If Something Is Factually True, Does The Source Matter?

[KevinG]

I'm yet to hear anything intelligent myself, particularly given so many people here only choose to read the heavily correlated (code for censored) material the church puts out there.

So 1981 CES talks by Elder Packer determine church wide practice and Rough Stone Rolling is heavily correlated (censored) material?

Wow. I can see why you draw the conclusions you do.

Try answering some of the questions and CFRs. I'm still waiting for that official quote telling me to avoid apostates.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

So 1981 CES talks by Elder Packer determine church wide practice and Rough Stone Rolling is heavily correlated (censored) material?

Like I said, I have no idea what he is talking about.

I think some one is afraid of the truth.

Edited August 15, 2011 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Ares]

Ozpoof please answer the calls for reference if you want to be taken seriously. Don't just spam threads with general accusations about church doctrine and authority then fail to back up what you say with sourced materials.

Others - please give Ozpoof some time and space to respond to your questions. This does not need to turn into a free for all.

[Messenger]

Warm fuzzies are not a reliable way to verify truth, ESPECIALLY if what you are pondering and praying about ISN'T THE REAL HISTORY!! What do you think it means if you are told a false history, and you ponder and pray about it and feel good about it? Does that make the false history true? NO. It's still false. Who's telling you it's true then?

Well, there's your problem right there! So, your gonna come up with some new facts and NOT have religious people pray about them, Really? Good luck with that sir.

[ldsfaqs]

No, I said FACTS. You're confusing dogma with facts. I agree with you that the problem with history is with those who frame it, or create lesson manuals about it, deliberately altering the order of events, omitting facts that would change the entire story, half truths, complete lies.

I've already told you that the basic story found in Sunday School Church materials, manuals etc. is the "basics", and that the FULL Truth doesn't change those basics.

Your lying about such materials "altering events, and omitting facts that would change the whole story, half truths, complete lies etc."

Sorry, but that's what anti-mormons do, not mormons.

I am aware that people or organizations can lie while conveying facts. I oppose that where ever I see it.

If you did you wouldn't be anti-mormon. Your current "perception" is not the "whole truth" buddy.

You are told to stay away from ex Mormons because you might learn what they know. That's the reason. If what they believe is not the truth, why worry? The church can surely stand if it speaks the truth and has nothing to hide.

You are aware you are on an "Apologetics" forum aren't you???

In other words, nearly every single one of us here are well experienced with ALL the facts of history, mormonism, religion, anti-mormonism, etc.

Again, do you show "Porn" to your children just so they can "learn the facts"?

Get a clue. You shouldn't confuse the protection of the innocent and weak of the Faith, with being the same as Mormons staying completely away from anti-mormons.

Wrong..... We are "encoraged" (not told moron) to avoid anti-mormonism because it LIES, not because we might learn what they know.

Let me tell you a little secret to clue you in. Everything anti-mormons "know" about mormonism COME FROM US....!!!! Our history, our records, etc. etc. All of which us "intellectually" minded folks study.

Thus, this lying idea of yours that the Church is somehow "scared" of what anti-mormons know, just shows your own ignorance.

Do you actually consider ANYTHING written by a non-Mormon to be a "best book"?

Nope..... I've actually read nearly every one that has existed, thus I know from experience and knowledge.

If a so-called Anti Mormon publishes a book that contains nothing but copies of early church documents, are you seriously telling me you will believe these are lies and must be ignored? Do you know what that type of behavior sounds like?

And have you ever learned not to create straw-man fallacies and putting words into people mouths?

Anti-mormons "don't" and never have created such a book, thus your question is stupid. Further, what little they have done, like I've already said, it's not the FACTS that are the problem, it's the anti-mormons misusing them, perverting them, and omitting them to then make their wonderful lying false conclusions about the subject matter.

The fact that you don't even know what so-called anti Mormons use as their sources shows you have never bothered to even check.

I'm a convert to the Church who left the Church and became anti-mormon, so spare me your so-called intellectual superiority and classic anti-mormon cliches. I'm WAY beyond you in knowing mormonism and anti-mormonism. I know very well they use "facts" to tell their lies. I was ignorant like you of the issues and believed them once.

You have already made up your mind.

My mind is made from YEARS of study and experience from ALL SIDES of the issue.

Further, every single day for the last 20 years I STILL deal with anti-mormon malarky like yours.

