Source: Ep. 85: Mormon Church Sues its Critics Channel: Truth to Mormons Published: May 1, 2026 | Archived: May 24, 2026

Video: Ep. 85: Mormon Church Sues its Critics
Channel: Truth to Mormons
Published: May 1, 2026
Duration: 40:04
Views: 939
Category: Education
Video ID: PGMwBNM7kqU

Description

Is It Biblical for the LDS Church to Sue John Dehlin?

Bill argues that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints functions as a manmade corporation and critiques its lawsuit against John Dehlin and the Mormon Stories podcast, describing it as a “David vs. Goliath” legal fight enabled by the church’s estimated $300+ billion in assets and the Kirton McConkie firm. He summarizes the complaint’s claims about trademark, branding similarities (including blue color, Christus imagery, “light rays”), copyright use of LDS images, lack of disclaimers, and use of the word “Mormon,” noting irony given prior LDS rejection of the term. From a Bible-believing perspective, he cites 1 Corinthians 6 and Matthew 5 to argue Christians should not sue other Christians in secular courts and should prefer internal judgment and nonretaliation, while distinguishing criminal cases. He alleges selective enforcement against critics, references the SEC shell-company deception, invokes the BITE model’s information control, and urges LDS viewers to reevaluate Mormonism’s claims to Christian identity.

00:00 Welcome and Premise 00:57 LDS Lawsuit Overview 03:49 David vs Goliath Legal Power 06:44 What the Complaint Claims 09:15 Mormon Name Irony 11:19 Bible on Christians Suing 13:42 Roman and Jewish Courts Context 19:07 Turn the Other Cheek 22:54 Limits of Pauls Teaching 25:16 Personal Courtroom Story 32:20 Hypocrisy and Selective Targeting 36:47 SEC Deception and BITE Model 39:00 Final Appeal and Signoff

RESOURCES LDS Church has Sued a Breakoff Restorationist Group: https://youtu.be/V9Z0r5mWydw?si=c2n-frirm7lyGo9A Read the Mormon Organization Lawsuit: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73209567/intellectual-reserve-inc-v-open-stories-foundation/

CONTACT: Contact@TruthToMormons.com WEBSITE: https://www.TruthToMormons.com DISCLAIMER:
Truth To Mormons is not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The views on this podcast are those of Truth To Mormons Ministry and do not necessarily represent the official positions of other featured content. This podcast, is under the Fair Use provisions found in Section 107 of the Copyright Act. Featured content, including thumbnails, are used for purposes of criticism, comment, and teaching. All rights and credits go directly to the rightful owners. No copyright infringements intended. #LDS “LDSChurch #Mormon #Mormonism #exMo #exMormon #religion #LDSBeliefs #Testimony #MormonChurch #Christian #Bible #Polygamy #TruthToMormons

Tags

LDS Mormon Lawsuit Christ Bible exMo

Transcript — YouTube panel (human-authored)

0:13 all rise. Hello everybody, I’m Bill and welcome back to Truth to Mormons, where facts meet feelings. In this episode, we’re going to gain yet more insight into the fact that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a man-made corporation masquerading as a Christian church, and we have biblical proof to back it up. LDS don’t fully believe the Bible, but we do on this channel. And so be warned, the very words of God have something to say about the recent litigation actions of the LDS Corporation, aka the LDS Church or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you’ve been even remotely tuned in to happenings within Mormonism the last couple of weeks, then you’re probably already aware that the LDS Corporation has just fullon weaponized its powerful law firm to sue the longest and arguably most influential channel against LDS church policies and doctrines. Of course, I’m referring to John Delint of the Mormon Stories

1:24 podcast. He started his podcast actually as far back as 2005 and the LDS organization has said nothing to him up until this point. So John’s been interviewed now by several ex Mormon podcasts and every believing LDS podcaster of note has been jawing about this situation as well. And while many have covered this heavy-handed act of the LDS Corporation thoroughly, here’s where this channel will aid to the discussion. Most Expo channels out there have lost their faith altogether.

