I love coming across sites that have unique things for sale... not that I ever have the money to actually buy the funny/cool things I see, but it's fun to check things out once in a while. (To all the True Blue Mormons out there who scope out my blog and mumble to themselves, it's not because I don't pay tithing to the church... if I paid tithing to the church I probably wouldn't have food in my fridge right now...)

Here are some cool items on Perpetualkid.com that I liked. Hope you enjoy the post!

Read more »

Read more »

Okay, many people have told me that the supposed blog by Lori Drew was a fake, and I have to agree with them. Who is taking time out of their day to create more hell for this girl's parents? What is wrong with people?

Read more »

I shared a story about Megan Meier, a girl who hung herself at the age of 13 after a neighbor created a MySpace account and harassed her. If you missed that post, you will want to read that first.

Well, it turns out the neighbor was a grown ass woman, and it looks like she doesn't feel sorry for terrorizing the girl... She (or some sick person pretending to be her) created a blog called, "MeganHadItComing"

Here is what the alleged neighbor had to say:

Monday, December 3, 2007

I'm Lori Drew

It's time I dropped the charade. Yes, I made this blog. Yes, I'm Lori Drew.

My daughter had nothing to do with this. Everyone needs to leave her alone. None of you can possibly know her involvement, and none of you can possibly know what she's gone through. She's just a kid. She doesn't deserve these brutal verbal attacks. Please stop.

Now that Mr. Banas has made public the announcement that there will be no charges filed against me or my family, I feel it is time to speak out about this tragic affair. I cannot count on any media organization to fairly represent my story, as they have grossly misrepresented and sensationalized the story so far. So, I must present my case here, on the blog that has been my only outlet.

You don't understand what the last two years have been like, living in this town, dealing with these people. When we came here, the Meiers seemed like a great family with whom we could form a friendship. Tina sold us our house and our little girls became fast friends. It was typical. Sleepovers and vacations and events in the community. The girls were inseparable.

We knew Megan and we liked having her around, at first. But as the months went on, we saw a change in our daughter. She was increasingly disturbed and defensive. We thought the effects of puberty were taking hold. But, we soon realized the negative influence was Megan. Megan had her bright and perky side, but she also had her dark side. We knew that she suffered from depression, so we tried to be supportive and patient. We talked to Ron and Tina about our concerns, but they would have none of it. Their precious Megan couldn't be the problem -- and they said we should feel bad for even suggesting it of a poor, mentally ill child.

It only got worse from there. Megan found out that we had gone to her parents and she worked to drive a wedge between our daughter and us. We fought back the only way we knew how: we supported our daughter and explained to her what we thought. She agreed with us, and that's when the fallout started.

When Sarah stopped going along with Megan's antics, Megan took it especially hard and lashed out. She called my daughter every nasty name in the book, swore to never be friends again and stormed out. Then a few days later they were friends again, Megan would try to manipulate Sarah, Sarah wouldn't buy it, and Megan would become furious again. Then came the MySpace attack. Not the one you're reading about in the news, but the one that started this whole thing.

After the final break-up in their frienship, Megan coordinated a MySpace attack on my daughter. Since she didn't have access to MySpace herself, she had to work through friends. I wasn't too surprised because I knew that Megan was grounded from MySpace the previous year after she made a fake profile with a friend to go prank and bully a classmate they didn't like.

Fortunately, that prank didn't go far, and neither did her latest attempted prank on my daughter. But the damage was done to my child, and I knew what kind of child Megan was, depression or not.

Now I had nothing but sympathy for Megan's condition. But my sympathy has limits. When you come after my daughter and try to hurt her like that, my patience wears out. This troubled child was no longer able to poison my baby in person, so she decided to reach out on the Internet to do it instead. Like any parent, when you see the ill-behaved child next door causing trouble for your family, you want to wring the neck of the parents who let it happen. But, as Megan's parents made it clear earlier, they were not about to come down on their precious Megan. I had no recourse with them. And, forbidding the children from seeing each other was not effective because Megan could simply harass my daughter online.

