Roots of Mormonism (Video)
Strange but True Thursday, January 21st, 2010This cartoon video explains the basic beliefs of Mormonism . . . Where people come from, where black people come from, what happens when we die, etc.
Enjoy!
The following details are posted on YouTube with the video, which has been re-posted and removed a number of times.
I guess this video has been getting removed from youtube because mormons dont like people to know about their less popular teachings. Im uploading this video to keep the information available. Mormons have been complaining that these are not taught by their religion, but a source of this video provided references to mormon literature for every claim made int he vid:
0:20 – 0:45 King Follett Discourse (History of the Church Vol 6 pg 302-317)
0:54 – 1:00 abraham 3
1:03 – 2:20 Gospel Principles Ch2-3
2:20 – 2:35 Official Statment by 1st presidency 08/17/49 and 08/17/51 and Joseph Fielding Smith in Doctrines of Salvation 1:65-66 2nd Nephi 5:21
2:38 – Gospel Princ Manual Ch3
2:40 – Pre 1982 2Nephi 30:6
2:44 – no longer taught he said early mormon profits… Brigham young journal of discourses vol 1 pg 50-51 and Wilford Woodruffs journal
3:20 – The seer pg 172, brigham young journal of discourses vol 1 p 346 orson hyde journal journal of discourses, vol 2 p 210
3:28 – D&C 113 and Isa 11
3:32 – Journal of Discourses 13:309
3:41 – 3Nephi
4:03 – 4 Nephi, Moroni
4:20 – 4:30 Moroni 10
4:37 – 4:50 State of NY VS Joseph Smith “The Glass Looker” other Court Documents
4:43 – 4:50 1826-1830 convicted of fraud, admitted “peepstoning” was fake.
5:01 – Joe Smith History 1:19
5:16 – 5:21 Howard W hunter “your temple recommend” New Era Apr 1995, 6
5:22 Russell M Nelson “SPirit of Elijah” Ensign Nov 1994, 84 and D&C 128, 138:33
5:27 – D&C 132:17-20
5:36 – Robert L Millet, “Joseph smith among the prophets” Ensign Jun 1994, 19
5:49 – :52 D&C 132
6:03 – Hist of the Church Vol pg 408-412
6:12 – He died in a shootout
Related articles:
- Westboro Baptist Church vs. Lady Gaga (Video)
- FFRF sends video message to Christian right: You're wrong about American history
- Featured Video: Occam's Razor
- Video: Perez Hilton Assaulted
- Multiplying Mormons Mount March Against Monogamy
Jenny Donati is webmistress and co-editor of Secular News Daily. Jenny is an outspoken secularist who believes firmly in the separation of church and state. She demands evidence to support arguments, and holds herself to the same standard. She doesn't write about herself in the third person . . . but there's a first time for everything.You can follow comments on this article through the RSS Comment Feed. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry.
I knew that the mormon church had some odd views on things but didn’t know about some of these. Who actually made this cartoon?
Since when did good liberals start parroting right wing Christian loonies like Ed Decker for their worldview?
I just find it ironic that a website like this would, for it’s view on Mormons, go to a bunch of right wing Christian fundamentalist nutbags for an accurate view of a religion they’ve hated for over 200 years (we keep stealing their paying parishoners).
This movie was made by a bunch of fundie Christian crackpots on an obviously low budget as a smear job on the LDS Church. It’s based off of Ed Decker’s hacktastic book “The Godmakers.” Decker got kicked out of the LDS Church after emotionally abusing his wife. He now lives in a haze of paranoia that the LDS Church is trying to assassinate him. He’ll show you the “bullet holes” in his bedroom wall if you ask.
If good liberals everywhere want to avoid looking like a bunch of gullible jackasses, they might want to double-check on the credibility of their sources a bit more closely.
Would you care to provide evidence refuting the cartoon, or are insults and ad hominem attacks all you have?
Mormonism is a religion built on hatred. According to Joseph Smith God told Joseph Smith that: "the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” (JSH 1:19)
That certainly wasn't the last word on the subject, over the years their leaders have said:
"The Christian world, so called, are heathens as to their knowledge of the salvation of God." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 8:171).
"What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing…Why so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest fools; they know neither God nor the things of God." (John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 13:225).
"The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon…." (Orson Pratt, Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, "Divine Authenticity," no.6, p.84).
