The Tanners quote from, and have Decker quote from, a bunch of unknown 'associates' of mine that say things against me. No names. Why? Cuz their 'scared' that's why! How can I respond to this? What 'associates'? I didn't have any such 'associates' other than I did a series of pro-LDS cassette tapes with Gary Wierlesky, and, according to Gary, the Tanners never spoke with him. When the Tanners don't have documents to prove a point, they use 'unnamed' informants. No court in the land would fail to laugh a prosecutor out of court with such 'informants'.
INFERENCE AND INNUENDO
The Tanners are absolute EXPERTS at using 'inference and innuendo'. These are like their little twin babies! A good example of that is when they 'infer' that I was dropping Dr. Gilbert Scharffs' name without his permission in order to form a Committee to research anti-Mormon literature. First, they quote an article from an LDS newspaper in Mesa, Arizona, to the effect that Dr. Scharffs was "working on the Zion's Camp Committee" which was set up by me, and then they write:
"It is interesting to note that the newspaper article cited above mentioned that Dr. Gilbert Scharffs was 'working on the Zion's Camp Committee,' When we contacted Dr. Scharffs, he seemed to have no recollection of working on this particular committee. He did say, however, that Darrick Evenson had invited him to some of the meetings regarding a new organization he was trying to set up. Out of curiousity Scharffs attended 'two or three meetings.' While he told Mr. Evenson that he 'would help' him with questions that might arise, he did not want to be an official member of the organization. Later, however, when he read the first issue of The Messenger & Advocate, he was surprised to find his name listed on the 'Advistory Board' of the organization."
This SOUNDS like I was dropping Dr. Scharffs name without his permission.
But wait!
Dr. Scharffs AGREED to be on the Advisory Board of the Zion's Camp Committee. Dr. Scharffs attended all three meetings. No 'work' was done because nothing came of it. I was hoping to get such a Committee going so that they could exchange information, and that people could be benefited by their information. I was going to give them ALL of my research too; the stuff I sacrificed many years to research and gather, but nothing came of it. He never 'worked' on it because he never did 'research' for it. If Scharffs told the Tanners I used his name without permission, they CERTAINLY would have quoted him.
The Tanner infer that I threatened and "stalked" a pastor in Salt Lake City. I was at an anti-Mormon meeting and asked Dick Bear about his first excommunication (it was for adultery). The pastor grabbed my elbow and told me to leave. I did. At the door he SHOVED me, and I said, "Shove me again and you're coming out here with me!" I was driven to that meeting by Darell Thorpe. I expected him to come out when he saw me leave, but he stayed inside for the entire meeting. Sandra said she saw me "pacing" outside as if waiting for the Pastor to come out so I could harm him. Actually, I waited an hour outside because Darell never came out to let me in his truck, and I couldn't go back in. I had to wait for him to come out. Darell came out about the same time Sandra Tanner did, and I was indeed 'pacing' back and forth. I'd waited over an hour!
The Tanners string together 'facts' like a popcorn-necklass in order to make things appear much darker and ominous than they really are.
Let me assure you: the Tanners are LIARS!!! The Tanners are DECEIVERS!!! Don't take my word for it. Get They Lie In Wait To Deceive Vol. 5 when it comes out, and see for yourself. Unlike the Tanners, the Browns DO NOT USE innuendo, inference, 'unknown' witnesses, and "evidence from the lack of evidence". The Browns DOCUMENT ___every_____single____word! Get the book and see for yourself!
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. Where you a believing Mormon when you wrote 'The Gainsayers'
A. Yes. I wrote that book just after my mission was over in 1985. It was rejected by Horizon Publishers twice. It was only printed because Duane Crownther's son (Crowther was owner of Horizon) had a fiancee at BYU who left him and the Church after reading The God Makers book. His son was DEVASTATED, so he dusted off my book and REWROTE it and published it.
Q. Why didn't you tell Crowther that you no longer believed in Mormonism?
A. I didn't tell him because I STILL BELIEVED IT! I just no longer believed that the Church was run by Prophets, Seers, and Revelators. I'd seen too much. I'd discovered too much. I saw too many problems. But I still wanted the book out, because I believed it could help people. I no longer believed the Church had ALL the Truth, but I still believed it had a lot more of it than the anti-Mormons/Evangelicals.
