Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: April 2017

Mormons will tell you that you can know that Mormonism is the true Christian Church by just praying to God and asking Him. At that time, they say, you will experience a burning sensation in the chest accompanied by feelings of peace which they call the Burning Bosom. This, say Mormons, is proof that the Mormon Church is the true Christian Church and the true church of God. Here is an LDS member saying so on the official LDS website.

This is despite the fact that Joseph Smith himself said he had made incorrect decisions based on such a Burning Bosom experience and the senior leader Boyd K. Packer in the 1983 LDS Ensign magazine in an article titled “Candle of the Lord” admitting that relying on the Burning Bosom can easily lead to following Satan or one’s own emotional impulse. Packer wrote as as follows:

Be ever on guard lest you be deceived by inspiration from an unworthy source. You can be given false spiritual messages. There are counterfeit spirits just as there are counterfeit angels. Be careful lest you be deceived, for the devil may come disguised as an angel of light.

The spiritual part of us and the emotional part of us are so closely linked that it is possible to mistake an emotional impulse for something spiritual. We occasionally find people who receive what they assume to be spiritual promptings from God, when those promptings are either centered in the emotions or are from the adversary.

Boyd K. Packer, “The Candle of the Lord,” Ensign, January 1983. Mr. Packer in his address offered no way to discern between the emotional, Satanic and Godly witnesses.

To assist Mr. Packer, the best way to discern between the Godly, Satanic and emotional impulses is to evaluate your proposed course of action against The Bible. Because The Bible was produced by The Holy Spirit, any advice from the Holy Spirit will never contradict The Bible because The Holy Spirit will never contradict Himself.

In my opinion it is very easy to tell that the Mormon Church is not a Christian church. And that is because in the First Vision of Joseph Smith in which he received his first messages from the spirit world he was told to reject all the Christian Churches and all Christian belief.

Later accounts say that when the personages appeared, Smith asked them “O Lord, what church shall I join?”[10] or “Must I join the Methodist Church?”[27] In answer, he was told that “all religious denominations were believing in incorrect doctrines, and that none of them was acknowledged of God as his church and kingdom.”[30] All churches and their professors were “corrupt”,[31] and “all their creeds were an abomination in [God’s] sight.”[15]

Here then is the basis of Mormonism: Reject all Christian Churches and all Christian belief. Would that message come from Jesus ?

Existing Christian belief would be replaced with a message which would later be given to Smith. This became The Book Of Mormon and associated other Mormon teachings.

The ninth president of the Mormon Church, David O. McKay, said that “the appearing of the Father and the Son to Joseph Smith is the foundation of the Church.” (Gospel Ideals, p. 85).

Given the foundation of Mormonism, it is easy to see that the Mormon Church is not Christian, but Anti-Christian.

Mormonism was Satan’s attempt to replace American Christianity with a counterfeit. Joseph Smith lived in an area which was in the peak of a major Christian revival. Mormonism was Satan’s attempt to undermine that revival and distract Americans from following the true Jesus.

Add to this the Satanic nature of Mormon’s core message – which is that Humans can become Gods by following Mormonism – plus the consideration that its major spiritual practice, Baptism for the Dead, is a means of occult interaction with the deceased – and I think it is clear that Mormonism is exposed as a Satanic enterprise.

I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.it…. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. (2 Corinthians 11:3-14)

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospelwhich is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse! (Galatians 1:6-9)

Advertisements

A few weeks ago I had a chat with a neighbour who is a Mormon who kindly gave me a bit of a run-down on the Mormon faith. I made some notes on our conversation

The reasons my neighbour gave to become a Mormon were that Traditional Christianity has splintered into a number of sects; only the Mormon church has a living prophet; your dead ancestors can get go to heaven and that the Bible has been changed and corrupted whereas the Book Of Mormon has not.

I’ll give a brief response to each reason to become a Mormon first, then a more detailed response below.

Brief Response

  1. Traditional Christianity Has Splintered Into Dozens Of Competing Sects

 

You mentioned that traditional Christianity has splintered into dozens of competing sects whereas the Mormon Church has remained one church. The continuity of Mormonism as a single church with a single doctrine proves that it is the true Christian Church.

