Two more bite the dust!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

charity wrote:If we could talk in the temple, you would slap yourself on the forehead like the V-8 commerical guys. And do you recall President Kimball saying that he learned something new each time he went? It only speaks to the complexity and depth of the temple ceremony. And most of us, including me, don't listen all that well.


Looking back on it, I see Masonic rite combined with scripture from Genesis; you know, the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.

And actually, it was President McKay who said that.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

the road to hana wrote:
charity wrote:the road to hana: 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?

charity: Why questions are never useful unless you can ask the people involved.


That has to be one of the most amazing non-answers ever.


hana, or whatever your nickname is, think about it. Who knows why Abraham LIncoln went to the theater that night? We could ask, "Why did he decided to go there? Just think how different history would have been." But who knows WHY? He isn't around to tell us.

That is the answer to most all "Why" questions in history. We don't know, and we can't know. So it is pointless to even ask a question with no discernible answer.
_Polygamy Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am

Post by _Polygamy Porter »

charity wrote:Oh, and we temple going LDS know the real way to look at the story of Adam and Eve. But it is easy to miss is you aren't listening for it. And haven't had the opportunity to go a hundreds of times. As a person has had when they are my age. You might listen next time you are there with your new temple recommend.
Charity, how long did the family of Adam and Eve practice incest?

Perhaps that is the reason behind Cain killing his brother -he got to sleep with momma first?

Adam was his own grampa!
_Polygamy Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am

Post by _Polygamy Porter »

Gazelam wrote: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.
God gaz, that crap might stick to the MAAD wall, but over here it just plain stinks.
_ludwigm
_Emeritus
Posts: 10158
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 8:07 am

Post by _ludwigm »

charity wrote:
the road to hana wrote: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.

1.
"I think it is possible for a man to have more than one committed relationship"
I would like Charity as 59th wife of ANY early GA. "If and only if the Lord commands it." Oh, Lord, please command it her!
2.
Please, draw the relationships.
Draw a circle with an "M" in it , for the male persons handled.
Draw a circle with an "F" in it , for the female persons handled.
Draw a line between the "F" and "M" circles, for any "committed relationship".
If there is one "F" or one "M" with more than one line (relationship), then there is polygamy or polygyny.
This is true, even one call the "relationships" commandment, eternal, celestial etc.
3.
"But I understand perfectly what you are sayiing"
No, You don't.
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco
- To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

charity wrote:
the road to hana wrote:
charity wrote:the road to hana: 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?

charity: Why questions are never useful unless you can ask the people involved.


That has to be one of the most amazing non-answers ever.


hana, or whatever your nickname is, think about it. Who knows why Abraham LIncoln went to the theater that night? We could ask, "Why did he decided to go there? Just think how different history would have been." But who knows WHY? He isn't around to tell us.

That is the answer to most all "Why" questions in history. We don't know, and we can't know. So it is pointless to even ask a question with no discernible answer.


Where has the principle of plural marriage ever been taught or advanced as non-sexual?
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

charity wrote:If we could talk in the temple, you would slap yourself on the forehead like the V-8 commerical guys. And do you recall President Kimball saying that he learned something new each time he went? It only speaks to the complexity and depth of the temple ceremony. And most of us, including me, don't listen all that well.


You might want to study the history of creation dramas.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Post by _Some Schmo »

beastie wrote:
charity: Laugh while you can.


Yes, for one day you will BURN IN HELL.


Exactly, beastie.

Oh look, another typical example of the average religious person's feeling of impotence coming out in a "God'll getcha" comment. Do these ever get old?

As the wise Billy Joel once wrote, "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints; the sinners are much more fun... only the good die young." How old did you say you were, charity?

hehe
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

the road to hana wrote:
charity wrote:If we could talk in the temple, you would slap yourself on the forehead like the V-8 commerical guys. And do you recall President Kimball saying that he learned something new each time he went? It only speaks to the complexity and depth of the temple ceremony. And most of us, including me, don't listen all that well.


You might want to study the history of creation dramas.


And what makes you think I haven't? That's why I suggested to Harmony pay close attention to the temple ceremony.
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

Some Schmo wrote:
beastie wrote:
charity: Laugh while you can.


Yes, for one day you will BURN IN HELL.


Exactly, beastie.

Oh look, another typical example of the average religious person's feeling of impotence coming out in a "God'll getcha" comment. Do these ever get old?

As the wise Billy Joel once wrote, "I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints; the sinners are much more fun... only the good die young." How old did you say you were, charity?

hehe


It is none of your business how old I am. Let's just say I passed the point of dying young decades ago. So I must be one of those sinners wise old Billy would like to laugh with.

A thought just struck me. Since LDS live longer than any other goupr (except for JW or SDA, I can't remember which) what conclusion can we come to there? Of course, there is the promise of honoring your paretns that allows us to live long. Maybe that's why we do. Not because we are sinners. Food for thought.
Post Reply