FAIR changes Mormon defenders website name

“I wonder if Fred Phelps is a descendant of William W. Phelps?”

Thinking the same thing!

I don't think that the National Geographic Society will be having THIS on the cover, as the lead off article, in the future.

However, they DID have THIS on this month's cover and main story.

(Tossed in a bit of evangelizing; too! ;^)

In the professional world a wise woman once told me ‘never try to accomplish more than one thing with an email.’ If she had two items to address she sent two emails. I try to follow her wisdom and will split my thoughts into three posts.

I don’t believe we’ve been introduced and my visceral response to FAIR was not a good introduction. Like you, I am an attorney (I joke that we all make regrettable mistakes in our youth). With the exception of a short in-house stint at a children’s hospital I have practiced at firms of 550 to 950 attorneys. That doesn’t mean I’m brilliant; instead it means that I have the luxury of being a drooling idiot on 99.999% of the law. The large firms permit me to have a niche academic practice. As my son says “dad, you don’t practice law; you write two 140-page term papers a week for a living.” Some odd issue comes into the firm and I have the pleasure of researching not only the legal issues but the general issues regarding remarkably obtuse subjects.

I’m called a ‘propeller head’ at work (I think with some kindness) after those little beanies with the spinning propeller on top. I enjoy reading and researching in my spare time, although Free Republic often gives me the ability to write free-form without academic strictures.

I don’t read all LDS articles on Free Republic. I certainly read less than half of them. I rarely comment if I read. I don’t proselytize and I strive to limit my comments to history and LDS sources. I frequently preface my comments with a statement that a support the right of all FR members to their religious beliefs. I’ve often tried politely on several occasions to correct those whom I thought were making statements contrary to LDS history or publications (or theology as set out in Principles of the Gospel, but we’ll get to that).

This has caused some Free Republic members to respond to me as if I am LDS or to object to the fact that I leave out Biblical scripture.

I’ve never referred to garments as “magic underwear” (although on an academic basis I’m prepared to discuss development of the garment and similarities between markings on garments and Masonic symbols). I recognize that garments are considered sacred clothing by LDS members who have been through the temple ceremony. I don’t refer to the Jewish tallit katan as magic underwear either. I’ve never posited a though on “Are Mormons Christians?” threads to this point.

I’m not denigrating other Free Republic posters or you by making any of those statements. I just want to being to establish the foundation from which I write.

My primary experience with the LDS church is through Scouting, because I’ve been the Council Commissioner of one of the country’s largest councils, and because I’ve served on regional and national BSA health and safety committees. As you are probably aware, LSA Scouting is a parallel but different program from traditional BSA Scouting, with a stated different purpose, different geographic boundaries, and reporting to a different set of authorities than every other Scouting unit, whether sponsored by a religious group or not. It makes things . . . unique . . . when you’re the Commissioner over units that report to different bodies and have different review processes and programs than everyone else.

One of my Assistant Scoutmasters is LDS. He converted after marrying an older divorced woman who was LDS over thirty-five years ago. He’s never been called to serve in an LDS unit and has been Scoutmaster or Assistant Scoutmaster in our unit for almost thirty years.

I don’t consider myself anti-Mormon. I simply consider myself to be rather educated on LDS history and theology. I’ve read the Book of Mormon, Doctrines & Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price, and even great portions of the Journal of Discourses. I have access to the 1997 edition of Gospel Principles through my Assistant Scoutmaster, and the 2009 version online. I’ve read both, and I analyzed the changed made in 2009. I’m a naturally curious guy.

To my knowledge, I’ve only been called ‘anti-Mormon’ on Free Republic once. Paragon Defender called me ‘anti-Mormon’ when I asked him or her why the official biography of Joseph Smith, Jr. on the www.lds.org website mentioned only Emma Hale Smith as his wife, although if you read through certain histories of Joseph Smith, Jr. and the church on the www.lds.org site, it listed many polyandrous marriages (FAIR disagrees with www.lds.org on who Joseph Smith, Jr.’s first wife was, incidentally).

I try to approach LDS beliefs from an academic viewpoint and as an amateur historian. However, I do not have your faith that the Book of Mormon is true and I do not practice “faith-promoting” or “faithful” history, as the phrase is most famously attributable to Apostle Boyd K. Packer (but was practiced without a name before his “The Mantle Is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect” speech.

As a result, you and I may draw different conclusions from the same set of historical facts. That doesn’t mean I’m anti-Mormon. It means that I’m analyzing issues without attempting to find a “faithful” or “faith-promoting” explanation or analysis of them. If we disagree, I hope you will agree with me that it can be because I don’t strive to be faith-promoting. That, by itself, shouldn’t brand me as anti-Mormon.

I would enjoying learning more about you. I’ve read your profile (in almost fourteen years, I’ve never written one), and I know you are proud of your militancy in support of conservative causes. Your posts here are often quite short and I am left with no insight.

This thread has been silent for a while. However, I think the topic of FAIR and MormonVoices is a significant one. I didn’t have the time to write a cogent and researched response at the time of the initial postings. I’ve done it in bits and pieces; that’s how life is. I won’t be responding this way to many, if any, other issues.

Now, with that introduction finished, let me venture into a couple of areas on which we may reach a different conclusion from the same facts.

Again, my apologies for the delay in posting, but I thought this was an important topic that deserved some research and a reasoned response. I had to do that research in available segments.

