Communist conspiracies

Remember how Ezra Benson was absolutely petrified by the Red Scare? This man, a prophet of God gifted with the privileges of visions, prophesy and discernment, couldn't sort his shit out when it came to world politics.

Shit like this kills me now. I could never quite believe that Communism was Satan's version of the United Order. It always felt like a wishful conclusion on the part of my church leaders and teachers. But I find it extremely problematic that a true prophet of God would get so carried away in McCarthyism and political scare tactics that he couldn't help but marry them to Mormonism. Talk about philosophies of man mingled with scripture!

Though I doubted it for years, I can now comfortably say the Ezra was a product of his time and clown of a prophet.

Greg Trimble's 11 Book of Mormon evidences

If you have Mormon friends on social media, chances are you've been presented with links to some pretty interesting Mormon logic. One post I've recently seen from a popular blog makes the case for The Book of Mormon in 11 poorly thought out proofs. The proofs are stated as questions and are the typical examples offered by general authorities of why The Book of Mormon is true which means they're the kinds of things you can say in church meetings to make yourself feel important and everyone else feel comfortable, but predictably they are not very convincing.

Here are the eleven questions that will prove the authenticity of The Book of Mormon and my brief responses.

1. Could an uneducated boy come up with 531 pages of ancient scripture on his own that was historically accurate and prophetic in nature?

Answer: Yes, absolutely. Please open your copy of the book to essentially any page that isn't copied almost verbatim from the King James Bible (that might be harder than it sounds). Now tell me how many verses you have to read before you find one that sounds like an uneducated young man (calling someone in his early 20s a "boy" is condescending and inaccurate) er-ing and um-ing a dictation from his head. Not many. Joseph Smith loaded his book so full of place keepers, redundancies, filler and slip ups that I'm amazed when I make it through a single verse without feeling the need to edit.

Keep in mind that this is how it reads even after the Church's editing of all the more egregious frontier farmer speech.

2. Would it be possible for that boy to understand and include ancient Hebrew literary writing styles such as idioms and Chiasmus, some of which weren’t even discovered until long after Joseph Smith was gone ?

Answer: Easily. He read the Bible a lot. He, like every other human being who reads, would absorb and reproduce the style of what he reads to some degree. As for chiasmus, it's an extremely common organizational tool that certainly appears in Jewish literature but is not in any way limited to it. I made a chiasmus on accident once, others are more carefully thought out. You can find chiasmus in children's literature as easily as you find it in adult literature from all over the world, European literature included. This just came to mind, maybe Jews wrote it:

(A) Hickory dickory dock! 
(B)/(C) The mouse went up the clock.
(C) The clock struck one,
(B) The mouse ran down.
(A) Hickory dickory dock!

And quit insisting Joseph was a "boy" when he wrote The Book of Mormon; he was a married man.

3. How would Joseph Smith have been able to know so much about the Middle East, especially the Arabian Peninsula where Lehi and his family traveled? The book includes findings in that region that no one had discovered yet.

Answer: The "knowledge" about the Middle East found in the Book of Mormon could have been derived from having been shown a map. What do you think has been discovered there after the printing of The Book of Mormon that was included in the text? The "NHM" alter? Come on, give us what you've got. Everything apologists have thrown out there has been debunked.

4. How could Joseph Smith come up with roughly 200 new names in the Book of Mormon and then have them turn out to be Semitic in nature?

Answer: He read the Bible a lot. He reused many of those names, modifying them as he saw fit. It wouldn't be hard to throw in a few more made up names that look similar to what's found in the Bible.

5. If you think Joseph Smith couldn’t have written this book, then where did it come from? If one says the devil put him up to it…then why would Satan want to publish another testament of Jesus Christ and a book that does nothing but promote righteousness. Jesus said that a house divided against itself would fall.

Answer: Only a moron would say the devil wrote or inspired the writing of The Book of Mormon. It's origins are clearly early 19th century publications and popular thought.

6. Who were the “other sheep” that would hear Jesus’s voice in John 10:16?

Answer: The "Gentiles", in other words, the non-Jews.

7. Why are there volumes of books written by non-LDS authors stating that Christ came and visited the America’s a couple thousand years ago just like it says in 3rd Nephi? (See Example “He Walked The America’s”) How would Joseph Smith have known this when at the time no one even considered it?

Answer: No one has a monopoly on stupidity, ethnocentrism and wishful thinking. The one book you linked us to is very revealing about yourself as a thinker.

8. If we have the stick of Judah (record of the Jews or the Bible), then where is the stick of Joseph that is referenced in Ezekiel 37:15-20? The Book of Mormon is the only explanation for this scripture. Lehi was a descendant of Joseph. Think Joseph Smith could have gotten that right by sheer chance?

Answer: This is a misinterpretation of the Bible.

9. How could there be so many witnesses of the Book of Mormon and the plates and not one of them deny their testimony even when some of them became bitter toward Joseph Smith? With so many people involved…a hoax of this magnitude could never go uncovered.
 
Answer: People do and say all sorts of things for friendship, family and their reputation. Historian Dan Vogel has some presented some important information for you to consider.

10. How could the Book of Mormon never contradict itself while being an extremely complex book? After all these years…someone would have found something…but no.

Answer: The Book of Mormon is relatively straight forward in its narrative. It basically just tells the same story over and over again. The repetition is numbing, not profound. Despite the simplicity of the repeated narrative, contradictions and errors have in fact been found (you just have to be brave enough to read something other than LDS apologetic literature). It also contradicts known archealogy, natural history, and the history of religious and political thought; it contradicts other Mormon scripture; it contradicts current LDS beliefs (e.g. temporary suffering in hell vs. eternal suffering and the nature of the Godhead).

Even though The Book of Mormon isn't horribly riddled with internal contradictions, why does that somehow make it true? Many authors manage to avoid totally screwing up their stories, does that mean their books are true? Absolutely not.

11. How do I feel while I read the Book of Mormon? Don’t let anyone tell you that you can’t trust your feelings. We are spiritual beings, and if we can’t trust our feelings, then what do we have? Over and over again in the Old and New Testament we’re told that we can trust that “still small voice” to guide us in our decisions. (1 Kings 19:12) I can write evidence after evidence to back up the Book of Mormon but each of those evidences I found were only secondary to the whispering of the Spirit I felt that day before I began waxing up my surf board.

