FREE COFFEE...
Lance Ferm
...at my home church every Sunday morning!
Joe Bento
Lance Ferm wrote:
>
> ...at my home church every Sunday morning!
>
>
Carl Mustoe
Lance Ferm wrote in message <01bd6bbf$83d2d580$9c3a1d26@wakeupcall>...
>...at my home church every Sunday morning!
>
>http://standrewspres.org
>
>http://home.earthlink.net/~wakeupcall/#mormon
And you're quite welcome to it!
Perhaps you'd like a cigarette and a whisky to go with that?!
Steve O'Neil
On 19 Apr 1998 18:17:04 GMT, "Lance Ferm" <wakeu...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>...at my home church every Sunday morning!
The church of Lance? No thanks.
Truth
Does that include drugs, alcohol and wild parties too Lance..........
Rev. John McKee
Joe Bento wrote:
> Lance Ferm wrote:
> >
> > ...at my home church every Sunday morning!
> >
> >
> Boy, that ought to cause a great apostasy from the LDS church!
The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS if
fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
togather and decieved the people.
DanDanite
In article <35436EEA...@bellsouth.net>, "Rev. John McKee"
<fm...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
>religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
>and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS if
>fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
>togather and decieved the people.
Your normally good grammar and spelling just left you, brother John. This one
is written a lot like Lance Ferm would write. Are yu two different people?
Dan
Williams
Reverend McKee, I'd appreciate it if you'd clue me in on what religion this
was. I know it wasn't the Methodists, so who else do we have to add to the list
of denominations that Joseph Smith is alleged to have signed up with before
printing the Book of Mormon?
-
Reverend McKee alleged:
f> The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
f> religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
f> and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS if
f> fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
f> togather and decieved the people.
-
If this is your opinion about where Mormonism comes from, be careful that
you don't discuss Christianity with Jewish people.
George (who sees the irony in bold statements)
--
|Fidonet: Williams 1:106/7861
|Internet: Will...@7861.conchbbs.com
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
Mark Hines
net...@mindspring.com (Guy R. "BrickWall" Briggs ) writes:
>I know what you're thinking - there were *never* any golden plates -
>but you're talking to Mormons who truly believe that they existed.
Of course, there never were any gold plates. According to court
records, Joseph Smith was convicted of an occult peep-stone treasure
hunting scheme. He functioned as a medium, through which demons
dictated the Book of Mormon. According to testimonials, he had a
peep-stone, or seer-stone as he called it, in his hat. He put his face
in the hat and saw words. He dictated these messages to an accomplice
who wrote them down. Smith was demon possessed. In a similar manner,
people have become demon possessed fooling with Ouija Boards. Any time
one deceives oneself and allows unknown spirits to communicate
messages, demons take advantage.
The Bible strictly warns against occult practices as being of Satan.
God severely condemns divination, automatic writing, soothsaying,
enchantments, fortune telling, magic arts, etc., as of the devil. Here
are some links that expose Mormonism:
www.teachingministry.com/ldswit3.htm
www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm
religion-cults.com/Cults/Christian/C-CULTS.htm
www.users.on.net/mec/answers
www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/mormonis.html
users.uniserve.com/~suncrest/mormon.htm
www.exmormon.org/whylft73.htm
www.utlm.org/lib/order1.htm
www.pnc.com.au/~mandate/mormons.htm
Again, the translation process included a principle of seership, namely
using a spiritual gift of vision or sight to see the spiritual light in
the translation instrument. Note in the following verse that God have
Joseph "sight and power" to translate. Joseph could already see, but he
was given a gift of spiritual sight and power. Without this visual gift
he couldn't have seen anything in the Urim and Thummim or his seer
stone.
12 And when thou deliveredst up that which God had given thee sight and
power to translate, thou deliveredst up that which was sacred into the
hands of a wicked man. . . . (D&C 3:12; italics added.)
The Prophet Joseph alone knew the full process, and he was deliberately
reluctant to describe details. We take passing notice of the words of
David Whitmer, Joseph Knight, and Martin Harris, who were observers,
not translators. David Whitmer indicated that as the Prophet used the
divine instrumentalities provided to help him, "the hieroglyphics would
appear, and also the translation in the English language ... in bright
luminous letters." Then Joseph would read the words to Oliver (quoted
in James H. Hart, "About the Book of Mormon," Deseret Evening News, 25
Mar. 1884, 2). Martin Harris related of the seer stone: "Sentences
would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin"
(quoted in Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses: Incidents in
the Life of Martin Harris," Latter-Day Saints' Millennial Star, 6 Feb.
1882, 86-87). Joseph Knight made similar observations. ...
