April 2014

During March, two new ‘essays’ appeared from Mormon Church leaders. One reiterates the continued stand against “Same-Sex Marriage”; a view which reflects complete ignorance of the scientific evidence now available regarding same sex attraction being hard-wired into the brains of some six to eight percent of humans (and a number of other species) and is entirely lacking in compassion and understanding; but it comes as no surprise.

LDS ESSAY: Same-sex Marriage.

***************

NOAH: The other essay is so absurd that had it been issued today (April 1st), I would have wondered, was it an ‘April Fool’s Day’ joke? But no, it confirms a continued belief in ‘Noah’ and the fictional story of a global flood in which god killed every living being (including babies), and creature on the planet (except those that lived in water – apparently, although it would have been impossible for freshwater fish to survive the mix of salt water, so where and how did Noah house all the freshwater life?), apart from eight people and several million species of animals – somehow.

The essay also reconfirms the Mormon belief that Adam and Eve were the very first humans, just six thousand years ago. “The scriptures list him [Noah] as the 10th patriarch from Adam.”

Due to some of the comments I will make, and although I have mentioned it before, it is important to fully clarify (for anyone who still doesn’t understand the difference between a ‘theory’ and ‘scientific theory’), the exact difference between the two concepts.

“Science is a systematic and logical approach to discovering how things in the universe work. It is derived from the Latin word “scientia,” which translates to knowledge. Unlike the arts, science aims for measurable results through testing and analysis. Science is based on fact, not opinion or preferences. The process of science is designed to challenge ideas through research. It is not meant to prove theories, but rule out alternative explanations until a likely conclusion is reached.

A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step—known as a theory—in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.

When used in non-scientific context, the word “theory” implies that something is unproven or speculative. As used in science, however, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.

Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists’ explanations and interpretations of the facts. Scientists can have various interpretations of the outcomes of experiments and observations, but the facts, which are the cornerstone of the scientific method, do not change.” From livescience.com (emphasis added).

For example, we know ‘evolution’ is an absolute fact that happened, and continues to happen (the fact of evolution), and the ‘theory of evolution’ is the scientific explanation of the facts.

Here’s a thought; if oceanic life survived the flood, why did this god have to kill almost all the flora and fauna just to get rid of most of the humans that he had created? Another thought; one third of the host of heaven apparently followed Satan and two thirds followed God (and Jesus). Yet by the time of Noah, almost all those previously ‘faithful’ people who were now on Earth had become so wicked they may as well have followed Satan in the first place? Yet everyone who followed after Noah was somehow okay? This same god is claimed to have managed to kill off the first born of Egypt, without affecting the rest of the people and animals. But then, in Mormonism, the world had to be ‘baptised’, so we must suppose that murdering many billions of creatures, in addition to millions of humans, including children and babies, was just part of this god’s ridiculous modus operandi.

If, by now, you have not realised that if the Mormon god exists, and this was indeed all part of a plan, he is indeed all that Richard Dawkins proclaimed: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” (The God Delusion, p.31). And, his so-called plan is so lame, it is not worthy of an entirely insane human, let alone a supposed god. The flood concept defies a number of different and well established scientific disciplines (not to mention engineering problems for a ship of that size made of wood), on every level. The idea is not just implausible or even improbable – it is scientifically completely impossible – period. The idea that ‘with god, all things are possible’ fails when it contradicts established laws of science which cannot be broken. If a god does exist, they are his own unbreakable laws.

The essay mentions the ‘generations’ from Adam, thus also confirming the continued belief in another clearly proven myth, ‘Adam and Eve’, who lived some six thousand years ago (at a time we know there were already some five million humans around the planet). This god did not create the cereal crops we know today either. Humans cultivated those (genetically modified if you like), from wild grasses, several thousands of years before the claimed time of Adam. God told Adam “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread” (Genesis 3:19). This concept was confirmed by Joseph Smith in Moses 1:5. But, if Adam was the first human (regardless of when), he would have had no cereal crops from which to make any bread, no idea what bread even was, and would have had no idea how to cook. Fire wasn’t tamed by humans for a very long time. Once you start to investigate such claims, the nonsense becomes clearer and clearer. There is no end to the evidence against such ludicrous claims as Adam and Eve, or the flood being a reality.

Creationism is thus also confirmed in Mormonism, despite the fact that evolution by natural selection is a proven fact – as solid an aspect of fully evidenced scientific truth that anyone could ever imagine existed. Despite this, the Mormon Church has reaffirmed its faith in more proven fiction by issuing this new essay.

Unless the Church wishes to change (or deny) Joseph Smith’s pronouncements, made in the Doctrine and Covenants, it is stuck with the belief that the entire ‘temporal existence’ of this planet extends to just seven thousand years, from beginning (of life), to end, including a yet to come one-thousand year millennium. Such beliefs as a ‘six thousand year old earth’, ‘Adam and Eve’, and ‘Noah’s flood’, are, in the modern world, beyond delusional – they are indeed completely insane, just as Richard Dawkins says. They may as well reaffirm the biblical belief that the world is flat and stationary (Dan 4:10-11; Matt 4:8, 1 Chron 16:30, Psalms 93:1), as scientifically, these myths and legends really are now that silly.

Yet, the Mormon Church just confirmed faith in fiction, over an (even reluctant) acceptance of fully evidenced scientific fact. If Mormon leaders had had the integrity to admit that the above stories are either fictional or allegorical, they may have stood a chance of saving their Church from its ultimate and inevitable demise. No wonder members are leaving the Church in droves. They are expected to have faith in and believe the equivalent of ‘Alice in Wonderland’, in an age when we know the truth ‘without a shadow of doubt’ (a phrase Mormons often use in their testimonies). Mormons will still repeat “I know the Church is true”, by rote, without stopping to actually ‘think’ about established evidence which leads everyone else to understand that, whether Mormons like it or not, or they are willing to believe it or not, they ‘know for an absolute fact that the Mormon Church cannot possibly be true.’ New converts, in the more enlightened parts of the world, will continue to be few and far between, and Mormon congregations will continue to dwindle as the truth is now so obvious and easily accessible.

D&C 77:6. Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?

1. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence. (Emphasis added).

LDS ESSAY: Noah.

A number of Mormons I know, understand and accept evolution; they realise ‘Adam and Eve’ could not have been the first humans, just six-thousand years ago; and they know that a global flood, about four-thousand-three-hundred years ago, was a physical impossibility. I wonder how they will cope with the cognitive dissonance that is bound to occur when and if they see this essay. The likelihood is remote at present because, as usual, the Church has just buried their essays in a general list that most members will never actually see – unless they start to question and go looking.

Mormon youth are taught the Mormon belief system at Church and in Seminary – with no evidentiary support whatsoever. There isn’t any; they are taught to live by faith. Meanwhile, they are taught in school, college and university, that a ‘scientific theory’ is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that has been substantiated through repeated experiments or testing. They will learn the truth (and the proof) behind the theory of evolution by natural selection, DNA and the mapping of the tree of life, the germ theory of disease, the theory of gravity, the theory of relativity, astrophysics, geology, palaeontology, microbiology, laws of thermodynamics, and much more, complete with up-to-the-minute evidence in support of our latest understanding in each area. They will know the true age of the planet and how long we have been here. They will study the history of civilisations that pre-date the Adam and Eve myth by thousands of years; at the same time realising that none of these cultures cater for a ‘flood gap’ (or later repopulation by entirely different people descended from Noah), and that the biblical flood simply could not and did not happen. It will put an end to their faith in fiction.

The various scientific disciplines combine (and none of them contradict each other), to paint a very accurate picture of life, our planet, and the universe that Mormonism must accept and adopt, or it will ultimately fail to retain its youth who will easily see through the hoax. Mormon youth will comprehend that science is the reliable bedrock of knowledge and understanding. Nonsensical religious stories, formulated in ignorance, many thousands of years ago, cannot stand up to scrutiny in the modern world. Myth and legend is quickly and easily recognised and rejected – except when it is wrapped up in so-called scripture, when it may just be accepted ‘on faith’ by those still prepared not to ‘think’. But it will become harder and harder to do so.

When faced with indisputable evidence against Mormon claims, the Church still resorts to the argument that the science must be flawed – when it really isn’t; it becomes more solid by the minute. The following is taken from this month’s Mormon Church magazine for its youth:

“False Idea: Some things in the Book of Mormon are refuted by current scientific evidence, and the accounts of how it was translated are inconsistent, so Joseph Smith must have made it all up or copied it from somewhere.

Where It Leads (Big Lie): The Book of Mormon was a big lie and Joseph Smith was not a prophet, so stop associating with the Church.

The Truth: Science affirms many things in the Book of Mormon and the “evidence” against it is flawed. But the most important evidence for it is the witness of the spirit telling you it is true and that Joseph Smith was a true prophet.” (New Era, April 2014).

Note the incredible and unsubstantiated off-hand statements that “Science affirms many things in the Book of Mormon” (it doesn’t confirm anything in the book at all), and that “the “evidence” against it is flawed”, whilst providing not a single word establishing exactly what is affirmed, or indeed, how or why extensive evidence against the book is flawed. In reality, evidence against the book (and most other things Mormon) is overwhelming. (See any of the five TMD volumes). The idea that “the most important evidence for it is the witness of the spirit” is simply insane, when any such ‘feeling’ is contradicted by concrete scientific evidence to the contrary.

See: ‘True or False’ for more nonsense in the rest of the article, inlcuding some valid reasoning, which is then manipulated to suit the Church position; including the idea that for Education: “A saint … seeks learning by study, and also by faith. Education … enables one to discern truth from error, particularly through studying the scriptures.” The brainwashing continues. You can’t learn anything by faith in proven fiction – you can only learn from established and scientifically verified facts. Faith is (unwisely) used to believe what someone else claims when evidence is absent. When evidence becomes abundant, such as with the flood, Adam and Eve, and evolution, integrity demands you must change your position. Faith that those ideas were factual, must then be laid aside. The Church is asking members to continue to have ‘faith’ in the opposite of evidenced ‘facts’, and that is not a valid (or healthy) option. Having made the wrong choice about them (due to the Bible and Joseph Smith), the Church has now decided to press on with the delusions rather than face and accept the truth. They will pay a huge price for that mistake. For Mormon youth, it would be far better for them to study the mountain of scientific evidence that has accumulated regarding false Mormon teachings, rather than blindly follow their leaders’ advice to believe myths and legends that have all been completely destroyed by that very evidence.

The catch-all statement that science (evidence against the Book of Mormon) is flawed and that the spirit is the best ‘evidence’, guides Mormon youngsters away from science and the indisputable facts, to a reliance on wishful thinking. Irrespective of the claim that “science affirms many things in the Book of Mormon”, the fact is that nothing in the Book of Mormon is supported by science (tangible evidence) at all. Everything that is testable is fully refuted by science, everything. See: The Mormon Delusion Vol. 2, for more. Nowhere will you actually find any independent, impartial, documented, peer reviewed, scientific evidence in support of the Book of Mormon (or any other Mormon) claims, as there is none whatsoever.

There are many books and articles available explaining all the scientific ‘flood’ problems that need to be considered. This is just one: Problems with a Global Flood.

