“After this vision closed, another great and glorious vision burst upon us[Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery]; for Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death, stood before us, and said: Behold, the time has fully come, which has been spoken by the mouth of Malachi—testifying that he [Elijah] should be sent, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come—To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse—Therefore, the keys of this dispensation are committed into your hands; and by this ye may know that the great and dreadful day of the Lord is near, even at the doors.” (D&C 110:13-16.)

The great and dreadful “day of the Lord” is a day that most Christians are well aware of, but the meaning is hidden in the Bible, and it can not be understood unless we look for the truth in the life of Jesus Christ. Jesus went to the cross and died for our sins. It is a great day for those who receive Jesus and are saved by his blood. It is dreadful day for those who disbelieve and reject their Savior! The spiritual day of the Lord is not dependent upon a specific point in earth’s history or future, but it refers to a time for each person’s individual salvation. No two people are saved in the exact same way or at the exact same time. There is order and time that God follows, and He saves each individual person a little differently, for all of us are unique, and God responds to this uniqueness. We are not parts on an assembly line saved in a “factory”, but we are individuals who are treated with our own unique blend of trials and circumstances that God sets up to teach us about Him.

Many LDS assume that “great and dreadful” day refers to the Second Coming based on Elijah appearing to Joseph Smith with the “sealing keys”. Mormonism assumes this day will come suddenly upon all people—that all at once both good and bad people will see Jesus Christ when He returns, and it will be a great day for the righteous who are good enough to survive, but it will be a dreadful day for the wicked who will be destroyed. I suppose there may be some truth in this view, however, it is not the intent of the writings of Malachi to teach salvation and damnation in a future event that treats everyone as a “part in a factory” that all see, hear, and feel Jesus at the same time. For if this interpretation is true, then the Bible verse only has application to those few souls who are still on earth when Jesus returns, which limits the scope of the Bible to exclude salvation and damnation from those who are not part of the Second Coming. For this reason, there must be a different answer. And there is: Malachi explains in greater clarity than Mormonism the meaning of the great and dreadful day of the Lord, if we study both Malachi Chapter 3 and Chapter 4:

“Behold, I will send my messenger [This refers to John the Baptist--see Mark 1:2-4 and Matthew 11:10], and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? And who shall stand when he appeareth? For he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap: And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord and offering in righteousness.” (Malachi 3:1-3.)

But for the proud and wicked the meeting date is for another time—for Jesus patiently waits, ensuring all have a chance to choose freely. The dreadful day of the Lord is reserved for those who reject the cross and refuse to open their hearts to Christ. And finally, after the time of grace has passed the door will burn down with heat, and the wicked will see their Maker. It will be a horrible day! Thus, all the proud and wicked will be as stubble, for the Lord of hosts will burn them up.

“For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.” (Mal 4:1)

As usual the LDS Church misunderstands the Spirit of God. God is a spirit [Gk. "God is spiritual"], and we must worship him in spirit and truth. (John 4:24.) Why do the Mormons constantly worship God with the flesh? The True Spirit is the spiritual Kingdom of God in each person. It is like a seed that grows. It is planted, cultivated, and watered; it bears the good fruit of the kingdom. We see the kingdom of God in us. Thus, Jesus comes to us, knocks, enters, and we become his temple. But if we do not plant the spiritual seed of Christ in our hearts, then instead, evil and wicked seeds grow in us. Rather than knocking quietly, the devil pounds loudly and forces his entry into our hearts by intimidation and fear, and then he remains in us with a mask of pride. The evil seeds grow into wicked trees. They produce the fruits of sin. At the last day, all the trees of pride will be uprooted and the fruit cut off, and all will be burned, just as God has declared. But we are not just one tree. We are a forest of different trees, of both good and evil. Therefore John teaches:

“And now also, the axe is laid unto the root of the trees [plural]: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.” (John 3:9.)

