“Google Is Your Friend” – Unless You Are Lds

[Mariner]

The placement of a website in the organic space of google is not controlled by google. There are companies out there who specialize in having your website show up on the first page and if you have a unique expression as the one mentioned, it is very easy and cheap to have hundreds of websites show up on top. Google does a much better job than yahoo at controlling this but it is how you get your website noticed. I pay to have mine show up first in the organic searches and we have to keep on top of it all the time because other companies are doing the same thing. There are three areas for google - their paid advertisements which list the top 4 or 5 on top and the rest at the side; the map region which lists you by alphabet depending on how much you pay and how close you are to the entry; and the organic search. The search ingen searches for the phrase and you identify locations on your website for google to look. Anti sites put this type of expression in a place for google to find, consequently they show up first.

Okay. Fair enough. I don't disagree with your explanation.

What astounded me was the variety of sources, the number of videos, and the sheer number of (seemingly) independent hits on this.

So now one comes the question as to whether the material that comes up in response to the search string is factual.

I have clearly not looked at every hit. However the ones I have looked at seem to be legitimate and contain factual information and reasonable opinions and analysis of the factual information, much as is contained in the TruthSeeker24 post above.

Are you claiming that the fact that a lot of folks use the same metadata tags for their content makes that content suspect?

If so, why?

If not, then why should folks not consider such content when forming an opinion about the LDS Church?

[DBMormon]

I believe there might actually be a problem in regards to this type of topic being brought to the world's attention. Not because its harmful, but because in essence, I don't believe we can get by the fact that it DID happen a lot during the early Utah days. Its common knowledge that the LDS leaders HAD to lie about the continuance of Plural Marriage after the 1890 manifesto. They had to lie to the government, and they had to lie to the congregation. Joseph Smith himself had to lie to Emma a number of times in regards to his having more wives because she wasn't willing or ready to hear it. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe that this stuff did in fact happen. That being said, I believe they made the correct choice in lying. Sometimes a lie is all you can do to keep something from another person that would damage them spiritually if they were to find out.

I think this hits it on the head. Also, while I am sure other church's have a past with similar kinds of issues (catholic church/pedaphilia, Jehovah Witnesses/false prophesies of coming of Christ), and if you search pedophile you likely will get Catholic responses and the JW's situation probaly comes up if you type false prophesies of second coming. Our church makes a very adament truth claim and when you couple that with some definite instances where we were dishonest along with Leaders saying things that can be interpreted as giving justification for not being truthful and completely forthright then you will have this occur. Couple that with the comment another poster made that the phrase "lying for the Lord" is a specific phrase used by LDS critics and is not used in other circles.... wahlah... you have your problem

[Mariner]

Remember that for whatever reason, the alliteration “Lying for the Lord” is uniquely Mormon. If you Google “Lying for God” or “Lying for Jesus”, and you get different results.

Analytics,

"Lying for Jesus" Is also a fruitful search string. It certainly shows that, in this regard, the LDS Church is not unique in Christendom.

[cdowis]

OK, and I googled "testimony of Christ" and three of the top five hits are LDS sites.

[thesometimesaint]

Mariner:

Just that that "Meme" is nothing new. It is akin to telling others what they believe.

Tell me do you get what you know of the Jews religion from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"?

[cinepro]

Are you claiming that the fact that a lot of folks use the same metadata tags for their content makes that content suspect?

If so, why?

I doubt any of those sites have done anything intentional to get placed at the top of the rankings. It is more a factor of them using the phrase and people visiting the site. I would expect this thread to be part of the search results before long.

[TruthSeeker24]

Thank you for a frank, honest and thoughtful response.

I happen to agree with you on this.

Your welcome. I'm glad we agree on this issue.

[wenglund]

I doubt any of those sites have done anything intentional to get placed at the top of the rankings. It is more a factor of them using the phrase and people visiting the site. I would expect this thread to be part of the search results before long.

Agreed. As I understand it, the search results are a function of how Google's search engine generally prioritizes the search results, and has nothing to do with some supposed specific anti-Mormon conspiracy within Google. According to Wikipedia: "The order of search results on Google's search-results pages is based, in part, on a priority rank called a 'PageRank'."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Mariner]

I doubt any of those sites have done anything intentional to get placed at the top of the rankings. It is more a factor of them using the phrase and people visiting the site. I would expect this thread to be part of the search results before long.

cinepro,

I hope not.

I intentionally did not use "Lying for the Lord" in the thread title.

