Ballard, you are a pathetic, bold faced liar

[_kairos]

Wasting 20 minutes on defining, describing and defending the "true" name of church says a lot about the fortress mentality of the LDS leadership. nothing ballard said has anything to do with leading a christian life but everything to do with inane pronouncements of the so-called apostles who supposedly have some kind of special witness of Jesus.

can you imagine helen whitney or charlie rose interviewing ballard and him going off on the drivel concerning the church's name? that interview would find itself on the cutting room floor.

in general all the GC talks exhort the faithful to do this or that, to follow the LDS regimen of life- and as my son asked "Havn't any of these guys had a recent spiritual experience so they would not have to go back 30-40+ years to dig up a missionary story or in monson's case the helping the widow story"-how true!

it is truly pathetic the drone of every speaker reading from the telepromter the crap the ghost writers have put together as supposed "wise counsel from the brethren"


as george carlin said "its all bulls*&tt and don't let anyone tell you differently"-Right on brother carlin Preach on!!!

[_just me]

Isn't it supposed to be "bald faced" liar? I don't really know for sure, but that's how I learned it.

They are both used. (Thanks google) Bald-faced liar first made it into print in 1943. Bold-faced liar dates to 1591. Bare-faced liar is a year older than that. LOL

Learn something new every damn day...

[_consiglieri]

Bare-chested liar.


2011.

[_Buffalo]

Bare-chested liar.


2011.

Bald lipped liar. Never trust anyone without a 'stache

[_jon]

Bald balled liar

You know they're gonna itch in the morning...

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

Right. Be a grammar Nazi, ignore the article.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/butthead

I said nothing about grammar. I was referring to your apparent misunderstanding of what "affiliation" means.

I don't think Infymous misunderstands what "affiliation" means. His point was that Ballard obscured the issue by saying there is no affiliation, as if to say there were no connection. We all know that the FLDS are not affiliated to the main LDS in the sense that they are not members, they are not governed or administered in any way by the LDS, but (and this is a big but) they are descended from the main church; there is a very strong connection that cannot be erased by simply disavowing responsibility.

Quibbling over this point makes you appear intellectually dishonest just like Ballard, although you may consider yourself to be in good company there.

[_sock puppet]

As I listened to his talk I had a couple thoughts:

1: He focused a lot on not calling the Church the Mormon Church but by it actual name. This seemed important because he wanted to emphasize that we are a Christian Church and be emphasizing the full church name people will understand that we worship Jesus Christ. You can use Mormon to refer to a member such as "Jason Bourne is a Mormon" but do not use it to call the Church THE Mormon Church. Again, being recognized as Christian was very important in this talk and the fact that many do not seemed an issue.

2: Next while he wants to be able to have the LDS Church called Christian he really did not like the fact that LDS splinter groups still are called Mormon in some way. This seems like a double standard to me. This is further problematic because (while I often do not agree) many Christians and Christian sects don't want to call the LDS church Christian because we are a splinter group from Christianity and one that is enough of a deviation in many areas that they feel we are not Christian.

3: It seems to me that the LDS splinter groups have as much if not more in common with the LDS Church than the LDS Church does with historic orthodox Christianity. If we want to be called Christians how can we honestly gripe about the splinter groups being called Mormon. Other than polygamy (which is still entrenched in LDS doctrine) and a few of the odd BY teachings that were brushed under the rug when he died, how different are the splinter groups. Oh sure some may argue how they teach and practice polygamy is different but I am speaking about the major tenants. Other than what I mentioned what is different?

It's a matter of where you send your tithing/contribution checks.

[_sock puppet]

Wasting 20 minutes on defining, describing and defending the "true" name of church says a lot about the fortress mentality of the LDS leadership. nothing ballard said has anything to do with leading a christian life but everything to do with inane pronouncements of the so-called apostles who supposedly have some kind of special witness of Jesus.

No, not even of Jesus, just his name. That's all they are "special" witnesses of. So I wonder what aspect of testifying to his name is special, as distinguished from how other believers in Christ testify of Jesus' name. Do they spell it differently? Are there other names of Jesus that we do not know, just the FP/12--but if that's the case, they are not very good at witnessing to it, just in keeping it a secret.

Is anyone else thinking what I am thinking, that this is just a pile of BS?

[_moksha]

Oh sure some may argue how they teach and practice polygamy is different but I am speaking about the major tenants. Other than what I mentioned what is different?

We have a PR firm that says to emphasize our Christianity and to downplay the others Mormonity, so that's different.

[_sock puppet]

Oh sure some may argue how they teach and practice polygamy is different but I am speaking about the major tenants. Other than what I mentioned what is different?

We have a PR firm that says to emphasize our Christianity and to downplay the others Mormonity, so that's different.

"Tastes great"
"Less filling"
"Tastes great"
"Less filling"
...