Mormon problems are exacerbated even further by the continued belief, confirmed in the Encyclopaedia of Mormonism, that the Garden of Eden was in what is now Jackson County, Missouri. Thus, all humans, from Adam, through to the time of the flood, resided in America. Noah’s ark left from there, ending up somewhere in the Middle East, where there were no humans before that time. For this to be the case, we would expect to find no evidence of any humans anywhere outside the Americas, until after the time of the flood. Abundant evidence from across the globe proves conclusively that this is not the case at all (and the science is not flawed). The premise that Noah ‘set off’ from America – along with the flood, Adam and Eve, and creationism, are declared as the truth by the Mormon Church. Yet we know for an absolute fact, that none of the above can possibly be true.

Perhaps the Mormon Church would like to explain why their stand that Eden was in Missouri conflicts with the Bible and also Joseph Smith’s Inspired Revision of the Bible (Moses 3:10-14).

Genesis 2:10. And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.

11. The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
12. And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone.
13. And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.
14. And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates.

With the best will in the world, you cannot scientifically (or even logically) equate Havilah (Saudi Arabia and Yemen), Ethiopia, Assyria and the Euphrates (Middle East), with Missouri in America. Eden is of course also fictional, but from the information in the Bible, which Joseph Smith did not alter, the closest it has been placed to America is possibly Turkey.

See also, the magnitude of additional problems caused by Apostle Jeff Holland’s proclamation that after the flood, America, “The promised place was set apart. Without habitation it waited for the fulfillment of God’s special purposes. …the Lord began almost at once to repeople the promised land. The Jaredites came first…” (A Promised Land, The Ensign, June 1976). (Emphasis added). Holland didn’t stop to think that by claiming there was no one in the Americas after the flood, before the Jaredites, then Lehi and company, that for this to be true, all Native American DNA must support that premise and prove decendancy from a single source group that migrated from Israel just a few hundred years BCE. Yet modern day Native American DNA does no such thing; it traces back to eastern Asian origins many thousands of years before the claimed flood. That science isn’t flawed either. (Scroll down to ‘Book of Mormon and DNA Studies’ note under ‘February’ below for further details).

*******************

On 14th March 2014, Westminster Magistrate’s Court in London, England, heard a fraud case which lasted a full day, brought against Thomas S. Monson – as sole owner of the ‘Corporation’ that is the Mormon Church. Tom Phillips, ex Stake President (who has had the ‘second anointing’ or ‘calling and election made sure’, therefore, technically he cannot be excommunicated), brought the case on behalf of Steve Bloor and Chris Ralph (both former Bishops). All three men are still members of the Mormon Church. (For further information, see the links below from 4th February and 7th February). The magistrate deferred judgement until the following Thursday (20th March), when he withdrew the summonses.

Church lawyers argued for costs against Tom, but this was rejected by the magistrate, who also instructed that Tom’s own costs be paid from central funds as the case had been brought by the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service). The gist as to why the summonses were withdrawn by the court is that it had not been shown that Monson is on record as personally declaring (testifying) that the clearly fraudulent claims listed are actually ‘true’. The lawyers argued that they were merely ‘beliefs’. None of the Church leadership were there to explain what the Church does teach as ‘true’ and everything was left to lawyers who are not Mormon and have no idea about what the Church actually claims to be true. Several things came out of the full one day hearing. ‘Beliefs’ of the Mormon Church can no longer be considered to be claimed as ‘facts’ – lawyers claimed that the Church doesn’t teach its ‘beliefs’ as ‘facts’. (The Book of Mormon is only ‘believed’ to be an historical document – it is not claimed as a matter of ‘fact’, etc). That will be news to most members of the Mormon Church.

Priesthood leaders are clearly not needed to represent the Lord’s Church any longer; instead, it is now lawyers who make pronouncements on behalf of the Church. Tithing is voluntary and optional rather than a ‘commandment’, despite the fact it has always been taught as a commandment. You can’t hold callings or attend a temple without paying it and you won’t get to the Celestial Kingdom, risking separation from family forever if you don’t pay. Does that sound voluntary?

For an analysis of the achievements of Tom Phillips’ case against Thomas S. Monson, here is a link to Steve Bloor’s blog concerning the case.