Thus, the confusion of Malachi comes to the LDS people in misunderstanding the “great and dreadful day of the Lord.” The Mormons believe Elijah restored the temple sealing keys to Joseph Smith in 1836 prior to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ in fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. It is the “simple message” the LDS convey to the average member. But the actual deeper doctrine of Elias and Elijah is much more complicated and convoluted. Few if anyone in the church can even understand it. I certainly don’t. There are SIX appearances of angels related to Elijah and Elias: 1) John the Baptist in the New Testament, 2) John the Baptist [Nephilim] appeared to Joseph Smith in 1829, 3) Elijah the prophet appeared to Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration, 4) John the Baptist appeared on the Mount of Transfiguration [Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, Mark 9:4], 5) Elijah [Nephilim] appeared to Joseph Smith in 1836, and finally, 6) Elias [Nephilim], who is an unknown prophet from Abraham’s day, appeared to Joseph Smith in 1836 [D&C 110:12.]

[I ought to add a seventh and eighth appearance, in which John the Baptist appeared to Otto Fetting in 1929 and later to William Draves, as explained in Chapter 3. But since the largest faction of Latter-day Saints reject Fetting’s experience, I won’t add it.]

Mormonism is very confusing and vague. John the Baptist supposedly holds the Aaronic priesthood keys, not the sealing keys. Elijah has the sealing keys. They both came before and after the ministry of Jesus Christ in the flesh. And thus, the entire prophecy in Malachi becomes muddled and perplexing. Before and after Jesus? See the confusion? Finally, Elias lived in Abraham’s day? He came to Joseph Smith after the ministry of Jesus?

On the other hand, the New Testament plainly teaches John the Baptist fulfilled the prophecy of both Mal 4:1 and 3:1, as has been explained. He came before Jesus Christ’s ministry in the flesh. His doctrine of repentance proceeds Christ’s spiritual coming in our hearts. The Bible is straightforward, clear, and succinct. But in Mormonism, TWO or THREE messengers fulfill Biblical prophecy. Why didn’t the Bible say: “Behold, I will send you two Elijahs in several appearances?” Or: “Behold, I send you my two or three messengers before and after the great day of the Lord. And a third will come called Elias.”

Thus, Mormonism promotes multiple angels zipping around with priesthood keys that save us, but the Bible is silent on the doctrine. The biggest obstacle in accepting the LDS understanding of Malachi is the New Testament! In Mormonism, John came THREE TIMES [five if we include Fetting and Draves]: 1) John’s personal ministry. 2) The mount of Transfiguration, and 3) To Joseph Smith in 1829. To explain the complications, Joseph Smith was inspired to “correct” the Bible. He changed all four gospels regarding the ministry of John: Matthew (Matt 3:38-40;13:15;17:14), Luke (Lk 3:4-11), Mark (Mk 9:3.), and John (John 1:20-34;3:38-40). These changes allow the LDS Church to interpret and justify these multiple appearances of John as well as the other messengers that did appear to Joseph Smith in visions, rather than accepting John’s earthly ministry as a fulfillment of Malachi.

Now I ask the reader: how reasonable is this assertion made by the LDS Church? All four gospels needed to be specifically altered to slip in the doctrine of multiple appearances of angels to deliver priesthood keys? What are the chances that this Bible corruption actually occurred as claimed? The Mormons assert that evil and corrupted men deliberately executed a plan to remove the priesthood doctrine of Elijah from all four gospels simultaneously! The implications are mind boggling. Such action could not have happened by accident — not to all four gospels! Only through wicked priests who sought power and control could anyone have target the specific scriptures on John and changed them all of them. But why would they make the changes? By removing the concept of legalistic priesthood sealing keys of Elijah, they would diminish their own power and authority, right?

When a person is arrested for a crime, the subject of motive is clearly defined to accuse the suspect. One could argue that the priests were concerned about the implications of Elijah restoring priesthood keys in the future, and thus, expose their own apostasy that Elijah would correct later. If this were true, however, we would see discussions about the Elijah’s second appearance to Joseph Smith debated in the history of the ancient church, right? It is a very weak argument, for there are no facts to back it up. Joseph Smith’s translation of the Bible makes it clear another Elias was to come besides John, and if Jesus clearly taught this, then we should see evidence of the teaching somewhere in history. Such doctrine would attract A LOT attention! Malachi’s prophecy predicting Elijah’s return is an obscure statement in one verse in one short book of the Old Testament — and the Jews haven’t forgotten it until this day. However, Jesus supposed teaching of Elias/Elijah appearing before his Second Coming was supposedly in the four books of the gospel and were widely distributed to believers, then ripped out later?