Then, my daughter heard that Megan was lobbying her parents to get her MySpace back. I was instantly terrified. That little monster was a tremendous poison for my daughter as-is. I didn't want to think about what kind of damage she would do if she had total access to the internet. I talked the situation over with people I knew and trusted, who told me to be very afraid. Teenage bullying was rampant on MySpace, and there were very few, if any, legal options for people being harassed. Everyone's advice was: if you're harassed, your only option is to delete your profile and run. It won't stop people from saying bad things about you, but at least you won't have to see it.

I wanted to hide my daughter away from all of this, and delete her MySpace, but she begged and pleaded with me to let her stay. I know it's MySpace and it's a social hub for teens today and I didn't want my daughter to be the only one without, so I relented.

Instead, I worked with a couple of people I knew to create a profile so I could keep tabs on Megan. They helped me add pictures and graphics and music so it would look like a boy that Megan would want to talk to. We didn't totally know what we were doing with the Josh Evans persona, or where it would lead, so I kept it quiet. We did our best to shmooze Megan into opening up. I complimented her pictures and said how great she was. I very gently asked her about her school life and her friends hoping that if she was planning any attack on my daughter that we would be one step ahead of her and could take this evidence to her parents, show them what their daughter is up to so they would finally take action.

A couple of weeks went by and Megan was buying it. We were surprised at how she could be so nice to "Josh" and still have an undercurrent of negativity when she talked about school friends. We wanted to make sure she wasn't going to try anything to get back at Sarah, so we kept the account going. When Megan started talking about being in love and wanting to do boyfriend/girlfriend stuff with "Josh" I got concerned. How do we keep going for information AND figure out a way to let her down gently once we were convinced nothing was going to happen? What if we let her down, and she regressed and came after my daughter anyway? I was becoming very confused and concerned then. Megan was unpredictable and I absolutely did NOT want her harassing my child. I didn't know what to do, so I kept going. I played down her innuendo. Anytime she became explicit, "Josh" backed off and kept the compliments above board.

Then I found out that Megan's parents were actively monitoring the account! Everything that had been going on, they were witness to. This troubled me deeply: were they not concerned when their 13 year old daughter wanted to have heavy duty make out sessions with a 16 year old boy? Hello!

I had "Josh" friend other people that Megan knew all the while so that if anyone else knew of anything that was going to happen, we'd have that much more chance of staying ahead of the game. One of the girls we friended even figured out that the profile was fake. We let her in on it, and asked what she wanted. Turns out, she wasn't friendly with Megan, either, so she wanted to help. I gave her access to the account.

It wasn't long after that that we saw what was being said on other accounts: Megan was still mad at Sarah and was very quiety spreading cruel rumors. She kept it off her own MySpace because she knew that kind of stuff would get her grounded off it again. I was furious! Not only was Megan obviously not going to stop until she had her revenge, but now there was no way to get any evidence about it.

That's when I decided I would have to teach Megan a lesson and give her a taste of her own medicine.

I decided that I would shut down the Josh account, and not be nice about it. Megan's feelings be damned, and to hell with her consequence! I was going to protect my daughter no matter what. So I sent the break up e-mail to Megan saying that Josh didn't want to be friends because Megan was very cruel to her friends. Naturally, Megan freaked, and I tried to keep the messages short and sweet. As a last resort bargaining chip, I figured that if she really loved Josh then maybe he could pressure her into stopping her lies. But it didn't work, and the situation devolved lightning fast.

Megan was screaming at Josh for answers on who he had been talking to: she wanted to know who ratted her out so she could take out revenge on them, too. I shared Megan's messages with everyone involved and encouraged everyone to stand up against her and not take her crap anymore.

Instead, once the word got out about Megan, so did all her romantic replies, as well as a few secrets and the MySpace crowd ganged up on her.But I didn't realize that this group would react that way. I expected a certain amount of bullying, and I was OK with it. I wanted Megan to get a taste of what she had been dishing out this whole time. But I didn't want it to go as far as it did. It's true that the slut and fat references came out of what I shared. And by the time I was done with work on that day, the bullying against Megan had progressed pretty far. I had heard about the "better off without you" message and that's when I told everyone to cool it. Megan had been punished enough, and I was satisfied that she would think twice before bullying or manipulating anyone again. I don't know who wrote that "better off without you" message.