1:59 They’re either agnostic or atheist, but this channel is a Christian channel with a ministry to current LDS, to former LDS, and to never Mormon Christians. And as such, this is a bibleelving channel. So, nobody cares what I think here, but we all care about what God thinks about things. And so, what we’re going to consider in this episode is whether it’s biblical for Christians to sue other Christians or in this case, a corporation presenting itself as a Christian organization going after a former Mormon. And in Mormonism’s eyes, this person is a literal child of the LDS Heavenly Father. But that doesn’t matter in this case. So yes, I’ll acknowledge that the LDS corporation is not Christian, but it thinks that it is.

2:50 And so this is relevant. As to John’s personal beliefs about his status, I think they’re probably unclear. But he has said uh that although he’s been excommunicated, he still considers himself to be a Mormon. And if you listen to some of his episodes, I don’t listen to a lot of them, but the ones I have, you’ll hear him often say we on the channel when referring to his LDS beliefs. So, more broadly, the Mormon Corporation considers other denominations to be Christian. And so, its actions here are out of bounds biblically, and we’ll go through that soon. And so as I move forward with this, this is yet another opportunity, LDS friends, for you to evaluate whether Mormonism is truly a Christian church and acting like it or whether it’s acting like a man-made organization, a corporation, a business entity. And I think you know uh obviously what conclusion I have made along the way and even before this news broke, there was talk of this possibility now that Don H.

3:54 Oaks is president of the LDS organization. Oaks being an attorney and a former Utah State Supreme Court justice himself. There was concern that Mormonism would be taking a more authoritarian and heavy-handed turn against his critics. And now that’s playing out. So Don had made a living in the court system before his move to LDS leadership. And now under his direction, the full weight and power of the LDS Corporation’s legal office is doing what Don has done best in his career.

4:31 So, it’s important that we understand the David versus Goliath situation that’s going on right now. channels and programs that critique Mormonism don’t have an army of lawyers and an unlimited budget to defend themselves. But the Mormon church using their Curtain McCunki law firm has over 200 attorneys across five offices in all 50 states and in 150 countries. And with an LDS church now valued at an estimated 300 plus billion with a B dollars in total assets, they really have unlimited ability to crush anyone in court that they want to. And their civil complaint shows that they put no less than six attorneys on this case. So that should tell you something about their intentions to win this perceived wrongdoing against the LDS Corporation.

5:28 Now, if I if I were John Delin, I’d have concerns about a fair jury if I were in Utah, given that 60 plus% of the population is LDS. And even if upcoming lawsuits are successfully defended by small channels or ministries on Mormonism, there’s still a huge financial and operating impact that threatens to bankrupt or even close ministries that refuse to adjust their ministry model. So, that’s really what’s at stake here. So, if you’d like to read the full complaint and appendices, then see the show notes below. But here’s the first page. On the left is the plaintiff, the Lord’s Church, the one and only true church on the face of the planet, aka the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Utah corporation. And I can say amen to that because the LDS organization is certainly acting like a corporation right now rather than the Church of the Living Lord. And then the defendant, they’re going after a nonprofit itself and enemy number one, Dr. John Delin of

6:36 the Mormon Stories podcast, a former Latter-day Saint himself before the LDS church excommunicated him. So, keeping this moving along at a high level, what’s the beef in the LDS litigation papers? Well, they’ve charged John Dint with confusing people with his channel and the official LDS church. They point out John’s use of some branding that is similar to LDS branding, including the egregious use of the same blue color that the LDS Corporation uses or the incorporation of the Christristus symbol or the center bottom of the graphic. The LDS Corporation is also zealously protecting its light rays. If you’re able to figure that out, that’s what those were in the first place. And then on the right, the complaint shows a slew of LDS videos and then the same images used by John charging that these copyright photos are beyond the bounds of fair use for the purposes of criticism. The complaint was that John

7:43 didn’t use disclaimers to prevent people from thinking he was LDS or that he was somehow affiliated with the LDS church. So ostensively, the Mormon lawsuit is about violations of trademarks, intellectual property, and copyright. And those are the grievances that are held out prominently. But let’s also be real. The LDS organization also doesn’t like the fact that John’s podcast has the word Mormon in its title. In fact, the complaint uses the word Mormon 135 times in just 30 pages. So, the complaint says in its introduction that quote, “The public associates the term Mormon with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has used the Mark Mormon,” notice it’s a mark now. It’s not a word, and other names. And Mark’s incorporating the term Mormon since its founding nearly 200 years ago.

