Comments on: Letter to the First Presidency & Quorum of Twelve, By Chris Ralph

By: mark richardson

mark richardson — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 17:58:09 +0000

Why can’t you guys do your own research and believe again? I’m not judging you for doubting, but for lethargy in getting to the truth. Your testimony of the church is out there if you know where to find it.

By: Bobby

Bobby — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:22:28 +0000

Thanks Jeff I will email you in just a sec, regarding people leaving the church Marlin Jenson who was then a part of the 70 and the head LDS historian gave an interview that said otherwise. Thats what my view on that is largely based on. I know that you firsthand have seen a number of cases too. But anyway emailing.

By: Jeff Walsh

Jeff Walsh — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 09:39:04 +0000

Hi Bobby, my laptop crashed and so I have lost your home address, please email me it and I will send you articles which contradict the assertion that the “early history” is covered up. I would also question that “many many” people are leaving the Church. Jeff

By: Ned Scarisbrick

Ned Scarisbrick — Wed, 02 Jan 2013 04:52:48 +0000

I don’t think it is about deception but perception. I know you think you understand what I said or whoever said what about anything but I’m not sure that what you heard is what I or them meant . :-)
Just a thought,

-Ned

By: Jeff Walsh

Jeff Walsh — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 23:45:30 +0000

Ned, it is good to know that there is someone on this site that has not been caught in the tangled web by those who flatter to deceive. Jeff Walsh

By: Bobby

Bobby — Mon, 31 Dec 2012 09:21:24 +0000

So basically Ned all your saying is you don’t find the issues raised convincing. OK no problem.

The issue is that many, many people do and are leaving in great numbers because of these issues. This letter is not in expectation that it will cause the General Authorities to lose their testimony, but rather in some expectation that they will actually address these issues rather than hide behind the (very much unofficial) apologists.

By: Mr. Ned SCARISBRICK

Mr. Ned SCARISBRICK — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 03:38:16 +0000

I checked out the links you gave me and the arguments all have been made before. The conclusions made are from fragmentary information. I will not try and refute each and every point. The style is very similar to that of the Tanners. They take small bits of information that may seem negative, give it the most negative spin possible and that’s all they talk about. Using this type of truth is typical of political arguments. You could even paint H2O or water to look deadly…

Frequently Asked Questions About Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) What is Dihydrogen Monoxide?Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, a species shown to mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters. The atomic components of DHMO are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol. For more detailed information, including precautions, disposal procedures and storage requirements, refer to one of the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) available for DHMO: I may be wrong but your tone seems to one of great anger. You have been lied too, deceived and used by the Church and therefore they must pay and pay dearly. The Church officials must come clean about all the deception. There are those who claim that we put our trust in Joseph Smith for our salvation. I put my trust in the Lord Jesus Christ and His finished work on the cross for my salvation regardless of who says what about anything else. That’s the truth I believe in. -Ned Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 23:55:50 +0000 To: [email protected]

By: Petunia

Petunia — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 23:55:48 +0000

Ned,
There are a number of websites and books written that cover the conflict surrounding the Book of Abraham. This website I find is particularly useful: http://www.bookofabraham.com/boamathie/BOA_TOC.html
The information that I have discovered leads me to no other conclusion than that Joseph Smith made it all up.
In addition I suggest you read the experience of Rev Henry Caswell when he met Joseph Smith and presented him with his copy of a Greek Psalter: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VTIBAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Henry+Caswall&hl=en&sa=X&ei=06-7UIeFJoW5hAfkz4HQAw&sqi=2&redir_esc=y

I hope this two sites will help you to see a little of the true character of Joseph Smith. If these were the only examples I would say that perhaps Joseph was carried away with his position, but unfortunately there are many other examples of immoral and base behaviour, including open dishonesty; these cannot and should not be ignored.
In short, Joseph told lies, the early leaders told lies and that lie is being perpetuated today. It is insupportable for me to continue with a church that sings hymns of praise to a man such as this, and yet calls itself the Church of Jesus Christ. It is a contradiction of all that christianity stands for.
I wish you all the best. Truth can hurt but I know there are many here that will be happy to support you on your journey of discovery. All the very best to you.

Petunia

By: Jeremy JDog Brown

Jeremy JDog Brown — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 15:10:00 +0000

Ned…. any defence of the BoA on scholarly grounds today is beyond laughable and hardly worth debating. Hence why the like of Dan Peterson and Jeff Holland try now to defend in on the basis that it was an inspiration and not a translation!!!

By: Double edged Sword

Double edged Sword — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 13:24:45 +0000

I am trying to think about moment or the straw that broke the delusional donkeys back ? was it the fact that JS had relations with young girls and with married women and then lied about it? or maybe its the many dishonest changes i have found in current church history that try to remove the hypocrisy folk magic and contradictions? Or maybe it is the failed revelations that are rarely if ever mentioned? or the failed attempts at translation like the Greek Psalter, the Kinder-hook plates ? or maybe its that final so called translation the Book of Abraham which many would try to defend and say we dont have the correct papyri to make a comparison or draw a conclusion? But i find when you weigh the totally inaccurate translating of the facsimiles along with the totally inaccurate translation of characters and Egyptian grammar recorded in the notebooks which smith used an wrote on during the translation process i am left with no other conclusion but that J Smith must have been relying on pure imagination and delusion.