That night I saw the ambulance lights at the Meier house, and then I saw them take Megan out on a stretcher. I was stunned and horrified. I wasn't sure what had happened, and when they had said Megan tried to kill herself, I didn't believe it. Yes, Megan suffered from depression, but she was always laughing and smiling when we were on vacations, or at sleep overs. After the shock wore off, I panicked: what if Megan ended her life after what happened on MySpace? It seemed ridiculous. When kids were bullied, they went to their rooms and cried -- even the depressed ones. They didn't hang themselves.

I was distraught over the event, so I instructed the key people involved to stay quiet to protect themselves against any counter-bullying, and I deleted the Josh profile. I kept the truth from the Meier family because there was simply no reason to come forward. Their little girl died the next day at the hospital. Their lives were destroyed. What good would it do to inform them that their daughter's MySpace boyfriend was a fake? They wouldn't believe that their daughter was a MySpace bully and a real life manipulator when she was alive, so why add to their grief now? I stayed quiet. I went to the funeral to pay my respects to this troubled child who took herself to a tragic end. We mourned the loss of a girl who once was a good friend. We all tried to get on with our lives.

Little by little rumors of the cause of Megan's suicide spread. Of course the Josh break-up was mentioned, as was the MySpace bullying. People talked about the need to stop MySpace bullying. There were a couple of news reports, but it never went anywhere.

Until six weeks later when one of the girls involved decided to link me to the issue. When Megan's parents found out that the Josh account was me, they focused all of their rage and pain and guilt at me. Instantly, what had been a mysterious suicide with no definite answers became a personal vendetta.

Just like Megan, her parents showed their dark side and scared the holy hell out of me when they dumped our smashed foosball table on our driveway. Instantly I knew we were dealing with unbalanced people. Aggravated by their child's death and their own culture of anxiety, I very much feared for my family. I made sure to report the incident to the police so the Meiers would know that we would stand up for ourselves and that the police were watching, should they choose to do something rash.

A little bit after that, I decided to try to diffuse the situation and confront the parents. I would lay out everything I knew, all the intent, and everything I thought. If they didn't want to accept the truth about their daughter, then there was nothing else I could do. But I would at least try. Unfortunately, Tina & Ron would have none of it. They wouldn't talk to us, they wouldn't deal with us. Ron pretty much came unglued when we made one last attempt. They had nothing but raw hatred for us, and they wouldn't listen. That's when I realized it was hopeless.

The police investigation was especially frightening. We cooperated as best we could. I provided my statement, but I was not satisfied with the officer who took it. He got most of the details wrong, and he left out intricacies that I've explained here. When I tried to get the report corrected, an officer at the desk said she was familiar with our case, and flat out refused to allow us to amend our statement. That was the beginning of the backlash. That it came from a police officer truly shook us.

The investigators asked both us and the Meiers to remain quiet about the issue while they conducted their work. They warned us of small town mob violence and undue media attention. We agreed and went on with our lives. We heard almost nothing for nearly nine months. Our lives seemed to be getting back to normal, despite the family down the street that still grieved visibly and had devolved into fights and separation. I truly felt bad for them. They lost their baby, and now they were tearing themselves apart because the pain wasn't getting any better. I made sure to kiss and hug my Sarah every night and tell her how much I loved her. We actually grew closer from it.

Then the investigation was over. No charges would be filed. We were relieved. It felt like a weight had finally been lifted from us. But not so for Tina & Ron. They had focused their rage on us and blamed us for everything. I could understand their pain and their guilt, but I had had enough of their accusations. One day I did snap and told Tina to "give it a rest." Looking back, it was insensitive to say. But, you have to understand that for months we had been dealing with a family that didn't want to listen to our side of the story and only called for us to "be gone." Like I said, my sympathy has limits.

After the investigation, Tina made it clear she wasn't going to let this go. We weren't sure what to expect, but we had grown to be dismissive of her and her incoherent ranting. Then came the newspaper article, which instantly painted us as hoaxers who were out to make Megan kill herself.

