A God of Miracles (Real Mormon/LDS)

LDS.org ^ | Sister Sydney S. Reynolds

[Elsie]

Your actions show your true intent.

[Elsie]

When folks call me a liar etc on an almost daily basis do they get their comments removed and/or warned?

Sigh...

We just don't CALL you a liar; but actually POINT THEM OUT!

---

YOU should try it some time: it's LIBERATING!

[Elsie]

You are lying or delusional.

Well; he claims to NOT be a liar...

[Elsie]

Sister Sydney S. Reynolds

SISTER Sydney?

[Elsie]

Evidently so!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_S._Reynolds

 

 

She DOES tend to JUMP to conclusions though...  repeating the tired, old MORMON myth:

 

One day Joseph Smith was reading in the Bible, and this is what he read: “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him” (James 1:5). That scripture was so powerful to him! He’d never prayed out loud before, but he needed an answer and he believed the scripture. Humbly, he went to a wooded area close to his house, and he knelt down and began to pray. This was such an important prayer that the powers of darkness threatened to overwhelm this strong, young farm boy, but he cried out to God for help. As he did, a light descended and the darkness went away. Joseph saw two personages standing in the light. One of them said to him, pointing to the other, “This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!” (JS—H 1:17). It was God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ.

 

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=21bc9fbee98db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=e48fff52fc41c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

[Religion Moderator]

If you, personally, are being accused of telling a lie let me know the post number by Freepmail.

[Religion Moderator]

Thank you.

[SZonian]

"I have no dishonorable posting history unless you twist it in your mind to be so."

See? The ad hominem is embedded in the faulty assertion built upon the faulty premise. That there is no "dishonor" unless we are already guilty of a type of malfeasance - "twisting".

Sorry, not going to let you off that easy.

Instead of using more accurate terms or words like “church critic”, the word “anti-” is used as it relates to the mormons as a people, “anti-mormon”. That it is a personal prejudice. To draw parallels to many “anti-” [such as anti-semitism] pogroms from the past and currently.

It’s an incendiary word that is already loaded with negative connotations that arouses in people a reflexive response that is neither necessary or relevant, almost feral in nature.

To elicit a sympathy response from an outsider who may or may not understand what has actually been said in previous discussions, only reflexive outrage.

The persistent use of the term “Propaganda” falls into the same category.

Casting out aspersions like feed corn without providing proof to support the accusations is "dishonorable". It is a clear demonstration of the Alinsky methods of attacking the poster, not the content.

Even when confronted on the "blasphemy" episode, the attempt was made to turn it around on to me. That it was my "twisting" of what was said, etc. ad nauseum. That is "dishonorable".

The use of broad and gross generalizations against the individuals using carefully parsed words in a thinly veiled, childish and cowardly attempt to hide behind the forum rules while at the same time giving the impression that the poster is the one being "attacked".

That is "dishonorable".

It may be within forum guidelines and rules, but it is NOT "honorable".

I don't expect a TBM to give any quarter to an apostate who speaks out against the church, but don't pretend it's "honorable" to malign the poster.

[FatherofFive]

If you, personally, are being accused of telling a lie let me know the post number

It may have been me. Post 117.

PD repeatedly tells me he did something that he did not do. I tried many ways to point out the fact that he did not do what he said he did.

I suggested he/she is lying, is delusional, or devoid of logic and reason.

I believe these to be true, but they are my conclusions that should not have been written publicly.

I am sorry if I broke a rule. It is useless talking to this person, and I will not do so any more.

[MHGinTN]

There is subtle fact surfacing in the refusal to answer direct questions, but instead direct the questioner to a bank of 'approved' responses. See if this makes it clearer:

Most of the questions folks have regarding Mormonism center upon conflicts with where Mormonism deviates from Christianity; if the mormonism apologist/deceiver answers directly, they have to verify they believe the mormon version and thus show they accept the blasphemies rather than what Christianity teaches; this instantly reveals that Momronism is not Christianity, that the apologist/deceiver knows it is not Christianity, and that the apologist/deceiver is fine with that even as the LDS apologist uses Jesus' name in their demonic cult name.

It is also clear that the Parsimonious Deflector is using FreeRepublic.com to try and proselytize for this cult religion, so exposing the glaring variations from the truth of Christianity would defeat the devious purpose of the poster.

[MHGinTN]

BTW, that devious purpose is to stealthily try to suck people into a cult which knows it is not Christian while using in its name the name Jesus Christ while knowing they are established by Joseph Smith, not Jesus Christ. Whne a mormon objects to that last sentence, ask them to then show you the rituals of mormonism found explained/directed in the ‘book of mormon’ poorly written novel they call their scriptures.

[MHGinTN]

BTW, that devious purpose is to stealthily try to suck people into a cult which knows it is not Christian while using in its name the name Jesus Christ while knowing they are established by Joseph Smith, not Jesus Christ. When a mormon objects to that last sentence, ask them to then show you the rituals of mormonism found explained/directed in the ‘book of mormon’ poorly written novel they call their scriptures.

[CynicalBear]

>>There is subtle fact surfacing in the refusal to answer direct questions, but instead direct the questioner to a bank of ‘approved’ responses.<<

Actually I think it’s a dodge. They don’t want to take the view on a personal level. They divert to the written words of the church which physiologically insulates them from culpability and gives them the protection of group think. Catholics do the same thing.

[T Minus Four]

Never got an answer

Because there aren't any. It's an empty cup. But please don't stop asking!

[T Minus Four]

ETERNITY! It’s not really forever anymore (wink, wink)

[T Minus Four]

Brigham Young taught as much baloney as Joseph Smith. How anyone follows these men is beyond me.

Easy - money, sex and power.

[T Minus Four]

This is a hostile environment for LDS Church members

Well of course it it. Any religion that preaches against THE Word is seriously in enemy territory here.

Either fight like a man or beat it.

[Godzilla]

[Godzilla]

As I explained. These boards are a hostile environment. I have given you sources to find your answer so you have gotten what you wanted.

Behold the jubulation t. cornpone method of mormon witnessing - run the other direction. In the amount of TIME PD has spent obfuscating you FoF - he could have answered you several times over.

[greyfoxx39]

The anti-Mormon propaganda tries to make you think there is.