Let me state clearly: this post has nothing to do with the LDS Church. MormonVoices and The Foundation for Apologetic Research & Information (FAIR) specifically state that they are neither affiliated with nor supported by the LDS Church. This post regards my concern with MormonVoices purporting to be a ‘source’ for the media on Mormons and Mormonism, and declaring that it will ‘fact-check’ the media on issues involving Mormons and Mormonism. This post has nothing to do with Mormons. It has to do with one organization that happens to be composed of Mormons and I don’t know enough about what all of the individual members actually do to speak about them individually.

Let me also state clearly: I respect the right of FR members and all people to their religious beliefs; I do not support the right of people to practice all elements of their religious beliefs (for example, I would not support a person’s right to perform human sacrifice in the name of his or her religion).

Here’s my concern with MormonVoices. Primarily, it has to do with the fact that MormonVoice is not the LDS Church but is the alter ego of FAIR. MormonVoices says its intent is:

to use “average Mormons;”
”to respond to false information put forward in the media;”
”to assist journalists, authors, bloggers, producers, and others in the media in getting their stories right, and to correct misinformation and distortions about Mormons, Mormonism, and other faith communities¹;”
”to shape the public . . . perceptions of the [Mormon] Church;”
(according to a press release from the President of The Foundation for Apologetic Research & Information (FAIR), Scott Gordon, “a resource for journalists; and”
to monitor news reports².

Other religious denominations no doubt have media relations departments, but I’m not aware of any grassroots campaigns using ordinary church or similar members, without training, to monitor news reports to correct what they believe to be misinformation. Nor, especially, to set up an official unofficial one-stop resource upon which journalists are encouraged to rely for information. I consider MormonVoices to be setting itself up as the unofficial official media resource. Its intent and actions are reported upon in the LDS Church’s official newspaper, The Desert News. Its goal was reported by The Desert New back in August 2011 and brief research found no statement from the LDS Church expressing concern with or distancing itself from MormonVoices.

MormonVoices states on its About page that:

”MormonVoices has been created to respond to false information put forward in the media. … MormonVoices is not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is sponsored by [FAIR].”

That’s the point at which I become troubled. I was somewhat familiar with FAIR but spent large parts of a rainy vacation week taking an in-depth look at it after being asked on countless occasions to do so by a former FR member. I simply accepted his or her challenge to ‘seek the truth.’ At some point I should address my issues with FAIR being portrayed as an academic, documented, or researched resource, with linked examples, but I won’t do that here. Perhaps later. FAIR states it is not affiliated with the LDS Church and specifically states that it does not speak for the LDS Church. My opinions reflect on FAIR’s statement from the President of that it is well-researched and well-documented and the repeated suggestions that it should be used as a reference material. I address it on that basis, not a theological basis.

The initial point about whether MormonVoices and FAIR should serve as the resource for facts about Mormonism is this: FAIR instructs its apologists that their main task is not to construct rational, logical or correct answers, but to convert those who question to Mormonism (more details at the site):

”Apologists must remember that their main task is to encourage others to seek a personal witness for themselves; the 'rational' part of apologetics is really a prelude to the important work of conversion.

Source: FAIR website.

FAIR tells its apologists that being right isn’t important when serving as a FAIR apologist and answering questions; having a strong LDS faith is.

Interested private members may seek to explain and defend their faith with the best tools at their disposal, but the truth of that faith does not depend on the soundness of their arguments.

Source: FAIR website..

FAIR states:

that it “can and does make mistakes,” and that its factual arguments don’t have to be sound because the faith is true (Source: FAIR website;
that it is discussing doctrinal issues without LDS priesthood authority and direction, and it falls more under the category of a book publisher than an LDS Church authority (Source: FAIR website);
when asked “how authoritative” its writing are, that it tries not to give the impression it is speaking for the LDS church “in any way;’ that it tries to discuss history or scholarly things and only gets into discussions of doctrine “when we feel our beliefs as Latter-day Saints have been misrepresented,” at which point, those acting on behalf of FAIR are simply “speaking from their own experience and beliefs (Source: FAIR website).”

At the bottom of each page of the FAIR website it states:

“ All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of FAIR, and should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.”

Website diagnostic tools won’t tell on how many of the 220,000+ pages (not including the 5,500+ linked FAIR papers) that disclaimer appears, but it appear to be part of the template for all ordinary FAIR and FAIRwiki pages. The disclaimer is loaded by a script on all pages I checked.

If FAIR has withdrawn all or some of these statements, then I would appreciate the link. I’d like to have the additional information. Absent withdrawal of those statements, when these declarations made by FAIR to the public, its apologists, and prospective apologists are read together it appears to me to say that when FAIR answers a question (drawing solely from FAIR’s and website):

An ordinary Mormon with no special training other than a strong LDS faith;
Whose expressly declared primary purpose is to convert the person addressed to the Mormon faith;
Who expressly is not speaking for the LDS Church;
Whose answers expressly should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice;
Who FAIR expressly acknowledges can and will make mistakes;
Who expressly is not tasked with giving a sound, rational, and logical answer, because that’s not important if the FAIR apologist’s LDS faith is strong;
Who expressly is addressing doctrinal issues solely from his or her own experiences and beliefs;
Who expressly is acting without priesthood authority (female apologists could not have held the priesthood anyway) from the Church when speaking on any issue, even doctrinal ones; and
Who expressly should really only be considered like a book publisher, not an LDS authority,

is answering the question.

