Heart of the Matter: Confronting Approaches to Salvation

LIVE! From the “Mecca of Mormonism” Salt Lake City, Utah – THIS . . . is Heart of the MatterTGNN’s original show where Shawn McCraney deconstructed religion and developed fulfilled theology. . . . “Where Mormonism Meets Biblical Christianity Face to Face.”

Show 44 The Reed Smoot Case November 3rd 2009

And I’m Shawn McCraneyFounder of TGNN and developer of the fulfilled perspective—calling people to faith outside of religion., your host. If you have family or friends who cannot get Heart through television give them a call and tell them to go to WWW.HOTM.TV And they can watch through streaming video from anywhere in the world! Our video archives hold hundreds of hour-long television programming for your viewing pleasure and education. Check it out: www.HOTM.TV

Reed Smoot Case

“I was a Born-Again Mormon” We recently made the manuscript available online through a downloadable PDF. Go to www.bornagainmormon.com and you can have the book in your hands within minutes for any size donation – or for free for that matter. If you prefer a bound copy, wait a few until we get the funds to reprint and make them available again.

LDS Church History

We’re going to try and finish up covering LDS Church History between now and the end of the year. Next year we are going to open the Bible and give a verse by verseTGNN’s Bible teaching series—book-by-book, through the lens of fulfillment and spiritual liberty. explanation of all the biblical passages the LDS use to errantly support their doctrine. Things like the real meaning of the two sticks mentioned in Ezekiel, their “baptism for the dead” ideas taken from 1st Corinthians, how they misuse Malachi, Matthew chapter five through seven . . . and on and on and on. I think I am more excited about this coming years programming than any in the past. Stay tuned.

Received a number of interesting emails this past week: Read HERE

Perspectives on Reaching God

You know, there are essentially two main attitudes people (who consider themselves Christian) maintain as “the way that they will both please God while alive on earth and to enter into His presence when they are dead.

The first attitude or approach is by believing they will please and enter His presence by their goodness, their righteousness, their self-discipline and their profound contributions to society. The second attitude is by believing they will please Him and enter His presence ONLY by trusting in what Jesus did on their behalf.

Believing and embracing any part of the first attitude will always translate (in one way or another) into people looking at themselves – and at others around them – through a lens of moral scrutiny, judgments, and condemnations. When the ball of salvation is ever taken out of Jesus hands placed on the court of Men, the need to dribble, pass, and shoot well becomes mandatory to remain on God’s team.

This is not so with true Christianity. Last week we ended our program with an LDS caller who identified himself as Rick. Rick decided that it was his job to ask me about my past or “personal worthiness” here on the air. He had heard, in a park from what he said, that I committed adultery and left my wife and children. I tried to address the accusation simply and directly by admitting to Rick that I was guilty – even though I have never “left” my wife or family as he implied.

I could have tried to offset his accusation by mentioning that he spoke of things nearly ten years in my past, but that would have been a smokescreen because to be quite frank, I am still the very same man – in my flesh – a fact I made clear to Rick as well by stating that I continue to be an adulterer every time I look on a woman with lust.

The point is that the caller Rick believed that it was his right, his duty, his position as my moral superior to publicly castigate me for the sins of my life. What made Rick think he needed or could do this? The fact that he embraces the first approach – the LDS approach to reaching God – which is through their own righteous lives and actions.

With this belief in hand, they somehow come to think that they can look out at their neighbors, friends, family and utter all sorts of “tisk tisks” because they have never or they would never fall to such levels of depravity. Right here, on this point alone, we have a MAJOR divergence between Mormonism and genuine Christianity.

Mormons actually believe they are going to enter heaven through a combination of Jesus shed blood AND their righteous, worthy lives . . . genuine biblical Christians know they will enter into the glory of God not because they are worthy or unworthy, but for no other reason than

Personal Reflection on Sin and Salvation

Their faith in the shed blood of His Son. The attitude of personal worthiness based on anything but the worthiness of Jesus is one of the greatest lies in the world . . . and it is embraced not only by most LDS, it becomes the world-view of many, many misguided Christians. My response to Rick created “concern” with some Christian brothers of mine, who called me to discuss their fears. It seems they too, wanted to make sure that I was not saying I was “literally involved in an adulterous affair” right now because how I responded made it seem like I was.

I want to say something that is going to bother some of you greatly. It will certainly be misunderstood but that will not prevent my saying it: I have NEVER, EVER met a man more evil than myself. Shawn McCraney, the man sitting in front of you right now IS – not was – is an selfish alcoholic, he is a prescription drug addict, he is an rabid adulterer, a sexual deviant, and a violent, violent man. If you need to see me, as a man, as anything else, you have got your wires all crossed. If you want me to reassure you of anything otherwise it is not going to happen.

Right now – in my body of flesh and bone – lives all things vile. Take me out and get my old man going and in the right circumstances I can assure you that I am capable of every evil act under the sun. I have nothing – nothing in myself at all – that will justify my natural person before God – nothing but my faith and trust and love for HIM. And yet in my state, my fallen nature, while I was in sinMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace., He came and saved me. I am a sinner saved by His grace – saved through no good thing in me. And through this salvation, I was made a new creature in Christ. In Christ. In Jesus. In Him. Anything that comes out from me that is positive, is loving, is beneficial, or is good originates from Him and Him alone. And for this, I praise Him.

With my spirit, I serve the law of God, loving others, forgiving others, returning evil with good, and with my flesh, the law of sin. If you are looking for someone to claim something else, to present to you any other picture, you have come to the wrong place. But if you want to meet a sinner saved by grace who loves, trusts, and gives his allegiance to the Lord God of Heaven, that title I can accept. And with that, let’s have a prayer.

Historical Investigation into Mormon Practices

For the past few weeks we have been discussing the discontinuation of the physical LDS practice of plural marriage. Remembering, of course, that the doctrine for the practice is still included in their present-day scripture and that LDS men today continue to take on more than one wife “spiritually” by being sealed to them in their LDS temples. Well last week we mentioned that once Mormons achieve statehood for the Utah territory, the LDS made a renewed effort to reinstitute plural marriage through the introduction of a thing called the Evan’s bill. Word got out of what they were trying to do and interested parties throughout the settled nation sort of rose up in revolt against the LDS’s underhand ways.

This revolt culminated in what was known as the Reed Smoot case, which was an in-depth investigation into Mormonism by a senate committee. This committee wanted to know things like: “Are the church and state one in the same in Utah?” “Does the church control the conduct of its members?” “Does Mormonism encourage polygamy and co-habitation?” “Would the temple oaths the LDS take supersede a Mormon’s loyalty to the American Government?” The answers? “Yes, yes, yes, and yes.”

Reed Smoot Case and Its Implications

The Smoot hearings lasted three years, produced more than 3000 pages of transcript and truly exposed much about Mormon culture, history, and theology. One of the major focuses of the investigation was to answer the question: Could Senator Smoot, who was a high-ranking authority in the LDS church, also be loyal to America? Central to this question were the LDS teachings – which were prevalent at the time – that all faithful Mormons were to swear an oath against the United States to avenge the blood of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The LDS doctrine of blood atonement was closely tied to this oath. This “oath of vengeance”

Origins and Implications of the LDS Prayer of Vengeance

The practice known as the "prayer of vengeance" appears to have originated in June of 1845 when the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gathered into a prayer circle and said a prayer of vengeance against those who shed Joseph Smith’s blood. Six months later, this “prayer” became part of the LDS temple endowment ceremony, and from there, “vengeance” became a major thread in the fabric of early Mormonism. Several Mormon hymns were composed and sung regularly, which included themes of vengeance.

The oath of vengeance remained in the LDS temples for seventy years—until February 1927—when Apostle George F. Richards sent a letter to all temple presidents, instructing them to omit the oath of revenge part from the prayer circle ritual. Because of this late date, it is a certainty that Senator Smoot had taken the oath and was therefore compromised as either a Mormon or a Senator, depending on where his allegiance lay and to whom he was willing to lie. Hypothetically speaking, if any LDS man or woman ever ran for the office of the US president, the same conflict would exist: is his allegiance to Mormonism and its prophet, who is supposed to have the ultimate say on all things spiritual or secular, or would his or her allegiance be to the United States and its people? This is a gigantic concern with enormous implications, which in this day and age, the LDS church is doing all it can to obscure.

Reed Smoot Hearings and Mormon Doctrine

Another factor brought forth by the Reed Smoot hearings was the LDS belief that non-Mormon people are unfit to govern the masses. By 1904, Mormons had been declaring that a just political system can ONLY originate from God. They also claimed that the authority to lead humanity rests solely with the men holding the LDS priesthood, and the keys to all knowledge and power are located only in the LDS priesthood. This Mormon stance was disconcerting to say the least, to the committee, but not to the Mormons, of course.

In addition to this, the old issue of polygamy took a tremendous amount of limelight in the Smoot case too. The first witness called by the senate committee was the sixth LDS president, Joseph F. Smith. During his testimony, which lasted over five days, President Smith admitted that some LDS leaders had, in fact, defied federal laws and the church manifesto against taking on additional wives. Responding to his own violation of the same defiance, the sixth prophet, seer, and revelator of the Mormon church admitted: “I have cohabited with my wives—not openly, that is, not in a manner that I thought would be offensive to my neighbors—but I have acknowledged them; I have visited them.” Smith failed to mention that he had also strongly promoted defiance against the federal laws to other saints and that he also performed polygamous sealings himself for the benefit of other leading men in the church.

