Church Of The Devil: An Authoritative Definition

[selek]

I think there is sufficient sin within the Church we don't need to spend our time and energy identifying it in other churches or institutions. Clean the inner vessel.

Good idea- YOU go first.

Since two thirds of your three posts here have been critical of the Church and the Saints, I think there is ample precedent for the suggestion of hypocrisy (if not trolling) on your part.

I rest my case. You just did exactly what I asked about in one of my other posts. You attacked me as being the problem. I am a member but have little desire to continue associating with people like you. I think I'll return the Methodists, they are at least Christian in their behavior.

How is my behavior any less "Christian" than yours, Truthin?

It is you who came here and used three of your four posts to identify the problems you "see" in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its members.

You aren't interested in introspection or in dealing with the beam in your own eye- you're far too worried about the mote in ours.

I somehow doubt you would be much more welcome in the Methodist Church. Perhaps you might try a group of Pharisees, instead. Your behavior is more consistent with the latter then the former.

[cinepro]

Nephi's writing -- like the words of John in the Book of Revelation, to which it is similar -- is archetypal and apocalyptic in nature. That is, it refers to the eternal battle of good vs. evil, truth vs. error. To limit it to any specific church or organzation is to view it myopically.

But doesn't Nephi do just that when he specifically says it is a church, and specifically says that it isn't every church, but one specific church that is seperate from other churches? If it were a group of people, wouldn't he use the generic term "people" as is done elsewhere in the BoM?

Church isn't a general term. It refers to a specific group of people, and the "myopic" would have to be Nephi's or Joseph Smith's.

It's awesome that you disagree with it, but your redefinition just doesn't fit with what the book actually says.

FWIW, I really like bluebell's "Two Church of the Devil" theory. Apparently, there are as many Church of the Devil theories as there are Hill Cumorahs.

[Pantsman]

You aren't interested in introspection or in dealing with the beam in your own eye- you're far too worried about the mote in ours.

I somehow doubt you would be much more welcome in the Methodist Church. Perhaps you might try a group of Pharisees, instead. Your behavior is more consistent with the latter then the former.

Does anyone else find these statements very hypocritical?

It's like an ad-hominem bonanza in here, can we stay on topic folks. I believe the topic is the LDS trying to squirm out of the Church of the Devil edict. To anyone who has read Nephi I and Nephi II, there's really no getting around it. The LDS have clearly stated all other Christians are serving the devil, and only LDS are Christians. At least a few here have guts enough to admit that's what was taught, including one of your most respected GA's. I agree with Catholic Girl it will take a few more centuries to complete the whitewash of this one.

[Scott Lloyd]

I don't believe that is a fair or accurate characterization of LDS doctrine. And, for the record, I don't share BC Space's conclusions on this subject.

Then I'm really not sure what would be a fair and accurate characterization of LDS doctrine, given the authoritative definition with which you commenced.

Perhaps you can clarify?

Best.

CKS

Not certain I understand why it needs clarification. Read the definition quoted in the opening post and tell me how you get "Catholic Church" out of it. Then, perhaps, I can offer some correction.

Read my posts. I manifestly did not get "Catholic Church" out of it--quite the opposite--as I labored to make clear. Perhaps you were reading someone else's posts? But not mine.

Best.

CKS

PS. In this interest of clarification, let me repost this comment:

If there are some non-LDS Christian groups that do not pervert the "pure and perfect gospel," then my comment is moot.

But, if LDS believe that only LDS believers do not pervert "pure and perfect gospel," then all non-LDS Christian groups are part of the great and abominable church.

I don't see any way around that.

Best.

CKS

Then I object just as strenuously to your interpretation of it referring to "all non-LDS Christian groups." I don't believe all such groups persecute the Saints and fight against God.

[Scott Lloyd]

The LDS have clearly stated all other Christians are serving the devil, and only LDS are Christians. At least a few here ahve guts enough to admit that's what was taught.

Call for references. Show us a specific instance where "the LDS" (and by this, I presume you mean the Church as an institution) has "clearly stated" that "all other Christians are serving the devil and only LDS are Christians." And don't try to pass off your own errant interpretation of our scripture as being what "the LDS" say.

[Scott Lloyd]

Nephi's writing -- like the words of John in the Book of Revelation, to which it is similar -- is archetypal and apocalyptic in nature. That is, it refers to the eternal battle of good vs. evil, truth vs. error. To limit it to any specific church or organzation is to view it myopically.