That’s what FAIR says about being a FAIR apologist. FAIR discloses that to the public, its apologists, and prospective FAIR apologists, if you work through its 220,000+ pages. (I gave up after finding the information above.) All of that information is on the FAIR website.

FAIR runs MormonVoices; it’s FAIR’s alter-ego ‘brand’ to the media. A website run by people who have all of the qualifiers listed above is presenting itself as the resource for the media on Mormonism and Mormon Church. And it says it will Fact-Check media, although it admits that it may be wrong, and that sound and correct answers aren’t the goal – conversion to the LDS faith and the answering apologist having a strong faith are the important things.

Again, FAIR runs MormonVoices. However, the MormonVoices website contains none of the qualifiers and limitations disclosed by FAIR, and discloses none of them to the reporters, the media, or the public who are target by the MormonVoices website. Instead, it portrays itself as much more unofficially official. Why is this? Why are the disclaimers important on a “research and academic” website, but not on the same party’s website presenting the same information to the media?

The media would have to tunnel its way past MormonVoices and into FAIR’s pages to find all of these things out, to read all of these disclosures and qualifications.

That’s my concern. MormonVoices isn’t the LDS Church officially answering or informing the media. These are just people using their admitted unofficial personal opinion to present doctrines, beliefs, and practices – and answering specifically without feeling compelled to present factual, rational, or logical arguments because they believe in the One True Church. And trying to convert you to Mormonism in the process as their main goal.

Do you see a problem with MormonVoices doing it without . . . well . . . telling the media that? This isn’t attacking the LDS Church . . . because MormonVoices and FAIR clearly tell us that they are not affiliated with or sanctioned by the LDS Church. I believe MormonVoices fraudulently represents itself.

¹ I don’t know what ‘other faith communities’ means. MormonVoices currently addresses only issues related to Mormons and Mormonism.
² MormonVoices will not be alone in monitoring the media during the 2012 Presidential campaign. An article from the LDS Church’s Desert News, highlighted on MormonVoices states: ”Noreen Malone [of New York Magazine] wrote that LDS Church officials have been closely monitoring the Internet, television broadcasts and print publications more frequently than during Romney’s 2008 campaign. ”According to the article, church spokesmen, including LDS Church managing director of public affairs Michael Otterson, have been more active in defending aspects of church doctrine. Malone wrote that that through such activity, Otterson and other spokesman are ‘campaigning on behalf of Romney and Huntsman’ — although Otterson explained the increased activity has been necessary. . “‘We now have two Latter-day Saints running, and the potential for misunderstanding or missteps is therefore twice what it was before,’ Otterson was quoted as saying.

Conference defending LDS doctrine catches attention of Wall Street Journal, Rhett Wilkerson, Deseret News (August 5, 2011).

Standard disclaimer: I respect the right of FR members to their religious beliefs. I don’t respect the right of everyone to practice his or her religious beliefs (one example: I draw the line at human sacrifice). None of that’s at issue.

I frequently come at my own religion with too strong an attempt to be rational and logical and academic and historical, instead of relying on faith, which makes for interesting discussions with my associate pastor and my pastor – but great discussions with my youth pastor (who has a masters in math). I am not a “faith-promoting” historian when it comes to my own faith, as LDS Apostle Boyd K. Packer would have used that term with respect to my faith in his famous speech to LDS historians, The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than the Intellect.

I acknowledge that I also approach any LDS issue from an academic and historical standpoint and without faith that the Book of Mormon is true. I am not a ‘faith-promoting’ or ‘faithful’ historian according to LDS standards. I may apply Occam’s Razor rather than LDS Apostle Boyd K. Packer’s guidance. As a result, I do not start with the premise of finding a way to rationalize evidence to support the LDS faith and the Book of Mormon. I may draw a straight line between two points rather than looking for a third point called “The LDS Church is True,” and drawing my line through that point on the way. I won’t erase points because they may show the church or its leaders in a bad light, but I won’t invent points because they do.

End of disclaimer.

FAIR and MormonVoices consist, essentially, of “Ask a Mormon.” They’re not official sites of the LDS Church and my issues with them are discussed above.

Does “Ask a Mormon” work to get correct answers?after reacting so viscerally to the mention of FAIR. I researched FAIR after former FR member repeatedly stated that seekers of truth would find the answers to my questions there.

The question I’ll Ask a Mormon is “What does Mormonism teach about Mormons becoming gods and having their own planets to populate with spirit children?”

In October 2011, Maureen Dowd, a columnist for The New York Times, wrote a column. She’d asked two Mormons that question. She didn’t ask just any two Mormons. She asked Richard Bushman, the Visiting Professor in Mormon Studies at Claremont Graduate University, and Kent P. Jackson, Associate Dean of Religion at Brigham Young University.

Dr. Bushman called the idea of devout Mormons having their own planets in eternity “Mormon lore” that stems from the Mormon belief that humans can become like God. He suggested that if Mormons can become like God, they might then be able to run a bit of God’s universe. Tagging the belief as “lore,” Dr. Bushman relegated the idea to the arena of mere tradition passed from person to person within the Mormon community by word of mouth (and some definitions of lore are ‘[a] body of traditions and knowledge on a subject or held by a particular group, typically passed from person to person by word of mouth.’)

Dr. Jackson said the idea of faithful Mormons being rewarded with their own planets in eternity is a “canard,” which is an “unfounded or false, deliberately misleading story.” Those are strong words that appear to accuse anyone who says Mormons believe they can be rewarded with their own planets of being deliberate liars; what some would call . . . “anti-Mormons” acting with malice. Once the word ‘canard,’ has been used, it suggests that the questioner is being combative to pursue the question further.

