The Truth about Mormons

[JakeStarkey]

The Temple Lot Case (1893) found the RLDS of Joseph Smith III to be the real descendants of the church of Joseph Smith, not the LDS Church, Truthspeaker.

The RLDS can have all claims to "the church of Joseph Smith" for all I care. Especially since it's not a church that Joseph established. We'll take the the original church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Clearly the federal case ruling, which makes it law, does not agree with your opinion.

 

[Truthspeaker]

The Temple Lot Case (1893) found the RLDS of Joseph Smith III to be the real descendants of the church of Joseph Smith, not the LDS Church, Truthspeaker.

The RLDS can have all claims to "the church of Joseph Smith" for all I care. Especially since it's not a church that Joseph established. We'll take the the original church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Clearly the federal case ruling, which makes it law, does not agree with your opinion.

Definitions of fact (n)
fact [ fakt ]

something known to be true: something that can be shown to be true, to exist, or to have happened despite statements of JakeStarkey to the contrary.

truth or reality of something: the truth or actual existence of something, as opposed to the supposition of something or a belief about something independant of opposing statements of JakeStarkey.

piece of information: a piece of information, e.g. a statistic or a statement of the truth which oftentimes may elude discovery by JakeStarkey.

Synonyms: piece of information, detail, datum, circumstance, statistic, element, point. All which may or may not come to attention of said starkey.

The fact in this matter is that the official church begun by Joseph Smith on the legal record is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints."

In whatever quack case you're referring to I haven't seen the feds deregulate us(as if they actually could) and turn over our assets and authorities over to the Reorganites, RLDS, Community of Christ or whatever name they decide to give themselves next. Major Fail by Starkey.

 

[Skeptik]

The Temple Lot Case (1893) found the RLDS of Joseph Smith III to be the real descendants of the church of Joseph Smith, not the LDS Church, Truthspeaker.

The RLDS can have all claims to "the church of Joseph Smith" for all I care. Especially since it's not a church that Joseph established. We'll take the the original church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Clearly the federal case ruling, which makes it law, does not agree with your opinion.

The temple lot case was about a disputed property, and had nothing to do with with the legitimacy of the Mormon Church vs. the Reorganized church.

Moreover, the case was overturned on appeal, not that it matters now.

Saying the RLDS or FLDS are Mormons is like saying that the Baptists and Lutherans are Catholic. It's absurd.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The RLDS can have all claims to "the church of Joseph Smith" for all I care. Especially since it's not a church that Joseph established. We'll take the the original church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Clearly the federal case ruling, which makes it law, does not agree with your opinion.

Definitions of fact (n)
fact [ fakt ]

something known to be true: something that can be shown to be true, to exist, or to have happened despite statements of JakeStarkey to the contrary.

truth or reality of something: the truth or actual existence of something, as opposed to the supposition of something or a belief about something independant of opposing statements of JakeStarkey.

piece of information: a piece of information, e.g. a statistic or a statement of the truth which oftentimes may elude discovery by JakeStarkey.

Synonyms: piece of information, detail, datum, circumstance, statistic, element, point. All which may or may not come to attention of said starkey.

The fact in this matter is that the official church begun by Joseph Smith on the legal record is "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints."

In whatever quack case you're referring to I haven't seen the feds deregulate us(as if they actually could) and turn over our assets and authorities over to the Reorganites, RLDS, Community of Christ or whatever name they decide to give themselves next. Major Fail by Starkey.

Then go read the case, Truthspeaker, at Temple Lot Case Information, Temple Lot Case Reference Articles - FindTarget Reference. There is a hidden bonus for you in it if you do. Go find it, and you will truly be pleased.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Skeptic, you misread the document, and you know iit. Where your parallel falls apart is that Lutherans and Baptists and Catholics are Christian. The RLDS and FLDS are Mormons, as are the Hedrickites, Wightites, the Latter Day Saints, and so on. Knowledgable and informed LDS mormons know they are not the only mormons.

 

[Christopher]

Skeptic, you misread the document, and you know iit. Where your parallel falls apart is that Lutherans and Baptists and Catholics are Christian. The RLDS and FLDS are Mormons, as are the Hedrickites, Wightites, the Latter Day Saints, and so on. Knowledgable and informed LDS mormons know they are not the only mormons.

From your source in the previous post:

The Temple Lot Case also known as the Temple Lot Suit and formally known as "The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, complainant, vs. the Church of Christ at Independence, Missouri" was a United States legal case in the 1890s which addressed legal ownership of the Temple Lot, a significant parcel of land in the Latter Day Saint movement. In the case, the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS Church) claimed legal title of the land and asked the court to order the Church of Christ (Temple Lot) to cease its occupation of the property. The RLDS Church won the case at trial, but the decision was reversed on appeal.

Sounds like Skeptic had it right on regarding the case.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Snap. I was waiting for it. I don't care about how the case turned out, but used it to remove a message-point here that has been trumpeted over and over. The error has been that only LDS are Mormons. Nonsense. More than 117 years ago the federal court did not discriminate among "Mormon" denominations. The court obviously accepted the validity they all followed Joseph Smith and the Restoration, thus all had a part, and all were Mormons.

Now let's hear that nonsense again, that only LDS are Mormons, which is an absolute fallacy.

 

[Christopher]

Snap. I was waiting for it. I don't care about how the case turned out, but used it to remove a message-point here that has been trumpeted over and over. The error has been that only LDS are Mormons. Nonsense. More than 117 years ago the federal court did not discriminate among "Mormon" denominations. The court obviously accepted the validity they all followed Joseph Smith and the Restoration, thus all had a part, and all were Mormons.

Now let's hear that nonsense again, that only LDS are Mormons, which is an absolute fallacy.

Definitions change over time, that is the way it is. However, current definitions for Mormon seem to be consistent:

Mormon - Definition of Mormon at YourDictionary.com

a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (commonly called the Mormon Church), founded in the U.S. in 1830 by Joseph Smith: among its sacred books is the Book of Mormon, represented by Smith as his translation of an account of some ancient American peoples by a prophet among them named Mormon

Mormon - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

A member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And you can find other dictionaries that define the term appropriately, which is that any follower of Joseph Smith and the Restorations are mormons. The various denominations of Mormonisn include the LDS, the RLDS, the CoC, the Restoration and Reorganization branches, the various fundamentalist polygmous branches, such as the FLDS, and so on.

 

[Skeptik]

And you can find other dictionaries that define the term appropriately, which is that any follower of Joseph Smith and the Restorations are mormons. The various denominations of Mormonisn include the LDS, the RLDS, the CoC, the Restoration and Reorganization branches, the various fundamentalist polygmous branches, such as the FLDS, and so on.

No, I seriously doubt that you can find a dictionary that doesn't have an anti Mormon agenda that would define the church that way.

Getting back to the analogy of Lutherans and Baptists being Catholic, those two denominations are called "protestant" as they came about through protest against the Catholic church. The RLDS and FLDS came about in much the same way. Calling churches that came about as a protest against the mainstream as denominations of the mainstream church is much like saying that the Lutherans are a Catholic denomination.

Since Catholics, Protestants, and Mormons all worship Christ and believe in the atonement, all of them are Christian churches by definition.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Skeptic: two words ~ grow up. The persecution complex gets tiring for all of us, you know. And your ending sentences only support the concept that Mormons applies to followers of Joseph Smith. Try again.

OK, famous anti-Mormon sites that hates the LDS.