You see, this is why I now have an extreme distrust for any media: they paint the story in whatever way gets the most readers. Everyone from Pokin to Andersoon Cooper has painted this story as if we set out to destroy Megan, as if her suicide was a foregone conclusion of our actions. But it's not. We didn't know Megan was going to do what she did. If we knew it was going to end like that, I wouldn't have started this whole thing. I had no intention for Megan to be so drastic. I wanted her to learn a lesson so she could be a better person. I didn't want her to die.

Then Sarah Wells outed me. Then the hate and harassment and threats poured in. Even against my daughter. First there were dozens of calls, then hundreds, then there was national news, and everyone went crazy.

That's why I started this blog and posted as "Kirsten." I was so angry at the world for being so unfair, especially when it came to my daughter whom I had sworn to protect from all of this. I took a low blow at Megan's memory because I desperately wanted the world to at least get a glimpse of the truth.

But that's all over now. The final word from authorities has come down that there will be no charges, so I don't have to remain silent. There's no point in hiding anymore. The internet has made it clear that mob revenge must prevail, even if there's no justice in it. So be it.

Here I am, internet. Come get me.

Wow... come and get you? Okay... where do I start?

First off, you can claim that you were doing this for the benefit of your own teenage daughter all you want, but I see through it. If you were so concerned about Myspace bullying, you should not let your daughter on MySpace. The fact that she begged and pleaded with you to keep the MySpace account shouldn't matter. You are her mother, and you need to do what is best for her. Instead, you did something very stupid. You and a bunch of kids ganged up on a child that you KNOW has depression issues.

You knew she was mentally ill. Why didn't that stop you? Obviously revenge is more important to you than helping the way an adult should.

At any time you could have met with Megan's parents and told them the truth. It wouldn't have been easy, but you are the one who put yourself in that position to start with. You should have done the right thing, instead you gave other people access to the account and opened the door for abuse that you would have no control of. How in the world did you think that was a good idea? You gave these teenagers a key to harass this girl... and it seems like you didn't care. You felt she deserved it. Guess what? No one deserves that... no one. Not her, not your daughter... no one. Step up and be a grown woman and admit that you completely blew it.

People are NOT turning this into something it's not. People are shocked and amazed that you could stand by and let things get so out of control. I, for one, agree with them. How dare you?

What you did was criminal, and I sincerely hope that one day you will pay for what you did.

Read more »

Read more »

Here I was... just minding my own business when my MSN messenger informed me I received an email from a relative. This is the first time I have ever received an email from this person directly, so I was intrigued and I checked it right away. This is what awaited me:

If that doesn't make your blood boil I don't know whats wrong with you! Can you be serious? I was so angry that I went onto one of my favorite sites PostMormon.org and vented my frustration. That is where a friend told me that there is an article about this on Snopes.com. I was happy, and decided to fire back a reply. Here is what I sent:

Good Afternoon,

I would just like to take a little time to let you know that this stamp does exist, although it is neither new nor a Christmas stamp: It is a seven-year-old USPS Holiday Series stamp commemorating two Islamic holidays that have no connection to Christmas.

The EID postage stamp was introduced by the United States Postal Service (at the then currant rate of 34 cents) as part of their Holiday Celebrations Series on September 1, 2001, just ten days before the September 11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The EID stamp has since been reissued at updated first class postage rates in 2002, 2006, and most recently in September 2007.

The United States Postal Service describes the EID Stamp:

"The Eid stamp commemorates the two most important festivals --or Eids-- in the Islamic calendar: Eid Al-Fitr and Eid Al-Adha. On these days, Muslims wish each other "Eid mubarak," the phrase featured in Islamic calligraphy on the stamp. "Eid mubarak" translates literally as "blessed festival" and can be paraphrased as "May your religious holiday be blessed." This phrase can be applied to both Eid Al-Fitr and Eif al-Adha.

The word Eid is roughly equibalent to the English word "celebration" or "festival." The three-day Eid Al-Fitr celebrates the end of the month-long fasting of Ramadan; the three day Eid Al-Adha commemorates the willingness of the Prophet Abraham to sacrifice his son Ishmael in response to God's command, and it marks the end of Hajj, the annual Muslim pilgrimage to the holy city of Mecca. (In 2007, Eid Al-Fitr begins on October 12, and Eid Al-Adha on December 20.)