I STILL put away my judgements and study Christian history, still study anti-mormonism, but more importantly I still study LDS Scholarship, materials which are light years beyond the malarkey anti-mormons produce, and I still compare the two sides, and see clearly who uses a little truth to lie, and who tells the whole truth. Mormons are on the side of the truth, because truth is the foundation of our entire beliefs. We aren't interested in man made religions, etc. Anti's on the other hand, their mission is based on hate, striving to destroy good and righteousness. They serve the devil, for only the devil lies in about everything he says, just as anti's do.

By claiming ex Mormons don't use historically accurate and verifiable information as their sources you have also said BYU and the church itself has fraudulent documents in their possession and are passing these off as historical, because most sources used by ex Mormons in their research are owned by the church.

You clearly don't read to comprehend anything. I never made such a claim at all. Further, you even prove my point by acknowledging that anti-mormon "facts" come from US in the first place.

What you don't get however, is they use that information to tell great lies. Maybe you like that in your hate and bigotry, but we don't in our love of truth and right.

No, These authors do not use "some" facts. They are very careful to use nothing but historical documents that often speak for themselves. Even familysearch.org is used. Are you claiming these sources are inaccurate and perverse?

You are clearly a "newbie"..... knowing nothing you are talking about.

They "frame" history to tell a lie. Your ignorance of this is your own problem, not ours.

We know OUR OWN HISTORY well..... We know when it's being lied about, perverted, etc.

Do you really think that those of us who are well familiar with anti-mormon claims, have read most of their books and websites, and have more importantly studied LDS history directly from the original materials are really so dumb that we would remain in the religion, if anti-mormons were actually telling the truth??? Sure, obviously with human nature some might be that dumb. But sorry, most of us become Mormons because we are NOT that dumb. We know man-made religion, we know false preachers and prophets, etc..... And we aren't interested in them/it!

Yes, I do know who the Father of perversion and lies is. I'd say someone who wants to protect lies would make sure the people he lies to never do their own research. He would create fear in them, claiming anything other than what he says is evil and must be ignored and avoided. Yes, I'm pretty familiar with the tactics used by liars.

See, you only show your own ignorance of Mormons in the first place. Your entire thesis is a straw-man, a lie....

Mormonism teaches us to pursue the truth from where-ever it comes. Just because there is the "recognition" of the damage evil anti-mormonism can do to the testimony of those who aren't scholars (and the rare one of those who somewhat are), doesn't mean we "BAN" people from studying anything and everything.

In other words..... Who says we "don't" "do our own research"??? Your anti-mormon liars?

You may be familiar with the tactics used by liars, but you clearly aren't familiar with mormons to think such malarkey actually applies to us.

I've spent 25 years studying anti-mormonism and everything else in creation, and not a single person in the Church in some 20 different wards, some 30 Bishop's, etc. has EVER told me to "not" to study anything, including anti-mormonism. You act like the "brief mention" a time or two in LDS history to avoid anti-mormonism is somehow DAILY brainwashing Gospel??? You don't know a thing.

If you actually knew mormonism, you would know we are taught to avoid "evil", not "information". Of course, evil information perverted for evil purposes, to destroy the Church is evil, and most certainly can be damaging. I know, I'm a victim myself..... Fortunately, I was smarter than most anti-mormons. I already knew through study that most anti-mormonism was crap, and I knew that I couldn't know a thing, if I had evil intent and judgments toward it, so I put away my judgments. Then when I finally was ready to again study religion and the Church, I did. And THAT is when everything was answered. Because of my FAITH.... the whole truth came out. And it certainly wasn't the anti-mormon "truth" on any subject, and has been so the last 20 years. Every single day, I deal with people like you..... People who think they "know" mormonism, when you don't know squat. You are not just children in your understanding, your wicked children, because you're a BULLY. You pick on those you THINK are "weaker" than you. You directly go against Christ's own words to the Apostles concerning other believers not with you in Mark 9 & Luke 9. Christ has harsh words for people like you.... Learn something true for a change.

Am I telling LDS that you should hang out at a GAY BAR, simply so we can get "accurate and verifiable information"? Ah no. I'm saying you should CHECK FACTS rather than dismissing everything anyone says who disagrees with what you believe.

Am I telling LDS that you need to "kill" someone in order to know not to do it? Let's not get carried away with straw men.

Am I telling LDS that you need to wallow in ANY MUD and SIN in order to get accurate and verifiable information? Not at all. Again, read what people say and CHECK FOR YOURSELF. Why are Mormons so afraid of doing some thinking for themselves?

Like I said..... Why do we need to suck down evil in order to in your mind "think for ourselves"?

Further, you do nothing but lie here. Who says we "don't check facts"? Who says we "don't check for ourselves"? Who says we don't "think for ourselves"?

Let me guess.... Your anti-mormon buddies?