So, Maureen Down ‘Asked Two Mormons’, a professor in Mormon Studies and the Associate Dean of Religion at BYU. The answer: The Mormon Professor said no, a tradition by word of mouth (i.e., not in writing, and not formal teaching). The Mormon Associate Dean of Religion say no, a deliberate anti-Mormon lie.

One FR member has stated that he’s been a member of the LDS church for 40+ years and has never heard “gods over own planet” taught.

Joanna Brooks, a Mormon who is identified as an “award-winning religion scholar” and covers Mormon life and politics on blogs says about the planet issue that Fox News Needs to Get a Grip on its Affiliate’s Issues with Mormonism. She says it’s “gentle insider humor”, and a “distorting and sensationalistic caricature of Mormon beliefs.” Ms. Brooks has a website, http://joannabrooks.org/, and her Twitter is @askmormongirl (She’s been names by Politico Magazine as One of the 50 Politicos to Watch as a Top Tweeter who 'is in constant dialogue with journalists and fans and a reliable source of news links on Mormons in politics'). She keeps a blog called Ask Mormon Girl. So if I’d Asked That Mormon (Girl), I’d have been told the answer is no.

As someone who studies things from a boringly academic and historical standpoint and tries too hard to fit pieces together, I’m puzzled by these answers. I knew a little about this issue from the official LDS publication Gospel Principles (and available here, and downloadable by chapter here[all sources from the www.lds.org website]) (particularly from the changes made between the 1997 edition and the 2009 edition on this topic). I’ve since done some research using Gospel Principle’s references. Permit me to post a few LDS sources so you perhaps may understand why I’m puzzled. Then I’ll post additional sources from the LDS’s Gospel Principles, LDS prophets, apostles, and other LDS sources to further demonstrate my puzzlement over the answers from these two learned Mormons.

Spencer W. Kimball – Twelfth Prophet of the LDS Church

"Each one of you has it within the realm of his possibility to develop a kingdom over which you will preside as its king and god. You will need to develop yourself and grow in ability and power and worthiness, to govern such a world with all of its people."

Source: “. . . the Matter of Marriage” [address delivered at University of Utah Institute of Religion, 22 Oct. 1976], 2. I realize that was thirty-five years ago. However, it was from a Prophet of the LDS church. I can’t find anything from a subsequent Prophet that changes it, and I don’t know the test LDS use to determine when a Prophet is supposed to be speaking as the revelator of God and when he is simply noodling. It appears that what was said thirty-five years ago is accepted now by the LDS Church, and not just as noodling, because that Spencer Kimball quote is included in three current LDS teaching manuals for youth from ages four through college:

Chapter 4: Teaching Children: from Four to Eleven Years,” A Parent’s Guide (an official and current LDS website). This manual is to help LDS parents teach their children ages four through eleven.
Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Seminary Teacher Resource Manual – Introduction (an official and current LDS website). This manual is for LDS members who teach seminary (religion) to LDS youth of high school age.
Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual - Chapter 10 (an official and current LDS website). This manual is for college students.

"The real life we’re preparing for is eternal life. Secular knowledge has for us eternal significance. Our conviction is that God, our Heavenly Father, wants us to live the life that He does. We learn both the spiritual things and the secular things 'so we may one day create worlds [and] people and govern them' “

Source: Spencer W. Kimball, The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, ed. Edward L. Kimball (1982), 386).

That was 29 years ago, but it also appears to be a relevant teaching today. LDS Apostle Henry B. Eyring is a member of the Quorum of Twelve. He’s the First Counselor to current LDS Prophet Thomas S. Monson (you know who LDS Apostle Eyring is, I’m sure, but I had to research it and I’m letting others know). In 2001, when he was Commissioner of the LDS Church Educational System, Eybring repeated the key part of this quote in a CES talk (I wasn’t there and have never seen a video or heard a tape; I believe this because the LDS Church News says so). The quote was repeated in the LDS Church News (an official LDS website publishing the May 12, 2001 edition) and in the October 2002 Ensign (as republished at the official LDS website). Again, although it was said 29 years ago, it was spoken by an LDS Prophet and the teaching appears to have enough current importance to have been spread through the LDS Church Educational System by lecture and publication, and published in the LDS Church News, just nine years ago.

This quote is also featured today as a seminary.lds.org quote for LDS high schoolers, both as originally said by Kimball and as re-quoted by Eyring. So, as I write this, the LDS is teaching in high school seminary that LDS members (those who are exalted through Celestial Marriage and more, and who enter the Celestial Kingdom, the only one of the three LDS heavenly kingdoms where God the Father dwells) may one day create worlds and people and govern them. There’s not anything on that page indicating that some quotes are considered to reflect current theology and some quotes are just there for historical purposes, so I’m assuming LDS high school students are being taught that quote in seminary for current purposes. I think that’s a reasonable assumption.

A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency (Joseph F. Smith, Sixth Prophet of the LDS Church) and the Twelve

“So far as the stages of eternal progression and attainment have been made known through divine revelation, we are to understand that only resurrected and glorified beings can become parents of spirit offspring. Only such exalted souls have reached maturity in the appointed course of eternal life; and the spirits born to them in the eternal worlds will pass in due sequence through the several stages or estates by which the glorified parents have attained exaltation.”