The ancient Jews were fanatical about the prophecy of Malachi, and held onto the prophecy as evidence of God’s power to predict the future. If Joseph Smith’s translation is correct, then the entire Christian Church would have known of a future time that more messengers would appear as RESURRECTED ANGELS to restore the priesthood keys. Thus, we would expect that the Church would have spoken and written much more about the priesthood doctrine of Elijah than what is in the current Bible, right? The Jews, for example, still to this day keep an open seat at the passover for Elijah. The doctrine has not been forgotten after thousands of years. Although twisted by a carnal interpretation, the basic idea God sending Elijah has been preserved. But why hasn’t the tradition in Christianity remained? The Christian Church has no traditions or writings on the subject. Antiquity is silent. Something this important would have been carried on by word-of-mouth at least. It would be prevalent in Church writings of the 1st and 2nd century. But the idea is only in Judaism and Mormonism! The LDS Church claims the original New Testament Church believed that another “Elijah/Elias” was going to come in person and “restore all things”.

But history is silent except with the Jews? Until the concept suddenly appears in the 1800s with Joseph Smith and Mormonism?

When we look at these facts before us, the most reasonable conclusion is that the assertion of Elijah holding priesthood keys is LDS vapor doctrine from false angels. The Bible is reliable. Wicked priests did not conspire to change all four gospels. But rather, false revelation inspired Joseph Smith to add the theology to the Bible that was never there to begin with. This better explains the silence in history on the subject. For there are no debates. No speculations on when the “future” Elijah will come. Why? Because everyone in the ancient Christian Church understood that John the Baptist fulfilled Malachi’s prophecy. It’s a no brainer. The church was anticipating the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and that is all!

Having the Holy Spirit in our hearts, the principles of eternal life are quite easy to see. But Joseph Smith was not prepared to understand these truths, for the Nephilim had taken control of his ministry. For example, when he read about baptism for the dead in 1 Corinthians 15:29, and without having received Jesus Christ in his heart, he was open to receive false light and inappropriate interpretations and conclusions of the Word of God. A bogus Elijah appeared to him in the temple. He saw brilliant glory of light. He boasted to other ministers of his doctrine. Few Christian ministers could challenge him Biblically, for he was filled with imitation power. He shared his powerful experiences. He testified that Jesus lives. He saw Him in 1820. Of course the ministers could not “win” a debate! Joseph Smith expounded on the most obscure passages that have little historical support or Biblical understanding, and thus, we are sometimes left to speculate and wonder about some things written in the Bible. But as we persist, God gives us answers in his own time, according to his purposes. With this book, the truth shines Biblical light on the darkness of the Nephilim, and God has called me to teach the truth from the Bible for your consideration. We’ve discussed the LDS priesthood in depth, and I have demonstrated from the Bible the errors made by LDS regarding the Mount of Transfiguration, the Melchizedek Priesthood, and the promise of God sending Elijah. The LDS priesthood cascades into a myriad of doctrines that are presumed to be true. For example, the Holy Grail of the Church is baptism by the proper priesthood authority. If salvation requires baptism by the LDS priesthood, then our dead must also be baptized to be saved. LDS Temples are build so that the living can perform baptisms for the dead by proxy.

Doesn’t it seem strange that God would pick just one man to suddenly shake Christianity with all kinds of bizarre and strange notions? LDS baptism for the dead is an excellent example of mixing truth and error. The truth is our spirit does go to a place of spirit paradise or spirit prison before the resurrection. Jesus went to the spirit world and preached the gospel to those in spirit prison so they could be saved before the resurrection of the body:

“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the spirit: By which also he went and preached to the spirits in prison;” (1 Peter 3:18-19.)

Obviously, the Latter-day Saints don’t go around saying this out loud. But if we examine the spirit behind the temple work, these are the kinds of thoughts that drive it forward. Satan has twisted the “priesthood keys” doctrine taught by Jesus in Mathew 16:19, and that Mormons believe that baptism by proxy for the dead opens the gates to God’s Kingdom for the dead. If this is true, wouldn’t God have provided more than just one obscure verse in the Bible?