[rameumptom]

It may very well be that the term is found in regards to LDS, simply because the question has been raised a few times. For example, during the Reed Smoot Senate hearings, the question was raised. So, if there are articles or discussions about that, then it will be automatically flagged for Google.

Did you follow any of the links to see if they were majority anti-Mormon? Or is it possible that several were just discussing the topic?

For example, the "lying for the Lord" Mormonwiki IS from the Mormonwiki pages, sponsored by FAIR! Don't we want that to be the top link found?

Granted, many of the following articles are from exmormon sites, but what of it? It isn't a Google conspiracy that they write about it much more than LDS do. If it were a Google conspiracy, wouldn't they bury the MormonWiki page, rather than have it as the very first?

I don't think it is a conspiracy. I think there are a dozen anti pages that write about it, and only one or two LDS pages that do. Of course the anti articles are going to show up on the first page!

[Damien the Leper]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere in scripture does it say "Thou shalt not lie...unless it is for Me". Nowhere do I see it as implied either. The mere fact that anyone would practice such a "principle" is disappointing.

[Mariner]

Mariner:

Just that that "Meme" is nothing new. It is akin to telling others what they believe.

Tell me do you get what you know of the Jews religion from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"?

thesometimesaint,

The answer is no.

I get most of what I know about the Jews from working with them, being guests in their homes (both in the US and Israel), and even having Jews as business partners now and then.

Same with Mormons. The main data that I use to evaluate and judge the truth claims of the LDS Church is obtained from members I have personally known or who have become well known in the media.

From my interactions with these individuals, including certain members of my own family, I believe that "Lying for the Lord" is a meme that has wormed its way deep into Mormon culture.

As for folks well known in the media, I would point out (again) that lying for the lord mitt romney came up as a second level search term on Google.

Edited May 3, 2012 by Mariner

[TruthSeeker24]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere in scripture does it say "Thou shalt not lie...unless it is for Me". Nowhere do I see it as implied either. The mere fact that anyone would practice such a "principle" is disappointing.

Unless God requires it. Didn't God tell Abraham to lie about his wife? It seems to me that there are strenuous circumstances where a lie is actually a good thing simply because it is the lesser of two evils (not unlike Adam and Eve partaking of the fruit).

[altersteve]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere in scripture does it say "Thou shalt not lie...unless it is for Me". Nowhere do I see it as implied either. The mere fact that anyone would practice such a "principle" is disappointing.

That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another. God said, 'Thou shalt not kill'; at another time He said, 'Thou shalt utterly destroy.' This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.'

[Mariner]

Joseph Smith said:

That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another. God said, 'Thou shalt not kill'; at another time He said, 'Thou shalt utterly destroy.' This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted—by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.'

Is this not good evidence (from Joseph Smith himself) that the "Lying for the Lord" meme is embedded deeply in Mormon culture?

Am I the only one who is disturbed by the seemingly cavalier acceptance and widespread tolerance of this principle in the Church?

If this is de rigueur, how is one to know when it is being practiced and when not?

Perhaps is doesn't matter.

[Damien the Leper]

Unless God requires it. Didn't God tell Abraham to lie about his wife? It seems to me that there are strenuous circumstances where a lie is actually a good thing simply because it is the lesser of two evils (not unlike Adam and Eve partaking of the fruit).

Then the sin of lying is God's sin. The commandment still stands as "THOU SHALT NOT LIE". There are no implied or explicit conditions to the commandment. A lie is still a lie.

[Damien the Leper]

Am I the only one who is disturbed by the seemingly cavalier acceptance and widespread tolerance of this principle in the Church?

No. You are not. This is a big problem for me.

[TruthSeeker24]

Then the sin of lying is God's sin. The commandment still stands as "THOU SHALT NOT LIE". There are no implied or explicit conditions to the commandment. A lie is still a lie.

I agree with you. That kind of goes with the quote by Joseph Smith given a few posts back. Its important that we go by whatever God asks. I guess the issue lies in being able to determine when it is in fact God telling you to lie, or just yourself, or even the adversary.

[Mariner]

I can certainly agree that there are circumstances when it is better for all concerned to tell a lie. Every married man knows the correct response to "Does this dress make my fanny look fat?"

However, when such lies are told, we must take responsibility for them and not claim that we are justified by the Lord. Liars are not justified. They have lied, and society cannot function if its members are liars.

[Minos]

I don't know how you go from a Google search to a blanket accusation of everyone in a church being a liar but we don't take kindly to calling even one person a liar on this board.