…or whichever PR flacks wrote and edited the article, since Monson himself can’t write much of anything these days. Still, they put it under his name and smiley photo, so he gets to take the hit. Great job there, COB Einsteins.

Thomas S. Monson, "Hastening the Work"
June 2014 Ensign, pp. 4-5:

"As you pursue family history work, you are going to find yourself running into roadblocks, and you are going to say to yourself, ‘There is nothing else I can do.’ When you come to that point, get down on your knees and ask the Lord to open the way, and He will open the way for you. I testify that this is true."

This is provably false.


Example 1: Joseph Smith

If there’s anyone whose genealogy the church wants to extend back to the beginning, it would have to be JS. Brigham Young is on record as saying that God was personally watching JS’s ancestry through the ages (that being 5,800 years of course):

"The Lord had his eye upon [Joseph Smith], and upon his father, and upon his father's father, and upon their progenitors clear back to Abraham, and from Abraham to the flood, from the flood to Enoch, and from Enoch to Adam. He has watched that family and that blood as it has circulated from its fountain to the birth of that man." (JoD 7:289-90; October 9, 1859)

JS’s earliest reliably identified ancestor in his patriarchal line is one Edward Smith, born around 1571. (Archibald F. Bennett, "Saviors on Mount Zion," p. 89.) Prior to then, it depends on the source you’re looking at. There’s no consensus and no church seal of approval that I can see. It’s a hash of competing claims and assertions. (The earliest I could find mentioned on LDS.org is Edward’s grandson Robert, born around 1626.)

The church can spend as much money as it wants on this effort, and it can hire the most competent genealogists in the world. But even with these tremendous resources at its disposal, after 180 years it’s managed to trace back the lineage of the Second Most Important Person in History only to the 16th century.

Further, the Smiths have occupied the very highest positions throughout the church’s history. They must have felt the occasional need to "get down on [their] knees" for divine help in extending JS’s pedigree; they’d be derelict if they didn’t. And what results did these apostles, prophets and patriarchs achieve from their years of heartfelt prayers? Really, none at all. "The Lord" demonstrably did NOT "open the way." Monson’s testimony fails.


Example 2: Thomas Monson(!)

Monson’s patriarchal line has been traced back only to the 1690’s or so. That’s about as far back as I can go with mine, and I haven’t had the second anointing, nor do I have the super powers of his mighty prophetic office.

And that’s it, the late 17th century. Does anyone think Monson hasn’t gotten "down on [his] knees and ask[ed] the Lord to open the way" many times over? And how’s that worked out for him? So he’s testifying to something that isn’t even true IN HIS OWN LIFE. If Monson’s Viking ancestors stuck in spirit prison are clamoring to get their sealing on, the Lord hasn’t been in much of a rush to do anything about it.


Monson’s testimony can be factually disproven, not just for JS, but also for himself, of which he is surely aware (or used to be). Therefore, Thomas S. Monson is objectively guilty of bearing false witness in the pages of an official church publication. No other conclusion is possible, and an autopen is no excuse. Just goes to show the value of an LDS testimony.

Of course this won't carry any weight with active mormons, i think that was some clever research you just did.

Good job. :)

Excellent work. Hats off to you.

Don't-these-guys-think-before-they-spout-off-ly yrs,

S

Genealogy. Shudder. Even as a TBM I'd sing, "Genealogy, I'm NOT doing it, my genealogy. And the reason why I'm NOT doing it is very clear to me. I don't care about, all my relatives. I hate my family tree...somethin somethin gag ack hairball."

Beautiful!!!

Being the myopic twits they are, the brethren (and their ghost writers) often forget they have an international, pan-cultural church. When it comes to genealogy, they have a lot of members for whom ancestral records never existed, because those cultures didn't worry about documentation. You can pray your ass off but there is no "way" to be opened. There's nothing there. Zero.

This genealogy-by-the-Spirit stuff is why professional genealogists hate the records Mormons have submitted. None of it ever gets cross-checked, and it's filled with errors and pious guesses. And most of it was gathered under duress, just to get someone off their backs. It's a lot of junk genealogy.

Of course if you take a break from a problem, your subconscious will continue to mull it over in the background and then pop out a solution.

Genealogy is a case of TSCC doing the right thing for the wrong reason. Making a conscious connection to dead ancestors, like the Buddhists do, is important. Wouldn't you want people down the line to think about you? Even if they perform meaningless ordinances for you, their hearts are in the right place. In their minds, they think they are saving you. Sure it's bullshlt, but it's lovely bullshlt.

