Talk:Church of Jesus Christ in Zion

message: ::The not-for-profit Missouri Corporation name the Church of Jesus Christ In Zion was officially dissolved in 1997 as I have previously reported, and as documented with a link to the official web site of the Secretary of the State of Missouri.  I have witnessed the entire episode from start to finish.  I remember when the not-for-profit Corporation was formed.  It was never a church in the context of a denominational group like the Mormons.  The forming of the non-denominational organization was to encourage the free exchange of ideas, and encompassed participants of many denominational backgrounds.  Participants of the group still get together when the opportunity arises, to share thoughts and opinions. 
::The statement by COGDEN, that the "1997 date is demonstrably untrue" begs reason.  There was no church facility for him to tour!  I spoke with his "close relative" who explained that COGDEN spent about 30 minutes touring the facilities of the International Academy of Science in Independence, Missouri where the relative was, and still is employed.  The tour was of a University research facility.  What he saw was hydrogen cars and computers -- nothing to do with any church, and especially nothing to do with whether or not this "Church" was dissolved at the time.  I definitely need to understand what it was about his visit to the Academy that provides any basis for his conclusion.  (As an aside, his "close relative" has corroborated the fact that the date of dissolution was as stated.)  For COGDEN to claim that touring a school is proof that an unrelated church still exists certainly requires some explanation.  
::As far as the web site is concerned, it was paid years in advance, and continued to be online until it was put up for sale on eBay earlier this year.  A residual web site is no proof of a legal entity.  As a Lawyer by training, one would expect COGDEN to understand that a legal corporate entity no longer exists, after it has been dissolved.
::COGDEN's reference to "The Pitch" article is especially interesting.  In the first place, "The Pitch" is a weekly tabloid newspaper circulated free at bars and roadside stands that advertises strip clubs and romance telephone lines -- hardly a reliable source of information.
::Even so, "The Pitch" article corroborates that the Church was not a "Mormon Sect" but rather non-denominational.  The most amazing thing that COGDEN failed to mention about "The Pitch" article is that the source for much of the information in the Pitch was taken from this very article in Wikipedia -- the one we are correcting.  What better confirmation of the need to get it right!  It is not an acceptable research method to use a "circular reference" as a reliable source of information.  I also know first hand that much of the Pitch article is completely false.
::I have attempted to include a substantial volume of accurate information regarding the topics that have been raised.  I will appreciate reactions.  Perhaps it is too much?  At least it is accurate.
::Finally, I will respond to the question by COGDEN about plural marriage.  There are no plural marriages by any of the members that have participated in the discussion group.  To claim that a person is guilty of plural marriage is to say that person is a law breaker, since statutes exist prohibiting such practices.  That is a very serious and defamatory charge.  I have addressed the specific basis for the "polygamy rumors" regarding Billings in the article.  He was uncomfortable with the LDS position on polygamy which was one reason that he chose to leave that church.  He does not espouse polygamy nor does he practice it.  
::When I spoke today with COGDEN's close relative, purportedly the "first hand" source of his information, I asked him if he was aware of anyone that participated in the discussion groups who was involved in plural marriage at any time.  He told me that he was not.  I know for a fact that Roger Billings is happily married to his one and only wife of over 30 years.  I will not say that he is a Saint, because he and I often disagree, but he is not a polygamist.  When you understand the effort that he is making with his hydrogen car, and the impact that his success would have on the world wide oil cartel, it is not hard to understand why there are some that would fight him and his reputation at every level.
Who posted this? @fishmr Fishmr (talk) 04:00, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes Regarding Latest Posting

message: I don't know what happened here, but apparently somebody rewrote the history of this sect and completely cut-out Roger E. Billings, who I understand was the Patriarch. You can see how things have changed if you go back on the Wayback Machine of the Internet Archive. Apparently this David Eyre guy bought the domain name and rewrote the church's history in his own image. I guess it's Utah-based, now, rather than here in Missouri. MotherHubbard 17:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History rewritten? 

message: I'm gonna personally need some help rebuilding this page. A lot of these previous iterations seemed pretty well informed and documented. However, in it's current iteration, it's got a lot of false information and no sources. I need help figuring out which is the best version to revert to. Preferably a revision made by @COGDEN would suffice as he was well documented and accurate. In addition, @MotherHubbard seems to have a lot of contributions as well. I would appreciate some input- @Fishmr Fishmr (talk) 04:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebuilding the page 

message: Heads up, any revisions made by Firewriter, no matter how seemingly accurate, should likely be reverted instantly. He specifically has vandalized other pages related to this topic that I have worked on and is the current reason the Roger E. Billings page is needing repairs. He has too many conflicts of interest and, if you read his entire history of contributions, like I have, he contradicts himself on multiple occasions (for example, in the Roger page, he initially wrote the article mentioning his service for the LDS church. 15 years later, he claimed that Roger was never associated with the LDS church, despite this church clearly being an off shoot of it). Either way, he should likely be penalized, and therefore, we need to heavily monitor his contributions on this post. Fishmr (talk) 04:24, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning about Firewriter