Answer: Epistemology is a tricky thing. You're insisting that emotions are all we have. That's an unfortunate move on your part because we have a lot more than that: we have other senses to work with and we have logic. But if you're going to insist on feelings let's look at your feelings. Let's say you wake up from a dream about your wife cheating on you and you feel hurt and angry. You can't look at her the same for weeks. Did she really cheat on you? Are your feelings reliable? And what about others' feelings? Why do you seem so willing to disregard anyone's feelings and impressions that don't align with your own? What makes you think yours are the only true ones when members of essentially every other religion will use the same evidence as proof of their religion being true?

P.S. I wrote this blog immediately after reading the questions. The answers were too easy. I then went back to the blog to read the comments and saw that several people had written their responses as well. Several were similar to my own but I definitely encourage others to read through them.

Hiding history

 
The media are reporting a celebration of a new era of LDS Church transparency with the release of The Joseph Smith Papers and, more recently, the printer's copy of The Book of Mormon. I can't disagree that the move to transparency is a good thing in that it's the most honest thing for the Church to do, but in the midst of all the celebrating I feel as though a lot of members are choosing to ignore what's to be celebrated. We're not celebrating new scripture, new revelations or even new propaganda for the missionaries to hand out. We're celebrating an end of the Church's suppression of information in one very specific area - it's early historical documents.
 
The two most infamous examples of previous attempts on behalf of the Church to keep historical information away from members include the Mark Hofmann forgeries and, earlier still, Joseph Fielding Smith's hiding of Joseph Smith’s 1832 version of the First Vision. Joseph Fielding had first discovered it in the First Presidency vault in Joseph Smith's personal letter book, freaked out about it enough to tear it out and hide the pages in his personal safe until he was pressured to release them in 1965. How messed up is that?

I'll admit I can't imagine what incentive he might have to share the first written version of the First Vision (it doesn't match well with the 1838 version), but his behavior is still alarming to me. Sure, it shows Joseph Fielding's lack of integrity, but it also shows just how fearful he was that the LDS house of cards would fall.

Now the Church is announcing via the Ensign and Liahona that Joseph Smith read magically appearing words on a stone in a hat and that that particular stone had nothing to do with an ancient Moroni, but that instead it has everything to do with a young Joseph Smith pretending he could see lost and buried objects (like gold). It's been 180 years and the general membership is only going to hear about it now (if they actually read the Liahona). Avoidance and denial add up to secrecy and deception in my brain.

LDS FAQ - "Masonry and the Temple"

I found a brief Church-sanctioned (I believe) explanation of the LDS temple's relationship to Freemasonry. I'm curious what it says. Text found here.

Students of both Mormonism and Freemasonry have pondered possible relationships between Masonic rites and the LDS temple ceremony. Although some argue that Joseph Smith borrowed elements of Freemasonry in developing the temple ceremony, the Endowment is more congruous with LDS scriptures (especially the book of Abraham and the Book of Moses) and ancient ritual than with Freemasonry. Both the book of Abraham and the Book of Moses are texts Joseph made up out of thin air, so I personally don't see why anyone would feel better knowing that they've influenced the creation of the LDS temple ceremonies. Pointing out that the temple has more more in common with those writings than with Freemasonry still doesn't justify the presence of Masonic oaths and handshakes in the temple. Latter-day Saints view the ordinances as a revealed restoration of ancient temple ceremony and only incidentally related to Freemasonry. There's no good reason to think the LDS temple ceremonies are ancient and I'm looking forward to seeing how you continue to downplay the influence of Freemasonry. The two are not antithetical, however, nor do they threaten each other, and neither institution discourages research regarding the ancient origins of their two ceremonies. The origins of Freemasonry are not ancient at all, they are medieval, late medieval. Many sacred ceremonies existed in the ancient world. Modified over centuries, these rituals existed in some form among ancient Egyptians, Coptic Christians, Israelites, and Masons, and in the Catholic and Protestant liturgies. Is this written for 6th graders? I can't believe you dared list the Masons in this group. And Egyptians? WTF? Which Egyptians are you talking about? Common elements include the wearing of special clothing, ritualistic speech, the dramatization of archetypal themes, instruction, and the use of symbolic gestures. Levi Strauss would be so proud to read this, but aren't these elements too broad to be taken seriously in this particular discussion of Freemasonry in the LDS temple? One theme common to many—found in the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Egyptian pyramid texts, and Coptic prayer circles, for example—is man's journey through life and his quest, following death, to successfully pass the sentinels guarding the entrance to eternal bliss with the gods. Right, Thor and all his buddies in Valhalla. Though these ceremonies vary greatly, significant common points raise the possibility of a common remote source. Human psychology most likely. Mormon wishful thinking knows no ends.
 

The Egyptian pyramid texts, for example, feature six main themes: (1) emphasis on a primordial written document behind the rites; (2) purification (including anointing, lustration, and clothing); (3) the Creation (resurrection and awakening texts); (4) the garden (including tree and ritual meal motifs); (5) travel (protection, a ferryman, and Osirian texts); and (6) ascension (including victory, coronation, admission to heavenly company, and Horus texts). Oh my god, that's so... DIFFERENT from the Mormon temple! Wow. Like such ancient ceremonies, the LDS temple Endowment presents aspects of these themes in figurative terms. Only if you're working in the most sympathetic of generalizations. It, too, presents, not a picture of immediate reality, but a model setting forth the pattern of human life on earth and the divine plan of which it is part. We're going to need some actual details here. It sounds like you're seeing what you want to see. It's called confirmation bias.
 
Masonic ceremonies are also allegorical, depicting life's states—youth, manhood, and old age—each with its associated burdens and challenges, followed by death and hoped-for immortality. The difference between your argument for the temple paralleling an Egyptian Book of Breathings and the Freemason ceremonies is that Joseph actually knew Masons and became one himself. On the other hand, he had no understanding of Egyptian despite having purchased a scroll containing a book of breathings. He feigned a translation that is laughable to today's Egyptologists. There is no universal agreement concerning when Freemasonry began. Maybe not, but no one can seriously claim it pre-dates the late Middle Ages. Some historians trace the order's origin to Solomon, Enoch, or even Adam. Only Mormon historians. Others argue that while some Masonic symbolism may be ancient, as an institution it began in the Middle Ages or later. Only everyone who isn't Mormon thinks this.
 
