Containing 5,890 Articles Spanning 370 Topics  
Ex-Mormon News, Stories And Recovery  
Online Since January 1, 2005  
topic image
Worship Service? Is It Really Called That Now?
Friday, Aug 15, 2014, at 08:18 AM
Original Author(s): Revived
Topic: CHANGING DOCTRINE   -Link To MC Article-
This is very similar to how the LDS church avoided, and disapproved of displays of an actual CROSS for years. When I became a "member" several years ago, I wore a necklace with a small gold-plated Cross to one of my first "Sacrament" meetings and subsequent missionary lessons... Wow! In Sacrament, one of the older (elderly) LDS members advised that I shouldn't be wearing that 'symbol' as it (the Cross) represented, only, the death of Jesus Christ and was a symbol not to be acknowledged by members of the LDS church.

What was strange was that the 'just-out-of-high-school' LDS missionaries also seemed to have somewhat of a problem with me wearing my Cross when noticed during one particular lesson. As the two LDS missionaries read through their dog-earred and bookmarked pages (lots of yellow sticky-notes) of their missionary guide training manual and other hand-outs, wearing a Cross was apparently something that an LDS member should not do!!! For a few years, this was pooh-poohed by my local LDS congregation.

How does this all apply to present LDS terminology if the change to "Worship Service - VS- Sacrament" is factual? From my prospective, it's very simple. Approximately 8-9 years after being called-out by LDS members and missionaries for wearing my Cross as an inactive, I went to a Sunday morning Easter service at my local LDS chapel and was surprised when I picked-up their Easter-day church bulletin as it featured three crosses. Hmmm... It was wrong according to all of them for years, but then it was suddently now OK to display a Cross?

Well... To 'better-fit-in' with the rest of the Christian world, you change the terminology through divine revelation, i.e. -

- The term "Sacrament", according to you here, is now called "Worship Service." I'd like to follow-up on this...

- Display of the Cross (from my personal experience) became acceptable within local wards / stakes. I must note that this seems to fall in line with the LDS church trying to be more 'mainstream' to 'fit-in' with the Christian world, just as it was 'revelation' that forced the LDS church to change their stance on priesthood members having explicit physical relations with other women while already married, or blacks (African Americans) being denied the priesthood.

FYI - Many missionaries now 'testify' that the reason for the LDS 'doctrine' of plural marriage was due to the 'alleged fact' that there were many more women than men during their early pioneer history. I've heard this claim countless times from missionaries and members alike. I don't think so. The oracles of God had to have a 'revelation' to change this stance - their early church publications would seem to counter what they now say. As for blacks? Hmmm... When the LDS church was finally pressured for THEIR (not other's) very, very well documented and racist teachings via their church leaders and/or publications, A-HA! Finally, there was a 'revelation' proclaiming that blacks and darker-skinned humans were now acceptable within the LDS ranks, i.e. - their priesthood.

And so it goes with the 'Oracles of God' (a self-defined term by LDS writers/authorities), gradually, and slowly, revising their 'ever-evolving' terminology and 'official doctrine' to gain more acceptance as "Christians" - that is, if what you're claiming here is true. I've observed many other similar changes over the years, but again I'd like to see if my local wards/stakes are doing this as well.

Regardless, just love them for where they're at and pray for them. They're not a 'peculiar people' by any means. I've seen it all. LDS members are sinners, just like the rest of us.
topic image
When Did You Realize That Your Dress Wouldn't Be Seen At The Temple?
Thursday, Aug 14, 2014, at 09:38 AM
Original Author(s): Releve
Topic: MORMON TEMPLES - SECTION 4   -Link To MC Article-
This is a sad conversation. A bride should know this information in advance. I think your mothers should have told you that you would be wearing a robe over your dress.

I sold and did alterations (temple fills) on bridal gowns and I told girls that their wedding dress would be covered in the temple. That was not hush, hush sacred information.

The gown that can be worn in the temple must have opaque sleeves to the elbow and a higher, lined neckline than the neckline that would just cover garments. Sometimes the alterations that were needed for the temple but not to cover garments were expensive and made the dress ugly. When that was the case, I would mention to the bride that the dress would not be seen and that a simple temple dress for the sealing and changing into her wedding gown for pictures, might be a better choice. I wanted the bride to have a pretty dress for the reception, but I didn't want to have the temple matrons cramming sleevlets and dickies into her dress.

I can't believe how many women I have met, who have left TSCC, who are really angry about the way they had to look when they got married. It's a shame that they can't get that day back.
topic image
When Did You Realize That Your Dress Wouldn't Be Seen At The Temple?
Thursday, Aug 14, 2014, at 09:33 AM
Original Author(s): Normarae
Topic: MORMON TEMPLES - SECTION 4   -Link To MC Article-
When did you realize that your dress wouldn't be seen at the temple?

No one told me I'd have to wear the clown costume over my wedding dress until we were in the bride's room and I grabbed my wedding veil to put it on and my mother came unglued and let me know I had to wear the temple veil. And that thing is so butt ugly and polygamist looking. Then she handed me the fig leaf and stuff and I spent from that moment until it was over and we got outside, trying to hold the tears back.

I thought that since I wasn't going through an endowment, I didn't wear the endowment garb. There was no internet or any spill-the-beans apostates around to tell me anything. So there we were, looking into the eternity mirrors and all I could see was a never-ending circus.
topic image
Seminary - New Rules
Wednesday, Aug 13, 2014, at 07:41 AM
Original Author(s): Red Ryder
Topic: SEMINARY   -Link To MC Article-
An open house was held for parents to meet the seminary teachers and learn about the new levels of graduation certificates. During this meeting the teacher clarified a few things:

Seminary graduation certificate

Mandatory attendance requirements, reading requirements, and a passed written exam are required in order to graduate for the year. An ecclesiastical endorsement (worthiness interview) will be required. Students can take the test as many times as they want until they get the minimum passing grade.

Edited to add: sophomores, juniors, and seniors will be grandfathered in.

If requirements are not met, the student will still receive a certificate of participation. The teacher mentioned the importance of the graduation certificate in that it was needed for entrance into a church owned college and also to get a missionary visa for specific countries. Brazil no longer allows visas for missionary service unless the missionary has been properly trained as clergy. The new 4 year graduation certificate will count as proof but has to be notarized similar to college transcripts. The teacher stated England was similar and expected most of Europe to follow in the future.

New Emphasis on Historical issues

The teacher was excited to share that word has come down from the brethren that historical issues will be taught and discussed. Issues like Mountain Meadows massacre, multiple versions of the first vision, JS polygamy, and others. He spent a few minutes explaining that many kids leave high school and go off to college and are getting challenged in their beliefs. They come across historical issues and feel like they were lied to. The new approach is to "teach these issues so that when the LIES come, they will know the TRUTH".

He wrapped up with his testimony that this generation is the chosen generation and shed a few tears while extending his gratitude for getting to work as a CES employee.
topic image
Ask Angela: Young Single Adult Wards Are Immature
Tuesday, Aug 12, 2014, at 07:31 AM
Original Author(s): Bazooka
Topic: THE SINGLE WARDS   -Link To MC Article-
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/8656 ... ivity.html

Quote:
Dear Angela: I'm supposed to go to the singles ward in my assigned geographic area. In this ward, however, all the activities, lessons and talks feel like they are created for a much younger age group. Most of our ward gatherings feel like mutual activities. I'd like to attend my assigned ward, but I'm 27 years old and I need to worship in a more mature and intellectually stimulating way. Any ideas?

Thanks,

Gettin' old I guess
Yet another article treating a "Primary" subject whilst ignoring the elephant in the room.... See:

Angela replies
Dear Gettin' old I guess,

There are a few things you could do. For starters, you could check out the local family ward. Sometimes family wards get a bad rap when you're single, but you'll be with older people (possibly more mature gospel discussions?) and may even meet some other single adults who are attending the family ward for the same reason. #NewFriends #Bonus
So, straight off the bat Angela advises "Getting' Old" to ignore the instruction and counsel from senior Church leadership.