"Brother Taylor has just said that the religions of the day were hatched in hell. The eggs were laid in hell, hatched on its borders, and then kicked on to the earth." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 6:176).
That is enough to prove my point on this issue. I can offer many more.
A lie on your part: "Decker got kicked out of the LDS Church after emotionally abusing his wife." Ed Decker was never kicked out, he demanded his name be removed from church records. His exit letter is available to view at the University of Utah.
I will be responding to your other lies and deceptions.
Stop lying.
“Mormonism teaches that the trillions of planets scattered throughout the cosmos are ruled by Gods who were once like us.”
Mormonism does not specify that we each get one planet. It merely says that, as heirs with God, we inherit all that he has.
The assertion that God the Father has a single planet is flat-out false in Mormon doctrine, because our scriptures clearly state that he has created “worlds without number.”
What does the video mean by “once like us?” This is a hotly debated topic within Mormon theology, with no clear answer. We simply do not know how God was ever like us.
“and one of his goddess wives”
Problems:
We have no idea from Mormon scripture if Eloheim (God the Father) was ever conceived by anyone or if he just always was God. This is also hotly debated among Mormon scholars.
We have no indication from scripture that if Eloheim was conceived by a goddess, if she was one of more than one wife. Polygamy is not taught as a pre-requisite for godhood in the LDS Church today, and arguably, it never was a doctrine to begin with.
“This spirit child was born to human parents”
We have no evidence of this in Mormon scripture, one way or the other. It is not taught in our current curriculum either.
“Was elevated to Godhood.”
Or always was God from the beginning. Either explanation is a possibility. We simply don’t know the details.
“and he lives with his many goddess wives on a planet near a mysterious star called Kolob”
What’s “mysterious” about it, I wonder?
At any rate, no one in the Mormon faith knows whether God has many wives or just one. It’s not something we care about, frankly. It’s not taught – one way or the other. We know that God has a wife at least. But that’s about it.
As for whether he’s on a planet near Kolob, for all we know, those passages of scripture were mere symbolic imagery. That’s how I view it anyway. Not that it matters to me that much. Nor do I see why it should matter to anyone else.
I also find it amusing that they make God an old guy with a white beard – even though Mormon doctrine posits we are resurrected to a perfected form. Also fun how they make all the wives blond clones. No doubt to ratchet up the “creepy” factor.
“through endless Celestial sex”
Problem: there is no Mormon doctrine of “Celestial sex.” Nothing in accepted Mormon doctrine teaches of sex in heaven.
How exactly to you create a child made of spirit anyway?
Sex? Why? Why would you need to do it that way? For all we know, spirit children are created via something like a Vulcan mind meld. Some LDS authorities have even speculated that God did not create our spirit forms to begin with, but that those were eternal – and we were made children of God more through adoption.
Nobody knows how it was done. And emphasizing sex as the method is just a Beavis-and-Butthead style move to say something controversial for the audience (and hopefully make the whole thing sound dirty to stuck-up self-righteous Christian prudes – who were the primary intended audience of this video).
And that’s just in the first 1:00 of footage. Would you like me to continue?
Please do. You’ll note that I’ve updated the article with the references posted online with the YouTube video . . . I assume you and the Mormon church disavow these references?
To continue exposing your deceptions. I quote you saying:
"What does the video mean by “once like us?” This is a hotly debated topic within Mormon theology, with no clear answer. We simply do not know how God was ever like us. "
Well your leaders didn't seems confused about what they meant:
Joseph Smith declared: "God Himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp.345-346). Another one of their leaders coined the phrase: "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become" (The Gospel Through the Ages, Hunter, p.105-106). Brigham Young preached: "It appears ridiculous to the world, under their darkened and erroneous traditions, that God has once been a finite being" (Deseret News, Nov. 16, 1859, p. 290).
You next big deception:
"Polygamy is not taught as a pre-requisite for godhood in the LDS Church today, and arguably, it never was a doctrine to begin with. "
Really? Your scripture says:
1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—
2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.
3 Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.
4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory
How could you become Gods if you are damned for not practicing polygamy? Here is what other LDS leaders have said on this topic:
Brigham Young said you are damned if you deny polygamy.
