I may have a 17 year old relative raised by TBMs checking out this page for the first time today. I told him I couldn't, out of respect to his parents, share with him any of the stuff I have learned about the truth, but if he typed in the words exmormon.org magical things might happen. Maybe not as magical as a good pair of underwear, but magical none the less.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2012 09:32AM by forbiddencokedrinker.

Even when I was a very young child around baptism age I couldn't quite swallow the absence of the golden plates. I had lost my big-wheel bike and created an elaborate story about how it just disapeared. My parents saw right through my obvious lie yet were kind enough to buy me another bike after forcing a confession about what really happened. I knew how to spin a yarn and Joseph's story about the plates just disapearing seemed like a spanking and some time-out was in order.

Book of Abraham and other "translations".

Joe Smith and all the other early church leader's womanizing.

Just too many great hits to choose just one

Any of the faults are wonderful to me, because it proves the church is false so I can keep 10% more of my money and drink coffee without feeling guilty.

Biggest load of horseshit ever.

The whole thing just doesn't hang together.

D&C132 vs Jacob2 is my favorite so far.

One says David/Solomon's plural marriages were fine, the other says they were an abomination.

I like it because it leaves the least wiggle room for any argument I've found so far.

Mormons so frequently say things like:
--God was speaking to different audiences
--Old law vs new law
--Obey the laws of Men instead of God's laws, because of AoF 12
--Spiritual Metaphor/parable vs literal
--etc...

But with this example:
It is the same audience
the same subjects (& same time period- D/S were long dead to both)
the same scenario
...there are no variables

So the mormon has 3 options:
-Lie
-Say I'll think about it (& ignore it forever)
-Accept that 1 scripture or the other is false... and all that that implies

There is actually another explanation used to justify polygamy. It is claimed by apologists that there are two types of polygamy, one is justifiable and one is an abomination:

1. Polygamy commanded by God to "raise up seed unto me," Jacob 2:30, which is considered to be acceptable and good, which is claimed to be the reason that Abraham, David and Solomon were justified. Supposedly they practiced polygamy by command from God in certain instances which was acceptable.
2. Polygamy practiced solely through the desire of the individual, outside the command of God, which is considered to be unacceptable and bad. Supposedly David and Solomon practiced polygamy out side the commands of God in other instances, and it is that conduct that is condemned.

Apologists point to D&C 132 and the claimed revelation from God to Joseph Smith that he and the saints were to practice polygamy, in which case it was God's command, acceptable and good.

The issue goes back to Jacob 2:30 where God says, "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people {to practice polygamy}; otherwise they shall harken unto these things."

Of course, the problem is that D&C 132 was not about raising up seed to God, but about the saints achieving godhood by practicing polygamy. It is also vehemently denied by the church that Joseph Smith fathered any children through his polygamous unions, so he was not engaging in the practice to raise up seed to God. That explanation places him in the category of David and Solomon by the definition provided in Jacob 2:30 and by the claims of apologists in the church, when in fact, Jacob 2:30 and D&C 132 contradict each other.

This is the classic example of "new" revelation cancelling the specifics of "old" revelation, of the "current living prophet" changing the revelations of the "dead prophets" and the "current living prophet" setting aside the foundational book of the restoration of the Mormon gospel even though it was said to be the "most perfect book on earth" and the "fulness of the gospel message."

justrob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> D&C132 vs Jacob2 is my favorite so far.
>
> One says David/Solomon's plural marriages were
> fine, the other says they were an abomination.


I remember feeling like my head exploded when I compared the two scriptures. Then you have so many scriptures saying that God is unchanging and that his laws are eternal, etc. I couldn't make anything mesh anymore.

B-B-But its not a cult, right??????

To me, it was the combination of many things. So many of those things have been mentioned in this thread. But, if I have to pick one, it is the life of Joseph Smith. The fabrications and the reinvention of who he was is just amazing. Lies, lies, lies. Face it, the credibility of JS is the foundation of everything in this church

Book of Abraham is conclusive proof JS was a TOTAL FRAUD. Add in DNA evidence on native Americans, Polyandry, the END.

androidandy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Book of Abraham is conclusive proof JS was a TOTAL
> FRAUD. Add in DNA evidence on native Americans,
> Polyandry, the END.

Totally.

No Nephites, no Lamanites, no Hebrews in America. 'Nuff said!

I had this "burning in my bosom"

The anachronisms, ridiculous, simplistic, and unbelievable story lines, and constant plagiarisms of the Bible.

For me, it's that the historical record proves there were no religious revivals within 50 miles of Palmyra in 1820. The churches showed no increase in baptisms from their normal 8-9 per year each. In years where there were revivals, there were more than 100 baptisms per church. There were no reports in the newspapers in 1820 that there were revivals in the area. No personal writings, letters, diaries have discussed religious activity. Lucy Smith's journal, which was extensive, doesn't mention religious activity OR a first vision in 1820. She does talk about one in 1823.

The point is, if they are lying about the first vision and there is overwhelming proof they ARE lying about the first vision, what else are they lying about? Especially since Gordon B. Hinckley said either the first vision is true or the whole church is a hoax. Well, the first vision isn't true so...

lots of good points already

one thing that gets me is that nobody wrote down the date(s) that the priesthood was restored

come on - angels come down from heaven and nobody could be bothered to take 10 seconds and put it in their journal???

"dear diary, today the angels peter, james and john came for a visit..."

the restoration, like everything else js did, was obviously made up after the fact

Yes, GG, this is a HUGE factoid, since the restoration of the vaunted Mo "priesthood" is their whole claim to authority to restore Christ's gospel, supposedly. So, this one thing is the biggest event in the history of the restoration, if not in all of modern times (if true). But there is no mention of such a heavenly visitation by ancient long-dead and now resurrected apostles of Christ, or of the restored priesthood, for YEARS after it supposedly happened, and no mention in the day's journals, words, church conferences etc..

To me, this is the biggest proof of the fraud, of all. Joe just made it up as he went along, and Oliver and Sydney helped him.

1) Zelph the White Lamanite/ finding the alter (pile of rocks) that Adam made to worship God - shows what an imagination JS had. He could just pull stuff out of the clouds at a moments notice to an eagerly listening crowd. Shows that YES he could have come up with the book of mormon.

2) View of the Hebrews - Published before the book of mormon by a minister who was also the minister for Oliver Cowdery's family. They attended his church at the time the book was published. Many parallels to the book of mormon.

3) Blood atonement - a teaching I consider to fit the actual description of "evil".

4) Moon Quakers - Just complete non-sense.

Kinderhook Plates, Book of Abraham, and Joseph's illicit sexual relations. One two three. Frankly, I've realized in the past months that there's way more evidence against the veracity of the church than for it. I can't believe I lied to so many people on mission.

At least you didnt knowingly spread the lie. I like the screen name btw.

Here is one for you that just pissed me off and made me hate the racisim and bigotry in the church.

Since the priesthood is supposed to be passed down from one person to the next uninterupted...as well as the "Keys of the kingdom" from prophet to prophet. How do you believe in a prophet like Spencer W. Kimball, that tells stories of Navajo Indian children (lamanite dark skinned) in the Indian Placement Program in the 1970-80's with skin that is changing into white (nephite skin) and proclaims that the blessings and prophecies of old are being fulfilled? He said he could see it happening in the adoptive families. And he said a Doctor examined the children and confirmed it too.

WHAT A WHOPPER OF A LIE.


After you think about that for a while, ask yourself, "Why would I believe in a book where people have their skin change from white, to dark, to white again?"

And ask yourself why Lehi, Nephi, Laman and Lemuel and the whole family of fictional charachters in the Book had white skin in the first place. Weren't they from Jerusalem? Wern't they ancient Jews? Do Jews from that time period have white skin? Nope. Black hair, dark eyes, and Olive or dark skin would be the norm in Jerusalem.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2012 05:54PM by upsidedown.

seriously?

I always wondered why this angel was apparently nameless. Every other angel had the decency to introduce themselves. This one just wanted JS to get down and dirty so he could watch.

No time for introductions. This sword won't stay flaming all day you know.

That the church Jesus Christ himself started simply fell apart.

Mindboggling if you believe in Jesus Christ.

dum
dum
dum dum!
dum

Oh man, I am not exLDS but I wish I were, if only to understand all the references here.
I know only a bit about Joseph Smith and the Lamanites but even that was enough.
But what's this about a flaming sword and JS being told to "get down"? And 200 yrs of peace? You mean there's even MORE of this garbage?

Drrr...

It's a big ol' MOUNTAIN of garbage...

Seer Stones

That its ok to mormons that a guy that used seer stones to look for buried treasure and went to court about it, ends up using seer stones to translate the gold plates he found in the ground.

Why not use seer stones now?

Plagiarism of "A View of the Hebrews" right down to the same mistranslation of the Greek word for isles translated as aisles (or vice versa). Nothing proves plagiarism like even lifting the mistakes.