Replies

Seekers of truth,

If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There's an anti-Mormon group of people here that spends a great deal of their time attacking the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. They post regurgitated propaganda on an almost daily basis.

They have a misguided obsession. You can witness many different tactics employed that you might find quite interesting. The straw man argument is a big favorite and is frequently preceded by cherry-picking quotes or other material. After the "quotation" the attacker will misrepresent what has been said or what was meant and then attack their own interpretation.

They will of course insist ad nauseum that they are merely using our sources and are therefore innocent of any deceptive practice. LDS persons have no issue whatsoever having our scriptures or leaders quoted as long as it is presented fairly and accurately. This is rarely (if ever) done.

Another favorite is posting scripture or statements which on their own really present no dilemma. They make something out of nothing while never bringing up a single objection that hasn't been addressed a hundred times before.

You might note a couple of other tactics used to try to antagonize is the use of disrespectful or insulting terms or language and/or pictures. That's a Christlike thing to do right? Yeah I don't think so either. It does speak volumes about them though.

Sometimes they cruise the headlines of the day seeking any story that might be twisted into making the Church look bad. Anything will do, just watch the progression of posts following it and see what I mean.

After reading their posts, I invite you to seek the truth about whatever "issue" they seem to be "revealing" or "exposing". I promise that if you do so with honest intent, the "ahah" moments you will have will be many and frequent. You will start to recognize the tactics employed to cleverly twist and attack and will likely chuckle the more you see. In actuality, there's nothing new here. It's all been addressed many times before.

Here's a few links to get your started from a different viewpoint. I have found that the vast majority of the "issues" brought up can be found and addressed at http://www.fairlds.org/ but here's more:

http://scriptures.lds.org/
http://www.lds.org
http://www.fairlds.org/
http://www.mormonapologetics.org/
http://www.mormonwiki.com/Main_Page
http://www.lightplanet.com/response/index.html
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDS_Intro.shtml
http://www.answeringantimormons.com/index.htm
http://promormon.blogspot.com/

Now you will likely notice the "you never address our points" posts pop up as usual. All after providing the answers just as you have here.

Sometimes it is claimed that these sites present a needle in a haystack. Far from it. But if you give up before you try you won't know will you?

Will you wear blinders too? Seek truth. Find out for yourself. Want to chat with someone on any topic? A few of these sites provide just that. So do your homework sincere seeker of truth. Listen and read from both "sides". Make up your own mind.

I witness to you of these truths and wish you the best, in the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.

They have a misguided obsession.

If you cannot turn to the original Hebrew for possible meanings, it is sometimes helpful to try other translations. It is interesting to note that the Prophet Joseph Smith recommended such possible study procedures. He said:
“Our latitude and longitude can be determined in the original Hebrew with far greater accuracy than in the English version. There is a grand distinction between the actual meaning of the prophets and the present translation.” (See Documentary History of the Church, vol, 5, pp. 339–45.)
With reference to something of value noted in another translation of a part of the Bible, he once said:
“I have an old edition of the New Testament in the Latin, Hebrew, German and Greek languages. I have been reading he German and find it to be the most nearly correct translation, and to correspond nearest to the revelations which God has given to me for the last fourteen years.” (Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 614.)

From ---> http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=8003438d9b76b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

Paragon Non-Defender wrote... [clarifications added in brackets]...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Undecided readers,

If you peruse the Free Republic religion forums you will notice a pattern. There’s an anti-Mormon [former mormons who left the cult and now are Christians] group of people here that spends [devotes] a great deal of their time attacking [revealing the truth they learned about] the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints [the cult known commonly as “mormons”]. They post regurgitated propaganda [From our own mormon church official sources! When they do it, it’s propaganda. When I do it, it is official doctrine.] on an almost daily basis [actually, they do it throughout the day - that’s how much they care!].

They have a misguided obsession [understand that as I write this, I am wearing magic mormon underwear, which can be tight and tend to ride up into the crotch, so pardon my frustrations with this]. You can witness many different tactics employed that you might find quite interesting. The straw man argument [used primarily by myself and other mormons] is a big favorite and is frequently preceded by cherry-picking quotes or other material [mormons like to cherry pick from the Bible in order to appear Christian, but it’s OK when we do it!]. After the “quotation” the [mormon] attacker will misrepresent what has been said or what was meant and then attack their own interpretation.