“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?” (1 Cor 15:29.)

The Mormons quote this one verse in the Bible to prove that we need the LDS priesthood and temples to save our dead. They claim that early Christians baptized relatives by proxy. But were they? Have we really looked at the logic behind that argument? Does the verse say that they were baptizing by proxy in temples? No. Does it mention the LDS priesthood powers? No. There is a much better explanation of this verse than what is provided by Mormonism. The key pronoun to understand in the verse is the word “they”. In Mormonism, it is referring to the living patrons and matrons that do the proxy baptisms in temples. Therefore, the verse would read:

“Else what shall [the living proxies] do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are [the living proxies] baptized for the dead?" (1 Cor 15:29)

“And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. Else what shall [the living proxies] do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are [the living proxies] baptized for the dead?” (1 Cor 15:28-29.)

There is a much better explanation. Paul was dealing with a group of Christians that did not believe in the resurrection. Why didn’t they believe in the resurrection? Surprisingly, I believe it actually can be explained using this verse. The Corinthians were baptizing a person’s dead body hoping that the spirit of that dead person would likely linger around the body until it was buried. Therefore, the church reasoned if they baptized the dead person’s body, and they prayed diligently for him or her, then hopefully that person would see the ordinance and by the power of prayer and faith he or she would receive Jesus in the spirit world and be saved. Thus, Paul only uses their baptismal practice in defense of the resurrection, pointing out that the “dead body” that they are baptizing is going to be raised again from the dead — when God is “all in all”. If not so, then why are they baptizing it? What would the dead bodies do if they were not resurrected? Nothing! Paul’s argument is much more persuasive in context, as we visualize a “dead body” going under the water and then being lifted back up out of the water by two or three brethren, representing the resurrection of the dead. To paraphrase Paul, his basic question to the saints to prove the resurrection is this: “If the dead do not rise, then why are you baptizing dead bodies that will never have life?”

Now, watch the Bible teach us when the pronoun “they” is understood correctly:

“And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. Else what shall [the dead bodies] do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are [the dead bodies] baptized for the dead?” (1 Cor 15:28-29.)

It is likely that because the Corinthians were focused so much on saving their dead friends in the spirit world, believing they accepted Jesus in the spirit world, their belief was naturally taken off the physical resurrection, and a disbelief of the physical resurrection entered into the flock. Thus they reasoned: “If a person can be saved without a body in the spirit world, why do we need a bodily resurrection? Our resurrection must be spiritual and not physical, etc.” Baptizing dead bodies not only explains Corinthians 15:29, it also explains where the false idea of a spiritual and not physical resurrection could have originated!

Thus, Paul reminds the Corinthians of the baptismal ordinance, which is symbolic of the resurrection of the body to prove his point. He also points out that they were using a dead body to save another, again pointing to the need of the body for salvation — even a dead one! Considering the circumstance, it was an excellent argument to present to the Saints in defense of the resurrection.

This explanation makes more sense than the LDS view. Who in the spirit world is going to be standing next to “proxy” temple patrons three hundred years after the person is dead? Or after a thousand years? Or what if the ordinance is performed, but the dead person has not accepted the gospel? Will they view the ordinance? No. The only dead spirits involved in LDS temple work are going to be dead Latter-day Saints. These believers are the ones that actually do appear in the LDS temples and communicate with human beings because they believe in the false priesthood and are anxious to have the ordinances done for their families in preparation for the resurrection.

Many Mormons have been deceived by this false light, and perhaps even more have been deceived in the spirit world. Many of the founding fathers of our country came to Wilford Woodruff to ask for their temple work to be done. Very interestingly, many of these men were Masons, which is the source of the occult temple ordinances! It’s probable that Joseph Smith went on into the spirit realms gathering a following of believers, and continues to preach his “white light” to others, just like he did on earth! And we can imagine the large following he could gather when he passed on to the next world and discovered the spirit world existing just as he had been taught by false angels! The devil is surely pleased that Joseph Smith is continuing his damning work beyond the veil. On the other hand, perhaps Wilford Woodruff was simply deceived by false angels impersonating the founding fathers. Who knows? But what I know or sure, is the burning in the bosom behind Mormonism is “false light”. Or rather, it is a twisted form of God’s light filtered through pride and sin. It is impure and half-true light. For that I experience myself.