Q. What sort of 'problems'?
A. Too many to name. But basically:
1) The 'prophets/seers/revelators' of the Church could not discern Mark Hofmann; the forger/bomber who fooled them again and again-year after year.-until he dropped one of his bombs and it blew-up in his face. President Hinckley and Elder Oakes DELIBERATELY misled investigators afterward to try to protect the Church. They also hid documents.
2) The Church was starting to DENY (in 1987-8) that it EVER taught that blacks were cursed or the descendants of Cain. This revisionist deception is still going on today. Don't believe me? Ask youself. Call 1-800-453-3860, and when you hear the recording dial "O', then ask for "The Office of The First Presidency" and then ask: "Did the Mormon Church ever teach that blacks were cursed or the descendants of Cain?" They will ask if you are a Member. If you are, you WILL NOT GET AN ANSWER, but told to "See your bishop", and the bishop will ask YOU questions and will not answer you. If you are not a Member, they will say, "No, the Church NEVER taught that black people were cursed or the descendants of Cain!" This is a BIG LIE. The Church is attempting to rewirte history in order to get good PR.
3) The gross materialism I saw among many Mormons, and how they used material wealth as a "sign" of righteousness or the 'lack' thereof (i.e. if you're rich the Lord has blessed you, but if you are poor you MUST be 'unworthy').
4) The fact that I had two roommates (one a BYU grad and another non-LDS) who screwed half the active Relief Society in the last Young Adult Ward I belonged to, and the cover-up which ensued. AND the fact that Mormon women were LYING to me constantly, and that fact that bishops were JUSTIFYING their lies to me ("their intent was good"), etc., etc., etc.
I could go on for hours, but I think you should see the point. I just could NO LONGER BELIEVE that the Church was divinely guided. And in order to be a good, active, temple-going Mormon you MUST believe that the current President is a Prophet who receives divine revelation just like Joseph Smith. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. I wish I could, but I can't. I know better.
Q. Why did you deny being a Mormon on the radio when in fact you were still a Member?
A. Having your name in the records does NOT make one a "Mormon". I never liked people calling themselves "Mormons" when they didn't believe it, or were inactive, or were hypocrites. I did not consider myself a "Mormon" because I no longer attended Church, and I no longer believed it was run by Divine Revelation. I DID tell them that I was a former Mormon; which part the Tanners conveniently left out (or forgot to mention) in their distored expose' of me.
Q. Why did you write that anti-New Age book?
A. I wanted to become a writer. I wanted to influence people. I had plans for books exposing the Gay Rights Movement, and Planned Parenthood (the one exposing Gay Rights were publsihed). I loved doing research, and this is what I wanted to do. Such books simply ARE NOT PUBLISHED in secular publishers anymore (at least none I could find). It is not "politically-correct". There is gross censorship in Amercan publishing that most people are not aware of. So Christian publishing was my only option, and I took it.
Q. Do you admit you used DECEPTION in regards to your research and when you presenting yourself as somebody else?
A. YES! I have no problem with that. To be 'duplicious' is to say "I will not use deception" and then use it (as the Tanners do every day of their lives). I have no problem using it in order to do my investigations. EVERY police officer does. EVERY private detective does. Captain Moroni in The Book of Mormon... "And he also knowing that it was the only desire of the Nephites to preserve their lands, and their liberty, and their church, therefore he thought it no sin that he should defend them by strategem;....(Alma 43:30). Look up the meaning for the word "strategem" in the dictionary tonight.
I have NO PROBLEM with it. To tell another's story with their permission is not, in my eyes, deceptive. Actors do it every day. I did it on radio. The only part I regret is allowing Mark Trosclair to add things to my book which are patently untrue. He wanted to add MANY MORE things. The final draft was a compromise after many heated debates.
Q. How do we know that Mark Trosclair added those things and you didn't?
A. How do you know anything??? How do you KNOW he didn't? AS GOD IS MY WITNESS...IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST....HE DID!!!. Jesus Christ is still a sacred name to me. I swear by His Name that Mark Trosclair wrote the back cover against my will, and that I fought him about it, and told him to remove it. He did not. The stuff about the car-chase/physical assaults happened to me, but had NOTHING to do with my research on the book. Those were HIS words, and not mine. They were published not 'without' my consent, but directly AGAINST my consent!
