly be saved and reject it; If false, no one

can possibly be saved and receive it... If, after a rigid examination, it be

found imposition, it should be extensively published to the world as such; the

evidences and arguments on which the imposture was detected, should be clearly

and logically stated, that those who have been sincerely yet unfortunately

deceived, may perceive the nature of deception, and to be reclaimed, and that

those who continue to publish the delusion may be exposed and silenced... by

strong and powerful arguments - by evidences adduced from scripture and

reason..." (Orson Pratt's Works, "Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon":

Liverpool, 1851, pp. 1, 2.)

We hope to show clearly and logically, even though very briefly in this letter,

that the Book of Mormon is not a divinely inspired record, but a 19th century

product. Joseph Smith claimed that after he translated the gold plates, he

returned them to an angel - so there is no way to inspect them or check the

accuracy of the translation. Mormons often refer to the witnesses of the Book of

Mormon. Most of these men left the Church, but claims are also made that even

though they did, they never denied that they had seen an angel who showed them

"the plates of the Book of Mormon." However, in the Journal of Discourses, vol.

7, page 164, Brigham Young stated:

"...witnesses of the Book of Mormon who handled the plates and conversed with

the angels of God were afterwards left to doubt and to disbelieve that they had

ever seen an angel."

Joseph Smith himself called these men wicked and liars and by many other

demeaning names. In the Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, pages 114-115, George A.

Smith lists those who have left the Church and mentions specifically, among

others, "the witnesses of the Book of Mormon." Martin Harris later claimed that

he had a better testimony of "the Shakers Book" than he ever had of the Book of

Mormon. Reading about these witnesses, one is drawn to the conclusion that they

were unstable men and easily convinced; for example, Martin Harris changed his

religion at least eight times. Some of the others started their own religions

later.

Let's now look at the Book of Mormon itself. The Book of Mormon presents

problems that cannot be explained away. Regarding language: 1 Ne. 1:2, etc.,

states that Hebrews who left Jerusalem and came to the Americas spoke Egyptian.

It is a known fact that Hebrews spoke Hebrew, and their records were kept in

Hebrew. Egyptians were their enemies. It is as absurd to think that Hebrews

would have written their sacred history in Egyptian as to think that American

History would have been written in Russian. In Mormon 9:32, 34, it states that

the language was "reformed Egyptian" and that no other people knew their

language. There is no known language called "reformed Egyptian." 1 Ne. 17:5

talks about fruit and wild honey being products of Sinai desert (called

Bountiful). Not possible! 1 Ne. 18:1 talks about ample timber that Jews used to

make a ship. There is not ample timber in that area. It was a desert; it still

is a desert. 1 Ne. 2:6-9 mentions a river named Laman that flows into the Red

Sea. There is no river there and there has not been since the Pleistocene era.

Botanical problems are many in the Book of Mormon. Wheat, barley, olives, etc.,

are mentioned, but none of these were in the Americas at that time. North

America had no cows, asses, horses, oxen, etc. Europeans brought them hundreds

and hundreds of years later. North America had no lions, leopards, nor sheep at

that time. Honey bees were brought here by Europeans much later. Ether 9:18, 19,

lists domestic cattle, cows and oxen as separate species! They did not even

exist in the Americas at that time. The Book of Mormon also mentions swine as

being useful to man. Maybe, but Jews would not think of swine as being useful or

good; swine were forbidden, unclean animals to the Jews. Horses, asses, and

elephants were not here either. And what on earth are "cureloms" and "cumoms"?

No such animals have ever been identified anywhere. Domestic animals that are

thought to be "useful" would hardly become extinct. Ether 9:30-34 talks about

poisonous snakes driving sheep to the south. The Book of Mormon tells that the

people ate the snake-killed animals, all of them! (v. 34). Jewish people could

not have eaten animals that were killed that way, since Mosaic law forbids it!

Chickens and dogs did not exist here at that time either. 3 Ne. 20:16 and 21:12

talk about lions as "beasts of the forests." Lions do not live in forests or

jungles, and they never lived in the Americas. No silk and wool clothing (nor

moths) existed, as 1 Ne. 13:7; Alma 4:6; Ether 9:17 and 10:24 indicate, at that

time either. Butter is also mentioned, but it could not possibly exist, since no

milk-producing animals were found in the Americas at that time.

Ether 15:30-31 says that after Shiz was beheaded, he raised up and struggled for

breath!!? In Ether, chapter 6, we learn that furious winds propelled the barges

to the promised land for 344 days! Even if the winds were not "furious," but,

for example, blew only 10 miles per hour, the distance traveled in 344 days

would have been 82,560 miles, or more than three times around the world.

Absurdity, to say the least! And why would the Lord instruct Jared to make a

hole on top and bottom of each barge? (Ether 2:20.) When Lehi left Jerusalem,

according to the Book of Mormon, his group consisted of fewer than 20 people.

Yet 19 years later the people had so prospered and multiplied in the promised

land that they built a temple which "manner of construction was like unto the

temple of Solomon: and the workmanship thereof was exceeding fine" (2. Ne.

5:16). Looking at what the Bible says about the construction of Solomon's

temple, we find that it took thirty thousand Israelites, a hundred and fifty

thousand hewers of stone and carriers, three thousand three hundred supervisors

(I Kings 5:13-16) and about seven years to build it. (See also I Kings 6.) And

how many people could Lehi have had in his group after 19 years? The book

further tells that in less than 30 years after arriving on this continent, they

had multiplied so rapidly that they even divided into two great nations. Even

the most rapid human reproduction could only have a few dozen in that brief

time, and most of them still would be infants and children and about one-third

older people.

Not only did they divide into "two great nations," but throughout the book,

about every three or four years, they had devastating wars that killed thousands

(i.e., Alma 28:2). Starting after the first 19 years or so, Laman and Lemuel and

their descendants and followers (!) turned dark skinned because of their

disobedience (2 Ne. 5:21). According to the Book of Mormon, dark skin color was

a curse from God! This change of skin color is happening throughout the book. In

2 Ne. 30:6 we read that if Lamanites accepted the true gospel, they became

"white and delightsome" (and since 1981 printing of the Book of Mormon, they

become "pure") but if they left this true gospel, they became "dark and

loathsome." People's skin color does not change if they believe or do not

believe! Nor is the skin color a curse! The Book of Mormon teaches that Indians

originated from these Jewish settlers. Indians are distinctly Mongoloid - they

have the "Mongoloid" blue spot, specific blood traits, and their facial features

are of typical Asian origin, not Semitic at all. In Ether 7:8, 9, we read of

steel and breakable windows (2:23) back in Abraham's time! Try to explain that

to an archaeologist! Steel was not even developed until about 1400 years later.

At the end of the Book of Mormon, Moroni tells about a great battle that took

place on the Hill Cumorah. Over two hundred thousand people, armed to their

teeth, were killed on that hill. The story tells about their weapons,

breastplates, helmets, swords, etc. Nothing has ever been found on that hill or

anywhere else in this continent, as a matter of fact. Metal, helmets, swords,

etc., do not disappear in a mere 1400 years. Before the LDS Church purchased the

Hill Cumorah, it was literally dug full of holes and even caves, but nothing was

ever found. (Joseph Smith even told about a cave inside of Hill Cumorah and how

they - he and Oliver - went in and out of it. It supposedly had wagon loads of

gold plates, Laban sword, etc.). When people dig for worms in the Holy Land,

they make discoveries. The Bible has been proven by archaeology, cities, places,

coins, clothing, swords, etc., have been found, but not one single place

mentioned in the Book of Mormon has ever been identified. There are still people

in the LDS Church who believe that archaeology has proven, at least to a degree,

the Book of Mormon. Some missionaries are still using slide presentations of

ruins from Mexico and South America, implying that they prove the Book of

Mormon. But they are from an entirely different time period. They are ruins of

idolworshipers who offered human sacrifices.

In the mid 1970's, President Spencer W. Kimball made a statement that should

have stopped these "faith promoting rumors." The Church News published it and it

said to "stop looking for archaeological evidences for the Book of Mormon, for

there is none," he said. Perhaps he finally realized that it was too

embarrassing to insist on Book of Mormon archaeology since professors in the

Church's own University had started to publicly deny that there was any truth to

it. Professor Dee Green, in "Dialogue," summer of 1969, pp. 74-78, wrote: "The

first myth we need to eliminate is that the Book of Mormon archaeology exists.

Titles of books full of archaeological half-truths, dilettante on peripheries of

American archaeology calling themselves Book of Mormon archaeologists regardless

of their education, and a Department of Archaeology at BYU devoted to the

production of Book of Mormon archaeologists do not insure that Book of Mormon

archaeology really exists... no Book of Mormon location is known...Biblical

archaeology can be studied, because we know where Jerusalem and Jericho were and

are, but we do not know where Zarahemla and Bountiful (or any location for that

matter) were or are..." Many Mormon scholars have faced the truth and fully

agree with Professor Green, but sadly enough, this "myth of the Book of Mormon

archaeology" still surfaces from the general membership, who are not updated on

these issues. Thomas S. Ferguson was a firm believer and he was sure that

archaeology would prove the Book of Mormon. He was an attorney and believed that

he knew how to weigh the evidence, once it was found. And a lot of "evidence"

was found, but unfortunately for the LDS Church, the evidence did not have any

connection to the Book of Mormon story. Thomas S. Ferguson spent hundreds of

thousands of dollars and 25 years of his life as a head of "The New World

Archaeological Foundation," funded by the Church. But in spite of all the

efforts, by 1970, he had come to the conclusion that all had been in vain and

that Joseph Smith was not a prophet and that Mormonism was not true. Here was a

man who had devoted his entire life, even before starting this foundation, to

Mormonism. He had written a book called "One Fold and One Shepherd" in defense

of Mormonism, but later he had to admit that the case against Joseph Smith was

absolutely devastating and could not be explained away. "The Book of Abraham"

was perhaps the final straw for him, as well as for many others who were more

aware of the problems in Mormonism.