Quote:
"This age-group tends to drift a little bit to different units, different wards," said Elder Steven E. Snow of the Presidency of the Seventy. "We hope this reduces confusion in their mind about where they should go to church, where they should worship."

The focus of Church leaders is to make sure that all young single adults have a place to call home, with the opportunity to serve and have their own spiritual needs met.

"We hope it [the change to location-based young single adult wards] will provide enhanced opportunities for them to serve in leadership positions," Elder Snow said. "We hope that it enhances their opportunities to meet other people and do meaningful service, and we want to deliver these opportunities in their geographic area, not require them to drive clear across the valley to attend church."

Another reason for the reorganization is to help local congregational leaders, or bishops, build stronger relationships with those in their congregations.

"[These bishops] really focus on the needs of the young single adults, from age 18 to 30, and we think that will increase accountability," Elder Snow said.

Although there are young single adult wards all over the United States, these changes will primarily impact those in Utah and Idaho. For the members along Utah's Wasatch Front, an additional change will be that all young single adult wards will now be part of a young single adult stake (similar to a diocese).

This transition has been underway for more than a year, and new young single adult stakes have already been organized in several areas of Utah, including Logan, Ogden, Cedar City, St. George and Ephraim. These same changes will be implemented in Salt Lake, Davis and Utah Counties in Utah by June. In most cases, it will simply be a matter of realigning boundaries, but there will also be a net increase of 12 young single adult stakes: 8 in Salt Lake County, 2 in Davis County and 2 in Utah County.

"It's been very successful. We've seen a lot of young people who haven't previously been engaged with the Church for a long time start to come back," Elder Snow said. "We are trying to get everyone in the fold. We want everyone to feel welcome."
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article... Angela wrote:
Fair warning, though, the grass is always greener on the other side. No ward or congregation is perfect, but it's worth checking out.
What? The grass is always greener so go check out other wards? I don't think Elder Snow would approve of such boundary promiscuity.

Angela wrote:
Second, you could approach your current YSA bishop about helping to plan the activities. You may even create specific activities for an older age group. If you're feeling this way, it's likely others are, too. Use your creativity and faith to find solutions.
Yeah, because females seeking more authority in the Church always ends well....

Angela wrote:
The last thing I'll say is that as you get older, your role in the ward changes a little bit. Membership statistics show that many religions lose members during their 20s, but not you. What have you done/learned/experienced that may help some other younger members of your singles ward? Teaching is a powerful way to worship and to feel the spirit.
Way to go Angela. Let's encourage "Getting' Old" to consider that people her age have left the Church so there must be a reason....and maybe she's missing out.

Angela wrote:
I hope some of these ideas help, let us know how it goes.

Love,

Angela
Once again Angela has gone for the 'Primary' and ignored the bigger problem.

The issue at play here is that the teaching programmes of the Church, all of them, are childish. Members are treated like six year olds. Adult discussion is frowned upon and eradicated, in favour of any lesson conclusion being summed up as "pray more, pay more, serve more, obey more".

'Getting Old' at 27 and single in the Church is a rarity. Her peer group has either been married for several years and now has children or they have left the Church.

The Church only caters for this demographic by herding them all together in the hopes they'll partner up and marry. YSA wards are designed merely as speed dating venues.
topic image
Details About LDS Inc Commercial Real Estate Project In Philadelphia + Other Enriching Ventures
Monday, Aug 11, 2014, at 09:17 AM
Original Author(s): Cdnxmo
Topic: MORMON MONEY - SECTION 3   -Link To MC Article-
The following are excerpts from Friday's Philly.com report (http://www.philly.com/philly/news/Mor...):

"After reviewing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' plans for an apartment tower, townhouses, retail space, and a meetinghouse at 1601 Vine St., the city Planning Commission's Design Review Committee advised the church to open a garden to the public, work with the Streets Department to improve traffic flow on adjacent Wood Street, and use a higher-grade material than blacktop in a public courtyard."

"The complex of residential, church and other spaces triggered CDR review because it is more than 100,000 square feet and calls for more than 100 residential units."

"The 148 market-rate dwelling units are split among the 32-story residential apartment tower and two rows of townhomes."

"The project also includes 11,000 square foot of retail space that 'holds the corner' of 16th and Vine."

And the expense of LD$ Inc.'s latest income-generating venture? From six months ago: "While church officials declined to say how much the project will cost, it is estimated to run roughly $120 million." (http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelph...)

In addition to the $120M development in Philadelphia, how much has the "restored" corporation of Mormonism's Je$u$ Chri$t spent during the past decade alone to expand its commercial real estate portfolio?

1) $3B for the City Creek project in SLC. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/70...

2) $565M for 382,834 acres of ranch and timberland in NW Florida. http://www.tampabay.com/news/business...

3) $72M for ~1,900 acres of virgin land in AZ (bought from two home builders: Fulton Homes Corp. and Shea Homes). http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepub...

4) $17.6M for 88,000 acres of ranchland in Nebraska. http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewto...

Add up these sums and you get $3,654,600,000 spent to increase LD$ Inc.'s wealth, longer-term. With that HUGE amount of money, the Mormon Church could have saved about TWO MILLION children from starving to death (between infancy and age five).

Clearly, the Latter-day $aint Je$u$ and his 'Profits' have had other priorities. He's the same imaginary Mormon being who's purportedly commanded that LD$ Church members hand over at least 1/10th of their allowance, money gifts, wages, salary, pension(s), inheritance(s), positive returns on investments, and all other increases of wealth to the financially secretive, religious-corporate organization headquartered in SLC.

Let's not forget Ensign Peak Advisors http://images.businessweek.com/slides..., LD$ Inc.'s wealth management and financial trading/investment firm. In 2006, an EPA vice-president, Laurence Stay, told Deseret News that the company did "billions of dollars" of trades "every day" in order to generate profits for the Mormon Church. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/65...

And how the Lawrd's "true" corporation LOVE$ to reduce its expenses when it comes to people!:

1) "Mormon-owned DI cuts workers' hours, avoids Obamacare rule" http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfai...

2) "Mormon church announces layoffs in two departments" http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/55...

3) "In 2002, the church offered voluntary early retirement to about 1,000 eligible employees. Nearly 600 of them opted to leave, and 40 percent of their positions were not filled. The plan was to use volunteers whenever possible." (Click http://www.sltrib.com/lds/ci_11399338 for the online report.)

4) "Cost-cutting is a top priority, [LDS] church documents show. It has even laid off janitors and called on members to clean temples and meeting houses." (Click http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/0... for the Reuters report.)

5) Senior missionaries [to work for free https://www.lds.org/bc/content/ldsorg...] sought by LD$ Inc. with experience in the petroleum industry and water resource management.

6) "A Mormon missionary's mother states that her son's food budget of $145 per month has been cut to $130 permanently while serving as a Mormon missionary in North Carolina. She entitles her message 'Missionary budget cuts... Paper or Food?'" (Click http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon... for the post.)

Finally, from the July 2012 Businessweek report about the $40-billion Mormon Church: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/...

"According to an official church Welfare Services fact sheet, the church gave $1.3 billion in humanitarian aid in more than 178 countries and territories during the 25 years between 1985 and 2010. A fact sheet from the previous year indicates that less than one-third of the sum was monetary assistance, while the rest was in the form of 'material assistance.' All in all, if one were to evenly distribute that $1.3 billion over a quarter-century, it would mean that the church gave $52 million annually. A study co-written by [Univ. of Tampa professor Ryan] Cragun and recently published in Free Inquiry estimates that the Mormon Church donates only about 0.7 percent of its annual income to charity; the United Methodist Church gives about 29 percent.

"'Members of our faith are very generous and very sacrificing, very charitable-they pay tithes and fast offerings, and when they see needs, they address those needs,' says [Ron] Madson, the former [Mormon] bishop. 'When we see the church not doing the same things it asks the members to do, we recoil. We wonder, is this looking more and more like a corporation and less and less like a church?'"