Unfortunately Mormonism has also splintered into dozens of competing sects.

Wikipedia currently lists 86 Mormon sects. (Google Article List Of Denominations In The Latter-Day Saints Movement).

If traditional Christianity is discredited and unreliable because of the proliferation of sects then so is Mormonism and there is no reason to become a Mormon.

  1. Only The Mormon Church Has A Living Prophet

You said that one of the great benefits of being a Mormon is that the Mormon Church has a living prophet to provide leadership, revelation and guidance to the church. The current living Mormon prophet is apparently Thomas Monson who was born in 1927.

Unfortunately for Mormons and for Thomas Monson, the Church of Jesus Christ already has a living and eternal prophet and that person is not a Mormon. 

The living prophet of the Church Of Jesus Christ is Jesus Christ. The Bible clearly explains that Jesus is the High Priest of His church, and that He has this position forever because He has an indestructible life. Quite obviously, Jesus is alive. Since Jesus is alive there is no need for any successor to Him and indeed there can never be any successor to Jesus.

 

Since Christians already have an eternally living and perfect High Priest and Prophet, namely Jesus Christ Himself, there is no reason to accept any other High Priest or Prophet and therefore no reason to become Mormon. 

 

3. Dead Ancestors Can Get Saved

You indicated that a big benefit of becoming a Mormon is that my dead ancestors can get saved by actions I can perform on their behalf, such as being Baptised for The Dead.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to get Baptised for The Dead. The Bible is clear that people are judged for their own works and do not gain any benefit from the works of others and also that there is no hope for salvation after death if that person has refused salvation prior to death.

Given this, Baptism for the Dead does not provide any incentive to become a Mormon, and is in fact a disincentive to become a Mormon, as it violates the teaching of Jesus as found in The Bible.

In fact, the Bible’s clear overall teaching is to deter believers from having any interaction or interest in the dead at all and in fact to avoid any interactions with them at all. Baptism for the Dead violates the boundaries that God has set up for our protection from harmful interaction with the Spirit World.

4. The Bible Has Become Corrupted

You mentioned that there are many different Bibles and therefore no-one can be really sure which Bible is the real one whereas the Book Of Mormon has remained the same ever since it was written and will never change. The unchanging nature of the Book Of Mormon proves that Mormonism is the true Christian Church.

Unfortunately the Book Of Mormon has indeed changed over time. Even Mormon websites acknowledge this, simply noting that the changes are merely clarifications and do not affect Mormon doctrine. See For example Fair Mormon here

Since the Book Of Mormon exhibits minor changes in different editions, it is no different to The Bible which also exhibits minor changes in different editions. Hence The Book Of Mormon does not exhibit any special textual constancy and therefore does not provide any compelling reason to become a Mormon.

Detailed Response

  1. Traditional Christianity Has Splintered Into Dozens Of Competing Sects

You mentioned that traditional Christianity has splintered into dozens of competing sects whereas the Mormon Church has remained one church. The continuity of Mormonism as a single church with a single doctrine proves that it is the true Christian Church.

Unfortunately Mormonism has also splintered into dozens of competing sects.

Wikipedia currently lists 86 Mormon sects. (Google Article List Of Denominations In The Latter-Day Saints Movement).

If traditional Christianity is discredited and unreliable because of the proliferation of sects then so is Mormonism and there is no reason to become a Mormon.

  1. Only The Mormon Church Has A Living Prophet

You said that one of the great benefits of being a Mormon is that the Mormon Church has a living prophet to provide leadership, revelation and guidance to the church. The current living Mormon prophet is apparently Thomas Monson who was born in 1927.

Unfortunately for Mormons and for Thomas Monson, the Church of Jesus Christ already has a living and eternal prophet and that person is not a Mormon. 

The living prophet of the Church Of Jesus Christ is Jesus Christ. The Bible clearly explains that Jesus is the High Priest of His church, and that He has this position forever because He has an indestructible life. Quite obviously, Jesus is alive. Since Jesus is alive there is no need for any successor to Him and indeed there can never be any successor to Jesus.