Why don't YOU think for yourself...... instead of regurgitating anti-mormon bearing false witness?

"Anti-mormonism perverts 99.9% of it's claims against mormonism." How on Earth would you know that? That's an outright lie!

Nope, it's the absolute truth. Every issue the anti-mormon uses some truth in order to tell a great lie.

You say Joseph was a Pedophile, the real truth tells otherwise.

You say Mormons are racist, the real truth tells otherwise.

over and over and over again.... basically ANY and all "evils" you claim against us, are nothing YOUR LIES.

As a former anti-mormon, I know for sure..... Sorry, but you are being deceived by the evil one.

"Every conclusion they have about mormonism is a lie." The Church disagrees with you. They have changed the preamble to the Book of Mormon now that DNA evidence shows the Native Americans originated in Asia. So the conclusion by ex Mormons that so-called Lamanites are not THE ancestors of a lost Semitic tribe is not a lie. The church wouldn't have changed the preamble if it was a lie.

Again, another anti-mormon lie.

Science had ALWAYS known that Native American's were primarily of Asiatic decent. Do you really think DNA changed any of that? Nope.

Moron Thomas Murphy who started this all off when he first told me his theory's, I just laughed.

It is further a lie, because Mormonism never claimed that "Lamanites" were of ONLY "semitic" decent. Lamanite in the BOM primarily referres to ALL non-Nephites. It was the BOM's version of the Bibles "Gentile". Most mormons knew this already. Further, DNA doesn't even show every "lineage". Semitic DNA would most certainly be in likely every single Native American by today. Of course, it's not the dominate strand, because Lehi's party was a small group that inserted into an entire continent.

Ultimately, the DNA issue was one big LIE (straw-man) from the beginning, based on false assumptions, specifically as it relates to the BOM and the Church. It was a tree built on many false foundations.

The Church changed the statement in order to help eliminate "confusion" by some, morons like you who don't actually know and understand the Church. The statement was still true, it didn't actually have to be changed. Because the word "Lamanite" did not mean someone decended from Lehi. It was a "heritage" title, not a genetic one. How can we say this? Because we actually know the BOM. For just one example, there were people who were of a different tribe, named differently even, who had nothing to do with Laman & Lemual or Nephi, who were also called at times "Lamanites". Lamanites were the "Gentiles" of the BOM. The Church removed the statement so the "layman" who wasn't a theologian or scholar in the Church wouldn't be confused and go and be stupid and leave the Church over it. Some people only can take milk you know....

Again, do you encourage people studying the Jews to delve into Fanatical Islam Bigotry? So, why should mormons delve into anti-mormon bigotry?

Evil is evil buddy..... We are to shun evil in all it's forms. Don't you know that?

"All truth is useful, however not all facts are truth."

Oh really? You certainly have taken Packer's talk to heart haven't you?

I seek and embrace truth alone, not lying perversion that is anti-mormonism or liberalism. You've told several lies already in your posts about mormons and mormonism, and we aren't even discussing any actual "subject" related to mormonism, save the brief one on DNA above.

Thus, you should consider that maybe you aren't on the side of "truth" as you think. If you can't even represent your target honestly and accurately, which anti-mormons don't, then you have a problem buddy. When you LIE with about everything you say about your target, you have a problem buddy. You don't commit the "rare" scholarly human error, you pervert everything. That's a serious problem, and shows exactly whom you serve, not who you think you serve. Again, heed Christ's words in Mark 9 & Luke 9. You offend us, and Christ has harsh words for those who would offend his children not with "you".

[ldsfaqs]

The church excommunicates people who publish nothing but copies of church documents from the past. The Tanners book that has nothing but quotes from church leaders and photocopied documents. Of course the church tells people to avoid anything that paints them as liars. "Some truths are not very useful".

Complete lies by you....

The Church has never excommunicated anyone for simply publishing historical documents. The Church HAS excommunicated people for misrepresenting the Church, falsely portraying certain issues perverting the history so as to attack the Church, and being dishonest and whatever else.

Again, you are aware you are on a board that is FULL of scholars and intellectuals who are well familiar with all aspects of the Church, including anti-mormonism?

Tanners? Predictable...

Just yesterday I was reviewing their "First Vision" accounts, and after the 1838 version they make a statement, then go to the 1844 version and then make a statement.

Problem was that there statements actually canceled each other out, and they didn't care at all about it. The 1844 verse proves that their earlier claims and their conclusive claims couldn't be accurate. The 1838 was the official version, to then try to claim Joseph was still making stuff up when the 1844 verse was different also, is scholarship abuse. The 1844 version being different clearly indicates that Joseph WASN'T making stuff up, that there were "other" reasons behind why many of the versions were different from each other, none of which has anything to do with him making stuff up, or lying.