A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency [Joseph F. Smith, Anthon H. Lund, Charles W. Penrose] and the Twelve, “The Father and the Son,” Improvement Era, June 1916, 942 (an official LDS website). ( Improvement Era (1897-1970) was the official arm of the LDS Young Men's Mutual Improvement Association. Source.) This addresses spirit offspring and ‘eternal worlds’ with specifying possession of a personal world.

And of course that was way back then, almost 100 years ago. But what was ‘then’ appears also to be valid now. That passage is quoted in and currently being taught in the LDS publication, Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual. One may purchase it from the LDS Church Educational System or through Amazon.

Lorenzo Snow – Fifth Prophet of the LDS Church

In 1901, LDS Prophet Lorenzo Snow said this after watching kindergarten children make balls out of clay:

“…these children are now at play, making mud worlds, the time will come when some of these boys, through their faithfulness to the gospel, will progress and develop in knowledge, intelligence and power, in future eternities, until they shall be able to go out into space where there is unorganized matter and call together the necessary elements, and through their knowledge of and control over the laws and powers of nature, to organize matter into worlds on which their posterity may dwell, and over which they shall rule as gods.’”

Source: Improvement Era, June 1919, 658–59 (you need a paid subscription to access the Improvement Era through LDS; nobody said research was inexpensive).

It’s another then and now comment. Made over 90 years ago by a LDS Prophet, but included in a current online LDS manual prepared by the Church Educational System to be used in teaching Mormon college students. So LDS Prophet Snow’s teaching about organizing and ruling over worlds as gods, and populating those worlds with the posterity, is being taught to Mormon college students as you read this.

Spencer W. Kimball – Twelfth Prophet of the LDS Church

In a 1981 book, President Kimball Speaks Out, LDS prophet Spencer W. Kimball wrote on page 91:

“Peter and John had little secular learning, being termed ignorant. But they knew the vital things of life, that God lives and that the crucified, resurrected Lord is the Son of God. They knew the path to eternal life. This they learned in a few decades of their mortal life. Their righteous lives opened the door to godhood for them and creation of worlds with eternal increase.”

That was then: 30 years ago. But there must be current value to the teaching of godhood, creation of worlds, and ‘eternal increase.’ LDS Apostle Tom L. Perry quotes those words in the August 2011 (I consider August 2011 to be now; I haven’t found anything disavowing the teaching in the last three months) Ensign magazine in an article title “The Tradition of a Balanced, Righteous Life,” (note that the link is to the lds.org website). Elder Perry believes this quote is important. He also used it when addressing the LDS General Conference in October 1997. The speech was titled Receive Truth, was reprinted beginning at page 60 of the November 1997 edition of Ensign magazine, and is reprinted on the current LDS.org website.

To me as someone simply tracking things historically and reading LDS current publications and teaching materials, that wraps everything up in a fairly nice current bow (and there are the 1997 and 2009 editions of LDS’s Gospel Principles to discuss, below). To me it’s obvious there are current LDS teaching manuals, marriage manuals, CES and other speakers, LDS magazines (I consider August 2011 to be current), LDS website publications, republished doctrinal expositions from the Prophet and Quorum of Twelve teaching that Mormons who are exalted (those entering the Celestial Kingdom), who will create worlds, and people (by giving birth to their spirits as spirit children – I haven’t research how the whole celestial sex thing works), and are going to govern them as kings and gods. It’s all pretty patriarchal because men get the priesthood and become gods, but there are eternally pregnant women involved; as I said, I haven’t researched the details, just confirmed that it’s currently taught. And that it’s being taught in multiple locations, including currently to children four through eleven, high school students, and college students, and regarding Celestial Marriage. What did I miss? Where am I wrong? Or are all of those prophets and apostles, doctrinal expositions, and current church teaching materials, church magazines, CES speakers, and church websites wrong?

Because when Maureen Down asked the Mormon assistant dean of religion at BYU, she was told that anyone who said Mormons taught this were intentionally telling a lie – sort of a threat to stay away from the issue and to stop asking about the issue. Period. And another Mormon professor told her it was only ‘lore’ spread by word of mouth.

Should I believe a Mormon or the current official teaching publications of the LDS Church? Should I believe a Mormon or teachings of the LDS prophets (see above and below) and a doctrinal exposition by the LDS Church prophet and apostles that’s currently being quoted in a current church publication on achieving celestial marriage?

And when it comes to FAIR and MormonVoices “Ask a Mormon” format, if I can’t ask the assistant dean of religion at BYU (or a Mormon “award-winning religion scholar,” a “Top 50 Politico” because she tweets as a “reliable [LDS] source” Joanna Brooks, at @askmormongirl) and get the right answer, why should I feel comfortable asking an untrained Mormon whose professed primary role is (as noted in an earlier post) first to convert me to Mormonism and second to protect the Mormon faith?

I won’t proselytize. I won’t ridicule your faith. But I’m interested because I’m puzzled at the answers given by Mssrs. Bushman and Jackson. And why they would give them; I found the teaching of LDS prophets and copies of the LDS education manuals and publications with several hours of searching. I would normally assume that a Professor on Mormon Studies and the Associate Dean of Religion at the LDS Church’s own BYU University would simply know these facts.

If I asked you, as my personal Ask A Mormon between FR members, ““What does Mormonism teach about Mormons who are exalted and reach the Celestial Level becoming gods and having their own planets to populate with spirit children?,” what would be your answer? If you don’t want to answer publicly, you may mail me and I will not disclose your answer to anyone.

