Robert and Rosemary Brown were two active Mormons down in Mesa. They owned several small women's clothing stores. When "Profesor Dee Jay Nelson" came to Mesa to give a lecture at a local Baptist Church, they attended. They had severe doubts about Prof Nelson's story, and decided to check his credentials. They found him to be a high school and college dropout with no earned degrees in anything. He was a tour host for tourists in Egypt at one time, which is the closest he ever got to being an Egyptologist.

Of course, whether Dee Jay was a Professor or not, had nothing to do with whether or not Joseph Smith could translate Egyptian; which he clearly could not.

Anyway, the Browns decided to do more volumes of "They Lie in Wait to Deceive". Volume Two was on "Dr." Walter R. Martin, proving his "doctorate" was unearned. They did Volume Four on Ed Decker and a few others. However, they were saving their greatest work for Volume Five: which would be an "expose" of Jerald and Sandra Tanner.

A "friend" of the Browns in Mesa, one Stanley Barker, convinced the Browns to give him all their research on the Tanners, and he would publish the book himself and give the Browns royalty. That was 1989. To date, Barker has not published "They Lie in Wait to Deceive" volume 5.

A friend of mine, Robert Durocher of California, whom all the Mormon scholars and apologists know, called Barker asking him "Where is Volume Five?" Barker replied (I know because I was there, and Barker was on speaker phone): "Bob, I can't tell you that. All I can tell you, is that Volume Five will be out soon. I can't tell you any more."

That was 1997.

Barker has his own "LDS Apologetics" website called SHIELDS, which mostly tackles some of the more "weak" arguments of some Anti-Mormons. It pretty much follows FAIRMORMON.

To date, Barker does NOT reply to emails or letters regarding whatever happened to the "Brown's research on the Tanners". He replies by saying: "I'm not at liberty to discuss that."

Barker could publish their research online, but has chosen not to do so.

The Browns did NOT deal with "substantial questions" such as "Is the Book of Mormon ancient history?" or "Could Joseph Smith translate Egyptian?" They didn't even mention those things. All they did was find "dirt" on professional Anti-Mormons, and print that dirt, with affidavits, etc., like in a court case. And, their evidence was air-tight. Let's face it, some anti-Mormons (especially those in the 1970s and 1980s) did LIE. They made false claims about themselves. For "some" reason, they felt they needed to use deception as well as fact. Perhaps for monetary reasons.

I SAW their research on the Tanners, which the Browns kept locked away in one of their storage rooms. It was devastating. But, I CANNOT prove anything I saw, because they gave all the evidence to Stan Barker, who, in 1989 (29 years ago), promised he would publish the book "very soon".

Maybe all of the evidence on the Tanners was taken up to heaven by an angel, so Barker is stalling for more time.

The Tanners work speaks for itself. It was well researched and documented. What is your point, that Barker failed to keep his word and publish dirt on the Tanners?

Other than the problem that came up with D.J. Nelson being a fake Egyptologist, the Tanners appear to me to be very honest. They did fantastic research on their books and yes, everything is documented. Sandra Tanner in her videos impresses me as an honest and genuine person who is concerned about the negative effects Mormonism has had on so many people. I will have to look into the D.J. Nelson thing more, to better understand what happened. But nothing is going to enable me to believe in Mormonism again.

Many Mormon give joyful, glowing testimonies of the "honest" research and information offered by Rod Meldrum and Wayne May. Anyone who has truly dug them out on the internet knows that they can't be trusted. People don't want to look, because they don't want to know. To them, Rod and Wayne and the "Firm Foundation" are saving their beloved church.

It is likely that Stanley Barker found some problems with the Browns' research and the evidence presented in their manuscript, and therefore decided not to publish it. Maybe their work was not so air-tight.

1) if the Browns could not "prove" a claim legally, they didn't publish it in their books.

2) If Barker simply found the evidence "wanting" he could have returned the materials and said to the browns "I don't feel right about publishing this". He didn't. They asked for their research back, and he stopped talking to them.

3) Before he blew himself up, I spoke to Mormons/ex-Mormons at Sunstone Symposium (after it while people were socializing) what they thought of Mark Hofmann. All of them, without exception, that I asked (about 8 people) said he was "a very honest researcher", "a hero" etc. So much for Mormon/Ex-Mormon "spirit of discernment".

4) Ask Sandra sometime "Why was Jerald removed as treasurer of the salt Lake City Mission" (a Christian charity for the homeless)? She's say "I dont remember" or change the subject. No, she remembers very well.



Josephina Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is likely that Stanley Barker found some
> problems with the Browns' research and the
> evidence presented in their manuscript, and
> therefore decided not to publish it. Maybe their
> work was not so air-tight.

1. Jerald Tanner was never the treasurer for the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake.
2. Jerald Tanner was a volunteer at the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake for many years. He kept their mailing list current and prepared the monthly newsletter for bulk-mailing. He was on the Board of Directors for several years in the 1980s and resigned when the Board embraced a con-man as the director.
3. Jerald helped count the weekly offering at his church, he was not the treasurer.
4. Jerald Tanner never claimed to have any degrees.

P.S.

The Browns were EXTREMELY worried about be sued, so they made sure that 100% of what they published could be proved in a court of law. Many things about Ed Decker, Walter R. Martin, etc., they could not legally prove, they didn't publish. 100% provable in a court of law. They had their attorney go over the material with a fine tooth comb before they published it.


13% of "Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?", all editions before 1981, were about the claims of "Professor Dee Jay Nelson" doctor of Egyptology. So much for the Tanners having "impeccable scholarship". Jerald and Sandra claims "they" exposed Dee Jay Nelson "after hearing from a woman in Arizona". The "woman in Arizona" was Rosemary Brown of Mesa.

Just because a man or woman SAYS WHAT YOU LIKE THEM TO SAY, does not make they heroes or "beyond reproach". I was told, many times, that the findings of Mark Hofmann were "beyond reproach"...before he blew himself up. Mark Hofmann told ex-Mormons and anti-Mormons what they wanted to "hear"; so they concluded he was "honest" and "impeccable" etc. He wasn't.

Do your own research: Jerald Tanner realized Mark Hoffman was a fraud early on and took a public stand against him.

You've been trolling here for a while under different names. In this recent thread, you seem to be extolling the work of Mormon apologists while making veiled accusations against church critics, all without proof.

Are you really an ex-Mormon? Or are you a believer trying to stir things up here? Your racist postings don't help your case.

Please let us know.

CZ (admin)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/15/2018 11:00AM by Concrete Zipper.

Dear Zipper,

1) I have not been "trolling". I've been writings facts and truths YOU do not like.

2) I criticize both Mormon apologists, when they are less than honest, and also anti-Mormons, when they are less than honest (for example Ed Decker, etc.). Mark Hofmann was the HERO of the anti-Mormon/ex-Mormon/Sunstone Mormon crowd. They praised him up and down. I know...I WAS THERE when they did it. In their eyes, he could DO NO WRONG. They were WRONG!!!!

3) To be an Ex-Mormon DOEs NOT necessarily mean you MUST ALSO BE a liberal-democrat anti-trump SJW, as you appear to THINK one must be.

4) STOP censoring posts that YOU don't agree with politically.


Concrete Zipper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You've been trolling here for a while under
> different names. In this recent thread, you seem
> to be extolling the work of Mormon apologists
> while making veiled accusations against church
> critics, all without proof.
>
> Are you really an ex-Mormon? Or are you a believer
> trying to stir things up here? Your racist
> postings don't help your case.
>
> Please let us know.
>
> CZ (admin)

OK, it sounds like you're here to spout off about your personal political agenda, which is not allowed.

We try to be very even-handed about politics and get complaints from all sides claiming that we are favoring their opponents. It simply doesn't work that way.

I will tell you that racist and homophobic vitriol, which you might have mixed into your political outlook, is not part of any true political agenda, be it conservative, liberal or whatever. It's just hate, and it's not allowed on this forum.

Why don't you take some time off to reflect on what you're really trying to accomplish. Perhaps you can post again once you've calmed down and are ready behave civilly.

CZ (admin)