Posted on 04/27/2005 6:07:01 PM PDT by WingedPaladin
I know the power of God is in this church. I have felt the power and love of God and it has brought my soul unspeakable joy. I know of the reality of the Holy Priesthood that has been restored to Joseph Smith, Jr. and Oliver Cowdery by the angels John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John the Beloved. Through this Priesthood, God has blessed and healed me. I don't believe in this church because the leaders told me to believe it. I know it because the Holy Spirit testified to my soul that it is true. I asked and God answered.
I hope this answers your question in regard to my feelings about the church.
Then don't complain when people refer to your church as a cult since your church teaches that my church and every other so-called christian church is apostate.
The term Apostate is a much nastier term than cult. It implies that you have left the faith entirely. Cult merely implies that you are out of the mainstream.
I might say that it puzzles me why your church would refer to mine as APOSTATE, but I won't. So if you don't mind, I'm not going to shed any crocodile tears for you if those churches that you refer to as Apostate, refer to your church as a cult.
Get over it.
The Nibley family has issued a couple of statements about the abuse. Apparently Martha's story has been embellished over the years. Her seven brothers and sisters have said there is no way that sexual abuse took place in their home. Her sister Rebecca, who is her staunchest supporter, was asked by Martha to search her memory because she thinks Rebecca was abused. Rebecca is adamament that she was not.
Martha's ex-husband (who is gay) also says that Martha isn't being quite honest about things. He flatly says that she has twisted or spun facts out of whack. He has no love for the LDS church and is no longer a member. One example is that Martha says she went home to Provo with her young famiy to get in touch with her roots and her inner self. Unfortunately, she had a big problem with anorexia and went home for treatment. She didn't work at BYU at that time as she claims either.
She also claims that women in Provo can't cut their hair unless they have their husband's permission. She also maintains that the First Presidency has a hit squad that targets critics of the LDS church.
As far as Martha's assertion that her father was under incredible pressure from the LDS church to toe the line, anyone who knows any of the Nibleys will roll their eyes at that characterization. All of the Nibleys are very outspoken, you could never muzzle them. Hugh Nibley was known for poking fun at the Utah Mormon culture (which can be quirky) but never denied his testimony or the truthfulness of the gospel and of Jesus Christ. Hugh Nibley was a brilliant scholar who knew 13 or 14 ancient languages. He was a genuis. He could have gone (and was offered big money) to go elsewhere. He chose to live in a tiny home in Provo, Utah and raise eight children with his wife.
As far as your statistic goes for child abuse in Utah, where did you get it? And where did you get the information about the fraudulent footnotes? Both are absolutely untrue. I know of one critic (Kent P Jackson) who did a critique on Nibley's writings and said that Nibley would take what he wanted to match his conclusions and footnote that. The interesting part about Jackson is that he turned around and wrote several essays and used Nibley as a source for much of his information. Can't have it both ways.
Here is the URL to the family's letter and addendum to Martha's book, Leaving the Saints. NIBLEY FAMILY RESPONSE TO MARTHA BECK'S "LEAVING THE SAINTS". Here is the URL to amazon.com where you can read the first chapter of her book. Leaving the Saints. Read the comments and the reviews. Even those who give the book a glowing review say that her caricatures of the LDS church are shallow and misleading. Another review I read said that while her writing skils are excellent, the facts read as though they are taken from an anti-Mormon 19th century tract. And here are a few reviews of her book. Leaving the Saints or Leaving Reality. Fantastic Fiction. Loss and Sadness Among the Saints.
I will say that I heard Hugh Nibley speak several times, both in church and at BYU. I just wanted that information upfront.
If you don't mind my asking, how long have you been a Mormon?
A good Mormon woman has elaborately curled, longish hair until middle age and a permed, upswept coiffure in later life. Either way, the highly sprayed hair moves as a unit, like a padded, shellacked helmet, protecting the brain from injury or information (pg. 193).(Note: I am a Mormon woman and these "facts" make me roll my eyes. Please. Oh, and I was born and raised in Provo, Utah.) Unfortunately with the many false claims that Martha makes, it makes it quite difficut to accept her other claims. I feel sorry for her and hope she finds peace in this life. Too bad she has to sling falsehoods at her father and at the LDS church and its leaders.
