Quote:
Originally Posted by HiJolly
The second sentence is not a lie, per se, but it is a question that implies an answer that is not justified by the evidence. Pretty darn close to a lie, in that it tends to make a (unspoken, assumed) lie look reasonable.
|
I assume you're talking about this sentence:
DO YOU THINK ITS ONLY A COINCIDENCE THAT JOSEPH SMITH INITIATED INTO FREEMASONRY AND THEN WITHIN THE MONTH "REVEALED" THE MORMON TEMPLE CEREMONY, WITH ALL ITS MASONIC ELEMENTS?
The author here clearly believes that Joseph Smith took the endowment from the Freemasons. I don't think that's a hidden assumption -- I think it's very in-your-face. He makes no bones about where he is coming from, and the timeline he describes is correct, I believe.
Once again, I get that you don't like the tone, but to call this a lie is, well, not exactly the truth.