Though in this dispensation the LDS Endowment dates from Kirtland and Nauvoo, Latter-day Saints believe that temple ordinances are as old as man and that the essentials of the gospel of Jesus Christ, including its necessary ritual and teachings, were first revealed to Adam. Mormons have no basis for believing this other than the fact that Joseph Smith, a notorious conman, taught it to his followers and it has been believed and repeated for generations. These saving principles and ordinances were subsequently revealed to Seth; Noah; Melchizedek; Abraham, and each prophet to whom the priesthood was given, including Peter. There is no historical evidence to convince us most of these men ever existed (Peter is the exception) and much less evidence that they ever practiced the ceremonies of the current LDS temples. Latter-day Saints believe that the ordinances performed in LDS temples today replicate rituals that were part of God's teachings from the beginning. But they have no reason to believe anything similar. Hopefully the author of this article will cite some convincing texts.
 

The Prophet Joseph Smith suggested that the Endowment and Freemasonry in part emanated from the same ancient spring. Joe Smith? He's not a very trustworthy source. Do you know he tried to trick investors into funding an illegal bank? The man was as phony as a $3 bill. Thus, some Nauvoo Masons thought of the Endowment as a restoration of a ritual only imperfectly preserved in Freemasonry and viewed Joseph Smith as a master of the underlying principles and allegorical symbolism (Heber C. Kimball to Parley P. Pratt, June 17, 1842, Church Archives). I'm sure those few unnamed Freemasons were totally right... The philosophy and major tenets of Freemasonry are not fundamentally incompatible with the teaching, theology, and doctrines of the Latter-day Saints. Obviously not, but that does not mean they derive from ancient biblical patriarchs or that one group did not co-opt them from the other. Both emphasize morality, sacrifice, consecration, and service, and both condemn selfishness, sin, and greed. So what? You're talking about two groups who's morality is founded in Christian European thought. You're also ignoring the fact that essentially every ethnography you'll read will describe cultures who's beliefs include similar concepts and virtues. That says more about human psychology than it does about the LDS temple being ancient. Furthermore, the aim of Masonic ritual is to instruct-to make truth available so that man can follow it.
 
Resemblances between the two rituals are limited to a small proportion of actions and words; indeed, some find that the LDS Endowment has more similarities with the Pyramid texts and the Coptic documents than with Freemasonry. At this point, dear reader you should compare and contrast the text shared between the temple endowment and the Mason ceremonies. They are in many cases identical! Even if we are to accept the author's claim that they only make up a "limited" portion of the temple, that DOES NOT justify their presence in temple liturgy. I would love to see where the endowment plagiarizes Coptic liturgy in the way. Even where the two rituals share symbolism, the fabric of meanings is different. Because Joseph took the symbols and recast them for his own purposes. In addition to creation and life themes, one similarity is that both call for the participants to make covenants. You keep dancing around the details. I find this approach willfully dishonest. Yet, the Endowment alone ties covenants to eternal blessings and to Jesus Christ. How did you reach this conclusion? Your argument is "OK, we have similarities, but ours is legit, theirs isn't, trust me!"? I'm not impressed. The Masonic ceremony does not emphasize priesthood or the need to be commissioned by God to represent him. So whoever emphasizes that the most wins? What kind of moronic game are you playing? The active participation of God in the world and in men's lives is a distinctly LDS temple motif. As is God's active participation with women, but only through men. It's called divine sexism. While Masons believe in an undefined, impersonal God, everything in the LDS Endowment emanates from, or is directed to, God who is a personage and man's eternal Father. That doesn't mean Joseph Smith didn't steal the Masonic rituals and infuse them into his own thought. The Endowment looks to the eternities and to eternal lives, but Freemasonry is earthbound, pervaded by human legend and hope for something better. Because Joseph had to outdo everyone, including himself.
 

Freemasonry is a fraternal society, and in its ritual all promises, oaths, and agreements are made between members. In the temple Endowment all covenants are between the individual and God. You finally seem to be admitting they use the same oaths (which they do), even if directed to different entities. In Freemasonry, testing, grading, penalizing, or sentencing accords with the rules of the fraternity or membership votes. In the Endowment, God alone is the judge. You lost me. Do you mean that the Freemasons actually take quality control seriously while Mormons just let anything go in the temple? That's dishonest. In the Mormon temple you have someone checking on you every step of the way making sure you do everything just right. The difference being that Freemasons have to learn everything by heart and then get tested, whereas Mormons get to copy what's shown to them on the spot. Within Freemasonry, rank and promotions are of great importance, while in the LDS temple rites there are no distinctions: all participants stand equal before God. Not really. Men and women have separate seating and gendered clothing, including a veil to cover the faces of women. Husbands are placed over wives in the temple. Men get to become king and priests and women queens and priestesses. Historically kings ruled over their queens and we have no idea what a priestess even does according to Mormon doctrine. This is not equality. The clash between good and evil, including Satan's role, is essential to, and vividly depicted in, the Endowment, but is largely absent from Masonic rites. So Joseph added a maniacal Satan to the stage, so what? This is a red herring. You need to look at the details you so diligently avoid! That's where you'll find the real devil. Temple ceremonies emphasize salvation for the dead through vicarious ordinance work, such as baptism for the dead; nothing in Masonic ritual allows for proxies acting on behalf of the dead. Because it's a ridiculous notion. Why would a fraternity need to induct the deceased? Women participate in all aspects of LDS temple rites; though Freemasonry has women's auxiliaries, Masonic ritual excludes them. Freemasonry is a men's club, just like the LDS endowment was back when it was introduced. Both have changed (Mormonism first, thanks to polygamy) to be more inclusive of women. The Endowment's inclusion of females underscores perhaps the most fundamental difference between the two rites: LDS temple rites unite husbands and wives, and their children, in eternal families (see Eternal Lives; Marriage). Now you've moved away from the endowment, where the Masonic plagiarism is found, to the sealing room. You've just moved the goal posts, moron. Latter-day Saint sealings would be completely out of place in the context of Masonic ceremonies. Incredible. I almost want to give you points for trying, except I feel like you're purposefully being sloppy in your analysis of Freemasonry and the LDS temple. I don't know if you're being dishonest or if you simply don't know what you're doing.
 

Freemasonry's 5 points of contact as used in the LDS temple endowment until 1990.

Thus, Latter-day Saints see their temple ordinances as fundamentally different from Masonic and other rituals and think of similarities as remnants from an ancient original. This conclusion is only reached by ignoring the verbatim theft of oaths, the co-opting of symbols, the exact copying of handshakes, and many other elements, while simultaneously cherry picking cultures to compare your beliefs to and then staying back in the vaguest of generalities in order to avoid seeing your comparison implode.

KENNETH W. GODFREY should be ashamed of himself.

Temple prep - Endowed from on High "Lesson 3"

I'm reading the Church Education System's manual for temple preparation and adding my two cents. Text found here. 

Objective

“And we ask thee, Holy Father, that thy servants may go forth from this house armed with thy power, and that thy name may be upon them, and thy glory be round about them” (D&C 109:22). God powers are the best! Let's go make some new animal species and some tornadoes!

To help class members understand that those who attend the temple worthily will receive great blessings from the Lord. I've been reading a lot about "blessings" in these temple prep materials. I hope this lesson gets into some concrete details. People should know what to expect in temporal in return for the temple attendance.

Preparation

1. Carefully review the scriptures used in this lesson so that you will be prepared to lead the class discussion about them. Naturally.
   
2. You may want to prepare to have class members sing a hymn about temple work, such as “We Love Thy House, O God” (Hymns, no. 247), or about the eternal nature of truth, such as “Oh Say, What Is Truth?” (Hymns, no. 272). Sounds brainwashy, but on theme.
   
3. If Family Home Evening Video Supplement 2 (53277) is available, you may want to show “Temples Are for Eternal Covenants,” a six-minute segment. Oh dear Lord, DO NOT SHOW THAT VIDEO! The sentimentality is laid on in extremely thick layers of Carpenters-esque song and enough '80s soft focus to make everyone will feel awkward as fuck. Gordon's talk at the end is more of the same empty temple rhetoric we've seen previously. Skip the film.
   

Lesson Presentation

Ask class members if they have any questions. About what? You haven't even introduced the topic yet and the first lesson was too safe to incite any kind of questions, so unless these kids have read something on their own (from the Internet, say) they won't have anything to ask. Take the time required to answer questions to the best of your ability and as guided by the Lord’s Spirit. OK, fine. Here's a question: Why did the Church change the initiation back in 2005? Don't we criticize early Christianity for changing baptism from immersion to sprinkling? Why would God condone the change from sitting naked and getting touched to sitting in garments and only having gestures of touching? I thought we were supposed to be washed and anointed BEFORE dawning the garment of the holy priesthood. Remember that some aspects of temple work must not be discussed outside the temple. Like not being touched naked while being washed? It's no longer part of the temple so we can talk about it, can't we?

Temple Work Has Existed Since Ancient Times

You may want to begin by singing together a hymn about temple work or about the eternal nature of truth. Then again, the temple LDS ceremonies as we now have them don't seem to be eternal in nature at all. They are not to be found in ancient cultures and they have not remained the same since Joseph Smith made them up in the mid-1840s. Teaching that they are unchanging truth is misleading.

Explain that the Lord has always commanded His people to build temples. Well, not "always". The first construction we consider a temple - the Israelite tabernacle - was commanded thousands of years after the creation of Adam and Eve. I'm also reluctant to accept that God has a "people" and that that people is the Israelite nation and Jews. He has revealed the work to be done in temples. It has a lot to do with killing animals and burning their fat and blood, two of God's favorite foods.

• What temples or tabernacles are mentioned in the scriptures? The Israelite tabernacle, Solomon's (First Temple) and Second temple (started under Cyrus the Great, embellished by Herod and destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE) are all from the Bible; The Book of Mormon mentions an early Solomon temple replica built by Nephi and another one (or is it the same one) shows up hundreds of years later in the land of Bountiful (but all this stuff has never been confirmed in the slightest by archeology or anthropological research); Doctrine & Covenants calls for the construction of the Kirtland and Nauvoo temples; The Pearl of Great Price only rehashes references to Second Temple as found in Matthew.

Invite class members to review scripture indexes to find references dealing with temples and tabernacles. What does this have to do with the blessings you receive from the temple? Is this list making taking us somewhere? You may want to list the class members’ answers on the chalkboard. Because it helps the students feel like they've contributed to the lesson. You may also want to have class members review the following scriptures:

Moses’ tabernacle: Exodus 40:1–2, 34–38

Solomon’s temple: 2 Chronicles 3:1–2; 2 Chronicles 5:1

Herod’s temple: Matthew 21:12–15

Nephite temples: 2 Nephi 5:16; Mosiah 1:18; 3 Nephi 11:1

Explain that because of apostasy, all of these temples eventually lost their true purposes and were destroyed. The true purpose being sacrificing animals to Jehovah so he can relish in the smell of burnt fat and blood. Temple work in its fulness has been restored in our day through the Prophet Joseph Smith, bringing great blessings into our lives. And through the Freemasons. Don't forget the Freemasons! And don't ignore the fact that Joseph did not restore animal sacrifice, so I guess he didn't really restore the "fulness" of previous temples at all. Are we going to list the "great blessings" the temple brings to us?

Elder Bruce R. McConkie said: “The inspired erection and proper use of temples is one of the great evidences of the divinity of the Lord’s work. But cathedrals, synagogues, megachurches, and other religious buildings of other religions do not obviously. Wait, is he talking about penises? … Where there are temples, with the spirit of revelation resting upon those who administer therein, there the Lord’s people will be found; where these are not, the Church and kingdom and the truth of heaven are not” (Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. [1966], 781). Now he's talking about people with penises, er... Priesthood. Well who cares what Bruce is talking about considering all the things he's said that sound a lot like bullshit. I'm pretty sure we don't need to listen to him. He was never the prophet anyway.

Those Who Attend the Temple Worthily Are Promised Great Blessings

The temple, or the house of the Lord, is the place where we go to prepare for exaltation in the celestial kingdom. Right, going out into the world healing the sick and feeding the hungry is horrible preparation. YOU NEED THE ROBES AND HANDSHAKES! There we learn more about Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. That's debatable. You just learn a couple extra names. We make covenants with Them, and They promise wonderful blessings to us. What "wonderful blessings"? Do tell.

In the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord has described some of the blessings that come to those who attend the temple and live worthy of the covenants made there. Some of these blessings are described in section 109, which is the prayer offered at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. A prayer to God describes the blessings God will give us? Aren't prayers what we ask for and not necessarily what God will give us? The words of this prayer were given to Joseph Smith by revelation. Joseph, this is Almighty God. Here's what you need to say to me. I know it's weird I just need to hear it in your charming voice...

President Howard W. Hunter said that this prayer “continues to be answered upon us individually, upon us as families, and upon us as a people because of the priesthood power the Lord has given us to use in His holy temples” (“The Great Symbol of Our Membership,” Ensign, Oct. 1994, 4). If Howard said so it must be true!

President Hunter then quoted some of the verses from section 109. Ask the class members to read these verses: Doctrine and Covenants 109:10–12, 22–23, 59, 67, 72, 75. Ask them to look for the blessings mentioned by the Lord.

Following the reading, ask the class members to list the blessings they have identified. Let's just skip to where you these blessings are listed below... Write the comments on the chalkboard. The blessings mentioned may include the following:

1. The Lord’s glory will be upon His people. Sounds great, but what does this mean? Will we all be shining brighter than the noonday sun? Will our hair be as brilliant white flames? Will we be accompanied by hosts of angels singing our praises? What?
   
2. The Lord’s servants will leave the temple with the Lord’s power, name, and glory, and angels will have charge over them. What power is that? The power to make billions of spirit children? The power to descend from the sky in a pillar of fire and float in the air? What power are we talking about? Who of the endowed LDS community has shown any sign of having these god powers? As for his name, you don't have to go to the temple for it. It's Elohim. I'm still confused about what the "glory" of the Lord is supposed to mean here. What will the angels who have charge over us do? Are these guardian angels? Inspiring angels? Is it even an honor for angels to have charge over a human or is it more like an annoying babysitting duty?
   
3. The Lord’s servants will take the truth of the gospel from the temple to the ends of the earth. This is a blessing for us how? We've already got our new secret name, special secret underwear and know the True Order of Prayer. We're good to go. Isn't preaching to others more of a blessing to those "others" and not us?
   
4. Stakes will be organized so that the Lord’s people may be gathered. I can see how this is sort of a blessing. Having a supportive community definitely benefits our psychological health. That said, I can't see how going to the temple produces this blessing. You can't get a temple before you have a few stakes set up first, so what really produces the stake is getting people to come to church regularly in the first place and getting them to pay their tithing. Once the people are there and the money's in, you just might get a temple. The cause and effect here are backwards.
   
5. All of scattered Israel will learn the truth and rejoice. "Scattered Israel"? Oh please. The LDS Church has not been at all effective in finding scattered Israel. We're still adopting everyone into the tribe of Ephraim. The Church isn't very good about sharing the truth either. They only just opened up about one of Joseph's favorite magic peep stones. It took them 180 years to reveal that truth to the world.
   
6. The families of the Saints and all of their sick and afflicted will be remembered before the Lord. Remembered by not healed or succored. Notice that the rate of illness and recovery  for LDS people are comparable their neighbors' with similar diets and lifestyles.
   
7. The Lord’s kingdom will fill the whole earth. We talking about a temporal or spiritual kingdom? Does fill mean there are no gaps or does it mean you'll find a Mormon within a 500 mile radius regardless of where you drop a pin on the map (oceans excluded, of course)? So far the LDS Church does not own the whole world (just Utah and 2% of Florida) and only makes up about .2% of the earth's population. Looks like we had all better go to the temple a lot more!
   
8. The Lord’s servants will someday be caught up to meet the Lord and will be with Him forever. Ah yes, the rapture and the resurrection of the dead. That will be one disgusting and terrifying event of carrion and carnage. God can hardly wait.By the way, why didn't God have Joseph pray for the blessing of eternal families? Isn't that the kicker for Mormons these days?
   

“Yea, and my presence shall be [in my house], for I will come into it, and all the pure in heart that shall come into it shall see God” (D&C 97:16). I've never known anyone in all my life who has ever professed to have seen God in the temple, only a couple batty old women who claim they saw the spirit of some deceased person show up to thank them. I think this is a wonderful time to go back and listen to Tom Philips' description of his second anointing. It might also be a fine time to read what Dallin Oaks has to say about trying to be worthy of seeing Jesus.

• How do you feel when you consider these wonderful blessings promised to those who attend the temple worthily and honor their covenants? I feel like someone's trying to pull the wool over my eyes. I do. I feel like this is the typical sort of motivation to get all us jackasses chasing a carrot they'll never catch. I feel pleased with myself for no longer attending the temple. But let's keep in mind that feelings or just feelings.

President Howard W. Hunter said: “Has there ever been a people with such stirring and wonderful promises! Yes. No wonder the Lord desires that His followers point themselves toward His example and toward His temples” (Ensign, Oct. 1994, 5). Non sequitur.

The Lord also made promises connected with temples in Doctrine and Covenants 97. Ask the class members to read Doctrine and Covenants 97:15–21.

• What do verses 15–17 teach about what the Lord’s people must do to qualify for the Lord’s blessings in His temples? (Be pure in heart and not allow any unclean thing to come into the temples.) God wants to give you lots of shit but only if you've washed your hands. He hates putting shit in dirty hands, it takes the fun out of it.

Explain that those who are pure in heart are called Zion. Verses 15–21 teach that we can help to build Zion by worthily attending the temple and striving to be pure in heart and undefiled by evil. The part that especially helps build Zion is your tithing. Pay your tithing and give generous donations to the Church. God likes it like that. And stop kissing Satan's asshole! God hates that.

• What blessings are promised in these verses to a people worthy to be called Zion? They'll see the Lord grab a soda from the temple kitchen fridge or maybe catch him sneak from the bathroom to his bedroom post shower.

Explain that a city named Zion existed in ancient times. No it didn't. Joseph made it up for his completely bullshit "inspired translation" of the Bible. This city was built by the prophet Enoch and his people. It was taken to heaven because of the righteousness of its people (see D&C 38:4; Moses 7:18–21, 69). Beamed straight up into the anus of heaven!

Zion will also exist in the latter days. As a U.S. national park in southern Utah. In the tenth article of faith, the Lord promises that a city named Zion will be built on the American continent. In Missouri, right? Or is this what the Church has in mind in Florida? Ask the class members to read this article of faith. Explain that the scattered people of Israel will gather to this great city (see D&C 103:11–13). We just have to figure out who and where they are.

Today, the members of the Church are counseled to become worthy to attend the holy temple and to build up Zion wherever they are living in the world. How will that work? Will they all migrate to Zion, America with their various chunks of the city and fit them all together like a giant puzzle or something? Or do you mean that members everywhere need to learn how to be pure in heart so they can enter Zion after the LDS Church builds it somewhere? We are to make our homes like temples—places of purity, love, and personal revelation. If you're living in a motor home it will probably be easier for you to take your personal Zion to the real, though still undetermined Zion.

• What can we do to become more pure in heart? Sell all we have, give the money to the poor and live humble lives of service to others.
• In what ways does the world sometimes make it hard to remain pure in heart? The world presents us with endless opportunities to buy more and more cool shit and even more stuff that will isn't so cool and will definitely end up in the trash within a year or two.
• In what ways could you help your family, branch, or ward to become pure in heart? Encourage them to give up their giant homes, several cars, massive televisions, expensive recreational toys and live like Jesus did. Maybe we could turn our churches into hospitals, homeless shelters, free hostels for travelers or food distribution centers. We should probably stop developing so much land and start designating our properties as wildlife refuges or something.

Explain that those who make and keep temple covenants and strive throughout their lives to become pure in heart are those who can help to build Zion. It sounds like the ultimate temple blessing here is that you'll get to become another brick in the wall of Zion. "You'll be blessed to work for us!" It sounds like a scam.

Conclusion

Bear testimony that those who worthily attend the temple will receive great blessings from the Lord, including the blessings of being a Zion people. You can say anything at all here. Anything at all. Tell the students that because you went to the temple you were able to see an old woman out trying to find her dog, you stopped and helped her find it and now she's taking the discussions. Tell them that you were once worried about your child's health but then one day in the temple you met someone who is an expert at administering essential oils and now, thanks to that expertise, your child is healthy and happy. Tell them that because you go to the temple twice a month, the Church is now building a temple in your old mission area. You really can take any event you want and attribute it to either going or not going to the temple. We must do all that we can to become worthy of these blessings and to become pure in heart. Please reference the so called blessing discussed above. They're not as impressive as they sound.

You may want to show the video presentation “Temples Are for Eternal Covenants.” I repeat, DO NOT show this video (linked above). It is horrible and your students will resent it.

Temple prep - "'We Saw the Lord'"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.

The day of the return of Elijah was a Sunday afternoon, April 3, 1836. A sacrament meeting had been held in the Kirtland Temple. Right, because the concept of the temple was more like a stake center or cathedral, not a Freemason temple. The Prophet described that afternoon in these simple terms:

In the afternoon, I assisted the other Presidents in distributing the Lord’s Supper to the Church, receiving it from the Twelve, whose privilege it was to officiate at the sacred desk this day. After having performed this service to my brethren, I retired to the pulpit, the veils being dropped, and bowed myself, with Oliver Cowdery, in solemn and silent prayer. After rising from prayer, the following vision was opened to both of us. (D&C 110, introduction.)

The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. So this is all imaginary...

We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber. You know where else Joseph saw visions of gold? In a hat.

His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying: This is sounds like one very horrifying acid trip.

I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father. Lord, are you really going to run through all your titles?

Behold, your sins are forgiven you; you are clean before me; therefore, lift up your heads and rejoice. Yay!

Let the hearts of your brethren rejoice, and let the hearts of all my people rejoice, who have, with their might, built this house to my name.

For behold, I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house. You're not pissed that they didn't built it by a beach or a lakeside resort, Lord? There's not even a patio for your sun chair.

Yea, I will appear unto my servants, and speak unto them with mine own voice, if my people will keep my commandments, and do not pollute this holy house. Is this where Mormons get the misguided idea that the prophet sees and hears the Lord? Who was the last prophet who said he saw Jesus in the temple?

Yea the hearts of thousands and tens of thousands shall greatly rejoice in consequence of the blessings which shall be poured out, and the endowment with which my servants have been endowed in this house. Tens of thousands? Proportionally to the world's population, that not very impressive.

And the fame of this house shall spread to foreign lands; and this is the beginning of the blessing which shall be poured out upon the heads of my people. Even so. Amen. The fame of the Kirtland temple is known abroad only to members and they have been given a whitewashed and embellished version of its history and meaning.

After this vision closed, the heavens were again opened unto us; and Moses appeared before us, and committed unto us the keys of the gathering of Israel from the four parts of the earth, and the leading of the ten tribes from the land of the north. Ah, yes, the 10 tribes!

After this, Elias appeared, and committed the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, saying that in us and our seed all generations after us should be blessed. The "gospel of Abraham"? Is that the gospel where you circumcise yourself, your sons and all other males in your household?

After this vision had closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us; for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us, and said: WHOA! Hang on a sec. You made a big booboo, Joseph. I think we can safely say you're pulling this vision out of your ass.

Behold, the time has fully come, which was spoken of by the mouth of Malachi—testifying that he [Elijah] should be sent, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come—

To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse—

Therefore, the keys of this dispensation are committed into your hands; and by this ye may know that the great and dreadful day of the Lord is near, even at the doors. (D&C 110:1–16.) I can't wait for the day of the Lord. That's Sunday, right?

I saw Jesus in the temple. He was so beautiful.

It had happened! This signal event went unheeded by the world, but it would influence the destiny of every soul who has ever lived or will live. In the words of Ken Ham, WERE YOU THERE? How do you know this happened? The story appears grossly fabricated. Things began quietly to happen. What things?! The Church became a temple-building church. The Church is definitely not quiet about its temple building! It is very quiet about how the purpose of temples has drastically changed and even quieter about how the ordinances continue to change today.

In the world there emerged here and there, in a way thought to be spontaneous, people and organizations and societies interested in tracing genealogies. This happened thanks to John Farmer's efforts in the more heavily populated New England area throughout the 1820s, not Joseph Smith receiving "keys" in on of America's sparsely populated frontier towns in the mid-1830s. This has all taken place since the appearance of Elijah in the Kirtland Temple. Or do you mean Elias? Please reread my comments above.

From that very day, April 3, 1836, the hearts of the children began to turn to their fathers. Before that, all children hated their fathers and never thought of them, especially not to help them. Thereafter ordinances were not tentative, but permanent. Baptism was tentative before 1836? Ordination to the Priesthood was tentative!! Are you serious? The sealing power was with us. Rest easy, kids, this highly suspicious story Joseph Smith told means we've got the most powerful magic of any religion. You're in the right place! No authorization transcends it in value. So never ever under any circumstance take seriously what other religions say they have to offer. That power gives substance and eternal permanence to all ordinances performed with proper authority for both the living and the dead. You'll feel it, brothers and sisters. It will feel low key. Almost anticlimactic. Kind of like the awesomeness of it all was in what was said, not so much in what was done and what happened afterward. What I'm saying is don't expect to see the Lord or anything amazing like that. Keep your expectations to a minimum.

Boyd Packer criticized

I have to admit, Boyd was committed. He spent 45 years as an apostle of the LDS Church, and don't think that the majority of the other 45 weren't spent serving the Church. He fought hard for the absurd. He probably even believed it.

Unfortunately for Boyd and his family, what he will be remembered for is all the bullshit he said. No, I'm not talking about all the times he bore his testimony of Jesus as the Savior or Satan as the Enemy, but we should careful not to give too much credit to that drivel either. What I'm talking about are his tirades against masturbation, homosexuality, feminism, objective history and intellectual pursuits.

The man wanted to suppress sexuality, women, historical facts and knowledge of the real world. What kind of deranged man claims to stand for truth and then discourages anyone from making  hard, honest inquiries into the motivations behind human behavior, ways to advance social justice, gaining a clearer understanding of our past, and trying to better understand how the world works in general?

He was a very loud Mormon voice on the wrong side of just about everything, and neither memory or history is kind to voices like that.

I believe the world is a slightly better place without Boyd K. Packer. I know that's not an especially kind thing to say. I know his family will miss him dearly. But while the vast majority of the world's population won't even realize he's gone, a whole lot of us - believers and non - will be crossing our fingers that the apostle who takes his place will not be so arrogant and dogmatic as Boyd was.

The Nauvoo Expositor

Here are a couple of very interesting facts about the whole Nauvoo Expositor fiasco.

1. The 15 resolutions the Expositor made against Joseph Smith were true. In fact, it's very difficult to find the "vicious lies" Joseph accused it of spreading.

2. Joseph Smith's order to destroy the Expositor printing press was a clear violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution - you know, the one guaranteeing the freedom of speech and of the press? That one. In other words, what Joseph and his followers did was strictly criminal (as was their practice of polygamy, by the way).

How are members supposed to justify Joseph's behavior? Where is God in all of this? What if I seriously doubt God had anything to do with any of this whole affair?

Exorcisms

The first miracle of Joseph Smith's new church was an exorcism. Now not all latter-day saints know what to make of exorcisms, but it's definitely a recognized practice in the New Testament, The Book of Mormon and elsewhere.

If you've heard the story of how Joseph cast a devil out of Newel Knight, there's a good chance it sounded pretty straight forward. The LDS Church, as it just so happens, likes to present its history in a clean, easy to swallow format fit for children - even if its for adults.

I, however, suggest we look at a more complete version of this miraculous exorcism as described by Dan Vogel, who takes into account a number of witness testimonies (emphasis mine).

"... when [Joseph] Smith asked him to pray, Newel begged to be excused. Like his father, he may have considered prayer to be a private matter and found his first attempt at public prayer embarrassing and difficult. Despite Smith's encouragement, Knight insisted on delaying his vocal prayer until morning when he could go into the woods.

"The next day, Knight attempted several times to pray vocally but experienced great difficulty. He began to feel a flood of emotion: anxiety, guilt, confusion, and finally panic. By the time he returned to his house, 'his appearance was such as to alarm his wife very much.' A desperate Newel anxiously asked his wife to bring Smith to him. 'I went and found him suffering very much in his mind,' Smith recalled, 'and his body acted upon in a most strange manner. His visage and limbs [were] distorted and twisted into every possible shape and appearances, and finally he was caught up off the floor of the apartment and tossed about most fearfully.' ...

"... Knight was unable to speak during his convulsions, for Smith reports that when he took hold of Knight's hand, 'almost immediately he was able to speak.'
"... Newel earnestly requested Joseph to cast the devil out of him. In front of eight or nine people who had gathered to witness the scene, Joseph said, 'If you know that I can, it shall be done.' Then Joseph rebuked the devil, commanding it 'in the name of Jesus Christ' to depart from Newell, upon which the latter 'saw the Devil leave him and vanish from his sight.'

Newel recalls levitating at this point:

"I felt myself attracted upward and remained for some time enwrapped in contemplation insomuch that I know not what was going on in the room. By and by I felt some weight pressing upon my shoulder and the side of my head; which served to recall me to a sense of my situation, and I found that the Spirit of the Lord had actually caught me up off the floor, and that my shoulder and head were pressing against the beams."

"... When Smith is brought to trial in South Bainbridge and Colesville in July 1830, Knight testifies that Smith had cast the devil out of him, but is evasive when asked to describe what the devil looked like. ... Apparently, he was less evasive in his home town, for Joel K. Noble, who presided over the trial in Colesville, remembered that Knight 'swore in open court [that] Jo. Smith cast a devil out of him ... and said how [the] devil looked. Said devil was a body of light..."

 "So I just cast it the fuck out right then and there! Easy!"

"... others remembered that Knight gave additional details. In the earliest account of the incident, [Martin] Harris said to Abner Cole in June 1830 that the devil, whom Smith had cast out of Newel, was of 'an uncommon size.' According to a later source, Joseph Knight Sr. and Josiah Stowell testified that they had seen the devil as well. Once testified that he saw 'a devil as large as a woodchuck leave the man and run across the floor,' while the other said he saw the devil leave the possessed and 'run off like a yellow dog.' neither witness said that Knight specifically described the devil's appearance, only that he had given an approximation of its size. This was confirmed by William R. Hine, a resident of Colesville, who said that Knight's testimony before Justice Noble was that 'Smith had cast three devils out of him. ... The first was as large as a woodchuck, the second was large as a squirrel, the third about the size of a rat.' When the judge asked what became of them, 'Knight said that they went out at the chimney.'" Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, pp. 496-98.

Demon woodchucks and their pals? I fucking hate them. Floating on the ceiling in ecstasy? Fucking love it. Thoughts on whether this miracle is legit? I think I'll go eat some ice cream.

Persauding men to do good

Even though there is zero evidence for the veracity of The Book of Mormon, could it still be true?

"To those in the last days who might reject the Book of Mormon, God through Moroni warns that they shall be 'accursed' (4:8). Conversely, anyone who wants to know the truth of the book is promised that 'because of my Spirit he shall know that these things are true; for it persuadeth men to do good. And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me; for good cometh of none save it be of me. I am the same that leaded men to all good' (4:11-12). In other words, since all good comes from God, and the Book of Mormon tries to persuade humankind to be righteous, it follows that the Book of Mormon is true, independent of its historicity. This statement, together with a similar one in Moroni 7, provides a glimpse into Smith's psyche, particularly the manner by which he might rationalized the use of deception. Although he felt inspired as he dictated the text, he would have known that there weren't any gold plates, and hence, no Nephites and no Jaredites. Still, he was dictating spiritual truths despite the absence of historical authenticity." Dan Vogel, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, pg. 348

The Nephites' Book of Mormon

We're lucky to live in a day and age when Heavenly Father has bestowed on us The Book of Mormon. There are so many unbelievable stories in there! One of the most incredible parts is that in this book about the colonization of the Americas by Jews contains within it a book about a previous colonization of the Americas by possible descendents of Ham (Noah's son) following the Tower of Babel. It's basically a Book of Mormon-like record for the people who then wrote the record that became The Book of Mormon. A Book of Mormon within a Book of Mormon, and it's called the Book of Ether! So cool.

Here's Dan Vogel on just how unbelievable the Book of Ether is:

"Moroni tells readers that he has abridged 'the twenty and four plates which were found by the people of Limhi, which is called the Book of Ether' (Ether 1:2; cf. Mosiah 8:9; 28:17-19). The book is named after the last prophet of the Jaredites, Ether, who like Moroni witnesses his people's war of total annihilation. In fact, the parallels between the two stories are so striking, down to the last battle occurring at the same hill, that Mormon writer B. H. Roberts wondered: 'is all this sober history? ... Or is it a wonder-tale of an immature mind, unconscious of what a test he is laying on human credulity?' It is puzzling why Smith would add a repetitive story to the the Book of Mormon, but it does emphasize the overall theme of his work, which is that Americans must repent or be destroyed." Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, pg. 340.

Totally far out prophetic shit! Love it!

Prosperity

If there is one reoccurring lesson in The Book of Mormon it's probably that "inasmuch as ye keep the commandments of God ye shall prosper" (1 Ne. 2:20; 4:14; 13:15, 20; 2 Ne. 1:9, 20; 4:4; Omni 1:6; Mos. 1:7, 17; 2:22, 31, 36; 7:29; 25:24; 26:37; 27:7; Alma 9:13, 22-23; 36:1, 30; 37:13, 43; 38:1; 45:8; 48:15, 25; 50:18-20; Hel. 12:1-2; 3 Ne. 5:22) or, in other words, if you do what God wants you to do he'll bless you with wealth and lots of kids. (Congratulations, God loves you!) In fact, the entire book is about two groups who were both righteous enough to be blessed with life in the Americas only to fall from grace and get wipe out almost completely by the will of God. The Book of Mormon exists to bolster the idea that God gives you health and wealth if you behave.

Take a look at how the Jaredites and Lehites "prosper", "multiply" and "wax" (often "exceedingly") every few chapters (2 Ne. 5:11, 13; Jar. 1:8; Mos. 2:2; 9:9; 10:5; 21:16; 23:19-20; Alma 1:31; 50:18-20; 62:48, 51; Hel. 3:8, 20; 4:13, 15; 6:12; 11:20; 3 Ne. 6:4-5; 4 Ne. 1:4, 10, 18, 23, 28; Eth. 6:18; 7:26; 9:16; 10:16, 28), but they're also always becoming prideful and "waxing in iniquity". That's when God has to smite them down (by the tens of thousands) to make them humble again so they follow the commandments again so God can bless them with riches again so they can get prideful again, etc. (You'd think God would catch on after a while, wouldn't you?) Within the LDS Church this cyclical narrative within The Book of Mormon is known as the Pride Cycle. I would dare say that the majority of believing Mormons are very familiar with the concept though few have probably lived the cycle, but it's supposed to be one of the greatest and clearest warnings in Mormon scripture.

Outside of Mormonism this kind of relationship with God is called the Prosperity Gospel and it was very popular with the Puritans who colonized New England.

Lucy Mack, Joseph Smith's mother, had a strong Puritan leaning, so in addition to growing up surrounded by New England's general culture of discussing and believing in the Prosperity Gospel Joseph had an earful of it at home.

His other ear was full of his father's Universalist tendencies and his grandfather's adherence to Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason. Predictably enough Universalism and rational skepticism are also extremely prominent in The Book of Mormon (though always as opponents of truth).

It's almost as though The Book of Mormon was written specifically for Joseph Smith's father and family members...

Could Joseph Smith have written The Book of Mormon? I mean, it just happens to be full of the very religious education he received at home! Let's hope he didn't, though. It would be extremely inconvenient for our testimony of The Book of Mormon. Maybe we shouldn't think about it too much after all.