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269). Why do we believe in and practice polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to his servants in a revelation given to Joseph Smith, and the Lord's servants have always practiced it. "And is that religion popular in heaven?" It is the only popular religion there . . . (Deseret News, August 6, 1862)
Mormonism still believes in polygamy:
"Living Women — A living woman may be sealed to only one husband. . . .
"Living Men — If a husband and wife have been sealed and the wife dies, the man may have another woman sealed to him if she is not already sealed. (Church Handbook of Instruction, p.72) "
To be continued.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by mommadona, Liam Fox and Stan Zaske, Mike Daniels. Mike Daniels said: RT @palibandaily Roots of Mormonism (Video) | Paliban Daily http://ow.ly/1noDUM [...]
Not necessarily.
The problem is that our critics in certain corners of Christianity like to take isolated quotes out of context, and inflate them into full-fledged doctrine. They also sometimes take the mere speculations of past LDS authority figures and promote them into iron-clad doctrine and present it as such. Others will distort the quotes that do exist, cut-and-paste various statements of LDS figures into something quite different from the message they were actually giving.
For example, if you isolate a few sentences of one of Brigham Young’s quotes, you can make it LOOK like he demanded all have more than one wife as a pre-requisite of attaining the highest level of heaven. But if you read the full quote in context, he is merely stating that you need to at least NOT OPPOSE the idea if you wish to make it. Big difference. And it fits better with the reality of Brigham Young’s Utah, since the vast majority of Mormon marriages in the state at that time were monogamous. Polygamous marriages that did exist were usually simply two wives. Any more than that were extremely rare.
But you don’t get this kind of nuance or context from our Christian fundamentalist attackers.
I’ll get back to you on other parts of the video in a bit since you asked me to. Then I’ll have a look at the citations you added.
Thanks, Seth. I look forward to hearing more!
Next I would like to address your statement:
"The problem is that our critics in certain corners of Christianity like to take isolated quotes out of context, and inflate them into full-fledged doctrine. They also sometimes take the mere speculations of past LDS authority figures and promote them into iron-clad doctrine and present it as such."
The problem on your part is your denial that what the leaders say they expect you to believe. I'll give you examples:
In the Imporovement Era, June 1945 contains the following quote as part of a Ward Teachers’ message:
"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan–it is God’s plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy. God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God."
Mormon leaders have often say: "The Lord Will Never Permit the Living Prophet to Lead the Church Astray" (ex: heading in the 1982 Manual for LDS college students)
“The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty.” (Wilford Woodruff, Excerpt regarding Manifesto/between Official Declarations #1 and #2)
“Give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you…his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith. (D&C 21:4-5)
The Lord Almighty leads this Church, and he will never suffer you to be led astray if you are “found doing your duty. You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a bade in its mother’s arms, as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray….” ( Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 9:289)
“…learn to do as you are told. …if you are told by your leader to do a thing, do it, none of your business whether it is right or wrong.” (Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, 6:32)
to be continued…
“If you do things according to counsel and they are wrong, the consequences will fall on the heads of those who counseled you, so don’t be troubled.” (William Clayton’s Journal, p. 334)
“God made Aaron to be the mouthpiece for the children of Israel, and He will make me to be god to you in His stead, and the Elders to be mouth for me; and if you don’t like it, you must lump it.” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 363/History of the Church, 6:319-20)
“I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture.” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 13:95)
“Recently, at the Church-wide fireside meeting held for the women of the Church, Young Women President Elaine Cannon made the following statement: “When the Prophet speaks,….the debate is over.” (Ensign, November 1978, p. 108). I was impressed by that simple statement, which carries such deep spiritual meaning for all of us. Wherever I go, my message to the people is: follow the prophet.
“Why else has the Lord placed prophets on the earth through the dispensations of time? In his infinite wisdom, and as part of the plan of life and salvation for his children, God has given us the blueprint to follow, the leadership to direct us and keep us on course, and the Church organization to help us lay the foundation and develop the skills, or make the preparation necessary, to lead us back to our eternal home. It is foolish to suppose that men can be left to their own devices and accomplish what God intended for them….
“It is difficult to understand why there are many people who fight against the counsel of the prophet and FOR the preservation of the very things that will bring them misery and death…. Latter-day Saints should be able to accept the words of the prophets without having to wait for science to prove the validity of their words. We are most fortunate to have a living prophet at the head of the Church to guide us, and all who heed his counsel will be partakers of the promised blessings which will not be enjoyed by those who fail to accept his messages….We cannot serve God and mammon. Whose side are we on? When the prophet speaks the debate is over.” (The Debate is Over, President N. Eldon Tanner, Ensign, August 1979, p. 3)
I can give even more statement, but I give several examples so you can't say it was only one leaders opinion. Members are clearly taught not to question what the leaders say. So when the leaders speak at General Conference, it is considered church doctrine. Unlike you, they have been chosen by the LDS church to represent it's teachings. Just because you are embarrassed by those teachings today doesn't mean they were not considered a teaching of the LDS church.
You also said:
"For example, if you isolate a few sentences of one of Brigham Young's quotes, you can make it LOOK like he demanded all have more than one wife as a pre-requisite of attaining the highest level of heaven. But if you read the full quote in context, he is merely stating that you need to at least NOT OPPOSE the idea if you wish to make it. Big difference."
What you are not telling is that during those days, only members who were practicing polygamy were allowed to hold the offices of Bishop and such. That is a lot more then just "not opposing it." Brigham Young certainly meant what he said concerning polygamy and was demanding it's practice by the members.
What I found funny is how you said "Polygamous marriages that did exist were usually simply two wives" as if it made it OK. It wasn't OK, it was an abomination to this nation and has been a curse to Mormonism.
OK, this reply is pretty late, but better late than never.
I managed to secure a transcript of the video script (hope it's accurate). Statements from the video are in quotation marks followed by my response:
“Mormonism teaches that trillions of planets scattered throughout the cosmos are ruled by countless gods who once were human like us. They say that long ago on one of these planets, to an unidentified god and one of his goddess wives, a spirit child named Elohim was conceived. This spirit child was later born to human parents who gave him a physical body. Through obedience to Mormon teaching and death and resurrection, he proved himself worthy, and was elevated to godhood, as his father before him.”
The main problem with this is that it speaks of matters that are purely speculative within Mormon teaching. SOME Mormon leadership in the past has speculated about an infinite backward chain of gods. But this has never become official doctrine within the religion and is not currently a part of any officially accepted LDS curriculum. The video takes a marginalized, wholly speculative, isolated, and unsupported portion of Mormon tradition, and enshrines it as core LDS teaching. It’s a classic instance of straw-man argument.
Specific problems include:
1.The implied idea that each “god” gets a single planet. This is nowhere supported in Mormon teaching and is directly contradicted by our scriptures. Our scriptures state that God the Father has created an infinite number of worlds. He then extends to us the promise of inheriting all that he has.
2.“Goddess Wives.” This is utterly speculative. Mormon theology declares God to be both male and female – a marriage of a male “Father” and female “Mother.” But beyond this, there is no official teaching or doctrine. Early Mormon leadership in the late 1800s occasionally speculated about God having more than one wife, or Jesus Christ having the same. However, these views have long since fallen out of circulation in LDS teaching and have very few adherents in the modern LDS Church. Mormon doctrine is simply silent on the matter of whether God has one wife or many.
3.God “proved himself worthy” and was “elevated” to Godhood. Mormon doctrine allows for the view that God progressed to his position from a prior state similar to ours. But this is not the only possible view under Mormon theology. It is equally possible under Mormon teaching that God’s time experiencing mortality was done in the same sense as Jesus Christ – fully divine. Thus there would never be, under this Mormon theological view, any time in which God the Father was anything less than fully divine. Again, the video is taking purely speculative aspects of Mormon thought and enshrining them as the official view.
On a side note, one might ask why it’s supposed to matter if a perfectly loving God is united with one perfected wife or many. A look at the animated imagery gives us some clues as to why the creators thought this idea was supposed to be upsetting. In the video, God is portrayed as an old man with a white beard, surrounded by a mob of youthful blond female clones gazing in brainwashed adoration. Obviously, the creators are trying to portray God as some sort of philandering old man with a harem of female sex slaves. This is completely ridiculous and outrageous.
Mormon doctrine teaches the full perfection, agency, free will, and freedom to love for both sexes. More on this later.
“Mormons believe that Elohim is their heavenly father, and that he lives with his many goddess wives on a planet near a mysterious star called Kolob. “
The video ignores here the fact that most Mormons don’t concern themselves greatly with the idea of God living on a particular planet. Much of LDS teaching takes these passages from the Book of Abraham as a symbolic representation of the cosmos – meant to teach spiritual truths rather than act as an astronomy textbook. The filmmakers of course, are at pains to bring up the catch-phrase “goddess wives” as often as possible for shock value.
“Here the god of Mormonism and his wives through endless celestial sex produced billions of spirit children.”
A clearly bigoted attempt to capitalize on ignorant Protestant paranoia about the inherent filthiness of sex. As mentioned before, Mormon doctrine is silent on the number of wives. Secondly, Mormon doctrine simply does not teach that spirit children are created via physical copulation and fetal gestation. It is utterly silent on the matter. We know we have a spirit father in Heavenly Father and a spirit mother in Heavenly Mother. That is the full extent of Mormon teaching on this matter and it goes no further.
We have zero information about the process of obtaining spirit children. Mormon teaching views physical sex between husband and wife to be a mortal and physical symbol of the loving creative power of God. But this does not mean that we automatically think God is having “endless sex” with “endlessly pregnant” wives. The process of creating spirit children could merely be nothing more than a symbolic expression of love between Father and Mother. It could be done via something like a Vulcan mind-meld. It could be done simply by speaking words of intent. It could be done by simply sharing a powerful thought. We simply do not know.
In fact, some strains of Mormon thought posit that spirit bodies are not created by God at all, but are in fact, eternal. Thus we become God’s “children” merely by a voluntary process of adoption. Simply because Mormon theology has not deigned to be specific on how spirit children come to be is not license for anti-Mormon filmmakers to simply fill in the blanks in attempting to play the popular prejudices of the day.
“To decide their destiny, the head of the Mormon gods called a great heavenly council meeting. Both of Elohim’s eldest sons were there: Lucifer and his brother Jesus.”
Mormon doctrine never claims that Lucifer is eldest. Not that I care particularly about this error, but people should try to be accurate anyway.
"A plan was presented to build planet earth, where the spirit children would be sent to take on mortal bodies, and learn good from evil. Lucifer stood and made his bid for becoming savior of this new world."
No particular beef here.
“Wanting the glory for himself, he planned to force everyone to become gods.“
Another error. What Lucifer proposed was to force everyone to obey God the Father. No word at all in Mormon scripture whether he cared if we became gods or not.
“Opposing the idea, the Mormon Jesus suggested giving man his freedom of choice, as on other planets.”
Another misrepresentation. Jesus did not forward his own suggestion. He merely presented himself as a candidate for savior in accordance with the plan God the Father already had in place – the plan Lucifer was challenging.
“The vote that followed approved the proposal of the Mormon Jesus, who would become savior of the planet Earth.”
Funny how the video keeps bringing up the term “Mormon Jesus” – as if Mormons believed there was another guy named Jesus wandering around the Palestinian countryside performing miracles and being killed by the Romans.
Another point of order, Mormon scripture and doctrine does not explicitly limit Christ’s atonement to one planet. We believe the atonement was infinite. This is another Protestant attempt to make it appear like the Mormon God is merely the god of one planet only – as opposed to the Protestant God of the whole universe. It’s a childish “my God is bigger than yours” kind of argument. But the Mormon concept of God is every bit as infinite as the Protestant one, as explained above.
“Enraged, Lucifer cunningly convinced one-third of the spirits destined for earth to fight with him and revolt. Thus, Lucifer became the devil, and his followers the demons.”
“Demons” is not a word found anywhere in Mormon thought. We actually don’t have a technical term for those who followed Satan. We believe they are evil. We believe they are spirits. So “evil spirits” would probably be more accurate.
“Sent to this world, they would forever be denied bodies of flesh and bone. Those who remained neutral in the battle, were cursed to be born with black skin.”
This was a popular folk doctrine espoused by some within the LDS Church. But it was never canonized and after the revelation allowing the Priesthood to all worthy males in the LDS Church this idea has become utterly discredited within the Mormon religion. There is no doctrine that blacks were inferior spirits in the pre-mortal state being taught in any accepted LDS curriculum. The idea has been rejected and repudiated. It never had any good scriptural basis to begin with.
“This is the Mormon explanation for the Negro race. The spirits that fought most valiantly against Lucifer, would be born into Mormon families on planet earth.”
The video acts like this is the “official” view of the LDS Church. But it is really nothing more than folk doctrine. Many Mormons reject this notion and it is not taught by the LDS Church officially. In fact, attempts have been made by LDS leadership to denounce variations of this notion.
