Just Mormon quotes

[Miles Peterson]

Done. I was wrong and I apologize. Now will you please explain to the others what is very, very wrong about what they are doing?

(How in the world can you other people get through high school and not know that you have to cite your secondary sources or it's plagiarism?? )

I'm still not sure what putting up hundred year old quotes from newspapers is supposed to mean...but knock yourself out!

No. Not done. You were not just "wrong", you were bearing false witness. You did not remove or retract your post. You did not acknowledge, or repent of your sin. Each post I have read on this thread provides a literary source. No poster claimed the words as their own. I see, from your posts following this one, that you still accuse others of plagiaizing from websites. Even if that were the case (and I don't know that it is - obviously, if I was able to obtain originals, therefore why couldn't they have as well) - it is a complaint without merit. Even if these quotes were read in secondary sources (and again, I don't know this was the case), it doesn't matter so long as the quote actually appears as given in the original source cited.

I remain expectant of an earnest apology from you, an admission of bearing false witness against me and now against others on this thread, full repentence for the same, and a complete retraction or removal of your above statement from this thread. Will you remain unrepentant of this sin?

 

[Juliann]

No. Not done. You were not just "wrong", you were bearing false witness. You did not remove or retract your post. You did not acknowledge, or repent of your sin. Each post I have read on this thread provides a literary source. No poster claimed the words as their own. I see, from your posts following this one, that you still accuse others of plagiaizing from websites. Even if that were the case (and I don't know that it is - obviously, if I was able to obtain originals, therefore why couldn't they have as well) - it is a complaint without merit. Even if these quotes were read in secondary sources (and again, I don't know this was the case), it doesn't matter so long as the quote actually appears as given in the original source cited.

I remain expectant of an earnest apology from you, an admission of bearing false witness against me and now against others on this thread, full repentence for the same, and a complete retraction or removal of your above statement from this thread. Will you remain unrepentant of this sin?

It does matter for people who value honesty in all their dealings. It is plagiarism to go to a book or website and pick off quotes that were gathered by someone else and put them under your name as if you had found them. It does not matter that you ripped off a partial cite with the quote, for cryin' out loud. This is not rocket science. Let me quote the website one more time: when a writer must refer to ideas or quote from a WWW site, she must cite that source.

Understand? If you refer to a QUOTE on a website or book, you must cite that source along with the quote. Get it?

It's also a protection to you to be honest about where you found the quotes...if they have ellipses they will likely be doctored. It's standard practice on hate sites, unfortunately. If you are putting that quote up under YOUR name...you are saying that you did the doctoring.

 

[drstevej]

No. Not done. You were not just "wrong", you were bearing false witness. You did not remove or retract your post. You did not acknowledge, or repent of your sin. Each post I have read on this thread provides a literary source. No poster claimed the words as their own. I see, from your posts following this one, that you still accuse others of plagiaizing from websites. Even if that were the case (and I don't know that it is - obviously, if I was able to obtain originals, therefore why couldn't they have as well) - it is a complaint without merit. Even if these quotes were read in secondary sources (and again, I don't know this was the case), it doesn't matter so long as the quote actually appears as given in the original source cited.

I remain expectant of an earnest apology from you, an admission of bearing false witness against me and now against others on this thread, full repentence for the same, and a complete retraction or removal of your above statement from this thread. Will you remain unrepentant of this sin?

While you are waiting. I found this...

They Call The Place Palmyra

(Tune: "And They Call The Wind Maria" with apologies to Frederick Loewe & Alan Jay Lerner - created by Alex Murphy - 09/11/2003 )



Now way up north they have a name for where begat the liar
The book of Mo', the prophet Joe and they call the place Palmyra
Joseph takes a new wife in, and sets her husband steamin'
Palmyra was the place wherein Joseph first found wimmin
Palmyra, Palmyra
They call the place Palmyra

Before I knew Palmyra's name and heard Joe's wail and whinin'
I had a gal and she had me and the Son was always shinin'
But then one day, my gal left me, and got new underoonies
Her brain is toast, but so's her heart, yes that's what happened to me
Palmyra, Palmyra
They call the place Palmyra

Now here they have a name for where the prophet, feeling randy
Never slept alone for sure, his revelations handy
No I'm a lost and lonely soul, my gal wife number ninety
Palmyra took my love from me, no longer here beside me
Palmyra (Palmyra), Palmyra (Palmyra)
They call the place Palmyra
Palmyra....Palmyra....Palmyra
They call the place Palmyra

 

[Wrigley]

P.S. And when you do....just make sure that you don't credit the guy who did all the work in running down your quotes for you. Or you could actually put a standard reference on the stuff you pilfered so it woudn't be so obvious....but then, that would mean having to do some work yourself.

Again...what are you guys so ashamed of? Why are you hiding your sources?

Even after you have been corrected about this, you still persist erecting that strawman?

How sad.

 

[Wrigley]

eehhhhhh.....can someone explain this to him? Hint: reread #2 real closely. Somebody found those "quotes" and it wasn't....you!

Put up the websites you are doing the cut & pastes from. Always this need to hide what you are doing. Weird.

Plagiarize:

1. To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one's own.
2. To appropriate for use as one's own passages or ideas from (another).

LOL

Maybe the mormon are indeed liberal. You're understanding of the second line is a strech most liberals would make.

Now, that that's out of the way, let's get back to the quotes which were spoken or written by mormons of old.

And if you really think about it, those posts are so heretical, I wouldn't want them associated as mine anyway. But those quotes are illustrative of real mormon thought, which could be why you're trying to deflect with this weak arguement that we're plagarizing quotes.

 

[Wrigley]

"For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do." (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 25:23).

 

[Wrigley]

"The Son of God, the Saviour of the world, in the way that it has been taught to us, is made to have a great share in it [salvation] and a great deal to do with it. Some suppose that he has done so much, and has made such peculiar kinds of provisions for our wants and necessities, that there is but little left for us to do, ...[Some suppose] that the great plan and work that bring salvation are things that belong [exclusively] to the mission of Jesus Christ. If this is correct, it is what we ought to believe; if it is not, it is that which we should expose; and we should labour to undeceive the people.... If there is a work left for us to do, it will be accomplished as the result of our exertions." (LDS Apostle Amasa M. Lyman, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 297, 1859).

 

[Wrigley]

"I want you to see this, and to comprehend that the whole matter of your salvation is your own business and work. What else has Jesus done? ...You examine principle in the Gospel as it is taught to you, and what requirement of that Gospel has been obeyed for you [by Christ]? None." (LDS Apostle Amasa M. Lyman, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, p. 301, 1859).

 

[Ben_Hur]

eehhhhhh.....can someone explain this to him? Hint: reread #2 real closely. Somebody found those "quotes" and it wasn't....you!

Put up the websites you are doing the cut & pastes from. Always this need to hide what you are doing. Weird.

What are you talking about? Most of those quotes cite sources, and even if they didn't, they were posted as being quotes from someone else. No one said that those quotes where theirs from another thread.

It is you, amigo, that needs to re-read the definitions very closely.

Remember in school (you went to school, right?) when you were to write a paper "in your own words." Yet, maybe you or your classmates copied paragraphs word-for-word AS IF they had written those words themselves?

THAT is plagiarism. Now if they had placed "quotes" around those words or stated that someone else said those things but didn't cite the reference, then that is not plagiarism. It is simply poor report writing.

 

[Miles Peterson]

"A careful reading of the scriptures reveals that the Lord did not tell all things to all people. There were some qualifications set that were prerequisite to receiving sacred information. Temple ceremonies fall within this category....We do not discuss the temple ordinances outside the temples....The ordinances and ceremonies of the temple are simple. They are beautiful. They are sacred. They are kept confidential lest they be given to those who are unprepared."

Selections from "These Things Are Sacred", found in the booklet "Preparing To Enter The Holy Temple", page 2. Booklet adapted from The Holy Temple by Boyd K. Packer.

 

[rnmomof7]

eehhhhhh.....can someone explain this to him? Hint: reread #2 real closely. Somebody found those "quotes" and it wasn't....you!

Put up the websites you are doing the cut & pastes from. Always this need to hide what you are doing. Weird.

Plagiarize is more like Joseph Smith did with the Bible

He built a tall tale and then fit in the words (quotes) or corrected the words to be what he wanted them to be ...and amazing the angel spoke the kings english .

Now THAT was plagiarism (As you know many felt he use a fictional book that he found in his mother's attic for the base of the tale ..and if true that would be plagiarism )

Quoting and giving the source of the quote so it can be verified as true does not fit the definition.

 

[rnmomof7]

he World Wide Web has become a more popular source of information for student papers, and many questions have arisen about how to avoid plagiarizing these sources. In most cases, the same rules apply as to a printed source: when a writer must refer to ideas or quote from a WWW site, she must cite that source.

That is when quoting a direct quote..like coping my term paper.

You always need to credit the author WITH HIS OWN WORK

 

[CCWoody]

Joseph Fielding Smith, the tenth president of the church, maintained that "Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no middle ground.

"If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who wilfully attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed; his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false,... I maintain that Joseph Smith was all that he claimed to be" (Doctrines of Salvation, 1959, vol.1, pp.188-89).

The only problem with these words is that Mormons either...

1. Think that only a Mormon could expose another Mormon with is absurd and is akin to letting the fox guard the henhouse.
   
   --- OR ---
   
2. Think that Joseph Fielding Smith should have kept his mouth shut like they say about Bruce.

Otherwise why all the hissie fits over non-Mormons exposing Joseph Smith as a fraud.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[twhite982]

Suppose I were to ask a question this morning, as a stranger, "What is "Mormonism?" I suppose it is known to most men at all conversant with principles classed under that name, that it is a nickname, or a name applied by the public, and not used officially by the Church so called. Mormon was a man, a Prophet, an author, a compiler, and a writer of a book. Mormon was a teacher of righteousness, holding certain doctrines. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are agreed with Mormon, as well as with many other ancient writers, and hold to the same principles; therefore their neighbours have seen fit to call those principles they hold, "MORMONISM." They might as well have called them, Abrahamism, Enochism, or Isaiahism; because the ancient Prophets, Patriarchs, and Apostles, held to the same truths in general terms, only differing in circumstances, in distant countries and ages of the world, and acted upon the same general principles, according to the particular circumstances that surrounded them. But the world, out of all the ancients, have selected one called Mormon, and all the principles held by all good, inspired men of all ages and countries they have seen fit to sum up, and call "Mormonism." Well, it is as well as anything else, for aught I know; the name does not affect the principles.

Discourse by Parley P. Pratt,
"Mormonism"
297A discourse delivered by Parley P. Pratt, in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, July 10, 1853.


TW
</I>

 

[Wrigley]

Suppose I were to ask a question this morning, as a stranger, "What is "Mormonism?" I suppose it is known to most men at all conversant with principles classed under that name, that it is a nickname, or a name applied by the public, and not used officially by the Church so called. Mormon was a man, a Prophet, an author, a compiler, and a writer of a book. Mormon was a teacher of righteousness, holding certain doctrines. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are agreed with Mormon, as well as with many other ancient writers, and hold to the same principles; therefore their neighbours have seen fit to call those principles they hold, "MORMONISM." They might as well have called them, Abrahamism, Enochism, or Isaiahism; because the ancient Prophets, Patriarchs, and Apostles, held to the same truths in general terms, only differing in circumstances, in distant countries and ages of the world, and acted upon the same general principles, according to the particular circumstances that surrounded them. But the world, out of all the ancients, have selected one called Mormon, and all the principles held by all good, inspired men of all ages and countries they have seen fit to sum up, and call "Mormonism." Well, it is as well as anything else, for aught I know; the name does not affect the principles.

Discourse by Parley P. Pratt,
"Mormonism"
297A discourse delivered by Parley P. Pratt, in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, July 10, 1853.


TW
</I>

See, that wasn't so hard.

His beliefs are misguided, but you've got the idea.

Keep the quotes coming.

 

[twhite982]

See, that wasn't so hard.

His beliefs are misguided, but you've got the idea.

Keep the quotes coming.

I was just adding to the fun and could waste my time pasting qoutes from my GospelLink2001, which has over 10,000 sources, but what is the point.

Are we doing shock therapy here?

Much of the quotes here are negative and I want to bring something to the table that is upbeat and positive. If I always concentrate on the small speck on the apple, sooner or later I'm going to think the whole apple is rotten when it really isn't.

But you guys know what you're doing right?

TW

 

[Wrigley]

Much of the quotes here are negative and I want to bring something to the table that is upbeat and positive. If I always concentrate on the small speck on the apple, sooner or later I'm going to think the whole apple is rotten when it really isn't.

LOLOLOL

The quotes are made by YOUR brethren.

 

[CCWoody]

Much of the quotes here are negative and I want to bring something to the table that is upbeat and positive. If I always concentrate on the small speck on the apple, sooner or later I'm going to think the whole apple is rotten when it really isn't.

I suppose that it is better to try and hide the faults of your leaders. That way, you can sucker people into believing...

The Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt said that if the Mormon religion had errors in it the members would be grateful if someone would point them out: ". . convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds" (The Seer, pp.15-16).​

Unfortunately, he really didn't mean it. After all, why the hissie fit from every single Mormon I've ever met when you start asking questions about what Mormon prophets and apostles have said. It's like they are embarrassed by what they said. And, quoting from "Mormon doctrine" seems to be totally out of the question.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[twhite982]

LOLOLOL

The quotes are made by YOUR brethren.

So you're trying to tell me that no other religion has ever made a quote that seemed not to fit properly in percieved Christianity?

Besides, I highly doubt that much of those quotes accurately reflect the original intent of the message. Much of the J of D and other sources, were compiled many years after the statements were made.

I'm not discounting everything quoted here as false, but you apparently think that whatever is attributed to an LDS leader is exactly what was said, just because it fits within your purpose for posting it. No questions asked!!!

It would seem to me, and I'm not too bright, that your only purpose here is to cast the CofJCofLDS in the absolute worst possible light as humanly possible.

If this is the case I know where you would have a much larger audience to more effectively dish out this type of evangelism.

If interested I'll post a link for you to join this forum that is jam packed with LDS posters.

Any takers?

TW

 

[twhite982]

I suppose that it is better to try and hide the faults of your leaders. That way, you can sucker people into believing...

The Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt said that if the Mormon religion had errors in it the members would be grateful if someone would point them out: ". . convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds" (The Seer, pp.15-16).​

Unfortunately, he really didn't mean it. After all, why the hissie fit from every single Mormon I've ever met when you start asking questions about what Mormon prophets and apostles have said. It's like they are embarrassed by what they said. And, quoting from "Mormon doctrine" seems to be totally out of the question.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

Feel free to quote any LDS leaders to your hearts content. Knock yourself out.

My problem is that you're trying to pass all those quotes off as official LDS doctrine and you're dead wrong.

You've been called on it and yet you still continue, disregarding my word, and ALL other LDS posters that, it is NOT official LDS doctrine.

TW