8:43 But amazingly, the complaint explains the dilletterious effect evidently of John’s channel in that it creates confusion that LDS members and others will not be able to identify or to recognize and trust that materials and services that they receive are the church’s legitimate and authorized materials and services. So, first I find it hard to believe that anyone would mistake John’s channel at this point for an official LDS channel or a sponsored channel. But secondly, the irony in all of this is that after Mormonism officially ditched the term Mormon, changing its website address, changing the name of the former Mormon tabernacle choir, and shaming people for using the term that the late LDS President Russell M. Nelson said was a major victory for Satan. The LDS church now identifies with this title and is going to court to restrain others from using the now offensive porative term called Mormon. Remember Nelson said, “What’s in a name or in this case a

9:52 nickname?“ When it comes to nicknames of the church, such as the LDS church, the Mormon church, or the Church of the Latter-day Saints, the most important thing in those names is the absence of the Savior’s name. To remove the Lord’s name from the Lord’s church is a major victory for Satan. When we discard the Savior’s name, we are subtly disregarding all that Jesus Christ did for us, even his atonement. Of course, the absence of the Savior’s name ignores the fact that a former title of the LDS organization didn’t include Jesus or even his title of Christ in its name.

10:35 Neither. And I’ve covered this before, but if we’re going to nitpick about church names, then the LDS Corporation was without Christ and apostate soon after it was started. So, as I understand it, John Delin actually worked with LDS lawyers before the lawsuit, changing the color of his branding, removing light rays, and more. But what he would not do were the demands of LDS attorneys that he put a disclaimer on every one of his episodes, something that he’s not required to do.

11:08 And second, they wanted him to change the title of his program, removing the word Mormon that Mormonism now evidently finds acceptable to us once again. Now, let me get to the biblical perspectives on this whole matter, which I don’t think any other Expo channel out there has been mentioning. Not that I’m aware of at least. The Bible that the LDS Corporation doesn’t believe completely.

11:32 God’s book, in other words, has something to say specifically about this whole matter. And it’s not surprising that the LDS corporation doesn’t care about putting itself under biblical authority. So, 1 Corinthians chapter 6 records a situation wherein news had made its way to the Apostle Paul that some Christians were going to the law against fellow believers. So Paul under the inspiration of God and so this is God’s attitude. He was insensed about why Christians would ever take a fellow believer to court and submit themselves to the binding decisions of unsaved judges or at least judges that must follow secular rules and specifically exclude biblical rules. So let’s read this clear passage from the Bible that LDS lawyers have clearly rejected.

12:27 Dare any of you having a matter against another go to law before the unjust and not before the saints? So, I know I didn’t get very far, but I wanted to highlight that the very first word that Paul uses here is dare. And so, this is a rhetorical question, and he’s essentially stating that it’s outrageous that Christians would sue each other before the unrighteous world system. So this isn’t a small issue. It wasn’t in Paul’s eyes. And because he was the penman and spokesperson for God, it’s a big deal for Christ as well. And so Paul starts his rebuke in a way to draw that out. So continuing with verse two, do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. So let me

13:43 just pull off right here and park for a moment. In Paul’s day, the Roman society was as ligious as ours today. So what you’re looking at here are the remains of a Roman beimma seat in Corinth, Greece. Beimma in Greek stands for step and it identifies a raised platform in a public place where Roman officials, judges and magistrates sat to conduct legal proceedings and delivered judgments and disputes. So within the Roman system, it served as the official seat of authority for the governor and the platform was also used for things like making announcements, whether it was for rewarding athletes after a competition or sentencing defendants.