But there were others, i.e. B. H. Roberts, noted scholar in the Mormon Church

and a General Authority, whose secret manuscript has only fairly recently been

published, and who had come to question the Book of M ormon quite some time

before Ferguson did. B. H. Roberts had written a typewritten manuscript "Book of

M ormon Difficulties" of over 400 pages, sometime between 1922-1933, and in it

he admitted that the Book of Mormon is in conflict with what is now known from

20th century archaeological investigation about the early inhabitants of

America. After going into a lengthy explanation of impossibilities in the Book

of M ormon he also says that he has come to discover things he didn't know

earlier in his life, for instance, that Joseph Smith did have access to a number

of books that could have assisted him and given him ideas for the Book of

Mormon. Roberts tells how Joseph's mother wrote in her book, "History of Joseph

Smith," that long before Joseph had received the gold plates, he gave:

"...most amazing recitals... he would describe the ancient inhabitants of this

continent, their dress, their mode of traveling, and the animals upon which they

rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of

warfare, and also their religious worship. This he would to with much ease,

seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them." (Quoted from B. H.

Robert's manuscript, page 280.)

Roberts then goes on to say that Joseph could have gotten his information from

"knowledge" that existed in the community, because of the books like Ethan

Smith's "View of the Hebrews" (published nearby in 1823) and Josiah Priest's

book, "The Wonders of Nature and Providence," published only 20 miles away,

about one year later. That book had lots to say about the Hebrew origin of

American Indians and their advanced culture and civilization. Roberts then asks:

 

"...Whence comes the young prophet's ability to give these descriptions 'with as

much ease as if he had spent his whole life' with these ancient inhabitants of

America? Not from the Book of Mormon, which is as yet, a sealed book to him...

These evening recitals could come from no other source than the vivid,

constructive imagination of Joseph Smith, a remarkable power which attended him

through all his life. It was as strong and varied as Shakespeare's and no more

to be accounted for than the English Bard's." (From B. H. Roberts' typewritten

manuscript, page 281.)

Prior to this, B. H. Roberts was known as a great defender of Mormonism, and he

is still considered one of the greatest scholars the LDS Church has ever had. He

wrote the six volume book "Comprehensive History of the Church," and many other

works as well. "Book of Mormon Difficulties, a Study" is now available in

bookstores. There would be much, much more to say why the Book of Mormon is not

an ancient record but an obvious production of a very intelligent and creative

person, Joseph Smith, who used a number of books, including the Bible, to create

this book. Interestingly enough though, not any of the important Mormon

doctrines of today are in the book that the Church claims "contains the fullness

of the everlasting Gospel." (According to the General Authorities of the Church,

"fullness of the Gospel" means that all doctrines leading to salvation in the

celestial kingdom are in that book, and one wouldn't even need any other books

to find information for salvation.) The Book of Mormon teaches against today's

Mormon doctrine, for example, polygamy: Jacob 1:15, 2:22-27; 3:5; Mosiah 11:2;

Ether 10:5; (polygamy is not practiced by the mainstream Church today, but it

remains as a doctrine of the Church, see D&C 132); eternal progression (that God

could have progressed from man to God): Alma 41:8, 3 Ne. 24:6; Mormon 9:9, 10,

19; Moroni 8:18, 23; secret combinations or oaths (temples): Mormon 8:27; 2 Ne.

9:9; 2 Ne. 26:22; Alma 34:36; 37:23, 31. IT TEACHES: that God created the heaven

and the earth by His word: Mormon 9:17; Jacob 4:9; that there is only one God:

Mosiah 7:27; 13:34; 15:1-5; 16:15; Alma 11:26-33, 38, 39, 44; and no work for

the dead: Alma 34:32-33. Doctrines like temple or eternal marriage, priesthoods,

etc., are not in the Book of Mormon, and, as we have already mentioned, one can

see that this book speaks against polygamy, work for the dead, oaths (temple),

men becoming gods, that there is more than one God, etc. It becomes quite

obvious to an investigator of M ormonism, that Joseph Smith changed his mind

about who God is after 1842 or so. He contradicted the Book of M ormon with the

Doctrine and Covenants, i.e.: Alma 34:36, "And this I know, because the Lord

hath said he dwelleth not in unholy temples, but in the hearts of the righteous

doth he dwell..." and D&C 130:3, "...the idea that the Father and the Son dwell

in a man's heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false"; and the Book of

Mormon, Jacob 4:9 "For behold, by the power of his word man came upon the face

of the earth, which earth was created by the power of his word. Wherefore, if

God being able to speak and the world was, and to speak and man was created...",

and "the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith," page 350: "...men who are

preaching salvation, say that God created the heavens and earth out of nothing?

The reason is, that they are unlearned in the things of God... God never had the

power to create the spirit of man at all." He then started to teach that his God

had once been a mere mortal man, etc.

In November, 1967, when discovered Egyptian Papyri was given back by the

Metropolitan Museum to the Mormon Church, it brought a great amount of

excitement into the hearts of Mormons. Finally there was something concrete that

an "angel didn't take away" that could once and for all prove to the doubting

people that Joseph Smith really was a prophet of God and had a God-given gift or

ability to translate. We read from the Pearl of Great Price the following

introduction to the Book of Abraham.