Another favorite is posting scripture or statements which on their own really present no dilemma. They make something out of nothing [of course, I acknowledge mormonism is made up out of whole cloth and pretty crazy! Really, where can you find millions of gods in the Bible?!!] while never bringing up a single objection that hasn’t been addressed a hundred times before [of course we claim to “address it” - we can’t claim we actually answered it, since we have no facts, evidence or logic to back us up. We “address it”].

Sometimes they cruise the headlines of the day [I know this because I have X-Ray vision and can see into their homes. I watch them all, closely, vigilantly and stalk their computers] seeking any story that might be twisted into making the Church [by “Church” I mean the cult, but Church sounds more mainstream] look bad. Anything will do, just watch the progression of posts following it and see what I mean [dang, my magic underwear is getting a bit tight-sorry].

After reading their posts, I invite you to seek the truth about whatever “issue” they seem to be “revealing” or “exposing”. I promise that if you do so with honest intent, the “ahah” moments you will have will be many and frequent [many, for instance, say, “AHAH! Now I understand why those former mormons want to spread the truth of mormonism! What a wacked out religion!”]. You will start to recognize the tactics employed [by mormons] to cleverly twist and attack and will likely chuckle the more you see [I chuckle quite a bit as I fail to ever answer a question! Heh, heh!]. In actuality, there’s nothing new here. It’s all been addressed [but of course, not answered] many times before.

Here’s a few links to get your started from a different viewpoint [no doubt our young cultic missionaries have visited your home to tell you why your own church is a false church]. I have found that the vast majority of the “issues” brought up can be found and addressed [but of course not answered, since we don’t do that at mormon links, but really, you will get more objective answers at the links] below:

http://www.irr.org/mit/default.html
http://www.exmormonsforjesus.org/
http://4mormon.org/ex-mormon.php
http://www.exmormon.org/
http://www.mormoncurtain.com/

Now you will likely notice the “you never address our points” posts pop up as usual [we try our best to never actually ANSWER, but we do address them by posting links!].

All after providing the answers just as you have here [of course, these “answers” aren’t filled with any facts or evidence or logic - they are just our way of avoiding difficult issues until we have you hooked in our cult]. Will you wear blinders too [why not switch to wearing magic underwear!]? Seek truth. Find out for yourself.

[One more thing...

PLEASE NEVER ASK ME A QUESTION!!! In all likelihood, you are too ignorant to get a real answer. We save the “meat” for when you have already joined the cult!

In particular, please do not ask questions about:

1. Multiple mormon gods
2. How you can also become a mormon god
3. Celestial sex between the millions of gods
4. Mormon Jesus being created just like people or Satan
5. What the Holy Spirit (also created) did that was naughty
6. Magic underwear!
7. Really, any question. They have already been “addressed”

I post links that “address things”, but I never personally
answer a question. That would involve thought. It is much easier and cleaner to just post the official links to the cult headquarters.]

What a load of bilgewater.

I find the following assertion of yours to be a classic example of hypocrisy on display. The assertions/allegations in your post are scurrilous and puerile.

"You might note a couple of other tactics used to try to antagonize is the use of disrespectful or insulting terms or language and/or pictures."

Uh huh, sure. Anti's and any who question mormonsim accused of being accessories to murder and arson? Compared to Gadianton robbers? Compared to pigs? Being Atherosclorotic? Sociopaths? Behaving like swine? Being dishonest? Yammering mocking demons? Spewers of hate? Vermin? Twisted thinkers? Slanderers? Liars?

No antagonizing, no disrespect or insulting going on here is there? And each time a mormon poster is called on their comment, silence. No admission of responsibility. Nothing.

"That's a Christlike thing to do right?"

"Yeah I don't think so either."

"It does speak volumes about them though."

Yes, yes it most assuredly does speak volumes.