Yup!
topic image
Rod Meldrum, Joe Sitting Owl And The Central Band Of Cherokee
Monday, Aug 11, 2014, at 08:44 AM
Original Author(s): Tapirrider
Topic: RODNEY L. MELDRUM   -Link To MC Article-
This is an older story, but it still comes up from time to time.

Rod Meldrum uses this video to argue that ancient Hebrews were in America. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHNRf...

What he doesn't tell you is that the Central Band of Cherokee are a fake tribe and Joe Sitting Owl IS NOT Native American.

All anyone has to do is read the Bureau of Indian Affairs final determination against granting the Central Band of Cherokee federal tribal status. It is signed by Larry Echo Hawk, who is now an LDS general authority. http://bia.gov/cs/groups/xofa/documen...

The BIA document is very interesting. It lays out the efforts and pseudo nonsense that Joe White (AKA Sitting Owl) and others tried to use to get federal recognition of their fake tribe. Page 18 sums it all up by stating that not even one of the so called Indians could show that they were descended from any Indian tribe.
"The evidence shows the petitioner's members and claimed ancestors were consistently identified as non-Indians living in non-Indian communities."

"none of the group's members have demonstrated descent from a historical Indian tribe or tribes that combined."
This article from the Cherokee Phoenix lays out the problems that people like Joe create. The garbage that Rod Meldrum and his kind are promoting has harmful affects on real people. http://www.cherokeephoenix.org/19212/...

If the LDS top 15 had an ounce of honesty and integrity they would put a stop to this kind of bullshit.;
topic image
Mormons: Don't Buy Into The Myth That Raising Kids In The Church Will Benefit Them - It Won't
Thursday, Jul 31, 2014, at 08:02 AM
Original Author(s): Dave Gamble
Topic: CHILDREN AND MORMONISM - SECTION 2   -Link To MC Article-
Generally Mormons are decent, honest, respectful, and don't have a culture that involves either alcohol or drugs, and so because of this some might argue that even if the actual beliefs are not true, being part of the culture can be beneficial.

"Raise your kids Mormon, because they nurture things such as public speaking, athletics, music, crafts, and other skills", is the thinking.

Actually, this belief prevails for many beliefs, I'm simply picking one so that I can talk a bit more specifically and critically about the myth that you need to raise your kids in a religious context for them to be truly good. You will find a similar belief prevails within many cultural contexts, it is all part of the con trick that belief has evolved with so that it can successfully propagate itself to the next generation.

While I am focusing on the Mormons, a similar criticism applies to all beliefs. If you opt to raise your kids as Mormons, then the observation that they will focus upon some truly good and noble attributes is indeed true, but it is only half the story, there is a dark side to it all as well.

The problem with such thinking is that there are other things included in the package that introduces real harm, here are some examples:
  • No Critical Thinking - The Kids are taught to obey and not to question, thinking and self-reliance is very much frowned upon. If they are presented with something they think is incorrect or simply don't understand, then they are expected to pray, study their scriptures, and seek guidance from the Bishop until they fall in line, get their mind right and conform. Those in charge cannot be wrong, so if the kids have doubts about something they are being told, then it must be them and their lack of faith. Instead of being encouraged to think things through for themselves in a rational manner, it nurtures a culture of dependence, one in which the kids permit others to do their thinking for them - this is a road that leads to disaster.
  • Blame culture - If the kids fall short and cannot keep all the rules, then the problem is clearly with them. The demand for perfection is a tool that is used to manipulate individuals and leverage guilt to keep them in line.
  • Honesty Filtration - This is perhaps an unintentional consequence of the culture. As the kids advance within the Church, they get interviewed by the Bishop as they progress to ensure that they are worthy for the next step. If they tell the truth, they will not advance, but will instead face criticism. However, if they parrot the desired rhetoric, then they will be praised and advanced up to the next level. Most young people are desperate for both acceptance by the community and also for the approval of their parents, so they learn to happily lie to achieve this goal, "Gosh no Bishop, I have never ever masturbated". The consequence is that those with some integrity, independence and honesty will be automatically filtered out because they will resist the pressure to play the game, and will instead tell the truth.
Parents who permit their children to be raised Mormon, or for that matter in other beliefs, so that they can inherit a moral lifestyle are playing with fire and may end up being badly burned. For example, Mormons tend to look down upon other non-Mormons and so the children will tragically end up viewing their non-believing parents as objects to pity, targets for conversion, or perhaps even as those to be avoided because they are in the grip of Satan. The final twist of the knife might come when they marry a fellow Mormon; the parents would not be permitted to attend because they would be deemed unworthy to enter the temple.

Many parents have successfully raised children who are indeed decent and honourable without recourse to any supernaturalism. By ditching an irrational religious upbringing they have avoided a lot of rather bad stuff, and a considerable degree of heartache.

The reality of the world we live in is that most humans, regardless of their belief or non-belief, strive to do what is right. The trap for many is that if the things that you believe to be right are not actually ethical, and are only believed to be right because they have been "blessed" by your favourite supernatural entity, then you are at risk doing some quite obnoxious stuff. If you are also in a place that suppresses self-reliance and critical thinking, then you are nurturing kids who will be unable to think things through for themselves, and will blindly obey.
"people who were raised as Mormons by "good" Mormon families have testified that their Mormon upbringing is a major source of their emotional and social problems later in life" - Richard Packman, ex-Mormon
http://www.skeptical-science.com/reli...
topic image
Brazillions Of Missing Mormons! What Would Paul Harvey Say?
Wednesday, Jul 30, 2014, at 09:16 AM
Original Author(s): Baura
Topic: CHURCH PUBLISHED MAGAZINES   -Link To MC Article-
The current issue of the ENSIGN has an article on the growth of the Church in Brazil:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2014/07/th...

A few tidbits:
"Growing Like an Oak

"A prophecy given in Argentina in 1926 by Elder Melvin J. Ballard (1873-1939) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles suggested that the region would initially have slow growth but that it would one day be mighty. He prophesied: "The work of the Lord will grow slowly for a time here just as an oak grows slowly from an acorn. It will not shoot up in a day as does the sunflower that grows quickly and then dies."
Notice how this remark has been upgraded into a "prophecy." Nowhere did he say it was a "prophecy." And nowhere in the quote does he say it will "become mighty." Now there are actual prophecies that Joseph Smith gave "in the name of the Lord" etc. that didn't happen and we're told, well, he was speaking as a man.

There are two things I like about the Church: it's face.

Further on in the article:
"The priesthood revelation and temple dedication were the catalysts for one of the greatest missionary successes ever seen in the Church: more than 700,000 Brazilians joined the Church in the next two decades."
and
"Dedicated Members

"The strength of the Church in Brazil is not just the number of members but also their dedication to the gospel."

"The Church in Brazil

Members: 1,239,166

Stakes: 242"
That comes out to 5120 members per stake. Wow, those stake conferences must be PACKED!

Now, as Paul Harvey used to say, here is the rest of the story:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfai...

From the article:
"The 2010 Brazilian census found that 225,695 people identified as Latter-day Saints whereas the LDS Church reported 1,138,740 members in Brazil in 2010.

""These findings indicate that self-identified Latter-day Saints on the census account for only 20 percent of total membership officially reported by the church in Brazil," writes Matt Martinich, an independent LDS researcher. "Furthermore, the percent of official LDS membership self-affiliating as Latter-day Saint on the census has declined over the past decade."

"In 2000, the census reported 199,645 Latter-day Saints, or 26 percent of Mormon membership reported for that year (775,822) by the Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

"To Martinich, who lives in Colorado Springs, the "most concerning finding" was about the LDS Church's growth rate.

"The church reported that Brazilian "membership increased by 362,918 members between 2000 and 2010 yet the censuses for these two years indicate a mere 26,050 increase in self-identified Latter-day Saints," Martinich wrote on his blog. "In other words, the increase in census-reported Latter-day Saints was only 7 percent of the membership increase reported by the church.""
So here's an interesting question to pose to your TBM friends who actually read the ENSIGN: Is the Church a reliable source of information about the Church?
topic image
LDS Youth Trek Or How To Manufacture A Spiritual Experience
Tuesday, Jul 29, 2014, at 07:23 AM
Original Author(s): Craig Paxton
Topic: MORMON HANDCARTS   -Link To MC Article-
Its that time of year when Mormon leaders take the youth of the church on a fanciful recreation of an event that involved less than 10% of those who immigrated to Utah during the period from 1847 to 1869, when the transcontinental railroad finally put an end to Brigham's brainchild, Yes I'm referring to the Hand Cart immigration recreations.