The Bible is also clear that the Church of Jesus Christ has no need for any revelatory prophets following Jesus because Jesus is the perfect revelator of scripture and of God, being the unique Son Of God and God Himself

Furthermore, Jesus is obviously a far better prophet and priest than Thomas Monson because Jesus is God and Thomas Monson isn’t.

Who makes the better prophet and priest  ? God or someone who is not God ?

If you had a choice between having God as your Priest and Prophet or someone else, who would you choose ? I choose Jesus. You can too. Why don’t you ? Why not do it now ?

Since Christians already have an eternally living and perfect High Priest and Prophet, namely Jesus Christ Himself who is God, there is no reason to accept any other High Priest or Prophet and therefore no reason to become Mormon. 

Why should Mormons wish to strip Jesus of his titles as High Priest or His church and final revelatory prophet and award them to someone else ? This is straight-forward blasphemy.

I now invite Mormon readers to renounce the false Mormon prophet and priest and accept the true Prophet and Priest of the Church of Jesus Christ, who is Jesus Christ, in his unique, sole, proper and full authority and Lordship.

The Mormon so-called living prophet cannot meet the needs of the church. I have a continuous daily need for revelation and guidance. This cannot be provided by a human being like Thomas Monson. The Christian Church currently numbers approximately Two Billion people. If Mr. Monson gave each of us a one minute face to face meeting it would take him approximateky 3,805 years to meet each one. If there was an additional 15 second turnover time between each person, then the process would take approximately 4,756 years to complete. I would be long dead before my one minute interview came to pass. Monson cannot give me, or anyone else the continuous guidance, revelation and comfort that we need.

This is why we need Jesus Christ to be our Prophet and High Priest. Since Jesus is God, Jesus is omni-present and can and does dwell personally live with His people. Jesus lives in me and in every believer. Therefore I have access to continuous guidance, revelation, wisdom and comfort from my living Prophet and High Priest, Jesus Christ. Mormons do not get anything remotely like this from Thomas Monson.

Dear Mormon, can you see how you are being ripped off and deprived of spiritual blessings by awarding your devotion to a human being ?

In this linked article, a Mormon explains that the church needs a living prophet because the communion of mankind with God was lost when Adam and Eve sinned. While it is true that the fall of mankind did indeed sever the continuous personal communion of mankind with God, that communion is restored by the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

That is the meaning of atonement – to make peace between feuding parties. Jesus Himself is the peace of mankind. He has reconciled God and humanity together. He is our Priest, our Prophet, our sacrifice, the gift, the Altar and our Atonement. He is our all-in-all. He is our peace with God. Mormonism has deprived you of your spiritual blessings in Jesus by giving you a fake Jesus and a deficient view of the Atonement, to state merely the beginning of the travesty of Mormon belief.

The church of Jesus Christ does indeed need a living prophet. It has one: Jesus.

I invite you now to make the true Jesus Lord of your life and renounce the fake and imposter prophets Jospeph Smith and Thomas Monson along with the false faith of Mormonism.

3. Dead Relatives Can Get Saved and Go To Heaven

You indicated that a big benefit of becoming a Mormon is that my dead ancestors can get saved by actions I can perform on their behalf, such as being Baptised for The Dead.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to get Baptised for The Dead. The Bible is clear that people are judged for their own works and do not gain any benefit from the works of others and also that there is no hope for salvation after death if that person has refused salvation prior to death.

Given this, Baptism for the Dead does not provide any incentive to become a Mormon, and is in fact a disincentive to become a Mormom, as it violates Bible teaching, which is the teaching of Jesus.

The Apostle Paul does indeed reference the pagan practice of people Baptising for the dead, but does not endorse it as a Christian practice. He did the same in Acts 17 when explaining to the pagan Athenians that the Unknown God was actually Jesus.   Paul didn’t worship the Unknown God himself thus endorsing the pagan practice. Rather he used their pagan practice as a bridge to explaining the truth about Jesus who is God who has revealed Himself and made Himself known. Similarly, the pagan practice of Baptism for the Dead is not endorsed, but is used as a bridge this time to under-informed Christians to explain that the Resurrection of Jesus was both real and a bodily resurrection. In a like manner to the Athenian example,  Paul would not himself Baptise for the Dead or endorse this practice.

