Hi ,
I haven't updated my Blog for sometime. There are just too many great ones out there and I didn't feel I could contribute anything more meaningful.
LDS Church members and former church members have done most of the hard work already in helping bring out the truth of Mormonism.
But I am busy on You Tube challenging the LDS church claims.
There is a recent video I did entitled ' Mormon Polygamy' and also details of my own challenge to the LDS church leadership and mission here in my area.
http://uk.youtube.com/user/ElderJoseph
I don't oppose Mormons as Individuals. I oppose the Deception from the Leadership of the church much in the same way that I oppose AMWAY ( but not its innocent members).
Tuesday, 11 November 2008
Saturday, 6 October 2007
Comoros Island
Steffie can you see the island and the name of its its Capital City ?Click on the picture and it should show full size ?
Let us know by email what you think ? I've not bothered much with this blog as there are too many other good ones out there ...
Saturday, 24 February 2007
Head In A Hat
This Is Really How He Came Up With His Book Of Mormon ! By Putting His Head In His Hat ! And Using His Seer Stone. The same one he used for treasure digging .
Russell M. Nelson, “A Treasured Testament,” Ensign, Jul 1993, 61
Adapted from an address given 25 June 1992 at a seminar for new mission presidents, Missionary Training Center, Provo, Utah.
Adapted from an address given 25 June 1992 at a seminar for new mission presidents, Missionary Training Center, Provo, Utah.
"The details of this miraculous method of translation are still not fully known. Yet we do have a few precious insights. David Whitmer wrote:
“Joseph Smith would put the seer stone into a hat, and put his face in the hat, drawing it closely around his face to exclude the light; and in the darkness the spiritual light would shine. A piece of something resembling parchment would appear, and on that appeared the writing. One character at a time would appear, and under it was the interpretation in English. Brother Joseph would read off the English to Oliver Cowdery, who was his principal scribe, and when it was written down and repeated to Brother Joseph to see if it was correct, then it would disappear, and another character with the interpretation would appear. Thus the Book of Mormon was translated by the gift and power of God, and not by any power of man.” (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, Richmond, Mo.: n.p., 1887, p. 12.)"
This is just a small transcript from the John Dehlin Interview with Richard Lyman Bushman about Joseph Smith Dictating or Reading from his peepstone with his head in his hat.This Picture on the Left is how I was misled to believe about the translation process until I found out it was with sticking his head in a hat. The LDS church is knowingly misleading members and investigators as it has done from its very inception .
John Dehlin so that’s , you know most people would be just stunned to know that there’s no real evidence that the plates were used materially in the translation and that the Urim and Thumin meaning the crystals in the breastplate weren’t used either . That’s real different from the accounts that we kind of grew up with in Primary and Sunday school and seminary .
Richard Bushman Yea well that’s the account that’s in the historical records though so we just have to live with it .
John Dehlin so we have to live with it …...erm and you know this really does bring up the question or two questions err one is Isn’t it completely dishonest or disingenuous to ever use the word translate or translation . Aren’t those just the wrong words first of all and then I’ll ask you the second question later so lets start there , why do we even call it a translation .
Richard Bushman Well Nibley’s discoursed on that subject , what does it mean to translate or carry over from one , one culture or one time to another err you know errr use the word translated to talk about bodies being resurrected or carried about one way or another . So I don’t think you could call it dishonest it certainly has misled us into thinking that you know I used to speculate that Joseph Smith learned Reformed Egyptian pearing at those plates and coming up with the words and that of course is besides the point as you see it this way, erm so maybe we do need to have another word, I think we certainly need to make clear to our children as we teach them or whoever that we refer to a translation is carrying a message from one culture into the language of another not necessarily using a dictionary so you do have to generalise or change the meaning of the translation from ordinary usage .
John Dehlin Ok err and do you think we need to change the art and the pictures and the graphics in the motion pictures that we are using to depict the process , do you think its disingenuous to continue having the curtain and using some type of spectacles and showing Joseph staring at the plates thinking earnestly and then you know dictating , Do you think that that’s something we need to change maybe ?
Richard Bushman Yea I definitely think we need to change it . Its not because erm you know it’s a horrible mistake you know because the guys who do those pictures are not trying to deceive anyone that’s what they think actually happened .It’s just a matter of accuracy and the problem is if that if you’re not accurate then you down the line you put your own erm credibility in jeopardy and I don’t , I just want to think all of our young people should think that they’re really getting the straight story on Joseph Smith or they’re going to go through the experience you’ve had , disillusionment , anger ,it’s a very sad thing and it’s unnecessary , so we do need to avoid that .
For the full Interview on Audio
Thursday, 15 February 2007
Church DVD Special Witnesses Of Christ
I've been watching the church DVD Special Witnesses of Christ . Have you noticed how they use Jerusalem, Tomb of Joseph of Arimathea and The Garden of Gethsemane to speak from ? They do like to use Biblical Archeology to know where they should be .
So why not speak from The Waters Of Mormon or from Zarahemla or from Hill Cumorah ( the real one !!) . Because they haven't a clue as to their whereabouts !!
It's amazing how they rely on Biblical Archeology and History and at the same time say its not needed for Faith when it's brought up about their own Book Of Mormon History . Faith itself wouldn't have brought them to Jerusalem's biblical sites .They looked on a map to find it .
I bet they would love to stand and speak at the Book Of Mormon sites but so far no revelation of their locations ??
So why not speak from The Waters Of Mormon or from Zarahemla or from Hill Cumorah ( the real one !!) . Because they haven't a clue as to their whereabouts !!
It's amazing how they rely on Biblical Archeology and History and at the same time say its not needed for Faith when it's brought up about their own Book Of Mormon History . Faith itself wouldn't have brought them to Jerusalem's biblical sites .They looked on a map to find it .
I bet they would love to stand and speak at the Book Of Mormon sites but so far no revelation of their locations ??
Gordon Hinckley Lying To The World
A German television reporter had a chance to interview LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley., In Winter of 2002, prior to the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics
REPORTER:
YES. ANOTHER CRITICS ABOUT FINANCES, I READ IN DIFFERENT MAGAZINES THE RUMOR THAT YOUR CHURCH IS VERY WEALTHY, AND I'D LIKE THE NUMBER OF 30 MILL…BILLION DOLLARS, US DOLLARS, WHAT DO YOU RESPOND?
HINCKLEY:
THAT'S SOMEBODY'S GUESS. THAT'S JUST A WILD GUESS. WELL, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, THIS, YES…IF YOU COUNT ALL OF OUR ASSETS, YES, WE ARE WELL-OFF. BUT THOSE ASSETS, YOU HAVE TO KNOW THIS, ARE NOT MONEY-PRODUCING. THOSE ASSETS ARE MONEY-CONSUMING. THOSE ASSETS, INCLUDING MEETING HOUSES, CHURCHES, THOUSANDS OF THEM ACROSS THE WORLD, THEY INCLUDE TEMPLES, THEY INCLUDE UNIVERSITIES, THEY INCLUDE WELFARE PROJECTS, THEY INCLUDE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, THEY INCLUDE ALL THE MISSIONARY WORK, THEY INCLUDE HUMANITARIAN WORK, THEY INCLUDE ALL THESE THINGS WHICH USE MONEY. WHICH DON'T PRODUCE MONEY. THE CHURCH IS…THE INCOME OF THE CHURCH COMES FROM THE CONSECRATIONS OF THE PEOPLE, WHO TITHE THEMSELVES, PAY THEIR TITEHS, THE ANCIENT LAW OF THE TITHE IS THE CHURCH'S LAW OF THE MANSE. AND THAT'S WHERE THE MONEY COMES WHICH OPERATES THE CHURCH. IF YOU LOOK AT OUR BALANCE SHEET, THAT SHOWS ALL THE FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE, AND THE PROGRAMS WE CARRY, WE APPEAR VERY WEALTHY. BUT YOU MUST REALIZE THAT ALL OF THOSE PROGRAMS CONSUME MONEY, THEY DON'T PRODUCE IT. THAT THE MONEY WHICH WE USE COMES FROM THE CONSECRATIONS OF THE PEOPLE.
So Here Is The Lie . They seem to have income producing assets , how else can they spend $1.5 billion without using Tithe funds ?
If anyone knows different please tell me !
From DeseretNews.Com February 4th 2007
Over the next five years, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' estimated $1.5 billion City Creek Center project in downtown Salt Lake City will add five new residential towers to the skyline, with about 430 new residential housing units.
From Ensign Magazine December 2006 p79
The Church first announced three years ago it was planning to redevelop the downtown area to energize the economy of the city that houses its headquarters and to bolster the area near Temple Square. No Tithing funds will be used in the redevelopment .
THE LIE ...... Gordon Hinckley says the churches's assets are money consuming , so where does the estimated $1.5 billion Dollars come from ?
Answer........ From Church Investments . So they have money producing assets also !
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2987383235452303450&q=gordon+hinckley+olympics&hl=en
REPORTER:
YES. ANOTHER CRITICS ABOUT FINANCES, I READ IN DIFFERENT MAGAZINES THE RUMOR THAT YOUR CHURCH IS VERY WEALTHY, AND I'D LIKE THE NUMBER OF 30 MILL…BILLION DOLLARS, US DOLLARS, WHAT DO YOU RESPOND?
HINCKLEY:
THAT'S SOMEBODY'S GUESS. THAT'S JUST A WILD GUESS. WELL, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, THIS, YES…IF YOU COUNT ALL OF OUR ASSETS, YES, WE ARE WELL-OFF. BUT THOSE ASSETS, YOU HAVE TO KNOW THIS, ARE NOT MONEY-PRODUCING. THOSE ASSETS ARE MONEY-CONSUMING. THOSE ASSETS, INCLUDING MEETING HOUSES, CHURCHES, THOUSANDS OF THEM ACROSS THE WORLD, THEY INCLUDE TEMPLES, THEY INCLUDE UNIVERSITIES, THEY INCLUDE WELFARE PROJECTS, THEY INCLUDE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES, THEY INCLUDE ALL THE MISSIONARY WORK, THEY INCLUDE HUMANITARIAN WORK, THEY INCLUDE ALL THESE THINGS WHICH USE MONEY. WHICH DON'T PRODUCE MONEY. THE CHURCH IS…THE INCOME OF THE CHURCH COMES FROM THE CONSECRATIONS OF THE PEOPLE, WHO TITHE THEMSELVES, PAY THEIR TITEHS, THE ANCIENT LAW OF THE TITHE IS THE CHURCH'S LAW OF THE MANSE. AND THAT'S WHERE THE MONEY COMES WHICH OPERATES THE CHURCH. IF YOU LOOK AT OUR BALANCE SHEET, THAT SHOWS ALL THE FACILITIES THAT WE HAVE, AND THE PROGRAMS WE CARRY, WE APPEAR VERY WEALTHY. BUT YOU MUST REALIZE THAT ALL OF THOSE PROGRAMS CONSUME MONEY, THEY DON'T PRODUCE IT. THAT THE MONEY WHICH WE USE COMES FROM THE CONSECRATIONS OF THE PEOPLE.
So Here Is The Lie . They seem to have income producing assets , how else can they spend $1.5 billion without using Tithe funds ?
If anyone knows different please tell me !
From DeseretNews.Com February 4th 2007
Over the next five years, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' estimated $1.5 billion City Creek Center project in downtown Salt Lake City will add five new residential towers to the skyline, with about 430 new residential housing units.
From Ensign Magazine December 2006 p79
The Church first announced three years ago it was planning to redevelop the downtown area to energize the economy of the city that houses its headquarters and to bolster the area near Temple Square. No Tithing funds will be used in the redevelopment .
THE LIE ...... Gordon Hinckley says the churches's assets are money consuming , so where does the estimated $1.5 billion Dollars come from ?
Answer........ From Church Investments . So they have money producing assets also !
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2987383235452303450&q=gordon+hinckley+olympics&hl=en
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