“These would be the lighter skinned people, or “white and delightsome” as the Book of Mormon describes them.”
The original Book of Mormon text produced by Joseph Smith rendered the passage “fair and delightsome”. The printer switched the word to “white.” The most recent edition of the Book of Mormon corrects this error.
Secondly, the Book of Mormon has repeated incidents of the supposedly darker-skinned Lamanites being more righteous, and more favored of God than the supposedly lighter-skinned Nephites. The Book of Mormon simply does not make the case that darker skin is a sign of inherent moral inferiority or lighter skin the opposite. In fact, the book is stunningly racially progressive for an ancient record, and even quite progressive for a 19th century work.
In fact, the first Mormons were largely abolitionist in political leanings – a fact which caused a lot of the hatred they attracted in pro-slavery Missouri. Joseph Smith personally ran on a presidential platform of purchasing the freedom of all slaves with the proceeds from sale of Louisiana Purchase lands. And Joseph Smith himself ordained a black man – Elijah Abel – to the Priesthood and high ranking LDS office.
“Early Mormon prophets taught that Elohim, and one of his goddess wives came to earth as Adam and Eve, to start the human race.”
First off, this repeats the baseless speculation about “goddess wives.”
Secondly, it carts out the Adam-God theory that was postulated by Brigham Young. This theory never caught on in the LDS Church. It was soundly challenged by other LDS leaders, Brigham Young himself never clarified the doctrine enough for us to know what it meant exactly, and he even contradicted the notion himself on occasion. Thus the theory was abandoned and does not enjoy anything but a tiny minority following in the modern LDS Church. Not that the video is going to bother giving this kind of context.
“Thousands of years later, Elohim, in human form once again, journeyed to Earth from the Starbase Kolob, this time to have sex with the virgin Mary, in order to provide Jesus with a physical body.”
“Starbase Kolob” is clearly a derogatory term meant to make fun of a symbolic LDS representation.
As for sex with the virgin Mary – again, not an official doctrine, but merely a folk doctrine. That said, I don’t know why other Christians consider the idea of God artificially inseminating Mary somehow more acceptable than actual sex.
But all this speculation aside, the only thing LDS scripture says on the matter, and the only thing taught by the modern LDS church on the matter is that Christ was conceived within Mary – “by the holy spirit.” Period.
"Mormon apostle Orson Pratt taught that after Jesus Christ grew to manhood, he took at least three wives: Mary, Martha and Mary Magdeline. Through these wives the Mormon Jesus, through whom Joseph Smith claimed direct descent, supposedly fathered a number of children before he was crucified. According to the Book of Mormon, after his resurrection, Jesus came to the Americas to preach to the Indians, who the Mormons believe are really Israelites. Thus, the Jesus of Mormonism established his church in the Americas as he had in Palestine."
The modern LDS Church takes no position on whether Jesus was even married to one woman – let alone three.
“By the year 421 AD, the dark skinned Indian Israelites, known as Lamanites, had destroyed all of the white Nephites in a number of great battles.”
I personally think the Book of Mormon record gives pretty good evidence that after the first one hundred years of the Book of Mormon narrative, there was no skin color difference between Lamanites and Nephites.
“The Nephite records were supposedly written on golden plates and buried by Moroni, the last living Nephite, in the hill Cumorah. 1400 years later, a young treasure seeker named Joseph Smith, who was known for his tall tales, claimed to have uncovered these same gold plates near his home in upstate New York.”
Joseph Smith was not “known for his tall tales.” Accounts on this matter are thoroughly controversial – many of the eyewitnesses having told their stories only a long time after they had grown hostile to Joseph Smith. Often their accounts are self-contradictory.
“He is now honored by Mormons as a prophet, because he claimed to have had visions from the spirit world in which he was commanded to organize the Mormon Church, because all Christian creeds were an abomination.”
No beef here.
“It was Joseph Smith who originated most of these peculiar doctrines which millions today believe to be true.”
LDS would say it was God who originated them. We would also point out that Joseph usually had a solid basis in Biblical scripture for most of the teachings he implemented – even those not typically followed by other Christians.
“By maintaining a rigid code of financial and moral requirements and through performing sacred temple rituals for themselves and the dead, the Latter-day Saints hope to prove their worthiness and thus become gods.”
