letterstotheeditorsmall.jpg (14279 bytes)


January 2002
(Names and Contact Info Removed)

Jan. 1, 2002

Subject: comments regarding your articles on this site


After doing some browsing on church related topics, I came across your site, "Legacy, a distorted view of Mormon History". Interesting indeed. I wondered a few things as I read, and if you will be so bold to answer a few inquiries that I have and hear a few observances.

One, are you currently a member of the church? have you ever been a member of the lds church at one time? Do you currently have a temple recommend, and do you attend regularly? Have you read the Book of Mormon cover to cover (not just skimming) and received an answer to Moroni's challenge? Did you serve a mission?

Some of these may be personal but none would I hesitate to answer to even a stranger.

A lot of the "facts" that you are attempting to bring to everyone's attention actually didn't shock me. To assume that Joseph was 100% on course and never affected by his surroundings or position of leadership over some and defender against others would be naive. I hope that most saints share the same view.

I'm sure mistakes were made. But could Joseph persuade saints in leadership roles to form secret bands like the gadianton robbers for the sake of murder, plunder and theft? And were the saints a wild band of religious fanatics murdering for gain and self righteous indignation? I have a hard time believing they were the KKK.

I would love to see where your sources are coming from all over this piece and see it for myself. But even if I did, I guess it comes down to something that keeps ringing over and over with me. What redeeming quality does your work have? What is the purpose of so much effort? To further faith? Can't be. To further salvation and spirituality? no. To further truth? ok, maybe you have found some dark patches.

But to focus there does what for you and all you persuade? In the eternal view of the plan of salvation, if you believe there is one, what does it do? Do I hometeach better because of it? Do I serve my neighbor better because of it? Do I attend the temple, study, pray, etc. with more ferver than ever before after having known all of it? No. Ignorance isn't bliss, but destruction was never construction either.

I wonder what/who your faith is actually in....

[Sandra's Note: Thanks for writing. You will find many of these questions answered at our web site. But I will give a brief answer here.

Jerald and I are both from 5th generation LDS families.

We both did baptism for the dead. I had a recommend to attend the dedication of the Los Angeles temple, but neither one of us has been through the endowment ceremony.

Yes, we have read the Book of Mormon many times. We continued to believe the Book of Mormon for two years after formally leaving the LDS Church. But after extensive research we concluded it was not a factual history but a novel written by Smith.

We did not go on LDS missions. We were struggling with Mormonism in our late teens. Jerald was trying to decide whether to go on a mission.

Our goal is to see people turn to Christ and look to the Bible for their answers, not Joseph Smith.]

Jan. 3, 2002

Personally, I think you are the people that are starting the great and abominal church. You start your own church becuase the real one is too hard for you to follow. Your week and your the church/churches that the book of mormon talk about. Your church deals with principles of the comon man. An enemy to god. You make your own beleifs and ways to understand things.

Well, for one, how did this earth get created. How did he make it from nothing. Can't understand now can you. But you know he did!!!!! So pull your heads out of you butts and see that there is not perfect comprehention of any church. But there is only one that brings truth and happiness to everyone. NOT JUST FAMILY's. I don't have one, but you know, I still see this church as a true church of God, And the son of god Jesus Christ.

How dare you mock Jesus, and act as a Prophet by translating your beleifs. Why don't you have followers. Why don't you have your own Buildings and temples of worship. I think if your the true church, god will help you. But you know what, your a false doctrine organization led by Satan and his followeres. There is no truth in what you say, just opinion!!! Sorry, your the whore of the Church!!!! That is in my opinion. Freedom of speech!!!!

Jan. 4, 2002

Subject: Can you help?

Dear Jerald and Sandra,

Hi ...I was told through a friend at church that you may be able to help me with a slight problem I have. Below is my dilemma.

In 1999 I wrote letters (TWICE) to headquarters, stake president and bishop no-brains-here stating that I no longer wished to be a member of their untrue and misguided church.

To this day, I am still on their rolls and records and am continuing to be harassed by visiting teachers and home teachers! Needless to say I am unimpressed. Other than going to see bishop no-brains-here and giving him a piece of my mind to get me off these stupid rolls and records, what do I do?

I need to get off these stupid records to have more peace in my life!!! Since this time I have been re-baptized and have become a member of a baptist church. I love it.

I love the Christian Jesus! He is the way and the life. I feel sorry for all the misguided mormons out there. I only wish that one day they too will become un-blind and see for themselves the real Christ. Thank you for your time.

[Sandra's Note: You will need to write a letter to the bishop, send copies to the stake pres. and church. You could state something to the effect (put your own words to these ideas) that you wrote to him in 1999 (send copies of the letters if you have them) stating that you wanted your membership terminated in the LDS Church. Explain that you realize that the church has a 30 day waiting period to make it final. However, it has been over two years since your letters and you are still on their rolls, and are still receiving unwanted calls/visits from the ward personnel. There should be no reason to further delay this action. State that you insist they immediately remove your name from their membership records and from their visitation lists. Be sure to include that you want a letter stating that your membership has been terminated. Instruct them to not use the word 'excommunication' in your paper work as your termination is at your insistence, not due to a bishops court for misconduct.

You could add something about your current beliefs, that you have placed your full confidence for eternal life in Christ, not Mormon temple ceremonies, and that you have now joined another church and will never be returning to the LDS organization. Explain that you do not want to make this a media issue, but if your instructions are not followed, you will be forced to go to the press about their controlling/harassing policies. You could tell them that while you welcome visits from your neighbors, you will not tolerate unsolicited visits from representatives of the LDS Church.

Hope this does it for you.]

Jan. 4, 2002

Ok, taking numerous suggestions from several people...this will be given to my Bishop this Sunday.

Dear Bishop N......,

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 I knew was contrary to that which was taught by the Savior himself. Some of the history and doctrines that have caused my wife and I 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 closet 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 (Joseph) 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. (ie, 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 (ie, 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 I 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) While on his mission, Mike had heard of the Kinderhook plates before but he never gave the story much credit. 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 me 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 I think we need to 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 2,230,000 deaths 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. I have had more than one self described "church scholar" tell me 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, I can summarize 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. This doctrine clearly contradicts what is taught in the Bible. (See Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, pp.50-51, Vol. 5, p.331,Deseret News, June 18, 1873) We are not the only members to have a major problem with this doctrine. ApostleAmasa 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 my 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 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 I 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. I 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 M..... 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 H.......... 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 M........ 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 N...........'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.


_____ ______

_____ ______

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.

Jan. 4, 2002

Subject: becoming god

Just a thought on the promise that people will actually become gods and rule over their own worlds...etc etc

Sounds an awful lot like the same promise Lucifer made to Eve when he was tempting her to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil doesn't it?..."for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like God...Genesis 3:4

Jan. 5, 2002

...I came across your address, via the Internet, looking at "Mormonism". We still are members, but have some doubts about the church.

Would you have suggestions as how to go about researching/reading articles, which are well documented, to find out for ourselves?

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards,

[Sandra's Note: Most of the books and documents from which we quote are in the libraries here in Utah, like the University of Utah and BYU. Also, the Utah State Historical Society has all the old LDS books. You might want to read through The Changing World of Mormonism. You can look up the references and see for yourself what they say.]

Jan. 5, 2002

I find it very sad that you must deceive people in order to make a buck! I mistakenly got on to your site by typing in Lattersaints.com. Maybe if you'd find your OWN website address instead of having to reroute people you'd get fewer nasty emails! I find it comical that you "changed" your name to become a "non Profit " ministry. We all know that this entitles you to receive money from our government. How convenient!!!!!!

Your fore fathers must be sickened by your hatred for the religion and cause that they gave so much for! What a reunion you will have with them when you meet them in the hereafter!

If you want to discredit the Book Of Mormon then so be it but when you stand at your Masters feet, it will be you who is discredited for the frauds you are and I believe that you will be held responsible for anyone that you help lead astray. How about them apples?

[Sandra's Note: Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

First, we were not the ones that set up the original site you visited. Someone else did that and put a link to our site. It's a free country, anyone can put up a link to anyone else's site.

Second, we do not receive any money from the government.

Third, the LDS Church is also a 'non-profit' organization.

Fourth, just as the LDS church sends out missionaries and gives out literature to promote their point of view, we have the right to print and distribute our point of view. We do not force anyone to read it.

Fifth, if our site is full of lies it should be easy for you to supply me with an example. Where have we misquoted the LDS Church or its leaders?]

Jan. 5, 2002

Dear Beloved of God,

Thanks so much for all the support you've given former Mormons. I am a walking testimony to the power of prayer. I'm currently witnessing to LDS at one of their web sites and need to find the reference where Spencer W. Kimball or another prophet said that Mormon's do believe in another Jesus. I'm currently at your web site but have not been able to find this source in my search so far. Thanks and God Bless You

[Sandra's Note: I believe you are referring to a talk by Gordon B. Hinckley, Deseret News, Church News Section, June 20, 1998, p. 7:

"President Gordon B. Hinckley paused for a moment while addressing members of the Church from Switzerland and southern France to revel in the beauty of that part of the world....

"'The crown of the gospel of Jesus Christ is upon our head. In this dispensation, the Lord has declared that this Church is 'the only true and living Church upon the face of the whole earth.'...

"In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints 'do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. He, together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages.

" 'Am I Christian? Of course I am. I believe in Christ. I talk of Christ. I pray through Christ. I'm trying to follow Him and live His gospel in my life.' "]

Jan. 6, 2002

Subject: I didn't like you - - - but now I see

I had heard many things about the Tanners after I joined the mormon church, well, I heard things about you BEFORE I joined, too. I was raised in a Christian home, yet when I was 21 years in 1993, I joined in Mormon church.

