Oh, this is rich! Mormons are actually taught how to recognize books they should avoid!

[Here are the steps to maintaining your testimony and never having to question your beliefs or think for yourselves:]

Consider the Publisher:

According to this site, there are only a few trusted sources Mormons are allowed to glean all their information from, and all others should be regarded as suspect:]

Books published by Deseret Book Company, Horizon, and other companies, as well as articles appearing in BYU Studies, Church magazines, and Meridian Magazine can safely assumed to be not anti-Mormon. The explanation is quite simple: the editors who make decisions whether to publish in these venues reject manuscripts that trash the Church. This list of friendly publishers and periodicals is by no means complete.

We can assume that publications of the Utah Gospel Mission and Jerald and Sandra Tanner, for example, are anti-Mormon at least in intent. When those who see it as their life's mission to tear down and destroy give speeches or produce writings, their words are in whole or in part predictably anti-Mormon.


[Mormons also need to pay attention to the following indicators:]

Inaccuracy:

if you find yourself saying, "Oh, no" or "What?" or "Oh, no," time after time, the chances are that the book is anti-Mormon.

[Anything that contradicts what they presently know as fact is Anti-Mormon. If they run across a statement, idea, or theory that causes any kind of doubt in their minds, they are to set aside the book at once, and immediately avoid reading further, for it is automatically deemed "full of lies" "twisting words" "misleading" and otherwise "not faith promoting".]

Telling us what we believe

To suggest that something is part of the fabric of current Mormonism when it is never mentioned and never advocated is a deliberate smear

[So, if a book you read mentions anything about Mountain Meadows Massacre, Joseph Smith's Polygamy practices, Blood Atonement, Curse of Cain, Mark Hofmann, or death oaths in the temple ordinances, AND YOU HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THESE BEFORE, you can rest assured that it is a lie, a fabrication, totally 100% made up and invented by those horrible Anti-Mormons, because if it were true, the Mormon leadership would have told the members all about these things themselves. Therefore, because the source is outside of the church, it is automatically not to be trusted or weighed into evidence]

Principle of selection

Since it is impossible to include everything, any author selects what he wishes to include. [If it]...shows no interest in goodness or dedication or courage or achievement-this is your typical anti-Mormon writer.

[Basically if it says anything that doesn't match up to what WE have told you, then a Mormon should rightly consider it to be Anti-Mormon material and discard it]

Interpretation

if it always shows the Church, its leaders, its people, and its beliefs in the worst possible light, it deserves the anti-Mormon label

[Would it even have to be in the worst possible light, or just contrary to what has been previously been taught and promoted from within the church? Most books that attempt to shed some light on the subjects that most members have no knowledge about aren't all that mean or slanderous towards the church. As a matter of opinion on my part, an excellent book that does NOT bash and trash the church, but goes into some detailed historical research on the origins of the Book of Mormon and the character of Joseph Smith is: An Insider's View of Mormon Origins, written by a member of the church no less: Grant Palmer. Mr. Palmer was disfellowshipped for writing and publishing this book, and has since gone on to write an excellent book about Jesus.]


Private life of the author

But if the author participates in anti-Mormon activities, denounces the Church, or engages in behavior defiantly contrary to Church standards, his portrayal of Mormons and their history will probably not be warm and friendly. If he presents himself as a Latter-day Saint when in fact he has not set foot inside a sacrament meeting for twenty-five years, if he pretends to be in the know because he comes from pioneer stock, we have a right to be suspicious. If he indulges in snide, disrespectful, cruel comments about the Saints and those they sustain as prophets, we should not be surprised if his book is anti-Mormon.


[Once again, we are to believe that TRUTH can only come from TRUSTED sources, and only Mormons can reveal anything about Mormonism. If anyone else claims to know anything about the church, their history, their early beliefs and practices, or worse yet, if any FORMER Mormon speaks out and decides to talk about things that the church would rather keep under wraps and deny, then it must be automatically and unilaterally tossed to the garbage heap, never to be seen or heard . What better way to keep each and every member close to it, than to suppress all information that would prompt investigation, questioning, comparison, or scrutiny? And what kind of organization would be interested in making sure that the only information that is circulated among the members is the kind of information that would maintain the beliefs, and keep that ever important tithing money rolling in? If it walks like a cult, and talks like a cult, well....it ain't no DUCK!!!]