14:29 And unfortunately, judges were always chosen from the wellto-do class. And as such, the upper class society in that day often received better treatment in the courts of law than the commoner did. And worse than that, social inferiors couldn’t in many cases even sue members of the upper class. It was not really a fair system. But according to Paul in verse four, even the lowliest believers in Christ are equipped to judge disputes between brothers within the church. And that’s because they have God, the Holy Spirit indwelling in them. And they should endeavor to approach disputes biblically and in prayer rather than through a secular code of regulations.

15:18 So also instructive to note that even the Jews of Paul’s day understood that disputes among Israelites should not be settled before the Gentiles. So in Jesus’s day, the Jewish legislative and judicial assembly was called the Sanhedrin. There were two levels of courts called Sanhedrin, the greater and the lesser. So the lesser Sanhedrin were appointed as tribunals in each city. But like our supreme court today, the great Sanhedrin took appeals from the lower court. So in the second temple period, the great Sanhedrin actually met in the temple in Jerusalem. In the Old Testament, we find that Moses and the Israelites were actually commanded by God to establish courts of judges, including a supreme court located at the central sanctuary to handle cases too difficult for local courts. So you can read about this in Exodus 18 and also in Deuteronomy chapters 1 and 17. So in the Jewish mind using non-Jewish courts to

16:32 settle internal Jewish disputes was seen as desecrating God’s name and it implied that the Torah’s legal system was somehow inferior to other secular systems. So the Charles Hajj commentary provides a rabbitic maxim of the day informed by Exodus 21:1 concerning the dispute resolution attitude that Jews had in their culture of that day. And it’s this. It is a statute which binds all Israelites that if one Israelite has a cause against another, it must not be prosecuted before the Gentiles.

17:12 So then the Apostle Paul, a Jew himself, no doubt saw this as an issue where carnal Christians hadn’t even reached the Jewish standards for dispute resolution. And this was a disgrace. And given the establishment of Jewish upper and lower courts to settle issues within the faith community, we see here that Paul’s rebuke of Christians suing Christians goes back a long, long way into the Bible and to the Torah itself.

17:44 So, this isn’t a trivial thing. in Christians and supposed Christian organizations. Suing other Christians is something that God Almighty has been against for many millennia well before the 1830 arrival of Mormonism. So let’s continue with First Corinthians. I speak to your shame. Is it so that there is not a wise man among you? No, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren, but brother goeth to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.

18:23 Now therefore, there is utterly a fault among you, because you go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong and defraud, and that’s your brethren. So, here’s the bottom line. No secular judge or jury is equipped to make spiritual decisions because they don’t comprehend spiritual principles.

18:57 And the court system won’t allow biblical principles to be overtly admitted into evidence to begin with, even if they did understand biblical principles. And admittedly, this is hard. In verse 7, Paul says that it is better to allow yourself to be defrauded or to be subject to wrongdoing without fighting back as this is a better testimony for Christ. And isn’t this exemplified in the entire earthly ministry of Christ? How many times was he impuged and blasphemed like LDS like to do now with the heavenly father? And how many times was he lied about? And how many times did he have to avoid being taken by force? And he was eventually, of course, scourged and crucified. So, he could have turned any one of these opponents into a smoking grease spot if he wanted to just by looking at them, but he chose not to.

19:54 And also, we’re all familiar with Jesus’s sermon on the mount, instructions found in Matthew 5:38-4 in particular, where he told believers to turn the other cheek, avoiding retaliation against personal insults and more. He even said that if someone assumes you for your very clothing, let him have your cloak as well. So, in Jesus’s day, hitting a person with your backhand on their cheek was a forceful insult, but it wasn’t considered a violent assault like it probably would be today. And here’s an interesting tidbit that you may not have known. Why the left cheek? Is that because you only have two cheeks and the other one is smarting? Right now, it’s more than that. So again, if you give someone, and the presumption here is that you’re right-handed, if you give somebody a backhand to their cheek, then you’re striking their right cheek. So when Christ says to turn the other cheek, you’re exposing your left cheek.

21:01 Okay? And so what that really meant in Jesus’s day was it was a bold rejection of the insult itself. In essence, you weren’t allowing that person a second opportunity at a backhand. And second, and more significantly, presenting the left cheek was a nonviolent challenge to the aggressor to repeat the offense while requiring that they now have to strike with an openhanded palm of their right hand. So again, a backhand to the right cheek was the greatest insult one could give. But now by turning and presenting one’s left cheek, you can’t make that connection with the back of your right hand again. And actually in Jesus’s day, slapping with one’s open hand with the palm of their hand was done not to a lesser person, but actually to an equal. In other words, turning the other cheek strongly declared that the aggressor held no power in their condescending shame because the victim’s honor is not dependent on human approval. It comes from somewhere else. So this didn’t

22:16 always diffuse a situation, but it at least had a chance to reshape the relationship, pushing the adversary to either back down or to treat the other person with respect and as an equal. So Christ was saying in essence that the Christian’s position should be one of using nonviolent resistance to evil. the kind of resistance that doesn’t escalate conflict but actually stands a chance to break the cycle of revenge that is within the human nature uh to do so now back to the lawsuit thing again. Some believers want to tamp down Paul’s words a little bit by saying that believers should merely avoid trying to sue fellow believers. But I don’t see that in the text. Paul is clear. Believers should not sue fellow believers. And let me set some boundaries here as well. Paul isn’t saying that Christians should never go to secular court against unbelievers.

23:20 For example, if a lawsuit is brought against you by an unbeliever or an institution, then it may be necessary for a Christian to defend themselves. Left unchecked and unchallenged, our culture would be even more wicked than it is already. And we would lose many of our most substantive and meaningful ways to express our faith, including even the ability to knock on people’s doors to share the gospel. And and what about more egregious crimes? For example, are we forbidden from bringing murderers or violent criminals to court? No. Uh, our text here is talking about Christians taking other Christians to secular courts to resolve personal disputes and minor financial grievances. For example, look again at verse 2b. And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge, notice here, the smallest matters? So murder, for example, is a serious crime and surely not a small matter. And so these need to be handled by our secular courts because only they have the god-given governmentinvested

24:34 ability to meet out the appropriate punishment and to remove them from civil society if necessary. So then 1 Corinthians is focused on civil lawsuits. It’s not a shield for criminality. Romans 13 in fact instructs Christians to be subject to governing authorities which again is God’s ordained way to punish wrongdoing and to restrain criminals. So from God’s view the overarching purpose in all of this is to prevent Christians from destroying their witness and their testimony in the eyes of others by squabbling over in some cases petty issues. So, I suspect many of you have had a similar experience to what I’m going to share with you right now.

25:22 But this matter is close to home for me and for good friends of mine in the church that I was attending formerly in Alabama. A long time and faithful family in our church had just enjoyed their son getting married to his young bride. Later they would be riding together on a motorcycle and this would be a very fateful day as an illegal alien. Yes, that’s what I still call them. An illegal alien in a pickup truck hit their motorcycle head on instantly killing the son and throwing his newlywed wife over the top of the vehicle where she struck the road and would later die the same night to join her best friend in heaven. the illegal fled the scene, leaving both to die on the road. He tried to actually cover up what he had done by dropping off his vehicle at a body shop to be painted.

26:20 Were it not for that decision, he might not have ever been caught. The illegal would eventually be sentenced to only 10 years for vehicular homicide. 5 years for each of the lives of two people who had their entire lives and dreams ahead of them. We all thought that this was way too lenient of a sentence. So I sat in the courtroom during the proceedings as did our pastor and his wife and many in the congregation. It was a horrible and lifealtering event. So it was the worst nightmare for any parent and it was clearly a criminal case, a serious legal and moral matter. The perpetrator showed no emotion the entire time and working through his translator, he could have made a statement of apology at least to the families, but he chose not to. But concerning our biblical passage today, I want to make two points. First, I still remember the reaction of the court audience at this sentencing. The mother of the slain daughter stunned the

27:31 entire audience attending when she uttered these words to the man who took her daughter’s life. I forgive you. There was a muffled reaction, an audible reaction of both surprise and shock among the people that were attending there. They couldn’t believe what they had just heard. This expressionless, nonapologetic, illegal alien just ran over her child and fled the scene, leaving two human beings in the road to die like a couple of tire chasing dogs. And yet, amid her soul crushing grief, she spoke words of grace to the man who killed her newlywed daughter. And with that, the hopes of ever seeing the child she raised live her life, serve the Lord, and provide her with some precious grandchildren one day. What she did took courage and Christian maturity. Yes, this man deserved justice from the law. He took the lives of two people. He was in the country illegally. He was a danger to others if justice wasn’t served. So 1 Corinthians 6 again doesn’t prohibit any

28:54 of this. But there was still a choice to be made by two sets of Christian parents. A choice not to retaliate. Their loved ones couldn’t be brought back. So instead, they chose to suffer being wronged. And we will likely never know in this life if this mother’s witness to the astonished court will have made impressions on someone. And her act of grace may perhaps be the very thing needed to bring an unbeliever to Christ. So her three words, I forgive you, spoke loudly. They said to everyone, there’s something different about this grieving mother. How could she forgive such a monster? Well, she did forgive because her Christ and her savior had forgiven her. And by living a surrendered and godly life, she would one day be ready to do what she believed Christ would have done as well. So, she chose to be defrauded of her precious daughter rather than to fight back. And yes, again, justice needed to be served.

30:12 And this man was indeed a danger to everyone else in the community. But this mother didn’t have to let that event eat at her soul for the rest of her life. She couldn’t bring her daughter back. And she was in a better place now anyway. And let me just say this, and unlike Mormonism, I praise the Lord that every Bible believer and saved Christian can have hope in these times. That for the child of God, we don’t go into a holding pattern in the LDS spirit world, waiting to find out what level of LDS heaven will receive based on works. And we won’t know that until the final judgment, if you’re a Latter-day Saint after the second coming. So again, we don’t have to sit around until the second coming reading back issues of Time magazine wondering whether we’ll ever live with the LDS Heavenly Father or Jesus one day if we don’t make the highest celestial kingdom. No way. The Bible says that for Christians, quote, “We are confident, I say, willing rather

31:20 to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord,“ unquote. 2 Corinthians 5:‘8. So that’s an immediate thing. The minute your heart stops and your life here on earth ends, you are in the presence of God. if you’re a Christian. So immediately these two young children of God when they breathed their last, they were immediately in the presence of the Lord in the fullness of the triune Godhead, the LDS mock and in the one and only heaven with eternal life that they actually had the moment they were saved or born again. But when they passed, it was finally reality in its fullest. And that was the case immediately.

32:09 And second, although unlikely they would have ever received a penny, neither family brought a lawsuit in this case, they could have, but they chose not to. All right, so now let’s bring this episode in for a landing by pivoting back to the corporation of the president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. No doubt we live in a postChristian society now that goes to court at the drop of a hat. And when Christians engage in this, it’s nothing less than damaging to the testimony and witness of Christ in the eyes of the unsaved. Today, it’s all about defending your rights and shutting down others who you disagree with. And so first, it’s just stunning that a $300 billion corporation thinks that it must crush a dent to prevent other people from being misled. We don’t copyright our materials at the church I attend or at any church that I’ve ever attended, but the LDS organization, it does. And now we see

33:15 why. So, we never made former officers also in churches that I attended sign non-disclosure agreements or NDAs when they left their positions or rotated off their positions, but the LDS Corporation does. Second, the hypocrisy of the LDS Corporation is strident. It chose to go after a denter while ignoring faithful LDS and even Christian content creators that have similar infringement issues.