Now, here I am...almost 9 years later...leaving. It's amazing how the truth can seem covered up and replaced by a clever cover by Satan. I served as a missionary and did all I was supposed to do, and in these last 2 years, my soul felt a hunger that I could not satisfy and could only be satisfied by Jesus Christ and His grace and mercy.

I was saved when I was 16 years old, yet within the last few weeks I feel like I have asked Him back into my heart and life all over again...and I'm back at square one...despite all the things I was raised to believe...I put them all aside and now...I'm starting over again. I just want to thank you for your love and concern you have for others who are daily walking blindly in the LDS faith.

I understand and appreciate you now more than I ever have before. I just want to say thanks and ask that you pray for me as I now search for a Bible teaching Church in North Texas.

It's a scary yet welcomed new start to a wonderful new life in Christ. I'm grateful that I'm single because it is just myself but I have friends who question how I could leave "the whole truth" to join something which teaches "1/2 truth". I'm still having a time explaining it all but I pray for the continued things I'm learning to be able to share the differences with them.

Thanks for everything you are doing! May God continue to Bless you as you do HIS work!

Jan. 7, 2002

Subject: Mark Hofmann follow up

I feel kind of silly writing to you, but I just finished the book "The Mormon Murders", and I am curious as to what ever happened to Mark Hofmann?

Is he still in prison? Have you ever written any follow-up as to his story? What a strange guy.......fascinating story, but a really strange guy.

[Sandra's Note: He is serving a life sentence at the Utah State Prison. He does not give interviews. There will be a new book out on Hofmann later in the year, by a writer from England.]

Jan. 7, 2002

Subject: Thank-you

To Jerald and Sandra Tanner,

I wrote to you last year. I asked for information about Mormonism, as a result of my sons involvement in that Cult. I also told you that my son had gone out to Utah. He wanted to go to school there.

Fortunately, he didn't. Because of a set of circumstances he had to return. He again went out there a few months later, but stayed only a short time. Thanks to a lot of prayers, I have my son back, close by.

The sad thing is he is still involved with the Cult. I am frustrated. They so brainwash their recruits!! At least I still have quite a bit of contact with him, and things aren't bad unless we get into a discussion about differences. At least he doesn't get mad openly. ...I am trying to be patient. I worry because he has a child, and he takes her to their church. ....

Well, I sincerely thank you for the information you sent to me originally and a few times later also. Keep up the god work. (Whoops, I made a typo-I meant to say good- but perhaps it should stand as Gods work.) The One and Only True God God Bless you greatly, and provide for you abundantly, I pray


Jan. 8, 2002

Subject: Reincarnation


I remember reading several years ago that Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and Orson Pratt taught reincarnation and transmigration. ("Transmigration" referred to the soul experiencing the essence of animal to human souls and vice versa). I also believe the term "sequential mortality" not reincarnation was used. Have you ever ran across any teachings of either of these two philosophies? Thanks for any help you can give. Have a great day!


[Sandra's Note: The LDS Church does not teach reincarnation. They believe that your basic personality has always existed, it just goes through different stages, originally an 'intelligence' then a 'spirit being', then a mortal existence, then a resurrected being—combining the spirit body with the mortal body—but you didn't go from a dog to man or from man to a dog. However, apostle Orson Pratt taught something resembling reincarnation. We have some material on this in our book, Mormonism—Shadow or Reality?, p.561.

LDS apostle Orson Pratt had some strange ideas about spirit particles moving up the food chain. Writing in 1853, Pratt taught:

"Vegetable and animal life is nothing more nor less than vegetable and animal spirit. The spirit of a vegetable is in the same image and likeness of its tabernacle, and of the same magnitude, for it fills every part thereof. It is capable of existing in an organized form before it enters its vegetable house, and also after it departs from it. If the spirit of an apple tree were rendered visible when separated from its natural tabernacle, it would appear in the form, likeness, and magnitude of the natural apple tree; and so it is with the spirit of every other tree, or herb, or blade of grass, its shape, its magnitude, and its appearance, resemble the natural tabernacle intended for its residence. It is the organized spirit that manifests life; it is the spirit that animates the vegetable, that causes it to grow, that shapes its different parts, that preserves it from decaying, that enables it to bud and blossom and bring forth seed. When the spiritual vegetable withdraws, the natural one decays and returns to its original elements; but its spirit, being a living substance, remains in its organized form, capable of happiness in its own sphere, and will again inhabit a celestial tabernacle when all things are made new.

"The spirits of fish, birds, beasts, insects, and of man, are in the image and likeness of their natural bodies of flesh and bones, and of the same magnitude, filling every part of the same. It is this spiritual substance, and not the body, that sees, hears, tastes, smells, feels, thinks, enjoys, suffers, and manifests every other affection or passion characteristic of the animal creation. It is this self-moving, powerful substance, that quickens, animates, and moves the natural body—that forms and fashions every part—that preserves the organization from decay and death. None of the spirits of the whole animal creation are disorganized by the death of the body, but are capable of feeling, thinking, moving, enjoying, suffering, out of the body as well as in it. They are eternal, and will exist forever, capable of joy and happiness." (The Seer, Orson Pratt, 1853, Vol.1, No.3, p.33-p.34)

Later in the same volume, Orson Pratt taught:

"Admitting the eternity of the capacities, then the materials of which our spirits are composed, must have been capable of thinking, moving, willing, &c., before they were organized in the womb of the celestial female. Preceding that period there was an endless duration, and each particle of our spirits had an eternal existence, and was in possession of eternal capacities. "Now can it be supposed, for one moment, that these particles were inactive and dormant from all eternity until they received their organization in the form of the infant spirit? Can we suppose that particles, possessed of the power to move themselves, would not have exerted that power, during the endless duration preceding their organization? If they were once organized in the vegetable kingdom, and then disorganized by becoming the food of celestial animals, and then again re-organized in the form of the spirits of animals which is a higher sphere of being, then, is it unreasonable to suppose that the seine particles have, from all eternity, been passing through an endless chain of unions and disunions, organizations and disorganizations, until at length they are permitted to enter into the highest and most exalted sphere of organization in the image and likeness of God? A transmigration of the same particles of spirits from a lower to a higher organization, is demonstrated from the fact that the same particles exist in a diffused scattered state, mingled with other matter; next, they exist in a united form, growing out of the earth in the shape of grass, herbs, and trees; and after this, these vegetables become food for celestial animals, and these same particles are organized into their offspring, and thus form the spirits of animals. Here, then, is apparently a transmigration of the same particles of spirit from an inferior to a superior organization, wherein their condition is improved, and their sphere of action enlarged. Who shall set any bounds to this upward tendency of spirit? Who shall prescribe limits to its progression? If it abide the laws and conditions of its several states of existence, who shall say that it will not progress until it shall gain the very summit of perfection, and exist in all the glorious beauty of the image of God?" (The Seer, Vol.1, No.7, p.102-103)

Joseph Smith, in History of the Church, Vol. 2, p.307, stated:

"Tuesday, November 10.—I resumed conversation with Matthias, and desired him to enlighten my mind more on his views respecting the resurrection.

"He said that he possessed the spirit of his fathers, that he was a literal descendant of Matthias, the Apostle, who was chosen in the place of Judas that fell; that his spirit was resurrected in him; and that this was the way or scheme of eternal life-this transmigration of soul or spirit from father to son.

"I told him that his doctrine was of the devil, that he was in reality in possession of a wicked and depraved spirit, although he professed to be the Spirit of truth itself; and he said also that he possessed the soul of Christ.

"He tarried until Wednesday, 11th, when, after breakfast, I told him, that my God told me, that his god was the devil, and I could not keep him any longer, and he must depart. And so I, for once, cast out the devil in bodily shape, and I believe a murderer."

James E. Talmage, in Jesus the Christ, p.374-5, wrote:

"It is not possible that Jesus could have meant that John was the same individual as Elijah; nor could the people have so understood His words, since the false doctrine of transmigration or reincarnation of spirits was repudiated by the Jews."

Hope this helps.]

Jan. 8, 2002

Subject: Mormonism

Hi there. My question is this: As believers in Christ, we emphasize a personal relationship with Jesus Christ; being born again. Do you find most Mormons putting their complete trust in Jesus and in Him alone or are they trusting in Mormonism for their salvation?

...Thank you! God bless.

[Sandra's Note: First you need to realize that Mormonism has redefined all the words. When they use the word 'saved' they do not mean it in the same sense as Christians. They believe everyone will be 'saved' since they equate 'saved' with being 'resurrected.' But being 'saved' (which means immortality or the ability to live forever) is not the same as having 'eternal life' which means having a temple marriage and 'godhood.'

Second, they believe you can be 'saved' and 'go to heaven' without being a Mormon, but you will not have 'eternal life' without being baptized in the LDS Church, full tithe payer, have a temple marriage, and living a faithful LDS life. 'Eternal life' is the same as 'exaltation' and 'godhood.' This is given to only those who earn the highest level of the top section of Heaven (the top of the Celestial Kingdom). These are the only ones who will be in the presence of God the Father, those in the lower kingdoms (like good Baptists, Muslims, Jews) will be in the presence of Jesus or the Holy Ghost.

So, no, I do not see 'most Mormons putting their complete trust in Jesus and in Him alone.' The active, temple attending Mormon is trusting in Mormonism, Joseph Smith's teachings, and his/her temple activity to gain them a place in the Celestial Kingdom, or 'eternal life.']

Jan. 8, 2002

today i received in the mail, threats from some anti-mormon, who gave me information from your brochures and articles.

Not only do i think this is pathetic and sad for someone to bash someone they dont know, but you people care about nothing other than trying to prove us wrong. Anyone can prove any religion wrong, but have you seen one "proven" correct? neither have I.

you get so angry because we have different beliefs than you, and yet, you are missing the whole point. You shouldn't spend time sending hate mail....he who is without sin, let him cast the first stone. are you without sin? i dont believe you are.