I've personally been involved with two of these treks. They are specifically designed to manufacture a spiritual experience in the youth who are almost always forced to go on these treks. I remember the amount of peer pressure we were encouraged to exert on the youth in our ward...particularly since none of them initially wanted to go and if given their free will wouldn't have chosen to go at all. But with lots of pressure from us and their parents...we were able to get the vast majority of our youth to attend the trek.


We marched them over the dry and windy plains of Wyoming, exposing them to the elements as best we could. Fed them johnnie cakes and water, crossed the Sweetwater river, had the boys carry the girls across much like boys from the recue party had allegedly carried survivors of the Martin-Willy companies. Had mock deaths along the way (since handcarts stories are full of mass dying, right?). We even stopped to dig a grave with sticks to bury a mock baby...(some of the female youth were given fake babies to care for...we would then randomly kill their babies along the wa)...all with one expressed purpose...to manufacture a spiritual experience in our youth.

Our SP told us that if we were able to break them physically on the trek, like one would break a horse (his exact words) we could then help them have a spiritual experience. True to his words...the youth testimony meeting was a tear filled meeting with both boys and girls bawling their eyes out by connecting with forefathers none of them had had for a recreation of a journey none of their forefathers had actually taken. (none of our youth had forefathers who were involved in the handcart migration). The experience was a complete success and completely manufactured by us to illicit a spiritual experience in the youth under our charge...and boy were we successful.
topic image
Over Dramatizing Pioneer Deaths
Monday, Jul 28, 2014, at 07:34 AM
Original Author(s): Just This Guy
Topic: MORMON HANDCARTS   -Link To MC Article-
We all know how much effort the church spends worshiping the sacrifice that Mormon pioneers had to make and how many people dies on the crossing. Well, a new study published by BYU shows that deaths on the trail was only slightly higher than the national average for all pioneers.

See: http://news.byu.edu/archive14-jul-pio...

Some interesting points that they make:

Quote:
Bashore worked with a team of actuarial scientists at Brigham Young University to analyze 56,000 pioneer records from 1847-1868. Of these 56,000, there were an estimated 1,900 people who died either on the plains or within the calendar year of their arrival. That is about a 3.5 percent mortality rate, whereas a national comparison group in 1850 experienced an annual mortality rate between 2.5 percent and 2.9 percent.
Quote:
Only four deaths reported were from Native Americans, two were eaten by wolves, two suffered a poisonous bite or scorpion sting, and one was murdered.
Quote:
Yet just 5 percent of Mormon immigrants traveled by handcart. Of those, 1,000 belonged to the Willie and Martin handcart companies. Not counting the Willie and Martin companies, pioneers who traveled by handcart experienced a 4.7 percent mortality rate.
Quote:
For some reason, pioneer babies fared better than expected on the trail given infant mortality rates at the time. Tolley isn't certain about the cause - but one possible explanation is that some expectant mothers chose to wait and make the journey after a successful delivery.
Quote:
The gender breakdown of the Mormon immigrants that came over is quite balanced, with 26,615 females and 28,306 males. In conjunction with the balanced number of females versus males in the data, their mortality rate is also quite similar with females at 3.6 percent and males at 3.3 percent. Interestingly, almost half of the immigrants were under the age of 20, and the mortality rate for this age demographic was a surprisingly low 1.75 percent.
So, while pioneer hardship makes a nice faith promoting story, reality is something different. Also, it is interesting how many of the thing they like to push (hard ship, wild animals, loss of babies and children, etc) really are false.
topic image
Drop Everything! Missionaries Are More Important Than You!
Friday, Jul 25, 2014, at 07:53 AM
Original Author(s): Cheryl
Topic: EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24   -Link To MC Article-
They're somebody's deluded kids. Their church and their families and communities mistreat them, so everyone else is mean if they don't step up, put their own pursuits on hold and take care of somebody's else's adult kids first.

I'm not buying it.

Supplementing mishies a little here or there might be nice. Giving them clues about their delusions might be nice. BUT none of that is required. It's purely optional.

Students in college have their own concerns and budget problems. Their classes, tests, and part time jobs are important to their futures. They need to stay focused. It isn't their fault mishies are sneaking on campus and confronting them.

People on the streets have busy lives taking care of their job concerns, their families, their health, and their personal goals. If they have an interest in halting their pursuits, they are making a choice. They are no more noble than those who hurry by missionaries to get to their medical oncologist appointments or to their eye surgeon's office than those who love missionaries and accept responsibility for them no matter what.

What about people in their homes? They also have lives and limited resources. If missionaries show up at their doors, they have a choice of continuing to do their physical therapy exercise program or postponing it for the sake of somebody else's adult children banging on the door. It's up to them and it isn't mean if a private stranger in their home continues with their phone call or their bath and ignores somebody else's gangly teens on their doorstep.

In my opinion it's disrespectful of a church to send missionaries to school campuses. It's certainly intrusive to send them to homes if the residents have said to stop coming there or if signs are posted against trespassing or solicitation. It's an admission of stupidity for Mormons to claim they can't keep their records in order and don't know which homes and campuses have banned religious proselytizing.

In truth the Mormon church wants these kids to trespass where they're unwanted and stay away from exmos who are excited to talk to them. So the church doesn't keep or honor "no entry" or "no contact" directives when they could if they chose.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to talk to or entertain missionaries. I do think it's inconsistent if anyone gives them preferential treatment over JW or other proselytizers however.

I also think it's a fair choice to ignore or send away any stranger who confronts you when you're trying to live your busy life. Your daily priorities are every bit as important as the goals of religious strangers who happen to pop up when you least expect them.

Every person is someone's child, mother, brother, sister or grandma. It isn't just missionaries who are someone's children. Our loved ones care what happens to us as much as mashie parents care. Anyone who has no loved ones to worry about them deserve special consideration. If they are not someone's child they might feel lonely and abandoned.
topic image
Age Gaps Don't Necessarily Matter At All In Love
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014, at 07:55 AM
Original Author(s): Tal Bachman
Topic: TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 7   -Link To MC Article-
Mormon leaders once had a lot to say about relationships: you should marry someone from your own culture, or your own race, or a returned missionary, and only in the temple, etc. It often seemed like there was a "preferred Mormon type" of couple.

But life outside the cult indicates that mutually-satisfactory relationships come in all different shapes.

One issue is age gaps. In his thoughtful, recent thread, "Forty Year Old Virgin", "anon" worried about finding a partner, since most women his age are now married or in relationships. Thinking about this, I realized that quite a number of the happy couples I know well in town have very large age gaps between partners. All the couples I describe below are real, and I know them well.

1.) B is, I believe, thirteen years older than her boyfriend, . - who, by the way, utterly adores her. They are a match seemingly made in non-Mormon heaven, and cannot get enough of each other. They have been together for years, and I think, will probably always be together. They are trying for a baby.

2.) L, a guy, is 47. His girlfriend is 23. They also utterly adore each other, and often are with L's kids from his previous marriage.

3.) R is a very "young" 52 Belgian guy. His girlfriend is in her early thirties.

4.) My buddy M married C. M is also 52. His wife is, I believe, 30. They are two peas in a pod and now have a child.

5.) A, a young man, is 22. His girlfriend is 31. They live together and are planning a life together.

Speaking for myself, I have gone out with, or just hung out with, quite a few women since my marriage ended in 2008 (I'm 45 now). My experiences have led me to marvel at the sometimes strange ways that attraction works.

One lady I happened to meet on a trip was fifty. She was married, but I have to admit, was fit, curvy, sexy, charming, feminine, service-oriented, and overall, a genuine smokeshow. Her husband (who, coincidentally, was seventeen years her senior) seemed like a lucky guy. Very few guys, even much younger guys, would have not felt attracted to her.

Another lady I met during a trip was single, and not what you would call beautiful by any means. She was very plain looking. She was also, I think, 58. But she was a very young 58, and she was just so damn honest, so at peace with herself, so healthy and full of life and fun, so passionate about her hobbies, that I had to admit to myself that I would rather spend an evening hanging out with her, than her physically hot daughter, who was around thirty.

On the flip side, most of the women I've dated in the past six years were in their mid-twenties (the youngest was 21, the oldest was 32, with most about 26). All but one were full-on smokeshows. But despite them being smokeshows, I only really felt "attracted" to a couple. One I dated for a while, but then broke up with once I realized there was no future. The other moved away to college, met some guy, and is now married. I later met a hottie as nuts as I was (she's 29), and we've been nearly inseparable now for a year.

What is the point? Well, there's a few. One is that there is an element of mystery to attraction and compatibility. It does not necessarily correlate with age, or even physical beauty.

But more importantly, I submit that, especially as ex-Mormons, we should refrain from negatively judging men and women who have found happiness together. Some people in particular seem very upset by couples fitting the older man-younger woman model, and are very free with insults like "creep" and "perv".

But different people find happiness in different ways. Different people have different needs, and different preferences, and who is to say that any one is right or wrong? Where two people find happiness together, regardless of age gap, culture or race difference, sexual orientation, or anything else, I think we ought to celebrate that - especially as ex-Mormons.

I submit that this world is big and wide, and that things like romantic love do not come to one and all in the same ways. Some find it in arranged marriages. Some find it with partners very similar to themselves. Some find it with partners seemingly very different to themselves. Some find it with members of the same sex. And some prefer other things to romantic love altogether. I think that is just what we should expect in a world uncontrolled by religious leaders preaching a "one size fits all" way of living.

The couples I mentioned in my other post would, I think, stare with a kind of stupefaction at anyone who would characterize their relationships as being about "ego", or as being "pervy", as some posters did on the other thread. Why? Because they sincerely love, adore, and respect each other. They have found with each other something they could not find with anyone else. The man loves the woman, and the woman loves the man. How anyone could, from afar, with no insight or knowledge, cast snippy aspersions on something so awesome for them, I'm sure would be nearly unfathomable to them. And I would love for those so keen to judge to be able to see with their own eyes that love can come to different people in different ways, and even more, to celebrate that. Instead of grinding axes, I think we should be sending sincere best wishes.

I think this point is reinforced by the fact that so many marriages, which outwardly fit all the "proper criteria", fail - proper criteria like "close in age", "from the same culture", "from the same race", "speaking the same language", etc. And not only do they fail, but many of the stories I am personally familiar with are shocking and heartbreaking. Often, kids bore the brunt of the destructive behaviour of one or both of the parties.

I already mentioned happy couples I know with big age differences. I also know several very happy inter-racial couples. One is a friend whose family came from Ghana. S is as black as it gets. His wife is as white as an ice floe, and her family is a wealthy, almost aristocratic family from England. They have little kids, and are happy as can be. Two other inter-racial couples I know (man is Canadian, woman is Japanese) are very happy, have lasted a long time, and have children. Another is a white Canadian woman with a black former gang member/former prison inmate from South Central Los Angeles. They are as happy as can be. One happy couple I know currently overcoming a language barrier is a caucasian Canadian man with a woman who recently moved here from Russia. They're married now and expecting a child, and I don't see them ever splitting up. They seem as happy as can be.

My point? There IS no "right way to be a couple"; and if the phrase "proper couples are mostly alike" had any merit to it, the divorce rates in North American wouldn't be in the toilet (unless by "proper couples" you mean "future divorcees").

I think ex-Mormons should be at the forefront of celebrating the rich diversity in personalities, needs, and desires within the human family, and celebrating the fact that love between consenting adults can come in all differerent kinds of ways.

Just my two cents.
topic image
Brian C. Hales Doesn't Know His Church's Own History Either
Wednesday, Jul 23, 2014, at 07:29 AM
Original Author(s): Willroberts038
Topic: BRIAN C. HALES   -Link To MC Article-
Brian Hales may be an expert on Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy, but he doesn't even know his church's own history. I did something really mean to him: I challenged him on something other than polygamy. Something I apparently know much more about than he does: the history of the First Vision. The full exchange can be read here (See: http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/the-j...) , but I'll post some excerpts and a TL;DR here. (See the bolded parts toward the bottom for a particularly interesting exchange.)

Why would I do something so "off topic"? Well, if you're going to defend JS, you had better be prepared to defend the whole package. Trying to defend Jim Jones' practice of public shaming would not be nearly enough to defend the man or his cult, and JS is no different with his practice of polygamy. So how did Brian Hales fare in defending the First Vision?

Me:
As you are a man who appreciates original sources, I'm sure you are familiar with the work of H. Michael Marquardt, who along with the Reverend Wesley Walters, has produced scores of original documents that demonstrate that Joseph Smith's first vision story is full of inconsistencies and contradictions from other primary sources. JS's polygamy doesn't matter if that vision didn't happen. And the evidence against that vision happening the way JS says it did is overwhelming.
BH:
I'm a little surprised to see you appeal to the First Vision allegations. As you probably know, the Joseph Smith's Papers project has published all of the original manuscripts at http://josephsmithpapers.org/site/acc.... There you and I can see the originals documents and make our own decisions. We don't need to get filtered and biased reporting from Wesley or my good friend Michael (he helped with several part of my books). I have read the accounts and am nonplussed by the critics' claims. But this is where I'm very comfortable agreeing to disagree. At least everyone is looking at the originals and not believing secondary sources.
Me:
You probably didn't look at http://firstvisiontimeline.com and you probably don't have time to wade through the dozens of original (and secondary) sources referenced there, including all of the First Vision accounts referenced in the Joseph Smith Papers URL you mentioned.

The apologetic responses to Walters/Marquardt are speculative and problematic in many areas. For example, JS said that his vision happened early in the spring of 1820. The evidence suggests that there was no religious excitement at that time comparable to 1816/17 and 1824/25, so apologists have to make the claim that "camp meetings were common and probably not mentioned that much", and they have to point to meetings of this sort that happened scores of miles away from Palmyra at a minimum, sometimes as many as 209 miles away (see http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith... ). This is a big stretch to assume that JS and his family would be traveling so far when there were plenty of religious meetings they could attend in their own town. Further, JS specifically stated that this excitement occurred "in the place where we lived". 209 miles away could hardly be considered the place where they lived, especially when travel was done by horse and foot. JS also stated: "great multitudes united themselves to the different religious parties". There is no evidence that this happened in 1820 anywhere near where the Smiths lived. This religious excitement matches perfectly to the revival of 1824/25. Literally every detail, such as when some of the Smiths joined the Presbyterian Church, it being after the death of Alvin Smith, it being the second year after the Smiths moved onto their Manchester farm, and the preachers Benjamin Stockton and George Lane mentioned by Oliver Cowdery and William Smith were actively preaching during this revival (George Lane specifically being the same preacher that gave a sermon that allegedly caused JS to ask God which church he should join). It leads one to wonder, how did William Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and Lucy Mack Smith all write such relatively consistent accounts, but JS's 1838 account is all mixed up in its details by comparison?
BH:
I visited the website you recommended and appreciate the research, but I'm puzzling over the enthusiasm expressed by critics regarding the First Vision, especially since http://josephsmithpapers.org/site/acc... has published all of the known accounts without any apologetic discussion and apparently not sensing the need for any. I've read them and am nonplussed by critics who worry about the different details that were emphasized in each account.

[An attempt here to change the subject to the Book of Mormon]

However, I did a little research and here is what I found. The Palmyra Register for July 5, 1820 states: "'Plain Truth' is received. By this communication, as well as by the remarks of some of our neighbors who belong to the Society of Methodists, we perceive that our remarks accompanying the notice of the unhappy death of James Couser, contained in our last, have not been correctly understood." You've undoubtedly read this, but it shows that "neighbors" belonged to the "Society of Methodists" in the Palmyra area in 1820. It is a small jump for me to believe they might have exhibited an "unusual excitement" etc.
Me:
There are a few problems with your explanation of religious excitement in 1820. First, show me where the great multitudes joining the various denominations are. See http://firstvisiontimeline.com/#11 for original sources on why 1824-25 is a better fit. Also, you need to explain why Lucy Mack Smith, William Smith, and Oliver Cowdery all seem to think it was no earlier than 1823. Lucy mentions it after Alvin's death in her memoirs, which occurred in November of 1823. And you also need both Rev. Benjamin Stockton and Rev. George Lane to be present in the Palmyra area as they are both specifically mentioned by William Smith. Cowdery also mentions Rev. Lane. You'll find original documents placing them directly in Palmyra at that same link above. Interestingly enough, William recalls the exact sermon that allegedly caused JS to take action, and guess which scripture was the subject of that sermon: none other than James 1:5.
BH:
[More trying to change the subject]

The issue of the First Vision is not a big deal to me. By 1838, Joseph Smith had dictated the Book of Mormon, the Book of Moses, and all the revelations in the D&C up to section 118. He gave us hundreds of pages of revelations and now we are quibbling about his memory regarding details he recalled from an event 18 years earlier. There just isn't enough available evidence to say his story has any errors. As I quoted, the Methodists were in Palmyra in 1820. It seems to me that this is another example of assuming there was no "excitement" etc. and then condemning Joseph based upon that assumption. If Joseph was a fraud, I might expect some documentation stronger than the First Vision criticism sometimes advanced.
Me:
I have a hard time understanding why the First Vision issues aren't a big deal to you. Despite it being 18 years after the fact, the way JS remembered it is just completely, totally, demonstrably wrong. There is plenty of available evidence to say his story has errors - you are just choosing not to acknowledge it. This is confirmation bias and use of defense mechanisms, specifically denial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial ) and intellectualization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectualization[8] ). The evolving story has key inconsistencies, it contradicts his contemporaries, and it contradicts the historical record that we have. Again, that religious excitement perfectly matches what the historical record reflects in 1824-25, including the very specific preachers mentioned by JS's brother and Oliver Cowdery. It matches what the church membership counts indicate. (For sources, see: http://www.fullerconsideration.com/so... ) If it didn't happen like he said, that's a problem. The LDS church sends out tens of thousands of missionaries every year that are teaching an incorrect narrative to people. That's a huge problem! If it happened more like the 1832 account like Richard Bushman and other well-known apologists contend, why aren't missionaries teaching that narrative instead? The church has dug itself into a deep hole with this one and unfortunately it's not the fault of anyone alive and there is no easy way out.
BH:
I'm also a little disappointed in your repeated appeals to alleged problems in the First Vision. You claim "the way JS remembered it is just completely, totally, demonstrably wrong," which is as remarkable as it is unprovable. Anyone who has performed much historical research realizes that little details do not usually persist in the historical record. What is more problematic in my view, however, is the confidence you reflect that Joseph's statements have been disproven. It doesn't work that way. You can't prove a negative. But also, it seems you have only consulted antagonistic sources. Maybe you should look at this article by Steven C. Harper: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/eval...
Me (this is an excerpt from the comment he did not allow on his site):
I'm quite disappointed in your repeated inadequate answers to the problems in the First Vision. If you want to claim my evidences don't prove the First Vision has irreconcilable problems, that is your prerogative, but I'm just having a really hard time understanding how you arrive at your conclusions based on the complete picture. Even Richard Bushman admitted, "Can we reconcile all of the conflicting evidence and get back to the actual chronology of events from 1816 to 1824? At this point, I think we must acknowledge the possibility of an error somewhere in Joseph's chronology, simply because of the internal contradiction." If Joseph's chronology is off, why are missionaries teaching a version of the First Vision that is demonstrably wrong?

Regarding my "antagonistic sources," please tell me what is antagonistic about the Palmyra Road Tax list? Or the Palmyra Town Book from 1820? How about "William Smith on Mormonism"? Or Lucy Mack Smith's memoirs? Or Oliver Cowdery's letters explaining the early history of the church? Or the membership records of the Presbyterian, Baptist, and Methodist church? These are the primary documents from which I draw my conclusions! Not a single antagonistic source by any stretch of the imagination. I've read some of Dr. Harper's work, including the essay you mentioned. I have more of his work on my reading list. His arguments concerning the First Vision do not refute what I've shown here. He deals with one fact at a time and conveniently forgets to look at the big picture. Intellectualization is indeed a very powerful defense mechanism.

This isn't just about "proving a negative," a phrase you've used repeatedly as if that's what's going on here. What I've quite effectively proven with these evidences is that JS's 1838 account could not have happened the way he told it. While no one knows for sure what exactly happened, I can say with an extremely high degree of confidence that the 1838 account is inaccurate at best. This is why Richard Bushman and other apologists (I believe this includes Steven Harper if I recall) gravitate toward the 1832 First Vision account, knowing full well it doesn't reconcile the many problems the 1838 account presents. It's a convenient intellectualization to avoid the discomfort of the problematic canonized account.

Even if Walters had known about the June 1820 Palmyra newspaper article about the Methodist camp meeting, he would certainly have reminded you that Rev. Benjamin Stockton and Rev. George Lane were not assigned to preside over their respective churches in the area at the time. He would have reminded you that this is still inconsistent with William Smith, Lucy Smith, and Oliver Cowdery's telling of the events (and if you were to guess where Oliver Cowdery heard the story, what would your guess be?). He would have pointed out that your "late Spring could have meant early Spring" argument is speculative and weak. The problem here is, Brian, you are zooming in on one thing at a time, providing a plausible explanation, but you aren't including the rest of the story. This is the typical pattern of Mormon apologetics and why your/FAIR's explanation is inadequate and frankly falls flat on its face.
TL;DR: When challenged on the history of the First Vision, Brian Hales had to resort to regurgitating FAIR/Mormon Interpreter pages to rebut me. He never answered my questions and prevented my final comment from showing on his website (probably recognizing that he couldn't adequately answer my questions).
 
mcimg
START HERE
HOME
FAQ
CONTACT ME
370 TOPICS
THE EX-MORMON FORUMS
MORMON RESIGNATION
RSS FEED
Google
Search The
Mormon Curtain




WWW
Mormon Curtain
Current Blogged Items
Fri, Aug 15, 2014:
Worship Service? Is It Really Called That Now?
Thu, Aug 14, 2014:
When Did You Realize That Your Dress Wouldn't Be Seen At The Temple?
When Did You Realize That Your Dress Wouldn't Be Seen At The Temple?
Wed, Aug 13, 2014:
Seminary - New Rules
Tue, Aug 12, 2014:
Ask Angela: Young Single Adult Wards Are Immature
Mon, Aug 11, 2014:
Details About LDS Inc Commercial Real Estate Project In Philadelphia + Other Enriching Ventures
Rod Meldrum, Joe Sitting Owl And The Central Band Of Cherokee
Thu, Jul 31, 2014:
Mormons: Don't Buy Into The Myth That Raising Kids In The Church Will Benefit Them - It Won't
Wed, Jul 30, 2014:
Brazillions Of Missing Mormons! What Would Paul Harvey Say?
Tue, Jul 29, 2014:
LDS Youth Trek Or How To Manufacture A Spiritual Experience
Mon, Jul 28, 2014:
Over Dramatizing Pioneer Deaths
Fri, Jul 25, 2014:
Drop Everything! Missionaries Are More Important Than You!
Thu, Jul 24, 2014:
Age Gaps Don't Necessarily Matter At All In Love
Wed, Jul 23, 2014:
Brian C. Hales Doesn't Know His Church's Own History Either
5,890 Articles In 370 Topics
TopicImage TOPIC INDEX (370 Topics)
TopicImage AUTHOR INDEX

  · ADAM GOD DOCTRINE (4)
  · ANCESTRY.COM (1)
  · APOLOGISTS (57)
  · ARTICLES OF FAITH (1)
  · BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD (31)
  · BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD - PEOPLE (16)
  · BLACKS AND MORMONISM (12)
  · BLACKS AND THE PRIESTHOOD (12)
  · BLOOD ATONEMENT (5)
  · BOB BENNETT (1)
  · BOB MCCUE - SECTION 1 (25)
  · BOB MCCUE - SECTION 2 (25)
  · BOB MCCUE - SECTION 3 (25)
  · BOB MCCUE - SECTION 4 (25)
  · BOB MCCUE - SECTION 5 (25)
  · BOB MCCUE - SECTION 6 (19)
  · BONNEVILLE COMMUNICATIONS (2)
  · BOOK OF ABRAHAM (53)
  · BOOK OF MORMON - SECTION 1 (25)
  · BOOK OF MORMON - SECTION 2 (25)
  · BOOK OF MORMON - SECTION 3 (16)
  · BOOK OF MORMON EVIDENCES (18)
  · BOOK OF MORMON GEOGRAPHY (24)
  · BOOK OF MORMON WITNESSES (5)
  · BOOK REVIEW - ROUGH STONE ROLLING (28)
  · BOOKS - AUTHORS AND DESCRIPTIONS (12)
  · BOOKS - COMMENTS AND REVIEWS - SECTION 1 (26)
  · BOOKS - COMMENTS AND REVIEWS - SECTION 2 (20)
  · BOY SCOUTS (22)
  · BOYD K. PACKER (33)
  · BRIAN C. HALES (2)
  · BRIGHAM YOUNG (25)
  · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 1 (25)
  · BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY - SECTION 2 (30)
  · BRUCE C. HAFEN (4)
  · BRUCE D. PORTER (1)
  · BRUCE R. MCCONKIE (10)
  · CALLINGS (12)
  · CATHOLIC CHURCH (5)
  · CES LETTER (1)
  · CHANGING DOCTRINE (15)
  · CHILDREN AND MORMONISM - SECTION 1 (24)
  · CHILDREN AND MORMONISM - SECTION 2 (25)
  · CHRIS BUTTARS (1)
  · CHURCH LEADERSHIP (3)
  · CHURCH PROPAGANDA (6)
  · CHURCH PUBLISHED MAGAZINES (56)
  · CHURCH TEACHING MANUALS (10)
  · CHURCH VAULTS (4)
  · CITY CREEK CENTER (23)
  · CIVIL UNIONS (14)
  · CLEON SKOUSEN (3)
  · COGNITIVE DISSONANCE (2)
  · COMEDY - SECTION 1 (24)
  · COMEDY - SECTION 2 (21)
  · COMEDY - SECTION 3 (24)
  · COMEDY - SECTION 4 (22)
  · COMEDY - SECTION 5 (40)
  · CONCISE DICTIONARY OF MORMONISM (14)
  · D. MICHAEL QUINN (1)
  · D. TODD CHRISTOFFERSON (6)
  · DALLIN H. OAKS (104)
  · DANIEL C. PETERSON (92)
  · DANITES (4)
  · DAVID A. BEDNAR (24)
  · DAVID O. MCKAY (9)
  · DAVID R. STONE (1)
  · DAVID WHITMER (1)
  · DELBERT L. STAPLEY (1)
  · DESERET NEWS (3)
  · DIETER F. UCHTDORF (13)
  · DNA (25)
  · DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS (8)
  · DON JESSE (2)
  · ELAINE S. DALTON (5)
  · EMMA SMITH (5)
  · ENSIGN PEAK (1)
  · ERICH W. KOPISCHKE (1)
  · EX-MORMON FOUNDATION (33)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 1 (35)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 10 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 11 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 12 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 13 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 14 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 15 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 16 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 17 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 18 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 19 (26)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 2 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 20 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 21 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 22 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 23 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 24 (41)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 3 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 4 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 5 (23)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 6 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 7 (25)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 8 (24)
  · EX-MORMON OPINION - SECTION 9 (26)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 1 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 10 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 11 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 12 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 13 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 14 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 15 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 16 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 17 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 18 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 19 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 2 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 20 (24)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 21 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 22 (24)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 23 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 24 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 25 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 26 (62)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 3 (21)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 4 (22)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 5 (24)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 6 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 7 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 8 (25)
  · EX-MORMONISM SECTION 9 (26)
  · EXCOMMUNICATION AND COURTS OF LOVE (19)
  · EZRA TAFT BENSON (31)
  · FACIAL HAIR (6)
  · FAIR / MADD - APOLOGETICS - SECTION 1 (25)
  · FAIR / MADD - APOLOGETICS - SECTION 2 (24)
  · FAIR / MADD - APOLOGETICS - SECTION 3 (21)
  · FAITH PROMOTING RUMORS (11)
  · FARMS (30)
  · FIRST VISION (25)
  · FOOD STORAGE (3)
  · FUNDAMENTALIST LDS (17)
  · GENERAL AUTHORITIES (30)
  · GENERAL CONFERENCE (15)
  · GENERAL NEWS (6)
  · GEORGE P. LEE (1)
  · GORDON B. HINCKLEY (68)
  · GRANT PALMER (8)
  · GREGORY L. SMITH (9)
  · GUNNISON MASSACRE (1)
  · H. DAVID BURTON (2)
  · HAROLD B. LEE (1)
  · HATE MAIL I RECEIVE (23)
  · HAUNS MILL (2)
  · HBO BIG LOVE (12)
  · HEBER C. KIMBALL (4)
  · HELEN RADKEY (17)
  · HELLEN MAR KIMBALL (4)
  · HENRY B. EYRING (5)
  · HOLIDAYS (13)
  · HOME AND VISITING TEACHING (9)
  · HOWARD W. HUNTER (1)
  · HUGH NIBLEY (13)
  · HYMNS (7)
  · INTERVIEWS IN MORMONISM (18)
  · J REUBEN CLARK (1)
  · JAMES E. FAUST (7)
  · JEFF LINDSAY (6)
  · JEFFREY MELDRUM (1)
  · JEFFREY R. HOLLAND (35)
  · JEFFREY S. NIELSEN (11)
  · JOHN DEHLIN AND KATE KELLY EXCOMMUNICATION (19)
  · JOHN GEE (3)
  · JOHN L. LUND (3)
  · JOHN L. SORENSON (4)
  · JOHN TAYLOR (1)
  · JOSEPH B. WIRTHLIN (1)
  · JOSEPH F. SMITH (1)
  · JOSEPH FIELDING SMITH (8)
  · JOSEPH SITATI (1)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - POLYGAMY - SECTION 1 (21)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - POLYGAMY - SECTION 2 (23)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - PROPHECY (8)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - SECTION 1 (25)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - SECTION 2 (23)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - SECTION 3 (22)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - SECTION 4 (31)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - SEER STONES (7)
  · JOSEPH SMITH - WORSHIP (13)
  · JUDAISM (3)
  · JULIE B. BECK (6)
  · KEITH B. MCMULLIN (1)
  · KERRY MUHLESTEIN (9)
  · KERRY SHIRTS (6)
  · KINDERHOOK PLATES (6)
  · KIRTLAND BANK (6)
  · KIRTLAND EGYPTIAN PAPERS (17)
  · L. TOM PERRY (5)
  · LAMANITE PLACEMENT PROGRAM (3)
  · LAMANITES (38)
  · LANCE B. WICKMAN (1)
  · LARRY ECHO HAWK (1)
  · LDS CHURCH - SECTION 1 (20)
  · LDS CHURCH OFFICE BUILDING (9)
  · LDS OFFICIAL ESSAYS (37)
  · LDS SOCIAL SERVICES (3)
  · LGBT - AND MORMONISM - SECTION 1 (45)
  · LORENZO SNOW (1)
  · LOUIS C. MIDGLEY (6)
  · LYNN A. MICKELSEN (2)
  · LYNN G. ROBBINS (1)
  · M. RUSSELL BALLARD (13)
  · MARK E. PETERSON (8)
  · MARK HOFFMAN (12)
  · MARLIN K. JENSEN (3)
  · MARRIOTT (2)
  · MARTIN HARRIS (5)
  · MASONS (16)
  · MELCHIZEDEK/AARONIC PRIESTHOOD (9)
  · MERRILL J. BATEMAN (3)
  · MICHAEL R. ASH (26)
  · MISSIONARIES - SECTION 1 (25)
  · MISSIONARIES - SECTION 2 (25)
  · MISSIONARIES - SECTION 3 (25)
  · MISSIONARIES - SECTION 4 (25)
  · MISSIONARIES - SECTION 5 (25)
  · MISSIONARIES - SECTION 6 (26)
  · MISSIONARY BLOGS (6)
  · MITT ROMNEY (71)
  · MORE GOOD FOUNDATION (4)
  · MORMON CELEBRITIES (14)
  · MORMON CHURCH HISTORY (8)
  · MORMON CHURCH PR (13)
  · MORMON CLASSES (1)
  · MORMON DOCTRINE (35)
  · MORMON FUNERALS (12)
  · MORMON GARMENTS (21)
  · MORMON HANDCARTS (14)
  · MORMON INTERPRETER (5)
  · MORMON MARRIAGE EXCLUSIONS (1)
  · MORMON MEMBERSHIP (38)
  · MORMON MEMBERSHIP PURGE 2014 (9)
  · MORMON MONEY - SECTION 1 (25)
  · MORMON MONEY - SECTION 2 (25)
  · MORMON MONEY - SECTION 3 (26)
  · MORMON NEWSROOM (5)
  · MORMON POLITICAL ISSUES (7)
  · MORMON RACISM (18)
  · MORMON TEMPLE CEREMONIES (39)
  · MORMON TEMPLE CHANGES (15)
  · MORMON TEMPLES - SECTION 1 (25)
  · MORMON TEMPLES - SECTION 2 (25)
  · MORMON TEMPLES - SECTION 3 (24)
  · MORMON TEMPLES - SECTION 4 (44)
  · MORMON VISITOR CENTERS (10)
  · MORMON WARDS AND STAKE CENTERS (1)
  · MORMONTHINK (13)
  · MOUNTAIN MEADOWS MASSACRE (21)
  · MURPHY TRANSCRIPT (1)
  · NATALIE R. COLLINS (11)
  · NAUVOO (3)
  · NAUVOO EXPOSITOR (2)
  · NEAL A. MAXWELL - SECTION 1 (1)
  · NEAL A. MAXWELL INSTITUTE (1)
  · NEIL L. ANDERSEN - SECTION 1 (4)
  · NEW ORDER MORMON (8)
  · OBEDIENCE - PAY, PRAY, OBEY (15)
  · OBJECT LESSONS (15)
  · OLIVER COWDREY (6)
  · ORRIN HATCH (10)
  · PARLEY P. PRATT (11)
  · PATRIARCHAL BLESSING (5)
  · PAUL H. DUNN (5)
  · PBS DOCUMENTARY THE MORMONS (20)
  · PERSECUTION (9)
  · PIONEER DAY (3)
  · PLAN OF SALVATION (5)
  · POLYGAMY - SECTION 1 (22)
  · POLYGAMY - SECTION 2 (23)
  · POLYGAMY - SECTION 3 (15)
  · PRIESTHOOD BLESSINGS (1)
  · PRIESTHOOD EXECUTIVE MEETING (0)
  · PRIMARY (1)
  · PROCLAMATIONS (1)
  · PROPOSITION 8 (21)
  · PROPOSITION 8 COMMENTS (11)
  · QUENTIN L. COOK (11)
  · RELIEF SOCIETY (14)
  · RESIGNATION PROCESS (28)
  · RICHARD E. TURLEY, JR. (6)
  · RICHARD G. HINCKLEY (2)
  · RICHARD G. SCOTT (8)
  · RICHARD LYMAN BUSHMAN (11)
  · ROBERT D. HALES (5)
  · ROBERT L. MILLET (7)
  · RODNEY L. MELDRUM (16)
  · ROYAL SKOUSEN (2)
  · RUNTU'S RINCON (79)
  · RUSSELL M. NELSON (15)
  · SACRAMENT MEETING (11)
  · SALT LAKE TRIBUNE (2)
  · SCOTT D. WHITING (1)
  · SCOTT GORDON (5)
  · SEMINARY (6)
  · SERVICE AND CHARITY (24)
  · SHERI L. DEW (4)
  · SHIELDS RESEARCH - MORMON APOLOGETICS (4)
  · SIDNEY RIGDON (7)
  · SIMON SOUTHERTON (34)
  · SPAULDING MANUSCRIPT (8)
  · SPENCER W. KIMBALL (12)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 1 (18)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 10 (17)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 11 (15)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 12 (19)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 13 (21)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 14 (17)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 15 (14)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 2 (21)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 3 (18)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 4 (25)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 5 (22)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 6 (19)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 7 (15)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 8 (13)
  · STEVE BENSON - SECTION 9 (19)
  · STORIES - SECTION 1 (1)
  · SUNSTONE FOUNDATION (2)
  · SURVEILLANCE (SCMC) (12)
  · TAD R. CALLISTER (4)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 1 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 2 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 3 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 4 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 5 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 6 (25)
  · TAL BACHMAN - SECTION 7 (12)
  · TALKS - SECTION 1 (1)
  · TEMPLE WEDDINGS (6)
  · TEMPLES - NAMES (1)
  · TERRYL GIVENS (2)
  · THE PEARL OF GREAT PRICE (1)
  · THE SINGLE WARDS (6)
  · THE WORLD TABLE (3)
  · THOMAS PHILLIPS (26)
  · THOMAS S. MONSON (33)
  · TIME (4)
  · TITHING - SECTION 1 (25)
  · TITHING - SECTION 2 (25)
  · TITHING - SECTION 3 (22)
  · UGO PEREGO (5)
  · UK COURTS (7)
  · UNNANOUNCED, UNINVITED AND UNWELCOME (36)
  · UTAH LIGHTHOUSE MINISTRY (3)
  · VALERIE HUDSON (3)
  · VAN HALE (16)
  · VAUGHN J. FEATHERSTONE (1)
  · VIDEOS (30)
  · WARD CLEANING (5)
  · WARREN SNOW (1)
  · WELFARE - SECTION 1 (0)
  · WENDY L. WATSON (7)
  · WHITE AND DELIGHTSOME (11)
  · WILFORD WOODRUFF (6)
  · WILLIAM HAMBLIN (15)
  · WILLIAM LAW (1)
  · WILLIAM SCHRYVER (5)
  · WILLIAM WINES PHELPS (3)
  · WOMEN AND MORMONISM - SECTION 1 (24)
  · WOMEN AND MORMONISM - SECTION 2 (25)
  · WOMEN AND MORMONISM - SECTION 3 (38)
  · WORD OF WISDOM (7)
Copyright And Info
Articles posted here are © by their respective owners when designated.

Website © 2005-2013

Compiled With: Caligra 1.121

HOSTED BY



AVOBASE

AvoBase is a light-weight robust point of sale software tool.

If you sell Avon, Stampin-Up, Scentsy, Mary-Kay? AvoBase is for you.

AvoBase can sell from any of them - and even sell from ALL of them at the same time.

And not just Avon, AvoBase can sell nearly ANYTHING.

Sell your product, track your customers and your taxes - all in one easy to use application.

Download FREE today at AvoBase.com.



VAULTASAUR

VaultASaur is a super light weight (less than 10k!) SHA-256 Encryption Password Vault. Designed to to help you store all of your website details including site, username, password, security questions, hints and URL. Fast, Safe, Secure and flippin Free!

VaultASaur was designed without databases or cloud storage. It's a simple on-the-go SHA-256 Encryption system for quick and easy SECURE access to your private data. The program is dead simple to use, has no nagware, is totally FREE, is less than 10k in size, no messy databases and comes with a built in updater.

Download FREE today at VaultASaur.com.