My argument to the LDS is that just because someone appears in a LDS temple doesn’t mean that the temple is from God, even if that spirit has noble intentions or is even a relative. I’m providing a very reasonable explanation for all the “visitations” and documented spiritual experiences that occur in Mormonism, and it is just as valid and is more “reasonable” than the LDS view. Reason dictates that the angels that appeared to Joseph Smith had to be false. There are too many historical and doctrinal changes since 1820, too many contradictions and inconsistencies with the Bible, and too many strange and bizarre doctrines that mirror the occult. It is the explanation that best supports all of the contradictory evidence in Church history. It is the best explanation that fits with the Bible. It ties together almost all the loose ends of known facts.

For example, if the LDS position on baptism for the dead were true, Paul the apostle would NOT have written to the saints and instructed them to avoid genealogies:

“Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.” (1 Timothy 1:4.)

If LDS priesthood baptism saves the dead, then Paul surely would not say anything negative about genealogy work, right? It’s very tedious labor. It’s hard enough to motivate the Latter-day Saints to do the research. Why would Paul say anything critical about it? Why are these Biblical scriptures not quoted from the LDS pulpit? It is the Word of God, right? Many Mormons could be loosed from the pressure they feel to do genealogy work with these two verses. They may even see the truth and conclude such is “unprofitable and vain” as Paul wrote.

What must God say in the Bible to get the Latter-day Saints to believe the Bible? Does God need to say, “Genealogy and temple work will not save us?” But how could he have said this in the Bible? The priesthood doctrine and practice did not exist in the early church. Why did they need to do genealogy if they were merely baptizing the dead person’s body?

If baptism for the dead were so important, more than one verse would be recorded in the Bible about it! The Bible puzzle just doesn’t fit!

In my transitioning out of Mormonism, one of my last sacred cows to be killed was the Kirtland Temple dedication in 1836 and the transfer of priesthood keys by Elijah, Moses, and other prophets to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey in D&C 110. I’ve always assumed that was of a most sacred nature. The opening of the explanatory notes of the D&C section 110 read:

“In the afternoon, I assisted the other Presidents in distributing the Lord’s supper to the Church, receiving it from the Twelve, whose privilege it was to officiate at the sacred desk this day. After having performed this service to my brethren, I retired to the pulpit, the veils being dropped, and bowed myself, with Oliver Cowdrey, in solemn and silent prayer.” (Introduction to D&C 110)

Wrong again. For when I investigated the other side of the debate, my view completely changed. Most members don’t understand that Joseph Smith liked to drink a little. He was not a bum, but he did like to get drunk once in a while when the occasion was appropriate. When I read about the temple dedication and what “partaking of the sacrament” really meant in 1836 in this temple meeting, it opened my eyes to a whole new world of Mormonism. On special occasions, feasts of bread and wine where partaken as a token of celebration. What happened on that day of temple dedication is quite different than is recorded in official Church publications. This is some of the “secret stuff” that is buried in LDS Church vaults.

The people had been laboring hard and long to finish the Kirtland temple. Joseph felt it was right for the people to celebrate. He had everyone fast for 24 hours and promised the Lord would send a divine manifestation of acceptance of the temple. Then they ended the fast with the sacrament. But the sacrament was an actual meal of bread and wine. They ate bread and drank wine until they were full. Joseph, it is recorded, had five glasses of wine for the “sacrament”. They passed around an offering plate, and with the money, went to the nearest tavern and purchased a keg of liquor. It was party time! The women were not allowed to participate, but only the priesthood. (I wonder why?). The men drank until 5:00am. During this time, Hyram threw up out the window, and Joseph expelled into a spittoon. The brethren got up at the pulpit and pronounced cursings on all of their enemies, contrary to the Lord’s instructions to bless our enemies and pray for them. After the party was over, Joseph justified the entire event by pointing to Noah’s drunkenness after the waters receded from the flood and his family finally settled on dry land.