"TRANSLATED FROM THE PAPYRUS BY JOSEPH SMITH. A TRANSLATION OF SOME ANCIENT

RECORDS, THAT HAVE FALLEN INTO OUR HANDS FROM THE CATACOMBS OF EGYPT - THE

WRITINGS OF ABRAHAM WHILE HE WAS IN EGYPT, CALLED THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM, WRITTEN

BY HIS OWN HAND, UPON PAPYRUS." This papyri was written in Egyptian language and

this would prove that if Joseph Smith's translation of papyri was correct, it

would be possible that he could have translated the Book of Mormon from

"reformed Egyptian." But problems started to surface very soon after the First

Presidency had given the papyri to Professor Hugh Nibley of BYU to translate it

or to find a translator capable to do so. (By the way, why not the current

prophet of the Church? Shouldn't he have done it?) Now, if this papyri was

written by Abraham "by his own hand," as Joseph Smith had said, it should be at

least about 4000 years old. After this papyri was evaluated, even Professor

Nibley had to agree that it was a production of not older than the first century

A.D. Thus Abraham couldn't have written it. That was the first blow. The second

was that after it was given to several qualified Egyptologists, it was clearly

shown not to be what the Book of Abraham said it was. Expectations of the Church

members' had been high. Dr. Sidney B. Sperry, one of the most noted scholars,

had said:

"The little volume of Scripture known as the Book of Abraham will someday be

recognized as one of the most remarkable documents in existence. It is evident

that writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, of which our printed Book of

Abraham is a copy, must of necessity be older than original text of Genesis..."

(Dr. Sidney B. Sperry, "Ancient Records Testify in Papyrus and Stone" 1938, page

39.)

Now that the papyri had been located and proven by the leaders of the Church and

its scholars to be the very one Joseph Smith had translated, the question was:

does it read the same as what Joseph Smith's translation said? It was very

quickly discovered to be nothing more than a pagan burial record, called the

"Book of Breathings," a short portion of the "Book of the Dead." Egyptologist,

James Henry Breasted, tells that the Book of the Dead is chiefly a book of

magical charms. It was written by a very superstitious people and is quite

different from the religion taught in the Bible. Mormon writers have admitted

that this is the case. (From his book, "Development of Religion and Thought in

Ancient Egypt," New York, 1969, p. 308.) "There has been a lot of things written

and suggestions made trying to justify the fact that not one mention of Abraham,

not his name, not his faith, nothing at all is on this papyri, only pagan

beliefs and instructions on afterlife as believed in Egypt." LDS doctrine on

blacks and the priesthood is (was) based on this Book of Abraham. The Utah

Mormon Church has not removed this book from their scriptures, but it is

interesting to note that the RLDS Church that is directed by the direct

descendants of Joseph Smith made this statement in "The New York Times" on May

3, 1970, "...it may be helpful to suggest, that the Book of Abraham represents

simply the product of Joseph Smith's imagination..." The RLDS Church removed the

book from among their scriptures. The only thing that the Utah Mormon Church

did, was to allow blacks (1978) to have the priesthood. But all in all, thinking

people started to see that a huge shadow was now cast also on the Book of

Mormon.

M ormon writer, Klaus Hansen, made some remarks in "Dialogue A Journal of Mormon

Thought," summer 1970, p. 110:

"...To a professional historian, for example, the recent translation of the

Joseph Smith papyri may well present the potentially most damaging case against

Mormonism since its foundation. Yet the 'Powers That Be' at the Church

Historian's Office should take comfort in the fact that almost total lack of

response to this translation is an uncanny proof of Frank Kermode's observation

that even the most devastating acts of disconfirmation will have no effect

whatever on true believers. Perhaps an even more telling response is that of the

'liberals,' or cultural Mormons. After the Joseph Smith's papyri affair, one

might have well expected a mass exodus of these people from the Church. Yet none

has occurred. Why? Because cultural Mormons, of course, do not believe in the

historical authenticity of M ormon scriptures in the first place. So there is

nothing to disconfirm."

Polygamy, as we have mentioned at the beginning, was the issue that led to the

killing of Joseph Smith. Investigation of the records shows that Joseph Smith

practiced polygamy from the early 1830's on. William Clayton was Joseph Smith's

personal secretary and scribe until his death. William Clayton's diary has been

a source for many revelations published in the Doctrine and Covenants. Clayton's

diary tells also how the "revelation" on polygamy came to be. Stated briefly, it

came as a result of a discussion between Joseph, his brother Hyrum, and William

Clayton, who wrote it down. Emma, Joseph's wife, had been suspecting Joseph of

having affairs with other women, i.e., Fanny Alger about 1831 and from then on.

Family life was not very happy and calm. Joseph was relating this to his brother

Hyrum and William Clayton. Hyrum suggested that Joseph would write a

"revelation" where God gives instructions for Joseph to have other wives. Joseph

doubted Emma would believe that. However, William Clayton wrote it down and

Hyrum took it to Emma. EMMA DID NOT BELIEVE IT. Later on, Joseph somehow

convinced Emma to accept it, which she did for a short time, but after Joseph's

death, Emma went into a total denial of polygamy as if it had never happened.

Many thought that her reasons were to protect her children and their memory of

their father. Utah LDS Church's historian, Andrew Jensen, in 1887, taking from

the enormous files of then secret manuscript material in the Salt Lake City

Church Library, compiled the first list of 27 wives of Joseph Smith.

