[Godzilla]

Linked by whom? The only ones I have known to use the phrase are enemies of the LDS church. I have never known Latter-day Saints to use it, much less recommend it.

Oh really logos. Fact of the matter is even apostle Oaks (1993) admits that mormons refer to this BY NAME -

Some have suggested that it is morally permissible to lie to promote a good cause. For example, some Mormons have taught or implied that lying is okay if you are lying for the Lord. . . . . As far as concerns our own church and culture, the most common allegations of lying for the Lord swirl around the initiation, practice, and discontinuance of polygamy.

He then goes on to justify it. Then he becomes conflicted and recants. Guess he just can't get it out of his system. He admits to the mormon practice BY NAME Logos.

The whole 'milk before meat' schick - Packer ("The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect") commented ". The scriptures teach emphatically that we must give milk before meat. The Lord made it very clear that some things are to be taught selectively and some things are to be given only to those who are worthy." So don't tell the "whole truth" if it would lead anyone to doubt the claims of mormonism. Yet this is exactly what mormons do - right logos - tell half truths. Here is a prime example -

Time interview on August, 1997 Hinkley said:

"Q: Just another related question that comes up is the statements in the King Follett discourse by the Prophet. "Hinckley: Yeah

"Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?

"Hinckley: I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don't know a lot about it and I don't know that others know a lot about it." (Time Magazine original transcript, Aug 4, 1997)

Come on logos - lying for the lord? Bob Millet continues to encourage the practice to missionaries even today.

[Logophile]

I must admit that I had not read the Oaks talk, so I looked it up on the Internet and found a transcript HERE. (Disclaimer: I cannot vouch for the source or accuracy of the transcript.) Too bad you did not quote more of what Elder Oaks said. You might have included the following paragraphs from the talk:

I ask myself, “If some of these Mormon leaders or members lied, therefore, what?” I reject a “therefore” which asserts or implies that this example shows that lying is morally permissible or that lying is a tradition or even a tolerated condition in the Mormon community or among the leaders of our church. That is not so.

I suppose most mortals employ some exaggeration and a little of what someone called “innocent after-mindedness.” But does this mean we condone deliberate and important misrepresentations of fact in a circumstance in which they are clearly intended to be believed and relied upon? Never! Lying is sinful, as it has always been, and there is no exempt category for so-called “lying for the Lord.” Lying is simply outside the range of permitted or condoned conduct by Latter-day Saints—members or leaders.

Elder Oaks does not justify "lying for the Lord." Far from it—he says that such behavior is sinful and impermissible.

So I must amend my previous statement about "lying for the Lord." Except for a speech by Elder Oaks in which he denounces the notion of "lying for the Lord," I have never known Latter-day Saints to use the phrase, much less recommend the practice.