Back to you, Dieter

Dear Dieter,

Two years ago I started this blog because you recycled a mind-numbingly stupid slogan about how we needed to be aggressively critical towards our doubts instead of towards our faith. It's a slogan that suggests we should engage in self-censorship by turning a blind eye to unfavorable information. You suggest that ignorance is better than honesty. The fact is it's not.

In one of your talks earlier this month, you repackage the story of Daniel ("and other young students in Israel") in Babylon like it's the story of a young, enthusiastic Mormon headed off to a liberal university where he must resist the peer pressure to adopt the philosophies of man. "But Daniel believed. Daniel did not doubt." It's a clever move. It's also a very misleading juxtaposition. To suggest that today's higher education systems throughout the world are comparable to the vicious theocracy of King Nebuchadnezzar in which nonconformists are burned alive is, in a word, bizarre. Seriously, the Babylonian "team of scholars" (the Bible says "magicians and astrologers") has nothing to do with thousands upon thousands of highly trained researchers across the world who endlessly critique each other's work. Daniel, the Israelite captive carried off to be indoctrinated probably has more in common with young LDS missionaries than college students being pressured to binge drink with their fraternities and sororities.

Just think about it. I am, Dieter, and I think your analogy sucks. How much easier would it have been for Daniel to simply go along with the ways of Babylon? I don't know. I imagine he would have faced some pressure from his fellow Isrealites in captivity and I can't imagine how attractive the Babylonian belief system would have been, if at all. Please don't think that replacing one's belief system is easy. When a belief system is not yours, you're mostly likely going to think it's obviously ridiculous. He could have set aside the restrictive code of conduct God had given the children of Israel. He could have feasted on the rich foods provided by the king and indulged in the worldly pleasures of the natural man. Think of all the vile bacon he could have been eating! He would have avoided ridicule. I didn't see where in the book of Daniel it mentions ridicule. Can I get a verse on that?

He would have been popular. WTF? He was the prince of the eunuch's favorite and one of Nebuchadnezzar's top four councilors.

He would have fit in. Poor kid. At least the totalitarian king loved him. :S

His path might have been much less complicated. Had he just drank the Kool-aid, er... wine...

As silly as your talk is up to this point, it's outdone in the next section where you blame it all on Satan and shame people who are skeptical or have doubts.

Satan, our adversary, wants us to fail. Satan is an early Christian invention, not an actual spirit being. He spreads lies as part of his effort to destroy our belief. What lies? That Joseph Smith had a history of making shit up to get money out of people starting from his early teens? That he plagiarized and falsified rather than actually translate? That he cheated on his wife many, many times and tried to exonerate himself with a fabricated revelation? He slyly suggests that the doubter, the skeptic, the cynic is sophisticated and intelligent, while those who have faith in God and His miracles are naive, blind, or brainwashed. No, that's not Satan, that's logic. Satan will advocate that it is cool to doubt spiritual gifts and the teachings of true prophets. No one's doubting because it's "cool", you asshole! People doubt because they see various inconsistencies in the theory of spiritual gifts and the teachings of those claiming to be prophets. Most of us don't go hunting for them; they arise naturally throughout the years of indoctrination. Right now you sound like the type of person who would claim fossils were put on earth by Satan to deceive us.

And now for the token quote from this train wreck of a prophetic message - the part where you call doubters ignoble, unimpressive, lazy, morally weak, disloyal and cowardly.

Brethren, let me be clear: there is nothing noble or impressive about being cynical. Skepticism is easy—anyone can do it. It is the faithful life that requires moral strength, dedication, and courage. Those who hold fast to faith are far more impressive than those who give in to doubt when mysterious questions or concerns arise.

Who the fuck do you think you're fooling? First off, don't conflated cynicism for skepticism. Now let me show you the other side:
  
Following your family, your friends and your community in their beliefs is easy. It's great having everyone around you be in constant agreement because they think like you do. It's very hard when you don't share the beliefs of your community and you live your life as an outsider. Your kids might even have a hard time finding friends whose parents will let them come over to play. But it is the sincere life of inquiry and careful judgement that requires moral strength, dedication and courage! Those who hold fast to integrity of thought and open-mindedness are far more impressive than those who allow their family or the geographical location in which they were born to provide a prepared set of default answers to questions or concerns about your worldview.