Q. When Mark Trosclair rewrote your book and made such claims why not just drop the whole thing?
A. I should have. But I OWED MONEY. I borrowed money to do the research, and to go to California to research in the Tara Center. Mark Trosclair rewrote the book and afterward they told me, "You owe us $1,000 for the rewrite, and unless we get it you can't have your book back!" The Trosclairs did similar things to other authors, and is why a few of them sued. I could not sue. I had NO MONEY. I decided to try to make the best of a bad situation. The Trosclairs sold over 55,000 books. I received $2,000; which was almost enough to pay back my debts. I was supposed to receive at least 50 cents per book. Do the math. I'm not the only one that the Trosclairs ripped-off, and ripped-off.... BIG-TIME. Dropping it would have been to me like abandoning my child. I couldn't do it.
Q. Didn't you say you were a Mason and a Jehovah's Witness and a Baha'i? How could you be all those things at one time? Are you religiously unstable?
A. Joseph Smith's neighbors thought him unstable when they saw him attend many different churches, and be troubled by contending claims. I WAS a Mason (Entered Apprendice). I became one not in order to fellowship with a bunch of old farts in drag, but because in order to research the connection between Mormonism and Masonry I needed to do lots of research in a Masonic Library; which is open only to Masons. I NEVER told anyone I was a Jehovah's Witness. I told Eric Pement I studied with them (which is true). I told them I was thinking of becoming a Baha'i (which I did). I took several years to study and visit various polygamist groups; because they claim that the Church is no longer run by Divine Revelation (which I also believed) and also claim that THEY ARE run by Divine Revelation (which I discoverd to be FALSE). I am a religious Seeker; which requires "seeking".
Q. Why do you want to defend the Church if you don't believe in it anymore?
A. I sacrificed many years of my life in order to find answers to anti-Mormon questions. I want that to mean something. Also, regardless of the self-righteous complatency of Mormon leaders and bureaucrats, I do KNOW what a Hell people go through when they join the Church and come across anti-Mormon literature. I don't want anyone to go through the LIVING HELL I had to go through. So, I do it for them. The Church is still true, but I believe that it was established to "prepare the way" the Millennial Kingdom of God. That Kingdom has come. It is called "The Baha'i Faith".
One thing about Mormon Apologetics that bothers me, is that MOST 'Mormon Apologists' I know don't give a farthing about saving souls or testimonies. They are in a game; a game they enjoy. As most Mormons, they care nothing for anyone they haven't bonded with. As long as they think they're going to get their heavenly rewards they care nothing of others (except their own families of course). They are game-players; for the sake of intellectual enjoyment and ego- satisfaction. That is one big reason I left the Church; because so many Mormons had 'egos to match the mountains'. I knew that was NOT the religion of Jesus Christ, but the religion of Self.
I've discovered that for too many "Latter-day Saints" it is 'The Brethren' who have become for them a surrogate Savior. Jesus Christ is mentioned at the beginning and ending of prayers, but He isn't at the center of most Mormon's lives. As a general rule I've found active Mormons to be in a state of self-righteous security; similar to the Jews at the time of John the Baptist or Lehi.
Another thing that I couldn't accept is that the "Church" (The Brethren and their hundreds of assistants who run the Church) DO NOT CARE about providing answers to anti-Mormon questions. They believe that if you are the 'Elect' then you simply won't have any questions. These are people who were born in the Church, never doubted, and can't understand why some people would question it. Most active Catholics NEVER question. Most active Jehovah's Witnesses never question. Most Muslims never question. These are not 'signs' of righteousness, but merely that MOST people who belong to a church or religion will NEVER question it or their leaders. Most people are SHEEP. That applies to Mormons and to every___other____religion or philosophy. The Brethren don't care, and neither do most of the independent Mormon Apologists. The Church ignores, and the Apologists play their intellectual games. But a few.... a VERY few....actually care about people. The Church cares about it's PR (how the World perceives the Church); not individuals (unless they are family members), but a few Mormon Apologists actually DO care about individuals. I was one of them. I still am.
Q. Why did you try to get the Zion's Camp Committee going in 1990 when you no longer considered yourself a 'Mormon'?
A. After 20 years of observing Mormons and Mormonism I've come to learn that many of them can't understand altruistic behavior. Everything a Mormon does (I'm speaking in general terms here) must have a personal benefit ("gain") or they think it is foolishness. I haven't seem many exceptions to this rule. I suppose my purpose was SELFISH too--in a way--because I wanted to channel my research into some system that could use it, and the Zion's Camp Committee seemed like the best way. Today, this is done on Pro-LDS internet groups.
Q. You say you lost faith in The Brethren because they couldn't discern Mark Hofmann, but isn't it also true that the Prophet Joshua was deceived by the Gibeonites?