The Eid Stamp is often mischaracterized as a "Christmas stamp" but it has nothing to do with Christmas other than it is part of a series of U.S. Postage stamps commemorating several diverse celebrations (Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Thanksgiving) that generally occur around the November-December timeframe commonly known as the "holiday season" in the U.S. The USPS Holiday series also commemorates celebrations that occur at other times of the year, such as Cinco de Mayo.

The Statement "Muslims don't even believe in Christ and they're getting their own Christmas stamp!" is therefore nonsensical, akin to protesting Hanukkah stamps because "Jews don't even believe in Christ but they have their own Christmas stamp!"

I do remember all the horrific tragedies that occurred due to terrorism, however, I do not blame Islam in general for those acts. I blame Islamic EXTREMISM for those acts. There are extremists in every religion, including Catholics, Christians, and even Mormons. Mormon extremists still practice polygamy to this day, and believe they are right... just as these muslim extremists believe they are right.

I have many Muslim friends in Orlando, and I have to stand up for the honor of their character. To consider blaming their religion as a whole is wrong, and that is not what our troops are fighting for. They are fighting for our freedom to believe what we want... even if that belief is an extreme version of any religion.

To bash any religion is un-patriotic... as there are hundreds of thousands of Muslim American Soldiers ready to fight for our country.

Read more »

Read more »

Read more »

Read more »

Once again I am following up on a site that helped me realize Mormonism wasn't true... the site is called 20 Concerns about Mormonism, and there is a handy-dandy link to your right. If you are questioning the church, this is a fantastic tool... I am not taking credit for this research, but I want to share it.

Adam-God doctrine. Brigham Young taught that Adam (as in Adam and Eve) was God. He also claimed that Adam was the father of our spirits, as well as the father of Jesus Christ. Here are some quotes:

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me - namely that Adam is our Father and God…Our Father Adam helped to make this earth, it was created expressly for him. He brought one of his wives with him. Who is he? He is Michael…He was the first man on the earth, and its framer and maker. He with the help of his brethren brought it into existence. Then he said: 'I want my children that were born to me in the spirit world to come here and take tabernacles of flesh that their spirits may have a house, a tabernacle, or a dwelling place as mine has' and where is the mystery?" (Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 18, 1873)

Adam and Eve (aww... aren't they cute?)

In a discourse delivered April 9, 1852, Brigham Young stated:

"When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family…I could tell you much more about this; but were I to tell you the whole truth, blasphemy would be nothing to it, in the estimation of the superstitious and over-righteous of mankind. However, I have told you the truth as far as I have gone.... Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, pp. 50-51)

Heber C. Kimball, first counselor to Brigham Young, declared that:

"There is but one God that pertains to this people, and he is the God that pertains to this earth--the first man. That first man sent his own Son to redeem the world…" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, p. 1)

In a 10-page letter written to B.Y.U. associate professor Eugene England on Feb. 19, 1981, Apostle Bruce R. McConkie makes the following admission:

"Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This [i.e., Brigham Young's teaching on Adam], however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel." (p. 6 of McConkie's letter)

This despite earlier claims by church leaders to the contrary. For example, Joseph Fielding Smith, who became the 10th President of the church, claimed concerning the source of the Adam-God theory in the church's own Journal of Discourses, that:

"...in all probability the sermon was erroneously transcribed". (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, p. 96)

Yet Brigham Young pronounced:

"I have never yet preached a sermon and sent It out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 95)

In an interview from The New Yorker on January 21, 2002 President Gordon B. Hinckley had this to say about Brigham's doctrine:

"But Hinckley did not seem interested in discussing matters of theology. When I asked him to characterize God's connubial relationship, he replied, "We don't speculate on that a lot. Brigham Young said if you went to Heaven and saw God it would be Adam and Eve. I don't know what he meant by that." Pointing to a grim-faced portrait of the Lion of the Lord, as Young was called, he said, "There he is, right there. I'm not going to worry about what he said about those things." (Lawrence Wright, The New Yorker, January 21, 2002)

"I'm not going to worry about what he said about those things..." President/Prophet Gordon B. Hinkley

Okay, so here we have one Prophet saying that what another Prophet said isn't important. If Brigham Young wasn't right how can we still call him a prophet? It's example one of how the church changes it's doctrine constantly.