You end your talk with the horrible idea that we simply choose to believe because somehow that will make all the absurdities of the LDS history and doctrine magically disappear. You're asking us to shut off our brains, to stop thinking. Most people can't do this. Most people will struggle silently with cognitive dissonance, will wear out their knees praying for answers, will hate themselves for not understanding and not getting any divine enlightenment. Others will have the courage and good sense to accept the reality of life on earth and walk away from the Church.

Dieter, you should be ashamed of yourself. Your talk will hurt thousands of people who are struggling to make Mormonism work somehow. My only consolation is that the only reason you gave this talk in the first place is because so many people are leaving the Church. You're desperate. You can't defend the Church with facts, so you attack the people who have seen the facts. How cowardly of you.

Temple prep - Endowed from on High "Introduction"

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

Purpose

This course of instruction is designed to help members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints prepare to receive temple recommends and attend the temple. Members who have previously attended the temple may also take the class to learn more about the temple. That is quite a promise. I learned so little about the temple in regular classes and meetings that I can't imagine this course can possibly offer any surprises for someone who's already been through.

Participants

Participants in this course should desire to go to the temple and be worthy of a temple recommend. If they have not yet received a recommend, they should be preparing to receive one.

If participants have not yet taken a Sunday School class that discusses the Gospel Principles manual, it is recommended, but not required, that they do so before taking this course. Before taking this course, they should have a reasonable understanding of basic gospel doctrines and principles and a willingness to obey the commandments of God, such as the law of chastity, keeping the Sabbath day holy, the Word of Wisdom, and the law of tithing. I grew up "in the Covenant" so I had all this information many times over before going through. Worthiness and striving for personal righteousness are necessary for participation in temple ordinances.

Each participant should receive a personal invitation to attend the class from the bishop or branch president or another Melchizedek Priesthood leader in the ward or branch. Put some direct pressure on the kids. It gets results.

Time and Place

The classes for this course may vary in size, but they should usually be taught in small groups on the ward or branch level. Classes may be taught at the meetinghouse or in a home. The place, time, and frequency of the instruction should be convenient for the participants and the instructor.

The material is divided into seven lessons. However, instructors should spend as much time as the class members need on each lesson. This may require more than one time period for each lesson. This is very wise instruction. Take a lot of time with your temple preparation. Research it thoroughly and ask lots of questions.

Class Materials

Each class member should have access to the scriptures in class. Why? The scriptures don't discuss the modern Mormon temple in much detail at all. Each person should also have access to a copy of the booklet Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple, which is the student supplement for this course. It is frequently referred to throughout the lessons, and class members should be asked to read it during the weeks the course is presented. Drop the booklet, it's awful. Consider instead providing everyone with the script used for the endowment.

Instructors

Individuals or married couples may be called to teach this course. Instructors should have strong testimonies of the gospel and be sensitive to the promptings of the Spirit. Unfortunately, without the power of discernment (which no one seems to have), you won't really know who's testimony you can trust and there's no way to measure the spirit. Look instead for someone with a reassuring voice and enough charisma to command attention. They should be endowed members who have current temple recommends and who understand the importance and sacredness of what transpires in the temple. You'll know you've got the right guy if when asked how important and sacred the temple is he responds with "Very! Yeah, even crucial!"

When possible, the instructors should accompany the participants to the temple when the participants receive their temple ordinances. So he or she can see feel deeply shamed for the embarrassment he's put the poor students through.

Suggestions for the Instructor

Before Church members enter the temple, they should be spiritually ready. Ready to check in their brains and accept whatever happens as divinely inspired. As part of this preparation, they should have sufficient understanding of the doctrines relating to the plan of salvation and temple work. That shouldn't be hard because it's so simple. It's so simple in fact that you can't think about it for too long before it falls apart. You have the privilege of helping others in this preparation, leading to one of the most sacred experiences of their lives. Or most spiritually devastating. You can never know for sure. Many of my friends, including current believers, have shared with me that they thought they had joined a cult their first time through. Be sensitive to the promptings of the Spirit so that you can present the lesson material in a way that is best for the participants. Because the way the manual presents it isn't inspired by the Spirit? Remember the Lord’s counsel: “The Spirit shall be given unto you by the prayer of faith; and if ye receive not the Spirit ye shall not teach” (D&C 42:14). No one obeys this scripture. The number of uninspired lessons I've sat through in church are proof of that, as is the fact that no one has ever stepped down from the front of the classroom because he or she didn't feel inspired that day.

