LDS

[Shalamar]

As I have previously mentioned many times. This thread is LDS. Anti Mormon propaganda is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

Actually, you are very wrong. The title of this thread, is LDS. This includes discussion on the current church, the past church, potential future church. It also will include discussion of the positive, and negative aspects of the church. It will also contain references to what you call 'Anti Mormon Propaganda' as they relate to the LDS church. Fortunately, we have others on this thread who, unlike you, are Mormon, or Ex-Mormon who are willing to discuss the LDS church.

Perhaps you should start a thread titled 'The LDS church is the best thing ever, and here we will talk only about how great it is, and only positive aspects so I can preach about it'.

 

[deaman]

Janadele -

In order to "discuss" Mormonism, you have to look at it from all perspectives, otherwise it is not a discussion, it is just preaching.

This site is NOT for preaching. If you want to preach, why not start a blog.

Do you really not understand what the JREF skeptical site is all about? It says right in the header, at the top of every page.

A place to discuss skepticism, critcal thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly and lively way.

Discuss, not preach.

 

[tsig]

As I have previously mentioned many times. This thread is LDS. Anti Mormon propaganda is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

The "anti-mormon site" you're denouncing is a Mormon apologetic site put up by the Mormon church.

Looks like you're on the outs from your own church.

 

[Cleon]

As I have previously mentioned many times. This thread is LDS.

And as you have been told many times, that includes criticism of LDS, regardless of whether you consider it "anti-Mormon propaganda" or not.

The fact remains that the Book of Mormon hypothesis is contradicted by virtually everything we know about that period, from flora and fauna to agriculture and technology. This is not "anti-Mormon propaganda," this is reality.

The fact remains that none of the hieroglyphs inscribed on the "Book of Abraham matches Joseph Smith's "translation." This is not "anti-Mormon propaganda," this is reality.

And the fact remains that LDS' apologetics and excuses for these problems are completely unsatisfactory to anyone to give it a second's critical thinking. Which is why LDS seems to be having an Internet problem.

Interesting bit from the article:

When fellow believers in Sweden first began coming to him with information from the Internet that contradicted the church’s history and teachings, he dismissed it as “anti-Mormon propaganda,” the whisperings of Lucifer.

Is the specific phrase "anti-Mormon propaganda" promoted by the Church in some way? That would explain some things.

 

[RandFan]

Anti Mormon propaganda...

Ad hominem poisoning of the well. Your argument is a fallacy. BTW: B.H. Roberts was a Mormon in good standing and church leader. You can't honestly state that his writing are anti-Mormon propaganda. Criticism and facts contrary to your belief are not anti-Mormon propaganda.

...is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

This is a skeptics site. The site is not censorious and there is no prior restraint. Unlike the Mormon Church, the JREF allows everyone to speak their minds freely so long as they abide by their membership agreement.

It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

More ad hominem poisoning the well.

The JREF is not here for you to post unchallenged commentary and apologetics. The JREF is here for discussion of issues. Often that results in an adversarial process. That's a good thing. Think of it as the free market of ideas. And BTW, you are here of your own free will and choice.

 

[jsfisher]

As I have previously mentioned many times. This thread is LDS. Anti Mormon propaganda is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

Janadele,

Please give careful consideration to whom in this thread has caused the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the most damage. Here's a hint: It would be the person expressing the most bigotry, hostility, and hatred in the name of religious zealotry, along with deliberate derail, evasion, and general unwillingness to discus the basic topic of this thread.

So, if you were truly interested in stopping the anti-Mormon propaganda in this thread, you'd stop posting. Problem solved.

 

[Slowvehicle]

As I have previously mentioned many times. This thread is LDS. Anti Mormon propaganda is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

Which is fine, because I do not belong to, or subscribe to, a "cult" of "anti-mormonism", no matter how loudly you want to make that false accusation.

On the other hand, I would truly apprecitate it if you would answer my questions:

What, in your opinion, gives the CJCLDS (just to make sure you don't misunderstand, I am using "CJCLDS" to refer to "The Curch of Jesus Christ of Latter~Day Saints) license to impose the "rules" (which themselves state that they apply to "members") upon non-members? Would you support some other church imposing its strictures upon mormons?

Why is what goes on among consenting adults in my demesne any more your business that what goes on among members in the fastness of your temples any of my business?

What is it about your "rules" that makes it so important to you to try and make sure that everyone must play by them, even when they are not playing with you, nor in your ambit?

Again I ask the question you have never answered: How can anything that happens among consenting adults in the privacy of my home affect you, in any way at all?

 

[deaman]

Janadele -

Your posting has more damage to the credibility of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, than any other postings I have ever seen, anywhere.

I, for one, appreciate you.

Thank you.

 

[Pup]

On a related tangent, where did the LDS concept come from in the first place? Yes, obviously it originated with Joe Smith but did it spring whole cloth from his imagination or was there already at the time an urban mythos about "Lost Tribes" and Native Americans? Did he invent something new or simply feed off an already established bit of woo?

It had been around for a while. Search the thread for "Adair" and I think it was discussed earlier.

 

[Cat Tale]

This thread is LDS. Anti Mormon propaganda is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

You haven't responded to my post , which is calling you out for saying the hollow earth is LDS doctrine. Again, to save you the time and trouble of going back to all the individual posts I'll summarize it. If you'd like to see the posts in context you can go to the above link, each of the following posts is linked so you can see the exact wording.

