bluebell

Watched the 2025 Anaconda movie with hubby and the littles last night. It's the one with Jack Black and Paul Rudd and some other well known actors. It was pretty entertaining and some parts will make you laugh out loud. It was also fun because it had some cameos from a couple actors from the 1990s movie (which was not a comedy). It's silly but fun, and you can rent it for $5.99 on amazon prime so a good deal. It's rated pg-13 and had the obligatory F word and lots of SH words but refreshingly there was zero sex or nudity and zero sexual or crude humor (other than maybe one scene that involves one of the friends having to pee on another friend because of a spider bite, some would probably find that crude).

Doing some extra research and not just copying and pasting stuff from questionable sources would go a long way toward answering a lot of your questions. First, this is an article from a church magazine which was printed in 1945. That right there should have given you pause in using it for any reason. Second, this is trotted out often in anti circles because they think it's a big gotcha, but it's not. When this was published, the backlash in the church and out of it was pretty big. Members and nonmembers were upset because it taught something so incredibly dumb. One nonmember even wrote a letter to then Prophet and president of the church George Albert about it. He responded to the letter, and this is what he said-- Hope that helps you understand this concept a little better.

I never understand when people in other churches accuse us of believing that everyone will have to become 'mormon' to be saved.

Thanks Ken!

Oh definitely. The church has really pushed this year for us to put special effort into remembering Christ from Christmas to Easter, to help us do better as a membership than we have in the past with treating Easter just as big of a deal and important as Christmas.

It’s more likely that it’s your understanding of our doctrine that contradicts and not our doctrine itself. 😊

I read a quote from Brigham Young that talks about how after Christ returns all the churches will still exist. There will still be Muslims, Buddhist, Baptists, etc. Because all good people will still be here on the Earth and will still be the same as they were before He came. Everything will take time, even becoming a Zion people. I need to see if I can find the quote now. I found it so interesting!

Why would anyone care if it was a "mormon thing" or not?

I’ve personally only heard it brought up once. It was in a church setting and it was said by an older member. This was back in 1997 and they were probably in their 60s at that time. It’s the only time that I can ever remember a teacher stopping a lesson and flat out refuting what somebody had said. Normally if somebody says something off the wall in a class the teacher tries to step around it or softly push back, but this teacher flat out said that that sentiment was wrong and not acceptable. The teacher was an institute teacher by profession though, so maybe he felt very comfortable correcting someone in class where other members might not.

Back in 1998 the church published an article explaining that the term (which comes from verses in the Book of Mormon) cannot be applied to any church. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1988/01/warring-against-the-saints-of-god?lang=eng In my opinion there is no excuse for any member still trotting out this old anti-catholic sentiment.

It would be interesting to compare the two economies in a fairer fight. The US economy was about 100 years old at this point and included many different industries. The Utah economy was about 20 years old at the latest. And had much fewer ways to make money than the entirety of the rest of the country did. Which isn’t to say that the outcome wouldn’t end up being the same. I just don’t know how accurately we can judge when the parameters are so different for the two entities. It seems like it would be like trying to compare the economy of a town with a few thousand people to the economy of a state with a few million. But maybe in her paper she controlled for the disparity?

No, I don’t think you lied. I also don’t think you really cared if it was true or not, and I think when you found out it wasn’t true that you downplayed the inaccuracy and pivoted to another angle (again, without really caring if it was true or not) to attempt to make the same case.

Such a hard thing. He’s blessed to have you.

I haven't read all of your statements so would never make such a claim. But what I have read, you've never been very open to be corrected. One example on this thread is where it was pointed out that Wilcox was never a general authority. You downplayed the correction and made another argument about how it didn't really matter that you had gotten it wrong. Finally, when the poster Jay asked "can you give me a link to the church's general authority's statement that everyone else is "playing" church?" You provided a link to the Wilcox talk, which you knew was not a link to a GA's statement (because he's not a GA) without bothering to correct Jay's misunderstanding, illustrating that you don't really care about presenting correct information at all.

Easter is also a part of Holy Week, and we've always celebrated Easter, right? Just because something shares the same time frame of Holy Week doesn't mean we are celebrating Holy Week. Holy Week is a very specific religious observance. It's the last week of Lent and has specific events celebrated throughout the week on different days. Holy Wednesday or Spy Wednesday marks the betrayal of Jesus, for example, and Holy Thursday or Maunday Thursday celebrates the last supper. Holy Friday is also know as Good Friday and focuses on the Passion of Jesus. Holy Saturday focuses on His death and descent into Hell. As the churches statement correctly conveys, we don't celebrate or have any religious observances that go throughout the week. Could this be a case where you weren't exactly aware of what Holy Week was and conflated the observance of Palm Sunday and Easter with an observance of Holy Week?

You and I, and everybody else who has read your posts, know that you are not open to correction.

Palm Sunday is biblical though.

Are you suggesting that Palm Sunday is creedal? I’m not sure I’m following your reasoning right.

We have quite a few ex Mormons on the board who post with integrity. I don’t always agree with them, but I always respect their voices and appreciate their contributions here. I agree that he’s angry and here to spread that anger around as much as he can, but just because he’s not a true believing latter day saint doesn’t mean he can’t be honest in his approach.

If you really were the active member that you claim to be, then you would know that all of these issues are very nuanced, and many (like the stuff in the refuted 'mormon doctrine' book, are historical at this point). That you pretend they aren't nuanced is another example of the half truths you like to portray as whole fact in your posts. Either you know what you are doing, and should try to be more honest in your approach. Or you don't know what you are doing because you don't know as much about our doctrine as you thought you did, and you should try to be more honest in your approach by admitting that. Like mustardseed said, there's plenty for you to sincerely and honestly criticize and complain about if that's brings you joy.

It's kind of your MO in your posts but as far as this thread is concerned, you implied that the church teaches or believes that the Catholic church is the "whore of all the earth" spoken of in the scriptures when we don't. We have had leaders who associated the two in the distant past, but the church has refuted that. You implied that the church believes that Everyone else is “playing church” according to a recent statement by an lds general authority when the church doesn't believe that, it wasn't said by a GA, was said in a fireside and not authoritatively, and many members of the church thought it was horrible that he said it. You also stated that the counselors in the general YM's presidency are in a position of very high influence with the youth… esp juvenile male priesthood holders when they serve for about 3 years before they are replaced, are quickly forgotten, and most of us (active members and not) could not name more than 2-3 who served in that position over the last 20 years without having to look them up (and Wilcox would be one of the 2-3). Same goes for those who served as the president. They are leaders but I don't know that anyone would classify them as in a position of high influence. They hardly ever even speak in General Conference. You also implied that the church believes/teaches that all other churches are an abomination and we don't do that either. I think those are enough examples in the four posts of yours that I've read in the thread.

Exactly. The embellishments and half truths that are are fond of throwing out there to try to make your points are your bad.

I loved that show as a teen. It was one of the first VHS that I ever owned. I haven't seen it in ages though.

That statement was made in 2022 during a church fireside and he got a lot of flak for the comment (and others he made during that talk) because it is not something the church teaches or most members believe. He also was not a general authority. He was a counselor in the YM's general presidency. A leader for sure, but not a GA.

Hugs to you too morgan.