Discrepancies in Church Leadership Testimonies

However—and this is important—the Mormon president also neglected to admit under oath that what he did privately was very different from what he said and did publicly. In a series of outright lies, the prophet and seer claimed that “no one had for years been authorized to perform any such marriages,” that he did not know of “any such cases,” and that to his knowledge, no plural marriages were “taking place in the church either in the US or any other country.” Lies. Lies. Lies. This is the heart of the matter when it comes to the Mormon religious institution—its political machinations, environment of deception, and corporate decisions to deceive—all in the concerted effort to protect “the Church.”

And Jesus said who is the father of all lies?

The deceptions and lies unearthed at the Smoot hearings continued—all in an effort to protect the church. Apostle Marriner W. Merrill swore, under oath, that he had not taken any plural wives since 1890. He took one as late as 1901. Absurd testimonies came forth. Apostle John Henry Smith testified that he could remember very little about anything that happened since the manifesto to end polygamy came out in 1890—including how many children were born to him since that year. The self-proclaimed Apostle of the Lord explained: “It is a matter with which I have never charged myself regarding dates. The date of my own birth has always been a little mixed in my mind.” Margaret Geddes swore she was an unwed mother but declined to identify the father of her child.

The Shift in LDS History

The senate committee believed that she was unwed. Then in 1912, when the richest man in Utah, David Eccles died, she immediately filed a paternity suit and swore then that she had been sealed by an LDS apostle to Eccles in 1898 – five years before she swore that she was an unwed mother. Exactly how many post-manifesto marriages took place is unknown because LDS records were changed to make the ritual appear to have occurred before the manifesto was given.

Apostle Francis Lyman told the committee that fellow apostle, Senator Smoot, was ignorant of his polygamous wives but that the general population of Utah was well aware of the fact. When questioned about the absurdity of such a statement, Apostle Francis Lyman said: “I think it is accepted as a fact by Mr. Smoot, but I do not think he knows it.” The ridiculousness of this statement caused the committee members to burst out laughing. This caused Lyman to contradict his statement but to justify the idiocy of it by adding that he had been directed by “the spirit of the Lord” in giving his answers.

Reed Smoot's Senate Position and Controversy

One Senator Hoar asked Apostle Lyman: “Did the spirit of the Lord direct you to make the answer which you just took back and said was a mistake?” Apostle Lyman could not respond. Through all of this, it was apparent that the 1890 manifesto issued by LDS prophet seer and revelator was only a ruse. Self-proclaimed Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and United States Senator Reed Smoot himself also lied under oath. For instance, he swore that as an apostle, he had “never heard a discussion of plural marriage in meetings of the Apostles.” Records today prove that Smoot was actually in at least sixteen meetings where it was not only discussed, but one in which Smoot himself said that if polygamous marriage: “if universally practiced would save the world much sorrow and distress.” He also stated that he “looked forward to its restoration.” On several other occasions Senator and Apostle Smoot advised others on how to avoid arrest for the practice. Despite these dishonors, Smoot held his position in Washington for thirty years, eventually becoming one of the most powerful of all congressmen.

The Rise of Mormon Fundamentalism

The senate committee voted seven to five against Reed Smoot retaining his seat in the senate, but by the time the report was presented and debated before the actual senate itself in 1907, Smoot had established many friends in congress over the years – including some intimate associations with President Teddy Roosevelt. At this point in LDS history, we can witness a dramatic and impressive shift. A shift from its foundations of magic, violence, and multiple wives, to new growth in power, politics, and the prestige of personality and personal preparation. Where powerful seeds of “Mormon persuasion” were now firmly planted in Washington DC. soils, Utah Mormonism was beginning to split. Some of the Saints preferring to progress into an age of “single spouse” and multiple bank accounts, and others refusing to abandon the vision and teachings of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and staying true to what these prophets claimed was eternally true.

Enter the rise of Mormon fundamentalism.

Let’s open up the phone lines: (801) 973-8820 (801) 973-TV20

Please, first time callers only LDS callers preferred. Please, turn your television sets down once the operator places you on hold.

While we’re waiting for the operators to clear the calls, we’re going to run a spot for our partners program. We know times are tough financially. We understand that Christian people are trying to support themselves, their families, their own churches, and many, many other viable ministries out there seeking to reach the lost. We hope you will consider Alathea Ministries. We can assure you that whether you support us through prayer, finances, or by volunteering your time, your offerings are greatly appreciated and will be put to good use for the Good News.