In fact, the Bible’s clear overall teaching is to deter believers from having any interaction or interest in the dead at all and in fact to avoid any interactions with them at all. Baptism for the Dead violates the boundaries that God has set up for our protection from harmful interaction with the Spirit World.

Mormons frequently interact with the dead during their ceremonies for Baptism for The Dead and it is incredibly disturbing that Mormons encourage their children to expect and welcome visitations from the dead. What more evidence does one need to see that the Mormon church is rife with occult and spiritually defiling practices ? It is obvious that this practice marks Mormonism as a false church established by a false prophet.

4. The Bible Has Become Corrupted

You mentioned that there are many different Bibles and therefore no-one can be really sure which Bible is the real one whereas the Book Of Mormon has remained the same ever since it was written and will never change. The unchanging nature of the Book Of Mormon proves that Mormonism is the true Christian Church.

Unfortunately the Book Of Mormon has indeed changed over time. Even Mormon websites acknowledge this, simply noting that the changes are merely clarifications and do not affect Mormon doctrine. See For example Fair Mormon here

Since the Book Of Mormon exhibits minor changes in different editions, it is no different to The Bible which also exhibits minor changes in different editions. Hence The Book Of Mormon does not exhibit any special textual purity and therefore does not provide any compelling reason to become a Mormon.

The Pearl Of Great Price is another book of Mormon Scripture which has undergone changes, significant changes occurring in 1878, 1900 and 1976. These changes are freely admitted by LDS leaders and members (Google the BYU Masters Thesis An Analysis Of Textual Changes In The Pearl Of Great Price). While fully accepted as a divine work by the major LDS denomination, large parts of Pearl are rejected by various LDS branches, especially the Book Of Abraham.

On the Book Of Abraham, Smith (i.e. Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism) supposedly translated this from Egyptian papyrus texts in his possession. Professional Egyptologists have inspected Smith’s papyri and find them to be standard Egyptian Funerary texts thus rejecting Smith’s supposed translations  as a blatant fraud. Please compare this to The Bible in which all of its translations from Greek and Hebrew are regarded by impartial professionals as academically honest.

A third Mormon Book Of Scripture Doctrine and Covenants has undergone extensive and continuous revision. Mormon Elder Boyd K. Packer, President of The Quorum Of the so-called Twelve Apostles of the LDS (i.e. Latter-Day Saints, the official term for the Mormon church) from 2008-2015 discussed the changes to  Doctrine And Covenants in a general conference:

Of course there have been changes and corrections. Anyone who has done even limited research knows that. (See the article at Fair Mormon ‘Doctrine and Covenants’).

Mormons accept The King James Version of The Bible as Scripture whilst simultaneously considering it to be corrupted and unreliable. I suspect Mormonism stands as unique in canonising works as Holy and Sacred whilst simultaneously considering them corrupted and unreliable.

Of course, Joseph Smith also produced his own version of The Bible called The Joseph Smith Translation. This is accepted by some, but not all,  LDS branches. The major LDS denomination accepts only some parts of the JST and incorporates those into The Pearl Of Great Price. A somewhat ambiguous view of the JST appears to exist within the main LDS denomination with  Bruce R. McConkie  of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles 1972-1985  saying, “The Joseph Smith Translation, or Inspired Version, is a thousand times over the best Bible now existing on earth”,  yet remaining doctrinally-bound by his church to accept only parts of the JST whilst fully affirming the inferior and more-or-less corrupted King James Version as sacred scripture.(Google Wikipedia article on The Joseph Smith Translation)

In summary, all the LDS Holy Books exhibit changes in their various editions. These changes are freely admitted and endorsed by LDS leadership.. Logically then there is no  reason to become a Mormon based on the supposed unchanging nature of their sacred texts. Because LDS allows its leadership to create, revoke or change scripture at any time the LDS have no requirement for constancy in their sacred scripture, so there is none.

Furthermore, independent experts in Egyptology have cross-checked Smith’s translation of Mormon scriptural sources and consider them to be blatantly fraudulent. Surely no other faith has had to endure such direct embarrassment to their prophetic and scriptural basis.

Because of Smith’s obvious fraud it can be seen that Mormonism is not a true church, it is in fact a false church with a false prophet and is a cult.

Overall, it is plain that the Mormon scriptural basis is hopelessly degraded and provides no incentive for anyone to become a Mormon.

I have just read David Marr’s essay The White Queen: One Nation and the Politics of Race (Quarterly Essay #65) on Pauline Hanson and her party, Pauline Hanson’s One Nation. The confluence in name between Pauline Hanson and her party is exact and intentional. As Hanson said on national TV The Party is me [1]. And she is correct. The One Nation phenonemon is entirely a product of Hanson’s passion, personality, raw determination and resilience. Without Hanson One Nation cannot exist.

I will use this post to comment on Marr’s excellent essay, which Marr conceived in order to put a floor of fact under Hanson’s people and her political people [2]. Like all observers of Australian politics, Marr wants to understand the One Nation phenonemon, how it is that a race-based political party can thrive and become so influential within Australia. For those who abhor the phenonemon of race-based politics this understanding is a foundational, crucial first step towards neutralising One Nation or at least preventing it advancing further from its present toxifying influence into a genuinely Fascistic unadulterated race-hate movement.

Can I just say that the title of Marr’s essay The White Queen is marvellous ? It captures Hanson and the relationship of Hanson’s supporters to her perfectly.

Typical

A portion of Marr’s essay is strict quantitative research in which a profile of the typical One Nation voter is resolved from longitudinal survey-based research. This section while relatively dry reading is absolutely essential to understanding Hanson’s people.

Marr finds that the typical One Nation voter is Australian-born, male (56% v 44% female), identifies as working class , secular (not religious), lives on urban fringes of cities and large towns (but also in small rural communities), likely to have a trades education (i.e. is less educated than the general public), are pessimistic about their own economic prospects and those of Australia generally, heavily distrust government and politicians, are inclined to a law and order viewpoint in solving societal issues, thinks there is too much welfare, detests immigration and multiculturalism but does not personally live among or even know recent migrants migrants (though they may live in neighbouring areas to migrants)  or know those on welfare and, strikingly, perceives a nexus between immigrants and crime.

Marr summarises the Hansonites as being from National Party heartland

Infantile

This post will develop over the next few weeks as I add to it, but I just want to start with one comment for now. Hanson’s people are, at an emotional level, infantile. 

Marr, summarizing Rebecca Huntley, who has conducted voter focus groups for many years says Hanson’s people yearn for the past [3]. Many Australians aged 40 or older may express an opinion that the Australia of their youth was a better place, but if pressed, most voters will say, no, they do not want to return to the Australia of the 1950’s with its monoculture, remoteness from the world and limited work opportunities for women. But Hanson voters do really want to return Australia to the 1950’s. Hanson’s voters want to return Australia to the young adulthood of their fathers, when they were children, when everything was certain, secure, predictable and they felt physically and emotionally safe.

Consequently, even though Marr does not say this, I do: Hanson’s people are infantile.

Engaging One Nation

This is an important finding for engaging with One Nation. It means that you are dealing with children. How do you win an argument with 55 year old children ? You can’t. You just need to give them a few lollies and their favourite blanket and hopefully that will quiet them down before they trash the joint.

John Howard knew this. When engaging with One Nation he didn’t try and argue with them. He tried to mollify them. Specifically, he addressed their insecurities. Howard said, speaking of his GST reforms, that he would  give them something better than what they had i.e. economic security and in this way draw them back to the mainstream.

Keating terrified Hanson’s people. Open borders, open tariffs, familiar industries closing down, unfamiliar new industries to be encouraged, the welcome of Asia. Every Hansonite in the country, beginning with Hanson herself, filled their nappies in horror.

The Hansonite infantilism drives their insecurity. Hence their attraction to law and order solutions such as Capital Punishment and to gun ownership, by which they hope to protect themselves and their property from both ravishing migrant hordes and theiving, dishonest government.

Hansonites are impervious to argument. They need calming down.

So the first thing you need to do for Hansonites, like Howard, is say ‘Yes, yes I hear you’. And then listen. I mean really listen. But, as for children, don’t necessarily do as they demand. Reassure them. Offer them a rosy picture of the future. Let them know they are important. I would even give them a few lollies like, I dunno, rural subsidy for road-building or construction of humungous Anzac Day memorials if it was thought this would help social cohesion and defuse their anger to some degree.

Social cohesion is worth paying for. And it is necessary for governments to argue the case for social change. Hansonism is partially at least a result of governments taking the conservative under-educated for granted.

But ultimately if the giant 55 year old toddler baby Hansonites refuse to stop tantruming, they should be ignored. Their core constituency is low in number. You can’t let the country be governed by children.

And this is the problem that Marr identifies throughout his essay. The major parties are willingly accommodating to Hansonites. John Howard was in fact a Hansonite himself. So is Dutton and the rest of the conservative, reactionary, white male rump of the Liberal National Coalition. Both Liberal and Labor have adopted Hanson’s policies in regard to Asylum-Seekers.

The country needs a government that will treat Hansonites as children. But not dismissively as Keating did, but inclusively, without succumbing to the attraction of populism or the fear of educated reactionaries who should know better.

Hanson Is Not Racist

Hanson denies she is racist. She defines racism as a belief that one’s own race is superior to other races and says that she doesn’t think that whites are superior to Aboriginals or Asians or anyone else.

I believe Hanson. Marr does not.

Marr says that what betrays Hanson as a racist is her conspiratorial mindset, the belief shared by aggressive, ideological racists that they (the hated and feared other race) have a secret agenda to take over. This is certainly Hansonite territory.

Hanson once believed that Asians were soon to swamp Australia and now believes that Muslims intend to impose Sharia Law on us all. So-called University-educated Elites were also imposing Political Correctness on mainstream, normal Australians like Pauline Hanson, so taking over Australia with some kind of leftist Sharia. Malcolm Roberts, her climate denialist compatriot and co-Senator thinks that Climate Change is a hoax invented by Jews acting in concert with the IMF and United Nations to take over the world and enforce One World Government. Why would Jews want to do that ? Because they are evil, presumably.

While the fear of being swamped or displaced by another race or culture is indeed a feature of racist thinking I don’t believe that Hanson is racist. I consider, instead, that Hanson is Xenophobic, i.e. has a fear of outsiders from other races. Specifically Hanson fears the extinction of her own culture: which is conservative, white, secular nominally-but-not-actually-semi-Christian Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Fish and Chips 1950’s Anglo-Australian middle-class parochialism. Once upon a time everybody Hanson knew, met, or ever even saw, was like that. Hanson thinks that this particular thing that she is, is the only kind of Australian that is authentically Australian.

John Howard is this kind of Australian too. John Howard once said that he was quintessentially Australian. This gave John Howard the self-assumed right and authority, therefore, to state what was Australian and what was UnAustralian. What was Mainstream and what wasn’t. Who could have rights and who couldn’t. Hanson assumes the same nativist, infallible perfection of insight. She is Australia and can therefore speak infallibly for Australia.

Hanson fears the loss of her own culture in her own country. She fears and experiences disempowerment. Her views were derided are passe, unacceptable and crass. She feels a displacement from the cultural centre, in other words a loss of privilege which she perceives as an attack on her and her culture; she perceives targeted assistance for Aboriginals as unfair to white Australians. She calls herself  a proud Australian. I don’t want to see my culture gone. She wants everyone to behave the same way as her when in her town, state and country. She refuses to accept that her views may be out-dated or vulgar and finds such an idea impossible. She does not believe that it is acceptable or possible for a culture to change, that there is more than one way to be Australian, that the idea of being Australian can evolve.

Hanson is definitely conservative and Xenophobic. These things do not mean that she considers her own culture superior to other cultures, but she does want to make sure her own culture remains dominant in her own town, state and country. I doubt she shares the anti-Semitic views of her co-Senator Malcolm Roberts.

[1] Marr, QE #65, p.72 from Sunday Mail 10 January 2015.

[2] QE #65, p.96

[3] QE #65, p.59

[4] QE #65, p.71