Not true. Several people have made requests for information about Sonja Johnson at BYU and they have articles and microfilm both. Martha also makes the claim that the LDS church controls what its members read and it is heavily censored. Which would come as news to many LDS authors who publish their books without any interference from the LDS church.
In a way, her lies/false claims about some things is actually beneficial to the LDS church, even if some of her other claims about Mormonism are true. While I am certainly no supporter of Mormonism, I would never use Martha as a reference. She has no real credibility. She is a very disturbed woman.
My sister has actually been following the Martha Beck book issue more closely. This is second-hand information, but the Nibley family is very worried about Martha. They're afraid that the email campaign to Oprah will send her over the edge (unfortunately there have been several threats in a few emails.) She does have some emotional problems and apparently this clouds her sense of reality.
Actually, I should not apologize for what I know to be true. Truth is truth. And if the truth God has given me upsets people, so be it. Those who are open and seeking for truth would not be stirred.
I understand more clearly now the words Joseph Smith, Jr. wrote in surprise to how people responded to him seeing a vision.
You can believe what you choose to believe; just be careful to consider the real possibility that what you think is true is actually false. I know a couple, he was a Mormon Bishop, that left the church when they could no longer reconcile so many inconsistencies in Mormon theology.
"The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us."
How does he know that? He saw them. There is no denial of the materiality of the Holy Spirit as he states in Doctrine & Covenants 131:7-8:
"There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter."
Joseph's eyes were purified, and he did see it.
I believe wholly in the words of Isaiah. Please find for me evidence of your statement concerning Brigham Young saying something to the effect of an "'immortal or resurrected and glorified Father' in an actual sexual act with Mary." As far as I am aware, that did not occur. Otherwise I will consider your statement to be false.
So ... You guys as good at making Jello as you claim?
"When the time came that His first-born, the Saviour, should come into the world and take a tabernacle, the Father came Himself and favoured that spirit with a tabernacle instead of letting any other man do it. The Saviour was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits, and that is all the organic difference between Jesus Christ and you and me. And a difference there is between our Father and us consists in that He has gained His exaltation, and has obtained eternal lives." (Journal of Discourses, Vol 4, p.218)
I understand "favored that spirit with a tabernacle" to mean that God gave Jesus Christ a physical body. A human man did not create the physical body of Jesus Christ. Does Brigham Young say it was a sexual act? I don't see it here.
I have searched your other quote and Brigham Young does indeed say that Jesus was not begotton by the Holy Ghost, but by the Father. As to whether it was a sexual act or not, I think we would need to ask Mary herself. All the references I have state she was a virgin.
I've read Luke 1:35 again, and it reads, "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
It says that the "Holy Ghost shall come upon thee" then it says "the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:" Does the "Highest" mean the Father? I believe it does.
Here is what Matthew 1:18-23 says: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."
In the Book of Mormon, Alma states, "And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God."
Do these scriptures say God the Father was not there? Does not God the Father perform miracles by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is His power? I believe the entire Godhead - Father, Son, and Holy Ghost - were all there to participate in this miracle. How they did it? I do not know. I am not God, nor am I Mary.
I think we all have learned something. To me, it being the Father Himself creating a physical body for Jesus Christ makes a lot of sense. Do you believe Jesus Christ to be literally the Son of God, the Only Begotten in the flesh? I certainly do.
Again, this is what it means to me and what I believe from what has been presented. I do not officially speak for the church.
Thanks for your helpful response. On doctrinal issues, I remain convinced that mormonism is a cult, but I now know that I should take this broken reed out of my arsenal.
Speaking as a Christian, I found Martha Beck's substitute for mormonism -- amorphus new age mumbo jumbo -- at least as weird.
Thanks for your response though I'm still a little confused by your answer. So, I can't go into the temple to view the ceremony, but she could hold a separate reception in which I can attend. The religion requires a mother and daughter to be separated at the most important moment in her life. I don't like it. (don't mean to be argumentative, just want to understand)
Can you elaborate please? Thanks, and no I am not Mormon. I'd just like to see your explanation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.