Genealogical Archives were used to add another 21. Nauvoo Temple records were

the main source. Fanny Alger was his first plural wife, married to Joseph in

1834. If one looks at the D&C from 1890, it says that revelation was GIVEN July

12, 1843. "History of the Church," vol. 5. pages 500-501, also says that it was

GIVEN that day, but now D&C section 132 says that it was RECORDED July 12, 1843

- implying that it could have been given at an earlier date. This kind of

altering of the records of the Church can be noticed quite often by comparing

the earlier printings with the more recent ones. Obvious attempts were thus made

to save some integrity, since Joseph Smith had made a number of public denials

of even knowing anything about polygamy. He and the Church leaders denied it

publicly, but practiced it secretly. In the first edition of the Doctrine and

Covenants, printed in 1835, in Section 101:4, there is denial of polygamy,

calling it a "crime of fornication..." This remained in the D&C until 1876, when

it was removed, and Section 132 added about God commanding the practice of

polygamy.

Joseph Smith (and later Brigham Young, also) were even married to women who, at

the time of marriage, were still other men's wives. Historical Records of these

strange marriages are available. A few examples might be proper to take here:

Prescinda Hunginton Buell, wife of Norman Buell, later also a wife of Heber C.

Kimball. She had married Norman Buell in 1827 and they had two children. Joseph

married her in the fall of 1838 and had a child by her. She continued to be

married to Buell also. Nancy Marinda Johnson Hyde, wife of Orson Hyde, was also

one of Joseph's wives. That caused Orson Hyde to leave the Church for a while,

but he came back later. Geneological Archives in Salt Lake City show that Nancy

Hyde was later sealed to Joseph Smith on July 30, 1857, years after Joseph

Smith's death. Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs, later wife of Brigham Young, was

married to Henry Jacobs on March 7, 1841, and seven and one-half months later,

to Joseph Smith, on October 27, 1841. Zina never divorced her husband Henry

Jacobs, but after Joseph's death, Brigham publicly told Jacobs: "The woman you

claim for a wife does not belong to you. She is a spiritual wife of brother

Joseph, sealed to him. I am his proxy, and she, in his behalf, with her

children, are my property. You can go where you please and get another..."

Jacobs obviously accepted Brigham's decision for he stood as a witness when in

the Nauvoo Temple, in January 1846, Zina was sealed to Brigham Young for time,

and Joseph Smith for eternity. Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, wife of Adam

Lightner, claimed later that Joseph had told her that an angel came to him with

drawn sword, and commanded Joseph in 1834 to take her as his wife. She was then

only 17. In her diary, she wrote that she was sealed and married to Joseph in

the Masonic Hall in Nauvoo and sealed again in the Nauvoo Temple by Heber C.

Kimball. She later came to Salt Lake City and remained in the Church, even

though her husband never joined the Church. The reason why Andrew Jensen, in

1887, did this research on polygamy, was to prove that Joseph Smith did practice

polygamy, since RLDS Church was denying that he ever did.

When Oliver Cowdery in 1838 had accused Joseph of these adulterous affairs,

Joseph had Oliver excommunicated. The controversy over polygamy was the

underlying reason for the death of Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum. William

Law's wife had confessed that she had an affair with Joseph. William Law left

the Church and started a publication called "Nauvoo Expositor." One issue was

published and the second one was going to print when Joseph found out that

William Law was going to print his wife's confession in that issue. Joseph had

the press destroyed and the building burned. That caused his arrest and,

consequently, his death. But he did not die as a martyr, as is claimed by the

Church. John Taylor, third president of the church, who was in the prison with

Joseph and Hyrum at the time, tells the following in the "Gospel Kingdom," page

360:

"Joseph opened the door slightly, and snapped the pistol six successive times...

afterwards (I) understood that two or three were wounded by these discharges,

two of whom, I am informed, died."

The same account is also in the History of the Church, vol. 6, p. XLI and pages

617-618. It was too bad that Joseph Smith was thus killed, but he did not die

like a martyr who went "as a lamb to the slaughter" as is claimed by the LDS

Church. HE DIED IN A GUNFIGHT, and killed two people before he was shot. Joseph

acted as a Mason at the time of his death. John Taylor tells also that Joseph

went to the window and made a Masonic distress sign after his gun was empty,

hoping that Masons, if there were any among this mob, would rescue him,

according to the Masonic oath "to defend one another, right or wrong."

The M ormon Temple Ceremony compares quite exactly with the Masonic Ceremony,

signs, tokens and penalties included. Joseph, Hyrum, Brigham, and others, were

Masons. (Cult experts consider Masonic religion to be a Satanic Cult.) Six weeks

after Joseph Smith and other Mormons were expelled from the Masonic order,

Joseph Smith introduced the Masonic ceremony as the temple ceremony "received as

a revelation from God." When Dr. Reed Durham, director of LDS Institute of

Religion, made his discovery of this in 1974, and gave his speech on the subject

of the Mormon-Mason connection in front of the Utah History Association on April

20, 1974, he was highly criticized for making this matter public. He also showed

the Jupiter talisman and explained that Joseph had had it from 1826 (the same

year he was convicted on money-digging charges and being a believer in magic),

and that Joseph had this Juperter talisman on him at the time of his death. The

talisman contains symbols relating to astrology and magic. There were other

magical items discovered at the same time that belonged to Hyrum Smith. The

Patriarch of the Church, Eldridge Smith, supposedly has them in his possession.

(And by the way, what has become of Patriarch Eldridge Smith?)