[ldsfaqs]

I'm yet to hear anything intelligent myself, particularly given so many people here only choose to read the heavily correlated (code for censored) material the church puts out there.

Again, what "planet" are you on???

You do know you're on a board that's full of LDS scholars?

Please pray tell how that somehow even "implies" that we on this board read only "Church correlated" materials?

When are you going to stop bearing false witness?

Further, since you yourself have admitted that basically everything anti-mormons claim of us come from us first, how can you even claim with a straight face that anti-mormons are somehow telling us things "we never knew" or are "hidden" from us?

Our scholars have been involved with LDS history well before and much longer than the moron Tanners and anyone else.

[ldsfaqs]

The church uses heavily edited scripture and half truths in their manuals. Everywhere they quote scripture and fill it with ........... or add words within [ ] they are modifying the scripture. If you go to the original, you can often see why they omitted parts. Section 132 is nothing but an embarrassment - talking about taking virgins and using the law of Sarah on first wives to threaten them with eternal destruction of they don't agree with their husband taking a teen girl. The manual writers do things like mention marriages and deaths in non-chronological order to hide the FACT that some women married other men in UT while their husband was still alive and still married to them. Joseph Smith AND Brigham Young engaged in polyandry, which is not doctrinal, even if you believe the atrocity of polygamy was of God. The church tells people NOT to use sources other than the manuals for lessons. Read the lesson manual before you screech CFR. The facts are there, but they are presented so as to deceive. That's lying and is not something a true church would do

A bunch of complete lying malarkey.... I've already written enough "detail" to you, but everything you've said here is a lie or a perversion of the facts.

We study this stuff every day, the sources themselves, the materials themselves. Plus, we've seen your anti-mormons lies for years, and have already refuted them.

[ldsfaqs]

Do your own research. Sources? What do you want me to do, break into the COB. Wow you really do have a closed mind and a hardened heart. Read Mormon Enigma. You might lear a few things about Joseph Smith. The preface talks about their excommunication.

Read it.... You misrepresent it, and it misrepresents many things of history and doctrine.

Simon Southerton also excommunicated for bringing to light the FACT there is zero Semitic DNA in "Lamanites". Write anything that makes the "official" church garbage look like lies and your get exxed, even if the book is factual and cannot be refuted by the church.

haa haa.... Simon Southerton wasn't excommunicated for that. Some of us actually know him and his works and history well you know. tisk tisk....

Well ya, obviously that's a possibility. If you go around lying about and degrading your faith, clearly you aren't a member anymore.

Why should any group tolerate "wolves in sheeps clothing"?

[ldsfaqs]

My priority is to find truth no matter how it shakes my preconceived notions. If I believe something and that is proven to be false, I will change my beliefs. I will not ignore new information that challenges my beliefs, I will learn and grow.

All truth is valuable. No truth is "disease germs" as Elder Packer called it. I want to show the facts of history to my family and help them find the truth. I want them to see all and then decide. I feel sorry for my family who are in the church and are too scared to read or learn from unapproved sources. That's not what a member of Christ's church should feel - fear of information. That's scary.

Right now I am very happy, except when I speak to Mormons. I find this site very adversarial, and feel a bad spirit here - except for your post. I come here to try and make people think, that;s all. Just think and research for yourself. Don't be afraid.

The evil you feel is the evil your present.....

Maidservant didn't actually respond to anything you said, thus obviously you would get a different "spirit" from her.

But, as to the things you say, you speak evil, thus obviously your evil is going to be addressed. The wicked take the truth to be hard.

[Skylla]

Thanks for the psych analysis. Perhaps you are a person who "thinks" something is not factual, despite the information appearing in church publications or documents, because the information conflicts with your preconceived views? That's called cognitive dissonance, and it doesn't stop the facts you don't like from being true. The church itself has often never refuted information contained in early historical documents that are sometimes written by Prophets despite referring to this information as "disease germs" (Boyd K Packer), and stating that some truths are not useful.

I have NEVER found any truth to be what could be considered to be "disease germs" and something to be avoided at all costs. I can't reconcile such an attitude by anyone who claims to represent truth.

Perhaps you are a person who knows there are facts that are being omitted or deliberately altered by publishers of lesson manuals, yet you remain silent because the modified version fits better with your cognition? Such a person could really never claim to be dealing honestly with their fellow "men" could they?

Don't accuse others of being dishonest here, Ozpoof. This thread is done.

Skylla