DiscussMormonism.com

New four-volume history of the Church will be 'transparent, honest and faithful'

“It is a narrative history written in an engaging style that will be accessible to both youth and adults,” he remarked.

“Saints, however, is not historical fiction. It is a true story based on the records of people from the past. Every detail and every line of dialogue is supported by historical sources.”

https://www.ldschurchnews.com/latest/20 ... hful-47140

Volume 1 — available later this year — tells the story of the Restoration from Joseph Smith’s childhood to the Saints receiving ordinances in the Nauvoo Temple in 1846.

Volume 2 covers the Saints’ challenges in gathering to the western United States and finishes with the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple.

Volume 3 recounts the Church’s global growth, ending with the dedication of the Bern Switzerland Temple in 1955.

Volume 4 brings the narrative up to the recent past in which temples dot the earth.

It will be interesting to see what they omit...

My guess:
Multiple first vision accounts.
Polyandry.
Joseph Smith translation plagarism.
Book of Abraham translation being wrong.
All previous first presidency statements on the priesthood ban being a revelation from God.

New four-volume history of the Church will be 'transparent, honest and faithful’.

Implying what? That all heretofore historical publications were not any of those things? Seems rather dubious for an organization that claims to be the one true Church on all the earth.

The question to ask is:

How would this work be different if it was only honest and transparent?

In other words, the very fact that the word "faithful" was part of the description tells you they are ommiting unfaithful parts.

They should've just called it for what it is, hagiography.

Fence Sitter wrote:The question to ask is:

How would this work be different if it was only honest and transparent?

In other words, the very fact that the word "faithful" was part of the description tells you they are ommiting unfaithful parts.

They should've just called it for what it is, hagiography.

It struck me as being dishonest. The church always reports things in a manner that put's the church in the best possible light and assists the testimony by remaining faithful to the information given.

How on earth can the church present anything faithful about the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 and Joseph Smith's declaration and presentation of those things? These are some serious warts in Mormonism and yet the church just covers them up and tells the faithful to not worry about those little things but to look at the whole picture. Well, the whole picture is one giant image of corruption. The Mormon church is totally corrupt from the foundation to the top -- full of rotten garbage.

The stink that comes out of Mormonism is enough to make any honest person to want to barf.

https://lds.org/languages/eng/content/h ... es-of-gold

Transparent and Honest? Don’t make me laugh...

The church is not what it claims to be. The leaders speak on behalf of an imaginary god and sell a lot of fantasy in exchange for real time and money. So, the new "history" must be merely more salesmanship and spin.

I have a question wrote:https://lds.org/languages/eng/content/history/saints-v1/03-plates-of-gold

Transparent and Honest? Don’t make me laugh...

The church has never, ever, ever, operated in a transparent manner. It is a secretive cult organization which has mutated into a business enterprise that hides its financial affairs from public scrutiny and continues to dole out financial rewards to the leaders of the church and their families.

The LDS CULT is not this.



Mormonism is anything but transparent. It is a cult organization that is secretive and hides up his history and refuses to talk about the controversies which are causing the organization to crumble at its foundations.

Does the church clarify its position on the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3? No. It doesn't. The church is anything but transparent.

So, when will they really be "transparent and honest" and admit to everyone that Joseph Smith made it all up?