Mountain Meadows Massacre

Click Here PBS Frontline-Mountain Meadows Part 1



Click Here PBS Frontline-Mountain Meadows Part 2

In case you are unfamiliar with the Mountain Meadows Massacre, the above videos are the 2 parts produced by PBS Frontline that give an accurate account of what happened in Mountain Meadows.

LDS Church Responds

The LDS church has published an article regarding the tragic event that happened in Mormon history. Although the article is part of the September Ensign in commemoration of the 150th anniversary, the early publication on the website comes as no surprise. I think the timing of the publication on the website is in response to the Living Hope Ministries publication, the PBS Frontline Documentary that dedicated a large portion (that can be viewed here) to the event as well as the upcoming movie "September Dawn".

"On September 11, 1857, some 50 to 60 local militiamen in southern Utah, aided by American Indian allies, massacred about 120 emigrants who were traveling by wagon to California. The horrific crime, which spared only 17 children age six and under, occurred in a highland valley called the Mountain Meadows, roughly 35 miles southwest of Cedar City. The victims, most of them from Arkansas, were on their way to California with dreams of a bright future"

The perpetrators were members of the LDS church at the time including local leaders. The Mormons killed a group of emigrants from Arkansas without any provocation. Under the direction of priesthood leaders, the Mormon members killed the unarmed men first, but didn't stop there. After they killed the men, they went to the wagons that contained the women and children and shot and killed everyone over the age of 6 in cold blood. The reason the Mormon members killed the women and children is because they didn't want witnesses.

I remember being taught a brief lesson about the Mountain Meadows massacre in seminary. I was taught that the incident was initiated by a small group of renegade apostates that were not affiliated with the mainstream church. However, my seminary teacher was lying to me, whether he knew it or not. Dallin H. Oaks has made the first public admission that members of the church including local leaders were behind this terrible event. However, in the same interview, Dallin H. Oaks also said that it is wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true. So if the members at the time questioned the massacre, would they be in the wrong?

"As is true with any historical episode, comprehending the events of September 11, 1857, requires understanding the conditions of the time"

As stated in the article, it is important to understand the conditions of the time to better comprehend what lead to that atrocity, so I will talk about a few key events that lead up to the massacre.

Events that led up to the atrocity

It is important to point out that Parley P. Pratt, a member of the quorum of the 12 apostles(and happens to be Mitt Romney's great-great grandfather) was killed in Arkansas in 1857, the same year as the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Since the Fancher party was from Arkansas, there were rumors that some of the people from the Fancher party were responsible for Pratt's death, even though those rumors were unfounded.

It is even more important to point out exactly why Parley P. Pratt was killed in Arkansas. A woman by the name of Eleanor McLean had converted to the Mormon church, but her husband did not. Elanor McLean left her husband and married Parley P. Pratt in a polygamist marriage. However, Elanor was still legally married to Hector McLean, her original husband, because they never got divorced. When Parley P. Pratt went to Arkansas in 1857 on a preaching mission, Elanor's legal husband killed him because he felt that Parley had taken her away from him.

So Parley P. Pratt was killed by a jealous husband of one of Pratt's plural wives, who was still legally married to Hector in Arkansas. The Fancher party had absolutely nothing to do with the assassination of Pratt, but because they were also from Arkansas, rumors had flied around that members of the party were responsible for Pratt's death. I think it is reasonable to say that Pratt's death could have influenced the tragedy at Mountain Meadows. In the minds of the Mormons at the time, they were in a way avenging the death of their apostle.

Other events that led to the Mountain Meadows massacre included the United States government breathing down their necks. I think that Mormons at the time had a frame of mind that America was the enemy.

Lessons Learned from Mountain Meadows

I think the Mountain Meadows massacre demonstrates the danger that exists when you have an organization that claims divine authority. To say that it is wrong to criticize the leaders of the church even if the criticism is true is exactly the mindset that led to this horrible atrocity. The people that participated in the murders and execution of innocent people were devout Mormon leaders and followers that did what their church leaders told them to do.