Blacks and the Priesthood

Blacks were not allowed to hold the Priesthood or receive exaltation until the policy was changed on 9/30/1978. Does that mean blacks living after that date can receive exaltation while those prior to that date cannot?

What sense does this make? Firstly, I want to be clear that everyone is equal... I in no way want to make it sound like I agree with the Church's past doctrine on African Americans. But, if the Book of Mormon is correct, blacks are supposedly cursed by God and their skin will turn white once they learn and accept the Mormon Gospel. It's stupid, yes. That is why they changed it... it also had much to do with the government warning them they would have to start paying taxes if they didn't make everyone welcome in their church. Presto-change-O.

Polygamy

Polygamy was practiced sporadically by prophets such as Abraham and Jacob in the old testament. It made a comeback in the early days of the LDS church and has since gone away again. The church has tried to distance itself from polygamy in recent years by, for example, changing all the quotes in the Brigham Young lesson manual from "wives" to "wife" and removing all mention of Joseph F. Smith's many plural wives and divorces from his lesson manual.

Hmmm... that isn't very honest, is it? Changing quotes in lesson manuals? Tell the truth if you have nothing to lie about.

Again... they had to change in order to survive. They are not being true to anything Joseph Smith taught, or Brigham Young for that matter.

Temple Endowments

There is no mention of temple endowments in ancient scripture resembling what is done today in the Mormon church. The endowment has even changed repeatedly in modern times. For example, the endowment given in the Kirtland Temple lacked the Masonic elements later added at the Nauvoo temple. Significant changes to the endowment have occurred as recently as 1990. If it came from God, why wasn't it done "right" the first time?

Joseph's prophecy of the Civil War (D&C 87) is often touted by Mormons as evidence of his prophetic calling. However, many are not aware of the numerous specific prophecies from Joseph which were never fulfilled.

The Government Overthrown

The plight of the early Saints after being driven out of their homes time and again is well known. Their wrongs were never redressed. Well more than "a few years" have passed since that time. Yet, despite the following prophecy from Joseph, the U.S. government continues strong.

"I prophesy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left, for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunger and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrated a foul and corroding blot upon the fair name of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame." (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 5, p. 394, May 1843)

A Temple in This Generation

On April 30, 1832, Joseph prophesied that a temple would be built in Independence, Missouri before the current generation passed away:

"4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.

5 For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house." (D&C 84: 4-5)

Allowing the widest possible latitude of 100 years for a generation, that still leaves the prophecy unfulfilled more than 70 years late and counting. There still is no LDS temple in Independence, Missouri.

Abridgement of D&C 137

In 1976, the 137th section of Doctrine and Covenants was submitted to the general conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for a vote to be "sustained" as scripture. It is a narrative of a vision supposedly seen by Joseph in Kirtland, Ohio in 1836.

What the members who voted on this new addition to scripture were not told by "the Brethren," is that whole paragraphs (216 words) of the actual revelation as recorded in The History of the Church had been conveniently left out of the version to be included in the Doctrine and Covenants. The reason for these omissions was that four false prophecies were contained in the part of the revelation which was censored out. These were prophecies so obviously incorrect that even the average LDS reader would pick them up. Therefore they went down the "black hole" of Mormon history.

Here is what is not in the new D&C 137:

[Joseph Smith:] "....I saw the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb, who are now upon the earth, who hold the keys of this last ministry, in foreign lands, standing together in a circle, much fatigued, with their clothes tattered and their feet swollen, with their eyes cast downward, and Jesus standing in their midst, and they did not behold him. The Saviour looked upon them and wept.

"I also beheld Elder M'Lellin in the south, standing upon a hill, surrounded by a vast multitude, preaching to them, and a lame man standing before him supported by his crutches; he threw them down at his word and leaped as a hart, by the mighty power of God.

