Two more bite the dust!

[_the road to hana]

I am finding it amazing that you seem to really think you have found a way around this by suggesting that the women are not married to each other so the man doesn't have more than one wife.

I'm sorry Charity but with all due respect this line of silliness is really way, WAY over the top.

Have you ever stepped back and really looked at what you are saying?


~dancer~

dancer, and all the others out there. Each plural marriage was independent of the others. Celestial marriage is a couple. Each wife had a husband. Whether or not he had other wives is not germane to the discussion. If you were not culturally conditioned to think only one wife per husband, you would see it is the same thing as a child sealed to parents. It doesn't matter how many other children there are of the same parents. Each child is sealed to parents.

Same thing.

And some of those wives already had other husbands.

Charity, you are still entirely missing the point about the word "union" as it relates to "one flesh."

[_Gazelam]

msnobody,

Mormonism for trusting in Christ alone

Mormonism and trusting in Christ are the same thing.

You forgot the "alone", Gaz. That's the operative word.

Trusting in Christ means accepting his servants. You can't even have faith in Christ without hearing about him through the testimony of his servants. Folowing Christ means partaking in the covenants he has asked you to make with him, and to do that you have to make those covenants through his authorized priesthood bearers, who stand in for him by proxy in serving you.

Shall I go on?

No thank you. You see, the problem is that you represent only one rather small and frankly marginal group amongst the many, many groups who have claimed to be 'his servants' over the last two thousand years, and who have in consequence demanded that everybody should accept their authority, and (often) hand over considerable amounts of money for the privilege of doing so.

Now I have to get on with cooking the dinner. Do you have some literature you can leave, and a number I can call if I am interested? Have a nice day. [Closes door politely but firmly]. Nothing honey, just a another Mormon missionary. I feel sorry for those guys, so I always speak to them nicely, though I try to be honest too. Poor kids.

I know this will sound rude to you, Gaz, but your in a cult. You cannot have all God offers without pledging allegience to the Morporation. Joseph Smith, modern day prophets, Book of Mormon, temple, temple marriage---- all idolatry. Open your eyes and see that you're being taken advantage of.

Lets see, Testimony is gained by hearing testimony:
Matt. 24: 14
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

Luke 4: 18
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at iliberty them that are bruised,

And who should do the preaching?
Rom. 10: 15
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent?

1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

And how is one seperated?
2 Tim 1:6
Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.

And what do they preach?
Matt. 28: 19
19 ¶ Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Acts 2: 38
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Shall I go on? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is The Church of Christ. It contains His Gospel, it contains his authorized servants, and it contains His ordinances which seal His name upon those who would be His children.


Im sure the Saducees and Pharasees also refered to the followers of Christ as a cult.

[_Chap]

Gazelam:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is The Church of Christ. It contains His Gospel, it contains his authorized servants, and it contains His ordinances which seal His name upon those who would be His children.

Sure, sure ... now I think you had better repeat that one more time, and everybody is bound to believe you. See the authoritative explanation of this rhetorical move by Lewis Carroll:

"Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried,
As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
By a finger entwined in his hair.

"Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What i tell you three times is true."

http://www.literature.org/authors/carro ... er-01.html

Carroll was, you will recall, the author of Alice in Wonderland.

[_Runtu]

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is The Church of Christ. It contains His Gospel, it contains his authorized servants, and it contains His ordinances which seal His name upon those who would be His children.

Is not! Neener neener!

Sometimes I wish you were right, Gaz. But I'm OK knowing you're wrong.

[_harmony]

Trusting in Christ means accepting his servants. You can't even have faith in Christ without hearing about him through the testimony of his servants. Folowing Christ means partaking in the covenants he has asked you to make with him, and to do that you have to make those covenants through his authorized priesthood bearers, who stand in for him by proxy in serving you.

Shall I go on?