Mormon Hypocrisy

The LDS church had publicly denied involvement in the Mountain Meadows Massacre for 150 years. However, now 150 years later, they are making the position that it is in the past and behind us. The big hypocrisy in the LDS church is that they claim to embrace and celebrate the past, but only the history that paints the church in a good light. It is good to learn about the past, but only the past that has been re-written by the LDS church. However, regarding the "little flicks of history" that don't paint the church in a good light, they say "let the book of the past be closed".



Couple that with Dallin H. Oaks comments that Mormons, including local leaders of the church were the prime movers in the Mountain Meadows Massacre and participated in the killing, and yet it is wrong to criticise the leaders of the church even if the criticism is true.

Disillusioned Mormon

Read more!

Video: The Lost Book Of Abraham

The information in this video is what made me conclude that the Book of Abraham is a fraud. When I learned about the Book of Abraham, and the fraudulent claims made by the church, I lost complete faith in Mormonism.

The LDS church still includes the Book of Abraham as part of their canonized scripture. The only apologetic response for the Book of Abraham being translated from a common funerary text is that it wasn't a literal translation, but a "spiritual translation". I am sorry, but I just can not begin to wrap my brain around that argument.

The most important thing it demonstrates is that Joseph Smith had absolutely no clue how to translate Egyptian. The Book of Mormon was supposed to be translated from a form of Egyptian. Joseph Smith said he recognized the hieroglyphics on the papyri from the golden plates. Who is to say that the Book of Mormon wasn't also a "spiritual translation" and not a literal translation? Perhaps there never were any golden plates.

Anyways, I hope you enjoy this video.

The big double-standard with the LDS church is that they lecture people about honesty and integrity, yet they have known that the Book of Abraham was a fraud since 1967 and have lied about it. Mormon leaders give interviews to members that question their worthiness. One of the questions they ask is if they are honest in their dealings with their fellow man. Maybe we should be interviewing the church leaders and asking them if the church is honest with its members.

The LDS church continues to assert its position that the Book of Abraham is a literal translation from a first-hand account of Abraham written on the ancient documents that went into the possession of the church in 1835. This article was written in the official LDS church publication The Ensign as recent as 1997 that re-asserts this position.

Skeptical Mormon Read more!

LDS Priesthood Leadership Training Video

A condensed version of the LDS priesthood leadership training video has been leaked on the internet. It outlines the new media campaign and is obviously not intended for view by the general membership or the general public for that matter. I give it a few days until it will be taken down. However, the entire production can be viewed on the church's public website:

http://www.mormon.org/truthrestored

I warn you that it takes a long time to upload the entire thing, and watching it will take a good hour. However, I also think it is a good insight as to what goes on in the priesthood meetings. After seeing the video, it seems that the bretheren are more interested in marketing a corporate product than teaching the gospel.

Skeptical Mormon Read more!

80's Mormon Commercial "Never Tell A Lie"

I ran across this 80's spot on youtube. When I saw it, I felt a sense of nostalgia because I remember the old days when they would have these PR commercials frequently on T.V.

During that time in my life, the church as I perceived it was perfect and could do no wrong. Now, I feel like in a way, that innocence is gone and can now see the hypocrisy behind the message.
Read more!

Response to LDS reaction to PBS Documentary "The Mormons

Most of the comments regarding the Documentary have been positive. Most people recognize that it was a documentary made to try to help people understand Mormonism. However, from reading many of the responses by LDS members, it appears that the common consensus is that the film wasn't "Balanced enough". By balanced, they mean it wasn't balanced from their point of view.

It is not a Mormon missionary video

The film was not made for Mormons, and it certainly was not made to try to convince people they should be Mormons. It was made for people that are non-LDS to help them obtain a better understand of Mormonism, even things that the LDS church feels embarrassed about, such as polygamy for example. The point the film was making regarding polygamy wasn't that Mormon polygamist groups exist, in fact, the film wasn't even trying to say that polygamists were in any way affiliated with the church. The point that the film was making, which flew way over their heads, was just how out of touch with reality Gordon B. Hinckley is regarding the existance of polygamist groups.

Gordon Hinckley saying that there is no such thing as a Fundamentalist Mormon would be like the Pope saying that there is no such thing as a protestant. As the film clearly shows, Mormon fundamentalists are people that more closely follow the teachings of Joseph Smith, and therefore are fundamentalists. What is interesting to me is to see how upset and bent out of shape that Church leaders get when they try to distance themselves away from polygamists, yet they don't denounce the polygamist practices of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and other early Mormon prophets, leaders and members.

While LDS members can't understand why the PBS special would mention Mormon Fundamentalists, the program isn't about the mainstream LDS church, it is about Mormonism in the broader sense. Look at it this way, if you did a documentary about Muslims, you would most likely talk about Sunni and Sheit Muslims. However, a Sunni would wonder why you would even mention a Sheit Muslim, since according to a Sunni Muslim, Sheits aren't actually Muslim. A Sheit would say the same thing about Sunnis. However, both groups claim to be the true followers of the prophet Mohammad. A Fundamentalist Mormon would say that the mainstream LDS church isn't actually Mormon, just like the mainstream LDS church says fundamentalists aren't Mormon. However, Fundamentalist Mormons have more credibility, because they are following the teachings of Joseph Smith the closest. The mainstream LDS church has become more and more conforming to society.

The Church Today is not the same church established by Joseph Smith

When I started to read about church history and compared what it was before and what it is today, I realized that it is not the same church at all that was established by Joseph Smith. I felt that it was very poetic and appropriate that the film "The Mormons" be shown in 2 parts, because it demonstrates how the church evolved from being an isolationist, theocratic polygamist, anti-government church into what it is today: a worldwide mainstream religion that is asserting itself as a christian church. If Joseph Smith were alive today, he would not be accepted into the LDS church. He would be seen the same way that Warren Jeffs is seen. If Joseph Smith was alive today, he would be seen as an extremist, an apostate polygamist and a great danger to the reputation to the church.

Overall response

Overall, the responses have been fairly positive in the general sense. I don't think this show will change any one's mind about Mormonism, and I don't think it should. However, I do think that it will spark curiosity and interest in both Mormons and non-Mormons in re-searching Mormon history. I find it fascinating that the main problem that most LDS members had with the documentary is that they were upset that the film didn't accurately show their point of view. Again, I say that the film was not supposed to be a Mormon recruitment video, and I think church members have failed to understand that . Although LDS members wished that the film could have shown non-members the point of view of church members, I think members of the church should look at the film to understand the point of view of others.

Skeptical Mormon
Read more!

Intellectualism is a Danger to the Church

Response to Chapter 19: "Dissenters and Exiles

In the 19th chapter of the PBS Frontline program "The Mormons", it confronts the issue of intellectualism that is currently happening in the church today. The question is as follows: Is too much intellectualism is a danger to the church?

Adam and Eve in Mormon Doctrine

Let me first point out something very important in Mormon Doctrine. According to Mormon doctrine, it was necessary for Adam and Eve to partake of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, even though it was disobedient to God. The lesson that we are taught in the church is that if Adam and Eve never partook of the tree of Knowledge of good and evil, they would have remained in a state of innocence like little children, not knowing good from evil. Remember that when Adam and Eve ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they discovered their nakedness and as a result, they were cast out of the garden of Eden and the beautiful paradise they once knew was transformed into the lone and dreary world we live in today. However, it was still necessary for Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If they never discovered their nakedness, they never would have produced any offspring, and they would have remained like innocent children, not knowing good from evil.

In Mormonism, education is highly valued. Most members are encouraged to study hard, get good grades in school and go to college. The church has many programs that encourage the study of the scriptures and church doctrine. That is, of course until what you are studying contradicts claims made by the church. At that point, the church leadership considers intellectualism a "great danger to the church".

Statements made by church leaders regarding Intellectualism

It was reported that Boyd K. Packer, a member of the Quorum of the 12 Apostles for the LDS church said years back in a meeting with other church members that one of the greatest dangers to the church were Homosexuals, Feminists, and Intellectuals. When asked about it in an interview for the PBS Frontline program, he responded with the following: "I suppose uh...I...I think I remember saying those things (laughs to himself)...If it's in print, I said it.(laughs again)"

Dallin H. Oaks, also a member of the Quorum of the 12 said the following: "I think all the leaders of the church are conscious of an obligation to warn the people when there is a danger...Intellectualism is a danger to the church."



Hypocrisy in the Mormon Church

One of the greatest contradictions in the LDS church is on one hand, you value education and stimulating thought. On the other, if what you discover disproves some of the claims made by the church, then if you entertain those questions, you are an apostate and a heretic.

In our own Mormon Scripture, D&C 9:8 it says that we should study things out in our mind before we pray about something, not the other way around. D&C 88:118 says that we should seek out and read the "best books". Finally, D&C 130:19 says that the more we learn on this earth, the greater advantage we will have in the life to come. In other words, we will have to learn everything there is to know about science at some point, so we would be better off by learning as much as we can while we are here.

To say that Intellectualism is a danger to the church contradicts our own scriptures. Why was it necessary for Adam and Eve to partake of the tree of Knowledge of good and evil, even in disobedience to God, to obtain knowledge, but it is dangerous for us to test the waters of science and philosophy if those thoughts do not conform with the teachings and claims made by the church.

What we can learn from the story of Adam and Eve

The story of Adam and Eve is a metaphor. The garden of Eden represents the church. When you are young and innocent, the church is flawless, perfect and beautiful. However, the garden of Eden was not flawless and perfect, Adam and Eve were naked, they just didn't know about it. The tree of knowledge of good and evil represents intellectualism. When Adam and Eve partook of the fruit, they discovered their own nakedness. Their nakedness represents flaws in the claims and history of the church. When people get involved with intellectualism and start to study the history of the church, they discover their own nakedness, in that they realize that many of the things they have always believed in are simply not true. At least many of the claims made by the church turn out to be inaccurate. And thus, because they discover their own nakedness, some are cast out of the church, just as Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden of Eden.

Skeptical Mormon Read more!

Response to Tal Bachman's comments

Tal Bachman's comments on the PBS Frontline documentary "The Mormons" were very interesting and understandable. He talked about how he was so entrenched in the Mormon church that he would have done anything, including strapping a bomb to his chest and blowing himself up like a suicide bomber. I think his decision to leave the church is respectable, but I politely disagree with his notion that even if something is good, if it isn't what it claims to be, we shouldn't be a part of it.

Tal Bachman: "I left the church because I felt that I was forced to conclude that for whatever else it might be, it wasn't what it claimed to be"

Tal Bachman of all people should know, just like any musician, that the music industry isn't what it claims to be either. The music industry is full of empty promises of wealth and a glamorous lifestyle, where the reality is that the majority of musicians don't make it in the music industry.

Many organizations have a troubled past

Walt Disney was racist. As you can see above, one of the early Mickey and Minnie Fantasy pieces entitled "A Black Outlook" talks about Mickey and Minnie being pitted against "Fierce Ni&&#rs". His idea of a theme park about a fantasy utopia was based on the idea of a paradise that only white people would be. The point is do I stop watching Disney Movies, shows or participate in anything affiliated with Disney because the founder was a racist ba$&@rd? That may be the case for some people, but not for me. Although racism may still exist within the organization, they aren't producing racist cartoons anymore.

I can still understand the anger and resentment that people feel about the church when they discover that it isn't what it claims to be. Perhaps Bachman's comments about blowing himself up like a suicide bomber were inappropriate, but what scares me is that I don't think he was exaggerating. Perhaps he would have more credibility if he left that part out, but it sure makes good T.V. However, many people within the church can point out that he is just angry and bitter at the church since he is no longer a member. I think the people that become the most bitter and upset are those that were the most devoted to it.