Based on the thread on the Heart of the Earth, GeneMachine asked on the LDS thread if the "hollow earth" was LDS doctrine. Pup responded that it would be difficult to find any sources in the LDS scriptures because it's not LDS doctrine. You then posted a list of 5 references from the D&C, four which have the term "in the earth," the fifth has a similar wording. When Pakeha asked if you were saying that the hollow earth formed a part of LDS doctrine, you replied with the D&C is LDS doctrine. That seems to imply that you're saying the "hollow earth" is LDS doctrine. When four others asked if that was what you were saying, you would not come back and say, "no." So in effect, by simply refusing to answer the several questions, the only assumption that one can take away is that you're saying it *is* LDS doctrine. How is that "gross misrepresentation" of your words?

BTW, I'm not anti-Mormon, I'm a faithful member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in good standing, and hold a current temple recommend. And no, I won't let this one go. You keep saying that this thread is only about LDS doctrine, and now you've said something that certainly isn't LDS doctrine. I'd like to know what you meant by giving those scriptures, your response about the D&C being Church doctrine, and then refusing to correct the following questions with even a simple, "no."

 

[Janadele]

Actually, you are very wrong. The title of this thread, is LDS. .

Yes, the title of this thread is LDS, and as the instigator of this thread it is not I who am wrong, nor have I any interest nor intention of discussing the cult of Anti-Mormonism which has hyjacked this thread.

 

[Shalamar]

Yes, the title of this thread is LDS, and as the instigator of this thread it is not I who am wrong, nor have I any interest nor intention of discussing the cult of Anti-Mormonism which has hyjacked this thread.

You also ignored the rest of my post.

You are still wrong.

If you are not interested in discussing your church, that is your prerogative. The rest of us will continue to discuss it without you, and we do understand that you are running away, with your tail tucked between your legs.

There is no 'cult of anti-mormonism', and this thread is about the discussion of the LDS church. Not to preach about it. Sometimes, discussion means asking uncomfortable questions, and pointing out falsehoods.

You have done more damage to your church here than you could possibly understand.

 

[tsig]

Yes, the title of this thread is LDS, and as the instigator of this thread it is not I who am wrong, nor have I any interest nor intention of discussing the cult of Anti-Mormonism which has hyjacked this thread.

Since you view any questions as anti-Mormon you would seem to have encased yourself in an impenetrable bubble.

 

[bruto]

Yes, the title of this thread is LDS, and as the instigator of this thread it is not I who am wrong, nor have I any interest nor intention of discussing the cult of Anti-Mormonism which has hyjacked this thread.

Are you under the delusion that being the starter and namer of a thread entitles you to set rules other than those of the rest of the forum? Maybe you should look around a little. It's not uncommon for people to begin threads with other contentions, such as that Bigfoot is abroad, or that they have figured out the secrets of the universe, or that Jinns are real, or that only idiots believe in evolution, and so forth. They too are very sincere. Do you really think the purpose of these forums and these threads is simply for all who agree to bow down and say "yassuh, boss?"

 

[Slowvehicle]

Yes, the title of this thread is LDS, and as the instigator of this thread it is not I who am wrong, nor have I any interest nor intention of discussing the cult of Anti-Mormonism which has hyjacked this thread.

Janadele:

If it meet and proper that some of the "rules" that govern members of the CJLDS be enforced upon non-members, why not all of them? Where is your drive to extirpate coffee and other hot drinks from Utah, and other states?
Where is your drive to reinstate Prohibition?
Where is your drive to make tobacco illegal in all the states?
Where is your drive to reinstate Blue Laws in all the states?
Where is your deal to impose weekly fasting upon all Americans?

Why is it that you are so selective in which of the "rules" you want non-members to be bound by?

 

[desertgal]

As I have previously mentioned many times. This thread is LDS. Anti Mormon propaganda is not the subject of this thread, and has nothing whatsoever to do with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It has no relation to the topic of this thread, and if the Anti Mormons had any scruples or honesty at all they would start their own thread... a good title would be "The Cult of Anti-Mormonism."

As has been explained to you numerous times, this is not YOUR thread. YOU don't get to dictate what is discussed here. As long as we abide by the MA, discussion of all aspects of the Mormon church, including criticism, is allowed.

If all you want is a platform to preach and spew hate and bigotry with people who will bow down and take everything that you say as gospel, go join an LDS forum. This is a forum for critical thinking, and that's what we do here.

 

[desertgal]

Yes, the title of this thread is LDS, and as the instigator of this thread it is not I who am wrong, nor have I any interest nor intention of discussing the cult of Anti-Mormonism which has hyjacked this thread.

Then leave.

 

[Pixel42]

If the Book of Mormon was true it would not contain anachronisms. Mormons would not be in the position of having to either construct elaborate and implausible rationalisations or scream "anti-Mormon propaganda!" and stick their heads in the sand when simple facts are pointed out.

If the Book if Mormon was true every new discovery (DNA analysis, archaeological digs etc) would provide collaborative evidence. Mormons would not be in the position of having to either construct elaborate and implausible rationalisations or scream "anti-Mormon propaganda!" and stick their heads in the sand when simple facts are pointed out.

 

[jsfisher]

If the Book of Mormon was true it would not contain anachronisms. Mormons would not be in the position of having to either construct elaborate and implausible rationalisations or scream "anti-Mormon propaganda!" and stick their heads in the sand when simple facts are pointed out.

If the Book if Mormon was true every new discovery (DNA analysis, archaeological digs etc) would provide collaborative evidence. Mormons would not be in the position of having to either construct elaborate and implausible rationalisations or scream "anti-Mormon propaganda!" and stick their heads in the sand when simple facts are pointed out.

So, in essence, what you are saying is that facts are anti-Mormon propaganda.

 

[Hawk one]

You're all wrong. This is propaganda: