Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Oct 12, 2011 Full story: CNN 32,006

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Full Story
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#19995 Feb 10, 2013
not ashamed wrote:
<quoted text> we are taught about the same Jesus that is in the KJV of bible. Same Jesus.I.was taught about as a child in a different denomination that Mormonism. Being a christian is about not only believing in christ, but following his example. I am christian, but your opinion as to weather I am or not has no bearing on my eternal salvation.
Yes My opinion as to whether you are a Christian or not has no bearing on your eternal salvation

And neither does your opinion have any bearing on whether you are Christian or Not.

Mt 7:15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
Mt 7:16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles?
Mt 7:17 Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
Mt 7:18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Mt 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Mt 7:20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Mt 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me,‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
Mt 7:22 Many will say to me on that day,‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’
Mt 7:23 Then I will tell them plainly,‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

You see the LDS put their Faith in a false Prophet J.S. who claimed to be greater than Jesus.

You See the LDS believe in a different Jesus than the on revealed in the Bilbe KJV included.

YOU see the LDS believe Jesus is no the creator of the Universe that he had a beginning and was once a Man like you or eye.

YOU see the LDS teach Lucifer is Jesus's spirit Brother

YOU see none of that is biblical and contradicts the Bible and the teachings found in the Bible

It is not I who says followers of the LDS faith are not Christian it is the Bible who says they are not.

The Bible defines what a true believer is what he believes if he truly has found the true Messiah and is covered by his blood.

We all are called to test our Faith and see if stands in light of God's Holy WORD preserved through out the ages.

Unfortunately for those who profess an LDS Faith it does not stand the biblical test it contradicts the Bible.

Truth matters LDS are not Christians the Bible tells you and me so.

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#19996 Feb 10, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
... blah, blah, blah...
Do you even hear yourself?

You have the same old, same old, anti-key knee jerk response with Not Ashamed...
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes My opinion as to whether you are a Christian or not has no bearing on your eternal salvation

And neither does your opinion have any bearing on whether you are Christian or Not.
The truth doesn't matter... only your opinion matters.
ConcernedEnoughT oGOOGLEiT

Yuba City, CA

#19997 Feb 10, 2013
I suppose Egypt is saying that since there's no being sure from just his opinion whether he's a practicing Christian, there need to be historically accurate evidence from the Abrahamic religious way.

He needs to check whether his religion has 12 Apostles as Jesus' Church;

He needs to check for baptism in immersive fashion as outlined in religious historical documentation of Jewish Temple bathing rites, and Christianic rites of identical submersions as baths, washing away sin;

He needs to check for laying on hands for a gift of edification called the "gift of the holy ghost."

He needs to check whether his church assigns and sets aside all men in devisions of priesthoods such that all are priests, but not all are qualified to assign the laying on of hands,

He needs to check for miraculous visitations from Angelic beings resembling men, who identify with the characters of history so well those biblical characters speak with them,'as one man speaketh with another'

He needs to check that his own church has groups of seventy at a time set apart to spread the gospel of the Church of Jesus Christ,

He needs to check that the priesthood can not be attained through donations of money

He needs to check that the persons involved claim of themselves as personal individuals, visiations from angels, God Himself, and having also visions of how things are going to be in the future, often referred to as 'dreams'.

He needs to check to be sure the organization is divinely appointed with heavenly beings doing all primary instruction before momentous events;

He needs to check to be sure the beings claimed to be seen, testify of repentence, and of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God of Israel; and that said beings appear to be able to quote, verbatim, scripture: identically in model to those of the Abrahamic religion's documentation.

When he has those

he can be sort of like the Mormons

who have those. And more.

He needs to check whether his organization has a culture of gathering by priests of one tenth for distribution to those in need.

He needs to check for whether the culture surrounding the organization he joins seem to have an unusually high number of regional and area-wide champions, as though the culture creates a large amount of personal self-development: where being successful is the norm in activities demanding a lot of perserverence.

He needs to check for an overall high amount of cultural sensitivity to the concepts of governance; crime among the indoctrinated being the exception rather than rule,

with the culture members being very frequently sought out as cultural secular leaders due to a capacity to work within governments.

The culture should have a high rate of literacy and stress systematically and statistically methodological ability to check for coherence in written & spoken language.

The culture of his church should be one that STRESSES CONTINUAL REVERENCE FOR even JESUS CHRIST,
the SAVIOR of THEM who REPENT of THEIR SINs.

The culture of his church should teach of a Godhead which uses classical leadership and political hierarchy organizational schematics & terminologies regularly,

His church should be an organization that has many converts from many different walks of life, from many different languages, lands, tribes, peoples.

His church should have a REFERENCE SYSTEM REGARDING MALE and FEMALE SEXUALITY as LITERAL and UTTERLY INTRINSIC to the BEINGS whom they claim to worship: such that a God CAN impregnate a woman: and that the CHILD be FULLY sexually functional in every way: and never
ever
refer to sexuality or human reproductive evolution in ANY but CLASSICAL sexual TERMS,
OVERLAPPING the GOD they WORSHIP and the FAMILY of MAN WORSHIPPING them.

No sneak tricks about how God's a deceiving liar because he didn't catch VD like the monogamists.

Then there are actually quite a few more things he can check and if he's got all that down for sure,

as we Mormons have in ours,

MAYBE.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#19998 Feb 10, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
Again read the evidence first hand most of it and most of it from LDS members who helped him have cordial visits with these women he was married to. That prove he hat intercourse with many of these women. You will need a week to through all of it I will be here when you get back from doing your homework.
NOW since when did it matter to the LDS whether these marriages were legal under US LAW, again if we are to take your pseudo logic to its natural conclusion then not one temple marriage is valid or real because the US government does not consider them a legal marriage. So you can't have your cake and it too. What matters is the LDS of his day believed they were marriages before God as did J.S>, YOU not only make straw men arguments you are now pulling at straws in a desperate attempt to hold on to that which you know is a lie.
Truth Matters LDS are not Christian the Bible tells us so.
The only real truth you have established is that you're good at pasting.
Next. There is no evidence, no solid evidence that Smith had sex with a single wife. We know what people claimed AFTER Smith was dead. And usually a decade or more after his death.
You or I or anyone else can have all the opinions we want of this topic. The fact remains there is no solid evidence to prove Smith consummated a single 'pretend' marriage.
In will not rely on rumours and hearsay as being facts as you do it. If you're going that route, you might as well believe the rumour Hitler was a Jew and that's why he hated them. You might as well believe the rumour that Bush planned and commanded 9/11. Rumours are called that for a specific reason. Because they are statements that haven't been proved as true with undisputed evidence. A child would be undisputed evidence. A dead or living child would be evidence. A trial against Smith for the charge of bigamy where it was shown he committed bigamy by evidence like living children, living with each wife individually in a home he established with her, things like that would prove Smith had sexual relations and had committed bigamy.
But none of that exists. And until something comes forth to prove beyond a doubt Smith had consummated all 30+'pretend' marriages, only rumours exist. Understand?
And of this marriage thing, it's a straw man argument for anyone that uses it. It matters not what any one claims or who believes those marriages were true and real.
The marriages were all false. They were pretend. So Smith by the legal definition of marriage in the US didn't marry any man's wife. I know that doesn't sit well with you but it's a fact. Smith legally married one wife. Only one. And that is the only legal wife and his only wife of all his wives that he had many, many children with.
Tough for you to prove Smith was sexing 30+ wives in a 3 year period for probably hundreds of times and never sired a single known child. Yet he and Emma would have sex and she'd become pregnate within the year.
So feed me some more of your straw man argument of how a man was having sex with 30+ women in a three year period for hundreds of times and not a single birth can be proven. Waiting ...:)
pearl

Syracuse, UT

#20000 Feb 10, 2013
There are other interesting facts regarding the surrounding culture of the LDS organization. Utah, home of the LDS rates number one in autism. Utah rates in the bottom half of the nation for high school graduation, although, Utah does produce the most babies, Yea? Also highest in rape, suicide, and use of antidepressants. It's just part of the culture. Oh, and don't even talk to someone from Utah about maybe recycling their waste, they don't even begin to understand that. Utah, the American theocracy at it's finest.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20001 Feb 10, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I see you can read but just not far enough lets continue....
2Sa 12:8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more.
2Sa 12:9 Why did you despise the word of the LORD by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the Ammonites.
He took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.’ you see to take the woman to be your own is to have sex with her.
When God gave Saul's house to him it is not stated that he is to take them as his own. We can see from this text that to take another man's wife brings Judgement David's house will always see the sword, and his son will be taken from him and his wives.
This whole story is God revealing his Character ONE HUSBAND one BRIDE
You presuppose that because God Gave Saul's wives to him that he takes them as he is own ( if he was just he would of released them and cared for them). But the text does not state he took them as his own you assume he did but that would be a grave mistake as if you had choosen to read further it is clear God disapproves of this as he does not condone his actions but judges them Severely.
Again God never condones Polygamy, Neither God nor his Prophets ever decrees a man to take more than one wife, all the examples of men taking more than one wife lead them to Spiritual Blindness and Judgement.
Maybe that's why J.S. died in a Jailhouse shoot out, it lead him to a horrible and shmaful end.
Truth Matters
David was a righteous man. Period. Until the Uriah incident. That means any and everything he did was did in righteousness. That includes receiving Saul's wives from God himself. And as his wives, his legal wives, that means David could have carnal intercourse with any of them and it wouldn't be a shameful/sinful act as you claim.
David had several wives prior to God giving him Saul's wives. Now you can believe David had 'wives' in wickedness all you want to state it. But never once did God state David was wicked in having many wives. David did become unrighteous in his lust for Bathsheba and the killing of her husband. He took her and married her without God's permission. That is why God was wroth with David. David took it upon himself to add an extra wife of his own choosing.
Know what that 'insinuates?' It insinuates that prior to each marriage BEFORE Bathsheba, David asked the Lord in prayer whom he should marry and or take for a wife and God answered and told him. So that information states that God was allowing David to have many wives as long as he asked the Lord. Why is that? Because the one time that David didn't ask the Lord what happened? God became wrath with David for wanting and taking Bathsheba for a wife.
You can claim all these prophets and leaders were unrighteous/ wicked and sinners for having polygamous marriages but no scripture will back that opinion up.
Never ever once does God ever state in the entire Bible that polygamy was wrong.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20002 Feb 10, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Still the dumbass. They do prove you can't marry a woman who is already married, which is what you wanted proof of, or are you too ignorant remember that? Oh, how you do love to change things after being shown with an idiot you are.
Again, being an intentional dumbass isn't going to save the perverted LDS church and it's sicko leaders.
lol...always resorting to your child name calling. How common of you.
Next. One of those commands you listed had to do with adultery, not being married to two or more wives. Adultery was the act of having sex with a woman a man wasn't married to. That is what that commandment addressed. THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY. Not THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY BY MARRYING EXTRA WIVES AND HAVING SEX WITH THEM ALSO. lol...talk about someone changing things for their own purpose.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20003 Feb 10, 2013
concerned in Eygpt wrote:
<quoted text>
You posted I had no first hand evidence so I posted my evidence again as it is first hand evidence your deceit did not go unnoticed.
With regards to David Answered above again you have removed a verse out of context and fail to consider the verses before and after.
If you conquered a nation in War and the spoils were that nations slaves does that mean God condones slavery.
Because David was righteous before God does that mean Murder is OK as David committed 1st degree murder.
YOUR logic is absurd to say the least.
David was righteous before God not of himself but because he knew his Savior, you really need to read the Bible on your own and stop regurgitating LDS propaganda.
You're really quite full of yourself. God condoned polygamy. God allowed prophets and leaders to have polygamous marriages and NEVER EVER said an ill word about it. That means that in some instances that served God's purposes, he allowed polygamous marriages to take place. Hate that Bible fact all you want but it remains a Bible fact.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#20004 Feb 10, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
And you're the master of being a full blown idiot who will swallow any stupid doctrine of the LDS church, no matter how absurd. Truth has never met your lips.
lolol....that comes from a guy that swallowed what he testified was God's truth for 30 years. Testified it to other people, testified it to himself in prayer for 30 years. For 30 years you claimed to know God's truth.
Now you claim to know God's truth a second time? You claim what you said for 30 years was a lie? Now you want people to believe you're not deceived and not lying a second time? You're a fricking lost soul and truth has never touched you lips and if it did, you didn't recognize it.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20005 Feb 10, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
You should just make a 'sticky key' to
help fine tune your
'copy paste ninja skills'- just call it your 'anti-key'
so you can speak out against the worship of Christ, in any way/shape/form you see fit to condemn.
*****
No Surprise is not LDS... he states that over and over again.
I see your anti-key is hard at work proving
The CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints isn't a
Church of Jesus Christ at all because of:
No Surprise,
and Joseph Smith,
and Moses,
and Abraham,
... and Jesus Christ.
*****
Your accusations of the LDS Church "not" being Christians
lays on the foundation of your
anti-Abrahamic/Isrealite/Mosai c based OPINIONS...
not fact based.
Your credibility is non-existent.
You have anti Biblical history agenda.
Multiple
agenda.
Nothing you've posted has proven him wrong. It just proves you don't like it.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20006 Feb 10, 2013
ConcernedEnoughToGOOGLEiT wrote:
<quoted text>
Where to begin is admitting you lied, through your teeth,
and now you're trying to explain away existence of history since Abraham of God not only endorsing,
but commanding polygamous heterosexuality for
thousand
upon
thousand
of years.
You're an ignorant huckster so swiftly checked on, even Google proves you're a systematic denier of Jewish heritage, history and history of worship.
Your changing the subject that it being so easy to check your pathology is surprising to you just locks you in.
Nowhere, absolutely nowhere, does the bible say that God commanded Abraham to take a second wife. Feel free to prove me wrong with something like a bible verse, and not those fictional scriptures you follow.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20007 Feb 10, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
Egypt,
Maybe you can share your anti-key instructions with
Mrs Dane Roberts...
just "YOU TUBE" it,
or you can instruct him on "WIKI-Pedia".
Oh, wait... he already has copy paste ninja skills
an anti-key,
and false agenda of his own.
And they have proven you wrong on every occasion. Whining like a little child isn't going to save Mormonism lady.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20008 Feb 10, 2013
ConcernedEnoughToGOOGLEiT wrote:
Satan is the father of lies, and as your leader, he drives you to obsessive-compulsive lying, and changing of the subject, Egypt.
People who everyone agrees is possessed by Satan, such as serial molesters, murderers, rapists,-
An almost perfect description of Joseph Smith. I guess you think it is OK when he says he did it in the name of the Lord.
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#20009 Feb 10, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
The only real truth you have established is that you're good at pasting.
Next. There is no evidence, no solid evidence that Smith had sex with a single wife. We know what people claimed AFTER Smith was dead. And usually a decade or more after his death.
You or I or anyone else can have all the opinions we want of this topic. The fact remains there is no solid evidence to prove Smith consummated a single 'pretend' marriage.
In will not rely on rumours and hearsay as being facts as you do it. If you're going that route, you might as well believe the rumour Hitler was a Jew and that's why he hated them. You might as well believe the rumour that Bush planned and commanded 9/11. Rumours are called that for a specific reason. Because they are statements that haven't been proved as true with undisputed evidence. A child would be undisputed evidence. A dead or living child would be evidence. A trial against Smith for the charge of bigamy where it was shown he committed bigamy by evidence like living children, living with each wife individually in a home he established with her, things like that would prove Smith had sexual relations and had committed bigamy.
But none of that exists. And until something comes forth to prove beyond a doubt Smith had consummated all 30+'pretend' marriages, only rumours exist. Understand?
And of this marriage thing, it's a straw man argument for anyone that uses it. It matters not what any one claims or who believes those marriages were true and real.
The marriages were all false. They were pretend. So Smith by the legal definition of marriage in the US didn't marry any man's wife. I know that doesn't sit well with you but it's a fact. Smith legally married one wife. Only one. And that is the only legal wife and his only wife of all his wives that he had many, many children with.
Tough for you to prove Smith was sexing 30+ wives in a 3 year period for probably hundreds of times and never sired a single known child. Yet he and Emma would have sex and she'd become pregnate within the year.
So feed me some more of your straw man argument of how a man was having sex with 30+ women in a three year period for hundreds of times and not a single birth can be proven. Waiting ...:)
Yes there is lots of first hand evidence he did it has been posted and given to you in detail with 3 pages of footnotes that you can verify you saying there is none does not make it so.

The evidence I have provided shows that I am not posting my opinion or hear say it has confirmed my assertions are fact.

YOU can keep up your grade school tactics but for those following this thread you have now become my best exhibit to show LDS are not Christians as you can not articulate one assertion you have made.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20010 Feb 10, 2013
ConcernedEnoughToGOOGLEiT wrote:
Like the father of all those other sociopathological, liars, Egypt.
The god of the lover of the dark. The god of the lover of the lie.
He told you to despise God's way. He told you that you don't have to honor past prophets' relationship to God because you have one, yourself: a personal one.
But you don't have a personal relationship with God as long as you remain a sociopath:
a glib, lying fanatical misleader of humanity,
with artificial zeal for
telling lies in the name of the Lord.
"Lying for the Lord" is another long held tradition of the LDS church:
http://www.mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord
Apparently, Mormons are great lovers of a good lie.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20011 Feb 10, 2013
ConcernedEnoughToGOOGLEiT wrote:
I suppose Egypt is saying that since there's no being sure from just his opinion whether he's a practicing Christian, there need to be historically accurate evidence from the Abrahamic religious way.
He needs to check whether his religion has 12 Apostles as Jesus' Church;
If he has Peter, Mark, Paul, John, etc, he does.
He needs to check for baptism in immersive fashion as outlined in religious historical documentation of Jewish Temple bathing rites, and Christianic rites of identical submersions as baths, washing away sin;
Jewish bathing rituals have nothing to do with water baptism. Baptism by immersion was never commanded as th only way it was to be done. Prove me wrong if you can.
He needs to check for laying on hands for a gift of edification called the "gift of the holy ghost."
The gift of the Holy Spirit can come to a person also just by hearing the word of God. The day of Pentecost is scriptural proof of that, as is Paul's conversion. Why are you trying to limit God?
He needs to check whether his church assigns and sets aside all men in devisions of priesthoods such that all are priests, but not all are qualified to assign the laying on of hands,
For one, if you are the church Christ created, there is only one High Priest, that is Jesus Christ. You should actually read what Hebrews says on the matter and learn your church has screwed it all up. For another, a Teacher isn't a priesthood, it's a position. For another, Elders are not 18 yr old boys who can barely wipe their noses, hence the use of the word "Elder". The mormon church really needs to get a dictionary. Deacons aren't suppose to be 12 yrs old either, and it isn't a priesthood, it is a position of authority in the church.
He needs to check for miraculous visitations from Angelic beings resembling men, who identify with the characters of history so well those biblical characters speak with them,'as one man speaketh with another'
After Joseph Smith, what record do you have of any of your leaders getting "Angelic visitations"? What evidence do we have besides Smiths word that he didn't make it up? I'll be glad to show you evidence that his "visitations" were fiction.
He needs to check that his own church has groups of seventy at a time set apart to spread the gospel of the Church of Jesus Christ,
That isn't a job just for the Seventies. That is a job for every believer of Jesus Christ.
He needs to check that the priesthood can not be attained through donations of money
Like the General Authorities of the LDS church do?
He needs to check that the persons involved claim of themselves as personal individuals, visiations from angels, God Himself, and having also visions of how things are going to be in the future, often referred to as 'dreams'.
And we need to check to make sure those same persons are not the false prophets Jesus warned us of in the Bible. Anyone can make claims, the burden of proof lays with the one making the claims.

To be continued...

