CFM Jan 1-7 / we are called “Mormons.”

[webbles]

Oh, that newsroom site gets better.  I've found three different versions of it:

https://news-gu.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/mormonism-101

https://news-jm.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/mormonism-101

https://news-uk.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/mormonism-101--faq

The Guam (news-gu) and the Jamaica (news-jm) are similar.  The Guam version has an opening paragraph that connects the church's name with Mormonism ("also known as Mormons").  Other than that, they look the same.  The UK (news-uk) version looks to be the Jamaica version with "Mormon" substituted with "Latter-day Saint" in almost all cases.  I see a few places where they just removed the term.

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I didn’t “find” the old video. Was was being a lazy learner and reading CFM and watched the videos… there’s three of them if you bothered to look. I just recall the prophet say that was a victory for Satan yet here we are .. church sponsored no less. 

In my post I never mentioned what you are doing other than the reference to this thread.  But since you brought it up, based on your prior posts it does seem like you are out trying to "find" these things:

Edited January 7, 2024 by InCognitus

[webbles]

31 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

In my post I never mentioned what you are doing other than the reference to this thread.  But since you brought it up, based on your prior posts it does seem like you are out trying to "find" these things:

The exmormon subreddit mentioned this yesterday so he might have noticed it there or somewhere else that picked it up from the subreddit.  They like to find all the instances of "Mormon" and point them out as "victories".

[InCognitus]

7 minutes ago, webbles said:

The exmormon subreddit mentioned this yesterday so he might have noticed it there or somewhere else that picked it up from the subreddit.  They like to find all the instances of "Mormon" and point them out as "victories".

That's exactly what I figured.

[Diamondhands69]

40 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

In my post I never mentioned what you are doing other than the reference to this thread.  But since you brought it up, based on your prior posts it does seem like you are out trying to "find" these things:

Yes if I see it I point it out. 
 

if it was a random member posting it somewhere I wouldn’t care. The church really cares a lot about this stuff so I make sure they see what is on their own website. Clearly they don’t know or at the very least don’t care. 

[Calm]

19 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Yep.. since it is owning the nickname the video is inappropriate to use nowadays. I’m betting it gets yanked from the online version soon. 

So we should just pretend the nickname doesn’t exist so we don’t ever have to use it, the result of which most likely will be that people continue to be confused and think there are two churches, thus perpetuating the use of “Mormon” by others?  That is the silliest and most self defeating thing I have seen in awhile. 

I am getting the impression that you are choosing to interpret the instruction so extremely, so broadly that even Pres Nelson’s instructions to stop using it breaks the standard you are shoving on the Church as does any mention of his instructions by any members since he uses “ Mormon” to do so. 
 

Brother Cook’s referring to “Mormon” being a nickname in the video of “Mormon” is much less egregious by your standard than your use of “Mormon” here in this thread, because he is teaching people the correct name of the Church, which is the only way to decrease the use of “Mormon”, and you instead created a thread repeating the nickname multiple times and requiring those who choose to respond to you to use the term in order to make sense for a thread which does not need exist and only does because you are forcing a standard on the Church it has never enforced or asked others to do…and you surely know your complaints and accusations will have no effect on the Church, so you are just indulging yourself imo instead of trying to accomplish anything useful. 

Edited January 8, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Duncan said:

We never watched any videos in our class 

It is a good video. I am glad the Church is bringing it to more people’s attention and I trust that the vast majority are intelligent enough that they will be able to figure out that while a 12 year old video might not use the  current style, it can still have valuable spiritual teaching and it doesn’t actually imply there is little value in trying to use the name of the Church instead of the nickname.

And those who use it to accuse the Church of not caring about what they teach or whatever are getting to do what they love, so win win all around. 

Edited January 7, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

27 minutes ago, webbles said:

They like to find all the instances of "Mormon" and point them out as "victories".

I am sure they will look back in 25 years and think to themselves “what a great investment of my time”.

[LoudmouthMormon]

7 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Apparently the COB has not received the memo from Pres Nelson. 

Ya know, @Diamondhands69, pianos with only one or two keys on them never make beautiful music...

 

For the record, I'm still good with my original responses the last time you brought this up.

Especially this response:

 

And here:

Quote

My point, of course, is it doesn't matter what we do, critics gonna critique, often in ways that directly contradict other criticisms.   [...]  After hearing the "you hide your past" claims for so many decades, since we're publishing everything and anything online for free, it's hardly surprising to find the criticism generator swinging the other way.  Your post is part of a greater trend here, @Diamondhands69.

I'm thinking this is my final opinion on the matter: Yeah, those videos are still there, and everybody can just shut up about it.  You think it's wrong, go start your own church and have your own webpage and change the emphasis on your own name.  Then you can go hide all the videos you want.

 

[teddyaware]

20 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Apparently the COB has not received the memo from Pres Nelson. 
 

third video down Bishop calls Mormons “Mormons.” Also calls the church “the Mormon faith.”

Starting at 25 sec mark. 
 

is the church backing away from the “Victory for Satan “ concept?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-home-and-church-book-of-mormon-2024/01?lang=eng

So you’re at it again! This time with a 13 year-old video in which the interviewee makes it clear that the official name of the church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and does so after explaining that the commonly used expression “Mormon” is a nickname that came about due to the church’s belief in the divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon. In addition, due to the video’s release date it’s likely that this short documentary was produced to possibly be part of the “Meet the Mormon’s” film documentary that had its theatrical release about 13 years ago, but for whatever reason wasn’t’ included in the final edit. It’s also very likely the documentary was titled “Meet the Mormons” because if it was titled “Meet the Latter-Day Saints” most people wouldn’t know what the film was about.

I find it amazing that though the young bishop in the film makes it perfectly clear that Mormon is just nickname, and that the official name of the church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,” yet for some strange reason you gleefully act as if you’ve uncovered a devastating “gotcha moment.” In the following 13 year-old video, elder Jeffrey R. Holland explains what the film “Meet the Mormons” is all about. Please note that he says one of the purposes of the film is to educate the public about the official name of the church .

 

Edited January 8, 2024 by teddyaware

[JAHS]

14 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Apparently the COB has not received the memo from Pres Nelson. 
 

third video down Bishop calls Mormons “Mormons.” Also calls the church “the Mormon faith.”

Starting at 25 sec mark. 
 

is the church backing away from the “Victory for Satan “ concept?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-home-and-church-book-of-mormon-2024/01?lang=eng

I bet you will really like this one by President Ezra Taft Benson. 😉

 

[Diamondhands69]

7 hours ago, JAHS said:

I bet you will really like this one by President Ezra Taft Benson. 😉

 

Actually that is a pretty dumb song. When ETB sang that in conference it was cringe worthy. That said, then Elder Nelson prob went home and broke a vase or something afterwards. He is the one with the problem. 
 

a song about honesty and truth:
 

It is too bad the past few first presidencies, presiding bishoprics and high priests over at ensign peak didn’t keep this song in mind when filling out all the fraudulent 13f paperwork and compelling church member employees to lie about the investments for an entire generation. 
 

The song surely isn’t a victory for Satan. 

Edited January 8, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[Diamondhands69]

8 hours ago, JAHS said:

I bet you will really like this one by President Ezra Taft Benson. 😉

This one is even worse:

Somewhere at a Mormon girls camp. 

[webbles]

54 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

This one is even worse:

Somewhere at a Mormon girls camp. 

I love that song.

[Kenngo1969]

2 hours ago, webbles said:

I love that song.

Could it be ... Satan???!!!

[Stargazer]

On 1/7/2024 at 3:38 PM, Calm said:

Iirc, the video has been around for awhile. I am certain I have seen it before and probably a year or two or more ago (I have no sense of time).  If it was produced overseas, they may not have had as strong of direction when it was done, but my random completely speculative guess they do now. 
 

Maybe @Stargazer can share what the consistency of members in Britain is for the shift in his experience 

added: it is 12 years old, so no mistake or change of trend, just recycling materials for lessons as they have always done 

I've attended church meetings in a number of places in southern England during the past seven years and the members over here seem to have taken seriously the admonition to not call the church the "Mormon Church." It's very seldom that I hear members referring to themselves as "Mormons". And usually it's just the more elderly members. But even then, hardly ever. What I hear in testimony meeting is "I know the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the true Church of Jesus Christ." 

My German-born wife who passed away in 2015 never liked the term "Mormon Church," and long before anyone in church leadership said anything about it, she always preferred the full proper name of the church. If she got a blank look from someone who didn't know what she meant, she would only then mention the name "Mormon." 

 

[Stargazer]

On 1/7/2024 at 4:34 PM, Diamondhands69 said:

It doesn’t matter when the video was made. This CFM curriculum was published in 2023. 

So, are we supposed to be Stalinists and go back "sanitizing" past media to remove all mention of these things? Like they did for the gentleman on the right in the first photo?

Edited January 8, 2024 by Stargazer

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

This one is even worse:

Somewhere at a Mormon girls camp. 

That song is the best!

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

So, are we supposed to be Stalinists and go back "sanitizing" past media to remove all mention of these things? Like they did for the gentleman on the right in the first photo?

If the church’s previous deletion of conference talks is any indication then yes. 
 

they could also choose to use new media or previously existing media which has proper doctrine, no racism, doesn't use the Mormon nickname etc. In this case, the church chose to use an obsolete video in a 2023 publication. 
 

they don’t need to delete anything. I responded to another poster earlier about this, the church can just make a quarantine page on the same website where obsolete, false, controversial, racist, sexiest or whatever other media and publications the church has disavowed or no longer emphasize. The page can be accessed from the main church website and the church can be fully transparent.  Since the church isn’t transparent, this is not possible. 
 

the church has deleted and re-recorded conference talks (without disclosing the re-recording) though so the Stalin label you invoked is owned by the first presidency. 

Edited January 8, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[webbles]

8 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

If the church’s previous deletion of conference talks is any indication then yes. 
 

they could also choose to use new media or previously existing media which has proper doctrine, no racism, doesn't use the Mormon nickname etc. In this case, the church chose to use an obsolete video in a 2023 publication. 
 

they don’t need to delete anything. I responded to another poster earlier about this, the church can just make a quarantine page on the same website where obsolete, false, controversial, racist, sexiest or whatever other media and publications the church has disavowed or no longer emphasize. The page can be accessed from the main church website and the church can be fully transparent.  Since the church isn’t transparent, this is not possible. 
 

the church has deleted and re-recorded conference talks (without disclosing there-recording) though so the Stalin label you invoked is owned by the first presidency. 

Are you talking about Elder Poelman's talk from 1984?  The one that was re-recorded to prevent fundamentists from mis-using it? https://sunstone.org/elder-poelmans-most-famous-speech/

Or are you talking about another one?

[Diamondhands69]

16 minutes ago, webbles said:

Are you talking about Elder Poelman's talk from 1984?  The one that was re-recorded to prevent fundamentists from mis-using it? https://sunstone.org/elder-poelmans-most-famous-speech/

Or are you talking about another one?

That is one. The original is not on the conference site . The other is BK Packers “To young men only” oct ‘76 priesthood session. 

Edited January 8, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

If the church’s previous deletion of conference talks is any indication then yes. 

Ah, good. Glad we've got that settled.

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

they could also choose to use new media or previously existing media which has proper doctrine, no racism, doesn't use the Mormon nickname etc. In this case, the church chose to use an obsolete video in a 2023 publication. 

they don’t need to delete anything. I responded to another poster earlier about this, the church can just make a quarantine page on the same website where obsolete, false, controversial, racist, sexiest or whatever other media and publications the church has disavowed or no longer emphasize. The page can be accessed from the main church website and the church can be fully transparent.  Since the church isn’t transparent, this is not possible. 

the church has deleted and re-recorded conference talks (without disclosing the re-recording) though so the Stalin label you invoked is owned by the first presidency. 

Fair enough! Although it does seem to be a wise move to correct things that are judged incorrect, especially when people are prone to take things exceedingly seriously. No doubt I've said some perhaps spurious things from the pulpit when giving talks. I recall a previous stake president who came up to me after I gave a talk in sacrament meeting wondering where on earth I came up with the particular thing I had said. Perhaps if the talk had been given for publication he might have wanted me to re-write/re-record part of it. A couple of weeks after that he mentioned it again to me: "I'm still thinking about what you said on that Sunday!" I wish I could remember what it was he was questioning, but in the mists of time I've long forgotten. 

In fact, I've written some things here that I've gotten considerable pushback on. Not that I was wrong, but if I could be shown to be wrong, I'd retract it. I've done that at least once.

[Tacenda]

On 1/8/2024 at 6:47 AM, Diamondhands69 said:

This one is even worse:

Somewhere at a Mormon girls camp. 

This is hilarious, reminds me of my oldest daughter's era. I remember her doing this with different wording. I swear they spell out more men at one time too, lol. 

[Diamondhands69]

58 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I swear they spell out more men at one time too, lol. 

Yes they did that at least once. 
 

this songbook has one in it called “more-men”

https://www.allthingsthrifty.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Girls-Camp-Songbook.pdf

[Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Yes they did that at least once. 
 

this songbook has one in it called “more-men”

https://www.allthingsthrifty.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Girls-Camp-Songbook.pdf

My favorite song in the Boy Scout songbook was called "Pink Pajamas"