Teachings of the LDS Church became even stranger after Brigham led the Mormons

to the Salt Lake Valley. Now they thought they were free to practice what had

been illegal elsewhere... i.e., polygamy and blood atonement.

Brigham Young made polygamy public from 1852 on in Utah, even though they still

denied it outside of Utah. From this same year on, he started to teach that

"Adam is God and Father and the only God with whom we have to do" and that Adam

was the father of human spirits as well as Jesus' physical father. (For these,

see the Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp. 50-51; vol. 4, p. 1; vol. 5, pp.

331-332, etc.) The LDS Church has issued denials saying that Adam-God doctrine

was never taught, but records clearly show that Brigham Young taught it, not

only by mentioning it once or twice, but that he taught it from 1852 until his

death in 1877. Let's look at some of his statements:

"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 the world. He is Michael, the Arc-angel, 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...

the earth was organized by three distrinct characters, namely, Eloheim, Yahovah,

and Michael, these three forming a quorum, as in heavenly bodies, and in

organizing element, perfectly represented in the Diety, as Father, Son, and Holy

Ghost." Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp. 50-51.

This teaching was repeated and carried on in the other Church's writings

throughout the years. For example, in the Millenial Star, vol. 17, page 195, we

read:

"... every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that he (Adam) is God of the

whole earth. Then will the words of the prophet Brigham Young, WHEN SPEAKING OF

ADAM, be fully realized - 'HE IS OUR FATHER AND OUR GOD, AND THE ONLY GOD WITH

WHOM WE HAVE TO DO.'"

Further in the Millenial Star, vol. 16, page 530, we read the counsel by James

A. Little: "I believe in the principal of obedience; and if I am told that Adam

is our Father and our God, I just believe it." The records show that there were

only two leaders in the Church who had difficulty with this doctrine, namely

apostles Orson Pratt and Amasa Lyman. In one of Brigham's sermons, printed in

the "Deseret News," June 14, 1873, Brigham declared:

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one

particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and WHICH GOD REVEALED TO ME -

namely that ADAM IS OUR FATHER AND GOD... Our Father Adam helped to make this

earth, it was created expressly for him. He brought one of his wives with him.

Who is he? He is Michael... He was the first man on the earth, and its framer

and maker. He with the help of his brethren brought it into existence."

"Then he (Adam) said: "I WANT MY CHILDREN THAT WERE BORN TO ME IN THE SPIRIT

WORLD TO COME HERE AND TAKE TABERNACLES OF FLESH THAT THEIR SPIRITS MAY HAVE A

HOUSE, A TABERNACLE, OR A DWELLING PLACE AS MINE HAS" and where is the mystery?"

Brigham Young clearly taught for over 20 years as a doctrine the following:

1) "ADAM NOT MADE OF THE DUST OF THIS EARTH" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p.

6);

2) "ADAM IS THE ONLY GOD WITH WHOM WE HAVE TO DO," (Journal of Discourses, vol.

1, p. 50);

3) "ADAM IS THE FATHER OF OUR SPIRITS" (Deseret News, 14. June 1873;

4) ADAM, THE FATHER OF JESUS CHRIST (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp. 50-51).

Heber C. Kimball, the First Counselor to Brigham Young, also taught:

"I have learned by experience that there is but one God that pertains to this

people, and he is the God that pertains to this earth - THE FIRST MAN. THAT

FIRST MAN SENT HIS OWN SON TO REDEEM THE WORLD..." (Journal of Discourses, vol.

4, p. 1.)

Brigham Young had claimed that God Himself had revealed this doctrine to him.

Brigham also had claimed that his sermons were "as good as scripture" (J. of D.,

vol. 13, p. 166). If that is so, then how can the LDS Church today logically

reject his teachings that he said came from his God? - (Who was Brigham's God?

Joseph Smith had said: "Some revelations are from God: some revelations are of

man: and some are of the devil..." - "Address to All Believers in Christ", p.

31. - Who determines the source of the revelations, the followers or the

prophet?) - Further, if Brigham Young was wrong, how can the modern Church

accept him as an authority from God? The LDS Church teaches that there must be

an unbroken link of true prophets after the restoration, otherwise the authority

would be lost. Contradicting Brigham Young now only proves the incredibility of

both the modern Church and Brigham Young, and breaks the link.

One could go on and on about these teachings that clearly show the non-Christian

nature of the LDS Church. But let's look now at some of the LDS Church's

teachings of today about Adam: In the Doctrine and Covenants 27:11, Adam is

referred to as the Ancient of Days, spoken by Daniel the prophet ( in Daniel

7:9-14.) But the Ancient of Days is one of the names of GOD ALMIGHTY in the

Bible, not Adam. There is absolutely no question about that! There is also no

question that the LDS Church believes and teaches that Adam is that one, the

Ancient of Days, who will judge the world. Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, in his

book, "Mormon Doctrine," page 34 says:

"Adam is known as the Ancient of Days... In this capacity he will yet sit in

formal judgment upon 'ten thousand times ten thousand'..."

In the Temple ceremony, Michael, the Archangel, is one of the creators of the

world and he then "becomes" Adam. According to Mormonism, "GODS" created the

world, (see Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 4 and 5), Adam being one of them, one

of three gods. It is clearly implied that he is God. There are more writings and

documented evidence to this fact.

