Posted on

“The Church Makes No Distinction Between God and Mammon” (Part 4)

There are many critics of the LDS Church’s wealth.  Is the LDS Church guilty of serving God and Mammon?  I asked Dr. Michael Quinn that question, and I think you’ll be surprised by his answer.

Michael: The accusation is there, but typically it comes from people who don’t recognize that the church makes no distinction between God and Mammon. The church is a money making operation, but it plows the money into the building of the Kingdom of God on Earth, which is a Mormon phrase that most members, even disaffected ones, will recognize. A member of the church, whether former member or current member in good faith, may feel uncomfortable with this huge portfolio that involves billions of dollars a day in transactions over the computer with only one of its investment houses.

It may be [that] members of the church and devout members and certainly ex-members of the church are uncomfortable, or may be uncomfortable with the commercial real estate that produces and the commercial investments in mines and oil, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which would be fossil fuels. For people who are concerned about that. And the Church has heavily invested in fossil fuels.  Nonetheless, it’s a part of building the Kingdom of God.

We’re going to talk about the City Creek Mall.  The LDS Church paid $1.5 Billion dollars to make it.  Michael Quinn says that this enormous income allows the church to spend enormous sums of money to support LDS Church growth.  It’s not just in poor countries like South America and Africa.  Quinn says that the LDS Church has deficit spending even in rich countries like England.

Michael: In 2006, the LDS Church headquarters gave a cash supplement to the church in the United Kingdom of nearly half a billion dollars, $450,000,000 and change. And that was in one year to one of the countries in which the church has had a significant presence since 1837. It is an industrial country. It is not a third world country. Its members are generally thought of as being comfortable. This is not the case in any country. Mormons can be poor even in the United States and there are poor members of the church who live on government welfare and church welfare in the United Kingdom. Well, the tithe payers in the United Kingdom couldn’t pay all of their responsibilities, all of the building and the maintenance and the missionary work and everything else, the aid to the really poor that occurs in the United Kingdom. And so in one year the church gave nearly half a billion dollars. I mean, I don’t know the total number, but I know it’s more than 100 countries throughout the world the church is in.

In third world countries, and there are at least 50 and there could be far more than that. The church, and I have the reports to demonstrate this, is paying 90 to 95 percent of their expenses are being paid in cash from church headquarters on a year by year basis in the developing country or what in during the Cold War used to be called the third world. The church could not do this if it didn’t have billions of dollars, not only of tithing, but of commercial income from for-profit businesses, which the City Creek Mall is intended to be for.

Is it true that the City Creek Mall is subsidizing churches in poor countries?

GT: So let me ask this question. I’ll phrase it this way. Would it be accurate to say that the City Creek Mall, and maybe even Victoria’s Secret, is subsidizing some of these buildings in Nigeria?

Michael: Without question. I mean, in the book, I lay out those that I’m aware of through the Internet. And there is a remarkable openness on the Internet to the Church’s investments in a variety of areas, whether it’s land where the produce is primarily going for the welfare program. But what they can’t use for the welfare program would spoil if they didn’t sell it to the general public. And that’s for profit. So there are profits that even Deseret Ranches of Florida, which is a welfare outfit in its original definition, it’s also for-profit and it’s making millions, maybe billions.

What are your thoughts that the LDS Church is “a money making operation?”  Is the LDS Church serving God and Mammon?

This was a fun interview!  Check out our conversation….

Does the LDS Church serve God and Mammon?
Does the LDS Church serve God and Mammon?


Don’t forget to check out our other conversations with Dr. Michael Quinn!

184: Would LDS Church Income Ever Support a Paid Ministry?(Quinn)

183: Are LDS Church Revenues really $50 Billion/Year? (Quinn)

182: Michael Quinn Discusses Deseret Hemp Company (Quinn)

Posted on

Hofmann, Church Leaders, & the McLellin Collection (Part 6)

As you can see from our previous conversations, Mark had a tangled web of interactions.  In this next conversation with forensics expert George Throckmorton, we’ll talk more about Mark’s dealings with church leaders.  What got Mark in hot water with church officials?

GT:  He had an appointment with, I believe it was Elder Oaks, Elder Pinnock. I don’t remember who all.

George: Elder Pinnock was the one that was dealing with him quite a bit.

GT: Yeah. And so, so can you a little bit about what was the relationship between Mark Hofmann and Elder Pinnock?

George: Business. Elder Pinnock had a history. In fact, I’ve known him. He was my wife’s bishop when we got married and so I’ve known him. I knew him for a long time before this and he was, you know, as much a victim as anybody.

