jean ritchie - ignorance is bliss

7/30/2019 Jean Ritchie - Ignorance is Bliss

1/50

Responses ToJean Ritchies

The World Of The

Cults (Ignorance Is Bliss)Compiled and Written by

Ronnie BrayBA (Hons) Theology & Religious Studies

2013


2/50

Contents

Preface................................................................................................................................. 4 Flesh And Blood? Hardly! ............................................................................................... 6 The Resurrection Real or Myth? .................................................................................... 10 Three Of The Lost Tribes Of Israel! ................................................................................. 15 Archologists Have Failed .......................................................................................... 17 Wider Yet And Wider ....................................................................................................... 19 Spirit Food ........................................................................................................................ 24 War In Heaven .................................................................................................................. 25 Adam Or God? .................................................................................................................. 27 According To The Holy Bible .......................................................................................... 29 Christian Polygamy ........................................................................................................... 33

Not Convicted! .................................................................................................................. 34 False Facts ...................................................................................................................... 36 Why Does Ritchie Tell Lie After Lie? .............................................................................. 38 If Ignorance Is Bliss Jean Ritchie Must Be Ecstatic! ........................................................ 39 Josephs First Vision ......................................................................................................... 40 Pauls First Vision ............................................................................................................. 42 The Lie Direct ................................................................................................................... 46 I Told It My Way! ............................................................................................................. 48 What Is Mark Payne Doing Now? .................................................................................... 49 Danger, Deprogrammers! ................................................................................................. 50


3/50


4/50

Preface

Trying to find biographical details about anti-religious writer Jean Ritchie is like trying tofind truth in her writings. From this, you will gather that I have tried to do so withoutsuccess.

I came across her book, The Secret World Of Cults, in the remnant box at a discountshop in Huddersfield and paid One British Pound for the privilege of reading her slopabout my faith. I am a Mormon and have been for sixty-two years as I write this, and canwith justification claim to know more than a little about my religion, its origins, itshistory, its doctrines, and its practices. I certainly know more than Jean Ritchie does.

My initial disappointment with Ritchie as an authoress that claims to write definitively ona variety of subjects under the umbre lla of cults (a word she fails to define and appearsnot to know its currency in Standard English), is that she fails to provide any referencesfor her selection of quotes, nor does she include a bibliography, not any footnotes so thatreaders can check her sources for themselves in reputable reference works. She asks us,tacitly, to trust her! Trusting Ritchie is something I strongly advise against, and after youhave seen some of her gross errors you will be disinclined to trust her. She does includea decent index, but footnotes with verifiable reference to her sources and a properbibliography would have been of more use to the honest seeker. However, having readthrough her opinions of Mormonism and Mormons I am hardly surprised that she hidesher referents.

Her sole allusion to her helpers is a list of acknowledgements, and that short listincludes some that have at one time or another been active in activities against what theydefine as cultists from a wide varie ty of accusations and charges, few, if any, of whichhave ever been successfully proven in any court to have been guilty of what Ritchie andher clan have charged them. More about them later. Apart from that list there is not onereference annotated in the two-hundred and twenty-eight pages of her wildly confusedand confusing book, although she does include the addresses of hate groups that share herorientation towards those she does not understand.

One reviewer of her Myra Hindley book complains, It' s certainly not the best book fordetails of the murders themselves; some location names are incorrect and victims areskimmed over too much for my liking. 1 She treats her subjects the same way in TheWorld Of Cults, which tells us that having little or no regard for her victims is the bestshe is willing or able to do.

I suppose we ought to ask ourselves whether attacks such as Ritchies ought to beconsidered in the wider world of religious scholarship since they are irrefutablyantagonistic to the requisite Christian attitude to those whose personal faith is not like our

1 Amazon reviewer of Inside The Mind Of a Murderer


5/50

own, whatever we are. This statement is relevant because whilst a person is attackinganothers faith they almost always step outside their professed Christian characters andadopt the guise of those as dark and as fierce as the demons they claim to oppose.Clearly, Jesus did not condone his followers using the Devils tools in their fight toestablish righteousness.

22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and hehealed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. 23 And all the peoplewere amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?

24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.

25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his

kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges.

28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he

first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. 2

Says a Christian scholar,

Christ was not satisfied by showing them [the carping Pharisees] the intrinsic absurdityof their argument. He showed them that it might as well be applied to them as to him.Y our disciples, taught by you and encouraged by you, pretend to cast out devils. If your argument be true that a man who casts out devils must be in league with the devil, then"your disciples" have made a covenant with him also. You must therefore either give upthis argument, or admit that the working of miracles is proof of the assistance of God. 3

The one thing that can be said about Jean Rit chie is that whatever it is, shes against it.She is wily enough not to expose her own faith, if indeed she has one, and fails to informus what she stands for , but is content to write a sensationalist book that includes all thosereligious expressions commonly attacked by those on the religious right where speakingin unknown tongues is of greater value that speaking Gods language of love. This is notstating the case too strongly when we consider that some of her referents consider theRoman Catholic Ch urch a cult and a tool of the Devil that is out to steal the souls of theCatholic faithful.

Not content to leave judgement to God, Ritchie sets out with her night-vision scythe andcuts a broad swathe of destruction across many lives. I wonder how she sleeps.

2 Matthew 123 Barnes Notes On The Bible
http://bible.cc/matthew/12-22.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-23.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-24.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-25.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-26.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-27.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-28.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-29.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-29.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-28.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-27.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-26.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-25.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-24.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-23.htmhttp://bible.cc/matthew/12-22.htm


6/50

Flesh And Blood? Hardly!

Despite noting Ritchie's all-points attack on everything that does not share her own jaundiced point of view, whatever that might be, I will deal exclusively with her harangueagainst The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as Mormons,because I am, as stated, a Mormon and well placed to counter her lies. In her firstparagraph she makes it evident that her knowledge of Mormonism is pilfered fromunreliable and unacknowledged sources.

On a planet near a star called Kolob, lives a god [sic] called Elohim with a great manywives. All the wives are kept very busy having babies, but although the god and his wivesare flesh and blood they look and are exactly like human beings the babies are allspirit children. 4

Apart from the reference to heaven where Elohim, the High God of Christianity lives, therest of Ritchies passage is imaginative fiction. Ritchies reference to God having manywives might or might not be true, the truth is that no Latter-day Saint knows or claims toknow whether it is so or not. Ritchies unsupported claim is found in a variety of meanspirited Anti-Mormon publications, but never in official Mormon sources.

Elohim is an Hebrew word found in Genesis and is usually translated as God in Englishversions of the Holy Bible. Latter-day Saints believe that Elohim is God the Father. Theliteral meaning of Elohim is masculine plural god or gods, although the name can mean

judges and other exalted beings both mortal and divine.

Mormons do not believe that either God or his wife, or, if he has more than one wife, hiswives, are personages of flesh and blood. A reference at this point would be extremelyuseful, but, alas, typical of Ritchies work, there is none.

The Mormon understanding of resurrected bodies is found in the New Testament in theGospel of Luke where Jesus appears to the eleven Apostles in the upper room:

36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them,Peace be unto you. 37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arisein your hearts? 39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see;

for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40 And when he had thus spoken,he shewed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and

4 Ritchie, The Secret World Of Cults [SWC], Chapter 5, p. 69


7/50

wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? 42 And they gave him a piece of abroiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 43 And he took it, and did eat before them. 5

Jesus said: Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for aspirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Clearly, Jesus was re surrected, as all will be, but not with Ritchies imaginary body of flesh and blood , but with a real, tangible, material body of flesh and bones that they wereinvited to touch.

Behold my hands ... - Jesus gave them first hand evidence that he was the same personthat had been crucified by showing them his hands and his feet - still, pierced, the woundsmade by the nails still open and directing them to touch him and see for themselves sothat they could witness to the world that he was alive and embodied again! He then atebefore them to prove to them that he was not, as they had supposed, a diaphanous spirit.No better evidence could have been given. He let them touch him and performed acts that

a disembodied spirit could not do.Jesus stood before them in his resurrected body of flesh and bones. His blood was pouredout on the earth. Why Ritchie finds occasion to re-introduce the blood of Jesus into therisen Christ we do not know, for she does not say, nor does she provide a reference to anyplace that tells us that what she here claims is actually what Mormons believe. Nowherein Latter-day Saint theology is there any reference to a belief that Jesus reclaimed hisshed blood and was resurrected with a body of flesh and blood. Nowhere.

Other Anti-Mormons know what Mormons believe about the resurrected Jesus Christ andhis Father. Michael Davis cites Mormon author Carfred Broderick:

"God is a personage of flesh and bone... The Savior was fathered by a personage of flesh and bone" 6

Mormons do believe that Elohim is a personage of flesh and bone, and that the SaviourJesus Christ was resurrected with the same kind of body, as Jesus Christ himself in theGospel of Saint Luke testifies.

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Who can doubt that Jesus was speaking the truth? Where Ritchie found her Jesus withflesh and blood she fails to say! Could it be from an online Catholic forum, such as thisone that speaks of Mormonism:

5 Luke 34:36-43 [AV]6 http://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/docs/mormonism/jesus-refs.html citing: Dialogue: AJournal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1967, p. 100-101
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/docs/mormonism/jesus-refs.htmlhttp://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/docs/mormonism/jesus-refs.htmlhttp://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/docs/mormonism/jesus-refs.htmlhttp://www.leaderu.com/offices/michaeldavis/docs/mormonism/jesus-refs.html


8/50

I have read several pla ces that Mormans [sic] say that God has a body made of flesh and blood. 7

Of course that is merely someones ill -informed or misunderstood opinion, but it iscontrary to what Mormons have taught and believed. A website that is operated by a

member of the LDS Church, but not by the Church, answers a question on this samesubject.

You claim that God is flesh and blood. How do you explain John 4:24? Asked by Anonymous, 12/16/2007

Mormons do not claim that God is flesh and blood. We claim that He has a bodyof flesh and bone. This distinction is important. We believe that God is a spiritbeing who chooses to inhabit a body of flesh and bone, much as humans havespirits that reside in physical bodies.

There are multiple biblical passages that suggest th at God possesses a physicalbody. The fact that man was created in God's image suggests that God is not somemysterious force or immaterial being; rather, God possess a physical body, andwe were made physical beings in His likeness (Genesis 1:26-27). The Old-Testament prophet Jacob saw God face-to-face, suggesting God has a physicalbody (Genesis 32:30). Moses also saw God face to face and spoke with Him(Exodus 33:11). Additionally, Moses also saw God's hand, back parts, feet,mouth, and finger, further suggesting He has a physical body (Exodus 33:21-23,Exodus 24:9-11, Numbers 12:6-8, Deuteronomy 8:3, and Deuteronomy 9:10).The psalmist also implied that God has a physical body when he wrote God'shands, arms, and countenance (Psalm 44:3). The New Testament described avision of God's right hand (Acts 7:55-56). The apostle John described God's face,again suggesting He has a physical body (Revelation 22:3-4).

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, one of the world -wide leaders of the Latter-day SaintChurch, recently made another good point: "[Mormons believe] in an embodiedbut certainly glorified God. To those who criticize this scripturally based belief, Iask at least rhetorically: If the idea of an embodied God is repugnant, why are thecentral doctrines and singularly most distinguishing characteristics of allChristianity the Incarnation, the Atonement, and the physical Resurrection of theLord Jesus Christ? If having a body is not only not needed but also not desirableby Deity, why did the Redeemer of mankind redeem His body, redeeming it fromthe grasp of death and the grave, guaranteeing it would never again be separatedfrom His spirit in time or eternity? Any who dismiss the concept of an embodiedGod dismiss both the mortal and the resurrected Christ. 8

7 An anonymous questioner8 AllAboutMormons.com Webmaster


9/50

Non-Latter-day Saint Theologians and Bible commentators have addressed the questionof Jesus body of flesh and bones, and are offered here as standard proofs that Latter -daySaint belief in the actual physical resurrection of Jesus was a real event is one shared bythe majority of Christians, for example,

flesh and bones -He says not flesh and blood ; for the blood is the life of the animaland corruptible body (Genesis 9:4), which "cannot inherit the kingdom of God" (1Corinthians 15:50); but "flesh and bones," implying the identity, but with diversity of laws, of the resurrection body. 9

From the foregoing, it should be evident that Mormons believe God has a body of fleshand bones, not flesh and blood, as Ritchie says. It is inconceivable that a former

journalist 10 could make such a fundamental error when Mormon teachings have beenreadily available since 1830 in the USA and since 1837 in Great Britain.

Mormons believe that the blood of Jesus was shed on the cross of Golgotha to make an

infinite atonement so that the sons and daughters of God could be cleansed from theeffects of their wrongs and stand before God and Jesus righteoused by Jesus Christ andforgiven and accepted by God the Father.

Jesus, who is in the express image of his Father was resurrected with a body of flesh andbones, and unless he has succumbed a second time to the demands of death following hisresurrection he will still have it today where he sits at God the Fathers right hand in theheavens. 11

Not only is Jesus Christ in the express image and likeness of his Father, but humanitywas made in the image and likeness of God. 12

9 Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary10 She worked for The Sun, a British tabloid that attracts a great deal of attention for its sensationalismand inaccuracies. "The Sun" thrived on controversial and sensational stories, including nude pin ups,presented in a quick-read format, with no demanding analysis.11 Hebrews 1:1-412 Genesis 1:26-27


10/50

The Resurrection Real or Myth?

The question of the nature of the persons spoken of in the Holy Bible as God the Father[Elohim] and God the Son [Jesus Christ] must concern us as Christians, since we dependon knowing what they are like to know what we are like and what we will become.

In his Great High Priestly Prayer, Jesus said:

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ,whom thou hast sent. 13

The knowledge of God and of his Son Jesus Christ is itself a source of unspeakable andeternal joy. The word "know" here, as in other places, expresses more than a merespeculative acquaintance with the character and perfections of God. "It includes all theimpressions on the mind and life which a just view of God and of the Saviour is fitted toproduce." It includes, of course, love, reverence, obedience, honour, gratitude, supremeaffection. "To know God as he is" is to know and regard him as a lawgiver, a sovereign, aparent, and a friend. It is to yield the whole soul to him, and strive to obey his law. 14

Full salvation is called eternal life to show that it reaches and endures beyond the limitsof time, and that it involves the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body, andthat it is never to end, hence it is , a life ever living, from , always, and, life, from , which is being or existence. No words more for cibly convey theidea of eternal life than these do . It is called , That eternal life, by way of its otherness. This life eternal of which Jesus speaks to his Father is eternal life withwhich infinite happiness is inseparably connected and is inseparably connected withexaltation or deification.

So, to the question of whether the resurrection is real or only notional in some vaguespiritual way that has no basis in reality. Paul entertains no doubt that is it real, actual,literal, as was the resurrection from the dead of Jesus Christ. Not only that, but he alsoteaches that it is universally applied to all mortals that have died.

For as in Adam all dies, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 15

That assurance gives life to the Christian. But what will be the nature of our resurrectedbodies? In what form can we expect to be after we are resurrected? According to theApostle John we shall be just as Jesus is.

13 John 17:314 Barnes Notes On The Bible15 1 Corinthians 15:22


11/50

Beloved, now are we the sons of God,and it doth not yet appear what we shall be:

but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 16

Non-LDS Christian divine and scholar says of this verse:

and it doth not yet appear what we shall be ; though they are sons, they do notappear now as such, as they will do, when they shall be introduced into theirFather's house, and into the many mansions there prepared for them; when Christshall publicly own them as the children given unto him, and when they shall beput into the possession of the inheritance they are heirs of; besides, they willappear then not only to be kings' sons, but kings themselves, as they now are; theywill then inherit the kingdom prepared for them, and will sit down on a throne of glory, and have a crown of righteousness, life, and glory, put upon them; and willappear not only perfectly justified, their sins being not to be found; and the

sentence of justification afresh pronounced, and they placed out of the reach of allcondemnation; but they will be perfectly holy and free from all sin, and perfectlyknowing and glorious; they have a right to glory now, and glory is preparing forthem, and they for that: and they are now representatively glorified in Christ, butthen they will be personally glorified: now, though all this shall certainly be, yet itdoes not now manifestly appear; it appears to God, who calls things that are not asthough they were and to Christ, whose delights were with the sons men, thesechildren of God, before the world was, and saw them in all the glory they were tobe brought to; but not even to angels, until they are owned and confessed beforethem; much less to the world, who do not know what they are now, and still lesswhat they will be, seeing them now in poverty, meanness, under many reproaches,afflictions, and persecutions; and even this does not appear to the saintsthemselves, whose life is a hidden life; and that by reason of darkness, desertion,and diffidence, for want of more knowledge, and from the nature of the happinessitself, which is at present unseen:

but we know that when he shall appear ; that is, Jesus Christ, who is now inheaven, and out of sight, but will appear a second time: the time when is notknown, but the thing itself is certain:

we shall be like him ; in body, fashioned like to his glorious body, in immortalityand incorruption, in power, in glory, and spirituality, in a freedom from allimperfections, sorrows, afflictions, and death; and in soul, which likeness will liein perfect knowledge of divine things, and in complete holiness;

for we shall see him as he is ; in his human nature, with the eyes of the body, andin his glorious person, with the eyes of the understanding; not by faith, as now,but by sight; not through ordinances, as in the present state, but through thosebeams of light and glory darting from him, with which the saints will be

16 1 John 3:2


12/50

irradiated; and this sight, as it is now exceeding desirable, will be unspeakablyglorious, delightful, and ravishing, soul satisfying, free from all darkness anderror, and interruption; will assimilate and transform into his image and likeness,and be for ever. 17

Philo the Jew observes

the saints in heaven will see God and Christ as they are, and as much as they areto be seen by creatures; God will be seen as he is in Christ; and Christ will beseen as he is in himself, both in his divine and human natures, as much as can be,or can be desired to be seen and known of him. 18

The Book of Hebrews contains stunning information about the figures of God and Christseated side by side in Heaven and in the express image and likeness of the other. Thatthese verses are not more widely used in Christian theology and Christology is a mystery,

for they contain beautiful truths about the nature and form of the heavenly Father and HisOnly Begotten Son.

1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto thefathers by the prophets, 2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, andupholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged oursins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; 4 Being made so muchbetter than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent namethan they. 19

Jesus has the brightness of his Fathers glory, and is in the express image of his Fathers person.

This is particularly meaningful when we learn from Genesis that, God said, Let us makeman in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea,and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over everycreeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in theimage of God created he him; male and female created he them .20

Although there is much discussion about what it means to be created in the image of God,the simple meaning is that we resemble God, an understanding that was prominent formany centuries until the image of God as a real personage was lost under pressure fromphilosophers that abandoned sacred scripture for speculation.

17 Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible18 De Praemiis. & Paenis, p. 91719 Hebrews 1:1-420 Genesis 1:26-27


13/50

God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 21

Gill says, So God created man in his own image ,.... Which consisted both in the form of his body, and the erect stature of it, different from all other creatures; in agreement with

the idea of that body, prepared in covenant for the Son of God, and which it was thereinagreed he should assume in the fulness of time; and in the immortality of his soul, and inhis intellectual powers, and in that purity, holiness, and righteousness in which he wascreated; as well as in his dominion, power, and authority over the creatures, in which he the Word was as God's viceregent, and resembled him. The Jerusalem Targum is,

the Word of the Lord created man in his likeness; even that Word that was in thebeginning with God, and was God, and in time became incarnate, by whom all thingswere made.

in the image of God[image and glory 22] created he him ; which is repeated for the

certainty of it. 1 Corinthians 11:723

Saint Paul confirms that the record of Genesis regarding humanity made in the image andlikeness of God is divine truth.

For a man indeed ought not to cover his head[whilst he prays 24], forasmuch as he is theimage and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 25

Moving forwards through the narratives of Genesis, we come to the birth of Adams son,Seth.

And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth .26

Again, the words image and likeness are employed, identifying how they are to beunderstood when they are used of Adam as created in the image and likeness of God.Seth is in the image and likeness of Adam; Adam is in the image and likeness of Elohim,and Jesus Christ Jehovah is in the image and likeness of God the Father. Why has Godtaken such pains to have us understand how we are in his image and likeness? He hasdone so because he is the Father of our Spirits, so that we are truly his offspring.

Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave themreverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? 27

21 Genesis 1:2722 23 Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible24 The Ethiopic version adds While he prays. 25 1 Corinthians 11:726 Genesis 5:327 Hebrews 12:9


14/50

God is called "the God of the spirits of all flesh." 28

Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, set a man over the congregation 29

Because the spirit or soul is the most important part of us, the name spirit of flesh isgiven to it by God, who alone is eminently and supremely the Father of our immortal,pre-existing eternal spirits. Man is immortal because each of us is endowed with aneternal spirit, which is never to die, and thereby we sustain our relationship to Father of our spirits as His children. Our earthly father is parent to us inasmuch as we are mortals,but God is our Father inasmuch as we are immortals.

When Jesus was resurrected it was not his shed and spent blood that vitiated hisresurrected body, but the immortal spirit with which God the Father endowed him, andwith which he endows each of us. When Jesus was raised he was raised immortal and nolonger needed blood to sustain his mortal body for it was changed and immortalised, and

eventually glorified. That is why he told the Eleven, a spirit hath not flesh and bone s as ye see me have! 30

Mormons believe that Jesus was raised from the dead with a body of flesh and bones inwhich he eternal spirit was tabernacle and that in this respect, as in every other, he is likeunto his father in Heaven.

28 Numbers 16:2229 Numbers 27:1630 Luke 34:39


15/50

Three Of The Lost Tribes Of Israel!

Like most Anti-Mormons, Ritchie falls foul of the plain and simple facts surrounding thefounding of The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-day Saints and the coming forth of theBook of Mormon. She calls Joseph Smith a farm hand. 31 It might be nothing more thana clumsy statement, but young Joseph worked with his father and brothers on the familyfarm.

an angel, called Moroni, appeared ant old Joseph that in a nearby hill hewould find a set of gold plates, inscribed with the history of an, early, unknowncivilisation in America, founded by three of the lost tribes of Israel. 32

How remarkable. Since Ritchie does not provide any references it is difficult to knowfrom where she picked this little bud of falsehood. The Book of Mormon containsinformation regarding the descent of its people through both Ephraim and Manasseh, thetwo sons of Joseph who was sold into Egypt and whose father was Jacob, also calledIsrael. The Book of Mormon came into to the world through the direct action of God andhis servants as a second witness for the convincing of both Jew and Gentile that Jesus isthe Christ, or Messiah, and the Saviour and Redeemer of the world. The Lost Ten Tribesas a whole or in part do not figure in any way in its production. Why does Ritchie believethey do?

A few pages later, Ritchie writes of the Mormon belief that the indigenous Red Indianswere descended from one of the lost tribes of Israel. 33 The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel arethe ten tribes of Israel that formed the Northern Kingdom of Israel which disappearedfrom biblical and all other histories after the kingdom was overrun in about 720 BCE byAssyria . They are called Lost because their whereabouts are unknown. After beingtaken into captivity by Tigleth-Pileser III they disappeared from the stage of history.They are never reported in Mormonism as having any bearing on the peoples of the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon records three separate migrations to the New World: the Jarediteswho came from the Tower of Babel around the time it was built, Lehi and his family whocame from Jerusalem around 600 BC, and the Mulekites who came from Jerusalem a fewyears later.

Joseph Smith said,

The Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western tribes of Indians; having been found through the ministration of an holy Angel, translated

31 Ritchie, Op. Cit. p. 6932 Ibid. p. 7033 Ritchie, Op. Cit. p. 75
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribes_of_Israelhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_%28Samaria%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Biblehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyriahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyriahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyriahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Biblehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_%28Samaria%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribes_of_Israel


16/50

into our own language by the gift and power of God, after having been hid up inthe earth for the last fourteen hundred years, containing the word of God whichwas delivered unto them. By it, we learn that our western tribes of Indians, aredescendants from that Joseph that was sold into Egypt, and that the land of

America is a promised land unto them. 34

The Book of Mormon may certainly be said to be a chronicle of the forefathers of theAmerican Indians, but Joseph Smith never claimed that it was the only one, nor need webelieve from this statement that the Book of Mormon accounts for all the ancestors of Native Americans.

One thing is sure: No Mormons believes the Native American people to be descendedfrom the Ten Tribes of Israel, although some Non-Mormons have considered them assuch.

34 Smith, lletter to the editor, American Revivalist and Rochester Observer, 1833


17/50

Archologists H ave Failed

Ritchie writes,

Despite the detail with which Smith writes, archologists have consistently failed to find any trace of the sites of towns or battlegrounds described by Smith, and excavations have

failed to discover even one example of several coins he names. 35

The last recorded entry in the Book of Mormon is dated around 600 CE. Towns andvenues that were in existence between 3000 BCE but which have not been in continuousoccupation or have been totally abandoned are unlikely to have any name attached tothem except the modern names given to them by explorers and archologists. Becausethese ancient places cannot be matched with reference to their names in the Book of Mormon does not diminish their importance, nor nullify their existence. Historic turmoiloften leads to mass migrations and resettlements. When abandoned places fall into ruin,or are robbed of their materials for later builder in other places, they are often lost to latergenerations.

There are estimated to be as many as 3,000 deserted medival; villages in England, andmany more that were emptied and fell apart and were lost in the churning wake of theIndustrial revolution that unsettled tens of thousands of villagers and drove them into thenew industrial towns. Some are known only by ancient records, but most are lost forever.Does that mean they were never there?

excavations have failed to discover even one example of several coins he names.

This is unsurprising because no coins are named in the Book of Mormon. No, not one!The text of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon makes no mention of coins. Theword coins was added in the 1920 edition to the chapter heading for Alma 11, but thiswas an error since no coins are referred to in the text itself.

Chapter headings are editorial notes, and some have been changed. The word coins is nolonger part of the chapter heading for Alma 11 in current copies of the Book of Mormon.

The Nephite monetary system is set forth Amulek contends with Zeezrom Christ willnot save people in their sins Only those who inherit the kingdom of heaven are saved

All men will rise in immortality There is no death after the Resurrection.

The pieces of gold and silver described in Alma 11:1-20 are not coins, but a surprisinglysophisticated 36 system of weights and measures that is consistent with Mesoamericanproto-monetary practices. 37

35 Ibid. p. 7036 "The Numerical Elegance of the Nephite System": Tables 1 and 2, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies8/2 (1999); John W. Welch, "Did the ancient peoples of Mesoamerica use a system of weights and scales in


18/50

Daniel C. Peterson noted , It is, alas, quite true that there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of Book of Mormon coins. Not even in the Book of Mormon itself.

The text of the Book of Mormon never mentions the word 'coin' or any variant of it. The

reference to 'Nephite coinage' in the chapter heading to Alma 11 is not part of theoriginal text, and is mistaken. Alma 11 is almost certainly talking about standardized weights of metal a historical step toward coinage, but not yet the real thing . 38

measuring goods & their values?," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8/2 (1999): John W. Welch,"Weighing & Measuring in the Worlds of the Book of Mormon," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 8/2(1999): 36 46.37 Marion Popenoe de Hatch, Kaminaljuy/San Jorge: Evidencia Arqueolgica de la Actividad Econmicaen el Valle de Guatemala, 300 a.C. a 300 d.C (Guatemala: Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, 1997), 100.38 Daniel C. Peterson, "Chattanooga Cheapshot, or The Gall of Bitterness (Review of Everything You EverWanted to Know about Mormonism by John Ankerberg and John Weldon)," FARMS Review of Books 5/1(1993): 1 86. see especially p. 55.


19/50

Wider Yet And Wider

But it is not Smiths fanciful creation of an early civ ilisation across North, South, and Central America that has given rise to the most controversy over his teachings. It is hisinterpretation of Christian theology: his version of the origin of man, his plurality of godsin heaven, his views on the relationship of God and Jesus, his rituals and ceremonies .39

Ritchie exaggerates with her notion that the Book of Mormon civilisations spread across North, South, and Central America . Again, she posits something not evidenced in theBook of Mormon or in Mormonism and again she fails to cite the source of hermisinformation.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has neither postulated nor confirmed anyspecific geographical areas in which the events portrayed in the Book of Mormon arebelieved to have taken place. Individual members are left to their own speculationsconcerning Book of Mormon geography, and that remains the case to this day.

Archaeology confirms that there were innovative cities and defences in Mesoamerica inBook of Mormon times, and rivers of the right size in the right portions of the land arealso found in in Mesoamerica.

There appears to be a problem with Book of Mormon directions and the layout of Mesoamerica. Whereas the Nephites generally used terms such as northward andsouthward, the hourglass shape of Mesoamerica runs northwest and southeast . Howcould an intelligent people like the Nephites get cardinal directions wrong? In bothMayan and Hebrew, north means on the left hand and south means on the right.Studies indicate that some people in Mesoamerica called the Pacific Ocean the west seaand the Gulf Coas t the east sea, just as done in the Book of Mormon. Even someEuropean conquerors used directions similar to those used in the Book of Mormon whenthey wrote about their travels in Mesoamerica.

What is certain is that ancient peoples inhabited the Americas well before the advent of European colonial powers. We are right to ask whether there remains any evidence at allof relatively advanced civilizations existing in ancient North America? The answer issurprising.

Most Americans have no idea that ancient cities with advanced architectures oncedotted the ancient North American landscape. It is estimated that there onceexisted over 200,000 cities, structures, and mounds across the continent. Monk'sMound in the ancient site of Cahokia, across from St. Louis, has a footprint biggerthan the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, and Cahokias population was estimated

39 Ritchie, Op. Cit. p. 70


20/50

to be greater than that of London or Rome. Some sites still existing, like theNewark Earthworks in Ohio, reveal a culture that was very sophisticated in itsknowledge of mathematics and astronomy. 40

Doubters can learn much more about lost ancient North American civilisations at:

http://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com

Next, we ask whether there is any evidence for ancient civilisations having beenuncovered in South America. Again, the answer is surprising.

As a result of the deforestation of the Amazon basin, a startling discovery hasbeen made. Hidden from view for centuries, the vast archaeological remains of anunknown, ancient civilization have been found.

A study published in Antiquity, a British archaeological journal, details how

satellite imagery was used to discern the footprint of the buildings and roads of asettlement, located in what is now Brazil and believed to span a region of morethan 150 miles across....

According to Martti Parssinen, Denise Schaan and Alceu Ranzi, the authors of thestudy, the community likely had a population of more than 60,000 people. Theresearchers said they have only uncovered roughly 10 percent of the existingstructures, which may date as far back as A.D. 800.

British explorer Colonel Percy Harrison Fawcett claimed he had found evidenceof an ancient civilization, which he called the City of Z, in the same area. Hedisappeared in the jungle on a 1925 expedition undertaken with his son and acompanion. The author of a book on this subject, David Grann, relates:

In cleared-away areas of the upper Amazon basin, researchers, using satelliteimagery, have recently pinpointed a vast network of monumental earthworks,including geometrically aligned roads and structures, constructed by a hithertounknown civilization.

According to a new report published in the journal Antiquity, the archaeologistMartii Prssinen and other scientists have documented more than two hundredand ten geometric structures, some of which may date as far back as the thirdcentury A.D. They are spread out over an area that spans more than two hundredand fifty kilometres, reaching all the way from northern Bolivia to the state of Amazonia in Brazil.

Over the past several years, however, there has been mounting evidence thatnearly everything that was once generally believed about the Amazon and itspeople was wrong, and that Fawcett was in fact prescient.

40 http://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/index.html
http://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/http://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/index.htmlhttp://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/index.htmlhttp://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/index.htmlhttp://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/index.htmlhttp://www.lostcivilizationdvd.com/


21/50

None of this wondrous discovery would have come as a shock to various authorswho decades ago recorded the stories of the natives and explorers. During thattime, however, mainstream archaeologists have frequently pooh-poohed thesetales and ignored the whole astounding field. As we can see, times are changing. 41

The Book of Mormon action is believed to have been chiefly concerned withMesoamerica, so we ask whether any evidence for advanced civilisations has beenuncovered to suppor t the Book of Mormons view. The answer, you will not be surprisedto learn, is surprising!