The keeping of temple covenants is not a way of “proving worthiness.” It is a way of entering into a relationship with God. It is Christ, through his atonement, who supplies all worthiness. Good works in Mormonism do not merit salvation.
“The Mormons teach that everyone must stand at the final judgment before Joseph Smith, the Mormon Jesus, and Elohim.”
A misrepresentation. Joseph Smith has been named as a judge of a certain portion of humanity. But only as a representative for God. The belief is that he will judge nothing but what the Father intends.
“Those Mormons who were sealed in the eternal marriage ceremony, expect to become polygamous gods in the Celestial kingdom, rule over other planets, and spawn new families throughout all eternity.”
Truth is, more modern Mormons do not expect to have more than one spouse in the hereafter. The vast majority of Mormons today are monogamous and prefer to keep it that way.
Secondly, we expect to inherit more than a mere “planet.” We expect to inherit all the Father has.
Use of the word “spawn” is simply a disgusting slur meant to evoke the early crass imagery of eternal pregnancy and such.
“The Mormons thank God for Joseph Smith, who claimed that he had done more for us than any other man, including Jesus Christ.”
This is flat-out false. No modern Mormon I know, and none of the leadership would claim Joseph did more than Jesus Christ. Brigham Young explicitly stated that Joseph had done more than any other man EXCEPT Jesus Christ. This is the most quoted statement on the subject and well-known in Mormon circles – and it clearly puts Jesus as the one who did the most. A blatant error here.
“The Mormons believe that he died as a martyr, shed his blood for us, so that we too may become gods.”
We believe no such thing. We believe that Joseph Smith’s death merely proved his own absolute conviction in what he was doing and gave his testimony additional force.
That’s it.
We do not believe that Joseph Smith’s blood has any power to make gods of us. We do not believe his death to be in the same class as that of Jesus Christ, nor does it have the same theological effect. This is merely a scare-tactic intended to convince the audience that Mormons worship Jesus when they do no such thing.
Hope that helps clear some things up.
Whew! Excellent job. Small question: I always thought it was John Taylor who said Joseph Smith had done more than any man save Jesus.
I must Concur, Excellent Job Seth! I was all set to get involved and enter all these rebuttals until I saw your posts. Very thorough. But GK is right–it was John Taylor who said what was said about Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ, and it is right there in the Doctrine & Covenants (one of our scriptures) for the world to read, so I am frankly flabbergasted that the makers of the cartoon would so blatantly distort what he said.
Also, the printer correction for 2 Nephi 30:6 is from "white and delightsome" to "pure and delightsome." Here is the history of that:
"Pure and delightsome" is what the original text said, in the manuscript and in the first editions of the Book of Mormon. However, in the 1840's, a new edition was published in England. (I think it was 1842.) This edition had a few errors creep in–such as the word "white" being switched with "pure"–because of the colloqualisms of the British, and because the printer was not as strictly watched over as he had been in America. Now, when the Latter-Day Saints were forced out of Nauvoo, most of them were unable to take much of anything with them, including their American Editions of the Book of Mormon. Later, when missionaries and Apostles were returning from Europe, as well as new converts, what edition did they bring with them? The English one. These books were examined and used as the model for new editions printed in Salt Lake City–errors and all. And for 140 years they remained the standard.
Then, with the 1982 edition, the Church went back to the original manuscripts (which it now had access to) and original editions, discovered the errors, and removed them. "White and delightsome" is out, "pure and delightsome" is back in.
By the way, Jenny: Did you notice how completely random the sources for that presentation were? It was like a salad bar of doctrines. Sure, a lot of it was "true," but they could make up anything they wanted out of those ingredients. It puts me in mind of "A Film Unfinished." Especially with that narrator and his ominous tone. Not hard to tell the agenda there.
Wow, thanks Seth.
You only mixed up words on your last sentence and said Jesus instead of Joseph.
Whoops! I Just re-read and caught that! He was probably typing so fast that he missed it–I read it so fast the first time that I did too, because I knew what he meant! Oh well, an understandable (what do they call it?) rhetorical slip, since he was on a roll.
It should read, "This is merely a scare-tactic intended to convince the audience that Mormons worship Joseph when they do no such thing." An important difference–and precisely the sort of bait-and-switch he'd been so effectively arguing against!
You're not even dismissing his arguments, you're going around them and lying. May God have mercy on your soul for spreading these lies.