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

[telnetd]

On 1/7/2024 at 10:24 AM, Diamondhands69 said:

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

Do you also believe all Catholic and Protestant churches provide a victory for Satan
when they call their church "St Mary's Catholic Church" or "Bethel Church" for example
instead of "The Church of Jesus Christ?"

[Diamondhands69]

4 hours ago, telnetd said:

Do you also believe all Catholic and Protestant churches provide a victory for Satan
when they call their church "St Mary's Catholic Church" or "Bethel Church" for example
instead of "The Church of Jesus Christ?"

I don’t even believe the Mormon church or calling it the “Mormon “ church is a victory for Satan. Take that up with RM Nelson-the Mormon Prophet. 
 

as for the other churches- if their leaders say they are then that is their problem. I don’t care what Mormons want to call themselves. I’m just pointing out that the prophet said not to do it, yet the church continues to do it. They are not serious about it. Fake controversy. 

[MustardSeed]

40 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Fake controversy

Indeed. 

[Stargazer]

3 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Fake controversy. 

Perhaps, but I don't think the controversy is a church-made controversy. I feel it's more a matter of the controversy which the permanently offended of the ex- and anti-Mormon community keep bringing up.

Is the church 100% consistent about the "Mormon" thing? No. It almost can't be. There's too much history for it to be totally abandoned. Especially since the church's enemies won't let it go. In fact, do not want to let it go.

Is it a victory for Satan that the name of Jesus Christ doesn't get the prominence He deserves? Yes. Absolutely.

[Diamondhands69]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Perhaps, but I don't think the controversy is a church-made controversy. I feel it's more a matter of the controversy which the permanently offended of the ex- and anti-Mormon community keep bringing up.

The controversy is of the church’s creation… rather Russel m Nelson’s creation. Declaring from the pulpit to the world Mormon ( used in a few different circumstances) is a victory for Satan … where all previous prophets who used the term to describe members of the church were thrown under the bus as agents for the devil. Then go on a rebranding spree spending millions of tithing dollars for a hobby horse project to include re naming Motab to a ridiculous name, SEO, renaming ad infinitum and sending out a style guide for the heathens to obey. Yea the controversy is bought and paid for by the church. 

Edited January 13, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[webbles]

6 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Declaring from the pulpit to the world Mormon ( used in a few different circumstances) is a victory for Satan

But he did NOT declare that.  He declared using a nickname for the church was a victory.  So LDS church is a problem, Mormon church is a problem, The Church of Latter-day Saints is a problem.  The word "Mormon" is not a "victory for Satan".

And it didn't start with him.  The church has been trying to get people to not call the church "Mormon church" before he was called as an apostle.  The Book of Mormon even states it.

[Stormin' Mormon]

13 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

The controversy is of the church’s creation… rather Russel m Nelson’s creation. Declaring from the pulpit to the world Mormon ( used in a few different circumstances) is a victory for Satan 

Except that he didn't.  His exact words:

Quote

To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s Church is a major victory for Satan.

Not AT ALL the same thing you are claiming.  This is from President Nelson's October 2018 talk.  If there was another instance in which he specifically said that the word "Mormon" was a victory for Satan, I'd like to know about it.  Consider this a formal CFR.  

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Except that he didn't.  His exact words:

Not AT ALL the same thing you are claiming.  This is from President Nelson's October 2018 talk.  If there was another instance in which he specifically said that the word "Mormon" was a victory for Satan, I'd like to know about it.  Consider this a formal CFR.  

Also his exact words: 

“Thus, the name of the Church is not negotiable. When the Savior clearly states what the name of His Church should be and even precedes His declaration with, “Thus shall my church be called,” He is serious. And if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended.”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/10/the-correct-name-of-the-church?lang=eng

not a victory for Satan?? Offending the Savior. What word is he talking about? 

Edited January 13, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Except that he didn't.  His exact words:

Not AT ALL the same thing you are claiming.  This is from President Nelson's October 2018 talk.  If there was another instance in which he specifically said that the word "Mormon" was a victory for Satan, I'd like to know about it.  Consider this a formal CFR.  

What other words are you thinking of??? Any others come to mind in that talk? Besides MORMON?