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#20012 Feb 10, 2013
He needs to check to be sure the organization is divinely appointed with heavenly beings doing all primary instruction before momentous events;
So do you. Again, you can claim anything.
He needs to check to be sure the beings claimed to be seen, testify of repentence, and of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God of Israel; and that said beings appear to be able to quote, verbatim, scripture: identically in model to those of the Abrahamic religion's documentation.
That would be just about every Christian denomination today, nothing that the LDS church can claim as exclusive. Not even close. The Mormon churches problem is that it denies the teachings of the Bible, adding doctrine to tickle the ears of men, denying the grace of Jesus Christ in favor of a salvation based upon your on righteousness, and not that of our Lords.
When he has those
he can be sort of like the Mormons
who have those. And more.
You're smoking crack, now. You are delusional.
He needs to check whether his organization has a culture of gathering by priests of one tenth for distribution to those in need.
Even though Paul taught that it was to come out of our abundance instead?
He needs to check for whether the culture surrounding the organization he joins seem to have an unusually high number of regional and area-wide champions, as though the culture creates a large amount of personal self-development: where being successful is the norm in activities demanding a lot of perserverence.
And he needs to check whether the culture has a high level of suicides, like Utah does. It is in the top 10% of the nation. You have been successful in that area.
He needs to check for an overall high amount of cultural sensitivity to the concepts of governance; crime among the indoctrinated being the exception rather than rule,
with the culture members being very frequently sought out as cultural secular leaders due to a capacity to work within governments.
That's why the LDS church had to move to Utah, it had such a "high amount of cultural sensitivity to the concepts of governance"
The culture should have a high rate of literacy and stress systematically and statistically methodological ability to check for coherence in written & spoken language.
Like Joseph Smith did with his 5th grade edumacation, Jethro.
The culture of his church should be one that STRESSES CONTINUAL REVERENCE FOR even JESUS CHRIST, the SAVIOR of THEM who REPENT of THEIR SINs. The culture of his church should teach of a Godhead which uses classical leadership and political hierarchy organizational schematics & terminologies regularly,
Well, if a church that claimed to be a church of Jesus Christ didn't have "reverence", what kind of church would it be? If this isn't the most ignorant of claims I've ever read. Just how stupid do you think people are?
His church should be an organization that has many converts from many different walks of life, from many different languages, lands, tribes, peoples.
His church should have a REFERENCE SYSTEM REGARDING MALE and FEMALE SEXUALITY as LITERAL and UTTERLY INTRINSIC to the BEINGS whom they claim to worship: such that a God CAN impregnate a woman: and that the CHILD be FULLY sexually functional in every way: and never
ever
refer to sexuality or human reproductive evolution in ANY but CLASSICAL sexual TERMS,
OVERLAPPING the GOD they WORSHIP and the FAMILY of MAN WORSHIPPING them.
No sneak tricks about how God's a deceiving liar because he didn't catch VD like the monogamists.
Then there are actually quite a few more things he can check and if he's got all that down for sure,
as we Mormons have in ours,
MAYBE.
So, you want the good old days of polygamy to come back? Where did you copy this trash? And you dare criticize Egyptian for copying and pasting?
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#20013 Feb 10, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You're really quite full of yourself. God condoned polygamy. God allowed prophets and leaders to have polygamous marriages and NEVER EVER said an ill word about it. That means that in some instances that served God's purposes, he allowed polygamous marriages to take place. Hate that Bible fact all you want but it remains a Bible fact.
NOT an ill well you would be as useless at poker as you are posting here

Dt 17:16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the LORD has told you,“You are not to go back that way again.”
Dt 17:17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.
Dt 17:18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the priests, who are Levites.
Dt 17:19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees
Dt 17:20 and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.

Dt 17:17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. did you get that pretty sure this qualifies as ill words.

Despite his world–renowned wisdom, Solomon’s peaceful and prosperous rule ended in idolatrous scandal and civil strife, for “his wives turned his heart after other gods”(1 Kings 11:4).

MATTHEW 19:4–6
“Haven’t you read,” he replied,“that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said,‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?’ So they are no longer two, but one.”

BTW when I copy and paste the Bible is that bad too??? LOL

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#20014 Feb 10, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
"Lying for the Lord" is another long held tradition of the LDS church:
http://www.mormonwiki.org/Lying_for_the_Lord
Apparently, Mormons are great lovers of a good lie.
Wiki is not a valid source for proven factual evidence... as anyone can edit and add anything they want to the data.
concerned in Eygpt

Aberdeen, UK

#20015 Feb 10, 2013
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
Wiki is not a valid source for proven factual evidence... as anyone can edit and add anything they want to the data.
Wiki can not be edited by just anybody as you say.

It is now considered even by Encyclopedia Britannica to be more accurate then there very own Encyclopedia and they have stopped printing theirs.

It is no considered by major Universities to be a legitimate source and now is better footnoted and documented than any other Encyclopedia in History.

you should google that one. or bing it or Yahoo it take your pick

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Religion Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Islam Will Conquer Italy and the Entire West (Sep '10) 7 min A snot is a grasser 377,717
West Oahu Catholic church buys 11 acres to buil... 7 min Bakatari 6
Pope Francis leaves the beatification ceremony ... 8 min Christsharian Law 9
LDS Apostle visited Tonga (Feb '14) 9 min fishy 18,574
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min USA Born 548,377
Perth mosques, Islamic school vandalised 11 min Bert 5
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 13 min waaasssuuup 229,898

Religion People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE