Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: Elwood ( )
Date: September 23, 2012 04:38PM

Anyone remember this book? It was first published in 1965 by Deseret Book, with additional printings in 1966, 1967, and 1973. It is what it claims to be – a introduction to mormonism and mormons. I hadn't seen it for decades but just got a copy because my picture is in it and I thought it would be fun to show people, including my kids, how far I have come. (I was just a kid when they took the picture, but yes I am that old.)

So I just quickly read through the book. Those were simpler times, at least for mosim. The level of scrutiny was much less, and so was the amount of commonly known scientific evidence. And Mosim was more sure of itself. A few gems:

On page 29 there is a picture of Joseph Smith dictating to Oliver Cowdery on the other side of a curtain. The real fun is that at the bottom of the picture is an inset with a picture of “characters from the plates, which are in a modified or 'reformed' Egyptian.” They printed the characters Joseph Smith made up right there for everyone to see. You don't see them doing that lately.

Then there is this amazing claim on page 40 discussing the people described in the Book of Mormon:

“Until only a few decades ago, relatively little was known about these civilizations apart from Book of Mormon history. When that record was first published, there was considerable skepticism by some concerning many of its claims.
But as archeology and anthropology began to explore these areas, the Book of Mormon claims—fantastic as some once thought them to be—were soon substantiated with concrete physical evidence. Buildings, fortifications, great highways, entire cities, and thousands of artifiacts are now known and can be visited on location or viewed in museums. The vast discoveries and extensive research of recent years verify the Book of Mormon story.”

That's a far cry from the current approach of trying to explain away facts and saying you can only know it is true by spiritual means.

I did learn something though. On page 51 it discusses Joseph's last trip to jail and there is this gem:

“”Joseph was urged by many to return, give himself up, and face arrest and trial on charges of treason that had been raised against him.
Joseph was not afraid of trial. Some forty-six times previously he had been arrested on false charges but had never been convicted on a single count.”

I didn't know he had been arrested that many times - they didn't talk about that in church. He was, however, convicted at least once of being a glass-looker but maybe they didn't know that in the 1960's.

Also interesting is what is not there – the book tells the history of Moism from the beginning to the time of printing, but nowhere is polygamy mentioned. Not even hinted at. Not really a surprise there.

It has been a fun walk down memory lane.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: hello ( )
Date: September 23, 2012 05:19PM

The Mishies loaned us that book when we joined. Sadly, I believed they were telling the truth about the archaeology, and I expected more would be coming from research that would completely prove the BOM. What a dolt I was!

I should have known something was missing, when I went to BYU and no one in the religion dept. or BOM class talked much about the "amazing discoveries". But by then, I was busy working for the church and my future as a slave.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Jude ( )
Date: September 23, 2012 06:32PM

I had the 1967 version right now I'm thinking of all the photos of children in the book. The LDS world is tiny. There cannot be 14-16 million mo's. lol.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Elder Berry ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 05:59PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: madalice ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 06:19PM

I'm a child of the 60's/70's. Books like that just prove that we aren't imagining what we were taught. They added and deleted so much that it's not the same religion.

In the 70's I was taught that we could be called at any moment to pack up and walk back to Missouri. Everyone I knew that was a good mormon owned a pair of hiking boots.

When the gas crisis hit and we couldn't buy gas anywhere it had the Mormons in a tizzy. There were many who thought that we'd be going east at any moment.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Chump ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 06:24PM

"Some forty-six times previously he had been arrested on false charges but had never been convicted on a single count.”

He was arrested a dozen times on real charges related to illegally operating a bank. Cleverly calling it an "anti-banking company" didn't fool the authorities...who could have imagined that?! To say that he was never convicted is misleading. He faced heavy fines (do you fine someone that isn't guilty?) and eventually fled the state.

He also never went to trial in Missouri on charges of treason, murder, etc... Most TBM's assume that he was released from Liberty Jail after facing the "false charges". In reality, he escaped and was a fugitive for the last six years of his life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ASteve ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 07:14PM

He was convicted of the bank charges in absentia. He was convicted of being a con man in PA and given leg bail, basically a lifetime ban from the county. He was convicted of treason as a result of the civil war he started in Missouri. In a military court. They subsequently decided to give him a civil trial, which he bribed his way out of jail and was a fugitive for the rest of his life.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: scmd ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 06:25PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Elwood ( )
Date: November 12, 2013 12:46AM

Sure, nobody has ever asked that before!

So is my claim to fame my tie to a book that was cheesy, out-dated, and filled with cult drivel when it was printed decades ago? I got cheated on my fifteen minutes of fame.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: misterzelph ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 06:28PM

This was also a filmstrip that I showed to investigators (1977).

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: rationalist01 ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 06:48PM

A good example of how info-disadvantaged we were before Google! They could pull that stuff then, but it's a new world now.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: cludgie ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 07:04PM

Funny how times change. What hasn't changed is how the Mormons have to keep putting publications, PR, and advertising campaigns out there to make it seem like some sort of normal organization, when in reality, if it were a normal organization, they wouldn't have to spend a dime.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Cornelius ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 07:35PM

Is this the book with the picture on the cover showing a man with a lady on each arm? I remember first seeing that picture and I couldn't tell if it was the man with his mother on one side and his wife on the other, or his wife on one side and his daughter on the other. Or just two wives.

I thought it was an interesting picture especially how opposed Mormons are to letting other people know they believe in polygamy.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Cornelius ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 07:37PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: zenjamin ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 08:05PM

Awesome!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: tig ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 09:18PM

The best part is that many of them still dress like that.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: jpt ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 08:49PM

Maybe the guy is taking care of a widow... with his wife's help, of course. That's the way mormons are supposed to roll.

Now I wonder if my dear old mom still has that book. I definitely remember it. She has a treasure chest of old books I'm sure leadership wishes would disappear.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Anonimouse ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 08:26PM

OMG WTF is that hat? LMAO!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: madalice ( )
Date: November 11, 2013 09:00PM

Looks like two wives to me. I can promise you she knitted her own hat and made that plaid shawl to match. Notice they have gloves on so you can see any wedding rings? Frankly he looks older than both of the women.

I was 12 in 1965. For the life of me I don't remember anyone wearing hats and gloves like that. It was more of a 50's thing. I do recall the yellow suit though. I had a couple of those that I made myself. Never ever wore a hat or gloves though.

It was during this time that the hippies were rolling onto the scene. I would have preferred a mini skirt or a granny dress to the prim little suit. I also wore jeans when I could get away with it. Skin tight Levi 501's. Those were the days I wore a 28" waist. which was really the size of my hips.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Whiskeytango ( )
Date: November 12, 2013 01:00AM

No, I think the girl in the yellow is his daughter. The woman in the fugly hat is a lot older and he is no spring chicken...I love that red blazer the boy is wearing...Gag!!!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: enoughenoch19 ( )
Date: November 12, 2013 03:43AM

"visited on location or viewed in museums" - you know those museums of the mind.....imaginary museums. I've been there. Haven't we all?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: enoughenoch19 ( )
Date: November 12, 2013 03:47AM

I'll bet the GAs have NEVER hated anyone or anything as much as they HATE the INTERNET! What a dent in their plans!! Ha Ha!

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********   ********   **     **  **    **  **     ** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **   **   **     ** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **  **    **     ** 
 ********   **     **  **     **  *****     **     ** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **  **    **     ** 
 **     **  **     **  **     **  **   **   **     ** 
 ********   ********    *******   **    **   *******