Or play with letters always demeaning the LDS with small letter...

Honey; be consistant.

The Church of Latter-day Saints should be abbreviated:

LdS; right?

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

is the official name of the religion commonly called the Mormon Church.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Hc4JlmxPCc0J:mormon.org/+official+name+latter+day+saints&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

We are sorry if our choice of FONT has confused you.

You are so right the religion guidlines no longer apply to the LDS you can call them demon whatever and it is not making it personal!

Hiss....

By their fruite ye shall know them

The rotten fruit; again?

It's the lDs THEOLOGY that is DEMONIC!

You have hit this one a couple of times, so I wanted to clear it up.

You haven't favored contrast-and-compare specifics of the branch of MORMONISM [BASIS: Your comment, May 6, 2008: I was discussing the generalization of the comparison between TWO RELIGIONS. I’m not actually discussing THE SPECIFICS of those TWO RELIGIONS, just whether it is a fair comparison to claim they are identical..If someone was arguing that some leader of FLDS compared to some leader of LDS, I wouldn’t bother to join the discussion..] Source: May 6, 2008: LDS rebut N.Y. Times Web article

That comment was in a thread about the LDS issuing a statement that the LDS practice of polygamy in the 1800s was not like what the FLDS was alleged to be doing in Texas.

I was very rude in that thread. I was snippy to people, I questioned their motives, I made sarcastic comments to them. Not exactly a model of decorum. And that was a religion thread, where I should have been better.

But that specific quote from me does not mean what you suggest. I wasn't making some profound pronouncement of my general opinion of contrasting religions. That comment was in a subthread of the article which was discussing to points: first, what the "normal" age was for marriage in the 1800s (on that point, I showed some suggestive material for a young age, said I didn't know, but thought that others who insisted it was older should provide some actual evidence for their opinion, not just keep SAYING it was true). Second, that in my specific dealings with LDS people, I found them to be in healthy monogamous families where they married at normal ages, not at all like the FLDS practice of polygamous families where they raped teenagers and forced them into marriages at young ages.

SO my argument about being "identical", and about the two religions, was NOT about the entire set of beliefs, but about the issue of whether they were identical in the specific area we were discussing.

The problem with ressurecting these arguments is that every thread is in context, and taking them out of context obscures the meaning.

I'll get back to this some other day.

Why would God command polygamy for 50 years and in the convenient demand of LDS elders to join the union suddenly have a revelation that polygamy is now verbotten?

This is not quite true: NONE of the 'scripture' has been changed, superceded, modified or excised from LdS canon.

It's STILL there.

MORMON (SLC branch) threw their GOD under the bus in favor of statehood.

Read it here for yourself - no PD links needed.

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.

Wilford Woodruff

President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

September 24th, 1890

Read the following VERY CAREFULLY!

If you can find the MORMON god telling them to STOP polygamy;

be SURE to point it out!

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!

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

Read the following VERY CAREFULLY!

If you can find the MORMON god telling them to STOP polygamy;

be SURE to point it out!

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!

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

That is a long, detailed comment, one which I would love to discuss, and which would be a great discussion for our board.

But I have to object to this entire exercise. Yes, I challenged you to back up your claim that I defended the FLDS. But this has nothing to do with that claim, or your attempt to provide evidence.

Instead, you have taken a post out of a thread from a long time ago, injected it into a thread about something entirely different, and did a detailed response to it.

If you had posted that IN the thread where the original comment was, at the time we were discussing that, it would have been great.

I think if you took those 5 points and posted them as a religious vanity, we’d have a great discussion (although you wouldn’t need my quotes for that, since your quotes from me are some straw-man “rebuttal” of your 5 points.

In general, I have disdain for the practice of making some new argument, and then finding random quotes from someone and suggesting they are “responses” to your new argument. Better to post your argument as a standalone thread, and see if I disagree with it.

Challenge #1: I encourage you -- go consult with a mainstream MORMON. Find out if the differences in what they believe are indeed ENOUGH to tell the fundamentalist MORMONS to their face that they indeed aren't "MORMON"! (After all, you may want to explain to them why they aren't ...Go ahead...do the allied work on behalf of MORMONS on this issue)

Style Guide - The Name of the Church

The official name of the Church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This full name was given by revelation from God to Joseph Smith in 1838.

While the term "Mormon Church" has long been publicly applied to the Church as a nickname, it is not an authorized title, and the Church discourages its use.

When writing about the Church, please follow these guidelines:

In the first reference, the full name of the Church is preferred: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints".
Please avoid the use of "Mormon Church", "LDS Church" or the "Church of the Latter-day Saints".
When a shortened reference is needed, the terms "the Church" or "the Church of Jesus Christ" are encouraged.
When referring to Church members, the term "Latter-day Saints" is preferred, though "Mormons" is acceptable.
"Mormon" is correctly used in proper names such as the Book of Mormon, Mormon Tabernacle Choir or Mormon Trail, or when used as an adjective in such expressions as "Mormon pioneers."
The term "Mormonism" is acceptable in describing the combination of doctrine, culture and lifestyle unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
When referring to people or organizations that practice polygamy, the terms "Mormons," "Mormon fundamentalist," "Mormon dissidents," etc. are incorrect. The Associated Press Stylebook notes: "The term Mormon is not properly applied to the other ... churches that resulted from the split after [Joseph] Smith's death."

http://beta-newsroom.lds.org/article/use-of-the-word-mormon-in-news-reports

Speaking of HYPOCRITES...

New President Thomas S. Monson, is the highest ranking official in The Mormon Church.

Left Back Row: Elder Richard G. Scott (1988) * Elder Robert D. Hales (1994) Elder Jeffrey R. Holland (1994) * President Henry B. Eyring (1995) Second Counselor, First Presidency since 2007 Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf (2004) Newly called Second Counsel

WHY won't these LOVING and CARING men reach out to the people who actually follow MORMON scripture (D&C 132) and ALLOW them to be called MORMON?

Since the SLC hierarchy is afraid of the Government and NOT of GOD, THEY should be the ones who CANNOT be called MORMONs: NOT the FUNDAMENTALISTs!

2 Nephi 3:12 Wherefore, the fruit of thy loins write; and the fruit of thy loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins of Judah, shall grow together,

2 Nephi 3:18 And the Lord said unto me also: I will raise up unto the fruit of thy loins; and I will make for him a spokesman. And I, behold, I will give unto him that he shall write the writing of the fruit of thy loins, unto the fruit of thy loins; and the spokesman of thy loins shall declare it.

Joseph Smith Translation Gen. 50: 27 Thus saith the Lord God of my fathers unto me, A choice seer will I raise up out of the fruit of thy loins, and he shall be esteemed highly among the fruit of thy loins; and unto him will I give commandment that he shall do a work for the fruit of thy loins, his brethren.

Joseph Smith Translation Gen. 50: 31 Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write, and the fruit of thy loins of Judah shall write; and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins, and also that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins of Judah, shall grow together

Diaboli virtus in lumbis ist. Diaboli virtus in lumbis ist.

The whole statement as said by bro Millet

This is on your homepage.

You just MIGHT want to SOURCE the video that it's from; it USED to be on your page; remember?

HAve I EVER thanked you enough for pointing it out to me?

Hee heeee heeeeee....

I guess what I SHOULD have said was that SOMEBODY here APPEARS to be very unhappy here on FR since all he or she SEEMS to do, IN MY OPINION, is whine, complain and gripe about the rules, the mods, the management and the other posters. PERHAPS. Nothing personal ;-)

They may ridicule

I ridicule you and your beliefs :-)

Or play with letters always demeaning the LDS with small letter

Resty, honestly, if the LDS church is THE ONE TRUE CHURCH, then how could a choice of fonts have the slightest power over it. Please.

I didn’t say anything about waterboarding babies. Mike and Debbie Pearl are famous for their advocating beating of babies and there’s family of trial now for the death of their child, while they were following the Pearl’s methods.

Growing Children God’s Way has been changed to BabyWise, because of the negative publicity.

http://kerussocharis.blogspot.com/2010/02/when-child-training-leads-to-abuse-and.html

http://ezzo.info/voices.htm

I saw some stuff about Baby Wise but didn’t know if it was the same thing.

Well, awful as the situation is with that kind of discipline, there’s something about the response of, *Well,it’s not just them. So-and-so over here does it too.* that is just inherently dishonest.

The waterboarding infants by the FLDS needs to be condemned, period. No, *if’s*, *and’s*, or *but’s*.

No distracting others with accounts of others who do bad things, too. No changing the subject to attack others. It smacks too much of excusing the FLDS and steering attention away from the rightful condemnation they deserve for it.

The Ezzo’s are not relevant to the thread. Why bring it up?

So, I checked your posting history and didn’t see any condemnation of this action.

Why not?

Are you LDS or FLDS?

You are correct.

That does not excuse what is happening here.