Oh come on, Tadpole. That letter was never meant to be taken seriously and I admitted it was fake as soon as I saw someone take it seriously.
It was supposed to be written over the top so people would know it was a joke. That was not a ‘lie’ or an attempt to seriously deceive. It was a PARODY. OY.
However, that people did take it seriously, says more about the control Mormonism shows over its members than it does about us.
Re - your other comments - none of those are lies either. You seem to be holding us to a standard that Mormons don’t hold each other or their leaders to.
And your implication that I ‘lie for Jesus’ is libel. I have NEVER EVER EVER lied on this forum. Nor would I.
I was going to make a resolution to not post lies on FR; but then realized most of my Official MORMON Sources would become useless.
It was supposed to be written over the top so people would know it was a joke. That was not a ‘lie’ or an attempt to seriously deceive. It was a PARODY. OY.
However, that people did take it seriously, says more about the control Mormonism shows over its members than it does about us.
Re - your other comments - none of those are lies either. You seem to be holding us to a standard that Mormons don’t hold each other or their leaders to.
And your implication that I ‘lie for Jesus’ is libel. I have NEVER EVER EVER lied on this forum. Nor would I.
I guess we need to look at the level of the statements.
Some things are factual, true statements. "Many Mormons currently live in Utah" is an example of something that nobody would disagree with (at least nobody sane). They need no further explanation to put them into context.
Other things are factual, but require additional information to explain to non-informed observers. "Mormons teach that Jesus is Satan's older brother" would be an example of this. Once you include the additional information that Mormons also teach that everybody is family through a pre-earth-life creation, then it makes more sense (or at least explains the context even if you disagree with it). I see this similar as the statement "Catholics are cannibals" without explaining their teachings on transubstantiation.
Then there are statements that are flat out incorrect. "Mormons do not sing Christmas Carols" or "mentions of the Cross are deleted from the mormon versions [of hymns]" or "Mormons have horns" are examples of these (yes, I have met people who actually believe that last one). I guess we can discuss the intention of the person making the statement. To me it is a lie regardless, but if it is malicious then it fits into the "lies for Jesus" category. If it is made through ignorance or bad education, it probably would not fit in the ""lies for Jesus" category.
Then there is your letter. It was intended as humor, and was therefore not a malicious lie, and you did acknowledge the falsely claimed source. However, the thread itself records a slightly different version than you present here. You admitted it was fake in response to my pointing out that it was fake. Your replies in post 74 and 75 of that thread shows your reaction.
And here we come to my point in all this. Had I not challenged the truthfulness of that letter (and the other statements I pointed out) they would have stood as presented unchallenged, and non-informed observers might have believed them to be truth instead of "flat-out-incorrect" statements.
I apologize if my stance seems like I am implying that you "lie for Jesus." And I do not recall any malicious lies from you (and I thank you for that). But an unchallenged incorrect statement can do as much damage as a lie. If the opposite of truth is lie, then what is an incorrect, untrue statement? Even if it is said in jest?
I would love to have a civil mature discussion on our differences. Alas, this forum (and most any other public place) does not lend itself to this effort. So all I try to do, when I have time, is point out or challenge the flat-out lies - err, incorrect statements.