The wonderful culture of the Mayan Indians to which we will now turn ourattention was developed in the humid lowlands of Central America and especiallyin the Yucatan peninsula. Artists are everywhere of the opinion that the sculpturesand other products of the Mayas deserve to rank among the highest art products of the world, and astronomers are amazed at the progress made by this people in the

measuring of time by the observed movements of the heavenly bodies.Moreover, they invented a remarkable system of hieroglyphic writing by whichthey were able to record facts and events and they built great cities of stone thatattest a degree of wealth and splendor beyond anything seen elsewhere in the NewWorld.

The Mayan culture was made possible by the agricultural conquest of the richlowlands where the exuberance of nature can only be held in check by organizedeffort., On the highlands the preparation of the land is comparatively easy, owingto scanty natural vegetation and a control vested in irrigation. On the lowlands,however, great trees have to be felled and fast-growing bushes kept down byuntiring energy. But when nature is truly tamed she returns recompense many foldto the daring farmer. Moreover, there is reason to believe that the removal of theforest cover over large areas affects favorably the conditions of life which under acanopy of leaves are hard indeed.

The principal crops of the Mayas were probably much the same as on thehighlands, with maize as the great staple. Varieties favorable to a humidenvironment had doubtless been developed from the highland stock by selectivebreeding as agriculture worked its way down into the lowlands. Archaic artappears along the edges of the Mayan area in the state of Vera Cruz, Mexico, andin the Uloa Valley, Honduras. In both these regions are also found clay figurinesthat mark the transition in style between the archaic and the Mayan as well asfinished examples of the latter. There can be no doubt, then, that the archaic art of Mexico marks an earlier horizon than the Mayan. Whether or not it was once laidentirely across the Mayan area cannot be decided on present data but it seems

41 http://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomy
http://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomyhttp://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomyhttp://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomyhttp://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomyhttp://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomyhttp://freethoughtnation.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=284:ancient-civilization-discovered-in-amazon&catid=53:archaeology-archaeoastronomy


22/50

unlikely. We have already seen that this first art was distributed primarily acrossarid and open territory.

With their calendrical system already in working order the Mayas appear on thethreshold of history about the beginning of the Christian Era according to a

correlation with European chronology that will be explained later.

The first great cities were Tikal in northern Guatemala and Copan in westernHonduras, both of which had a long and glorious existence. Many others spranginto prominence at a somewhat later date; for example, Palenque, Yaxchilan orMenche, Piedras Negras, Seibal, Naranjo, and Quirigua. The most brilliant periodwas from 300 to 600 A. D., after which all these cities appear to have beenabandoned to the forest that soon closed over them. The population moved tonorthern Yucatan, where it no longer reacted strongly upon the other nations of Central America and where it enjoyed a second period of brilliancy severalhundred years later. []

At Copan there is an especially fine example of artificial platform mound risingfrom one end of the Great Plaza and affording space for several temples as well asfor sunken courts with stepped sides that may have been theatres. The riverwashing against one side of this great mound has removed perhaps a third of itand made a vertical section that shows the method of construction. It is apparentthat the mound was enlarged and old walls and floors buried.

Mayan buildings are of too principal kinds. One is a temple pure and simple andthe other has been called a palace. The temple is a rectangular structure crowninga rather high pyramid that rises in several steps or terraces. As a rule the templehas a single front with one or more doorways and is approached by a broadstairway. The pyramid is ordinarily a solid mass of rubble and earth faced withcement or cut stone and rarely contains compartments. Some temples have but asingle chamber while others have two or more chambers, the central or innermostone being specially developed into a sanctuary. The so-called palaces are clustersof rooms on low and often irregular platforms. These palaces may have beenhabitations of the priests and nobility. The common people doubtless lived inpalm-thatched huts similar to those used today in the same region.

The typical Mayan construction is a faced concrete. The limestone, whichabounds in nearly all parts of the Mayan area, was burned into lime. This wasthen slaked to make mortar and applied to a mass of broken limestone. The facingstones were smoothed on the outside and left rough-hewn and pointed on theinside. It is likely that these facing stones were held in place between forms andthe lime, mortar and rubble filled in between. The resulting wall was essentiallymonolithic. The rooms of Mayan buildings are characteristically vaulted but theroof is not a true arch with a keystone. The vault, like the walls, is a solid mass of concrete that grips the cut stone veneer and that must have been held in place by a


23/50

false work form while it was hardening. The so-called corbelled arch of overstepping stones was doubtless known to the Mayan builders. 42

While Mormons make no claims about how widespread ancient civilisations were in theAmericas, North, South, and Central, if they had, there is sufficient archological support

to buttress any such claims.

42 http://archive.org/stream/ancientcivilizat00spinrich/ancientcivilizat00spinrich_djvu.txt
http://archive.org/stream/ancientcivilizat00spinrich/ancientcivilizat00spinrich_djvu.txthttp://archive.org/stream/ancientcivilizat00spinrich/ancientcivilizat00spinrich_djvu.txthttp://archive.org/stream/ancientcivilizat00spinrich/ancientcivilizat00spinrich_djvu.txthttp://archive.org/stream/ancientcivilizat00spinrich/ancientcivilizat00spinrich_djvu.txt


24/50

Spirit Food

The reason that the flesh-and-blood God and his flesh-and-blood wives give birth to spirit children is that in heaven they eat spirit food, not earthly food. Celestial vegetables, when digested, form a spiritual fluid which gives immortality and eternal lifeto the organisation in which it flows, according to Mormon doctrine. 43

Although Ritchie does not provide a source for this information, a source is available in abook by Orson Pratt, written in 1853 in which he undertakes to explain what is, accordingto Mormon doctrine, inexplicable. Pratt wrote,

The celestial beings who dwell in the Heaven from which we came, having beenraised from the grave, in a former world, and having been filled with all the

fulness of these eternal attributes, are called Gods, because the fulness of God dwells in each. Both the males and the females enjoy this fulness. The celestialvegetables and fruits which grow out of the soil of this redeemed Heaven,constitute the food of the Gods. This food differs from the food derived from thevegetables of a fallen world: the latter are converted into blood, which,circulating in the veins and arteries, produces flesh and bones of a mortal nature,having a constant tendency to decay: while the former, or celestial vegetables,are, when digested in the stomach, converted into a fluid, which, in its nature, isspiritual, and which, circulating in the veins and arteries of the celestial male and

female, preserves their tabernacles from decay and death. Earthly vegetables form blood, and blood forms flesh and bones ; celestial vegetables, whendigested, form a spiritual fluid which gives immortality and eternal life to theorganization in which it flows .44

Although Pratts writing is i nteresting, it cannot be considered Mormon Doctrine. I doubtthat more than a dozen Latter-day Saints out of the current 15,000,000 have ever heard of it, and if they have, do not believe it to be doctrine.

Mormons believe that exaltation is a gift bestowed by God upon those that become heirsof salvation. To them God grant gifts of immortality and eternal life. Whether theresurrected eat or do not eat is an unrevealed mystery, but the notion that it is necessaryto eat spiritual vegetables to maintain immortality seems more than a little incongruous.

43 Ritchie, Op. Cit. p. 7044 Pratt, The Seer,


25/50

War In Heaven

When Elohim and the other gods ruled in favour of Jesus plan, Lucifer was angry and recruited a third of all the spirits in heaven to support him. They came to earth as evilspirits, doomed never to have bodies to live in but always bent on undoing the good work of Jesus. The spirits who supported Jesus were sent to earth as white people, while thosewho remained neutral were punished with dark skins and became negroes.

Mormons do belie ve that there was a council in heaven to determine how Elohims Planof Happiness was to be conducted. They believe that Jesus, the Firstborn of all Godsspirit children, and the pre-existent Jesus, or Jehovah, offered a plane in which the soulsof men were free to follow evil or good, and the glory they received would be passed onto Elohim. Lucifer, then a noble son of God, suggested that he would force all humanityto be saved by coercion and the withholding of moral free agency, but he wanted theglory they received to be directed to himself. When the majority of two-thirds of the sonsand daughters of God rejected Lucifers plan he rebelled and drawing a third of the spiritsafter him he fought against God, for which he was cast down to earth with his angels.

If Ritchies theory is correct, then the earth would be peopled only with white people andNegros, which it plainly is not. Where does Ritchie believe brown, copper, and yellowskinned people come from?

While it is true that some Mormons have speculated on the reason why Negros were notgiven the priesthood until 1978, the reason has never been revealed. Gordon B Hinckleysuggested that the reason as an imprecise understanding of a couple of passages of scripture. I could also have had its foundation in the widespread Christian view that hadtoo little regard for Negros. The removal of the ban was welcomed by the Latter-daySaints. As for the regard Mormon had for Negros, Joseph Smith recorded in 1838,

"Elder Hyde inquired about the situation of the negro. I replied, they came intothe world slaves mentally and physically. Change their situation with the whites,and they would be like them. They have souls, and are subjects of salvation. Gointo Cincinnati or any city, and find an educated negro, who rides in his carriage,and you will see a man who has risen by the powers of his own mind to his exalted state of respectability. The slaves in Washington are more refined than many in

high places, and the black boys will take the shine off many of those they brushand wait on.

Elder Hyde remarked, "Put them on the level, and they will rise above me." I replied, if I raised you to be my equal, and then attempted to oppress you, would

you not be indignant? []


26/50

Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization." 45

In Mormonism, Negros were not and are not regarded as inferior 46 to any other race ornation.

45 History of the Church, Volume 5, p. 21646 Ritchie, p. 71


27/50

Adam Or God?

Joseph Smiths version the origin of man on earth is that God came down from his planet, in flesh and blood, as Adam and procreated with Eve.

A site hostile to Mormonism states,

Kolob is a star or planet described in Mormon scripture. Reference to Kolob is found in the Book of Abraham, a work published by Latter Day Saint (LDS) prophet Joseph Smith, Jr. According to this work, Kolob is the heavenly bodynearest to the throne or residence of God. 47

Whether heavens location is on a planet or on anything else in not known to Mormons.Other Christians are at the same loss to explain its location.

According to Max Lucado, Heaven is an Unknown Country. 48

Heaven is not limited by the normal boundaries of time and space. Scriptureclearly teaches that heaven is a real place that can be seen and touched and inhabited by beings with material bodies. We affirm that truth unequivocally.

But Scripture also reveals heaven as a realm not confined to an area delimited byheight, width, and breadth. Heaven seems to span all those dimensions-and more.

In Christ's message to the Philadelphian church, for example, He speaks of theeternal realm as "New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from MyGod" (Rev. 3:12). In the closing chapters of Scripture, the apostle John speaks of "the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God" (Rev.21:10).

The New Heaven and New Earth are seen blending together in a great kingdomthat incorporates both realms. The paradise of eternity is thus revealed as amagnificent kingdom where both heaven and earth unite in a glory that surpassesthe limits of the human imagination and the boundaries of earthly dimensions.

So heaven is not confined to one locality marked off by boundaries that can be

seen or measured. It transcends the confines of time/space dimensions. Perhapsthat is part of what Scripture means when it states that God inhabits eternity (Isa.57:15). His dwelling place--heaven--is not subject to the normal limitations of

finite dimensions.

47 Top 10 craziest Mormon beliefs48 Max Lucado, When Christ Comes, Word Publishing, Chapter 5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Abrahamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith,_Jr.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thronehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thronehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith,_Jr.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Abrahamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star


28/50

We don't need to speculate about how this can be; it is sufficient to note that thisis how Scripture describes heaven. It is a real place where people with physicalbodies will dwell in God's presence for all eternity; and it is also a realm that surpasses our finite concept of what a "place" is. 49

The Christian website gotquestions.org, disagrees.

Heaven is most certainly a real place. The Bible very definitely speaks of heavensexistence and access to heaven through faith in Jesus Christ but there are noverses that give us a Mapquest-style location. The short answer to this question is,heaven is where God is. The place referred to in this question is called thethird heaven and paradise in 2 Corinthians 12:1 -4, where the apostle Paultells of a living man who was caught up to heaven and was unable t o describeit. The Greek word translated caught up is also used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 indescribing the rapture, wherein believers will be caught up to be with the Lord.These passages have led to the conclusion that heaven is beyond the earths

airspace and beyond the stars. However, since God is spirit, heaven cannot signify a place remote from uswhich He inhabits. The Greek gods were thought of as spending most of their time

far away from earth in sort of a celestial equivalent of the Bahamas, but the God of the Bible is not like this. He is always near us when we call on Him (James4:8), and we are encouraged to draw near to Him (Hebrews 10:1, 22).Granted, the heaven where saints and angels dwell has to be thought of as asort of locality, b ecause saints and angels, as Gods creatures, exist in space and time. But when the Creator is said to be in heaven, the thought is that He existson a different plane from us, rather than in a different place.

That God in heaven is always near to His children on earth is something whichthe Bible expresses throughout. The New Testament mentions heaven withconsiderable frequency. Yet, even with this frequency, detailed description of itslocation is missing. Perhaps God has intentionally covered its location inmystery, for it is more important for us to focus on the God of heaven than thedescription or location of it. It is more important to know the why than the where.The New Testament focuses on the purpose of heaven more than telling us what it is like or where it is. We have seen that hell is for separation and punishment (Matthew 8:12; 22:13). Heaven, on the other hand, is for fellowship and eternal

joy and, more importantly, worshipping around the throne of God.

So, heaven is somewhere, and, according to others, it is nowhere except where God is.Who is to say whether heavens nearest planet, Kolob, is not close to heaven?

49 John MacArthur, The Glory of Heaven


29/50

According To The Holy Bible

According to Joseph Smiths revelations, Abraham, Moses, David, and Solomon and other biblical figures all had polygamous marriages. And it was not confined to Old Testament figures, as both Paul and Jesus disciple John are both believed by Mormon tohave had more than one wife .50

According to the Holy Bible, Abraham, Moses, David, and Solomon and other biblical figures all had polygamous marriages. In fact, according to the Holy Bible, with whichRitchie seems unfamiliar, God commanded plural marriage so that Levirate marriagebecame a biblical custom. It is described in Deuteronomy 25.

5: If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the deadman shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall goin to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.

6: And it shall be that the firstborn son which she bears will succeed to the name of hisdead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel.

7: But if the man does not want to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go upto the gate to the elders, and say, 'My husband's brother refuses to raise up a name to hisbrother in Israel; he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.'

8: Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him. But if he stands firm andsays, "I do not want to take her,"

9: then his brother's wife shall come to him in the presence of the elders, remove hissandal from his foot, spit in his face, and answer and say, "So shall it be done to the manwho will not build up his brother's house."

10: And his name shall be called in Israel, "The house of him who had his sandalremoved." 51

Thus, if a married man in Old Testament Israel died leaving behind a childless widow,the brother of the deceased was required by Gods L aw to marry his dead brother'swidow. The purpose was to produce a son that would be heir to the wealth of thedeceased.

50 Ritchie, p. 7251 NKJV


30/50

Was levirate marriage limited to single men? In other words, if the brother of thedeceased was already married, was he still required to take his brother's widow as asecond wife?

People who hold the position that polygamy was, is, and always will be a sin obviously

claim these are moot questions because if polygamy itself is a sin, then taking more thanone wife, even as prescribed by levirate law, would also be sinful. However, since theBible itself is silent on this matter the best we can do is to consider what has been written.If a sufficiently strong case can be made that being married did not exempt a man fromlevirate marriage, it should put to rest the idea that polygamy is a sin.

Most Bible commentators are silent as to whether a married man was required to take thewidow of his deceased brother as a secondary wife, and those that are not silent stand onopposite sides of the question.

The Reformation Study Bible:The limitation to brothers "living together" may indicate that it applied to an unmarriedbrother, but it is doubtful that this limitation held in practice.

The MacArthur Study Bible:

Obviously, this required that the brother be unmarried...

So, whereas, the Reformation Study Bible says "it is doubtful that this limitation [abrother that is un married at the time of his brothers death] held in practice," while TheMacArthur Study Bible says "Obviously, this required that the brother be unmarried...".

The Oxford Dictionary of the Bible:

The [levirate] law did not forbid a man to be married twice (Deuteronomy 21:15-17 ) .

Biblical examples of polygynous men include:

Lamech had two wives Genesis 4:19.Esau had three wives Genesis 26:34 & 28:9.Jacob had four wives Genesis 29:28 & 30:4-9.Gideon had many wives Judges 8:30.Abijah had 14 wives II Chronicles 13:21.


31/50

Most Biblical patriarchs are reported as having many wives. Nothing in the Bible saysthat polygamy is contrary to the will of God, and if it is not contrary, then God approves,even, as in the case of Levirate marriages, commanding it through his Lawgiver, Moshe.

In the Second Temple period, Jewish society was, at least in theory, polygamous 52

"There is evidence of the practice of polygamy in P alestinian Judaism in NT times. 53

Herod the Great (37-4 B.C.) had ten wives 54 and a considerable harem. 55

Polygamy and concubinage among the aristocracy is attested by Josephus. 56

The continued practice of levirate marriage 57 evidently led to polygamy, which wascountenanced by the school of Shammai but not that of Hillel, nor by the Qumranis. Itseems not to have been extensively practiced by Jews in the New Testament period,particularly by rabbis:

Polygamy was present and visible in parts of Palestinian Judaism, and generally confinedto the aristocracy on economic grounds.

Most Jewish teachers allowed that polygamy was both legal and approved by God,therefore, they did not see marrying a second wife as adultery. The fact that polygamywas current during the beginning of the Christian period is attested by Justin Martyr whorebuked the Jews for their common practice of polygamy, and did so with evident anti-Semitic fervour:

"Your imprudent and blind masters [i.e., Jewish teachers] even until this time permit each man to have four or five wives. And if anyone sees a beautiful womanand desires to have her, they quote the doings of Jacob."

Irenus condemned Gnostics for polygamy:

"Others, again, following upon Basilides and Carpocrates, have introduced promiscuous intercourse and a plurality of wives..."

Tertullian was as vehement in his condemnation of plural marriage, despite its divineorigins:

We do not indeed forbid the union of man and woman, blest by God as theseminary of the human race, and devised for the replenishment of the earth and

52 Jewish Women in Grco-Roman Palestine, p. 85 53 FJ Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic and Social Conditionsduring the New Testament Period, 1969, pp. 90, 93, 369 f 54 Josephus, Ant. 17, 19f.; War 1,56255 Ibid. War 1,51156 Antiquities of the Jews 12, 186ff.; 13, 380; War 1, 9757 Yeb. 15b


32/50

the furnishing of the world, and therefore permitted, yet Singly. For Adam was theone husband of Eve, and Eve his one wife, one woman, one rib.

Methodius, in the third Christian century, insisted that plural marriage had not continuedafter the time of the Prophets:

"The contracting of marriage with several wives had been done away with fromthe times of the prophets. For we read, 'Do not go after your lusts, but refrain

yourself from your appetites'...And in another place, 'Let your fountain be blessed and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.' This plainly forbids a plurality of wives."

Yet plural marriage remained common even among Christians as shown by the Councilof Neocaesarea, circa AD 315, that refers to a 'purification period' for polygamists. Bythat time, sinners had to 'sit out' of Church activities until they had demonstratedreformation. If a sin showed up on this list of canons, it was considered a 'bad sin' andpolygamy shows up here:

In the Ancient Epitome of Canon III, it is recorded that time for doing penanceand purification of polygamists is well known, and that a zeal for penance mayshorten it."

Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea (329 or 330 January 1, 379), mentioned polygamy anumber of times in his letters, generally concerning the period for exclusion from churchfor polygamists, calling it 'limited fornication':

In the case of trigamy and polygamy they laid down the same rule, in proportion,as in the case of digamy; namely one year for digamy (some authorities say two

years); for trigamy men are separated [from Church activity] for three, often for four; but this is no longer described as marriage at all, but as polygamy; nayrather as limited fornication. It is for this reason that the Lord said to the womanof Samaria, who had five husbands, "he whom thou now hast is not thy husband."

He does not reckon those who had exceeded the limits of a second marriage asworthy of the title of husband or wife. In cases of trigamy we have accepted aseclusion of five years, not by the canons, but following the precept of our

predecessors. Such offenders ought not to be altogether prohibited from the privileges of the Church; they should be considered deserving of hearing after two or three years, and afterwards of being permitted to stand in their place; but they must be kept from the communion of the good gift, and only restored to the

place of communion after showing some fruit of repentance.

The data for the NT is at best unclear. Although it was by this time best described as aminority practice, it remained a practice among Jews and Christians. The Bible is clearthat polygamy is not only authorized, but in many cases it was demanded by God. If Godsanctions it, it cannot be counted as adultery.


33/50

Christian Polygamy

There is a Christian movement, Christian Polygamy , whose website says,

Christian Polygamy is based solely upon the Old and New Testament Scriptures. It is a belief held mostly by evangelical, conservative Christians, who operate bythe presupposition that the Scriptures, the Word of God, as written in thelanguages in which they were originally written, is the sole basis for doctrinalbelief []Yes, Christian Polygamy is genuinely Christian! 58

Those Christian reform movements that have attempted to build up abandoned Christiandoctrines justifying their interpretations on the Bible alone ( sola scriptura ) have acceptedpolygamy as a Biblical practice. During the Protestant Reformations, Martin Luthergranted Philip of Hesse who had been living constantly in a state of adultery and

fornication, a dispensation to take a second wife. 59

Fifteen years earlier, Luther stated that he could not "forbid a person to marry severalwives, for it does not contradict Scripture." ("Ego sane fateor, me non posse prohibere, siquis plures velit uxores ducere, nec repugnat sacris literis.") 60

"The parliament at Nrnberg decreed that, because so many men were killedduring the Thirty Years War, [] every man was allowed to marry up to tenwomen. 61

Controversial Christian vegetarian activist and leader Nathan Braun implies a positivestance towards polygamy. 62

58 christianpolygamy.info59 Martin Luther, Der Beichtrat [English, "The Confessional Advice"]60 Luther, Letter to Saxon Chancellor Gregor Brck 61 February 14, 165062 Braun, The History and Philosophy of Marriage, fourth edition


34/50

Not Convicted!

Before founding his new religion [Joseph Smith] had been convicted in 1826 for glasslooking:

Much energy has been expended in the search for evidence that Joseph Smith wasconvicted of a public-order offence in 1826. It is admitted that evidence exists whichsuggests he made a court appearance in that year, but its nature is such that it must beregarded as inconclusive, both as to the nature of charge and the outcome of the hearing.The debate continues in the absence of any formal court record. Ritchie, in common withother Anti-Mormons deal with his alleged "conviction" and his unproven criminality as if it was an established fact. It is not.

In March 1826...Peter Bridgeman, swore out a warrant for [Smith's] arrest...thecourt pronounced him guilty, though what sentence was finally passed the record does not say. 63

Since Brodie cannot be considered a friend of Smith, if there were evidence for hisconviction, then she would have found it. Christadelphian Anti-Mormon, ForrestBrinkerhoff who relies on Brodie thinks he had Smith tried, found guilty, and convicted.

Smith admit ted [his conviction] later when he said, "I was visited by aconstable and arrested by him on a warrant, on the charge of being a

disorderly person, of setting the country in an uproar by preaching the Book of Mormon, etc. 64

Smith does no more here than admit he was arrested on a charge of being a disorderlyperson, for setting the country in an uproar by preaching the Book of Mormon. However,Smith does not write that the year was 1826. Brinkerhoff's inconsistency is his treatmentof the alleged 1826 trial becomes evident when he quotes directly from Brodie,

At length the public becoming wearied with the base imposition which he was palming off upon the credulity of the ignorant, for the purpose of sponging hisliving from their earnings, had him arrested as a disorderly person, tried and

condemned before a court of justice. but considering his youth, he then being aminor, and thinking he might reform his conduct, he was designedly allowed toescape.

If he escaped, then he was not convicted. In coupling these passages together Brinkerhoff displays poor judgement. The Book of Mormon had not been published in

63 Fawn M Brodie, No Man Knows My History, p. 3064 Smith, Documentary History of the Church, volume 1, pp. 88-89


35/50

1826, which shows that the two reports are not connected. The reference, one of the fewthat Brinkerhoff provides, shows the date of the trial to be 1830, which was four yearsafter the trial to which Brodie refers, and contains the evidence that Smith was acquittedon all charges, as well as providing primary contemporary testimony to his blamelessconduct and good character.