Here are additional reasons why I’m puzzled that LDS academicians Bushman and Jackson would answer Maureen Dowd the ways they did. It doesn’t appear that this is just lore that was spread only by ‘word of mouth’ or that someone who says it is or was taught is knowingly telling a lie. Note that publication of something in the Journal of Discourses does not make it LDS doctrine. However, if you’ll note, some items from the Journal of Discourse are statements from LDS Prophets, coming from sermons or other statements. You may review the event at which each statement was made at the hyperlinked source.

(Regarding my puzzlement: I’m often puzzled; for example, how could an announced “Remastered Original Version” of Runaround Sue by Dion & the Belmonts not have used the original 1961 version of Runaround Sue (Laurie Records #3110) as the version that was remastered? That’s bothered me for a couple of weeks. And when did Hank Williams, Sr. switch from a J-45 to a Martin? And why does the serial number on one of my dual-speed Edison Home (cylinder) Phonographs predate the introduction of dual-speed Home models? It’s a factory dual-gear mechanism and not the retrofit, so the serial number baffles me. But don’t get me started on music history. It always puzzles me. Like some of the alternate weaving forms of Nantucket Lightship baskets puzzle me. I’m a geek and I just enjoy reading and learning; yet I still remain stupid about 99% of the time on 99% of topics.)

I have problems reconciling what follows with what LDS academicians Bushman and Jackson said about it just being lore (something not written down). Sometime, the quotes contain all of the elements; in some cases, it’s a matter of reading pieces in connection with other pieces. To begin with, Joseph Smith, Jr. began the teaching of multiple gods, and Earth being created by God the Father’s, father, and God the Father populating it with his spirit babies. The quote are too numerous to include. I can if you would like.

Brigham Young – Second Prophet of the LDS Church

"All those who are counted worthy to be exalted and to become Gods, even the sons of God, will go forth and have earths and worlds like those who framed this and millions on millions of others."

< a href-“http://www.journalofdiscourses.org/volume-17/>Source: Journal of Discourses 17:143 (an official LDS website).

“Having fought the good fight we then shall be prepared to lay our bodies down to rest to await the morning of the resurrection when they will come forth and be reunited with the spirits, the faithful, as it is said, receiving crowns, glory, immortality and eternal lives, even a fullness with the Father, …Then will they become gods, even the sons of God; then will they become eternal fathers, eternal mothers, eternal sons and eternal daughters; being eternal in their organization, they go from glory to glory, from power to power; they will never cease to increase and to multiply, worlds without end. When they receive their crowns, their dominions, they then will be prepared to frame earths like unto ours and to people them in the same manner as we have been brought forth by our parents, by our Father and God.”

Source: Journal of Discourses 18:259 (an official LDS website).

Lorenzo Snow – Fifth Prophet of the LDS Church

“We are the offspring of God, born with the same faculties and powers as He possesses, capable of enlargement through the experience that we are now passing through in our second estate… He has begotten us in His own image. He has given us faculties and powers that are capable of enlargement until His fullness is reached which He has promised — until we shall sit upon thrones, governing and controlling our posterity from eternity to eternity, and increasing eternally.”

Source: Millennial Star 56:772, October 5, 1894 (the longest continuously published periodical of the LDS Church, printed from 1840 until 1970 – not to be confused with the LDS-themed blog by the same name).

Joseph Fielding Smith – Tenth Prophet of the LDS Church

“The Father has promised us that through our faithfulness we shall be blessed with the fullness of his kingdom. In other words, we will have the privilege of becoming like him. To become like him we must have all the powers of godhood; thus a man and his wife when glorified will have spirit children who eventually will go on an earth like this one we are on and pass through the same kind of experiences, being subject to mortal conditions, and if faithful, then they also will receive the fullness of exaltation and partake of the same blessings. There is no end to this development; it will go on forever. We will become gods and have jurisdiction over worlds, and these worlds will be peopled by our own offspring.”

Source: Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation2:48, quoted in Achieving a Celestial Marriage Student Manual (above).

Orson Pratt – Original Member of the Quorum of Twelve, Parley Pratt’s brother

"But another and still greater object the Lord had in view in sending us down from yonder world to this is, that we might be redeemed in due time, by keeping the celestial law, and have our tabernacles restored to us in all the beauty of immortality. Then we will be able to multiply and extend forth our posterity and the increase of our dominion without end. Can spirits do this? No, they remain single. There are no marriages among spirits, no coupling together of the males and females among them; but when they rise from the grave, after being tabernacled in mortal bodies, they have all the functions that are necessary to people worlds. As our Father and God begat us, sons and daughters, so will we rise immortal, males and females, and beget children, and, in our turn, form and create worlds, and send forth our spirit children to inherit those worlds, the same as we were sent here, and thus will the works of God continue, and not only God himself, and His Son Jesus Christ have the power of endless lives, but all of His redeemed offspring."

Source: Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses 14:242 (an official LDS website).

“Each God, through his wife or wives, raises up a numerous family of sons and daughters; indeed, there will be no end to the increase of his own children: for each father and mother will be in a condition to multiply forever and ever. As soon as each God has begotten many millions of male and female spirits, and his Heavenly inheritance becomes too small, to comfortably accommodate his great family, he, in connection with his sons, organizes a new world, after a similar order to the one which we now inhabit, where he sends both the male and female spirits to inhabit tabernacles of flesh and bones. Thus each God forms a world for the accommodation of his own sons and daughters who are sent forth in their times and seasons, and generations to be born into the same. The inhabitants of each world are required to reverence, adore, and worship their own personal father who dwells in the Heaven which they formerly inhabited.”

Source: Orson Pratt, The Seer, 37, March 1853. Note: Orson Pratt was sent on several missions by the LDS Church in Europe and the U.S. Northeast to defend the church after the public announcement of polygamy in 1852. He wrote almost exclusively to promote and defend the LDS doctrine of polyandry. His writings on godhood, giving birth to spirit children, and having planets, occur as minor point in larger writings defending polyandry. In 1865, the First Presidency and the Quorum of Twelve officially disavowed Pratt’s works. Note, however, that the concepts of godhood, spirit children, and worlds and planets continued to be taught by other LDS prophets and are still taught to this day. Apologists say that anything Pratt wrote is not reliable because of the official statement disavowing his works; others will argue that the LDS Church disagreed with his views regarding polyandry and that the disavowal was a rejection of those views alone. Others will point to interpersonal issues (Joseph Smith, Jr. had attempted to take Pratt’s wife as Smith’s polyandrous wife while Pratt was on a mission but was rejected by her), and the fact that Pratt was so well regarded by the same individuals who disavowed his work that he was made Church Historian, so the disavowal appears to have been solely with some aspect or the key topic of his work, his views on polyandry.

Moses Thatcher

Thatcher was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Note: He was dropped from the Quorum be remained in good standing and retained the priesthood office of apostle.

"There is a spirit in man and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth it understanding; the sinful who listen and obey are led to repentance, and, through the doors of baptism of the water and spirit are brought out of wickedness to the enlightenment of pure knowledge, until in obedience to heavenly law they secure the keys of power authorizing them to pass by the angels, inherit glory, become heirs of God, joint heirs with Christ; and, having abiding in them eternal lives shall beget, throughout the endless ages of eternity, the souls of the children of men to the honor and glory of God, and create and have dominion over worlds."

Source: Moses Thatcher, Journal of Discourses 26:305 (an official LDS website).

Apostle Melvin J. Ballard - A Member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

“What do we mean by endless or eternal increase? We mean that through the righteousness and faithfulness of men and women who keep the commandments of God they will come forth with celestial bodies, fitted and prepared to enter into their great, high and eternal glory in the celestial kingdom of God; and unto them, through their preparation, there will come children, who will be spirit children. I don’t think that is very difficult to comprehend and understand.”

Source: Melvin J. Ballard, Three Degrees of Glory, p. 10, 1922 (text of September 22, 1922, discourse in the Ogden, Utah, tabernacle found here.

Apostle Bruce McConkie - A Member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

The reader should do his or her own research on McConkie’s book, Mormon Doctrine: A Compendium of the Gospel, its impact on other LDS publications and theology, and the circumstances regarding the discontinuation of its printing in 2010. It’s one of the largest-selling LDS books of all time and for better or worse, McConkie is still considered a (or the) leading LDS theologian despite Apostle Mark E. Peterson saying that the first edition contained over 1,000 errors.

“Exalted parents are to their children as our Eternal Parents are to us. Eternal increase, a continuation of the seeds forever and ever, eternal lives — these comprise the eternal family of those who gain eternal life. For them new earths are created, and thus the on-rolling purposes of the Gods of Heaven go forward from eternity to eternity.”

Source: Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah, 23, 1982 (available from LDS’s Desert Books> as part of a six-volume set or at Amazon)

BYU Studies, a LDS Peer-Reviewed Academic Journal

"Brigham Young believed that man is sovereign over his own actions; yet he did not rule out the omnipotence of God. He recognized the possibility of divine intervention, such as the religious experience of Paul, but believed the ultimate decisions of life affecting man's eternal destiny are to be left to man. This idea was so important to Brigham Young as he conceived the purpose of this mortal existence that he said that "the consent of the creature must be obtained before the Creator can rule perfectly." Explaining this with eternal perspective, Brigham Young said: "Man is made an agent to himself before his God; he is organized for the express purpose, that he may become like his master. The Lord has organized mankind for the purpose of increasing in that intelligence and truth. . . until he is capable of creating worlds on worlds, and becoming Gods, even the sons of God." Believing that "the power of choice all intelligent beings inherit from the Gods of eternity. . . is innate,"

Source: "The Reflections of Brigham Young on the Nature of Man and the State," by J. Keith Melville, BYU Studies, vol. 4 (1961-1962), Num. 3 and 4 - Spring and Summer 1962, p.257. Melville was a political science professor at Brigham Young University (BYU) and taught formerly at Ricks College, which is now BYU(Idaho). Note that this affirms the “becoming a god and creating worlds” teachings of Brigham Young in a LDS peer-reviewed academic journal. LDS Gospel Principles Gospel Principles is an LDS-published guide to basic doctrines and principles of the LDS church. Although it contains simplified doctrines and principles and is generally used as a Sunday School book for recent converts and non-Mormons, the LDS Church mandated that it be used two times per month in 2010 and 2011 as the lesson manual for Sunday Relief Society and Melchizedek priesthood classes. The 2009 edition of the official LDS publication is available online is availablehere, here, and downloadable by chapter here[all sources from the www.lds.org website]).

I have access to the 1997 edition in hard copy through a friend and can note the changes made in 2009. Chapter 38 is entitled “Eternal Marriage.” One subheading, Eternal Marriage is Essential for Salvation states (changes from 1997 version shown):

“An essential requirement for exaltation is celestial marriage, for exaltation depends upon the continuation of the family in eternity and ~~the power to populate other worlds as our Father did this one~~ all that the Father hath.”

