What did the Asians, Indians and others do?

[_Chap]

... Frankly, I think you guys are too afraid to admit that your quotes are out of context or not in a doctrinal work (suach as is the case here) which is why you don't see too many references unless someone calls you on it....

A hypothetical dialogue:

Apostle (brandishing gun): Hi there TBM. You have to give me all your money or I'll blow your head off... and gee, that's a pretty daughter you got there, and I'm feeling horny. Pass her over too.

TBM: Um, Mr Apostle, I am really worried about what you are saying. Let's get the context right. I mean, I have to know if you really are speaking as an Apostle and if this is doctrine.

Apostle (pointing gun at TBM while backing into bedroom with girl): Hell no. I'm just speaking as a plain ole ornery robber and rapist. It's Friday and I'm off duty.

TBM: Gee thanks. That really sets my mind at rest. For a moment, I was really worried about what the anti-mormons would say about this!

[_cinepro]

Sometimes they spoke as Apostles and Prophets and sometimes they spoke as boobs.

Did you know that searching for the word "boobs" at LDS.org returns three results?

My favorite is this one:

I took her by the hand, and as we walked along the hallway, all I could do was squeeze her ... boobs ... in the hallway. But we didn’t pay any attention to the traffic because something momentous was happening to us. Our lives had been changed.

David B. Haight This Work Is True

(The above is based on a post someone else did sometime somewhere, but I can't remember who or when or where).

[_SatanWasSetUp]

Here you go BC SpacedOut, because you are too damned lazy to look it up.

How do you know I didn't look it up? A good debater often knows the answer before he asks the question thereby making the opposition prove his point in giving the answer.

If you make the claim, it is incumbent on YOU to show the proof or the basis. Frankly, I think you guys are too afraid to admit that your quotes are out of context or not in a doctrinal work (suach as is the case here) which is why you don't see too many references unless someone calls you on it.

Make sure your argument is airtight next time or you'll lose the initiative yet again.

Mark E Peterson's racist comments are common knowledge. CFR is typically reserved for new or obscure things that most people don't know about.

[_Gazelam]

There is evidence to say that the true gospel was taught and practiced for a time in Northwest China.

[_John Larsen]

There is evidence to say that the true gospel was taught and practiced for a time in Northwest China.

By all means, do go on.

[_sunstoned]

What many non-believers say is that it is strange that an apostle who is supposed to be in communion with God could be so completely, outrageously, cruelly out of touch with goodness and decency, let alone truth.

So true. So sadly true. There is no excuse for this at all.

[_moksha]

There is evidence to say that the true gospel was taught and practiced for a time in Northwest China.

Might as well cite the Kama Sutra for collateral proof as well.

[_Chap]

There is evidence to say that the true gospel was taught and practiced for a time in Northwest China.

Naah. Those two are clearly just another couple of Masons.

http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/symbolism/china_texts.html

[_truth dancer]

There is evidence to say that the true gospel was taught and practiced for a time in Northwest China.

Anxiously awaiting more...

It certainly could not be that humans have used symbols even before language. It could not be that humankind came to understand certain "truths" like the sun and water had something to do with life, that mating was part of their experience, that snakes shed their skin, that seeds turned into plants, that the moon changed its appearance, etc. etc. etc.

No... it must be that everyone knew the one true gospel, and were all members of the CoJCoLDS minus the LDS.