During his short troubled life as an instrument in the hands of God, Joseph Smith washauled before courts on no fewer than 43 occasions. On each of these he was found notguilty of the charges brought against him and acquitted without a stain on his character.


36/50

False Facts

The Mormon Church [] is the largest shareholder in the Los Angeles Timesnewspaper. 65

Here is another tidbit that would benefit from having a verifiable reference. The MormonChurch does not own or have any part in the LA Times. A respectable journalist shouldknow how to check and verify her statements.

The Los Angeles Times is a daily newspaper published in Los Angeles,California, since 1881. It was the second-largest metropolitan newspaper incirculation in the United States in 2008 and the fourth most widely distributed newspaper in the country .[3] In 2000, the Tribune Company, parent company of the Chicago Tribune and the area's KTLA, purchased the Los Angeles Times .

The Times was first published on December 4, 1881, as the Los Angeles DailyTimes under the direction of Nathan Cole Jr. and Thomas Gardiner. It was

printed at the Mirror printing plant, owned by Jesse Yarnell and T.J. Caystile.Unable to pay the printing bill, Cole and Gardiner turned the paper over to the

Mirror Company. In the meantime, S.J. Mathes had joined the firm, and it was at his insistence that the Times continued publication. In July 1882, Harrison GrayOtis moved from Santa Barbara to become the paper's editor.[5] Otis made theTimes a financial success.

Upon Otis's death in 1917, his son-in-law, Harry Chandler, took control as publisher of the Times. Harry Chandler was succeeded in 1944 by his son, Norman Chandler, who ran the paper during the rapid growth of post-war Los Angeles. Norman's wife, Dorothy Buffum Chandler, became active in civic affairsand led the effort to build the Los Angeles Music Center, whose main concert hallwas named the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in her honor. Family members areburied at the Hollywood Forever Cemetery near Paramount Studios. The site alsoincludes a memorial to the Times Building bombing victims.

The fourth generation of family publishers, Otis Chandler, held that position from 1960 to 1980. Otis Chandler sought legitimacy and recognition for his

family's paper, often forgotten in the power centers of the Northeastern United States due to its geographic and cultural distance. He sought to remake the paper in the model of the nation's most respected newspapers, notably The New York Times and Washington Post. Believing that the newsroom was "the heartbeat of the business",[9] Otis Chandler increased the size and pay of the reporting staff and expanded its national and international reporting. In 1962, the paper joined

65 Ritchie, p. 76
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaperhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribune_Companyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Tribunehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTLAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTLAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Tribunehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribune_Companyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspaper


37/50

with the Washington Post to form the Los Angeles Times-Washington Post NewsService to syndicate articles from both papers for other news organizations.

The paper's early history and subsequent transformation was chronicled in anunauthorized history Thinking Big (1977, ISBN 0-399-11766-0), and was one of

four organizations profiled by David Halberstam in The Powers That Be (1979, ISBN 0-394-50381-3; 2000 reprint ISBN 0-252-06941-2). It has also been thewhole or partial subject of nearly thirty dissertations in communications or socialscience in the past four decades.

The Times was beset in the first decade of the 21st century by a change inownership, a bankruptcy, a rapid succession of editors, reductions in staff,decreases in paid circulation and the need to increase its Web presence. In 2000,the Tribune Company acquired the Times, placing the paper in co-ownership withthen-WB (now CW)-affiliated KTLA, which Tribune acquired in 1985. In

December 2008, the Tribune Company filed for bankruptcy protection. 66

66 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Timeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Times


38/50

Why Does Ritchie Tell Lie After Lie?

[The Mormon Church] owns [] the Marriot Hotel Chain where guests have the Book of Mormon instead of the Gideon Bible in their bedrooms. 67

First, the Mormon Church does not now and never has owned the Marriott Hotel chain. Itwould be interesting to learn why Ritchie believes they do or did. It was founded byWillard Marriott, who was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,but the Church has never owned it.

Second,

The hotel is noted for including copies of the Book of Mormon in addition to the Holy Bible in its rooms. 68

67 Ritchie, P. 7668 Dowell, Edward. "Bible Now Shares Hotel Rooms With Some Other Good Books" . The New York Times
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon


39/50

If Ignorance Is Bliss Jean Ritchie Must Be Ecstatic!

A woman can only get to heaven if she is married to a man who is on the right track tobecome a god. If her husband fails to live up to the expectations of the religion, sheknows she will not become a goddess. 69

Although officially the Church tolerates but does not approve of divorce, some [Mormon]women feel pressured into divorcing their husbands the minute they know he is not goingto take them through the Temple ceremonies to godhood. 70

Women and men can get to heaven whether they are married or not. A woman married toan unworthy husband will not be denied the blessings of heaven. God is just and willtake care of worthy men and worthy women regardless of the spiritual condition of theireternal partners. Thus, while one souse might disqualify him or herself for exaltation, hisor her lack of faithfulness does not make the worthy partner unworthy. Ritchie is not onlywrong, but she is wrong at the top of her voice.

Neither women nor men are pressured to divorce their spouses when they do not honourthe covenants they have made with the Lord God. Latter-day Saint ministers might listento husbands and wives that seek comfort and counsel about a spouse that is unfaithful, butany decision to either continue to redeem the marriage or to end it is solely in the handsof the people concerned. There is no preparation or policy in place to pressure anyone toabandon a faithless husband or wife. In the spirit of Christianity, men and women areencouraged to be patient, longsuffering, and forgiving in the hope that their waywardpartner will return to the way of the Lord.

It would have helped Jean Ritchie if she had studied Mormonism rather than merely cutand pasted from the plethora of distorted versions of Mormonism available on the weband in scurrilous publications. But, I forgot, she is not a fair reporter of fact, but asensationalist.

I hope she will forgive those that expected better from her and are disappointed at whatshe delivered. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expectingdifferent results. Ritchie is at least consistent in that her deliberate sensatio nalism thatbears no relation to truth always produces the same results, regardless of who her victimshappen to be at the time, namely, a tissue of inexactitudes that prevaricate without effortand present false and harmful images of her victims.

For this she is recompensed!

69 Ritchie, p. 7970 Ibid.


40/50

Josephs First Vision

Mark and Thelma Payne, former Mormons, were informants for Ritchies book. 71 Theyhave much to say about why they became dissatisfied with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, including:

We [] discovered that there were four or five different version of Joseph Smiths first vision. We felt shocked, betrayed, deeply let down. It was like a physical hurt: somethingwe had believed in so deeply and had run our entire lives around. 72

Whilst one can feel sorry for their disappointment, it is less easy to understand why theyfelt so badly let down. The various accounts of the First Vision have addressed manytimes.

Critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints often seek to point out differences between the various accounts which Joseph Smith gave of his First Vision. Indefense of their position that the Prophet changed his story over a six year period (1832to 1838) they claim that the earliest followers of Joseph Smith either didn t know about the First Vision, or seem to have been confused about it. The Church, however, hasdiscussed the various accounts in a number of publications. Joseph Smith's variousaccounts of the First Vision were targeted at different audiences, and had different

purposes. They, however, show a remarkable degree of harmony between them. There isno evidence that the early leaders of the LDS Church did not understand that the Prophet saw two Divine Personages during his inaugural theophany. 73

"Critics of Mormonism have delighted in the discrepancies between the canonical [1838 PGP] account and earlier renditions, especially one written in Smith's own hand in 1832.For example, in the 1832 version, Jesus appears to Smith alone, and does all the talkinghimself. Such complaints, however, are much ado about relatively nothing. Any good lawyer (or historian) would expect to find contradictions or competing narratives writtendown years apart and decades after the event. And despite the contradictions, keyelements abide. In each case, Jesus appears to Smith in a vision. In each case, Smith isblessed with a revelation. In each case, God tells him to remain aloof from all Christiandenominations, as something better is in store." 74

71 Ritchie, p. 7972 Ibid. p. 8373 Fairmor

jean ritchie - ignorance is bliss

Documents