It turns out this Mark Hofmann was trying to give more credence to the Spaulding Theory, which states that Sidney Rigdon got a copy of the Spaulding Manuscript, gave it to Joseph Smith, and Joseph plagiarized the Book of Mormon from Solomon Spaulding.  The problem has been, there has never been any connection between Joseph Smith and Solomon Spaulding.  However, Mark tried to solve that problem with a forgery with a new collection known as the McLellin Collection.

George:  There’s an old theory called a Solomon Spaulding theory. Are you aware that?

GT: I am aware of that.

George: Okay. But one of the problems, it’s never been given much credibility. They think that Solomon Spalding wrote it.

GT:  Wrote the Book of Mormon.

George:  And Martin[1] just copied the Book of Mormon, but there was really no relationship between Solomon Spalding and Joseph Smith that could be found. So, it’s not given a whole lot of credit. I mean there’s always people that bring it up, but my opinion is not given credit because they never met until too late, until this land deed showed up. And it’s a land deed that was signed by Solomon Spalding and Martin Harris. So, it showed there was a relationship between Solomon Spalding and Martin Harris and the date was appropriate. And this is the document that Mark Hofmann showed Hugh Pinnock and Al Rust and some others, and he says this is part of the McLellin Collection.

Check out our conversation….and don’t forget our other episodes with George!

Mark Hofmann hoped his forged McLellin Collection would give credence to the Spaulding Theory.
Mark Hofmann hoped his forged McLellin Collection would give credence to the Spaulding Theory.

173: Why Hofmann Killed his Best Friends

172: Who was the 3rd Bomb Intended For?

171: More Hofmann Techniques & Forged Sports Memorabilia

170: How Hofmann Fooled Experts with a Toy Chemistry Set

169: How George Became a Forensics Expert

Please help support Gospel Tangents by becoming a paid monthly subscriber.  To hear the entire interview uninterrupted, become a patron at

[1] George was referring to Martin Harris, but he meant Sidney Rigdon.  In a future interview with Steven Mayfield, you can see the forged land deed with Sidney Rigdon’s forged signature.

Posted on

Sealing & Born in the Covenant: A Guarantee of Heaven? (Part 7)

We’re concluding our conversation with Dr. Jonathan Stapley.  We’re talking about sealings, especially child to parent sealings, such as born in the covenant.  In early Mormonism, these bonds were considered permanent (as Dr. Bill Smith mentioned.)  John D. Lee was sealed as an adopted son of Brigham Young, but Lee also participated in the Mountain Meadows Massacre.  What is his status?

Jonathan:  Brigham Young has to wrestle with this. Well, is this a persevering relationship? And faced with that reality, he says, “No. You guys have to…” He gets up. And he’s like, “Oh, you people that are sealed to me, yes indeed. You can’t get on my coattails. You have to do your work.” Right? But on the one hand, but on the other hand he’s saying, “my kids are totally in.”

We will also talk about the protestant ideas of Calvinism and Arminianism.  How does Mormonism fit in with those paradigms?

Jonathan:  Calvinism is this idea that, you know, to the modern perspective, once you are saved, you are saved always and you cannot fall from grace. And Arminians were like, well, you can certainly backslide.  Like you can be saved and then screw up then backslide. And the challenge is that for everybody, for every Christian, no matter what sort of soft theology you adhere to, is that we all know folks that are burning converts that are regenerated and have the faith. And that also ended up being just complete jerks and falling away, right? And the Calvinists would perhaps say, “Well, he never really was saved in the first place.”  He was never elect.  Right?

And the Methodist, the Arminian would say, well, he was certainly saved, but he then backslid and fell from grace. And the question is, how does that—he explicitly referenced, Joseph Smith explicitly references these two ideas and then places the sealing in between. And I think how one way to think about this is that sealings in as much as they materialized, heaven, they created, literally heaven.  It doesn’t exist anywhere outside of the creation of these sealed networks. If I am sealed into the network of heaven, I have a place there. And then if I backslide, so the discussion with these early sins being persevering, that once you are part of heaven, you cannot be taken away. You persevere in heaven. The idea is, at least in section 132, is that you can backslide, but your place in heaven is still there and there’s strong language that destruction of flesh and, all these, like warnings, right?

Are Mormon sealings considered permanent today?  Are our marriage bonds sealing our children into heaven?

Dr. Stapley discusses child to parent sealings, like born in the covenant. Does this guarantee a child in heaven?
Dr. Stapley discusses child to parent sealings, like born in the covenant. Does this guarantee a child in heaven?

One last thing.  We’ve started a new page at Patreon.  If you would like to watch entire interviews in one session, our first interview with George Throckmorton is now up at  For $5/month you can get the whole interview!  Check it out!  Also, please support Gospel Tangents by becoming a monthly subscriber!  For $10/month (click the yellow button at the top of the page here on I will send you a transcript of this and all future interviews!  Or simply go to to purchase this or other transcripts.