A. I'm the first one I know of who tried to defend The Brethren by using the Gibeonite example. The Gibeonites were Canaanites who donned old clothes and worn-out asses and deceived the Israelites into believing they weren't Canaanites but travelers from a far country come to serve them. The Prophet Joshua "inquired not at the mouth of the Lord" and was indeed deceived by them. I used it way back when Hofmann confessed to show how a true prophet can still be deceived. But, it is were ONLY Hofmann, then I may reconsider. But The Brethren have a long recent history of being deceived and showing NO SIGNS of any Spirit of Discernment:
1) For years George P. Lee (a Navajo General Authority) was molesting young girls, and the "prophets,seers,revelators" could not discern this. He even spoke in General Conferences during the time he was molesting young girls.
2) During the early 1980s Salt Lake City was "Fraud Capital of the World" (Wall Street Journal 5.29.85). This was because Mormons were investing hundreds of millions of dollars in get-rich-quick real estate scemes (many Mormons belief that 'wealth' is a divine right of the "Righteous", and indeed a 'sign' of a person "Blessed by God"). Elder Marvin Ashton of the Twelve Apostles gave a scathing "warning" to the Saints in the Fall General Conference in 1985: months after the national media had broke the story. This is like somebody going up to a car wrech and saying, "No, you must be careful driving in this weather or you're going to wreck!!". The Brethren said NOTHING all the years that Mormons were being scammed. Some of the scammers were bishops, and at least one Stake President. I know Mormons who tried to warn the Church (as I had tried to warn it about Mark Hofmann back in 1983), but were themselves threatened to keep silent (as was I). Where's the discernment?
3) The Brethren had NO IDEA that Elder Paul Dunn was lying and exaggerating in his popular stories. Did they ever hear any? He spoke at General Conference.
4) President Gordon B. Hinckley personally purchases many forged documents from Mark Hofmann and hides them. Elder Dallin Oakes meets with Hofmann on the DAY of one of the killings in order to arrange a SECRET LOAN so that Hofmann can purchase the McLellin Collection (he was then forging them) and then sell them to a rich Mormon (who was asked by Elder Oakes to do this) so the rich Mormon could purchase them and donate them (secretly) to the Church so the Church could "honestly" say, "No, we have purchased no such collection!"
Many more examples could be given, but when this TOTAL LACK OF DISCERNMENT happens over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again....one MUST conclude (unless they go into denial) that The Brethren HAVE NO DISCERNMENT.....whatsoever!
None.
Q. Why don't you just repent of your adultery and come back to the Church?
A. I haven't committed any adultery. I haven't had sex YET (with man or woman). I want to get married, and I'm waiting until marriage. While on my mission I remember meeting several ex-Mormons (none of them anti-Mormon... just former LDS who no longer believed it). I remember several of my companions saying after we spoke with these people, "Oh...they're ALL adulterers!" At least a half-dozen Mormons have called me an "adulterer" and this is why I left the Church. One called me a "child molestor". I always expected such things from anti-Mormons, but not from people who call themselves "Saints". Many, MANY Mormons are very self-righteous people. They see themselves as the "RIGHTEOUS" and everybody else as the "UNrighteous". If you're not an active Mormon, then you're evil. If you leave the Church, it's because you're an adulterer or some other heinous unrepented sin. Now, TRUE, I've met plenty of ex-Mormons who claim they left the Church ONLY because they started to read their Bibles, and then I've discovered they were exed for adultery, or were multiple adulterers. But to say that EVERYONE who leaves the Church is because of adultery is not only unfair to that person, but it violates the Law of God by "not bearing false witness against thy neighbor". Some people actually leave the Church when they discover that their bishop or stake president doesn't have the Spirit of Discernment. Some people leave because they have been offended 'for a word'. I was offended by Members SO MANY TIMES. I was LIED to and disrespected SO MANY TIMES. My motives were judged, and judged 'wrongly' SO MANY TIMES I can't number them. Yet, I stayed. I stayed until I saw too much, and I KNEW (and could NOT deny it) that the leaders of the Church were Prophets who don't ' prophesy', Seers who don't ' see', and Revelators who don't 'revelate' . THAT is when I had to leave; because I could no longer have blind faith in The Brethren.
In order to be a Latter-day Saint in good-standing you must attend the Temple. How could I attend the Temple again when I could not get a Temple recommend? To do that you must affirm and sustain The Brethren as Prophets, Seers, and Revelators. I KNEW they were NOT! I know some Mormons who believe just as I, but they remain in the Church. Often these are men who have families, and they do it to appease their families. I don't have a wife or family in the Church. I had nobody to placate; except myself.
Q. How can you justify using DECEPTION?
A. Fairly easily. Read Alma 43:30! As a young Mormon I would NEVER use lying under ANY circumstances, but I discovered that the Mormon women I met, the Church itself, Joseph Smith, the Apostle Paul, couldn't hold up to my standard. Anti-Mormons justified it, and Mormons justified it. So do police, and investigative journalists. I KNEW that if I wanted to be an investigative author I would have to use it too. I remember going to bishops a few years after so many LDS women were lying to me (and other men they weren't interested in):
Darrick: "Are you aware that many or most of these attractive young LDS women LIE to men frequently?"
Bishops: "Well....sure! But's c'mon!!"
Darrick: "C'mon what???"
Bishops: "C'mon. They were just sparing your feelings!"
Darrick: "So LYING is OK in order to spare another's feelings?"
Bishops: "Well No, but c'mon!!!"
Darrick: "C'mon what? What does 'c'mon' mean?"
Bishops: "C'mon, we ALL know this goes on, but...well, that's just a woman's perogative. That is known by everyone and accepted."
Darrick: "So, it's OK for LDS women to use lies but not for others?"
Bishops: "C'mon Darrick! You know what I mean!"
Darrick: "I'd like for you to answer. In what circumstances it is OK to use LIES?"
Bishops: "C'mon!!!"
Darrick: "Can you answer that question?"
Bishops: "Well...ah...I think this conversation is going nowhere. Have a nice day!"
One bishop once told me that I 'forced' women to LIE to me. Why? Because I asked them out, and they didn't want to go out with me. Many (if not most) Mormon women LIVE by the code of situational-ethics; to LIE only when 'forced' to. There is some perception in Mormon culture that "Mormon" women are pure, and their motives ALWAYS good, and if they lie, or get pregnant out of wedlock, etc., it is because some EVIL man (Mormon or not) 'FORCED' them into it.
One bishop told me: "As long as the intent of the heart is good then to lie is not a sin!"
I rejected that for a l-o-n-g time, but, eventually, I came to embrace it; because otherwise every attractive LDS woman would be a LIAR destined for Hell. Also, Joseph Smith LIED. The Apostle Paul LIED. Abraham LIED. Yet they were Prophets of God. Of course, Anti-Mormons LIE! Is their intent 'pure'? In my opinion, a few of them do have sincere intents. The Lord is the Final Judge.
Why did all those Mormon women LIE to me? Because I was poor. Because lying to me was easier than telling me the truth.
I remember in 1991 wanting to promote The Gainsayers book. Van Hale, a self-styled Mormon Apologist and host of a Sunday night 'Religion on the Line' talkshow in Salt Lake City, agreed to interview me for the program. The night before we had a telephone conversation:
Darrick: "Van, are we going to discuss ANYTHING besides my book 'The Gainsayers'? Are we going to discuss ANYTHING else besides that book?"
Hale: (clears his throat) "No".
During the program they often went to commercial break, and I could stil hear Van Hale speaking with his sidekick Steven Fields:
Mayfield: "Are you gonna ask him about Troy Lawrence after the break?"
Hale: "Soon. I'll get to it soon!"
I could hear them. Van wasn't a great engineer and left the line open between breaks. They didn't know I could hear them. Then, they got to their question:
Hale: "Darrick. Let me ask you a question. Do you believe it is OK to use DECEPTION as a means to defend the Church?"
Darrick: "Yes!"
Hale and Mayfield: (confusion and bewilderment) "Ah,...ah....whah?...ah...ah...let me ask you AGAIN. (he asked the same question again)
Darrick: "Yes I do. I believe it is OK to use deception to defend your Church, your country, and your people. Just like Capt. Moroni did."
Hale: "Ah....ah....let me ask you ONE MORE TIME.. DO YOU BELIEVE IT IS OK TO USE DECEPTION TO DEFEND THE CHURCH????"
Darrick: "Van, IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH YOUR HEARING?? What part of 'YES' DID NOT YOU UNDERSTAND?"
Van: "We want to tell our listeners that Darrick Evenson was exposed as a FRAUD recently in several anti-Mormon publications....."
Darrick: "Van??? Van Hale you TOLD me last night that we would speak ONLY about 'The Gainsayers'. You LIED sir!!!"
Van: "Darrick, your credibility has EVERYTHING to do with 'The Gainsayers', so I didn't lie to you!"
Yes...HE DID!!!
He LIED. Van Hale LIED in his attempt to 'catch me in a snare'. He and his little sidekick Steve Mayfield THOUGHT I would say "Oh NOOO! You can't use deception to defend the Church!!!" and then they were going to say, "Oh REALLY? What about 'Troy Lawrence' hummmm???" and then pat themselves on the back for being such fine examples of truth and dignity.
Hypocrites MAKE ME SICK!!! They made Joseph Smith ill too, and that's why he beat up so many! That's right...he BEAT UP people who showed him disrespect. He had no patience for such scum.
Q. Do you have regrets about this?
A. I regret it didn't go as planned. I regret I didn't stand my ground with Mark Trosclair more than I did. But GOOD THINGS did come of it. I influenced Pat Matriciana for the good (I believe), and I did get to write a book and do research for others because of it. Decker had plans for a video which would have resulted in the DEATHS of many missionaries around the world (I am convinced), and I told Matriciana this, and the plans for THATparticular video-project was scrapped. So, I think I had some good influence. Pat thought my book was great, and he could HARDLY chide me for using deception when he MUST use it in order to film people in his videos. Pat Matriciana is a good man, and it is unfortunately that Decker has conned him; but Decker has conned millions.
Conclusion
Anyone who uses deception and then accuses ME of being a "liar" is in fact a HYPOCRITE. I DO NOT CLAIM that I do not use deception. Any investigative jounalist MUST if he's going to get his story. But Ed Decker, Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Constance Cumbey, Al Cresta, Eric Pement, and Van Hale ALL "used deception" in order to 'expose' me. And that is why they are hypocrites. Nothing less.
My Testimony
I would like to bear my testimony that I know the Church is true. It is the only true sect of Christianity on the face of the whole earth. I believe that Jesus Christ commissioned Joseph Smith to restore Original Christianity. I've studied anti-Mormon claims like nobody else. I've refuted ALL of them, and it would take me a year full-time just to put all my information on the Internet. I've found the 1820 revivals that the Tanners said never happened. I've found that the Kinderhook Plates were authentic, and only the Chicago Plate (the one 'discovered' in 1920 and tested) is a fraud. I've found many many more things that refuteall anti-Mormon claims. I sacrificed my youth for it. I sacrificed college for it. I sacrificed marriage for it. BecauseI had to know. But I alsoknow folks....I also know that the Church is not run by Divine Revelation, but this is OK. It is still performing it's divine mandate. But I know that the Millennial Kingdom is here, and it is the Baha'i Faith. I know that Baha'u'llah is Christ Returned 'in the Glory of the Father'. Jesus is the Christ. Joseph Smith was a true Prophet of God, the Church is true, and the Millennial Kingdom has come. I say this in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen!
Other Articles
Below you will find links to other articles you may wish to read in connection to this matter. I hope you will get a copy of the Brown's expose of the Tanners when it comes out in LDS bookstores. Below you will find a link about the Tanners and Ed Decker, in one of them they quote Decker writing:
"Either the Tanners are the greatest dupes in the business or bald-faced liars.(Saints Alive Newsletter, March-April 1993)
The Tanners are NO DUPES; they just HAVE dupes. They have about 50,000 of them who buy their materials and read their newsletters all the time!
You will see below also articles about Mark Hofmann; the greatest forger ever perhaps.
You will also find several articles regarding the Joseph Smith and the Baha'i Faith. I hope you read them. You will be entertained, if not convinced. Thanks for your time. Good night.
Darrick Evenson
18 February 2001
darrickevenson@yahoo.com
Articles of Interest
They Lie In Wait To Deceive Website
Was Ed Decker Poisoned? (Tanners)
Decker et al threaten Tanners with Lawsuit over 'God Makers' Part II (Tanners)
Tanners vs. God Makers II (Tanners)
The 1890-91 Prophecies of Joseph Smith FULFILLED in the Baha'i Faith!
The Baha'i Faith: An Introduction for Mormons
Jerald and Sandra Tanner (anti-Tanner websites)
Decker's Attempted 'Trojan Horsing' of a Pro-LDS Meeting
Meet Mark Hofmann
Brief Overview of Mark Hofmann Case
Decker vs. Tanners (Quotes)
Former CRI Researchers Charge Hank Hanegraaff With Fraud, Criminal Acts
31 CRI Employees Sign anti-Hank Petition