Read this manual from beginning to end before the first lesson so you will understand how the material fits together. Prepare each lesson well in advance so that you will understand the ideas and be able to present them well. This is good advise when teaching any subject. Know your curriculum! As you teach the lessons, be sure that participants fully understand the ideas before moving on. How are we to establish a sure knowledge of their understanding? Do not hurry through the lessons. Be patient and allow participants to think through the messages and respond to them. Yes, because they won't be see many opportunities to ask difficult questions during the ceremonies.

Before each lesson and at any time during the lessons, provide opportunities for class members to ask questions and discuss ideas. Just hope and pray no one's thought about anything too hard or *gasp* gone to the internet for information. Help them to apply the principles they learn in their lives. By following them all home and babysitting them for a few hours. We don't want these kids stepping out of line and doing something evil like masturbating on us now, do we? Answer questions by using the scriptures, the teachings of the latter-day prophets, and the guidance of the Spirit of the Lord. The Spirit says disclose all. Hide nothing. Be explicit. No secrets.

Throughout this course, remember the sacred nature of temple ordinances. No laughing loudly should be permitted during these lessons. You promised! As explained in the following statement, some aspects of temple work are not to be discussed outside the temple:

“We do not discuss the temple ordinances outside the temples. No one discusses the temple in the temple either. Fortunately plenty of people feel free to talk about it online. It was never intended that knowledge of these temple ceremonies would be limited to a select few who would be obliged to ensure that others never learn of them. It is quite the opposite, in fact. With great effort we urge every soul to qualify and prepare for the temple experience. … Riiiiiight, Mormons are just the gatekeepers who sit and unrighteously judge others to be unworthy.

“The ordinances and ceremonies of the temple are simple. They're Masonic and designed to test one's memory. They are beautiful. Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. Some see the ugliness of sexism in them. They are sacred. Not to the vast majority of people living on earth... They are kept confidential lest they be given to those who are unprepared” No, they're kept confidential because that's the tradition of the Masonic fraternity they come from. (Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple, 2).

Work to strengthen your own testimony of the temple, and testify to your class often about the truth of the principles you teach. This sounds familiar. Also provide opportunities for the class members to bear their testimonies as appropriate. How can these kids bear their testimony of the temple when they don't and won't understand it? Teach them everything about the temple. At least as much as you know. Don't pull this "sacred, not secret" bullshit on them.

Always remember the vital importance of temple work. Isn't the right word "crucial"? Packer preferred "crucial". Elder Boyd K. Packer said: “Ordinances and covenants become our credentials for admission into His presence. Right! Baptism by water and by fire, and participation in the Lord's supper. To worthily receive them is the quest of a lifetime; to keep them thereafter is the challenge of mortality” Yes, it's a challenge in that you'll never really know for sure if you on track or just part of a scam. (in Conference Report, Apr. 1987, 27; or Ensign, May 1987, 24).

Temple prep - "Toward the Veil"

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

We must gain some feeling for why we build temples, and why the ordinances are required of us. Feeling, not knowledge. Feelings are more reliable. Thereafter we are continually instructed and enlightened on matters of spiritual importance. We're only continually enlightened if we continually have the same banal questions. Anything more requires something a little more dialectic than what the temple offers (a set script). Students don't learn from a teacher who gives the exact same lesson every day of the year and never stops the lesson to see if the students have questions. It comes line upon line, precept upon precept, until we gain a fullness of light and knowledge. People, there are no additional lines beyond what is included in the script. You're required to fill in all the gaps but no one will ever check your work to make sure you've filled things in correctly. Your conclusions about the meaning of the temple are likely to be extremely idiosyncratic and significantly different from other members. This becomes a great protection to us—to each of us personally. Personally, yes, because you always feel you're right, but certainly not collectively. Can you imagine the kinds of heated arguments that would ensue if members actually had to discuss their long researched (through feelings only) temple epiphanies? We would eat each other alive in a giant feeding fest of heartfelt disagreement. It is a protection also for the Church. Most definitely! If members actually talked about the temple openly the emperor's nakedness would be plain for all to see.

No work is more of a protection to this Church than temple work and the genealogical research which supports it. What? How does genealogical work protect the Church? By giving it a research organ that actually does credible work unlike the moronic apologists over at BYU and FAIR? No work is more spiritually refining. Whatever that means. I would think that Jesus would argue for exercising charity. No work we do gives us more power. Man, you're power hungry to say the least! You keep going off about all the power the temple gives you. Relax. Accept that you're a mortal like the rest of us. No work requires a higher standard of righteousness. Keep fanning our self-righteous ego! It feels so good!

Our labors in the temple cover us with a shield and a protection, both individually and as a people. You've already explained that the individual shield is a layer of cotton-poly blend, but what's this collective shield? A host of angels? A bubble like force field? A veil of ignorance?

It is in the ordinances of the temple that we are placed under covenant to Him—it is there we become the covenant people. Because baptism by water and the Holy Spirit aren't covenants with God? What about the sacrament? Who is that covenant with?

If we will accept the revelation concerning temple ordinance work, if we will enter into our covenants without reservation or apology, the Lord will protect us. Protect us from what? What the hell are you talking about? We will receive inspiration sufficient for the challenges of life. That sounds like minimal inspiration, which is definitely what I got during my years of activity.

The work relating to the temples is true. Huh? What does that even mean? It was revealed from beyond the veil and revelation continues. Which veil, the temple veil or the veil of forgetfulness? If you mean the temple veil you should know the 5 points of contact and all that came from Freemasons, not God. If you mean the veil of forgetfulness, you're going to have to explain a few things like how the hell Elijah and Elias were different people and why anyone should consider plural marriage a divine and holy practice.

Revelation may come to each member of the Church individually concerning temple work. It has to because the Church won't teach about it anywhere in any depth or detail. May we all take the initiative and do a few Internet searches about the temple in our quest for understanding.

So come to the temple—come and claim your blessings. They're the unspecific blessings we'll work the whole rest of our lives trying to identify. It is a sacred work. It is what you want it to be, I guess. I actually dared to want something otherworldly and beautiful. What I got was human and mundane. I doubted my doubts, but I could only delude myself for so long before letting it go.

Temple prep - New Era "Feeling the Spirit more Abundantly"

Ashley Tuft, 20, Texas, USA

Before I went through the temple, I didn’t know exactly what to expect. Because no one tells you. It's secret. I read the booklet Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple and took a temple preparation class. Neither of which told you jack shit because the temple is too secret. That helped me be more prepared for receiving my own endowment. I can't imagine how. It certainly doesn't tell you what to expect. When I went to the temple for the first time, I was not nervous like I thought I would be, because I felt peace. I had the opposite experience. I went in confident and became increasingly nervous and humiliated as the charade of madness progressed. The temple workers were all very friendly and made sure I knew where to go the whole time I was at the temple. Friendly, yes, but they only tell you what you have to do as you have to do it.

During the endowment, I made covenants with my Father in Heaven and in return was promised many beautiful blessings and gifts of knowledge. Beautifully vague promises (it makes it easier for you to "discover" them later on). Like other ordinances, including baptism, the endowment ordinance is very symbolic. Mormon symbolism is the most profound. Before I went through the endowment session, a temple worker told me that I may have many questions by the end of the session. Did you? What were they? Because there are so many symbols, it’s impossible to understand everything at once. That’s why I think it’s so important to return to the temple as often as possible. Polly want a cracker? Did anyone explain the symbolism during the subsequent visits? Did you have a nice detailed talk about Freemasonry? No.

Since I’ve been to the temple, I’ve felt the Spirit more abundantly in my life. Feelings are awesome! I’ve felt the words that I heard in the temple sink into my heart, and I know that if I do all that I covenanted with my Heavenly Father to do, then I will be blessed. Aren't they the same things you promised at baptism? This ordinance has helped me understand how much Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ love each individual person, because we are taught in the temple how to be happy. What? We are? You mean by learning how to banish Satan and await "further light and knowledge from Father"? Well, y'know, if it make you happy...

Temple prep - New Era "Making Important Covenants"

Allie Bradford, 20, Utah, USA

I received my mission call in January to the Cape Verde Praia Mission! I’m really excited about my mission, but I was just as excited to be able to go through the temple and receive my endowment. Probably because you had no idea what to expect for either the temple or your mission.

Both my bishop and my stake president reminded me that the temple is not merely a stepping-stone to the mission. Did you need that reminder? I can't imagine why you would. The covenants I make in the temple are literally vital for my salvation; a mission is not. I'm not sure temple covenants are vital. New Testament writers never brought them up and neither did the Jaredites, Mulekites or Lehites. Only Joseph Smith brings them up and only then after he became a Freemason.

I prepared to go to the temple by focusing on my baptismal covenants, reading the booklet Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple, reading my scriptures daily, and praying a lot. Baptismal covenants cover everything, so that's good. The only thing the temple adds are promises of secrecy. The temple prep booklet is worthless. It didn't tell you a damned thing that you didn't already know and neither did what you read in the scriptures or felt when you prayed. To truly prepare for what you'll do, you should have Googled the endowment ceremony or watched it on YouTube. Or both. Then you'd know what you were getting into. I felt like I was about as prepared as I could have been, without actually knowing specifically what was going to happen. That's totally how I felt too! Man, was I wrong.

I feel like I’ve been preparing for my endowment my whole life. You have been. Remember all those Primary songs and that eternal marriage talk? I wasn’t really nervous about it, even though I still didn’t know what to expect. Yes! We have so much in common! I had my parents, other family members, and temple workers escorting me the whole time, so I was never alone. Never alone, yet barely informed of anything.

Before I went to the temple, I got the same advice from a lot of people: Don’t worry about trying to learn or remember it all the first time, don’t stress about the symbolism, and don’t worry if you don’t understand everything; just focus on feeling the Spirit. That what I was told too. Unfortunately I just felt uncomfortable. That’s just what I did, and my first time in the temple was a very good experience. The Spirit was so strong. I guess this is where you and I differ. I felt confused and wondered why no one had properly informed me of what this experience would be like. So who's feelings are most valid, yours or mine?

The things that happen in the temple are different from the way we worship outside the temple. Because they're stolen from the Freemasons and have absolutely nothing to do with Christian worship. But the Spirit is the same, and that’s the most important thing. It didn't feel the same to me! I felt like I was in an entirely different church. When we’re worthy and prepared to be there, we can truly feel God’s presence in His house. Polly want a cracker? I’m so grateful that I’ve been able to receive my endowment and make those important covenants. Your baptismal covenant already covered that shit, yo! I look forward to going back again and again. Totally! Until you get bored out of your mind.

Neil Andersen criticized

For any of you who have ever doubted Joseph Smith because of something you've read online or from uncorrelated material, please read or listen to Neil Andersen's recent Conference talk. His strategy of quoting Joseph Smith about himself, reading a crazy-ass quote from John Taylor and offering up brainwashy methods of "gaining a testimony" should be enough to make you wonder if he's sincerely illogical or carefully hiding something. I can't help but think that his talk will ultimately do more harm to members' testimonies than he could possibly imagine. (And he's showing much love when he categorizes dissenters as Judases.)

Why will it harm members' testimonies? Because, as in the case of the Church's anti-science stance, Neil's argument requires that you reject study (as least anything you study that the Church won't like) and favor ignorance instead. In this case instead of repeating "I don't know" to ourselves we're supposed to repeat Joseph's false history to ourselves until we believe it. A testimony like that can only be protected by plugging your ears and shutting off your critical thinking.

Henry Eyring criticized

I like Henry. He seems like a pretty nice guy, and not because he's the most teary-eyed of the GAs. I only have one criticism specific to him - I wish he'd shut the hell up about his father the Mormon badass chemist.

Note to Henry B:

Henry, listen, you're dad was quite a guy, but here's your problem: you conflate your father's authority in science with his lack of authority with regards to spiritual realities. In other words, just because you're dad was a good scientist and a devout believer doesn't give his belief the same weight of his scientific research. No more of this "Hey, my dad was smart and still believed, so it must be true" bullshit. Listen, you've got a BS in physics and you're a fucking apostle of the big JC. Put it all together for us. Show us how it works in more than a mere 100 pages that essentially say "Embrace the mystery!"

Thank you.
Be well.
Abe

Russell's call to arms

Last month our dearly beloved apostle of the THE LORD JESUS CHRIST gave an impassioned commencement speech at Brigham Young University. It was pretty awesome and really hard to improve upon, but that doesn't mean there weren't complaints or that it wasn't improved upon.

Humble yourself before the Lord's anointed and learn at his feet, brothers and sisters.

Quick Guide to Continued Belief

This comes from the Internet.

"[T]hose who have been led by the Letter to a CES Director to abandon their faith, should, in my view, reconsider those Mormon claims and the abundant historical support that’s available for them. They simply haven’t studied enough." -Daniel C. Peterson, fairmormon.org. 

Mormonism: a gospel "so simple even a child could understand" but so nuanced only a person with the equivalent of a PhD of study of church history could actually convince themselves was true. But what do I know? I'm just another apostate.

P.S. If you're not following Just Another Apostate on Facebook, you probably should.

10 Bible Facts by Robert Price

Here's a fairly decent podcast featuring Bible scholar Robert Price debunking ten common misunderstandings about the Bible. Enjoy.

In college and doubting?

BYU Magazine has joined the fray when it comes to offering advice on tackling doubts.

Unlike the advice recently offered for teens, this one's actually not all bad. It encourages parents to embrace the doubter, engage in respectful conversation, avoid shutdown language, get educated on the issues causing doubt and admit when they don't know something.

Maybe ignorance on these topics is why parents - and Mormons at large - have developed such strong negative responses to doubting and questioning which has in turn created a culture in which members with doubts often feel isolated.

Professor Rachel Cope (cited in the article) rightly points out that “If parents are fearful of the questions, that could feed the crisis because it implies something’s wrong. If they can’t even go there, their children will assume there must be a real issue. There needs to be less fear and more willingness to talk.”

I'm not going to say there aren't real issues in the LDS Church and its doctrine, but I wholeheartedly agree that "there needs to be less fear and more willingness to talk."

Teenaged and doubting?

The LDS Church has recently released an article for the doubting youth of the Church. It's a beautiful piece reminding kids that if they don't reach the conclusion that the Church is true, then they've been lazy and illogical.

P.S. The annotated version might also be of value.

Chiasmus

Mormon apologists love to bring up the existence of chiasmi in The Book of Mormon as a strong indication that the writing is seeped in Hebrew literary culture. It sounds great. For those of us who want to believe, this is when you pop the champagne cork and get to celebrating the truthfulness of The Book of Mormon.

However, it might not be a bad idea to hold off on celebrating and look at the pervasiveness of chiasmi in other literary works. What are we to make of the fact that, in addition to great authors like Shakespeare, nursery rhimes and children's books also use chiasmi? Finding a chiasmus is always fun, but does it really mean what we want it to mean?

PS. So looking back on what I wrote I found that I had unintentionally created a rather complex chiasmus. The only thing I added was "hold off on celebrating and" to the second paragraph. Check it out.

(A) Mormon apologists  
(B) love to
(C) bring up the existence of chiasmi
(D) in The Book of Mormon as a strong indication that
(E) the writing is seeped in Hebrew literary culture.
(F) It sounds great. For those of us who want to  
(G) believe, this is when  
(H) you pop the champagne cork and get to celebrating 
(I) the truthfulness of The Book of Mormon.

(I) However, it might not be a bad idea
(H) to hold off on celebrating and  
(G) look at the
(E) pervasiveness of chiasmi in other literary works.
(F) What are we to make of the fact that,  
(D) in addition to great authors like Shakespeare, nursery rhimes and children's books also use chiasmi?
(C) Finding a chiasmus is always  
(B) fun, but does it really mean what  
(A) we want it to mean?

As you can see (F) and (E) trade places in the second part, but I have to say I'm kind of proud of myself. I must be an ancient Hebrew at heart. Oh wait, I am! I'm totally the tribe of Ephraim!

Scriptural errors

"And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ." (Title page of The Book of Mormon)

This would be a great "Get out of jail free card" for the ancient writers of The Book of Mormon if the faults and mistakes in their writings were not the same faults and mistakes of the translators of the King James Bible.

The Book of Mormon repeats verbatim the mistranslated words, it often keeps the non-textual words and phrases added by KJT translators, it promotes  misunderstandings of the Bible popular in Joseph Smith's time, and it doesn't even align with the "inspired" corrections of the JST.

To suggest that the Lehite prophets possessed the KJT is absurd. To suggest that God filled Joseph's illuminated translating mind with the texts he was already familiar with instead of giving him the actual translation of the gold plates defeats the purpose of bringing out new and improved scripture.

We need to think about this a little bit. If a student turns in homework with the same mistakes as another student, what is the teacher to think? If Thomas Monson came out tomorrow with a new book of freshly translated ancient scripture from Australia and a large part of it quoted verbatim sections from the Doctrine & Covenants and, say, the Book of Enoch, how would we feel about that?

Isaiah and the Book of Mormon

Deutero-Isaiah (or is this one Trito?) writing about Jesus. 

If the fact that Isaiah was written by more than one person isn't enough to bring on at least a little doubt, consider this fact: anything from Isaiah chapters 40-66 that made it into The Book of Mormon either verbatim, slightly altered, or paraphrased (1 Nephi 10:8, 13:37, 17:36, 20-21, 22:8 & 10-11; 2 Nephi 6:6-7 & 16-18, 7-8, 9:50-51, 10:9, 26:25; Mosiah 12:21-24, 14, 15:10-11 & 14-18 & 29-31; 3 Nephi 16:18-20, 21:8-10 & 29, 22; Moroni 10:31) was written after Lehi & Co. left Jerusalem. So how the hell did they make it onto the brass plates and over to the New World?

You could doubt the authorship of The Book of Mormon at this point if you wanted to. Or you could simply doubt the scholarly understanding that Isaiah was written by multiple authors on into the years following Lehi's departure. After all, we know that The Book of Mormon is true and that "the wisdom of this world is foolishness" (1 Corinthians 3:19).

Problem solved! Except there's still the whole plagiarism thing you have to consider too...

The Bible - Joseph's translation

One of the absolute worst Bible translations out there today is the Joseph Smith Translation (JST), also known as the Inspired Version (IV).

Without any rigorous recourse to ancient texts in ancient languages, Joseph took to correcting the Bible and replacing the truths that had unfortunately (or by the cunning wiles of the Devil) been lost over the centuries. He remixed and deleted based on whatever (spiritual?) whim had taken him, but the real miracle of the project was how much Joseph added. He threw in entire chapters at times.

Some people have asked why we don't use this version of the Bible - myself among them. One would think that a scriptural project commanded by God to his prophet would qualify as canonical, right? God says "Hey, fix the Bible!," Joseph does it, and yet the LDS Church doesn't use it. Very weird.

Some say it's a copyright issue. The Community of Christ owns the copyright, so we can print it. Sucks, right? But just because the Community of Christ owns the copyright doesn't mean LDS Mormons can't buy it, does it? Why does the LDS Church have to own the copyright at all? This is about learning the true content of the Bible, not about which church is making money from scripture sales. Or at least it should be.

FAIR offers up another very interesting reason why we LDS saints can't adopt the JST: it "would be a stumbling block to converts." Too much newness for the new recruits. We wouldn't want to scare them off with the truth! I mean, we can believe Joseph's version is the most badass of the them all, but don't you dare tell any investigators or new converts about it until they're thoroughly convinced they're in The One True Church! It's not dishonest, it's practical.

"Holy shit, this book is awful!"

But isn't it silly that anyone should worry about this at all? The LDS version of the KJV has all sorts of JST footnotes and we even have some made up chapters published in their entirety in The Pearl of Great Price. That should be enough for any good saint. Why would anyone want the complete, unabridged version? People can be so greedy.

Anyway, what we really need is a modern translation of the JST! Something that fixes all the errors Joseph left in... But I doubt we'll get it.

The Bible! The Bible! Who assembled the Bible?

A common pet peeve among Mormons is when someone assumes the Book of Mormon is the Mormon version of the Bible. Fuck's sake, people, "we believe the Bible to be the word of God" (Article of Faith 1:8)! We just have another book of scripture to help straighten things out. See, it's like a pair of glasses - one corrective lens isn't going to be enough to get your vision into focus...

So if Mormons are cool with the extra books found in The Book of Mormon how do Mormons feel about the Apocrypha? Well, quite frankly, Mormons never touch it. Here's what God told Joseph Smith:

"Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you concerning the Apocrypha—There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly; There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men. Verily, I say unto you, that it is not needful that the Apocrypha should be translated. Therefore, whoso readeth it, let him understand, for the Spirit manifesteth truth" (D&C 91:1-4).

In other words, there's too much shit to wade through; don't waste your time. Oh, and don't read the Songs of Solomon either - they're not inspired. Those Old Testament apocrypha are the worst! (But the Book of Judith seems to have inspired the Book of Mormon somehow.) But the New Testament apocryphal gospels are a little trickier. Some of those darn Gnostic gospels actually predate the gospels included in the final cut. It seems as though their exclusion from the Greatest Hits compilation was more a matter of politics than unbiased research.

What if, in addition to pseudopigrypha, there were a huge absence of authentic and essential texts in the Bible? Why aren't the LDS Church and Mormons at large more interested and involved in a revision of the canonical Bible texts? Does corrective power of The Book of Mormon really justify having the wrong prescription in the other lens?

Tongues

Mormons believe in the gift of tongues and the interpretation of tongues (Article of Faith 1:7), but not that crazy speaking in tongues stuff! Well, at least not anymore. That tongues of fire shit was so early 19th century!

This gift of the spirit has really wised up. Today it's all about speaking languages that other people use and live with every day. No more mystical chatter coming to you out of the blue. Now it's about studying vocabulary and grammar and careful memorization of set phrases for prayer or testimony sharing in, say, Spanish or Korean or Twi (and sometimes emoticons).

Never mind the fact that many missionaries return from foreign lands with really shitty language skills. Not everyone enjoys the same gifts. Never mind the fact that world travelers often have stories about being somewhere where they do not speak the language and yet they manage to perfectly and inexplicably experience a moment of clear communication and understanding with a local. The gifts of the Spirit can be enjoyed by all from time to time, like by infants who suddenly start speaking by about two years old. Then, of course, there's everyone else who learns various languages throughout their lives. All of that's through the Spirit.

You might be thinking "hey, the gifts of the Spirit typically come after someone has been given the Gift of the Holy Ghost!" Don't worry about it. All you need to know is that only Finnish babies and Mormon missionaries can learn Finnish, and that relentless study and over a year of living abroad can never produce the kind of gifts of tongues enjoyed by the missionaries. Now do yourself a favor and avoid discussing amazing moments of breaking the language barrier with anyone who's not Mormon.

The Apocalypse - a baptism by fire

In my study of the Bible I learned, thanks to the Church Institute manuals, that one reason why it was so important that the Earth literally be literally baptized by immersion by the Flood was because the Earth needed that ordinance in order to receive the Holy Ghost. This later ordinance would take place just before the Second Coming during the Apocalypse, when the entire Earth would be literally burned with fire and literally purified.

This information was a little hard to swallow for me. Really? The Apocalypse is the Refiner's fire? The entire world needs to burn LITERALLY, NOT SYMBOLICALLY? I swear I had never heard this silliness before in my life. Is it not obvious what a bad idea that would be? All that smoke and ash will be a very serious problem. Besides isn't it going to be bad enough with the Four Horsemen running around? Do we really need a global fire? Mormon's don't really believe this, right? At least not any more, I hope.

The Un-holy Bible

Upon arriving in the mission field I felt very strongly that I needed to actually read the entire Bible before running around saying I believed in it. It didn’t make sense that I should be telling people about how the Book of Mormon complements the Bible without actually having a solid basis for comparison. I have to say deciding to read it all was one of the best decisions I made as a missionary.

I read both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety along with the accompanying Institute manuals. It took a long time. I was constantly flipping back and forth from my “quad” and the manuals underlining and highlighting things whenever inspired to do so.

But I have to admit it was not an entirely edifying experience. As it turns out the Bible is full of insane shit – unbelievable insane shit – bizarre moments that probably shouldn’t be called holy such as the many disturbing deaths and killings, of which Jehovah was often responsible.

One gruesome chapter really got to me; I honestly closed my Bible and walked away for a break. It was the story in Judges 19 of a Levite man who throws his concubine to the men of Gibeah, who gang-rape her to death and leave her on her husband’s doorstep. The husband comes out and tells her to get up and get a move on but she doesn't answer because she's been fucked to death. So he hauls her back home, chops her into twelve chunks and sends them off to the Twelve Tribes. And that ended my scripture study for the day. 

This could possibly be the tamest rendition of this act one could ever hope to create.

I'm not the only one who can figure out why God needed this story in his book. Maybe God just needed to chronicle the evil of this asshole Levite and the sick motherfuckers of Gibeah for whatever reason. Then again, it was Jehovah who approved of having concubines and sex slaves, and it was Jehovah who told the Israelites to quarantine women during their period and women who have recently given birth, and it was Jehovah who had bears maul children to death, and it was Jehovah who told the Israelites to kill Canaanite women and children. Maybe he even told Adam to procreate with his own daughters. The Bible doesn't really say how Adam and Eve started the human race, does it?

Did I believe in this book? Could I honestly argue that all the super weird stuff in the Bible was probably mistranslated or added in by evil and divisive copyists? Absolutely not, so I guess I shouldn't think about it too much. I might nurture my doubts.