All I can say is WOW!

Defending the indenfesible has always been difficult for LDSInc. But lying for the Lord really makes no sense. The GAs were the original apologists, and its funny that they (Brigham, et.al.) couldn't think up anything better than that. Dan Peterson, Robert Millett and his ilk are much more subtle, deceitful, slick, and strategic. It is so easy to prove with scriptures that they teach that God is a God of truth, so why would he want them to lie for him? Pretty open and shut. Nowadays LDSInc lets the GAs pass the baton to professional apologists who prefer the "baffle them with bullshit" approach, rather than using JS' "an angel with a flaming sword told me to do it" or Brigham's "lying for the Lord" bullshit. I think Hinckley's approach was the best. "I DON'T KNOW"

Wow, they'll be seriously bury to patch that sore.

 

I hadn't expected to see the links dominated by Mormon ones. 

 

D 

This is very telling that is is all a fraud!!!!!!!

Ecstacy,

 

Fascinating, isn't it?

 

Take a look at this:

 

http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2010/02/best-conference-talk-you-never-read_13.html