But doesn't Nephi do just that when he specifically says it is a church, and specifically says that it isn't every church, but one specific church that is seperate from other churches? If it were a group of people, wouldn't he use the generic term "people" as is done elsewhere in the BoM?

Church isn't a general term. It refers to a specific group of people, and the "myopic" would have to be Nephi's or Joseph Smith's.

It's awesome that you disagree with it, but your redefinition just doesn't fit with what the book actually says.

FWIW, I really like bluebell's "Two Church of the Devil" theory. Apparently, there are as many Church of the Devil theories as there are Hill Cumorahs.

FWIW, I like it too, I was already aware of it, and it influenced what I have been trying to say here. I don't, however, see how you can say you like it, as you contradict it in insisting that the term applies to a specific church.

You say "church" isn't a general term. In this instance, it is a metaphorical term. Your refusal to grasp this fact is at the root of your invincible misinterpretation of this scriptural passage.

[Pantsman]

The LDS have clearly stated all other Christians are serving the devil, and only LDS are Christians. At least a few here ahve guts enough to admit that's what was taught.

Call for references. Show us a specific instance where "the LDS" (and by this, I presume you mean the Church as an institution) has "clearly stated" that "all other Christians are serving the devil and only LDS are Christians." And don't try to pass off your own errant interpretation of our scripture as being what "the LDS" say.

The references are already provided in this thread, your Book of Mormon and Bruce McConkie teach it. I assume you are allowed to interpret the Book of Mormon? Well Nephi I and Nephi II are pretty much in my favor, and some very well respected LDS prophets and GA's have agreed with me.

[selek]

You aren't interested in introspection or in dealing with the beam in your own eye- you're far too worried about the mote in ours.

I somehow doubt you would be much more welcome in the Methodist Church. Perhaps you might try a group of Pharisees, instead. Your behavior is more consistent with the latter then the former.

Does anyone else find these statements very hypocritical?

It's like an ad-hominem bonanza in here, can we stay on topic folks. I believe the topic is the LDS trying to squirm out of the Church of the Devil edict. To anyone who has read Nephi I and Nephi II, there's really no getting around it. The LDS have clearly stated all other Christians are serving the devil, and only LDS are Christians. At least a few here have guts enough to admit that's what was taught, including one of your most respected GA's. I agree with Catholic Girl it will take a few more centuries to complete the whitewash of this one.

For all your complaints of ad hominem, Pantsman, I find it an absolutely delicious irony in that it is you who is bearing false witness against us.

My comments were a direct response to "Truthin" and his/her/its criticism of the Church while wrapping himself in false piety about not finding faults in others.

Until you can show a clear, definitive, authoritative statement from the LDS leadership demonstrating your position, you too are engaging in false witness, and the same hypocrisy as was Truthin'.

Will you deny that the Catholic Church considers itself "the one true Church" and denounces all others as heritics and apostates?

Until you do, you are engaging in the very same "sin" of which you accuse us, with far less ground to do so.

The references are already provided in this thread, your Book of Mormon and Bruce McConkie teach it. I assume you are allowed to interpret the Book of Mormon? Well Nephi I and Nephi II are pretty much in my favor, and some very well respected LDS prophets and GA's have agreed with me.

This is an allegation, Pantsman, not a statement. Your appeal to "interpretation" would suggest that the text does NOT plainly say what you claim, but rather must be spun that way.

Call For References: Which prophets and which General Authorities. Which authoritative statements from which sources clearly indict the Catholic church (or any other for that matter)?

[Scott Lloyd]

The LDS have clearly stated all other Christians are serving the devil, and only LDS are Christians. At least a few here ahve guts enough to admit that's what was taught.

Call for references. Show us a specific instance where "the LDS" (and by this, I presume you mean the Church as an institution) has "clearly stated" that "all other Christians are serving the devil and only LDS are Christians." And don't try to pass off your own errant interpretation of our scripture as being what "the LDS" say.

The references are already provided in this thread, your Book of Mormon and Bruce McConkie teach it. I assume you are allowed to interpret the Book of Mormon? Well Nephi I and Nephi II are pretty much in my favor, and some very well respected LDS prophets and GA's have agreed with me.

This has already been addressed. You are misinterpreting the Book of Mormon passage. The McConkie book carries a disclaimer saying he takes personal responsiblity for it, while the quote I provided is from an official publication of the Church. And you haven't cited any "well respected LDS prophets and GAs" who agree with you.

The rules of the board state that when you are challenged to provide references substantiating what you say, you must provide them. Do you intend to do so? If not, don't waste my time repeating invalid arguments.

[cksalmon]

Then I object just as strenuously to your interpretation of it referring to "all non-LDS Christian groups." I don't believe all such groups persecute the Saints and fight against God.

But, I wasn't referring to all such groups who persecute the Saints and fight against God. I was referring to your authoritative definition that all groups who pervert "pure and perfect gospel" are members of the great and abominable Church. Let's not change horses in mid-stream here.

You've introduced a qualifier that is not evident in your OP. Let's deal with the issue as you laid it out originally. Or, do you mean to definitively qualify your understanding of the source you've cited? What you've now said is not equivalent to what you quoted. Which is it?

Best.

CKS

[Scott Lloyd]

Then I object just as strenuously to your interpretation of it referring to "all non-LDS Christian groups." I don't believe all such groups persecute the Saints and fight against God.

But, I wasn't referring to all such groups who persecute the Saints and fight against God. I was referring to your authoritative definition that all groups who pervert "pure and perfect gospel" are members of the great and abominable Church. Let's not change horses in mid-stream here.

You've introduced a qualifier that is not evident in your OP. Let's deal with the issue as you laid it out originally. Or, do you mean to definitively qualify your understanding of the source you've cited? What you've now said is not equivalent to what you quoted. Which is it?

Best.

CKS

The terms "church of the devil" and "great and abominable church" come from a passage in 1 Nephi that has been amply cited in this thread. In that passage, the elements of persecuting the saints and fighting against God are part and parcel of the definition. Please, I must insist that we discuss this topic in its scriptural context.

Also, other Christian groups do not in every instance pervert the pure and perfect gospel. To a great degree, they uphold and teach it. I believe in giving credit where credit is due. If, in some ways they err, I ascribe it to the devil and the metaphorical "great and abominable church" he founded.

As I see it, the most egregious manner of perverting the pure and perfect gospel is that perpetrated by self-appointed adversaries of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who misinterpret and mischaracterize what we teach and generally bear false witness against us. In so doing they are part of the great and abominable church.

[Pantsman]

The rules of the board state that when you are challenged to provide references substantiating what you say, you must provide them. Do you intend to do so? If not, don't waste my time repeating invalid arguments.

You know very well what the BofM says, as well as what Bruce McConkie said in his book, he was a "well respected GA correct"? Why have me dig up references you know very well? I mean without revealing Temple content we ALL know how priests and Protestant ministers were portrayed? Don't waste me time seriously.

""...I must join none of them [Christian Churches], for they were all wrong...that all their creeds were an abomination in His sight" (Joseph Smith History 1:19)."

"...orthodox Christian views of God are Pagan rather than Christian." (Mormon Doctrine of Deity by B.H. Roberts, p.116).

"...the God whom the 'Christians' worship is a being of their own creation..." (Apostle Charles W. Penrose, Journal of Discourses 23:243).

"The Christian world, so called, are heathens as to their knowledge of the salvation of God." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 8:171).

"What! Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beast." (John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 13:225).

"What does the Christian world know about God? Nothing...Why so far as the things of God are concerned, they are the veriest fools; they know neither God nor the things of God." (John Taylor, Journal of Discourses 13:225).

"Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.177).

You know and I know I can go on all day so stop with the "call for references nonsense", you know what I'm saying here, let's not play stupid.

"The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon...." (Orson Pratt, Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, "Divine Authenticity," no.6, p.84).

Let's not pretend that this was never taught...

[Hammer]

I observed Halloween last night by focusing my topical scripture study on the devil and related subjects. I'm generally more positive in my approach to gospel study, but I'm convinced an important part of any battle strategy is knowing one's enemy.

I looked in Guide to the Scriptures, a Church-published reference work prepared for inclusion in non-English versions of the LDS scriptures in lieu of the Topical Guide, Index and Bible Dictionary that are found in the English-language version.

I ran across this definition for "the church of the devil":

Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God.

So here we have an authoritative source contradicting the false notion and claim that Mormonism regards the church of the devil, or the great and abominable church, as being the Catholic Church or any other specific faith group.