This is common change. Chapter 47 on Exaltation was change in from the 1997 to the 2009 version to read:

“If we prove faithful to the Lord, we will live in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom of heaven. We will become exalted, ~~just like our Heavenly Father~~ to live with our Heavenly Father in eternal families.”

…

They will ~~have~~ be united eternally with their righteous family members ~~with them~~ and will be able to have spirit children also. These spirit children will have ~~the same relationship to them as we do to our Heavenly Father. They will be an eternal family~~ eternal increase

When the 2009 edition of Gospel Principles was published, only one reference to ‘becoming gods’ was left in Gospel Principles. The rest of the references were changes to ‘as our Heavenly Father,” “having all the gifts of Heavenly Father,” or similar euphemisms.

I don’t intend to research other LDS issues as thoroughly as this one. I remain interested in LDS history and theology but there are so many other things that interest me. I took this seriously because I hope it will help you understand why someone who is not LDS, or is LDS but is aware of the tactics employed by FAIR, and is appalled what can politely be called the obfuscation of Mormon professors Richard Bushman and Kent P. Jackson, doesn’t think ‘Ask A Mormon’ is a responsible way to get information on the LDS church.

Frankly, when I ask Mormons (except for my Assistant Scoutmaster and friend), I generally don’t get straight answers. I certainly don’t get answers that match the LDS Gospel Principles. Whether Mormons think they’re giving me milk before meat, or protecting something that is “sacred, not secret”, I don’t know. But asking a Mormon hasn’t helped me. On FR, questions are ignored and we’re directed to FAIR (as the first source – not lds.org).

Seriously, as someone trying to be objective and trying to act as an academic and historian, what am I missing (besides LDS faith) that would lead me to a different conclusion?

Please note that at no time did I comment on the merits of LDS belief on the three glories of the Celestial, Telestial, and Terresital Kingdoms, or the teachings of becoming gods over worlds or planets, and populating them progneny. I simply pointed out that it was taught and is currently taught in LDS educational manuals in LDS Gospel Principles. Personally, I don’t believe there’s anything ‘anti-‘ about making a factual observation without assigning a judgment to it.

My comment was on whether it’s valid for expect people to rely on “Ask a Mormon” sites when LDS assistant deans of religions, professors, ‘award-winning religious scholars,’ 40+ year ordinary Mormons, and others say this doctrine does not exist when it is being taught today to children four to eleven, high school students, college students, and all Mormons through the LDS publication Gospel Doctrine, a doctrinal exposition by the Prophet and the Quorum of the Twelve, the lds.org website as well as the teachings of Prophets, and other sources.

I’m particularly disturbed that I can find these current educational manuals, the current LDS manual on its doctrine, the official doctrinal exposition by the Prophet and the Quorum of the Twelve, and other sources with several hours of research – and yet the Assistant Dean of Religion at BYU says it’s a canard to suggest that the LDS Church teaches it. That’s like a veiled threat. ‘Continue to ask about it – to research it – to discuss it – and you’re vicious and evil and anti-Mormon.’ He’s a LDS Assistant Dean of Religion at BYU, for Pete’s sake. Surely he knows this is being taught. But he suggests that if you dare to ask about or speak the truth about it, you’re anti-Mormon?

So. I don’t think Ask a Mormon is going to work. It doesn’t appear to work on Free Republic, although I recognize that LDS FR members may doubt the reasons that questions are asked, people can be sincere. I was when I asked my first question of Paragon Defender. Mormon FR members never seem to answer questions.

It doesn’t seem to work in the real world. It didn’t work for Maureen Dowd.

And the LDS Church has already told its members to stop asking questions about Church doctrine and theology. So Ask a Mormon does not appear to work for Mormons, unless they are asking their bishops, who may or may not know more than the Assistant Dean of Religion at BYU.

I know understand why we have at least one LDS Free Republic member (not RLDS/Community of Christ who insists that Joseph Smith, Jr., never practiced polyandry. He may have Asked a Mormon.

To my knowledge, I’ve only been called ‘anti-Mormon’ on Free Republic once.

MORMONism IS Biblical some of the time:

Matthew 12:30 "He who is not with me is against me..."

So, if you stay in these threads and post things 'about' MORMONism that is NOT positive, uplifts the CHURCH, engenders 'faith' and minimizes DOUBT; then you'll need a ...

...counter.

Primarily, it has to do with the fact that MormonVoice is not the LDS Church but is the alter ego of FAIR.

Humph!

I know altar egos and them folks sure AIN'T!!

--MormonDupe(I'm only speaking for myself here; of course.)

MEGO!

Wake me when it's over...)

666 posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2011 8:35:28 AM by MormonDude (I may not understand everything MORMON, but, by golly, I sure BELIEVE it!)

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 666 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

I guess Sandy is doing what she does best: ignoring the facts.

She may be cross checking my references. I spent a lot of time researching the references. I wouldn't consider it unusual for somebody to spend a lot of time cross-checking the references if it concerned a matter important to them.

I wasn't play 'getcha' with my posts. She likely needs to confirm that the educational manuals are currently teaching those points, or that FAIR gives those disclosures and instructions to its apologists.

I have no personal axe to grind with Saundra.

http://stevebloor.wordpress.com/2011/12/18/letter-to-ward-members-re-resignation-as-their-bishop/#comment-244

exceptional research