"Also, I saw Elder Brigham Young standing in a strange land, in the far south and west, in a desert place, upon a rock in the midst of a bout a dozen men of color, who appeared hostile. He was preaching to them in their own tongue, and the angel of God standing above his head with a drawn sword in his hand, protecting him, but he did not see it.

"And I finally saw the Twelve in the celestial kingdom of God. I also beheld the redemption of Zion and many things which the tongue of man cannot describe in full."

First, at least seven of the twelve under discussion were soon excommunicated or apostatized from the church: John F. Boynton & Luke S. Johnson (1837), Lyman Johnson (1838), William E. M'Lellin (c.1838), Thomas B. Marsh & Orson Hyde (1838), and William Smith (1845). How could they have ever attained the celestial kingdom under those conditions? Although a few of these men later returned to the church, the majority remained apart for life.

Second, the vision of M'Lellin preaching and working miracles in the south never came true because he apostatized from the church without ever doing it (see above).

Third, although Brigham Young did bring the Mormons west and was a great colonizer and orator, the vision of Brigham Young preaching to "men of color" in their own language, in some strange and faraway place in the southwest never took place, or at least there is no trace of it in the very detailed records and diaries concerning his reign as prophet.

Finally, Zion (Independence, Missouri) was never redeemed, and has never been redeemed in the 150+ years since the prophecy was made. Is it any wonder that the Brethren chose to remove whole chunks of this "inspired" revelation?

United Order

In D&C 104:1 (1834) a prophecy is given concerning the LDS institution, the "United Order" (a theocratic, communistic method of distributing and controlling property and goods):

"…I give unto you counsel and a commandment, concerning all the properties which belong to the order which I commanded to be organized and established, to be a united order, and an everlasting order for the benefit of my church, and for the salvation of men until I come…"

LDS history reveals that this "everlasting" order had to be disbanded soon after because it failed. Mormons today do not practice a communal approach to property.

Treasures in Salem

With more than $50,000 in debts coming due, Joseph hearkened back to his gold digging days when he read a story in the Painesville Telegraph concerning a vast treasure buried beneath an old house in Salem, Massachusetts. Joseph had been enchanted by Salem as a youth, as it was where he first tasted the exciting world outside his small Vermont village. A convert named Burgess offered to lead Joseph to the exact location of the house in Salem. So Joseph departed east with Sidney Rigdon, Oliver Cowdery, and his brother Hyrum, ostensibly on a missionary tour. When they arrived in Salem in August 1836, he received this revelation:

"I have much treasure in this city for you, for the benefit of Zion, and many people in this city, whom I will gather out in due time for the benefit of Zion, through your instrumentality…and it shall come to pass in due time that I will give this city into your hands, that you shall have power over it, insomuch that they shall not discover your secret parts; and its wealth, pertaining to gold and silver shall be yours. Concern not yourselves about your debts, for I will give you power to pay them… And the place where it is my will that you would tarry, for the main, shall be signalized unto you by the peace and power of my Spirit, that shall flow unto you. This place you may obtain by hire. And inquire diligently concerning the more ancient inhabitants and founders of this city. For there are more treasures than one for you in this city." (D&C 111)

Joseph never found any treasures in Salem. The "many people" were never gathered out, as only 13 were baptized out of the whole city. The treasures of silver and gold prophesied were never found. They returned to Kirtland, Ohio the following month, disillusioned and without funds to pay their debts. (Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 192-193)

Mission of David W. Patten

"…thus saith the Lord: It is wisdom in my servant, David W. Patten, that he settle up all his business as soon as he possibly can, and make a disposition of his merchandise, that he may perform a mission unto me next spring, in company with others, even twelve including himself, to testify of my name and bear glad tidings unto all the world. (D&C 114:1, 1838)

Sadly, Patten was killed before he could fulfill this prophecy. Apologists have two arguments against this fact. One is that Patten was actually being called on a mission to the spirit world after death. Although that is a creative response, the verse itself contradicts it since 1) he was to go on the mission with eleven other men, none of whom were killed before spring; and 2) the verse says his mission was to "the whole world."

The other argument is that he wasn't worthy of the mission so the Lord killed him. The problem with that assertion is that Joseph Smith himself proclaimed that:

"Brother David Patten was a very worthy man, beloved by all good men who knew him…and died as he had lived, a man of God, and strong in the faith of a glorious resurrection…one of his last expressions to his wife was 'whatever you do else, O! do not deny the faith.'" (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 3, p. 171).

These explanations do not hold water.

Mission to Toronto

In the work, An Address to All Believers in Christ, David Whitmer, (one of the "Three Witnesses" to the Book of Mormon) related that in the winter of 1829-1830, Joseph Smith sent Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery on a mission to Toronto, Canada to sell the copyright to the Book of Mormon. This mission was ordered by a revelation that Joseph claimed he had received from God.

Unfortunately, both the mission and the revelation were failures. This is yet another false prophecy, as the man anxious to buy the copyright to the Book of Mormon never appeared. When Joseph was asked why the revelation had failed, he explained that:

"Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of man: and some revelations are of the devil…When a man enquires of the Lord concerning a matter, if he is deceived by his own carnal desires, and is in error, he will receive an answer according to his erring heart, but it will not be a revelation from the Lord." (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, p. 31)

But the question must be asked, if the "prophet" Joseph Smith cannot tell which of his revelations are from God and which are not; why should we trust any of them?

Despite claims by the LDS church to the contrary, the evidence is strong that Joseph blessed his eldest son, Joseph, and promised him succession as the church's next prophet. In the winter of 1843, during a sermon to his people in the grove next to the Nauvoo temple, Joseph called his son to the stand beside him and declared:

"I have often been asked who would succeed me as the prophet to the church. My son Joseph will be your next prophet."

This event was confirmed through sworn testimonies by Sophia K. Cook, niece of Martin Harris, as well as James Whitehead, secretary to Joseph Smith, and John H. Carter, all of whom heard the speech (Zion's Ensign, Vol. 12, No. 29, p. 5; Temple Lot Case, pp. 28, 180; No Man Knows My History, p. 381-2).

Lyman Wight said in a letter to the Northern Islander:

"Now Mr. Editor, if you had been present when Joseph called on me shortly after we came out of jail, to lay hands with him on the head of a youth, and heard him cry aloud, you are my successor when I depart, and heard the blessings poured on his head…you would not have been led by blind fanaticism…" (Reprinted in Saints Advocate, Vol. 7 (September 1884), p. 478)

Joseph's son recalled this incident in later years:

"I was also present at a meeting in the grove near the temple, and I remember my father laying his hands on my head, and saying to the people that this was his successor, or was to be his successor." (Temple Lot Case, p. 79).

Henry Brown in his History of Illinois (New York, 1844) stated:

"The prophet, it is said, has left a will or revelation appointing a successor; and, among other things, it is stated that his son, a lad of twelve years, is named therein as his successor. Of this, however, there is no certainty." (History of Illinois, p. 489)

And finally, John D. Lee confirmed:

"It was then understood among the Saints that Young Joseph was to succeed his father." (Mormonism Unveiled, p. 155)

Of course, the Reorganized LDS Church broke away on this very issue, because Brigham Young rather than Joseph's son was appointed the successor in the LDS Church.

Failed Miracles

Although Joseph was reputed to have been involved with miracles of healing, there were cases where his miracles went awry. For example, at the first general conference in Kirtland he seized a convert's hand which had been crippled in an accident, stating: "Brother Murdock, I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to straighten your hand!". He tugged stiffly at the curled fingers, but to no avail. Turning to an old man who was lame in one leg, Joseph ordered him to rise and walk. The old man took a step or two, then could go no further. A father brought forth the body of his small child, but despite earnest prayers by Joseph the child could not be brought back to life. Some later rationalized that the failure of Joseph's miracles was because Ohio was not consecrated ground, and that only in the promised land would they become efficacious. (As detailed through several letters from Ezra Booth to Edward Partridge, published in 1831-1832 in the Ohio Star at Ravenna. See also John Whitmer, History of the Church, MS., Chapter 7; and History of the Church, Vol. I, p. 176n)

Read more »