The revelation in Doctrine and Covenants 18:20 enjoins the early Brethren -- and, by extension, us today -- to "contend against no church, save it be the church of the devil." My take on this is that we are to oppose no specific faith group, but rather, to oppose evil and error wherever it may be found, even when it is espoused by those who claim nominal membership in the Church. Conversely, we are to uphold goodness and truth wherever it may be found, even among those who do not accept the restored gospel.

The fact that the Church has a history of cooperation with Catholic groups on humanitarian causes and other issues of mutual interest debunks the notion that we consider the Catholic Church to be the great and abominable church prophesied of in the Book of Mormon.

Finally, I will venture to say that individuals and groups who, by their own choice, stridently oppose The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (not merely teach contrasting doctrines), collectively fit the church-of-the-devil archetype more neatly that anyone or anything I can think of.

You have it right. The church of the devil is made up of anti-mormons and Christian church who make a point of trying to tear the church down.

It is also members who find it their self-righteous joy to criticize leaders and programs and events of the church.

Importantly we must note that everyone can be part of the church of the devil at one time or another and hense the mighty need for repentence.

Its a dirty bird that messes in its own nest. Its even a dirtier bird that leaves the nest and only comes back to mess in its old nest. (sound like anyone we know here?)

[cksalmon]

Then I object just as strenuously to your interpretation of it referring to "all non-LDS Christian groups." I don't believe all such groups persecute the Saints and fight against God.

But, I wasn't referring to all such groups who persecute the Saints and fight against God. I was referring to your authoritative definition that all groups who pervert "pure and perfect gospel" are members of the great and abominable Church. Let's not change horses in mid-stream here.

You've introduced a qualifier that is not evident in your OP. Let's deal with the issue as you laid it out originally. Or, do you mean to definitively qualify your understanding of the source you've cited? What you've now said is not equivalent to what you quoted. Which is it?

Best.

CKS

The terms "church of the devil" and "great and abominable church" come from a passage in 1 Nephi that has been amply cited in this thread. In that passage, the elements of persecuting the saints and fighting against God are part and parcel of the definition. Please, I must insist that we discuss this topic in its scriptural context.

Also, other Christian groups do not in every instance pervert the pure and perfect gospel. To a great degree, they uphold and teach it. I believe in giving credit where credit is due. If, in some ways they err, I ascribe it to the devil and the metaphorical "great and abominable church" he founded.

As I see it, the most egregious manner of perverting the pure and perfect gospel is that perpetrated by self-appointed adversaries of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who misinterpret and mischaracterize what we teach and generally bear false witness against us. In so doing they are part of the great and abominable church.

So, I take it that you're backing off your original assertion that "Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God" is part of the Great and Abominable Church? Or, should I take it that there are, on the face of the earth, non-LDS Christian groups that do not pevert the pure and perfect gospel? You're saying that, insofar as non-LDS Christian groups err from the "pure and perfect gospel," you ascribe it to the Devil? If you ascribe it to the Devil, then obviously, it would seem, that those perpetrators are part of the "Great and Abominable Church?" Is that right? Am I bearing false witness against your original assertion? I don't think so.

How am I mischaracterizing what you teach? I don't see it...? Credit where credit is due, and all that. But, what you're saying is that non-LDS Christians groups who teach a different gospel than the LDS church are guilty of perverting the pure and precious gospel...? Right? If not, then why should we convert?

I don't get it...?

CKS

[Pantsman]

Or, should I take it that there are, on the face of the earth, non-LDS Christian groups that do not pevert the pure and perfect gospel?

CKS

That's an impossibility since all other Christian groups disagree with LDS doctrine, therefore they "pervert the pure and perfect Gospel", hence they are all the Church of the Devil, with the Catholic Church being the most abominable. This is a long standing teaching in Mormonism and has only recently been shyed away from.

[Hammer]

So, I take it that you're backing off your original assertion that "Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God" is part of the Great and Abominable Church? Or, should I take it that there are, on the face of the earth, non-LDS Christian groups that do not pevert the pure and perfect gospel? You're saying that, insofar as non-LDS Christian groups err from the "pure and perfect gospel," you ascribe it to the Devil? If you ascribe it to the Devil, then obviously, it would seem, that those perpetrators are part of the "Great and Abominable Church?" Is that right? Am I bearing false witness against your original assertion? I don't think so.

How am I mischaracterizing what you teach? I don't see it...? Credit where credit is due, and all that. But, what you're saying is that non-LDS Christians groups who teach a different gospel than the LDS church are guilty of perverting the pure and precious gospel...? Right? If not, then why should we convert?