What does the LDS Church teach about Jesus Christ? First of all, it is already

documented above that Brigham Young taught that he (Jesus) was a spirit child of

Adam and spirit brother of all human kind, as well as a brother of angels,

spirit beings, even the fallen ones, i.e., Jesus being a brother of Lucifer.

Brigham further taught that he (Jesus) was also physically a son of Adam, who,

as an exalted, resurrected being, came to Mary and fathered Jesus. Brigham has

emphasized that Jesus was not begotten by the Holy Ghost, as the Bible says.

This teaching shows that Jesus of the LDS Church is not "Emmanuel," "God with

us;" God, who, according to the Bible (Matt. 1:23), became a man for us, to be

our Redeemer. Jesus of the LDS Church is a created being, who also had to be

redeemed... But, Jesus of the Bible is The Creator - UNCREATED GOD who created

everything, including Lucifer (John 1:3; Col.1:16). Let's look at the modern

teachings of the LDS Church: President Ezra Taft Benson said, in his book, "Come

unto Christ," page 4:

"...The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was SIRED by that

Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father. Jesus was not the son of

Joseph, nor was He begotten by the Holy Ghost. He is the Son of the Eternal

Father."

Bruce R. McConkie, in his book, Mormon Doctrine, on page 742, says:

"God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And

Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was

born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born

to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about this paternity; he was

BEGOTTEN, CONCEIVED and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he

is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says." McConkie, in the

same book, pages 546-547, says further, under the heading "ONLY BEGOTTEN SON":

"...Each word is to be understood literally. Only means only; Begotten means

begotten; and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the

SAME WAY THAT MORTAL MEN ARE BEGOTTEN BY THEIR MORTAL FATHERS."

This is not what the Bible says. The Bible tells that a Virgin will conceive and

bring forth a Son, who is called Emmanuel, meaning "God with us" (not a brother

with us!) (Matt. 1:18-23) M ary of the LDS Church was not a Virgin who brought

forth a son, but a "wife" of the heavenly Father, whom Brigham declared to be

Adam. Orson Pratt, an apostle, told in his doctrinal book entitled, "The Seer,"

page 158: "...The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father.

Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have

been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin

Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father.

Inasmuch as God was the first HUSBAND TO HER (Mary), it may be that He only gave

her to be the wife of Joseph while in this mortal state, and that He intended

after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up

immortal spirits in eternity..."

The leaders of the LDS Church have also taught that their Jesus was married and

had children, and that he was even a polygamist. Apostle Orson Pratt, in his

book, The Seer, page 172, says:

"...the great Messiah who was the founder of the Christian religion was a

Polygamist...the Messiah chose to take upon himself his seed; and by marrying

many honorable wives himself, show to all future generations that he approved

the plurality of Wives under Christian dispensation... The son followed the

example of his Father, and became the great Bridegroom to whom kings' daughters

and many of the honorable Wives were to be married. We have also proved that

both God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ inherit their wives in eternity as

well as in time..."

Joseph Fielding Smith, who was the president of the LDS Church in 1970's, said,

in an answer to a question: "Was Jesus married?" - "Yes, but do not throw pearls

to the swine!" We can clearly see that the LDS church still believes that Jesus

was married, but doesn't want to "throw pearls to the swine" or to reveal this

to the non-Mormons.

Bernard P. Brockbank, in the LDS Church's 147th General Conference, said that

the CHRIST FOLLOWED BY THE MORMONS IS NOT THE CHRIST FOLLOWED BY TRADITIONAL

CHRISTIANITY; he said:

"... It is true that many of the Christian churches worship A DIFFERENT JESUS

CHRIST than is worshipped by the Mormons..." ("The Ensign," May 1977, p. 26.)

In summary, Jesus of the LDS Church is not Jesus of the Bible. God of the LDS

Church is not God of the Bible. Joseph Smith said that there is "A GOD ABOVE THE

FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST..." and in Mormon Doctrine, pages 332-323, we

read: "...If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and ... God the Father of Jesus

Christ had a Father, you may suppose that he had a Father also. Where was there

ever a son without a father? ...Hence if Jesus had a Father, can we not believe

that he had a Father also?" Joseph Smith, in 1844, as recorded in the Teachings

of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pages 344-347, first told the audience that:

"...every man has a natural, and, in our country, a constitutional right to be a

FALSE PROPHET, as well as a true one..." Then on the next page, he says: "...I

am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that

God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil,

so that you may see." He tells that "...God himself was once as we are now...and

you got to learn how to be Gods yourselves... the same as all Gods have done

before you..."

The God of the Bible says: "...Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God; I

KNOW NOT ANY." (Isa. 44:10) If God had a father and he had a father and so on,

God of the Bible surely would know that! In the Bible, God calls us to "know,"

to "believe" and to "understand" who He is. He says: "Ye are my witnesses, saith

the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may KNOW and BELIEVE me,

and UNDERSTAND that I am he: BEFORE ME THERE WAS NO GOD FORMED, NEITHER SHALL

THERE BE AFTER ME." (Isaiah 43:10) To Joseph Smith and to all Mormons, that

simply means: THEY WILL NOT BECOME GODS! They cannot "learn" how to become gods!

God of the Bible says so! God says: "I AM THE LORD, AND THERE IS NONE ELSE,

THERE IS NO GOD BESIDE ME..." (Isa. 45:5) God tells what happens to the false

prophets who try to lead people after other gods: "If there arise among you a

prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the

sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go

after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; thou shalt

not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or the dreamer of dreams: for the

LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all

your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and

fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him,

and cleave unto him. AND THAT PROPHET, OR THAT DREAMER OF DREAMS, SHALL BE PUT

TO DEATH; BECAUSE HE HAD SPOKEN TO TURN YOU AWAY FROM THE LORD YOUR GOD..."

(Deut. 13:1-5) It is interesting to note that about six weeks after Joseph Smith

had preached this sermon (in April 1844), that men will and can become gods and

that God was not God from all eternity, Joseph was killed!! Coincidence??

(Orthodox Jews have a saying: "Coincidence is not a kosher word!")

The Bible tells that God is God "from everlasting to everlasting" (Ps. 90:2),

and when speaking about Messiah, GOD BECOMING A MAN (not a man becoming God!) it

says: "For unto us a child is born, unto us the son is given:.. and his name

shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, THE EVERLASING FATHER, THE

PRINCE OF PEACE" (Isa. 9:6), and "Art thou not from EVERLASTING, O LORD MY GOD,

MINE HOLY ONE?" (Hab. 1:12) To the believers of the God of the Bible are given

these comforting words: 'THE ETERNAL GOD IS THY REFUGE, AND UNDERNEATH ARE THE

EVERLASTING ARMS..." (Deut. 33:27) To the followers of Joseph Smith, Brigham

Young, and today's LDS prophets, we would like to say, as Joshua said to Israel:

"...choose you this day whom ye will serve... but as for me and my house, we

will serve the LORD." (Joshua 24:15)

In the English Bible (KJV), whenever the word LORD is in all capital letters, in

Hebrew it is a name of God, represented by consonants JHWH (Hebrews didn't dare

to pronounce it) and it is translated both LORD or GOD. When God spoke to Moses,

He declared Himself to be God, the Great I AM, and He told that by His name JHWH

(JE-HO-VAH) he was not known to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. This was the first

time that He revealed His name (Exodus 6:3).

Throughout the Bible, the words "I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD" (i.e., Ex. 6:7) or "I

THE LORD GOD" are used by God to tell the prophet who is speaking. The word LORD

(JHWH) and the word GOD (ELOHYIM) (Eloheim) are used as in the example above: I,

THE LORD GOD, (not we, like Mormon doctrine teaches). Speaking of the Godhead,

"Mormon Doctrine," page 576, says: "...As each of these persons is a God, it is

evident, from this standpoint alone, that a plurality of Gods exists." In

Hebrew, the word EL means God, word Eloheim is plural form of the word

(similarly, the word Cherub is singular and the word Cherubim is plural). When

we read in our English Bible: "I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD," if we put it back into

Hebrew, it would read: "I am JHWH your Eloheim." One doesn't get two gods from

it - but only one God. Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible as a word, but

plurality of persons in ONE GOD is clearly demonstrated throughout the Bible.

The Bible came to us through Israel. To the Jew there is but one God, JHWH.

Deut. 6:4 is what Jews repeat daily and with their dying breath say: "Hear, O

Israel, LORD our GOD is one LORD" or in Hebrew: "Hear, O Israel, JHWH our

Eloheim is JHWH." Most people agree that Father is God. The Bible teaches that

Jesus is God (i.e., John 1:1, 14; 20:28), and that Holy Ghost is God (comp. Acts

5:3 and 4, and 1 Cor. 3:17 with 6:19), but the Bible also teaches that THERE IS

ONLY ONE GOD. In Isa. 45, verses 5, 6, 14, 18, 21, 22, God says that there is no

other God or Lord. Other examples: Deut. 4:35 and 39; 32:39; I Sam. 2:2; II Sam.

7:22; 22:32, I Kings 8:60; Ps. 18:31; Jer. 10:10; Gal. 3:20; Eph. 4:6; Mark

12:32 and 34. In James 2:19, it tells that even demons know that there is only

one God. Why is it that the LDS Church doesn't know that? The LDS Church often

says that there is more than one god, because God, in Gen. 1:26, says: "And God

said, let us make man in our image..." Note that there is only one image, and

the next verse clears it by saying: "So God created man in HIS own image... in

the image of God created HE them: (Not WE!) The word Eloheim (GOD) refers to the

Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but the verb is in the singular in every

case where plural form Eloheim appears. Examples of what God says about Himself:

"I, the Lord God" (I JHWH Eloheim), not "we", (JHWH and Eloheim) or "I AM THE

LORD YOUR GOD," not, "we are" JHWH and Eloheim.

Since the Bible declares itself as being God's word, it doesn't "argue" about

God. The Bible clearly tells that His ways and thoughts are far above our

thoughts, but that through the Holy Spirit we will learn to understand what He

has done for us and how great His love is towards us. God has given us a simple

way, one way, narrow way. Let no one confuse you of that. Jesus said: "I am the

way, the truth and the life." He said, in John 17:3: "...this is eternal life to

know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." Just because

you may have believed previously false teachings of the LDS Church, it doesn't

mean that you cannot now accept the truth from God's Word, the Bible.

Dennis & Rauni Higley

 

 

 

Click here to write to the authors, Dennis and Rauni, of this specific story

 

Back to Recovery from Mormonism