33:45 but because they’re friendly to the church, none of them have been served papers. So, here’s just a sample. Jacob Hansen is the LDS apologetic poster boy, and his influence is notable. He’s got almost 70,000 subscribers, and he’s all over the place on debates and on other channels, concocting philosophical ideas that even his church doesn’t teach. and he not only uses a circle and blue branding, but he’s got an LDS temple on it, no less. But he’s safe. Mormonism will leave him alone. To the right is another LDS content creator, Mormonism with the Murf. And notice he’s using that Victory for Satan name that the LDS organization wants to distance itself from. So, Mormonism is suing John Delin, but the Murf is okay, even though he’s got Mormonism prominently displayed in his channel name. Bottom left here’s an evangelical actually with the ugly porative word Mormon in his channel title, but he’s friendly to LDS. He doesn’t evangelize. He won’t warn people about Mormonism. And so, he’s a useful

34:56 tool for the LDS corporation. and he’s building bridges and normalizing people’s views of a religion that will one day damn their souls if they join it or if they stay in it. But he’s okay. No papers have been served to him. And then the bottom right is the leading former LDS channel in the UK, Nemo the Mormon. Up until a few years ago, actually, he was still a Latter-day Saint and still including the name Mormon in his channel, but he was pushing for reforms.

35:27 and the LDS organization finally got tired of it and excommunicated him. So notice that he’s still kept the word Mormon in his channel, which could lead some to be confused as to whether he’s actually a current Mormon or not. Yes, the channel banner now shows that he’s excommunicated, but it didn’t always say that. And what if he removes this banner one day? Will he be slapped with a lawsuit then?

35:55 So folks, don’t tell me that this is just about copyright or trademark infringement. No way. It’s about silencing critics. The first three that I’ve highlighted are probably good to go. Uh but Nemo, he’s a critic. And so I wouldn’t be surprised that one day he gets served since the organization wants to own the word Mormon now, even though it’s a victory for Satan. And I’m not sure about the if he can even be served paper since he doesn’t live in the US.

36:25 I’m not sure how all that works. But if the church can get to him, they eventually probably will. But we can again be certain that if the LDS church is successful against the big guy, John Delin and Mormon stories, then every other XMO channel will be in the crosshairs as well. And I’m not quite done ranting yet. Third, and even more striking to me, is the organization’s stated concern about others being misled and deceived by John Delin.

37:00 All the while having itself been caught for 20 years of purposeful, calculated deception itself as it hid tithing dollars from its reporting obligations to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Anybody that’s been following Mormonism knows this. But instead, Mormonism acted like a crooked corporation, creating illegal shell companies to hide its assets and not telling its members or even the people it put over the 12 shell companies themselves what they were doing. To this day, the LDS church hasn’t even openly admitted wrongdoing. It dropped a statement on the official church newsroom website acknowledging that it was fined several million dollars and then showing no accountability considering the matter closed and it has refused to talk about this since including during each and every general conference meeting where there’s a very specific segment a financial statement segment where they could have notified the church but they didn’t. They kept their mouth shut. \[music\] And one last

38:12 thing perhaps, I think this whole thing really illustrates the bite model that \[music\] cults use. Bite being a acronym for behavior control, information control, thought control, and \[music\] emotional control. So the I information control is exactly what’s going on here. They want to shut down people \[music\] and not allow alternate views to be out there because of the prominent effect that a lot of exmo channels have had on Mormonism. So instead of just acting like a Christian organization and letting people make their own decisions, \[music\] the church is going after people to shut them down because it has lost the narrative since the internet.

38:55 \[music\] So now it’s reverting to the legal system in order to flesh people up. So, \[music\] in the end, for my LDS viewers, if you’re still with me, I hope that this activity by your organization is yet another data point and another opportunity for you to \[music\] consider whether you’re really following a New Testament church or not. Would the living Christ today approve of his church seeking six attorneys to go after church opponents and for the \[music\] grievous act of using the color blue and a christrist and pictures of LDS authorities \[music\] for purposes of fair use criticism? I don’t think so. I would not recognize that Jesus.

39:43 All right, thanks for watching everybody today and until next time, take care and God bless.