I didn't believe in mormonism at first either, and then i read the book, and i now believe it is true with all my heart. If you were to swallow your uncanny amounts of selfish pride and read it, you might also learn something.. So, although it irritates me for your subscribers to be sending me hate mail, i forgive you, and i just wish that the cowards would put return addresses on the envelopes so that i could talk with them and ask them why they feel they have the power to "cast the first stone". good day.

[Sandra's Note: Thanks for your note. I understand your feelings. I agree, people should put their name and address on any religious mail. I, too, get unsolicited mail with no return address, only from angry Mormons. I put my address on everything I send out as I am perfectly willing to be identified with my views.

Since I do not know what all was sent to you I don't know how to respond to your charge of receiving 'hate' mail. I do not consider our printing of an opposing view to be 'hateful.'

As for reading the Book of Mormon, I have read it cover to cover many times and while still a Mormon prayed about its truthfulness. I believe God answered my prayer and led me to the evidence that the book is a product of Smith's imagination, not history.]

Jan. 9, 2002

Dear Mr & Mrs Tanner,

...I was just surfing the net and I came across your website. I'm happy to say that I am forever grateful that I have the truthfulness of the Gospel. I am 19 years old and I was born and raised in the church. My friends fell away from church during Youth, they were born and raised too. ...The world had so many questions, so many negativity towards this church and it's teachings and my own non-member friends were never too shy to approach me with their questions. ...So here I am at an age where you both had so many unanswered questions about our Saviors Gospel, I have asked in faith, with real intent and a sincere heart if all these things are true. And my answer is this simple testimony. It is TRUE....and I love my Savior and I know he loves you both too. Please try again, soften your hearts (2 Nephi 9:29) and seek him again, ask in faith, as Moroni prophesied.

Forever Grateful,

Jan. 9, 2002

Greetings in Jesus' name....I love the testimonials on your websites from ex-Mormons who now personally know Jesus. ...Thank you.

Jan. 9, 2002

Subject: A simple "thanks"

Dear Jerald and Sandra,

...The work you do is outstanding! ...I lost my best friend to mormonism 9 days ago. We were both Christians at one time. He converted 2 1/2 years ago.

I only began noticing a drastic change in his behavior towards me around 8 months ago, which I eventually identified as an attempt to entice me to join his religion.

At one point he indicated that "real truth" is going to be either on the side of the LDS, or on the side of the catholics: as a protestant, I don't have a leg to stand on, since we are "cast offs" from the catholic church, and he enumerated the reasons why Christians are wrong.

I knew nothing about mormonism, so I embarked in a full scale investigation, which at some point linked me to your site. As for his claims about Christians, I had a good answer for each one, but just to be absolutely sure, I double checked, and once I was satisfied that he didn't have a case, I forgot the issue without saying one word about it to him.

A couple of months back I simply gave him a detailed account of why I will not compromise my beliefs (a brief presentation of the Gospel of the Grace of God in an email and in my own words, really) and concluded with the reasons why I believe the LDS church is not what it claims to be.

His response was to attack me personally, not my reasons, and after that he barely spoke to me again. It was as if an iron wall had risen between us.

I realized that, while I was willing to hear and respect his opinion, even if I totally disagreed, he would not grant me the same courtesy.

Finally, his reply to a brief "Happy New Year" email was to request I not write anymore as he considers it best for his current situation. I continued reading material related to mormonism and now understand that his reaction is not unusual. It's obvious that LDS view themselves as superior and do not hesitate to cut ties with anyone who in any manner opposes or disagrees with them.

Anyway, I simply wanted to say that what you offer here has been of great help to me in this situation and thank you for making it available. I will keep your ministry in my prayers and lift you up to God. May He richly continue to bless the work you do and protect you!


Jan. 9, 2002



Jan. 9, 2002

Subject: Criticism good for mormons


I'm sure this is an old question, but when the Mormon church studies you website and sees your critiques, doesn't this give them ammunition to provide further coverups?

They can replace book of Mormon passages and gradually weed out inconsistencies. They can then change whatever they need to to justify any criticisms.

I appreciate your insights to issues which I certainly did not see during my many years of Mormonism. ...


[Sandra's Note: They already know the problems and have already tried to suppress the information. As for changing things like the Book of Mormon, they know that people like us will immediately find out and make it public. It's harder for them to get away with changes these days.]

Jan. 10, 2002

Subject: reaching to the lost

I thank you for your information on the answers I was seeking there. I was also wondering if joseph smith's name is written in the lds bible. I was told it but A couple of my christian friends are wanting to find it and me also. I will definitely want to look for these books that you have listed. Thanks again.

[Sandra's Note: Joseph Smith produced a new version of the Bible where he added many words and concepts of his own. At the back of a regular LDS Bible is a section entitled 'Joseph Smith Translation.' This has a few extracts of his additions. He added a whole section to Genesis 50 that prophesied a future prophet called 'Joseph' who would be named after his father, Joseph. The section is obviously meant to refer to Joseph Smith. A copy of the official LDS Bible, with extracts from Smith's translation at the back, is listed on our book list.

We also sell a parallel edition of the KJV Bible compared to Smith's revised version. It is titled Joseph Smith's "New Translation" of the Bible.]

Jan. 11, 2002

Subject: need advice

My friend is in the process of meeting with missionaries and hopes to be baptized mormon by the end of the month. I am a strong Christian (methodist) and of course am strongly opposed to her decision.. I have confronted her with the theological differences which she didn't seem to know what Mormons believe. She has been dating a Mormon boy long distance off and on for a year and we all have a feeling she is choosing this religion because of him even though she insists she isnt. He will go on his mission this May. Now that I have confronted her, told her I am scared and it appears to have no effect- what do I do now? I can't lost her as a friend but I cant lose her to Mormonism either. Thanks,

[Sandra's Note: One option would be to ask her to watch the video Latter-day Facade. It is kindly done but lays out a good case for the errors and problems of Mormonism.]

Jan. 11, 2002

This is in response to this publication.

You can dispute the church and it's practices all you want. If you want to find a fault in any issue that you are studying, you will. Men are not gods, and subject to error just like you are.

That doesn't mean that the church isn't true. The Church of Jesus Christ is the true church on this earth. There is no other. Even we don't understand all of the doctrine of the church. There is doctrine that hasn't even been revealed yet. We believe in revelations. Which means that things can change as we progress in this world. We are not a religion that bases our facts on the past. ...Doctrine doesn't make a person know that the church is true. Only divine revelation from God can do that. All the doctrine in the world doesn't change that.

As far as polygamy is concerned, it was dropped because of one of our Articles of faith that states, we will honor and obey the law. Those who didn't want to fled to Mexico. We believe in honoring and sustaining the law.

...As I said, all the doctrine and knowledge you may have about the church, doesn't alter the fact that the Church is the True church of Jesus Christ, and named after him. ...We do not believe that all other churches have fallen into apostasy. Every church teaches a part of the truth. BUT there is only one who teaches the whole truth, and that is the church that Jesus Christ established under his own name....

As to the Adam is God theory, I think it does make sense to me. However, people are human, and do make mistakes. And things, even in this church, can be mis-said which is what I think happened after Brigham Young made his statement. People aren't ready to believe that yet. How could they, when most don't even really believe in God.

Every article you print doesn't change my theories, or believes in this Church. ...I hope the spirit enlightens you, but I don't think it ever will because all you can see is the point of disputing doctrine. Explain that to God in the next life if you can, because he couldn't care less about it. The truth isn't based on doctrine, but the assurance that you can receive from God that it is true, regardless of doctrine is what matters to him.


Jan. 11, 2002

Subject: do BOTH parents need to give permission for child baptism?

Hello, kudos to your site. You have been a fabulous resource for me. I have left the church, but my husband is still active and practicing. He is supportive of me, but anticipates that our children will someday both become members.

My son will be approaching his 8th Bday this spring and I found out that the Primary teacher he is assigned to has ALREADY scheduled his baptism without consulting BOTH parents. Question: Does a child need permission from BOTH parents to be baptized?

However, my son has not attended ANY primary classes in the last 6 mos, and has made it clear to his Father, by his own choice, that he is Christian and does not wish to be a member of the Mormon church.

[Sandra's Note: I suspect the ward would respect the husband's (priesthood holder) wishes over the wife. You could send a letter to both the Primary teacher and the Bishop, could be the same letter, stating that you do not give your consent to your son's baptism on religious grounds (since you do not accept the LDS claims and have your own faith). He can make this decision for himself when he comes of age at 18. Until then, they should respect your religious faith and not press the issue. You could site the LDS Articles of Faith, no.11:

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

Then state that you expect them to honor this article and not go against your religious convictions by baptizing your son without your consent.]

Jan. 12, 2002

Subject: Encouragement.....


I admire your thorough research and debate style. The successful nature of such really inspires me. Keep up the great work.

Jan. 12, 2002

Subject: I'm Free!!


Grace to you in the name of our victorious resurrected Savior Jesus Christ!

After more than six years as a Mormon, I did see the light and left that heretical church and returned to Christianity. I was a card-carrying, garment wearing, temple-attending Mormon.

Your website (and some great email debates with you) truly helped to open my eyes!...thought you'd like to get a positive email about this.

I have rejoined the Lutheran Church and have actually enrolled in the AALC Seminary. I'm taking a great course of Christology this semester.

If I had known then what I know today, I could not have every possibly joined that church. I am now prayerfully considering my own call to the ministry in the Lutheran Church, AALC.

By the way, I've even gone through the steps to have my name removed from their records. ...Thanks for your help.

Jan. 13, 2002

... how do you make sure that your name is taken off the membership list of the LDS Church, either for yourself, or for a friend, or for someone else like i.e. President Franklin D. Roosevelt?

Is a letter from your Bishop stating your membership removal adequate? After having followed the instructions on "How to Remove Your Name from the LDS Records"?

[Sandra's Note: When you send your letter to the Bishop ask him to send a letter back stating that your name has been removed from the membership rolls. After six months you could phone the LDS Church membership dept. in Salt Lake City, at 801-240-3500, and ask if your name has been removed from their records.

As far as finding out about which people the LDS may have done baptismal work for, you would have to hunt that down using their genealogical records. You would have to see if the person is in their data bank and look at the records. This can be done at their genealogical library.]

Jan. 13, 2002

Subject: Mormon?

I don't know if you are aware but the "Mormon" Church is known as "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". I believe you would be much more fair in your remarks about the "Mormons" if you referred to them as members of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".

I find it very intriguing the this is the only church that I have found that uses the name of Jesus Christ in it's title.

[Sandra's Note: Thanks for writing. Yes, I am aware that the current official name of the Mormon Church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Are you aware of its two previous names?

It was originally founded as the Church of Christ, then the name was changed in 1834 to the Church of the Latter Day Saints (no name of Jesus in it at all). It did not receive its current name until 1838 (see D&C sec. 115:3-4). This is confirmed by LDS historians James Allen and Glen Leonard, in the book "Story of the Latter-day Saints," published by Deseret Book, p. 55:

"The newly organized group called itself the Church of Christ, and until 1834 members used either that name or the Church of Jesus Christ. The use of the term Saints came gradually, but as early as August 1831 Church members were referred to as Saints in a revelation...On May 3, 1834, a conference of the Church in Kirtland, Ohio, accepted a resolution proclaiming that thereafter the Church would be known as The Church of the Latter-day Saints. Finally, on April 26, 1838, a revelation designated the name as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This has been the official title ever since."

So for a period of four years the LDS church did not even have the name of Christ in its official name.

As for other churches, I have a book entitled "Handbook of Denominations in the United States," by Mead and Hill, that lists dozens of churches that include 'Jesus Christ' in their name. There are many more that incorporate either Jesus or Christ, or God, in their names.

I fail to see that the New Testament ever states there has to be a particular name for the church. In 1 Corinthians 1:2, Paul refers to the 'church of God.' See also 2 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:4. In 1 Cor. 16:1, Paul refers to the churches by simply siting the city name, 'churches of Galatia.' At the end of the chapter he refers to 'the churches of Asia.' See also 2 Cor. 8:1; Gal.1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess.1:1; Rev. 2:1, 18.

Why not call the church 'The Saints in Christ Jesus' as in Philippians 1:1? Or the 'Flock of God' as in 1 Peter 5:2? Or 'Church of the living God' as in 1 Tim. 3:15? Or 'General assembly and church of the firstborn' as in Heb 12:23?

As long as the LDS Church continues to use the name 'Mormon' (as in 'Mormon Tabernacle Choir' and Apostle McConkie's book 'Mormon Doctrine') I fail to see any problem using it.]

Jan. 15, 2002

Subject Need Help

Once again I seek your assistance in finding information about a particular teaching of the LDS Church. I find your web site so helpful and I have used tons of your material in witnessing God's truth in love to Latter-day Saints. I searched, in vain, to find the origin of the LDS teaching that most LDS are literal decendents of Ehpraim, the son of Joseph. I've read Sandra's P.Blessing and remember mine but could not find info on when the original so-called-revelation came from to begin with. In otherwards was it JSmith that first taught LDS were decendents of Ephriam? Thanks for any help you can offer me.

Sincerely Blessed,

[Sandra's Note: Writing in 1983, Mormon scholar Irene Bates explained the origins of the LDS teaching of being the lineage of Ephraim:

Patriarch Abraham was told, "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 1818, 2218). Jacob passed on this heritage through the twelve tribes of Israel. And Ephraim, because of the faithfulness and integrity of his father, Joseph, inherited the birthright in Israel. Anciently, the birthright endowed the firstborn with certain special blessings, rights, powers, and privileges (see Gen. 2524-34; 27; 4333; 1 Chron. 51-2, for references to birthright). Modern Mormon revelation refers to the gathering of the Lost Tribes of Israel who will receive their blessings at the hands of the children of Ephraim (D&C 133).5 Latter-day Saints believe they will receive the promised blessings through a specific tribe. Declarations of tribal lineage in patriarchal blessings have been seen variously over time as designating (1) literal blood relationships, (2) transformations of the blood, (3) adoptions into certain tribes, and (4) simply the tribe through which one may expect future blessings. The first mention of lineage in patriarchal blessings appears to have been made on 9 December 1834 when Joseph Smith, Sr., blessed his family. Among other things, he said to his eldest son, Hyrum, "I now ask my heavenly Father in the name of Jesus Christ, to bless thee with the same blessing with which Jacob blessed his son Joseph, for thou art his true descendant, and thy posterity shall be numbered with the house of Ephraim..."

Subsequent blessings given by Father Smith referred to recipients as being "through the loins of Ephraim" or "of the lineage of Ephraim," or simply thou art "an Ephraimite." The inference that most recipients were literal descendants of the House of Israel was repeated by subsequent patriarchs. William Smith referred to the priesthood power and authority being confined to "that Royal stock and noble blood that was not allowed to mingle among the nations in order to preserve the purity of the sanctuary of the Lord and the Holy Priesthood from adulteration." Harriet Knowlton was assured by Patriarch Isaac Morley, "Thy name is enrolled with the daughters of Abraham in the Lamb's Book of Life; for thy descent is from Jacob (notwithstanding thou hast much of the gentile blood running in thy veins)."

Patriarchs continued to refer to a blood relationship with the tribes of Israel. In 1929, Patriarch Hyrum G. Smith stated,

At the present time in the Church the great majority of those receiving their blessings are declared to be of the house and lineage of Ephraim, while many others are designated as members of the house of Mannasseh; but up to the present time we have discovered that those who are leaders in Israel, no matter from where they come, no matter out of what nation they have come, are of Ephraim; while the blood of Mannasseh is found in the tribes and nations of the Indians of North and South America. ('Patriarchal Blessings and the Routinization of Charisma' by Irene M. Bates, Dialogue A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol.26, No.3, p.3-4)]

Jan. 17, 2002

Subject: My Mormon Experience

Hello. I wanted to drop you a quick line and thank you for your excellent work. Several months ago, a group of Mormons came to our house and visited. I saw an opportunity for evangelism, so I invited them in, and we met several times over the next several weeks.

We discussed several issues related to Mormonism, and specifically, the differences between Mormonism and Christianity. During that time, I did a lot of research, some of it on your site, some on other sites, but I found your site to be particularly useful. I think that your site helped me to not only be patient with my visitors, but also to present the gospel appropriately. In the end, they indicated that they could not come back to visit, since I was unwilling to "take the next step". ...

Jan. 17, 2002

so, do you people have real jobs? maybe my question would be better phrased if I were to ask why you spend ridiculously large amounts of time proving a religion to be wrong that, at least, claims to be christian, when there are billions of people who reject christianity altogether. What about buddhists, hindus, muslims, atheists, agnostics, gnostics and zoroastrians? Shouldn't someone be pointing them in the right direction, too?

[Sandra's Note: Yes, there are hundreds of ministries and missionaries making efforts to reach those people with the gospel of Jesus Christ.]

Jan. 18, 2002

Subject: Article on Baptism for the Dead

Attached for your reference and use is a short essay showing the contradictions between the LDS practice of vicarious baptism and LDS scriptures.


Does Baptism for the Dead Make a Mockery of Christ's Atonement?

Soho Preacher, January 2002

And now it came to pass that Alma took Helam, he being one of the first, and went and stood forth in the water, and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart. And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world.

And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.

Alma 18:12-14 (Emphasis added.)

Despite Alma's unambiguous reference to baptism as a covenant pertaining to mortality, the LDS church currently espouses a doctrine of vicarious baptism for deceased persons. LDS Missionaries often quote John 3:3-5 to demonstrate to investigators the need for vicarious baptism:

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

While we can debate whether the use of the word "water" in verse 5 imposes an absolute requirement of baptism, LDS missionaries present it as proof that ALL must indeed be baptized in order to be saved - even the dead. Current LDS theology teaches that baptism for the dead is only truly effective for those who did not have the opportunity (however defined) to accept the gospel in this life.

During His ministry, Christ offered "little children" as examples of the type of people we all need to emulate in order to be saved. There is not, however, any direct exclusion for "little children" from the requirement of John 3:3-5, as it is interpreted by the LDS church, contained in the Bible. This exclusion is, therefore, one of the plain and precious truths apparently lost from the Bible and restored in the Book of Mormon. (see Moroni 8:12-24) The same exclusion is reiterated in the Doctrine and Covenants. (see D&C 68:27 and 137:10)

The great irony in the use of these scriptures to justify an exclusion for little children from the requirement of baptism is that they also include a parallel exclusion for "those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing the will of God concerning them" or, in other words, for those who "are without the law". (see 2 Nephi 9:26-27, Mosiah 3:11 and Moroni 8:20-24) The language in Moroni 8:22-23 is worth quoting here:

22 For behold that all little children are alive in Christ, and also all they that are without the law. For the power of redemption cometh on all them that have no law; wherefore, he that is not condemned, or he that is under no condemnation, cannot repent; and unto such baptism availeth nothing-

23 But it is mockery before God, denying the mercies of Christ, and the power of his Holy Spirit, and putting trust in dead works.

The use of the words "and also" in verse 22 makes it clear that those without the law are in an equal position to that of little children with respect to the requirement of baptism. Being already saved through the atonement, the additional requirement of baptism for these groups "is mockery before God" and denies "the mercies of Christ". The last phrase of verse 23 ("putting trust in dead works") is especially ironic when one considers current LDS theology.