Mormon Church. n. Mormon: Definition from Answers.com 1. An ancient prophet believed to have compiled a sacred history of the Americas, which were translated and published by Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon in 1830.
2. A member of the Mormon Church. Also called Latter-day Saint [which the RLDS loved to call themselves]. adj. Of or relating to the Mormons, their religion, or the Mormon Church.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language
Mor·mon (môrmn) Mormon Church n. 1. An ancient prophet believed to have compiled a sacred history of the Americas, which were translated and published by Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon in 1830.
2. A member of the Mormon Church. Also called Latter-day Saint. adj. Of or relating to the Mormons, their religion, or the Mormon Church. Mormon·ism n. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Another example that 'Mormon' is not an exclusive property of the LDS Church is how it is used in history works. One respected scholar defines Mormonism in terms as those who "still practiced those tenants marking them as a sect of nineteenth-century Mormonism: temple ritual, economic communitarianism, and polygamy." Scholars about Mormon history including active temple-card temple going LDS historians, such as Richard E. Bennett and Richard E. Bushman and Todd Compton, do not use it exclusively any more than inactive LDS historians like Will Bagley, or excommunicated former LDS historians like Mike Quinn or Lavina F. Anderson, or non-LDS Mormon historians like Steven Shields or Ron Romig or Newell Bringhurst or Bill Russell, or non-LDS historians beloved by the LDS like Jan Shipps.

Skeptic, simply put, you LDS can use your definitions as you wish, but when you put them in the public forum, do not think they will be automatically excepted or that you rebut successfully. The rest of the world is not held hostage to 13mm peoples' beliefs.

And, oh, all should note that when a LDS defender starts talking about "apostate" or "anti-Mormon" this or that, you will know automatically such person is on tenuous ground and knows it. In my research, I have seen a concerted effort by LDS folks to try to dominate the 'definition' game with a small amount of success. The real place to look is how those who deal with the term socially, politically, culturally, economically, and philosophically use it.

 

[Skeptik]

Skeptic: two words ~ grow up. The persecution complex gets tiring for all of us, you know. And your ending sentences only support the concept that Mormons applies to followers of Joseph Smith. Try again.

Persecution complex? Please. I just don't like to see misinformation being spread around.

OK, famous anti-Mormon sites that hates the LDS.

Mormon Church. n. Mormon: Definition from Answers.com 1. An ancient prophet believed to have compiled a sacred history of the Americas, which were translated and published by Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon in 1830.
2. A member of the Mormon Church. Also called Latter-day Saint [which the RLDS loved to call themselves]. adj. Of or relating to the Mormons, their religion, or the Mormon Church.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language
Mor·mon (môrmn) Mormon Church n. 1. An ancient prophet believed to have compiled a sacred history of the Americas, which were translated and published by Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon in 1830.
2. A member of the Mormon Church. Also called Latter-day Saint. adj. Of or relating to the Mormons, their religion, or the Mormon Church. Mormon·ism n. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

"A member of the Mormon Church, AKA Latter Day Saint"

"A member of the Mormon church"

Both good definitions. Neither one mentions RLDS or FLDS, only LDS, regardless of what the RLDS "loved to call themselves."

Skeptic, simply put, you LDS can use your definitions as you wish, but when you put them in the public forum, do not think they will be automatically excepted or that you rebut successfully. The rest of the world is not held hostage to 13mm peoples' beliefs.

Thanks, I will. You can except them if you want, but I'm not sure what you're excepting them from.

13mm people? I think most people are taller than that. I have no idea what you might mean by that.

And, oh, all should note that when a LDS defender starts talking about "apostate" or "anti-Mormon" this or that, you will know automatically such person is on tenuous ground and knows it. In my research, I have seen a concerted effort by LDS folks to try to dominate the 'definition' game with a small amount of success. The real place to look is how those who deal with the term socially, politically, culturally, economically, and philosophically use it.

No, I'll accept the definitions given by the dictionaries you have cited. No need to defend them. I'm not sure just where the word "apostate" came from, but it wasn't in my post.

There is nothing wrong with the FLDS or the RLDS. They just aren't LDS, not any more than the Lutherans are Catholics. That doesn't mean that Lutherans are apostate Catholics, does it?

Oh, yes, and the term "LDS Defender" tells us exactly where you're coming from. I'm not trying to defend anything other than the facts.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Thank you!

1. You admit the FLDS and the CoC and all the rest are not of the CoJCofLDS. Yet all of them are Mormon becaue they follow Joseph Smith and the Restoration.

2. Mormon historians use the term to define all of the followers of Joseph Smith and the Restoration.

3. My sites above demonstrate that the term is not exclusive to the LDS, or they would have made that inclusiveness as part of the definition.

The rest of the world is not confined or confounded by your desire for a limited definition of the term.

And, yes, every time the word "anti-Mormon" or "apostate" or whatever is used, users of those words are whinging, revealing a persecution complex. Two words: grow up.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Snap. I was waiting for it. I don't care about how the case turned out, but used it to remove a message-point here that has been trumpeted over and over. The error has been that only LDS are Mormons. Nonsense. More than 117 years ago the federal court did not discriminate among "Mormon" denominations. The court obviously accepted the validity they all followed Joseph Smith and the Restoration, thus all had a part, and all were Mormons.

Now let's hear that nonsense again, that only LDS are Mormons, which is an absolute fallacy.

For this notion of yours I revert back to my original statement that "Mormons" is a nickname given to us by people who didn't understand us and persecuted us. How would they know the difference between a "Mormon" and an ex-"Mormon". It's a nickname we never asked for anyway. You are entitled to nickname anyone anything you want. I've said before I wish we could somehow get away from the nickname label. If I could give it to polygamists and let them keep it, I'd be happy with it if we could get our real name out there.
The Fact of the matter is that there is one church that Joseph Smith established. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. There are no sects of this church even if defected members call themselves a sect of our church because we have no respect for their authority, and recognize none of their ordinances.

That being said, when the nickname "Mormons" is heard, 99% of all people in the world understand that it is the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints that is being referred to. Perception is not reality.

 

[Truthspeaker]

1. You admit the FLDS and the CoC and all the rest are not of the CoJCofLDS. Yet all of them are Mormon becaue they follow Joseph Smith and the Restoration.

Do they? If Joseph Smith clearly and explicitly told them "He who leaves the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has lost his way.", are they really following Joseph Smith? I'm sure they think by their interpretation somehow they're following him. But if they really followed him they would have stayed in the Church and not renamed the inspired name of the Church into something else that was not revealed in the Doctrine and Covenants.
They've broken so many of the laws in our books that it's impossible to say they're followers of Joseph Smith. They are not followers of Christ via Joseph Smith either.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nonetheless, Mormonism and being Mormon encompasses anyone who believes in Joseph Smith and the Restoration. It is not solely for use to identify only LDS as Mormons.

 

[JakeStarkey]

All who follow Joseph Smith and the Restoration are Mormons and part of Mormonism.

Thus, LDS, FLDS, CoC, RLDS, TSLDS, AvatarLDS are all part of Mormonism and are Mormons.

 

[Skeptik]

All who follow Joseph Smith and the Restoration are Mormons and part of Mormonism.

Thus, LDS, FLDS, CoC, RLDS, TSLDS, AvatarLDS are all part of Mormonism and are Mormons.

and by that same logic, the Lutherans, Catholics, Baptists, etc. are all the same since they are all Christians.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are almost there, Skeptic, they are all the same in that they are Christians. Thus, LDS and FLDS etc are all the same in that they are Mormons. Now the parsing comes in what kind of Christian or Mormon might be.

I suspect you are a member of the LDS of Mormonism, which is part of Christianity (and to those of you who say 'no' to Mormon as Christian, you are willful morons - the worst kind - who don't learn your own scriptures and teachings). The difference then comes in the parsing of Christianity.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You are almost there, Skeptic, they are all the same in that they are Christians. Thus, LDS and FLDS etc are all the same in that they are Mormons. Now the parsing comes in what kind of Christian or Mormon might be.

I suspect you are a member of the LDS of Mormonism, which is part of Christianity (and to those of you who say 'no' to Mormon as Christian, you are willful morons - the worst kind - who don't learn your own scriptures and teachings). The difference then comes in the parsing of Christianity.

It will be interesting to see what labels people are given by God at the last day and what labels they had given themselves which get stripped away.

You forget to question the authority of the labelers. Whoever they are. Who has the right to dish out a label I might ask you Jake?