Under the Banner of Heaven
Comments: 20
Jon Krakauer has a new book out (Timothy Egan, NYTimes). It’s not about mountains.
Fresh from writing one of the most popular books ever published about mountain climbing, Jon Krakauer circulated a proposal for his next project. An account of the 1984 killings of a Utah woman and her infant daughter, the new book promised outlaw sex, bizarre rituals, unknown history, an examination of the tragic consequences of faith — all built around murder in the service of a home-grown religion.
If you’ve never read Krakauer, by all means start with “Into Thin Air” but read his other books as well. Everything he’s done is great — he’s an extremely talented writer.
•••
Posted to Books • 2003.07.13 (Sun) • 12:54
Comments
Posted by Silus Grok 2003.07.13, 23:25
Hm. Should be interesting.
I loved his book “Into the Wild”, and he certainly is a fantastic story-teller. But if the review is at all indicative, it would appear we have another book by an author who (or won’t) can’t tell the difference between the Fundies and the Mormon Church (a bit like mistaking Lutherans for Catholics)… and who attribute hesitancy on the part of local officials to prosecute polygamy on some sick nostalgia, instead on the real (much more mundane, complex) issues: difficulty of proving criminal misconduct, limited resources of the rural counties that would be burdened with the costs of the trials, and the inevitable hit to state welfare budgets should the trials be successful and the women and children in these families be forced on to the dole and into state-funded psychological counseling.
Posted by James 2003.07.14, 22:49
it would appear we have another book by an author who (or won’t) can’t tell the difference between the Fundies and the Mormon Church (a bit like mistaking Lutherans for Catholics)…
Thank you. As a member of that particular church, it’s a relief for me to hear that not everyone buys into the notion that the “Fundamentalists” are really just devout Mormons. They’re certainly not.
Those who adopt the “fundamentalist” lifestyle are excommunicated from our church. I would love to see the whole bunch of them rounded up and arrested for their crimes against women, children, and society in general.
It infuriates me when people can’t seem to see the difference. It really is like confusing Lutherans with Catholics.
Posted by Silus Grok 2003.07.14, 23:37
Okay. Well that’s embarrassing: it should read “…an author who can’t (or won’t)…”.
(And just so there’s no confusion: I am a devout mormon… apparently I just don’t write like one.)
Posted by James 2003.07.15, 00:16
Well, heck, then maybe there really isn’t anyone else that actually gets the difference. :-)
Posted by J. Smith 2003.07.17, 08:42
I get the difference. Current “non” fundie mormons haven’t studied their religion very well. Section 132 from the Doctrine and Covenants is explicit on the issue of whether plural marriage is commanded of us. Don’t you know the D & C is holy scripture?
(Remember as you read, to consider any viewpoints different from ours as persecution against us)
Here’s another “difference” for you: Christian vs. non-Christian. Catholics and Lutherans are Christian religions. God instructed that we should join none of these religions, for they are all wrong … their creeds are an abomination in his sight … and those professors are all corrupt … (Joseph Smith History 1: 15-19). “Christians” (Catholics and Lutherans) believe in ONE God in three persons, who is unmarried, and has never possessed a physcial body. AND “Christians” have no chance of becoming gods themselves! So why do we mormons call ourselves Christians???!!! Hmmmm.
If any of this is confusing, remember to follow the prophet, follow the prophet, follow the prophet, follow the prophet, follow the prophet … …You know, when Gordon Hinckley said in Newsweek in 1997 that Mormons don’t teach that god the father was once a man or know much about it. Hmmmm more confusion.
I get the difference. Why you don’t believe in the words of the prophet?
JS
Posted by Silus Grok 2003.07.18, 00:37
Um… sorry Jeremy for opening the can of worms.
And the vitriolic nature of your screed aside, JS, you raise some points that might have lead to an interesting discussion in a forum/medium that was better suited to nuanced dialog.
Shame, really.
Posted by J. Smith 2003.07.18, 10:14
I’m sure too, that you’ll be saying that from the celestial sphere or whatever planet too which you are appointed.
JS
Posted by Silus Grok 2003.07.18, 13:51
“… might have led…”
Posted by Brian R. 2003.07.21, 14:31
Interesting discourse. To the mainstream Mormons: Is what JS writes true about polygamy in Doctrine and Covenants section 132, Christian vs. Mormon concept of God, and Joseph Smith’s comments about mainstream Christianity? I’m curious to hear your viewpoint.
Brian
Posted by Silus Grok 2003.07.21, 22:40
Brian,
To keep poor Jeremy’s blog entry from taking on a life of its own, I’d invite you to e-mail me directly… as I’d be happy to answer your questions.
Posted by Brian 2003.07.31, 06:36
Thanks Silus for the off-line offer. But I rather prefer this somewhat public forum for this discussion. That way any comments you have might benefit all visitors to this site. So far I don’t think this exchange has taken on much of a life of it’s own yet.
So what’s the scoop on section 132, Christian and Mormon concepts of God, and why did G. Hinckley say God was not once a man if Mormons believe the contrary.
Brian
Posted by Les 2003.08.10, 23:52
Interesting about comparing LDS and FLDS like comparing Catholics to Lutherans. In an enlightend age, both Catholics and Lutherans have acknowleded their “sins of the past”, i.e. anti-semitism and the Pope actually sought the forgiveness for those who suffered in centuries past. Would the LDS leaders ever be so magnanimous as to apologize to those in the past who suffered because of polygamy? Every faith , Christian or not, has things that have been done in its name to seek forgiveness. I somehow don’t expect the LDS leaders to do so. But on the other hand I grow weary of those who demonize an entire belief system because of the errors of a few.
Posted by what the hell? 2003.08.12, 15:45
You Morons(Mormons) are completely off your rocker. You are so caught up in your own misguided beliefs you have lost all connections with reality. Sit back and take a look at the real, natural world around you and start living your life for yourself.
Posted by Non-member Friend 2003.08.20, 05:33
I am just starting this book…and so far…it’s right on track. The denials and the accolades I have read in this thread are well…expected. More later.
Posted by Daisy 2003.08.28, 03:51
I just want to add something to the discussion had on President Hinckly’s comment “Mormons don’t teach that God the father was once a man or know much about it.” He said that “we” don’t teach it—in my mind saying that we do not present or mark this as doctrine of the church”—this doesn’t mean that many of us might tend to lean towards this conclusion b/c of scriptures or other doctrine taught related to this topic. The church does not teach this doctrine or know the details about it. But in some peoples minds—maybe more then not—this seems to be in line with some of our standard beliefs. Once again the church does not “teach” this doctrine or know much about it.
Posted by Andy 2003.09.06, 16:56
Daisy, do you understand what you just wrote?
“Mormons don’t teach that god the father was once a man” … “but it seems to be in line with some of our standard beliefs???”
What in blazes is the difference? Is it Mormon doctrine or isn’t it? You sound like a politician or like Hinckley himself!
Just be honest with yourself and the gentiles that Mormons wish to convert. True Mormons believe that god the father was once a man, that he currently exists of flesh and bone, and that all men have the potential to become gods like the father! Do you deny this? Does this former Mormon prophet’s statement ring a bell? “As man is, god once was. As god is, man may become.”
I hope Daisy, that you don’t buy into this very basic tenet of the Mormon religion. I hope that you will find the unchanging truth by reading your New Testament. It does not mention or preach baptizing for the dead, blood atonement for certain sins, polygamy (past, present, or future), eternal marriages, existence of numerous gods of numerous planets. It talks about equal salvation for all who believe in the one true God - No higher levels of heaven for those who are closer to perfection than others. God’s love and salvation is given equally to all who believe.
Keep searching for the Truth Daisy. Learn on your own. Any church that would discourage anyone from investigating truth, must be afraid of it.
Posted by Crostick 2003.09.29, 17:51
Daisy has me confused and Andy appears to be right on track. If Andy is, or once was a member of THE CHURCH, he undoubtedly got his information in his Priesthood Meetings. I was a born & raised Mormon, and bought into the church lock-stock and Barrel. I was a missionary in Uruguay and was married in the Oakland Temple. I was always told in church that, “As man is, god once was. As god is, man may become.” There was never a doubt or question to that basic belief in the LDS Church. In fact, the main goal of Priesthood members was to reach the Celestial Kingdom, where they could possibly become Gods of flesh and blood, with many wives of flesh and blood, having physical sex with those wives and raising “spirit children,” who would then be sent forth to populate a planet (other than our Earth) and that the Man-God would then be the God of that planet, and many others, depending on how many “spirit children” he and his wives had in the “Celestial Kingdom.” To prove this, the Mormon Church relies on the scripture that says, “Worlds without number have I created,” and use that scripture constantly to assure that the God of this world is the God of many other world that He has created to give his spirit children physical bodies, or in other words, to be born. This is the reason that men and women are sealed to each other, during marriage in Mormon Temples, for “time and all eternity.” Good Mormon men were expected to seal as many women to themselves as possible, before the Federal Government outlawed plural marriage. Currently, this sealing process is postponed until reaching the Celestial Kingdom. The only reason that plural marriage was dropped by the church is because it became against the law in this country. Anyone who disagrees with this is either outright lying, or does not know the doctrines and covenants of this church or the basic history of it. On top of these absolute beliefs of the Mormon Church, I have to add that the church also teaches that our God, made of flesh and blood, came to earth and had actual physical sex with Mary to conceive Christ. The church has become so mum on this last belief, that it has become another bit of doctrine that they have to constantly sweep under the table.
Posted by Edy 2003.10.17, 09:19
As a former 5th generation Mormon (back to 1830 in Ohio) with a thorough Mormon education in Utah at BYU High and BYU, those of you who are Mormons and are trying to artfully disguise or dodge your own doctrine when it is actually in the Doctrine & Covenants are not doing any good for your LDS church or for yourselves. If you are trying to disguise/deny your doctrine, you seem foolish to me because I read and study and I have an excellent Mormon library. On the other hand, if you do not know these things, then I feel pity for you because ignorance of the LAW and of GRACE will get you a ticket straight to HELL. Please read this very good book! There are also many other good history books on Mormonism that will give you perspective on it. Then don’t neglect the Bible. It will save your soul. “For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope, then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and find Me when you search for me with all your heart.” NKJV, Jeremiah 29:11-13.
Posted by Margaret Cagnina 2005.05.17, 21:34
It seems to me that there is a very basic argument missing from this discussion about Under the Banner of Heaven: How is it that Joseph Smith (founder of the Mormon religion) can be considered legitimate to his believers and yet the main tenets he set forth for the religion are condemned by the LDS church and mainstream Mormons? It just doesn’t make much sense—either the man was a prophet in communication with the Lord and what he said is held to be true, plural marriages, extreme racism, hatred of homosexuals and all, or the man was a serving-his-ego-to-the-point-of-starting-a-new-religion crackpot. So far in my reading, the evidence certainly points towards the latter. Is this how a religion gets started? A man with a bunch of charisma and and some visions in his head sees an opportunity to start a new religion, in this case where he can have sex with hoardes of women under twenty until he dies, the religion takes off, and a century and half later believers mulitiply exponentially (due in no small part to the mandatory reproduction and mandatory missions) all the while professing AND denouncing AND believing their founder? Wake up and smell the spell…Newsweek was right, this is the creepiest book to be written in a long time.
Posted by Joseph Smith was Satan 2007.02.10, 00:28
Joseph Smith was a liar and deceiver. And people that follow him aren’t reading their bibles. Jesus himself said he is THE way. Not a way. He also said other false profits will come after him, and that many will be lead astray. I.e. Mohammed, Joseph Smith, David Koresh etc.
Why in-fact do Mormons call themselves Christians when they follow doctrine that contradicts Jesus? It’s because they have created a religion from their imagination. It’s made up; it’s bull butter! Joseph Smith wrote the majority of the book of Mormon looking at or into a “seer stone” which he later condemns as sorcery!!! OK the profit of the Mormon religion says the method he used to write the Mormon religion was SORCERY! If you want to “follow the profit” as most Fundamentalists (and even non-fundamentalists) say is the key, then listen to Joseph Smith when he condemns the use of Seer Stones as sorcery.
http://www.mormonfortress.com/seer2.html
Post a comment:
Send This Story to an Enemy
• • •