Some time following Joseph Smith's receiving of the revelation of the three kingdoms (see D&C 88), he received a revelation wherein he saw his brother Alvin in the Celestial Kingdom. (see D&C 137) Upon seeing Alvin there, he:

"marveled how it was that he had obtained an inheritance in that kingdom, seeing that he had departed this life before the Lord had set his hand to gather Israel the second time, and had not been baptized for the remission of sins." (see verse 6)

The most important fact revealed in this verse, to support my thesis anyway, is that Alvin had not been baptized prior to his death. While he would nevertheless have been redeemed from the fall according to the Book of Mormon, it may have appeared strange or "marvelous" to the prophet that he had inherited a place in the Celestial Kingdom without baptism.

The voice of the Lord then spoke and explained how this could be. As an aside, while LDS members can discount statements of prior leaders that disagree with later teachings, I suggest that they should be more hesitant when discounting or qualifying canonized counsel from the Lord Himself. The Lord explained that:

7 . . . All who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God;

8 Also all that shall die henceforth without a knowledge of it, who would have received it with all their hearts, shall be heirs of that kingdom;

9 For I, the Lord, will judge all men according to their works, according to the desire of their hearts.

Here the Lord clearly sets the standard by which unbaptized deceased persons will enter the Celestial Kingdom. The Lord states that He will judge them "according to their works, according to the desire of their hearts" to determine whether they would have received the gospel "if they had been permitted to tarry". The teaching reads similar to the Catholic "baptism of desire". Verse 8 tells us that this standard applies to all those who have died or will die subsequent to the revelation.

In addition, this standard clearly contemplates what a person would have done in mortality. There is no mention or suggestion, and the revelation arguably precludes the conclusion, that any affirmative action on the part of the deceased person in the spirit world is required or would make any difference. Such a conclusion is supported by numerous verses in the Book of Mormon warning that our ultimate judgment will be based SOLELY on our works during our mortal probation. (see, for example, 1 Nephi 15:32, 2 Nephi 2:21, 9:27, Alma 12:24, 42:4-13, Helaman 13:38)

The verses from LDS scriptures cited above demonstrate the mercy of Christ's atonement by providing for the redemption of those who die without the gospel. The legalistic requirement of baptism is, according to these verses, clearly intended only for those who have knowledge of its importance in the gospel plan. God will not punish those who failed to fulfill a requirement of which they were entirely ignorant. In this regard, the Book of Mormon clearly equates the position of those without the law or, as in Mosiah 3:11, those who die without a knowledge of God's will according to them, with that of little children. It is my conclusion that, according to LDS scripture, baptism for such persons is no more justified than the baptism of little children, and both practices are soundly condemned as "mockery before God, denying the mercies of Christ, and the power of his Holy Spirit, and putting trust in dead works". (see Moroni 8:23)

Jan. 18, 2002

You know, I am a true believing member, even though I find the "business" part of the Church funny. I read on your lawsuit between you and the Church [regarding the LDS Church Handbook of Instruction], and I actually found a couple of websites with the book published in its entirety.

I read through it, and you know what the funniest thing is? There isn't anything in there to worry about. There aren't any smoking guns or bad information that would hurt the Church, so I am a bit more curious about the lawsuit.

What is your complete opinion of why they sued you? Did you re-word it or change the wording? After listening to Godmakers, and seeing the joke that movie is with a lot of the lies it portrays, I can see how the Church could be afraid of you adding things into the text. It seems a common tactic of professional Anti-Mormons to take a truth and mix it with lies. Did you honestly publish the text un-edited? Can you provide any insight?


[Sandra's Note: It was the EXACT text. The lawsuit NEVER charged us with tampering with the text. We simply put up excerpts dealing with terminating membership and how the bishop should handle discipline cases.

I believe the church thought it had a chance to put us out of business, but the case turned out to be more complicated due to the internet and First Amendment issues involved.]

Jan. 19, 2002

Subject: just discovered your site

To the Tanners:

I have just discovered your ministry and wanted to send you an note of encouragement. I have a 21 yr. old son ...[who] joined the military and developed a close friendship with a Mormon boy, partly I think because they had similar moral values and there were no other Christians around. When they got out of training, my son met this friend's sister and began talking with her a lot on the phone. ...They visited each other.

I finally realized he was dating her and confronted him. I asked him why he would continue this relationship when their basic doctrinal beliefs were so different, and that marriage would cause major problems with either family. I think he felt he might bring her over to Christ but I also think he was beginning to think that, contrary to what he'd been raised to believe, maybe Mormonism wasn't really a cult. I could tell he was becoming confused about all doctrines. We discussed it with him somewhat, he knew where we stood and just avoided the subject with us.

God gave me peace that He would somehow use this experience to strengthen our son and make his faith his own, not his parents. I prayed continually Eph. 6 for him: the armor of God. Now he has broken up with her because she went on a mission, he admitted it wasn't because he had summon the spiritual strength to do so. But I am still concerned about where his faith is. He became so impressed by these people's sincerity. The subtlety of how this "religion" affected us frightens me.

I guess I just needed to vent this to people who understand (although, of course I have many Christian friends who have been praying for my son also!). I was so encouraged to see how God has placed people like you to work among the Mormons and help them to see the truth.

I was impressed by how your website offers the facts but in a loving and earnest way. Having now been touched by Mormonism, I will praying for people such as yourselves who have dedicated themselves to sharing only the truth of God's Word.

Looking to Him for strength,

Jan. 19, 2002

First I was raised as a baptist. I believe in the right to worship god as you choose. M Y WIFE IS A Latter Day Saint . At first i was rude to every member of the church i met.

Last Sunday i went to my wifes baptism. Everyone knows that i do not believe in joseph smith or the book of mormon but the missionaries are really a nice bunch of guys. If baptist, holiness or catholic would watch the mormons they might learn that church does not end when you walk out the door on Sunday night.

I have a cousin that is a mormon if she does not make it to heaven then I dont know who will she is one of the sweetest people I know. thanks for your time

[Sandra's Note: Thanks for writing. I, too, believe in the right of everyone to worship however they want. But I also believe in the right to print another point of view. We try to do this factually, citing the various sources so anyone can look the references up themselves.

We also believe that Christianity, as set forth in the Bible, is true. But the LDS Church is adding to the gospel by insisting that one can not have eternal life unless you are married in the secret LDS temple ritual. It is also a great blasphemy to say that God was once a mortal who had to earn the right to become a god, that he has a wife, mom and dad, grandfather and grandmother, that there are countless other gods of other worlds.

I agree that there are many nice Mormons, including many of my own family. I also agree that Christians should live their religion all the time, not just at church. I always encourage my associates to be polite to the Mormons, to not be rude, but show the graciousness of Christ.

However, Mormonism is not just saying they have a little nicer church, come try us out. They are saying they are the ONLY true church and that their rituals are necessary for eternal life. Such a claim deserves further investigation. Eternal life is too important to just decide on a church by who is 'nice.' The claims must match with the Bible and truth.]

Jan. 21, 2002

...I sincerely feel bad about your situation. I really don't understand why you guy's feel it your duty to attempt, but fail, at bringing down a wholesome family oriented religion.

...Sure maybe you disagree with some of the Latter Day Saint practices, but who gives you the right to bash and hurt others. Don't say Jesus Christ, because our Savior always taught understanding, and love. ...I respect you for your beliefs, and would never want to try and tear those down. I just hope one day you will understand that all of this trouble you are trying to cause will not do anything.

I don't know if someone offended you in the church, or you are just misguided, but please try to show understanding for others. It will bring you much greater joy than what you are doing now. ...sincerely your brother,

Jan. 22, 2002

Hi! I am a ex mormon who left the church about oh 8 weeks ago,...I found tons of useful info at your site, and I wanted to thank you for that. ...

Jan. 22, 2002

Subject: Gratitude

I was just visiting your Web Site and appreciated reading your testimonies. I was born and raised in the Mormon faith from childhood, "knowing its truth" from a young age, as was the case with you both.

Early into my adult life after having returned from a mission and actually at the time of my father's death, I found myself outwardly admitting doubts for the first time. Then I was 25 years old. Years have passed, many. It has been a very slow process leaving the structure. As well you know, it contains much good along with that which is false.

Something calls me, though, and I am no longer ignoring the voice. From my childhood, I had an unexplainable love and interest in Jesus Christ. What wasted years I have had since not really knowing how to bring His presence into my life as a personal Savior. For years I have wept reading about His life. Today I weep asking that He ever be the center of mine.

Sincerely I thank you for your dedication.

Jan. 22, 2002

Hello....I personally believe that utlm is the most effective organization I've seen as an evangelistic tool....Most people who have computers are more willing to read in an investigative way than the average follower of mormonism... I read the online material and copy it for friends. ...

Jan. 22, 2002

We have been blessed for years by the MESSENGER, since my wife left the LDS church over 12 years ago. I was blessed to have many UtLM resources available when she began to question the validity of the church, and I had almost everything in print at one time, including "changing world", ..."white salamander," "39xx changes to the book of mormon".

You are a blessing, and I and my wife thank you for your ministry, and we hope to pass on the hope that you provided so long ago to others lost in the deception. Thanks for being on line, and for making 'Changing World' available on line....Many blessings and grateful thanks...

Jan. 22, 2002

Dear Jerald and Sandra,

I just wanted to drop you yet another letter of encouragement for the work that you do. My wife, who was still Mormon when we married, (I was rather lost myself!) left the church half a year ago officially, and has since been baptized as a true-believing Christian, going with me to Faith Bible Church.