I don't get it...?

CKS

If you were God and you sent the complete truth down and some churches chose to stay with their way of seeing it, rather than embracing the fullness of the gospel as revealed through his chosen prophets, wouldn't you think it was a perversion from your ways? Wouldn't you see it as the work of opposition?

[Not quite me]

You have it right. The church of the devil is made up of anti-mormons and Christian church who make a point of trying to tear the church down.

It is also members who find it their self-righteous joy to criticize leaders and programs and events of the church.

Importantly we must note that everyone can be part of the church of the devil at one time or another and hense the mighty need for repentence.

Its a dirty bird that messes in its own nest. Its even a dirtier bird that leaves the nest and only comes back to mess in its old nest. (sound like anyone we know here?)

This makes me wonder. What do you think motivates former members to come here and "mess in the nest"?

[cksalmon]

So, I take it that you're backing off your original assertion that "Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God" is part of the Great and Abominable Church? Or, should I take it that there are, on the face of the earth, non-LDS Christian groups that do not pevert the pure and perfect gospel? You're saying that, insofar as non-LDS Christian groups err from the "pure and perfect gospel," you ascribe it to the Devil? If you ascribe it to the Devil, then obviously, it would seem, that those perpetrators are part of the "Great and Abominable Church?" Is that right? Am I bearing false witness against your original assertion? I don't think so.

How am I mischaracterizing what you teach? I don't see it...? Credit where credit is due, and all that. But, what you're saying is that non-LDS Christians groups who teach a different gospel than the LDS church are guilty of perverting the pure and precious gospel...? Right? If not, then why should we convert?

I don't get it...?

CKS

If you were God and you sent the complete truth down and some churches chose to stay with their way of seeing it, rather than embracing the fullness of the gospel as revealed through his chosen prophets, wouldn't you think it was a perversion from your ways? Wouldn't you see it as the work of opposition?

I think you've rather proved my point.

Those who disagree with the LDS version of the Gospel are among those who distort the pure and perfect gospel of Christ.

Best.

CKS

[juliann]

CK,

So, I take it that you're backing off your original assertion that "Every evil and worldly organization on earth that perverts the pure and perfect gospel and fights against the Lamb of God" is part of the Great and Abominable Church? Or, should I take it that there are, on the face of the earth, non-LDS Christian groups that do not pevert the pure and perfect gospel? You're saying that, insofar as non-LDS Christian groups err from the "pure and perfect gospel," you ascribe it to the Devil? If you ascribe it to the Devil, then obviously, it would seem, that those perpetrators are part of the "Great and Abominable Church?" Is that right? Am I bearing false witness against your original assertion? I don't think so.

Are you thinking the "gospel" is a church? What is the perfect gospel? Do LDS even claim they have perfection? The interpretation of it being Catholics (which makes NO sense unless Catholicism has been here since the dawn of time) is actually not an old interpretation at all.

My question is why do so many want it to be? Does this make it easier to attack the church by setting up a strawman, Pantsman? Your prooftexts are ridiculous....you need to get something that is remotely official.

Ether 4:12 And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me; for good cometh of none save it be of me. I am the same that leadeth men to all good; he that will not believe my words will not believe me--that I am; and he that will not believe me will not believe the Father who sent me. For behold, I am the Father, I am the light, and the life, and the truth of the world.

Matthew 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

If you would bother to read the official version, there are actually three groups:

1 Nephi 14:10-16 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the power of the Lamb of God, that it descended upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and they were armed with righteousness and with the power of God in great glory. Wherefore, he that fighteth against Zion, both Jew and Gentile, both bond and free, both male and female, shall perish; for they are they who are the whore of all the earth; for they who are not for me are against me, saith our God. And the angel said unto me: Behold the formation of a church which is most abominable above all other churches, which slayeth the saints of God, yea, and tortureth them and bindeth them down, and yoketh them with a yoke of iron, and bringeth them down into captivity.

Who is a member of the great and abominable church? It couldn't be any plainer: Wherefore, he that fighteth against Zion, both Jew and Gentile, both bond and free, both male and female, shall perish; for they are they who are the whore of all the earth.

Are the Catholics fighting Zion? Are they against God? Have they been torturing people from the dawn of time to the present? It sounds a little more like this...

Ether 8:22-26 And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed; for the Lord will not suffer that the blood of his saints, which shall be shed by them, shall always cry unto him from the ground for vengeance upon them and yet he avenge them not.

D&C 84: 46-47 And the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world; and the Spirit enlighteneth every man through the world, that hearkeneth to the voice of the Spirit. And every one that hearkeneth to the voice of the Spirit cometh unto God, even the Father For whoso cometh not unto me is under the bondage of sin.

The devil needs the cooperation of nations...random destruction is not effective. The BOM usually has that formula. But why read it to find out what all this means when you can just cough up some random quotes, eh, Pantsman?

I'd say it is the hatemongers who have the best shot at being church of the devil members...who else contends against other churches?

Contend against no church save it be the church of the devil. D&C 18:20

LDS are cautioned...calling yourself Mormon is no protection: Moroni 7:14 But behold, that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do good continually; wherefore, every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God, and to serve him, is inspired of God. Wherefore, take heed, my beloved brethren, that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God, or that which is good and of God to be of the devil.

Moroni 7:18 And now, my brethren, seeing that ye know the light by which ye may judge, which light is the light of Christ, see that ye do not judge wrongfully; for with that same judgment which ye judge ye shall also be judged.

[juliann]

I'm sure Pantsman just forgot to show us this one from his collection of random quotes:

Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.202 - p.203 - p.204, George Q. Cannon, April 6, 1879

If the Chinaman should come here and build a Joss house and burn incense to Joss, if he prostrate himself in adoration before the images that he thinks represents his deity, we have no right in the world to interfere with him. If an Ingersoll should come here and say that he did not believe in any God at all, and he could carry his feelings into practice, we would have no right to interfere with him. Under the circumstances I have described, he would have a perfect right to believe in God or not. We would have no right to interfere with a man who, believing his priest has power to remit his sins, would enter the confessional chamber for the purpose of having them forgiven; or with the Episcopalian who may choose to sprinkle his infant, or the Jew because he believed in circumcising his infant child, or with the Baptist because he believed in baptism by immersion... The Parsee and fire worshipper and men of kindred belief may yet come to this land of liberty; and I tell you if the spirit of the Constitution be maintained, as the Latter-day Saints will yet maintain it, they will have a perfect right to worship their God according to the dictates of their own consciences without any to molest or make afraid. The only time that these men can be interfered with will be when their religious acts interfere with the rights and liberties of their fellowmen. Hear it, ye Latter-day Saints! When John Chinaman comes in your midst, teach your children to respect him. When any other man of any other creed, race or color takes his abode among you, teach your children to respect this form of worship. And if they go to the church of the Catholics or that of the Presbyterians or of any other sect, teach them to behave themselves and treat everybody with civility and kindness, and that it is none of their business how these sects worship, teach that they violate good order and good law when they in any way make light of religious exercises.

[Hammer]

You have it right. The church of the devil is made up of anti-mormons and Christian church who make a point of trying to tear the church down.

It is also members who find it their self-righteous joy to criticize leaders and programs and events of the church.

Importantly we must note that everyone can be part of the church of the devil at one time or another and hense the mighty need for repentence.

Its a dirty bird that messes in its own nest. Its even a dirtier bird that leaves the nest and only comes back to mess in its old nest. (sound like anyone we know here?)

This makes me wonder. What do you think motivates former members to come here and "mess in the nest"?

I believe they are frustrated with themselves and where they are and must constantly try and validate their positions to ease their consciences.

[Not quite me]

I believe they are frustrated with themselves and where they are and must constantly try and validate their positions to ease their consciences.

Funny, I've heard the same thing said about apologists.

For what it's worth, I'm comfortable with where I am, and my conscience is pretty darn clear, thank you.

[juliann]

Funny, I've heard the same thing said about apologists.

Funny, that is a rather frightening worldview that sees people who defend themselves against attackers as the problem.

[Not quite me]

Funny, I've heard the same thing said about apologists.

Funny, that is a rather frightening worldview that sees people who defend themselves against attackers as the problem.

I've seen plenty of attacking on both sides, thank you very much. I did not say that apologists were "the problem." Where would you get such an idea?

[Hammer]

I believe they are frustrated with themselves and where they are and must constantly try and validate their positions to ease their consciences.

Funny, I've heard the same thing said about apologists.

For what it's worth, I'm comfortable with where I am, and my conscience is pretty darn clear, thank you.

For what its worth, I don't believe you. To defend one's turf is way different than attacking someone elses. I don't go to anyone's elses turf and attack them.