Just dump on Joseph Smith

[NORTH]

.

[karenstricycle]

.

[karenstricycle]

.

[darinhouston]

http://www.josephlied.com/exit.html

Dear Bishop Nelson,

This is to inform you that as of today, January 6, 2002, we wish to terminate our membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We also wish to dissolve any connection that our three children have in the membership files of the church.

1. Please remove all of our names from the records of the church.

2. As soon as reasonably possible (within 45 days), please send us a letter confirming our memberships were terminated at our request.

3. The word "excommunication" is not to be used in your letter to us or on official church records.

At this time we would like to express our appreciation for your example, outstanding character, and kindness. You have been with us through some of the best times and some of the worst times of our lives and we are proud to consider you one of our friends. It would be an understatement to say that we have valued your friendship. We truly hope that our friendship can continue.

The reason for our decision to leave the church is that we were ignorant of its history and many un-biblical doctrines, both past and present. Although we have taught many investigators over the years, both during Mike's mission to Southern California and, more recently, as co-teachers of the ward Gospel Essentials class, we must now admit that we failed to "investigate" the church for ourselves. In fact, the main reason we asked to be released from our calling several weeks ago was due to the fact that it was becoming increasingly difficult for us to teach doctrine that we knew was contrary to that which was taught by the Savior himself. Some of the history and doctrines that have caused us particular concern and distress are as follows:

The fact that Joseph Smith never actually said that he saw God and Christ in the Spring of 1820. In fact, many church leaders who were very close personal friends of Joseph Smith were totally unaware that he had ever claimed to have seen God and Jesus Christ. People like Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Heber C. Kimball, Orson Hyde, George A. Smith, George Q. Cannon and even members of Joseph's own family like his mother and his brother William make it very clear through their talks and writings that they simply had never heard the fact that the "two personages" Joseph saw in 1820 were in fact God and Jesus Christ. Even in the famous letter Joseph Smith wrote to John Wentworth in 1842 (which we received the Articles of Faith from) Joseph only refers to his first vision as that of "two personages". There are many conflicting accounts of the "first vision" but they all have one thing in common: virtually none of them make the claim that he saw God and Jesus Christ. Simply put, Joseph Smith never told his closest friends and family members that he had seen God and Christ in 1820 but rather his "first vision" story was an endlessly evolving and changing story that did not consistently include God and Jesus Christ until nearly 1890. As just a few examples of this fact, we refer you to the following quotes (We have emphasized a few parts in bold print):

Brigham Young - "The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven ... but He did send his angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun., who afterwards became a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong" Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 171 (1855)

Wilford Woodruff - "The same organization and Gospel that Christ died for ... is again established in this generation. How did it come? By the ministering of an holy angel from God, out of heaven, who held converse with man, and revealed unto him the darkness that enveloped the world ... He told him the Gospel was not among men, and that there was not a true organization of His kingdom in the world" Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 196 (1855)

Orson Hyde - "Some one may say, 'If this work of the last days be true, why did not the Saviour come himself to communicate this intelligence to the world?' Because to the angels was committed the power of reaping the earth, and it was committed to none else." Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 335 (1854)

George A. Smith - "...he [Joseph Smith] went humbly before the Lord and inquired of Him, and the Lord answered his prayer, and revealed to Joseph, by the ministration of angels, the true condition of the religious world. When the holy angel appeared, Joseph inquired which of all these denominations was right and which he should join, and was told they were all wrong" Journal of Discourses, vol. 12, p. 334 (1863)

George A. Smith - "[Joseph] was enlightened by the vision of an holy angel. When this personage appeared to him, one of the first inquiries was 'Which of the denominations of Christians in the vicinity was right?' " Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 78 (1869)

John Taylor - "None of them was right, just as it was when the Prophet Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right that he might join it. The answer was that none of them are right." Journal of Discourses, vol. 20, p. 167 (1879)

George Q. Cannon-"But suppose that the statement that Joseph Smith says the angel made to him should be true-that there was no church upon the face of the earth whom God recognized as His, and whose acts He acknowledged-suppose this were true..." Journal of Discourses, vol. 24, pg. 135 (1889)

William Smith- "He accordingly went out into the woods and falling upon his knees called for a long time upon the Lord for wisdom and knowledge. While engaged in prayer a light appeared in the heavens, and descended until it rested upon the trees where he was. It appeared like fire. But to his great astonishment, did not burn the trees. An angel then appeared to him and conversed with him upon many things. He told him that none of the sects were right..."William Smith On Mormonism , By William Smith, Joseph Smith's brother. pg. 5 (1883)

" The angel again forbade Joseph to join any of these churches, and he promised that the true and everlasting Gospel should be revealed to him at some future time. Joseph continues: 'Many other things did he (the angel) say unto me which I cannot write at this time' " Church Historical Record, Vol. 7, January, 1888 [It should be noted here that in this quote the first reference to "the angel" was later changed to "the Holy Being" and the second reference to "the angel" was changed to "the Christ"]

Joseph Smith, Nov. 1835 - "...I received the first visitation of Angels when I was about 14 years old..." Personal writings of Joseph Smith, pg. 84 [It should be noted that this entry has been changed in the History of the Church, Vol. 2, pg. 312. It now reads "my first vision" instead of "visitation of Angels"]

Brigham Young - " Do we believe that the Lord sent his messengers to Joseph Smith, and commanded him to refrain from joining any Christian church, and to refrain from the wickedness he saw in the churches, and finally delivered to him a message informing him that the Lord was about to establish his kingdom on the earth..." Journal of Discourses, Vol. 18, pg. 239


Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy and polyandry nearly 10 years before the "revelation" to take more than one wife was given. Most disturbing of all was Joseph's practice of taking women to be his wives who were currently happily married to other men. (i.e., Lucinda Pendleton in 1838 while she was married to George Harris & Zina Jacobs in 1841 while she was married to Henry Jacobs.) Not to mention Josephs marriage to his 14 and 16 year old foster daughters. It appears as though all of these marriages (Joseph had 34 wives including Emma) were fully consummated. (For more details on these and Joseph's many other marriages, read the book Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith by LDS authors Linda Newell & Valeen Avery and also the book In Sacred Lonliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith by LDS author Todd Compton. They can both be found at most LDS bookstores.) Ironically, the Book of Mormon speaks out against polygamy (See Jacob 2:27 and 3:5)

Brigham Young's doctrine (he taught for 25 years) of "blood atonement"; the necessity of shedding one's own blood for certain sins (i.e., adultery). Ironically, adultery is a sin that Jesus clearly forgave during his lifetime, and clearly forgives now. Apparently the Savior's "infinite atonement" is "finite". Here are just a couple of Brigham Young's comments on this subject:

"...suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin, and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but what would say, "shed my blood that I may be saved and exalted with the Gods? All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers or sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant." Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pg. 219

"Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case; and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands." Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pg. 248

The doctrine that the "virgin Mary" was in fact not a virgin at all. The doctrine that God literally had sexual intercourse with his spirit daughter (the "virgin" Mary) and even took her to be one of his many polygamous wives is a doctrine that we personally find to be repugnant yet it was clearly taught by such men as Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, Bruce R. McKonkie, Ezra Taft Benson and many other church leaders and is one of the many little known doctrines of the church that is still accepted to this day. (See Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 51, Vol. 8, pg. 115, Religious Truths Defined, by Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr., pg. 44, Mormon Doctrine, pg. 546-547, Deseret News, Oct. 10, 1866, The Seer, by Orson Pratt, pg. 158, The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg. 6-7, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, pg. 18)

The fact that Joseph Smith "translated" a portion of the bogus "Kinderhook Plates" in 1843. These were phony brass plates that were made up by enemies of the church with the intention of fooling Joseph Smith. They were successful. Joseph said: "I have translated a portion of them, and find that they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of Heaven and earth." (History of the Church 5:372 [This was actually written by William Clayton as quoted by J. Smith])

While on his mission, Mike had heard of the Kinderhook plates before but he never gave the story much credit because the Church ran an article in the Ensign in 1981 which basically stated that there was no direct evidence (i.e., something in Joseph's personal handwriting) that proved Joseph Smith translated any of the Kinderhook plates. The article did mention the quote by William Clayton but it failed to mention that Clayton was acting as the prophets personal secretary at the time. Parley P. Pratt also wrote a similar comment in his journal and Brigham Young even made a rubbing of one of the plates in his journal. Two local newspapers (one was a Mormon newspaper) ran articles about the 6 brass plates and they both reported that the prophet was in the act of translating them and that they would publish the translation when he was finished. Joseph Smith was killed shortly afterwards and was unable to finish his translation.

The "translation" of the Book of Abraham papyri that Joseph Smith came up with is entirely different than the actual translation of the papyri that was done when the original papyri was found in 1967. Many people are unfamiliar with the origin of, and main problem with, the Book of Abraham so let us briefly explain. A man named Michael Chandler was traveling through the Eastern United States with about a dozen Egyptian mummies and a couple rolls of Egyptian papyri in the mid 1830's, occasionally selling a mummy here and there. By the time he reached Kirtland, Ohio in 1835 (where the Saints were currently gathered) he had four mummies and the papyri left. He would charge people a nominal fee to let them view the papyri and mummies. It was brought to his attention that a local man (Joseph Smith) might be able to translate the papyri. When Joseph looked at the papyri he claimed that one scroll was an account of Abraham (the same Abraham in the Old Testament) in Egypt and that it was written by Abraham's own hand. Joseph claimed that the other scroll was an account of Joseph who was sold into Egypt by his brothers and his travails in Egypt. This was quite a find indeed. Several Church members pooled their funds and bought the papyri for $2,400 and Joseph proceeded to "translate" the papyri that contained the story of Abraham in Egypt. (See History of the Church Vol. 2, pp. 235, 236, 348-351for a more detailed account)

The "translation" of the papyri was published in the Times and Seasons (a Nauvoo newspaper) as the "Book of Abraham". All was well in Zion until 1967 when the original papyri was found in a New York museum and turned over to the Church. Every single legitimate Egyptologist that has studied the Book of Abraham papyri since then has come to the conclusion that it is nothing more than Pagan funerary text taken from the Book of Breathings/Book of the Dead. Even Mormon scholars agree that "...when one compares the text of the book of Abraham with a translation of the Book of Breathings; they clearly are not the same." (Ensign, July 1988, pg. 51) Since 1967 the church has come up with at least 10 different theories as to why Joseph's translation doesn't match the actual translation of the papyri. In this particular instance we think one should apply the theory of Occam's Razor; the simplest explanation is most likely the correct explanation. In this case the simplest explanation is that Joseph simply made up his "translation" of the Book of Abraham. Church scholars to this very day continue to rack their brains in attempts to come up with a logical explanation for the discrepancy between Joseph's and Egyptologists translation of the ancient papyri and each theory they come up with is more bizarre than the one before it.

The fact that (according to the Book of Mormon) there were over 2,230,000deaths at the Hill Cumorah in the State of New York (between the Jaredites {see Ether 15:2}and the Nephites and Lamanites {see Mormon 6:10-15}) and yet there is not a trace of archaeological evidence to support this belief even though there was heavy use of steel swords, breastplates and helmets. We have had more than one self described "church scholar" tell us that the Hill Cumorah in New York is not the Hill Cumorah where these battles took place. This belief does not jive with what church leaders have told us. (See talk by Marion G. Romney in the Saturday Morning Session of General Conference, Oct. 4, 1975 and the Journal of Discourses Vol. 16 pg. 50, Vol. 20 pg. 63, Vol. 22 pg. 224 and Vol. 17 pg. 30)

Apostle Bruce R. McKonkie wrote "...the gift of the discerning of spirits is poured out upon presiding officials of God's kingdom; they have it given to them to discern all gifts and all spirits, lest any come among the saints and practice deception..." (Mormon Doctrine ) and yet church leaders like Pres. N. Eldon Tanner, Pres. Marion G. Romney, Apostle Boyd K. Packer, Apostle Dallin H. Oaks, Pres. Spencer W. Kimball and Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley were unable to discern the evil intentions of murderer and master forger Mark Hoffman in the mid 1980's.[NOTE: If you are not familiar with the Mark Hoffman story, it can summarized it in about three sentences; Hoffman created numerous forgeries that were allegedly written by the hands of some of Mormonism's founders. Several of these forgeries literally re-wrote the history of Mormonism as we know it and eventually he killed two people in an effort to conceal his crimes. He was eventually caught and convicted.] In fact, less than 12 hours after killing two members of the church (including a Bishop), Mark Hoffman personally met with Apostle Dallin H. Oaks and General Authority Hugh Pinnock and even discussed the two murders but the brethren were unable to discern the thoughts and intentions of Hoffman's evil and murderous heart. (See also D&C 101:95 and D&C 46:27 on the power of discernment) Through the power of discernment the Apostle Peter caught Ananias and Sapphira red-handed in their attempt to deceive the church with regard to a financial transaction (see Acts 5:3) and yet the LDS Church leaders bought (or traded) nearly 400 items from Mark Hoffman in the 1980's, many of which were forgeries or stolen property and they never caught onto him at all, even after he had killed two people.

We are certain that all church members are familiar with the phrase "As man is, God once was. As God is, man may become." So, we were a little confused by Pres. Hinckley's response when a reporter asked in 1997 "Just another related question that comes up is the statements in the King Follet discourse by the Prophet, about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?". Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley responded by saying, "I don’t know that we teach it. I don’t know that we emphasize it. I haven’t heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don’t know. I don’t know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don’t know a lot about it and I don’t know that others know a lot about it. "

As former Gospel Essentials teachers we can assure you that even we know that the church teaches that God was once a normal man who grew to eventually become God and we believe this to be one of the most basic and elementary doctrines of the Church and yet Gordon B. Hinckley acts as if he's totally unfamiliar with this particular doctrine and the extremely well known talk in which the doctrine was first introduced. Is this an effort of the church to once again evolve its doctrine regarding the nature of God?

The fact that the church taught from 1835 until 1921 that God was a spirit and did not have a physical body. In the Fifth Lecture on Faith (the Lectures on Faith were part of the D&C from 1835 until 1921 and are, in fact, where we got the "Doctrine" part of the "Doctrine and Covenants") Joseph Smith taught that God was "a personage of spirit" and Christ was "a personage of tabernacle" and the Holy Ghost was the mind that the Father and Son shared. This wasn't just an opinion but it was Church doctrine from 1835 until 1921. In 1921 the Lectures on Faith were removed from the Doctrine and Covenants and section 130 was added, thus officially changing the nature of God from "a personage of spirit" to one who "has a body of flesh and bone". The Lectures on Faith can be found at any LDS bookstore to confirm this.

The Adam-God doctrine as taught by Brigham Young. President Young clearly taught the belief that God came down to earth and took a physical body in the form of Adam and one of his many polygamous wives came down as Eve. He also taught that when we become Gods and Goddesses that we too can one day become Adams and Eves on our own planet that we will rule over as Gods. (See Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp.50-51, Vol. 5, p.331,Deseret News, June 18, 1873) This doctrine clearly contradicts what is taught in the Bible. We are not the only members to have a major problem with this doctrine. Apostle Amasa Lyman and Apostle Orson Pratt were said to have nearly apostatized because of it.("Minutes of the School of the Prophets," Provo, Utah, 1868-71, p.38 of typed copy at Utah State Historical Society).The fact that there are many Gods and that we too can become Gods is, in our opinion, directly violating the very first commandment and is one of the most blasphemous teachings of the church. (See Ex. 20: 3, Ex. 34: 14, Jer. 25: 6, John 17: 3, Deut. 6: 4, Matt. 19: 17, Mark 10: 18, Mark 12: 32, Luke 18: 19, Rom. 3: 30, 1 Cor. 8: 4, 1 Cor. 8: 6, Gal. 3: 20, Eph. 4: 6, 1 Tim. 2: 5, James 2: 19 and probably about a thousand more scriptures that I missed.)

The fact that there have been many substantive changes in the Book of Mormon since 1830 is bothersome considering the meticulous method which was used in the "translation" process but what really bothered us was the hundreds of major changes in the Doctrine and Covenants since 1835. It's not like the D&C needed to be translated from an ancient language into English. Most of the changes in the D&C have been made retroactive. For example, there are several times when the Melchizedek Priesthood is mentioned and used before the time when the Melchizedek Priesthood had even been given (helpful hint: it wasn't given before April 6, 1830). There are some changes in the D&C that completely reversed the original revelation. This bothered Book of Mormon witness David Whitmer so much that he left the church because of it. He later wrote: "Is it possible that the minds of men can be so blinded as to believe that God would give these revelations...and then afterwards command them to change and add to them some words which change the meaning entirely? Is it possible that a man who pretends to any spirituality would believe that God would work in any such manner?" (An Address to All Believers in Christ, 1887) It should be noted that several Church leaders over the decades have denied that any changes have been made to the Doctrine & Covenants. Apostle John A. Widtsoe, for instance, maintained that the revelations "...have remained unchanged. There has been no tampering with God's Word." (Joseph Smith — Seeker After Truth, p. 119) Joseph Fielding Smith, who became the tenth president of the church, likewise maintained that there "...was no need for eliminating, changing, or adjusting " the revelations. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 170) This letter is going to be long as it is so we will not go into the specifics of the changes in the D&C here. However, I will say that you can buy a set of books at most LDS bookstores titled "Joseph Smith Begins His Work" in which you can find a photographic reproduction of the original 1833 D&C (then called The Book of Commandments) and also the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. We would challenge you to compare the 1833 version with the most recent version and not find major additions or subtractions on almost every single page.

Frankly Bishop, we could go on and on (the letter Mike gave you on Dec. 23rd had a total of 29 objections but we have whittled the list down to our 12 most serious concerns) but we think you get the point.

We want to strongly emphasize that we are not leaving the church because we were offended by anyone. We love our neighbors and everyone in the ward and it breaks our hearts to know that some of them will choose to avoid us and ignore us after this becomes public information. We are not leaving the church because "living the gospel is too hard." We believe that in this day and age following the Savior is becoming more and more difficult but our decision to leave the church is based entirely on our decision to follow Christ. Surely nobody would seriously think that our lives will be "easier" once we leave the church considering the enormous LDS population in our area. We are all too familiar with the way ex-Mormons are treated and/or ostracized in a predominately LDS community but we are hoping (and praying) that for some reason things will be different for us.

Although we no longer wish to associate ourselves with the LDS Church, as long as we live on Hollow Road we will always be members of the Ward (geographically speaking, of course). Therefore, if one of our neighbors needs help moving (in or out) and the Elders Quorum needs some extra helping hands, feel free to call on Mike to lend a hand. If the Elders Quorum or Relief Society is having some sort of activity that non-members are invited to, please feel free to invite us (especially if the activity involves snowmobiles). Just because we no longer wish to follow the teachings of Joseph Smith, we do wish to remain friendly with our neighbors and still consider them to be friends. We just hope the feeling is mutual.

We wish you well in life and hope that you understand our position and respect it. Feel free to share the contents of this letter with anyone and everyone. All we ask is that if the word is spread that "the Norton's left the church" people are told the actual reason and not left to make assumptions and speculate as to "the real reason" we left. We think this letter makes the "real reason" pretty clear.
Sincerely,

Michael A. Norton

Shalise Norton

PS: If you or anyone else who reads this letter does not believe that the church currently (or formerly) teaches some of the above stated doctrines (such as the un-virgin birth of Christ, blood atonement or the Adam-God doctrine) I would suggest they ask someone who is very well versed in the doctrines of the Church. We think that most High Priests and Stake Presidents should be aware of these beliefs.