That is manifestly incorrect, Gaz. Trusting in Christ means trusting in God, not men. Whenever I see anything that says to trust men over God, to allow a man between me and God, to elevate men over other men, I know that comes from men who desire power, not men who have authority. His servants are all just men and women, all of them all too human. The most humble of them have some good advice to give. Unfortunately, LDS leaders are not known for their humility. Some of his servants don't even know his name, but they serve him just the same since they live his gospel. Blessed be the peacemakers, whether they bear the name or not. God is no respector of persons; he loves and blesses all of his children, even the troublemakers, even the sinful, even those who disagree with the men who claim to be his servants.

[_charity]

Charity, you are still entirely missing the point about the word "union" as it relates to "one flesh."

I don't miss your point. I just don't agree with it. I think you are mistaken about "one flesh." I think it is possible for a man to have more than one committed relationship, concurrent, of course. If and only if the Lord commands it.

But I understand perfectly what you are sayiing.

[_the road to hana]

Charity, you are still entirely missing the point about the word "union" as it relates to "one flesh."

I don't miss your point. I just don't agree with it. I think you are mistaken about "one flesh." I think it is possible for a man to have more than one committed relationship, concurrent, of course. If and only if the Lord commands it.

But I understand perfectly what you are sayiing.

I am saying "one flesh" as it relates to a marriage being a consummated union. Whether or not there are more than one (in the case of polygamy) is aside from the point I am making about marriage being a "union."

You are asserting that Joseph Smith had non-sexual "marriages." Why then would they be described as a marriage, and where has the principle of plural marriage ever been taught or advanced as non-sexual?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

A genetic testing lab just released data that according to DNA testing, Mosiah Hancock and Oliver Buell, the darlings of the polyandry crowd, are definately NOT Joseph Smith's offspring.

This is old news -- the interesting one is Josephine Lyons; anyone know if there's been any conclusion about her?

[_truth dancer]

LOL....

Each plural marriage was independent of the others.

How you turn this into the idea that if women aren't married to each other it is OK for a man have multiple wives and still pretend you are abiding by the law, 'one man and one wife', is beyond me.

Each wife had a husband.

And these husbands had MULTIPLE WIVES... not a wife. There is a diffrence between one man and one wife, and one man and multiple wives, even if you want to pretend the fact that the woman are not married to each other, disqualifies the man from having multiple wives.

Whether or not he had other wives is not germane to the discussion.

Whether a man had one or many wives is EXACTLY the issue. One man and one woman. NOT one man and many women. However you want to twist it Charity, in polygamy one man had multiple wives, not one.

If you were not culturally conditioned to think only one wife per husband, you would see it is the same thing as a child sealed to parents.

What nonsense Charity. I'm guessing you have read the New Testament... seems Jesus Christ himself made it clear one man was to have ONE wife. NOT MULTIPLE wives.

One man and one wife means just what it says to everyone but you. Your idea that if the wives aren't married to each other it disqualifies the man from having multiple women is yours and yours alone Charity. It has nothing to do with my cultural conditioning. Your interpretation has to do with your need to find a way around the commandment/law, one man to one woman.

It doesn't matter how many other children there are of the same parents. Each child is sealed to parents.

Ohhh dear. (sigh)

Seriously, please show me any commandment/scripture/teaching where it states a father or mother are only to have one child. Something like... parents are to have one child, or a mother is to have only one child, or a father is to have only one child.

Dance, contort, pretend, interpret, make believe, conjecture, imagine, whatever.

One man and one wife means just what it says.

But, I have the sense you REALLY need to believe some alternative idea so I'll leave it at that.

~dancer~

[_Runtu]

A genetic testing lab just released data that according to DNA testing, Mosiah Hancock and Oliver Buell, the darlings of the polyandry crowd, are definately NOT Joseph Smith's offspring.

This is old news -- the interesting one is Josephine Lyons; anyone know if there's been any conclusion about her?

The thing about Josephine is that she looks an awful lot like Joseph. I wish I had a photo of Windsor Lyon to compare her to.