One eventually gets to the point to where there are no records. And then there are cultures and civilizations who just didn't care about record keeping, at least not for ordinary people. Then there are the bogus genealogies that tie people into all the royalty of Europe and then to the Bible. My sister truly believes we're related to kings.

Then you get genealogists like my brother who refuses to accept a date that means some revered ancestor got knocked up before marriage. "It must be an error." Yeah, because no one in OUR sacred pioneer ancestry would EVER do the nasty without being lawfully married. That would be impossible.

Yeah, Josexph Smith would never do a thing like that! :D:D:D:D

I never got the fixation with family history. Never did a stitch of it. I found pornography more enticing.

The other problem with family history, beyond maybe your great grandparents, is that you start to have a ridiculous number of direct ancestors. You already have eight great grand parents. In 10 generations you already have over a thousand direct ancestors. You don't have to go back very far until your ancestors are everyone in a given region. You are a direct descendant of the whole ancient population of say, England, and so are millions of other people alive today. At a certain point it becomes meaningless in individual terms and impossible. Sexual reproduction is a fantastically good way of mixing up the old gene pool.

The vast majority of Caucasians are direct descendants of Charlemagne.

I have a hard time believing that JSJ's ancestry can only be traced back to a guy born in 1571. I would highly suspect that the Morg would rather not talk about whatever his lineage is before that.

It's not only believable, but expected. For the common folk, it's rare to find records before 1550 or so. You usually have to go into royalty or peerage to get anything earlier.

In the case of the 1571 guy, his Church of England baptismal record didn't give the father's name, so that pretty much stops the process. But even so, a name like "Smith" is fiendish to trace; there are so many that you can't tell which child belongs to whom. You practically need divine intervention to separate them out properly.

The key word here is *reliable*. Any fool can link two random entries together, and many have done just that. That's where all the garbage pedigrees come from. Unfounded assumptions, wishful thinking and plain delusion rule the day.

On your other topic, I mostly agree with you on Charlemagne. I'm not certain if "vast majority" is accurate. I once read a piece (can't give references) that concluded that up to half of all people of European heritage were descended from Charlemagne.

That's a reasonable proposition. Charlemagne had a libido that Joseph Smith would envy, plus he had the means to gratify it. You and I and many people on this board might well trace back to him. Not through his wife of course, nor even his many acknowledged mistresses, but probably through whichever scullery maid or buxom serving wench happened to strike his fancy that particular hour.

Your main point remains valid though. "Descendants of Charlemagne" is not an exclusive club, however grand it may sound at first.

(Note: All serving wenches must be buxom. It's part of the job description.)

I got bogged down in the 1500's tracing a line back through my dad. I don't think it's unusual.

Try checking the details from http://thomasmonson.com/79/stories-from-the-family-history-of-thomas-s-monson against a family history web site. I am not sure which is the greater sin in mormondom: lying about your family history or not doing your family history.

Monson said "When you come to that point, get down on your knees and ask the Lord to open the way, and He will open the way for you. I testify that this is true."

And the lord opened the way with DNA studies. So Tommy - get your ass to the temple and do ordinances for Neandertal ancestors:)

Ohhhh this is good!!!

I baptize you templendumbed for and in behalf of ung huk ah angh weeeee who is dead, in the name of the sky dad, the zombie sun, and the beefy roast, ramen.

I have got to infiltrate a fireside on the bap for the ded and ask this question about how do I baptize my neanderthal ancestors for the dead!!!!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/05/2014 06:08PM by templeendumbed.

But the neanderthal ancestors were already baptized in "the flood". Hence, TSCC can say they don't need the dead dunking. LOL.

I was always told that we should do as much genealogy as possible while on earth. What we can't do, due to lack of records, will be done during the millennium time. In fact, one bishop told us that this would be the "great work" of the millennium.

I can't help but wonder why they wouldn't just wait to do all the baptisms for the dead, and do it 100% accurately and efficiently, during the Millenium. If the Millenium is right around the corner and if it's a job that they are planning to do anyway during that time, what's the rush to work on it now?

something 'new' here?

Understandable doubt. I'd just offer that I've come to see statements by prophets and even the Lord in a different light when I take time out of the equation. It's hard for us because we're bound to time, but time doesn't exist for God. So when Jesus said, "ask..., seek..., knock..." or that "he that liveth and believeth in me shall never die", we might also doubt those words, unless and until we can remove time from the equation.

