New Mormon anti-freeper site and campaign to bankrupt FR

rumor mill | March 29, 2009 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

I understand there is a new anti-freeper site started by disgruntled former and present Mormon FReepers and it is their intention of bankrupting FR during the coming Freepathon by withholding their donations and disrupting our activities. Well, all I can say is, if they feel that badly against FR, by all means they should withhold their donations and drop out of FR. But it they attempt to disrupt our operations I will guarantee they will no longer be members of FR. If that is their wish, so be it.

I'm not going to try to defend FR from their claims of religious persecution, but I will say that Mormons have and always have had free reign to post their threads on FR just as all other religious groups have enjoyed. Free Republic defends the right to freedom of religion and has always welcomed religious discussion and always will. And Mormons have always been welcome here. I have absolutely nothing against Mormons.

If you are one who has left or is leaving, I wish you well, but disruption of FR is not welcome and will not be tolerated.

And this is not the first time such activity has been attempted by groups of disgruntled former FReepers. Good luck with that. There is always some group that feels FR should be bent to their way of thinking and end up saying my way or the highway. Well, I don't know about you, but I'm not changing so I guess it's the highway. Is it Feb 8 yet?

God bless.

[Elsie]

Do you think the readers will agree with you?

 

  Time will tell...

---

---

1890: Manifesto (a statement denouncing polygamy)

"Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriage...I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws..."

~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President

---

---

 

The Mormon church Organization; based in Salt Lake City, does not practice Polygamy any more.

They decided to stop the practice for fear of losing all their worldly goods.

It was banned in 1890!.

  

---

---

---

 

 

    OFFICIAL DECLARATION—1

To Whom It May Concern:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy—

I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

---

---

---

President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:

“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.

Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.

---

---

---

 

EXCERPTS FROM THREE ADDRESSES BY
PRESIDENT WILFORD WOODRUFF
REGARDING THE MANIFESTO

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. (Sixty-first Semiannual General Conference of the Church, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2.)

It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by the inspiration of Almighty God. If they do not do it that way, they cannot do it at all. . . .

I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. . . .

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . . . any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.

. . . I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . . .

I leave this with you, for you to contemplate and consider. The Lord is at work with us.

(Cache Stake Conference, Logan, Utah, Sunday, November 1, 1891. Reported in Deseret Weekly, November 14, 1891.)

 

 

 

Now I will tell you what was manifested to me and what the Son of God performed in this thing. . . . All these things would have come to pass, as God Almighty lives, had not that Manifesto been given. Therefore, the Son of God felt disposed to have that thing presented to the Church and to the world for purposes in his own mind. The Lord had decreed the establishment of Zion. He had decreed the finishing of this temple. He had decreed that the salvation of the living and the dead should be given in these valleys of the mountains. And Almighty God decreed that the Devil should not thwart it. If you can understand that, that is a key to it.

 

(From a discourse at the sixth session of the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple, April 1893. Typescript of Dedicatory Services, Archives, Church Historical Department, Salt Lake City, Utah.)

 

---

 

 

 

 

What kind of  'Leadership' is THIS???

 

compared to...

 

 

 

 

Hebrews 11:35-40
 35.  Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.
 36.  Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison.
 37.  They were stoned ; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated--
 38.  the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. 
 

 

or compared to...

 

Acts 4:19.  But Peter and John replied, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God.

 

---

---

 

So much for an 'Everlasting Covenant' that thundered out of Heaven!!!

 

Well; it DID last about 47 years!

[luckystarmom]

Thank you Utah Girl. If I’ve ever been offensive, then I apologize. (I also voted for Romney in the California primaries, so I’m in shock that I’m on the list.)

[greyfoxx39]

They will come after the

before they get around to you...that should give you some time to reflect on your misbehavior. ;)

[Vroomfondel]

I’m on the list. How in the heck????

Me, too. And I'm Mormon. Still scratching my head over that one.

[Elsie]

 

Sadly, too many Mormons don't realize the extent of blasphemies spewed by Joe Smith and his successors.

 

Let me help a bit then...

---

First Nephi

 

God told Lehi to look at the  ball and read the words written upon it. And when he read the words "he did fear and tremble exceedingly." 16:26

The pointers on the ball work according to the faith of its user. 16:28

And the words written on the ball change according to the faith of its user. 16:29

So Nephi found his way to the top of the mountain by following the instructions that were written on the ball. 16:30

 

 

 

"It's better to know nothing than to know what ain't so."
--Josh Billings

[Drango]

Mrs Drango went to a campaign rally for Romney, shook his hand and wrote him a check. But I’m on the list too.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

ƃuıɥɔʇɐʍ puɐ ƃuılıǝɔ ǝɥʇ uo ƃuıpıɥ ɹǝʞɹɐɯǝɔɐld ʎʇılıqısıʌuı ɟo ʞɐolɔ ɐɾuıu

 

[luckystarmom]

That’s what I’m thinking. I don’t think that pointing out they are different than other Christian denominations is the same as hating.

Heck, Catholics and Protestants are different, and pointing out that doesn’t mean that I hate Catholics.

[Godzilla]

That’s what I’m thinking. I don’t think that pointing out they are different than other Christian denominations is the same as hating. Heck, Catholics and Protestants are different, and pointing out that doesn’t mean that I hate Catholics.

We are not dealing with rational individuals here (or rather there - they got zotted here). By their definition ANY opposition to mormonism brands one an anti.

[luckystarmom]

My husband’s family is Mormon. I know they were some of the original settlers in Utah. I think his dad was raised in the Mormon church, but became an atheist. My husband was raised Lutheran. I think we’re both interested in the Mormon church because of his family’s background.

[AmericanArchConservative]

SENTINEL

You hit several nails on the head, and as evidenced by the (type of) responses generated from your understanding of the religious world you formerly inhabited, your knowledge of its secrets which exist for no sensible reason whatsoever is also spot on.

When any person could have normal Christianity, with assurance of salvation PROMISED ABSOLUTELY by G_d, as a gift from which He will not repent,

guaranteed by the once for all people, for all time sacrifice of His only Begotten Son who blessedly BECAME sin itself for us

- taking away all our burden and all our guilt...

Why would they want to willingly accept a lesser substitute which required (often unachievably) more from them with a lesser guarantee, more frustrations, more arcane rules imposed after the fact...

Why embrace something which withholds such a significant amount of (apparently needful) information from so many average and newly initiated members - as closely guarded secrets?

Although there are many passages of the Bible that are difficult to read and fully understand, the Lord has withheld NOTHING from us - now, or ever, which He deemed necessary for our salvation.

This is NOT the case with the doctrines of mormonism, replete with secret information, secret understandings stemming from that secret information, secret ceremonies grown from that information and the understanding of it - all of which CANNOT/MUST NOT be openly discussed, etc...

Under the guise of having been labeled “sacred”

The good Lord surely knew that there would be many among us of less than average intellectual means, and many who would through their earthly lives, lack power, wealth and influence sufficient to buy a perfect enough sacrificial animal in the temple courts, or acquire “hidden knowledge”.

And so He, in His wisdom - made certain that salvation was FREE, easy to grasp, and available to all - even children, and the “lowly” of society.

There is no trick, there are no secret doctrines that guarantee a higher level of heaven, and regardless of the agendas of men in ANY denomination, there has never been a colour or a gender barrier standard for salvation in Christ.

ANYONE who claims any differently does not speak G_d’s truth.

Why, therefore, would anyone want to have their daughter submit to the hand-applied oil anointing of “personal areas”, when it has no valid scriptural purpose?

The only proscriptions for anointing a person with oil are for physical healing from sickness (not the purpose in the unholy secret ceremony your document’s redacted passage alluded to) or as a symbol of the infilling of the Holy Spirit, for ordination in ministry - such as being made a legitimate prophet, bishop, minister, or teacher in service to the Lord.

Correct me if my investigations into LDS lore and tradition have misinformed me, but the anointing you sought to bar with your custody agreement had nothing to do with either of those specific kinds of anointing, right?!

I congratulate you for being astute enough to ensure your children are safeguarded against the invasiveness of privacy of worthless, non-biblical, unG_dly traditions cloaked in a veil of secrecy.

Ooooh-Rahhh! Job well-done, Marine!

A.A.C.

[1000 silverlings]

Astute observation. Heck I’m related to the Archbishop of Denver but I still don’t agree with his beliefs

[jla]

"They think you belong in hell.
What did you expect? A cookie?"

"LOL"

[Vroomfondel]

I think his dad was raised in the Mormon church, but became an atheist.

I tried to be an atheist for a while, but couldn't quite do it. Came crawling back.

[greyfoxx39]

Thank you for your post and your support of Sentinel.

[LiteKeeper]

We are not Mormon-haters. Mormons are created in the image of God, as we all are. What we hate is the false system of religion that they are caught up in.

[humblegunner]

Came crawling back.

What religion requires you to crawl?

[Vroomfondel]

What religion requires you to crawl?

Requires? None that I'm aware of.

[SENTINEL]

Thanks for the encouragement.

The "annointing" of oil in the temple is for none of the reasons you mention. It is done to girls as well as men. It is applied while you stand disrobed, on places normally covered with underwear.

Although it is watered down now, I think it was nothing more than a con by Joseph Smith in the beginning to see and touch young women on their wedding day. Reminds me of the "Prima Noctu" in the movie Braveheart....

[Godzilla]

I think his dad was raised in the Mormon church, but became an atheist.

If you read the stories of (too) many exmormons, many become atheistic as a reaction to the discovery that their faith is false and do not want to have anything to do with 'god' anymore.