Joseph F. Smith, Journal of Discourses, vol. 18, preface, “Those who read the utterances of the servants of God, contained in this book, under the same influence by which the speakers were inspired, cannot fail to receive profit from the perusal.”

George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 345 “Read the discourses of the first Presidency and the Twelve, and you will see that they are filled with revelation, with light, with knowledge, with wisdom, and with good counsel unto this people.”

Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. iii “We are privileged to present to the Saints and the world, the Third Volume of the Journal of Discourses, containing the principles of the Gospel of salvation delivered to this generation through the Apostles and Prophets of the Most High, by the power of the Holy Ghost.”

However, the current LDS leadership states that the Journal of Discourses is not LDS canon. Curiously, modern LDS apostles and prophets still quote from the Journal of Discourses in contemporary books and talks.

Significant volumes of previously published Mormon church approved material has been discarded as the uninspired beliefs of misguided men. What percentage of neo-LDS publications will be dismissed in future years as the mistaken viewpoints of erroneous men?

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2009-2010/death_online/timeline.html

“Look up what the word “VIRGIN” meant in biblical times. Do you not see a problem with this quoting??”

The quote is from the D&C which was published in the 1800s and contain dictations from Joseph Smith, not quite Biblical Times. I do have to wonder why an active member of the LDS faith would have in their mind however that the D&C = “Biblical Times” I came up with a few possibilities, you have come so accustomed to just accepting LDS scripture as such that do not differentiate or consider the diversity from which each one originated or perhaps subconsciously you do accept that JS was mimicking the Bible rather than actually receiving new revelation in the 19 century or just assumed that since JS was using 17 century style English which is the same as the Bible you read that somehow makes it “Biblical Times” which by the way was not written in 17th century English. I also think it was pretty obvious SkiUtah was being satirical with this post anyway.

“Talk about polygamy!… is far superior to monogamy for the raising of healthy, robust children!” I’ll give you a hint. The 3 dots ruin the whole meaning.”

Fair enough here is the paragraph in its entirety:

“Talk about polygamy! There is no true philosopher on the face of the earth but what will admit that such a system, properly carried out according to the order of heaven, is far superior to monogamy for the raising of healthy, robust children! A person possessing a moderate knowledge of physiology, or who has paid attention to his own nature and the nature of the gentler sex, can readily understand this.”
I am not necessarily seeing where the point BY was making changes or that there was deception in omitting some of the fluff, but sense you have accused us of just that I would be curious for you to show which paragraph or specific quote of mine you were able to find the below example that you give and post it in entirety so we can compare each of our tactics.

“I am… Mormon. I belong… to the LDS Church. I actually…believe the LDS Church is true.” (Coventryrm 2009)”

Finally you take issue with our claims regarding our sources:

Next, your sourcing for almost every one of the “quotes” is not endorsed by the LDS church. “Mormon Doctrine” is not Mormon doctrine

.
Endorsed by the church is not the same as claiming it to be Doctrine, we have been down this road enough to know that just about anything can denied as being Doctrine by the current leadership of the church. I also find it interesting that you were actually naïve enough to choose this specific quote and publication to challenge. Yes there has been controversy concerning the original publication of this book, the quote however comes from the second edition published by Bookcraft and approved of by the President of the Church at the time. The leadership of the church as allowed it to continue to be published with revisions as late as 1978 to accommodate the priesthood ban. I personally use a search program purchased through Deseret Books called “LDS Library 2006” I feel most confident that when I quote from this source I am in very ethical territory to label it a reliable LDS source.

I would also like to address not only the source material but the content. Are you challenging the actual statement?

“…plural marriage was openly taught and practiced until the year 1890… Obviously the holy practice will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium.”

I am not so sure you can dismiss this as non-doctrinal. The church still hold plural marriage as a concept that will be practiced in the Celestial kingdom don’t they? I know that my father was just recently sealed in the temple to my stepmother; he is also still sealed to my mother who passed away. However it is Church policy that if my Father would have preceded my Mother in death she would not be able to be sealed to another in this life. Sounds like the above statement that is still found in the revised edition of Mormon Doctrine is actually just that – Doctrine.

“btw, notice that the Lord doesn’t specify “female” virgins,”

Look up what the word “VIRGIN” meant in biblical times.

Do you not see a problem with this quoting??

“Talk about polygamy!… is far superior to monogamy for the raising of healthy, robust children!”

I’ll give you a hint. The 3 dots ruin the whole meaning. For example I could write:

“I am… Mormon. I belong… to the LDS Church. I actually…believe the LDS Church is true.” (Coventryrm 2009)

See a problem???

Next, your sourcing for almost every one of the “quotes” is not endorsed by the LDS church. “Mormon Doctrine” is not Mormon doctrine.

bring it on.

They also believe that pro-wrestling is true. “Look at the big audience. I get a good feeling watching it; pro-wrestling is true!”

If I try to point out facts, they simply dismiss me as being anti-pro-wrestling and ask why do I hate pro-wrestling…

One response might be that the items posted here are all derogatory lies. All of the quotes here are from Mormon leaders referenced in LDS authorized publications.

Hatred? no. humorous quotes from LDS leaders, yes…

http://www.mormonzeitgeist.com/node/158