[Stormin' Mormon]

17 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Also his exact words: 

“Thus, the name of the Church is not negotiable. When the Savior clearly states what the name of His Church should be and even precedes His declaration with, “Thus shall my church be called,” He is serious. And if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended.”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/10/the-correct-name-of-the-church?lang=eng

 

 

Doesn't answer the CFR. Your claim was:

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Declaring from the pulpit to the world Mormon ( used in a few different circumstances) is a victory for Satan

President Nelson said that removing the name of Christ from the name of His Church is a victory for Satan. He also said that God is offended by the use of a nickname. 

Unless you can show otherwise, President Nelson did not say that the use of the nickname is a victory for Satan. A victory for Satan is not synonymous with offending God.

You can't take a little from Column A and a little from Column B and glom them together to concoct a claim that President Nelson didn't actually make.

Please cite a reference or withdraw the above claim.

Edited January 13, 2024 by Stormin' Mormon

[Diamondhands69]

26 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Doesn't answer the CFR. Your claim was:

President Nelson said that removing the name of Christ from the name of His Church is a victory for Satan. He also said that God is offended by the use of a nickname. 

Unless you can show otherwise, President Nelson did not say that the use of the nickname is a victory for Satan. A victory for Satan is not synonymous with offending God.

You can't take a little from Column A and a little from Column B and glom them together to concoct a claim that President Nelson didn't actually make.

Please cite a reference or withdraw the above claim.

I provided a cfr. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t bind me to keep providing alternate CFRs till you are satisfied. You will have to get over it. 
 

look.. you can win the internet today.. congrats. 
 

ps- I’m not withdrawing the claim either. There is a reason nearly everything Mormon is getting tossed in the memory hole. It offends the Savior and delights the devil 

Edited January 13, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[InCognitus]

Uh, wake up!  We are studying the Book of MORMON this year.   

Woops, why did that strikethrough happen??  Oh no! 

Edited January 13, 2024 by InCognitus

[webbles]

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

Also his exact words: 

“Thus, the name of the Church is not negotiable. When the Savior clearly states what the name of His Church should be and even precedes His declaration with, “Thus shall my church be called,” He is serious. And if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended.”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2018/10/the-correct-name-of-the-church?lang=eng

not a victory for Satan?? Offending the Savior. What word is he talking about? 

He is talking about the nickname for the name of the church. "Mormon church", "LDS church", etc.  Not the word Mormon.

The talk doesn't mention anything about whether we can call ourselves Mormons.  The style guide does and I believe it is to help reinforce the idea that the "Mormon church" nickname is wrong.  It has always been wrong.  Even during the "I am a Mormon" campaign, the name of the church was never "Mormon church".

[Diamondhands69]

1 minute ago, webbles said:

He is serious. And if we allow nicknames to be used or adopt or even sponsor those nicknames ourselves, He is offended.”

I’m pretty sure we’re talking bout the same thing. Mormon is a nickname for member of the (insert huge long name) …. It isn’t the word Mormon by itself; it is calling oneself a Mormon, calling others Mormon or calling the church the Mormon church. 

[Diamondhands69]

13 minutes ago, webbles said:

He is talking about the nickname for the name of the church. "Mormon church", "LDS church", etc.  Not the word Mormon.

I agree. The style guide is the policy the church put out. It is an extension and execution of the change pres Nelson presented over the pulpit. 
 

Why change all this other stuff if it isn’t carrying out the will of the prophet? You think he has no clue the church changed nearly everything that said Mormon? He authorized the expenditure of millions of tithepayer $$ to make these changes. If using the word Mormon as a nickname was only a victory for Satan when using it to replace the name of the church, why the name change for Motab?

and the new name for Motab is about the dumbest thing ever. Bring back Motab. It was the only cultural cachet the church had. Now it has none as evidenced by a recent survey posted on this forum a while back. 

Edited January 13, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[MustardSeed]

11 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I agree. The style guide is the policy the church put out. It is an extension and execution of the change pres Nelson presented over the pulpit. 
 

Why change all this other stuff if it isn’t carrying out the will of the prophet? You think he has no clue the church changed nearly everything that said Mormon? He authorized the expenditure of millions of tithepayer $$ to make these changes. If using the word Mormon as a nickname was only a victory for Satan when using it to replace the name of the church, why the name change for Motab?

I don’t understand why this is the hill you seem to want to die on?  You’re trying to point out the inconsistencies and the hypocrisy in the people or in the prophet? Or both? 
 
i think if it were a simple quick cost efficient change, it would be made.  Most of us don’t care too much either way but we’re trying our best to do our part and also to demonstrate good effort.  
 

im sure there are other issues where you could easily ID inconsistency and hypocrisy that might carry more impact, like our focus on health in Wow but our leniency with sugar, or our focus on the family vs The excessive time away from family to serve the church? Or the directive to never discuss heavenly mother but yet she’s mentioned in that approved hymn? 
 

news flash- we are flawed. The list goes on and on. 

Edited January 13, 2024 by MustardSeed

[Diamondhands69]

7 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I don’t understand why this is the hill you seem to want to die on?  You’re trying to point out the inconsistencies and the hypocrisy in the people or in the prophet? Or both? 
 
i think if it were a simple quick cost efficient change, it would be made.  Most of us don’t care too much either way but we’re trying our best to do our part and also to demonstrate good effort.  
 

im sure there are other issues where you could easily ID inconsistency and hypocrisy that might carry more impact, like our focus on health in Wow but our leniency with sugar, or our focus on the family vs The excessive time away from family to serve the church? Or the directive to never discuss heavenly mother but yet she’s mentioned in that approved hymn? 
 

news flash- we are flawed. The list goes on and on. 

Thanks for the new list of things to criticize. I’m gonna start working on one of them. Will be a great way to spend my phone time in EQ on Sunday. 

[Diamondhands69]

6 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I don’t understand why this is the hill you seem to want to die on?  

Speaking of… if this is a seemingly trivial topic not worth discussing; why are you even responding? 
 

lame topic and it gets 66 replies lol

[Stormin' Mormon]

7 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I provided a cfr. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t bind me to keep providing alternate CFRs till you are satisfied. You will have to get over it. 
 

You provided a quote where President Nelson did not say the thing you said he did.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  He did not say it, declare it, or pronounce it.  Your assertion that he "declared it over the pulpit" is a lie. I will be satisfied with a fulfilled CFR if you can provide a quote from President Nelson saying what you said he did.  

7 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

look.. you can win the internet today.. congrats. 
 

CFRs are not about winning the internet or pwning other posters.  It's about maintaining clear communication between posters.  Even though you failed at producing a single reference in support of your assertion, the attempt to do so provides some insight into your thought process and why and how you fabricated the assertion in the first place.  I'm not interested in any victories today, but in making sure that all parties (you, me, and innocent bystanders) are fully aware of what support our claims actually do or do not have.  

[webbles]

8 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I’m pretty sure we’re talking bout the same thing. Mormon is a nickname for member of the (insert huge long name) …. It isn’t the word Mormon by itself; it is calling oneself a Mormon, calling others Mormon or calling the church the Mormon church. 

He is talking about the name of the church.  The entire talk is about the name of the church.  The times he mentions "victory for Satan" or "offends God", it is about the name of the church.  So it isn't about the term "Mormon" but only when it is a nickname for the church, such as "Mormon church".  The style guide says not to call members "LDS" either.

8 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I agree. The style guide is the policy the church put out. It is an extension and execution of the change pres Nelson presented over the pulpit. 
 

Why change all this other stuff if it isn’t carrying out the will of the prophet? You think he has no clue the church changed nearly everything that said Mormon? He authorized the expenditure of millions of tithepayer $$ to make these changes. If using the word Mormon as a nickname was only a victory for Satan when using it to replace the name of the church, why the name change for Motab?

and the new name for Motab is about the dumbest thing ever. Bring back Motab. It was the only cultural cachet the church had. Now it has none as evidenced by a recent survey posted on this forum a while back. 

The church has tried for many years to have people stop referring to us as "Mormon church", "LDS church", etc.  Nothing has really worked.  So President Nelson was inspired to use a more drastic approach.  If we change the names of our institutions that have "Mormon" in it, then it breaks the connection.  If someone says "Mormon Tabernacle Choir", it sounds like it is from the "Mormon church".

You are conflating two different things.  The "victory for Satan" and the "offends God" is only about the name of the church being misused.  The massive renaming of things related to the church (Mormon Tabernacle Choir -> The Tabernacle Choir at Temple Square) is trying to help prevent misuse of the name of the church.  Calling the Tabernacle Choir "MoTab" or "Mormon Tabernacle Choir" is not a "victory for Satan" or "offends God".  It is only when talking about the church.

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

You provided a quote where President Nelson did not say the thing you said he did.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  He did not say it, declare it, or pronounce it.  Your assertion that he "declared it over the pulpit" is a lie. I will be satisfied with a fulfilled CFR if you can provide a quote from President Nelson saying what you said he did.  

CFRs are not about winning the internet or pwning other posters.  It's about maintaining clear communication between posters.  Even though you failed at producing a single reference in support of your assertion, the attempt to do so provides some insight into your thought process and why and how you fabricated the assertion in the first place.  I'm not interested in any victories today, but in making sure that all parties (you, me, and innocent bystanders) are fully aware of what support our claims actually do or do not have.  

My communication is clear. You just don’t agree. That’s ok. You will have to get over the fact I’m not losing sleep over providing evidence to your liking. Take care. 

[Raingirl]

2 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

You provided a quote where President Nelson did not say the thing you said he did.  No ifs, ands, or buts.  He did not say it, declare it, or pronounce it.  Your assertion that he "declared it over the pulpit" is a lie. I will be satisfied with a fulfilled CFR if you can provide a quote from President Nelson saying what you said he did.  

CFRs are not about winning the internet or pwning other posters.  It's about maintaining clear communication between posters.  Even though you failed at producing a single reference in support of your assertion, the attempt to do so provides some insight into your thought process and why and how you fabricated the assertion in the first place.  I'm not interested in any victories today, but in making sure that all parties (you, me, and innocent bystanders) are fully aware of what support our claims actually do or do not have.  

In my experience, and probably your’s too, people refuse to respond to a CFR because no proof or documentation actually exists, and they don’t want to admit to that. 

[Stormin' Mormon]

45 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

My communication is clear. You just don’t agree. That’s ok. You will have to get over the fact I’m not losing sleep over providing evidence to your liking. Take care. 

It's not a matter of me agreeing with you or not. This is a black-and-white, yes-or-no, objectively verifiable fact on which you are wrong (or unwilling to provide documentation for).  

You literally said that President Nelson declared "over the pulpit to the world that Mormon, used in a few different circumstances, is a victory for Satan." Your exact words.  And yet, President Nelson said no such thing.  He said a couple of things that are vaguely similar, that is true.  It may even be argued that those vaguely similar things can create an inference that this is what President Nelson really meant, even if he didn't actually say it.  But that's not what you've argued.  You are arguing that words came out of President Nelson's mouth that everybody reading the source material can see did not come out of his mouth. 

I'm done with the board nannying.  Do what you will with your board credibility; I'm not the boss of you.  

 

 

[mfbukowski]

On 1/12/2024 at 7:12 PM, Diamondhands69 said:

The controversy is of the church’s creation… rather Russel m Nelson’s creation. Declaring from the pulpit to the world Mormon ( used in a few different circumstances) is a victory for Satan … where all previous prophets who used the term to describe members of the church were thrown under the bus as agents for the devil. Then go on a rebranding spree spending millions of tithing dollars for a hobby horse project to include re naming Motab to a ridiculous name, SEO, renaming ad infinitum and sending out a style guide for the heathens to obey. Yea the controversy is bought and paid for by the church. 

I thought Mormons prayed to an Indian God and his saints.

Now I know better.

Sort of.

[mfbukowski]

On 1/13/2024 at 8:16 AM, Stormin' Mormon said:

It's not a matter of me agreeing with you or not. This is a black-and-white, yes-or-no, objectively verifiable fact on which you are wrong (or unwilling to provide documentation for).  

You literally said that President Nelson declared "over the pulpit to the world that Mormon, used in a few different circumstances, is a victory for Satan." Your exact words.  And yet, President Nelson said no such thing.  He said a couple of things that are vaguely similar, that is true.  It may even be argued that those vaguely similar things can create an inference that this is what President Nelson really meant, even if he didn't actually say it.  But that's not what you've argued.  You are arguing that words came out of President Nelson's mouth that everybody reading the source material can see did not come out of his mouth. 

I'm done with the board nannying.  Do what you will with your board credibility; I'm not the boss of you.  

 

 

Just note how many pluses you get vs all the minuses he racks up.

Fergitabouthim.