Though she is quite bitter over the church, we have both realized that it is our duty to spread the truth, all of these things which snowballed from the beginning, when I bumped into your site and found it intriguing. God bless you, and know that your service is truly sent from Him. Words cannot express my thankfulness,


P.S., all of my research on LDS history has inspired me to write my Master's thesis on the foundation, growth and changes in Mormon racial attitudes and missionizing practices. (Which is currently underway) I'm at ... University studying Latin Am. History, amongst more than a few Mormons in my program... bet you can picture this... tension so thick you could cut it with a knife!

Jan. 23, 2002

...I have a family member who has joined the mormon church for her husband and wish to inform myself with current information. I have read Joseph's Smith's biography and several other library books but want to keep current. Your Newsletter sounds like just the thing.

My family member is constantly sending us info and for my oldest child's confirmation into the Lutheran Church she sent her The Book of Mormon and a history of the church to read and pray about. I feel I need the info in order to wisely inform my children about the mormon church. It is no longer about my husband and I simply throwing out the literature coming into our home.

Thank you so much. I heard Sandra on KLIF 570 AM radio this morning and feel it was a blessing sent my way. Thank you for the blessings from Jesus....

Jan. 23, 2002

Subject: From a friend

To Whomever it May Concern,

Your distorting "scientific" facts are but rubbish to so many more people that those who believe it. I am possitive beyond a shaddow of a doubt that this is not the first complaint you have recieved and i promise i WILL NOT be the last.

You and the rest of the world who do not beleive the Book of Mormon to be true and claim Joseph Smith to be a fake are twisted but not wicked,...you are however extremely mislead and biased. You have never truely read the Book, only searched it for script to prove your own points. If you only read it sincerely and thought not of science you would truely know of its truth and would no longer seek to prove it wrong. Pray the best you know how to God in the name of out Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and ask if what you read is true. ...

Good Bye

Jan. 23, 2002

Subject: Found this disturbing!!


I applaud you guys for your hard work and dedicaton at exposing mormonism for the false religion that it is. We need more people like you out there.

Anyways i was recently visiting the lds.org web site where i would go and look at the doctrine. to compare it with what the bible had to say. well just today i visited it again and they changed the whole format of the doctrine!!! They have left out so much of the BS that makes mormonism what it is. I'm afraid that many more people will fall victim to the lies of the church ...I'm just a little worried at the new tactics the church is using. thanks,

Jan. 23, 2002

Subject: How is all this possible?


...i have visited this site along with other Mormon information sites (CARM, MRM) frequently (i speak to many Mormons). But recently, when witnessing to Mormons on chat, i have been encouraged to read information FOR Mormonism. I accepted, after all truth is truth... and now, im am feeling very shaky. Just a few days ago i was so positive, i was ready to talk to anyone. But after reading FARMS, and some other select sites... the evidence for the divine making of the BoM seems very strong. My questions is... what are the chances of this happening? I am scared that this is true... but if it is i want to know...Any help on any part would be GREATLY appreciated. Thank you so much

God Bless,

[Sandra's Note: It seems you may have given more time to reading LDS sites than to reading the serious research questioning the historicity of the Book of Mormon. These issues have been dealt with.

Mormons often try to impress people that Smith couldn't have known all the things necessary in order to compile the Book of Mormon. However, there were dozens of books written in Smith's time, prior to the Book of Mormon, suggesting that the American Indians were descended from the tribes of Israel. Many of these books spoke of an ancient record of the Indians. Smith seems to have just picked up on the current thought of his day and incorporated it into the Book of Mormon. Also, the idea for metal plates could have come from reading the popular Jewish historian, Josephus. In his Antiquities of the Jews, he mentioned "engraven" "public records" of "brass." (Josephus Complete Works, Kregel Pub., chap.x, p.299) Also, the Apocrapha (published in many King James Bibles of Smith's day) contained mention of metal records "So then they wrote it in tables of brass" (KJV Apocrapha, I Maccabees 1418, 27, 48)

Go to the Topical Index on our web site, read all the articles under Book of Mormon. For instance, read: Where Did Joseph Smith Get His Ideas for the Book of Mormon?

Then I suggest you carefully read Studies of the Book of Mormon (LDS scholar B.H. Roberts thought Smith had the ability to write the Book of Mormon), New Approaches to the Book of Mormon (articles by various scholars detailing problem areas), Quest for the Gold Plates (good evaluation of FARMS type arguments) and then Joseph Smith and the Origins of the Book of Mormon. There is NO evidence that the Book of Mormon peoples ever existed outside of Smith's imagination.]

Jan. 23, 2002

We are trying to inform our local church about Mormonism...We appreciate your web site and found it helpful. Our pastor said it would be nice if we could find a brochure or pamphlet that would get the main points across simply. Do you have something like that or could you suggest another source for something like this? Thank you.

[Sandra's Note: Yes, see the tracts at -- www.irr.org. I like the one called '"Is Mormonism Christian?" But all their tracts are good.

American Tract Soc. has a good one called "I Bear You My Testimony" at www.atstracts.org.]

Jan. 24, 2002


I'm living in Sweden and notice sometimes your struggling with the lds-church.

My I ask what your opinion is regarding baptism for the dead. In the new testament we can read about it, but no other church as far as I know deal with this issue.

[Sandra's Note: Thank you for writing. As a former Mormon I am fully aware of the LDS practice. In fact, I performed such baptisms in the Los Angeles temple during the late 1950's. However, I do not believe that Christ taught such a doctrine or practice. Paul's comment is not instruction to the churches, just an example drawn from some other group that he used to reinforce his arguments for the resurrection. See the links below for further details.

Changing World, Baptism for the Dead
Mormon Claims Answered
, Baptism for the Dead

Jan. 24, 2002

It seems to be like the whole basis of your church is to discredit the mormon church!! In reality just by reading your material it makes me want to learn more about the mormon church, so thank you very much!!!!!

Jan. 25, 2002

Subject: Glad You're Still There!

Mr & Mrs Tanner,

...I'm a Christian who originally became aware of your work through the late Dr. Walter Martin & his book "Kingdom Of The Cults". ...One of my first actions in Salt Lake was to seek out your bookstore & get a copy of "Mormonism: Shadow or Reality". I devoured that book.

Upon my return to California, I loaned it to a friend who never returned it. He must have liked it too! ...I looked you up on the web & was so glad to see that you two are still ministering the gospel & shedding the light of truth on Mormonism. May God continue to richly bless you both in your endeavors there. ...Blessings,

Jan. 25, 2002


I was recently told that when I was a child my father had me blessed in the LDS Church. He was inactive at the time but it was only a request from my grandmother who is no longer a member of the LDS Church.

I am a Christian and I was raised in a local Christian Church and I don't want to be affiliated with the LDS Church in any way. I was wondering, if my name was automatically put on the LDS membership rolls when I was blessed in their church. If so I will have it removed immediately.

Thank you for your time. You and your ministry are in my prayers every day.

A friend in Christ.

[Sandra's Note: No, you would not be listed as a 'member.' The blessing would have entered your name on their attendance rolls, but not as a member.

But if you want to verify this, here is the phone number for the LDS membership dept.: 801-240-3500

You would need to call during weekday work hours.]

Jan. 27, 2002

Subject: dead sea scrolls

I have heard Mormons state that the Dead Sea Scrolls contain, more or less, the Mormon temple ceremony. I'm not sure what this would mean, since the Essenes weren't even Christians, but it is hard to believe in any case. When a Mormon told me this in defense of the LDS church, I simply asked, "Which one? The temple ceremony has been changed several times." There was no answer.

However, I would like to know. Is there anything in the Dead Sea Scrolls which is at all similar to the Mormon temple ceremony? Or, is this a blatant lie told to strengthen the faith of people who will never check?


[Sandra's Note: The Essenes evidently had some sort of secret rites but that does not mean that they had anything like the LDS temple ceremony.

The Egyptians and religions all over the world had/have secret rites. Are we to assume that ANY group with 'secret rites' is somehow connected/derived from LDS practices?

If you have access to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, see Vol.1, p361-364. There is an entry on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Under the heading "LDS Perspective" it says:

"Initial zeal [over the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947] led to some superficial treatments, sensationalism, and misunderstandings....Certain aspects of the scrolls have particularly interested Latter-day Saints. For example, the Essenes of Qumran accepted the concepts of continuing REVELATION and open CANON much as Latter-day Saints do,...Qumran commentaries...contain new Essene prophetic interpretations of world events of the LAST DAYS, and the Qumran Temple Scroll claims to be a direct revelation to Moses. Similarly, Latter-day Saints believe that the Bible does not contain all of God's word,...Some people have made much of comparisons between Essene practices and those of the New Testament church, or between both of these and elements of Mormonism. For example, Essene cleansing rituals are in some ways similar to New Testament baptisms, and Essene ritual meals can be interpreted as sacramental....Some relate the Essene communal council, with its twelve men and three priests, to Jesus' calling of twelve apostles and favoring among them PETER, JAMES, AND JOHN, or to the Latter-day Saint organization with twelve apostles and a three-member FIRST PRESIDENCY.... However, the similarities are counterbalanced by radical differences between Essene practices and the teachings of Jesus Christ, of Paul, or of the Church in modern times. Notably, the Essenes taught their adherents to hate their enemies. Their sect was strict and exclusive. Their ideas of ritual cleanness effectively barred women from the temple and from the temple city of Jerusalem."

Clearly the closest parallel to Smith's ritual is the Masonic ritual, which Smith participated in prior to his inventing the Mormon ritual.]

Jan. 27, 2002

Subject: mormonism vs the US government

Please tell me what the early history of mormonism tells about it's feeling of the US government? I thought I have read something about their goal to overthrow it, am I in error? It really bothers me that we are telling all kinds of security secrets to the government people in Salt Lake City, Utah for the 2002 winter Olympic games. I will appreciate any information you can offer me.

Thanks so much,

[Sandra's Note: Originally the Mormons expected Christ to return within their life time and set up the political kingdom of God, putting the Mormons in charge of the governing of the world. Now they realize it will take a while. But they still believe that at the return of Christ the Mormon priesthood will be put in charge of everything.

For more information see: Joseph Smith's "White Horse" Prophecy

Also, a new book out on this topic is The Mormon Conspiracy.

It is interesting that many in the FBI and CIA are Mormons.]

Jan. 27, 2002

Subject: My Time in the LDS

After reading so many of the experiences of those who were Mormons, I feel that my experience was brief, and not worthy of anyone's time.

Yet, as one who was raised with a strong sense of duty to one's fellow human beings, as well as having a sense of justice and fairness (something that was lacking in the other correspondence by former members), I believe that I need to speak out.

I was baptized and raised a Catholic. I spend 9 1/2 years in Catholic schools, ...I learned how to think for myself, that logic conquers all, and to never take anything at face value. I began to lose the faith in high school, a time when youth questions everything and expects answers.

At this time, I was taught to disregard the Old Testament as the Jews tended to exaggerate (read lie), and to take the New Testament with a grain of salt. ...During high school, I became an atheist (if I could not see or touch God, then he did not exist. Plain and simple.)

A few years later, I became an agnostic. Then, in the space of about ten years, I was a witness to events that definitely confirmed that there is a God, and that there is a Devil. I will not go into those incidents, but I will tell you that I am not a superstitious person. My training in computer science, and in Catholic schools, taught me to disseminate the information received and to reach a logical conclusion.

After I had become "born again," I wanted to join a spiritual family, ...I wondered what church to join. ...Where I worked, there were a few of the LDS. They were not the brightest people, but they seemed so happy and content. One of them presented me with a Book of Mormon, and connected me with some missionaries. I joined the LDS in March, 1994. The people seemed so friendly, and I felt that here was the spiritual home that I was looking for. ...

...Now, if God wanted the full gospel to be restored, would he have told Smith to invite all, so that they could "see and believe?" No. Instead, Smith was told by the angel Moroni where to find a set of gold plates which supposedly described the history of the Jews in the new world. These plates were not written in Hebrew, the language of the Jewish people, but in something called "Reformed Egyptian!" Smith refused to let the intelligentsia of his day see the plates, claiming that they wanted them so that they could melt them down. Before the educators could come, Smith claimed that an angel came and took them away.

Personally, I thought that what they were teaching was a crock, but I desperately wanted to belong to this church that made me feel like I belonged to something. But I was to find that there was no place for me....

I have since accepted that Christ died for me, that he is my personal savior. I know that I am going to heaven, and I continue to serve others. (Even if you do not believe in celestial brownie points, aiding others does tend to improve the world. Try it sometime and see for yourself.) ...I am in the midst of a divorce from an LDS woman ....I do miss the camaraderie of the church, of the sense of belonging, but only that....

Jan. 27, 2002

Subject: so called sec 143

Since I hold in my hand a D & C and look at Sec 143 which by the way was given years after the assassination of the leader of OUR church, how can you put such trash on your site?

Are you trying to fit in with the ways of the world and what they want to push through as law in California? May God forgive your sins

_____ ______, 6th generation RLDS Church member

[Sandra's Note: Sorry, not sure just what you are referring to on our site. What portion or article are you labeling 'trash?'

How am I to understand your complaint without a specific reference? The LDS Doctrine & Covenants doesn't have a sec. 143.

Are you referring to the LDS sec. 132 on plural marriage? If so, there is plenty of historical information to show that Joseph Smith originated the teaching and practiced it. Even the Reorganized LDS historians admit that.

Have you read the biography of David Smith, Joseph Smith's son? He was greatly troubled when he realized his father actually practiced polygamy. See: From Mission to Madness: Last Son of the Mormon Prophet by Valeen T. Avery. Also her biography of Smith's wife, Emma, documents Smith's involvement with polygamy. See: Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith.]

Jan. 28, 2002

Subject: Removing my son's name from Church records

I requested that my name be removed from church records. My 8 year old son who was blessed as an infant but was never baptized continually receives correspondence from what I assume is my ward.

My transition from Mormonism to Christianity has been confusing enough for him without his primary teacher dropping off invitations to "fun parties" that his mother won't let him attend. Since he had not been baptized I assumed that he was not on church records. Do I need to send a formal letter for his name to be removed? If I do this, does it have to be signed by my child's father or will the signature of me, his custodial parent, be enough? I would prefer to take care of this discretely. If my X-husband and his family found out that I was not raising my son to be a Mormon there could be repercussions.

I would appreciate any advise that you could give me.-

PS~Thank You for your wonderful website. When I would ask questions about the Mormon religion I was told to "go on Faith" that it would be enough. When I gave "an act of Faith" as my reason for leaving the Mormon Church, suddenly Faith was not considered to be good enough. Your website has not only affirmed my decision but has helped me defend it.

[Sandra's Note: I would suggest writing a letter directly to the bishop in your area and state that you want your son removed from ALL of their contact lists (Primary, priesthood, Sunday School, etc.). State that as his custodial parent, and a former Mormon, you do not want any contact from the ward. Explain that when your son is an adult he can make his own choices, but while he is under your supervision you will be taking him to your own church, that their efforts to contact your son against your wishes are an invasion of your privacy. Hope this helps.]

Jan. 28, 2002

Subject: A prophecy of Joseph Smith?

Hello. I remember reading somewhere (I obviously can't remember where) :) that Joseph Smith (or possibly Brigham Young) made a prophecy of the coming of Christ to a specific year. He said something along the lines of Christ coming in eighty-six? years and that he (J.S./B.Y.) would be there for it. I haven't been able to find my source, but I sincerely believe I saw it somewhere. I'm hoping you can help me. I know it's possible my mind is remembering incorrectly, but I'm hoping this is not the case. I thank you in advance for any help you may be able to offer.


[Sandra's Note: It was Joseph Smith. See: The Changing World of Mormonism: The Lord's Coming

Other information on false prophecies can be found in Mormon Claims Answered. Also, there is a chapter on false prophecy in our larger book, Mormonism—Shadow or Reality?]

Jan. 29, 2002

I was on the net and saw your page. wow. It really makes me sad. you also will be sad when you meet the Lord face to face. I have been home from my mission 2 years and to see people like you wasting your time and lives with this garbage. well you really need help. im sorry you are so bitter. but anyway, I want you to know than I bear testimony of the true and living church of God brought forth by Joseph Smith. I know God lives and this is my testimony. take care.


Jan. 29, 2002

Just an observation: those individuals who have questions about Mormonism, perhaps should visit www.lds.org. If one has questions about Catholics, then one talks to a Catholic. Questions about the LDS church should go directly to the source.

Respectfully submitted,

[Sandra's Note: If the LDS Church would clearly state their beliefs, I would be glad to refer people to their site for information on LDS teachings. But where on their site to they explain their unique doctrines: that God has not always been a god, that he once lived on another planet as a mortal, died, went to heaven, learned how to become a god, that he has a father-god over him, that each god also has a wife? Where do they honestly tell the history of Joseph Smith? Where do they list his 33 plural wives?]

Jan. 29, 2002

Is there any pronouncements from the LDS Church leaders regarding whether it is OK for members of the LDS Church to drink green tea? I remember seeing a statement from Heber J. Grant that green tea is OK and only black tea is forbidden. If there is such a statement I would like to know where it can be found.

Thanks, and God bless you,

[Sandra's Note: Here is a statement by Brigham Young in 1867, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 12, p.28:

"Now, there is no harm in a teapot, even if it contains tea, if it is let alone; and I say of a truth that where a person is diseased, say, for instance, with canker, there is no better medicine than green tea, and where it is thus used it should be drank sparingly. Instead of drinking thirteen or fourteen cups every morning, noon, and night, there should not be any used. You may think I am speaking extravagantly, but I remember a tea-drinking match once in which fourteen cups a-piece were drank, so you see it can be done. But to drink half a dozen or even three or four cups of strong tea is hurtful. It injures and impairs the system, benumbs the faculties of the stomach, and affects the blood, and is deleterious in its nature. If a person is weary, worn out, cast down, fainting, or dying, a brandy sling, a little wine, or a cup of tea is good to revive them. Do not throw these things away, and say they must never be used; they are good to be used with judgment, prudence, and discretion. Ask our Bishops if they drink tea every day, and in most cases they will tell you they do if they can get it. They take it when they do not need it and when it injures them. I want to say to the Elders in Israel, this is not our privilege. We have a great many privileges, but to indulge in liquor or other things to our own injury is not one of them."]

Jan. 29, 2002

Subject: Blood infusion??

I was @ a friends house last night sharing some apologetic resources regarding Mormon doctrine.... anyway during our conversation she indicated to me that her [LDS] mom told her that at some specific point in time (baptism??) Mormons were infused with Hebrew blood. That was new to me. Can you give me any direction with regards to that. ...Thanks for any assistance you can provide!

In Christ,

[Sandra's Note: Here is a quote from our book, MormonismShadow or Reality?, p.562:

"Changing The Blood

"One of the oddest doctrines that Joseph Smith taught was that a Gentile must literally have his blood changed so that he is a actually of the seed of Abraham:

'...as the Holy Ghost falls upon one of the LITERAL seed of Abraham, it is calm and serene;...while the effect of the Holy Ghost upon a Gentile, is to PURGE OUT THE OLD BLOOD, AND MAKE HIM ACTUALLY OF THE SEED OF ABRAHAM.' (History of the Church, Vol. 3, page 380)

"Brigham Young, the second President of the Church, said:

'Again, if a pure Gentile firmly believes the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and yields obedience to it, in such a case I will give you the words of the Prophet Joseph—'When the Lord pours out the Holy Ghost upon that individual he will have SPASMS, and you would think that he was going into fits.'

" 'Joseph said that the GENTILE BLOOD WAS ACTUALLY CLEANSED OUT OF THEIR VEINS, AND THE BLOOD OF JACOB MADE TO CIRCULATE IN THEM; and the revolution and change in the system were so great that it caused the beholder to think they were going into FITS.' (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, page 269)

"According to this doctrine we would expect that a Jew would have the proper blood, but Brigham Young taught that even a Jew must have his blood changed:

'If a Jew comes into this Church, and honestly professes to be a Saint, a follower of Christ, and IF THE BLOOD OF JUDAH IS IN HIS VEINS, HE WILL APOSTATIZE. He may have been born and bred a Jew,...and have openly professed to be a Jew all his days; but I will tell you a secret—there is NOT A PARTICLE of the blood of Judaism in him, if he has become a true Christian, a Saint of God; for if there is, he will most assuredly leave the Church of Christ, or that blood will be purged out of his veins. We have men among us who were Jews,...here is brother Neibaur; do I believe there is one particle of the blood of Judah in his veins? No, not so much as could be seen on the point of the finest cambric needle, through a microscope with a magnifying power of two millions.' (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, page 142)"

In the article 'Patriarchal Blessings and the Routinization of Charisma,'  by Irene M. Bates,  Dialogue A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol.26, No.3, Fall 1993,  p.3, we read:

Mormons take literally God's promise that Abraham "shall become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him." Patriarch Abraham was told, "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 18:18, 22:18). Jacob passed on this heritage through the twelve tribes of Israel. And Ephraim, because of the faithfulness and integrity of his father, Joseph, inherited the birthright in Israel. Anciently, the birthright endowed the firstborn with certain special blessings, rights, powers, and privileges (see Gen. 25:24-34; 27; 43:33; 1 Chron. 51-2, for references to birthright). Modern Mormon revelation refers to the gathering of the Lost Tribes of Israel who will receive their blessings at the hands of the children of Ephraim (D&C 133). Latter-day Saints believe they will receive the promised blessings through a specific tribe. Declarations of tribal lineage in patriarchal blessings have been seen variously over time as designating (1) literal blood relationships, (2) transformations of the blood, (3) adoptions into certain tribes, and (4) simply the tribe through which one may expect future blessings. The first mention of lineage in patriarchal blessings appears to have been made on 9 December 1834 when Joseph Smith, Sr., blessed his family. Among other things, he said to his eldest son, Hyrum, "I now ask my heavenly Father in the name of Jesus Christ, to bless thee with the same blessing with which Jacob blessed his son Joseph, for thou art his true descendant, and thy posterity shall be numbered with the house of Ephraim...

Hope this helps.]

Jan. 30, 2002

[Here is] a piece I wrote a couple of years ago [on DNA and the Book of Mormon]. Do you have any further information on this type of work?

Mormons believe that the Americas were colonized by Israelites several hundred years before the birth of Jesus. Native Americans, or Indians, who are called "Lamanites" by Mormons, are considered to be the descendants of those ancient colonists. If that were true, then American Indians should share certain genetic and linguistic characteristics with Middle Eastern people. American Indian languages should share with Middle Eastern languages a small percentage of vocabulary and bear a similar sentence structure.

According to Cavalli-Sforza, author of Genes, Peoples, and Languages, sentence structure is especially resilient to change over centuries. The genetic information within the chromosomes of American Indians should also have a calculable degree of similarity and dissimilarity known as "genetic drift" in comparison with that of Middle Eastern people.

With the discovery that genes have encoded in them information that documents their ancestry, a new field of study has arisen, something like forensic genetic anthropology, whose goal is to determine the ancestry of man back to Adam and Eve, as it were.

Several advancement have made this possible. For one, the newly discovered ability to examine and fix the exact protein sequences that encode the organic structure and function in all living things has allowed us to map the entire human genome. With that technology, better and better techniques have been developed to show relatedness between people as individuals and as peoples. By comparing samples of ancient human DNA with that of modern humans, it has become possible to measure genetic distance, degrees of ancestry and relatedness, etc. Before another decade passes, the entire human family will know their lineage back to the first Humans who emerged from Africa several tens of thousands of years ago.

Mormons hold that Africans with black skin are descendants of Cain and until 1978, believed that they are cursed by God as to the blessings of the priesthood. Modern genetics show that all of us are African by origin. Through genetic mapping, we are discovering that Modern American Indians share their genetic heritage with North Eastern Asians, not people from the Middle East.

Linguistically, similar findings are confirming the genetic ones. After a thousand years, speakers of any language would only recognize about 1/10th of the words spoken by their progenitors. But sentence structure will last largely more or less intact much longer than that. Studies of American Indian languages show that linguistically, American Indians are not descendants of Middle Easterners but of North East Asians. We can't go backward and look in time directly, but as different methods of studying the past repeat the same findings, we can rely on those findings with increasing confidence. As time goes on and genetic research on past peoples continues and fills in the picture of our historical migrations as humans, Mormons will come to the point of having no intellectual ground upon which to base their religion. for more study, please see: Scientific American, March 1993­Genetics, linguistics and dentition in determining American Native Peoples' origins Genes Peoples and Languages by Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza.

[Sandra's Note: See http://www.exmormon.org/whylft125.htm, 'DNA genealogies of American Indians and the Book of Mormon.']

Jan. 30, 2002

Congratulations for your web page!

You have been doing an excellent work, i guess you are of my favorite people....I left the mormon church 1 year ago, and was baptized on last sunday.

I have learned to recognize mormonism as the recombination of different and contradictory christian-like views of different times, with degeneration of masonic rituals, misuse of egyptian documents, etc.

That proves something: Combination of all kinds of truths or cool stuff doesn't add up to give all truth....overall if the man "restoring" has no idea of what truth is.

What i enjoy in the bible is that the real prophets are ever talking about material things, nor they did try "their best", they just listened the words of God and spoke them.

As for Jesus, I have been learning to appreciate him as my savior.

I know how difficult is this work for both of you. but it is soo important!. Sometimes i have feel really stressed, since i am at BYU, but i have started to enjoy myself....I try not to listen the stuff of everybody, since these youngsters are unexperienced......It can be soo difficult recognizing the truth!


Jan. 30, 2002

i find it somewhat sad that a group not associated with the lds faith would use such a website. I read quiet a bit a your testimonies and find that there was none. There was more of just trying to defend your position and that is not a testimony. I too know that christ lives also and respect your dicisions but advise you to insteed of looking for errors in mormon doctrine ...just worry about what you personally are doing..because destroying others faith ..being different or not is sin in itself.

Jan. 31, 2002

Subject: Re: Your LDS writings

Get a life.

Jan. 31, 2002

Subject: Book Recommendation

Dear Tanners,

Your site is my primary resource in my education about Mormonism. Thank you for providing it and for your commitment to honesty and fairness in presenting evidence.

I would like to recommend that you offer the book by Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853), "The Testimony of the Evangelists, The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence." It is my opinion, based on a couple of remarks in the book, that Greenleaf, a contemporary of the BOM publishing, wrote this book as a means of evaluating the credibility of Joseph Smith, the BOM, and Smith's "witnesses." It is available through Simon Greenleaf U., Anaheim, CA. (800) 922-4748.


Jan. 31, 2002

Subject: The lost 116 Pages of the Book of Mormon

The excerpt from 'The Golden Bible' is completely misinformed.. You see.. the 116 pages were from the Book of Lehi. In the first book of Nephi we read that Nephi knew not why The Lord had commanded him to record his version of the events following the Family leaving Jerusalem. But we see it was wisdom in God Because Lehi's account was lost. Words of Mormon signify the end of the record that was not abridged by Mormon. He explains that the rest of the Record known as the Golden Plates is Mormon writing his condensed account of the Prophets from that point on.

The 116 pages were not from the beginning up to the account of King Benjamin. Joseph had already translated up to that point.. but he had not given ALL his translation to Brother Harris. Had Martin not lost them, then the Book of Mormon would have taken 257 pages to reach King Benjamin.

And the first two books (Lehi and 1st Nephi) would have been exceedingly redundant. The Lord, in His infinite wisdom, knew that Sister Harris would lose/burn/sell/or otherwise dispose the pages (however she did it, we know not for sure. But I assure you God did/does.)

Therefore it is foolishness to assume that Joseph Smith Jr was translating the "WRONG" Plates. The first 116 pages were the beginning of the ONLY plates he had. Concerning Mormon being "part of the fraud" I would have to teach you concerning what it means to say "The Plates of Nephi" It can mean both 1st and 2nd Nephi.. or it can mean All the plates up to Words of Mormon. This latter definition is on account of the record from the death of Nephi up to Words of Mormon were made on the same plates Nephi first forged to start his record.

As far as Satan "circumventing the Lord" This is ludicrous. The Lord cannot remove man's free agency. Joseph chose to lend Martin the pages.

This is as far as I chose to read in the Excerpt because up to this point the Author has completely proven his ignorance of the history of the early Saints, and his misunderstanding of the History of the early inhabitants of the American Continent. I can only assume it gets worse.

Thank you for you time,

[Sandra's Note: I suggest you read the last part of our book Joseph Smith's Plagiarism of the Bible. We have a section in it called 'Covering Up the Black Hole in the Book of Mormon.' This deals with the problems raised by Smith's replacement of the lost 116 pages. It's a little more complicated than you seem to realize. There is also a good chapter by Brent Metcalf in the book New Approaches to the Book of Mormon.]

Go to Letters to the Editor: Main

Go to Online Resources


Home | FAQs | What's New | Topical Index | Testimony | Newsletters | Online Resources | Online Books | Booklist | Order/Contact | Email | Other Websites