"Well, it's either true or false. If it's false, we're engaged in a great fraud.

Rest if quote: If it's true, it's the most important thing in the world. Now, that's the whole picture. It is either right or wrong, true or false, fraudulent or true. And that's exactly where we stand, with a conviction in our hearts that it is true: that Joseph went into the Grove; that he saw the Father and the Son; that he talked with them; that Moroni came; that the Book of Mormon was translated from the plates; that the priesthood was restored by those who held it anciently. That's our claim. That's where we stand, and that's where we fall, if we fall. But we don't. We just stand secure in that faith."
- Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, Interview "The Mormons"; PBS Documentary, April 2007

And that is the core of the matter.

I'm convinced it's not true, and is, in deed, a great fraud.
Clearly, I am not alone!

Roger that.

It isn't that simple and Hinckley and Packer knew this fact.

It was said for the Mormons who were sitting on the fence and the non-Mormons.

Useful falsehoods have always been the modus operandi of Mormonism.

The beautiful thing about that quote is that the **first** first hand accounts by the founders of the church say otherwise.

This was such a fantastic program. My whole family left the church because of it. Thank you PBS for saving us from continued woe.

I remember thinking, omg, he knows it's a fraud.
then he went on to rant about it all being true and I just couldn't get over the feeling that he knew it was a fraud and was trying to talk himself into believing it was true.

Holding fast to a fraud is not a wise thing do.
Wishing for a thing does not make it so.
Members often say that if they all went to hell, they would just make a little corner of hell a little piece of heaven, but hell is hell what are they thinking. If their belief in the adversary tells them anything, it is that the adversary will have control over them and will weep wail all their days.

Well, the church has provided proof the BOM was translated from a ROCK, not from plates.

So I guess if we take GBH at his word, there's really nothing much left to discuss...

fathered_by_parents


Being married to an engineer I think I picked his tendency to complicate things...:-) It hit me today that it is just that simple.

Getting out is the complicated part!

Rocks and hats are cool tools that are necessary for preserving the Scriptures ;) Do any of you remember the BoM story on how my brothers and I went back to Jerusalem for the Rock and Hat? According to the most correct book on earth its better for one man to perish than lose the rock.

More than that; look at what he said – and didn't say:

"And that's exactly where we stand, with a conviction in our hearts that it is true"

Notice that he said, "a conviction in our hearts" rather than "with the knowledge that it is true." Merely being CONVINCED of something is *not* the same as KNOWING it.

He had an opportunity to bear his testimony in front of the world, exactly what prophets are supposed to do. And the best he could come up with is that he was convinced. Meanwhile, the plebes and missionaries are expected to say that they KNOW. The so-called prophet of the Lord couldn't do himself what he and his cronies have harangued the pew sitters to do for decades.

If regular members were to get up in F&T and talk about having a "conviction in their hearts" about the truth of the church, they would probably get called into the bishop's office for a lecture on their lack of faith and how they need to "follow the brethren." A strict regimen of prayer and scripture reading would be assigned, because that's the cure for everything.

And evidence is on YOUR side, not theirs.
Which is why "faith" isn't worth a damn.

Faith is pretending to know things you don't know.

My heart can't rejoice in what my mind rejects.

Very cultish sounding to me!

Ironically, most things of value don't operate that way. The fact that Mormonism is even characterized that way makes it weak and simple.

I concur. After long and heartfelt study, I conclude that Mormonism is indeed a fraud.

My assessment of the sneaky Hinkster is that he thought himself to be so very clever in his ability to APPEAR as if he was telling the truth in simple sentences but then, in the explanations that followed, he made sure to leave wiggle room, double meanings, and loop holes for what he was REALLY saying.

Definitely, a conman supreme who got a sick thrill of fooling the masses.

Think of his statement on Larry King Live in 2008 which, when asked if a man can become a God, the answer he gave, as THE prophet if Mormonism was, "I don't know that we teach it." Seriously? His answer was not definite in the least. Notice he does not declare, "I know for sure we don't teach it" or "I know for sure we do teach it." His goal was to make his church fit right in with Christendom and this was how he was going to do it.

The Hinkster's press releases, which he seemed to enjoy immensely, were as slippery as green jello being nailed to a wall......and he knew they were because he planned them that way. I'm sure after all the practice he had, this talent came quite naturally, and he could snooze instead of make plans.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2016 09:47PM by presleynfactsrock.

in b 4 ~ engaged in a great fraud

Nevermo here but any time I saw GBH on TV, I always thought he looked and sounded like the Norman Rockwell version of the 'perfect grandpa'!

Don't forget that Gordy lied about knowing Mark Hofmann. What else did he lie about?

I rather think with the Hinkster it is easier to ask the question what didn't he lie about? One will get finished with the task faster.

For me, this man made my skin crawl. Maybe it is something in my background, my experiences, but when I saw him and heard him speak I saw a little weasel-worm with a false smile on his face about to try to pull the wool over people's eyes with the his well polished and thought out words.

The sum of how I saw him was one SNEAKY CREEP.

The fascinating thing is that, from a historical perspective,
one can prove that Joseph Smith didn't even CLAIM to have had
that great vision of the Father and the Son until MUCH later.

The stories that Joseph told, the sermons that were given, the
recollections of his closest associates (family, three
witnesses etc.) early histories of the Church all talk about
the FIRST vision being the Moroni/Nephi visit/dream. The
doctrine of the Godhead that was preached in early Mormonism
contradicted the First Vision account. The Book of Mormon
itself identifies Jesus as "the Father." It teaches a
"modalism" view of the trinity where each member of the Godhead
is really one god ACTING in a different capacity. The identity
of Jesus as the "Father" was so striking that the Church had to
issue an explanation in the early 1900s of how the BOM didn't
mean what it said.

A historically safer position for Hinckley to take is that they
stand on Joseph's prophetic calling, and then have the
"prophets are human and make mistakes" ploy. But to stand on
the 1838 version of the First Vision (the one currently in the
POGP) as being accurate is historically intenable.

He knew it was a fraud. I've always wondered if he was afraid of what may happen to him if there is life after death, and was trying to give himself some good points. He and his family were in too deep for them to get out, but he was trying to score points by basically telling people "It's a fraud." He was hoping that by saving some people by everything but directly saying "it's a fraud," that getting some fence sitters out, that Jesus would go easy on him in an afterlife.

This is what the Gordster said in the April 2003 conference:

(pasted)

"Each of us has to face the matter—either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing."

Link:https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2003/04/loyalty?lang=eng

Notice the context - loyalty. It's interesting how he weaves in some sort of personal accountability on the matter. So I guess its up to each of us to decide if the church is true? Is this what he is saying? I find this very strange coming from the 'mouthpiece of the Lord'. I think using the 'all or nothing' proposition as a fear tactic and designed to bolster those who are loyal and offend those that have questions. He is separating the 'wheat from the tares' as it were.

As I have posted in the past - you have to wonder how these leaders can maintain their sanity. They have no visions, no special powers, Joe's rocks hidden in the vault don't work, etc. - they bleed like all the rest of us.