And now I ask a question. Do we really think a Holy God would come and reveal himself in that environment? Of course not! They were false angels in 1823, 1829, 1830, and in 1836. If you don’t believe me, go do the research. David Whitmer is a credible source. He was a witness to the Book of Mormon. Go research what he writes about the Kirtland temple dedication. The whole doctrine of baptism for the dead hinges on Elijah appearing and transferring keys during this celebration. Have you read about the mass apostasy in Kirtland after the temple dedication? After seeing all of these spiritual manifestations, why on earth would everyone turn against the prophet? The reason is they all knew the spiritual manifestations came during a drunken festival. They all had doubts that what was happening was not right.

With this new understanding, how comfortable do we now feel about the doctrine of baptism for the dead through the power of the holy priesthood of God? Hmmm…let’s see. We have only one scripture from Corinthians 15:29 that has been taken out of context, which is contradicted by two scriptures that direct the saints not to do genealogies. And we have Elijah appearing during a drunken celebration, with Jesus clearly teaching John the Baptist fulfilled this prophecy.

The LDS viewpoint sounds convincing, doesn’t it? So convincing that Joseph Smith changed all four gospels to bring the doctrine of Elijah in harmony with the Bible?

But let’s look at it from even another angle. Millions of names are being processed in the LDS temples, are given a “new name”, and are being baptized for the dead in LDS temples. Let’s consider further. Look at the “actions” and “activity” that is going on. All of it presumes that the “keys” of the priesthood are “external and legalistic” and unlocks heaven’s door, which nobody has seen. It is vapor doctrine and goes against common sense. God is all-powerful! Why does he need a human being to save anyone? That’s what Mormonism teaches! God gives his power to human beings! God needs human beings to perform an earthly ordinance for dead people or God can not save them! Not only that, it must be recorded on a piece of paper to be accepted in heaven! What kind of God would initiate such nonsense? Only the devil would. Only a fallen being who thought he was God would create such doctrine. See the pattern? Who is trying to be God? This chapter and the truth in the Bible is more solid evidence that the doctrines came from a false, imitation god.

Absurd? It gets even worse on the brain! Let us consider furhter. If I get sealed to my parents and then the parents get divorced, now what? Who am I “sealed to”. In my case, I left the Church and my wife stayed. Who will my wife be sealed to? And my children? What happens to them? The everlasting priesthood power has been severed. And me? I can’t live with Heavenly Father! My salvation is in the hands of God. It’s in the hands of a man who holds God’s authority! A man who is equal to God, for he holds the saving priesthood keys!

Think! That is a most illogical and absurd doctrine on earth, if we assume God is Almighty. And what about the billions upon billions of people who have ever lived! How are those names going to be found? Or what if we are in the temple and we forget the “new name” during the temple ceremony, but we don’t tell anyone. We are too embarrassed to stand up in front of the congregation and admit we forgot! This certainly does happen occasionally. Is that dead person now condemned because we didn’t do the ordinance correctly? Or what if we say or do other parts of the ordinance incorrectly, and nobody catches the error? If the ordinances truly save us, then we have condemned that person by our mistake, right? That ordinance wasn’t really “performed”, but it was only imagined to be done correctly! Oh, there are so many absurdities in this snake pit of logic, I could write another book on this topic alone!

But I already know the standard LDS answer. “During the Millenium all these things will be worked out in the temple.” That’s an easy trip to the future that no one can truly see. Any illogical and irrational question can be answered by taking it to a place that no one knows about. Suddenly, the absurdity vanishes away, and everyone is happy! It’s like the priesthood keys that “open a door” that nobody has really seen, except for a few men that have testified to seeing an angel and hearing God’s voice. But what if they were honestly deceived? Where does that leave our belief? On an assumption, and not on the Word of God, and not on the truth.

Again, this book is a mental stimulus for change. It will hopefully motivate readers to go and research the other side of the LDS story. What? Do you think Oliver Cowdrey and David Whitmer who left the church in Kirtland were not credible sources? My goodness, they saw the bogus gold plates and false angels. Go check the details out yourself. Read what they wrote! There are plenty of references in the appendix.