When you remove *time* from the equation, *everyone* is a prophet--prophecy is meaningless unless it *is* bound by time.

Well, I'll be… First time a TBM has resurrected one of my old threads in order to argue. I suppose I should take that as a compliment, telling me that I've finally arrived!

Welcome to RFM, Scalpel. It's your first post, so I don't know if you're a lurker or just a hit-and-run. No matter, this BB is where Mormons come to learn – really learn – about Mormonism.

Your stated belief that god exists outside of time is not supported by Mormon scriptures nor its prophets. In fact, that statement led me to suspect that you could simply be a garden-variety Xtian. But upon further reflection, it seems that you're more likely to have grown up TBM in the milky correlated church and weren't taught the older, more interesting doctrines. For example, I've been informed that the study of the Book of Abraham is now mostly discouraged. The BOA clearly teaches that time does indeed exist for god, although on a much different scale. And since god lives within time, you can't fairly and honestly take time out of the equation; if you try, you're just twisting the words. (Like what the church does with "translate" in its BOA essay.)

Abraham 3:4
"And the Lord said unto me, by the Urim and Thummim, that Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord's time, according to the reckoning of Kolob."

Abraham 3:9
"And thus there shall be the reckoning of the time of one planet above another, until thou come nigh unto Kolob, which Kolob is after the reckoning of the Lord's time; which Kolob is set nigh unto the throne of God, to govern all those planets which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest."

Abraham 5:13
"But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the time that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die. Now I, Abraham, saw that it was after the Lord's time, which was after the time of Kolob; for as yet the Gods had not appointed unto Adam his reckoning."

Facs 2, Fig 1
"Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God. First in government, the last pertaining to the measurement of time. The measurement according to celestial time, which celestial time signifies one day to a cubit. One day in Kolob is equal to a thousand years according to the measurement of this earth, which is called by the Egyptians Jah-oh-eh."


You argue that god should essentially be given an infinite, or at least indefinite, amount of time to keep a promise, which an omnipotent god would hardly need; and allows an allegedly fair and just god to move the goalposts at a whim, and you never have the slightest idea how close you might be in obtaining said promise. You're being told to hit a target you're not allowed to see, and which could potentially be moving. Cat and mouse. No sale.

But even if your argument were valid, it would be irrelevant. The Monson testimony in the OP is an INDIVIDUAL promise, not a collective one. "When YOU come to that point… he will open the way for YOU." Not necessarily immediate, but certainly not after you're dead, otherwise why bother? All the praying and beseeching and fasting and tears did nothing for the generations of researchers of Joseph Smith's ancestry. Many of those researchers are dead, as well as all the Smith prophets and apostles. THEY came to that point and god did not open the way for THEM. Monson testified falsely. Praying and fasting etc. has done no good for Monson. He's as good as dead. The time remaining for god to answer Monson's INDIVIDUAL promise is just about up.

Are you prepared to testify to us that there is yet a chance, that god will answer before Monson is boxed up and planted? And when Monson dies beneath the silent heavens, without the way ever being opened for HIM, are you prepared to return here and publicly admit your misplaced faith? Somehow I doubt it. Or will you make another excuse, perhaps that he's now meeting his ancestors in the Spirit World™ so it's true after all? Big deal, we're all supposed to do that, prayer or no.

Something's wrong with a god who needs mere mortals and apologists to make these excuses for him. Perhaps he should get up off his La-Z-God couch, put down his celestial pork rinds, and do something (anything!) so his prophets can actually look like, you know, prophets. That would be a change.

Now back to you. Even though your rebuttal failed, your god is pleased with your valiant effort to bail him out. For bumping my thread, you get three Celestial Kingdom points, to be redeemed when you give the Sure Sign of the Nail to Joseph Smith during your final handshake exam.

another LDS Baddie!:

if god Doesn't 'open the heavens for you' (after sincere prayer)... IT'S YOUR FAULT!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2015 05:49PM by GNPE.

At a certain point in time hundreds of years ago, my ancestors relocated from Hungary to Czeck to Romania. The Romanian government sealed their records and doing family research had been really difficult if not impossible. So while I enjoyed doing research, I felt frustrated with the block on their records. Now that I have learned the morg is a lie I cannot thank the Romanian government enough for their policy. I would rather feel frustrated in not doing it than feel guilt over doing meaningless work in the temple.

They always rely on the Church members simply believing them and not looking into their lofty claims.

That's the difference between the members and us ex-Mos. We check the references.

my paternal generataions only goes back to mid 1800's. Oh the joys of generations of bastards. love it!