Word o’ God

I canot believe they passed this!  What corruption, they must have in CA.  The LDS church really helped get it passed.  So many things wrong with the proposition and the way it got passed, I would not know where to start.  So just watch the video.

What follows is a brief chain of email correspondences between Ed Decker and myself.  Ed is one of the minds behind the movie “The God Makers” and the main drive behind the very controversial “God Makers 2″, he has also recently started his own Christian ministry.  (You should google the story about the second movie.)  Really why exaggerate and make things up, when the truth is bad enough on its own?     I gained what I think is a better perspective from this conversation so I thought I would share it. I am putting my original email first followed by his response and finally my rebuttal…

To: ED

Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:28 AMSubject: question 

Ed, I probably know the answer but I want to ask anyway. 

I have read and listened to a lot of your work.  I completely understand your views on Mormonism.  I myself am an exMormon.  A problem I have with some exMormons is that they reject Mormonism, on a logical basis.  (which I agree with) but then they lack the will to continue that logical progression.  How can you not continue to hold Christianity to the same Logical standards that allowed you to discredit Mormonism? 

Why support a more basic corruption? Mormonism is simply lies built on top of lies.  It just seems to me that an exMormon Christian, might as well have remained a Mormon.  

Unless the person left for personal and not logical reasons.  They have simply traded imaginary Celestial Kingdom, imaginary outer darkness for imaginary Heaven, imaginary hell.

My wife was a convert and she shed the Mormon skin quite easily, in comparison to me a bred and raised Mormon.  However when faced with the mountains of proof regarding Christianity and the God of the bible, she refuses to bend.  She accepts her college education in relation to no flood, Jews not being slaves in Egypt, etc etc  But she cannot let go of the mythology.  She admits that there are dire problems from the Jesus story being barrowed from earlier history, to the bible itself being anything but a collection of writings from unknown and unknowing sources.  And will not even try to defend it.  She admits she does not want to give up the last piece of faith she has.   

I have a hard time understanding this paradigm.  I assume it is due to my own experience, It was probably the most extreme experience of my life, realizing that my belief was corrupt.  All other life experiences, realizations, perspectives, everything pales in comparison.   So it is very easy to accept that anything, and everything else has the potential to be corrupt.  Being a convert must allow a person the ability to segregate the Mormon portions from the Christian aspects and place the later in a “do not open” portion of the brain.  

Any insight you might have from your perspective would be greatly appreciated. 

From: Ed Decker 
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 2:00 PM
To: admin@wordogod.com
Subject: Re: question 

Dear XXXXX,  Thanks for writing about this concern. It is one many deal  with, esp. when they leave a cult like Msm. We  each select want we choose to believe in.. I choose to believe the Bible to be the true word of God and live my life by it. If my wife and I and your wife are wrong, we have enjoyed a life given to others  in peace and joy and end up ashes as you believe you will end up. If we are right , we go to be with the Prince of Peace and you end up in hell.  It is all a matter of choice.. With best regards, 

 Keeping you in prayer,
Ed Decker
Saints Alive in Jesus  go to: www.saintsalive.com
sign up for our Email Newsletter

*************************************************************************************************** 

Ed,     Thank you so much for responding, and sharing your thoughts. While I do greatly appreciate your correspondence and acknowledge that you did so out of complete kindness and with a heart of charity; I do feel compelled to tell you that the logic of your response is flawed.       Unless I am completely misunderstanding you, you are gambling with what in your mind is your very salvation.  What I draw from your statement is that “I am Christian and defend Christianity, on the grounds that IF it is true, I will be in a place of glory and others will not!”     regardless of logic, facts, or proof.     

    Using this thought pattern we may just meet in Jahannam if the majority of humanity (Muslims) are correct, perhaps we should follow and defend them?  That is if you are a gambling man!     It would appear hypocritical for someone to publicly question a groups “choice” to believe in a 1800’s prophet while they themselves purvey  an equally apocryphal “choice”.    

  In my observations, the only people who passionately defend a “choice of” or “belief in” a religion, are either delusional or delusive.     Please do not take my comments as anything but an inquisitive drive.  I simply feel a need to understand this thinking process.  I do not intend to provoke any negative feelings or responses, but rather some deeper thoughts.   

 The bottom line is that, there is no more proof that the god of the Hebrew bible exist than there is proof that the God of the Mormons exist.  By taking a conscience stand against one and defending the other, it would be expected that you have some profound evidence that the rest of us lack.   That evidence is what I am seeking.  Again, Thank you for your response. Sincerely your fellow searcher.

***************************************************************************************************

I will try to remember to update this entry with his response if he chooses to make one.

One of the more fascinating subjects of Mormon history that I have found.   The Deseret Alphabet, Mormon Alphabet, or Temple Alphabet as it has been called; is simply a phonetic alphabet commisioned by the early LDS church.   Here is a research paper I wrote on the subject…

Deseret Alphabet booklet

It is a pdf so you’ll need a reader.  

I also created a small application to translate between standard english and deseret, today most people will not run a “.exe” from the web.  but this is really just a small vb app that uses SAPI from M$.  

Zip file containing translate.exe

If you have Sapi(voice) working it will read deseret to you.  Pretty cool, if I do say so myself.

Here are some PDF’s of things in deseret…

a few images from an original BOM in Deseret

First reader

Second reader

Family Proclamation to the World

For as long as humans have believed in religion there has probably been some form of “end times” belief.  A threat of impending doom to behave and get your life in order; not because it is the right thing to do, but rather so you might obtain some reward for it.  Like a child in the store with it’s Mother, if you behave I will buy you some candy at the register on the way out!  There have been a few religious zelots throughout time that have actually been bold enough to step up and give us an exact date.  One that I recently read about was the originator of the Jehovah’s witnesses, Charles Russell.  His story is very intriguing, He actually predicted it more than once, when the date came and nothing happened he would just move it up a few years.  Yes there are still followers today! Go figure??? 
    I am certain there are several in our current time, that have marked an X on the calendar as well.  One such prophetic individual that I stumbled across today is a Mr. Ronald Weinland.  I believe he is a former “WWChurch of God” pastor/preacher. 
    Note: For those that do not know about the “World Wide Church of God”…  First of all it is worth researching.  It was founded by Herbert Armstrong a radio talk show host in CA.  He amassed a rather large following and huge $$chunk o’ change$$.  Started a college etc etc.  Sometime in the 80’s after his death the leadership being somewhat more learned came out and devastated the membership by admitting that Herbert had made it all up!   (they pretty much did the right thing but suffered by losing most of their members.)  My brief note really does not serve justice to the tale, but you can find the details online.
I have emailed Ronald to try and verify if he was/is affiliated with the WWCOG, I’ll update this if he replies.   So Ronald says God called him as a prophet in 1996.  And that the end of time will begin in April of 2008, just around the corner.  He seems to be quite the celebrity; you can listen to a number of interviews with talk shows around the world on his site.  He will even send you a copy of his latest book.  His site contains a lot of interesting information, not to mention his mailing address so that you may send him a 10% tithing of your income (after taxes, he says).   I guess it aint cheap traveling around the world with his wife.  He is defiantly sure of the 2008 date though.     So how can I be sure if he really believes what he is preaching?  The only thing I could come up with was a wager, but what to gamble with?  Well if he really knew that currency would be worthless, etc in April, then what could I offer?  I always thought it was funny when as a child we would loose a bet and have to be the victors slave for a day, so that seemed the most practical deal.   I have challenged Ron to a wager, If his revelation comes to pass then I shall be his personal servant for the term of one year, unless I meet my demise in the madness that ensues during the first year of the apocalypse.  In return if as I believe the world continues to roll on as good or bad as it is, then he becomes my personal assistant for the year.  If his God really told him what he claims then he should have no reservations accepting my offer.  On the other hand if he refuses then I think we all know what that indicates.  If you want to check out his site it is http://www.the-end.com/ it links to several others he has setup.

One man’s sin is another man’s Godly right.  I think I have found one of the funniest sites on the web.  This morning, just for kicks I went to google to see if my blog even showed up in the list.  So I entered “word of god” of course my blog was nowhere to be seen!  But at the top of the list was a rather interesting site … www.sexinchrist.com It is a site that uses the bible to vindicate everything from Viagra to Anal Sex!  While most are very loose interpretations and some even absurd definitions of biblical passages, some seem validated. 

   At first I thought it was a joke, but after reading a few topics (purely for research purposes) I realized the author is serious.  I have always felt that you could use the bible to prove almost any point of view you agreed with, or to disprove the same. 

Why would a deity provide you with a guide that left so much room for interpretation?   Exactly, he wouldn’t!

 I had a discussion with a TBM a while back, I made the statement that the resurrection story could only be found in the bible, which was written years (70+) later.  None of the scribes or surviving documents from the actual time of Christ even mention it(or him for that matter).  He said “well because God works on Faith, so there is no proof that it happened, because then you would not be able to rely on faith.”   Hmm, I thought about that for a while but I can’t seem to understand what the Bible and the BoM are for then.  I mean the Bible is referred to as exactly that “the word of God!” telling us the story so we know what to believe.  The BoM is a “second witness to the truth that Jesus died for us and was resurrected”.  So which is it?  Faith or Historical evidence that we should follow?  Either we throw out all documented historical evidence, of any form, including the scriptures and go completely on Faith that what our parents have taught us is correct.  Or we look at all the evidence and make a logical informed decision on our own, weighing all the evidence available to us.  I prefer the later, if your parents tricked you into believing a fat man in a red suit was watching you to get you to behave through the month of December, maybe the conspiracy is a little bigger than that!  Maybe?

This morning my good friend at www.themormonmind.com sent me this link…

Mother Teresa’s Crisis of Faith 

The article on CNN about mother Teresa’s struggle with what seemed to me to be a void of any proof in her faith.  It is a rather long article as they go.  And I do not wish to summarize it, but rather make a few comments.  
    Like most people I have experienced some envy in my life.  At times during my TBM days, I would attend a meeting where the speaker would boast of some recent inspiration, or participate in a discussion where someone would relate a dream with evident revelatory content, or even a vision of sorts.  In Sunday school we would discuss biblical visions, early leaders’ experiences of heavenly visitors, modern prophets meetings with deity and our own personal revelations.  I would attend the Temple and sitting in the celestial room, observe other TBMs around me, while they spoke of the overpowering Spirit that enveloped the beautiful room, I felt inferior.   You see, I always had a hard time accepting the feeling of friendship, awe of beauty, and general love of fellow man as anything more than that.  I thought to myself what is wrong with me; does the God that loves all his children not love me as much as he does the bishop?  I prayed for and craved the personal revelation that others claimed.  When ever my current calling (job) at church would require me to seek revelation, with the cooperation of others, I would just agree with their general feelings.  When administering blessings, I would consciously refuse to pre-plan what to say, in an attempt to “allow the spirit to flow”.   I never said anything that I was not completely conscious of, and nothing remotely inspired.  These other people had to be feeling things I was not, receiving promptings that were directed by more than basic human observation.  Oh I grew more envious as time went by.              The zenith was probably when a good friend told me, that while attending sacrament meeting, he was prompted that an elderly woman of the congregation was in need.  He felt compelled to give her a gift of the money he had on his person that day.  She was extremely grateful and very impressed with his reception of the spirit, and now would be able to pay her power bill.  Not to belittle the experience, he was very perceptive of the woman and her current emotional state.  However looking back on it, the woman was well known to be in some form of distress on a regular bases; this distress was generally financial.  Being a very affectionate and caring person he was attentive of her current emotional state.  There was no mystical nudge or angel on his shoulder.  I feel quite silly now for believing there was anything more than what it really was. 

            The simple truth is that even if there is a God he has not made himself known to us.  That is right; the ones who claim he has are either delusional or delusive.

                Many people including myself have been anxiously awaiting the release of the movie “September Dawn”.  There is a mysterious air surrounding this movie; you see it was filmed over a year ago, possibly two.  Twice the release has been postponed; the official website has undergone extensive changes, mostly reduction of content.  Some are pointing fingers at the church, due to the content of the movie.  While the story is historical fiction, it touches on one of the most grotesque subjects in Mormon history.  While the majority of the church fellowship knows nothing about it, the ones that do are often gravely misinformed.  The film portrays a romance between a Mormon girl and a gentile boy that happens to be a part of the Fancher wagon train.  The people of the wagon train were the victims of the Mountain Meadows Massacre.   

                If this extremely graphical drama were to be released and viewed by current LDS members, that are either unaware of the events, or at least some of the true events, it could be very devastating.  Just as I was shocked the first time I read of Martin Harris’s confession to the leaders of the church in Kirtland that “no one had ever actually seen the golden plates”, so too would the modern saints of the church be shocked.  How could you soften the blow, so to speak, of such a shocking dramatization?   One way would be to preempt it by doing something you have not done in the 150 years since the incident occurred, publicly address it to your followers.  This way you can take some of the proverbial sting out of the punch. 

It is ironic that this month (August 2007) in the Ensign there is a rather long article about the Mountain Meadows Massacre; also a new book on the subject has been commissioned by the church and soon to be released (Just in case you need additional information).  If I were conspiracy minded I would conclude that the church was successful in convincing the producers of the movie to hold off the release until they had completed their preemptive strike (as it were).

For one hundred fifty years church historians and LDS writers have misled the curious, by providing false information, limited information or just totally avoiding the subject. 
As an example…
      I had always avoided the Mountain Meadows Massacre when talking with my father about issues I had found with the church, partly because it was so depressing and partly because I hated the thought of putting him in a position where he would feel he had to defend such an atrocity.  One evening he actually brought it up.  He wanted to know if it was perhaps one of my problems with the church.  Now my father was sixty-six years old at this point, and has spent all of them in the church.  My father has been a branch president more than once, served a mission, had stake callings, is a high priest, you name it he has probably done it, when it comes to the church.  I was not totally surprised when he said something like “well you know it was the Indians, they were upset because the wagon train had polluted the water upstream with dead animals.  The Mormons were sort of caught in the middle. Trying to appease the Indians.”  He had been curious at some point and even acquired a book (apparently from a LDS source)  I am sure in his sixty-six years of church meetings he had never heard a detailed discussion or even mention of the event. 

While I do welcome the few admissions of facts in the Ensign article, at first I was not sure why they would provide them to the general membership.  I assume that the normal yarns would not be passable in today’s information age; there are too many people that have the proof to dispute a modern blatant deceit.  However as anyone that has really studied this Massacre, may deduce, they still leave out important details, and draw very broad conclusions.  I will grant that it would take more than every page of the magazine to provide the scope of the information available. 

I do not want, nor could I in a few pages discuss all the important details, however I do feel it my duty to point out a few things… 
                The article avoids any of the preface to the attack or the conditioning the Mormon citizens had been enduring from the leadership of the church.  Proof of the mentality of the people is evident when you consider other similar actions of the people, like the Circleville Massacre.  Also you have the discussions John D. Lee has testified to having with his direct leaders, and church officials.
                While some historians dispute the tale of the two horsemen being confronted and one being shot while the other reentered the camp with news that it was really white men and not Indians that were attacking them, requiring the Militia to kill them all to prevent them from telling (The ensign article does not give you enough details here anyway).   This concept really does not make sense because, to begin with how could two horsemen escape an encircled wagon train ( which by the way, is more than the wagons parked end to end in a circle) ,  surrounded by militia men in Indian garb, and real Indians (well on the first day anyway) without even being noticed?  And then the single surviving horseman is able to reenter the entrenchment?  Even if this scenario had taken place, would the victims blindly surrender to the very people that they had just discovered were imitating Indians, under the pretence that John had arranged a truce with said fake Indians?   Huh?
                I really like the one-liner that says a witness “Johnson” stated that settlers did most of the killing.  It is more likely that they did all of the killing.  There is evidence that the Indians left after the first day when some of their men were mortally wounded, and they also feared repercussions of the federal Government if the Mormons used them as scapegoats, which they tried to do anyway  (they had been victims of the Government before, not fun!).  At this point it was really not worth a few cattle, and it was very uncharacteristic of them to endure a prolonged siege.
                The addition of some of the details in this article implies that, as most people assume anyway, the church has a lot more details than they are admitting.  While this is most likely in self defense, and reasonably so, it is still wrong.
                One point that impressed me in the whole horrid affair was the US Army’s response, which seems to be unimportant in this article.  When the Army finally arrived and began to investigate the Massacre, the first thing they did was collect the bodies, that had been left naked strewn in the valley unprotected from the elements and the wild animals, and erected a makeshift grave and memorial, with a cross inscribed with the words “Vengeance is mine. I will repay, saith the Lord”.  Secondly the Captain that discovered that there were children that had been spared and distributed amongst LDS families, he demanded the return of the children at gun point.
                In my opinion there are two events that prove undeniably that the 1857 leadership of the church condoned the killing of those people.  Brigham Young and his entourage some time later while visiting some of the outlying territories passed by the afore mentioned monument that the Army had erected, after reading the inscription he raised his arm to the square and said “Vengeance is mine, and I have taken a little” after this, some of his men disassembled the monument and “not a stone was left in place”.  Far worse Isaac Haight and John D. Lee were justly excommunicated from the church, the only two men to be punished.  However Isaac Haight was later reinstated to the church.  John D. Lee was executed on the site of the massacre.  Believe it or not John D. Lee was posthumously reinstated to the church with full restoration of office and status.       Do you really need to know anything else?                As a summary we have gone from “the Indians did it” to well “John D. Lee did it” to now “it was the local leadership acting on their own with out any preconceptions placed by the leaders of the church”, perhaps in another one-hundred-fifty years we will get the whole truth. 

So this is a stake president of a rather large area, Manhattan, New York.  He does not know anything about the church.  First of all polygamy was not ended due to “a revelation from God”,  and yes the church still does believe in polygamy (it’s still in the D&C), The church has not always been called “the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints”, and it is not taught as an alternative!

I just thought this was funny. 

JD 1:133, Brigham Young, April 6, 1853Perhaps it may make some of you stumble, were I to ask you a question - Does a man’s being a Prophet in this Church prove that he shall be the President of it? I answer, no! A man may be a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and it may have nothing to do with his being the President of the Church. Suffice it to say, that Joseph was the President of the Church, as long as he lived: the people chose to have it so. He always filled that responsible station, by the voice of the people. Can you find any revelation appointing him the President of the Church? The keys of the Priesthood were committed to Joseph, to build up the Kingdom of God on the earth, and were not to be taken from him in time or in eternity; but when he was called to preside over the Church, it was by the voice of the people; though he held the keys of the Priesthood, independent of their voice.