Bachman also makes a good point that if the churh isn't real, life is too valuable to risk it for something made up. I can see his point on this respect and if he did infact risk his life on his mission, I can see why he would feel this way. I have never been in a situation where my life has been threatened. I wouldn't want to put myself or anyone else in harms way for the church either. If anything, I have a better understanding that although people follow religion to answer questions that have no answer, not everything is black and white all the time.

Tal Bachman: "It might be the best thing ever invented, but if it is invented it's not worth dying for"

I can't help but to wonder if democracy itself is worth dying for. Democracy is invented. The constitution of the United States is invented. Many people have given their lives to defend those things.


Skeptical Mormon Read more!

Who funded the PBS Frontline documentary "The Mormons"?

http://www.pbs.org/mormons/

"Funding for FRONTLINE and American Experience is provided through the support of PBS viewers. Additional funding for FRONTLINE is provided by The Park Foundation. Additional funding for "The Mormons" is provided by Edward D. Smith, Steven J. and Kalleen Lund, Mr. and Mrs. Blake M. Roney, and others. A complete list is available from PBS."

I was curious to see who helped fund this well done and well executed documentary on the Mormon Church. I would assume that the names mentioned at the beginning of the program and on the website are the principal supporters of the project. I decided to do a simple Google search to see who were the major financial backers of the film. I found some interesting information.

Mr. and Mrs. Edward D. Smith- they are active LDS members and are also members of the Philo T. Farnsworth Society. The Philo T. Farnsworth Society members support KBYU and BYU Television with charitable gifts of $1000 or more annually. Edward D. Smith was a Mission president for the Georgia Atlanta North mission from 2003-2006.


Steven J. and Kalleen Lund- They are active LDS members that established a charitable foundation based in Provo, Utah called the "Steven J. and Kallen Lund Foundation" It appears that Steven J. Lund was also a mission president for the Georgia Atlanta mission from 2003-2006. Steven Lund is Vice chairman of the board at Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. Based in Provo, UT.

Blake Roney- Chairman of the board at Nu Skin Enterprises, Inc. based in Provo, UT.

Obviously there is a connection between the three major donors to the PBS Frontline documentary "The Mormons". We know at least 2 of them are active members, Edward Smith was Mission president for the Georgia, Atlanta North mission, during the same 3 year period that Steven Lund was Mission president of the Georgia, Atlanta misison.. Steven Lund and Blake Roney are both on the board of directors at Nu Skin Enterprises. It is reasonable to to think that Blake Roney is LDS.

Obviously, the private donors of the program didn't have direct control of the content, but they were fully aware that it would be an objective view of the Mormon church and it's history from an "outsider's" perspective. This demonstrates to me that many active LDS members wish to shed light on the truth as to our own history so that we can finally confront it and move forward. This makes me very pleased to see that the major donors for this program were active believing LDS members, because that way nobody can say that it was funded by "anti-Mormons". It is refreshing to see that there are honest people within the church that want to take an honest approach to the church's claims and history.

Skeptical Mormon
Read more!

PBS Frontline presents "The Mormons"

http://www.pbs.org/mormons/

"A four-hour exploration into the richness, the complexities and the controversies of the Mormons' story as told through interviews with members of the church, leading writers and historians, and supporters and critics of the Mormon faith."

After watching the first part of a two-part series, I am very impressed so far with the documentary. It is a very fair and objective view on the history of Mormonism. It does a very good job of staying factual. It provides all different points of views and is full of terrific information. I would have to say it is the best film I have ever seen on the Mormons. I will expand more on what I thought of the film later on, but it is 2:30 a.m right now and I am ready to go to bed. I look forward to seeing the second part tomorrow.

The film will be available on DVD and will be available for viewing online Tuesday, May 1 at noon. If you have a few hours, I would highly recommend everyone see it, it outlines many aspects of the church that have caused me to question my faith.

Skeptical Mormon Read more!