Discerning, decided readers,

Some Non Defenders Non Defend by claiming what we say has been covered over & over @ links they provide...
These Non Defenders claim these are Non issues...
...and that all you need to do is click, pop in a word in the search, click again and voila!
...”needles of wisdom” just pour forth from your computer screen...

Some Non Defenders claim one such haystack link worth investigatin' is fairlds.org...
...So when you take up this defective deflective challenge...
...and put in a phrase like “Adam-God” [re: Brigham Young's teaching that the first man, Adam, was God] in the search box of that Web site, the second entry that pops up from that search is Church doctrine/Repudiated concepts/Adam-God [This is FAIR's WIKI format attempt to address some things]

Some Non Defenders claim such entries at their links both "address" and "answer" these claims...
...yet when you check under the hood of this lemon, you get varied Lds apologists' opinion about Brigham's "Adam is God" teaching...
...like: Brigham was wrong [Joseph Smith said the very “first principle” of the Mormon gospel was to know the character of God, (King Follet funeral sermon), yet Brigham couldn't get a kindergarten identity issue down in not being able to distinguish Adam from God?]

Some Non Defenders claim such entries at their links reinforce for us such attractive snapshots of Brigham Young, such as Lds apologist Van Hale's concession that Brigham was ”mistaken” about who Adam was and that Adam, after all, was a ”complex doctrinal subject.”

Some Non Defenders claim such entries at their links love to cite Lds “apostle” letters from almost 30 years ago, letters which concede THAT BRIGHAM YOUNG, CONTRADICTED BRIGHAM YOUNG, AND THE ISSUE BECOMES ONE OF WHICH BRIGHAM YOUNG WE WILL BELIEVE. [Lds "apostle" Bruce R. McConkie, 1981 letter cited on link above]

Therefore, instead of Non Defenders just telling you outright that Lds “apostles” concede that...
Brigham Young taught falsely who God was...
But didn't always identify Adam as God...
Therefore, Brigham Young was theologically schizophrenic...
And that Brigham Young was 100% untrustworthy, because we don't know (still) which Brigham Young to believe?
...he makes you click twice, type in a word, and read an entire Mormon FAIR Wiki entry!!!

Some Non Defenders claim such entries at their links don't all agree what Mormon apologists should do about Brigham's out-of-tune “glitches” … as if you – the spiritual inquirer – just warm up and tingle all inside whenever you hear admissions from “the faithful” that their flock front man “glitches” on basic Genesis quizzes like, “Who was Adam?” But, not wanting to psychoanalyze Brigham Young as spiritually schizophrenic, what's a Mormon apologist to do?

Well, that narrows down the conclusions left for the average Mormon apologist, if you follow the links provided by some Non Defenders.

Why, if Brigham wasn't schizophrenic, what then?
Final “options?”...
The summations below precede the bracketed {actual quotations found @ one of Non Defender's links -- FAIR's WIKI entry on Adam-God being "repudiated"}

#1 Brigham was PR-challenged {“A final explanation is that Brigham Young believed and taught Adam-God...but he...didn't live long enough to 'develop' the teaching [read: spin] into something that could be reconciled with LDS scripture...”}
#2 Brigham inspired a LOT of Mormon agnostic followers about who God was: {”We don't know...In this view, we simply don't know what Brigham Young meant...”}
#3 Brigham's plain English was non-interpretable minus either a decoder ring, or dark hat, or the Joe Smith special urim and thummim {"We simply don't know what Brigham Young meant."...why that could only mean they don't know plain English!!!}
#4 Brigham's “revelation receptor” was “glitch” prone – comparable to the Ford Pinto of a later era {”An anomaly is a glitch.... A classic example of an anomaly in the LDS tradition is the so-called "Adam-God theory." -- BYU professor Stephen Robinson}
#5 Brigham inspired in the average Mormon apologist this “confessional credo”: “How do we Mormons deal with these questions? We don't. We abandon them...like we abandon you the inquirer...like we abandon the questions on FR.” {”So how do Latter-day Saints deal with the phenomenon? WE DON'T; WE SIMPLY SET IT ASIDE.” – BYU professor Stephen Robinson}

Such “gems of wisdom” await you all...all at the multiple click of a mouse!