New Anti-Mormon video is distributed

Search for the Truth

This video entitled "Search for the truth" was distributed to thousands of members of the church for free. Although I was not selected to receive the DVD, anyone can watch it on the Internet. Overall, I thought it was pretty boring but it did have some good points as to why I no longer believe in the Mormon church. The part about the Book of Abraham was the most important part for me, because when I learned about the Book of Abraham, that is when I completely lost faith in the Mormon Church. I will discuss my discoveries on the Book of Abraham at a later time. Just like most "Anti-Mormon" productions made by evangelicals, I found about 15 mins worth of substantial information in a 1:30 hour presentation. It was a typical over-impassioned film, but it did have some worthwile and accurate information, even if it was watered down at times.

Evangelicals and Hypocrisy

I find it fascinating that Evangelicals are quick to point to DNA and archaeology to disprove the Book of Mormon, yet they fail to recognize that the same science disproves many aspects of the Bible as well. DNA disproves creationism for one, and there is no scientific evidence to back up the story of Noah's ark. There is some evidence to support some events in the Bible, but there is also evidence to contradict other events and stories. In the video, there was a part where someone was saying "scientists are not debating the origin of the Native Americans". However, there is also no debate in the scientific community on the origin of man either. Scientists have used DNA evidence to link Homo sapiens to the Homo heidelbergensis and the Homo ecrectus species. So, if we can apply DNA evidence to prove that Native Americans are from North Eastern Asia and not Israel as the Book of Mormon claims, we can use the same DNA evidence to prove that men came from apes and not Adam and Eve. My point is if you discredit DNA evidence when it disproves the Bible, you have to discredit it completely.

Locations as Evidence for the Bible?

It is interesting that people would point out that the locations mentioned in the Bible exist and therefore that proves that it is a true book. However, the cities mentioned in the Doctrine and Covenants exist. I can go to Independence, Missouri, Carthage, IL or Palmyra, NY and see evidence that Joseph Smith existed. I can look at archaeological evidence to support that Joseph Smith was a real person and that the people groups that are mentioned existed. Does that mean that the Doctrine and Covenants is a true book?

Mormons and Hypocrisy

On the flip side, I am also amazed at the reaction of church members. Most members of the church are repulsed by the idea of someone sending them a video that questions their faith and is trying to ram their beliefs down their throats to get them to change religions. Then, I laugh because the LDS church is doing the exact same thing, it looks like people don't like the taste of their own medicine.

I know all about what LDS missionaries do, because I was one. As a missionary, I was trained to destroy other people's faith in their religion. We would send videos along with other medias, but the point is that now that the shoe is on the other foot, LDS members need to understand why other people are mad when we try to shove our beliefs down other people's throats.

Everyone is a Hypocrite

Evangelicals like to use science to disprove Mormonism, but when the same science disproves the bible, suddenly science isn't reliable. Mormons like to drop by unannounced and show people videos that they didn't ask for, but get bent out of shape if someone else does the same thing to them. I suppose it is just part of human nature to only see what we want to see. I am sure I do the same thing. As for the quality of the video, I have seen other videos that are better.

Church Response to the video

LDS apologists offer some insight. This is the part where I lose faith in Mormonsim. LDS apologists can't refute what is said on the video, all they can do is attack the source. The worst is the part where they admit that the Book of Abraham is a hoax and the church has known it since 1967.

The official church response is very angry and upset about the video. Once again, they can't refute any of the facts on the video, they can only attack the source of the video. "one religious group chooses to target another with a DVD full of distortions of its doctrine and history, and misrepresentations so stark that they call into question the integrity of the producers." Pot, meet Kettle. You want to talk about a group that distorts LDS doctrine and church history, look in the mirror. I just mentioned the Book of Abraham and how the LDS church has known since 1967 that it was a hoax, but yet the church hides and distorts that fact from the general church population. The Book of Abraham is still an officially cannonized scripture.

By their own words, a religious group that is full of distortions of the LDS doctrine and history, and misrepresentations so stark that they call into question the integrity of that group, we should not trust anything said by that religious group. Nobody has distorted and misrepresented LDS history and doctrine like the LDS church.

Skeptical Mormon
Read more!