The revelation respecting the Toronto journey was not of God, surely;
else it would not have failed; but the Prophet, overwrought in his deep
anxiety for the progress of the work, saw reflected in the "Seer Stone"
his own thought, or that suggested to him by his brother Hyrum, rather
than the thought of God … in this instance of the Toronto journey,
Joseph was evidently not directed by the inspiration of the Lord. (A
Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, B.H. Roberts, vol. 1, pages 164-165, emphasis added)
In speaking of the translation of the Book of Mormon, Emma Smith's
cousin "...reported that Smith `translated the book of Mormon by means
of the same peep stone, and under the same inspiration that directed
his enchantments and dog sacrifices; it was all by the same spirit,'"
(Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, Dr. D. Michael Quinn, p.
144; emphasis mine).
Guy R. Briggs
mjh...@ix.netcom.com (Mark Hines) wrote:
| net...@mindspring.com (Guy R. Briggs) writes:
|
|> I know what you're thinking - there were *never* any golden plates -
|> but you're talking to Mormons who truly believe that they existed.
|
| Of course, there never were any gold plates.
|
a.r.m. - where we've come to expect stuff like this - but also to
a.r.m.f. where it's off-topic and extreemly rude. I'm sure it sound
great when preached from an orthodox Christian pulpit, but in a
fellowship group you have to make basic assumptions.
For instance, the people you're talking to and trying to convince are
Mormons and believe in the existence of golden plates. You will never -
repeat *never* convince us of anything unless you first address and
acknowledge the things we *do* believe.
Ever hear of Dale Carnegie? You ought to read his book sometime. It's
called _How to Win Friends and Influence People_.
|
| According to court records, Joseph Smith was convicted of an occult
| peep-stone treasure hunting scheme.
|
Court records fail to show he was convicted of anything. A receipt
for escorthing JS *to* court names him as "Joe Smith, the glass-looker"
but that's hardly a conviction, now is it? Besides, to prove he was
convicted of an "occult peep-stone treasure hunting scheme" you'd first
have to show us where there was a law on the books in the great state of
New York that prohibited it in the first place! After that you'll have
to deal with the fact that the so-called "victim" of this scheme
testified that JS hadn't done anything wrong. Kinda hard to get a
conviction with a victim like that.
|
| He functioned as a medium, through which demons dictated the Book
| of Mormon. According to testimonials, he had a peep-stone, or
| seer-stone as he called it, in his hat. He put his face in the hat
| and saw words. He dictated these messages to an accomplice who wrote
| them down. Smith was demon possessed.
|
It's interesting that you would take the most outlandish version of
the "translation process" and accept it as the gospel truth.
|
| In a similar manner, people have become demon possessed fooling with
| Ouija Boards. Any time one deceives oneself and allows unknown spirits
| to communicate messages, demons take advantage.
|
I see you're a graduate of the Loftes Tryk School of Logical
Reasoning. A "New Age" anti-Mormon. You believe that the Hebraisms
demonstrated in the Book of Mormon (especially chiasmus) are
supernatural but not divine. Well, thats fine - and you're not alone in
that theory - but you're kind of shooting yourself in the foot with that
approach because you're heralding ELS as proof of the divinity of the
Bible.
IOW, the Bible is true because it has Hebrew literary devices in it -
watermarks, so to speak - but the Book of Mormon is demonic even though
it has Hebrew literary devices (albiet no ELS, because it's a
*translation*) in it.
Don't you see any problem with that logic?
|
| The Bible strictly warns against occult practices as being of Satan.
| God severely condemns divination, automatic writing, soothsaying,
| enchantments, fortune telling, magic arts, etc., as of the devil. Here
| are some links that expose Mormonism:
<remainder snipped - this *was* crossposted to a fellowship group!>
BestRegards,
Guy R. "BrickWall" Briggs ----------- net...@mindspring.com
"All God's critters got a place in the choir,
Some sing low, some sing higher.
Some sing out loud on the telephone wire!
And some just clap their hands, or paws,
Or anything they got."
Williams
Guy, it appears that one man's meat is another man's poison:
-
The guy you quoted objected to "occult" practices:
n> | The Bible strictly warns against occult practices as being of Satan.
n> | God severely condemns divination, automatic writing, soothsaying,
n> | enchantments, fortune telling, magic arts, etc.,
n> as of the devil. Here
n> | are some links that expose Mormonism:
-
I wonder what he would have said had he seen my reaction to some of the
unapproved "charismatic" happenings that were staged at a youth meeting here in
Houston back in 1971. They scared the hell out of me, and got our youth
director fired.
George
Rev. John McKee
DanDanite wrote:
> In article <35436EEA...@bellsouth.net>, "Rev. John McKee"
> <fm...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
> >The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
> >religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
> >and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS if
> >fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
> >togather and decieved the people.
>
> Your normally good grammar and spelling just left you, brother John. This one
> is written a lot like Lance Ferm would write. Are yu two different people?
>
> Dan
Dan,
My English grammer and spelling are not my strong points and I,m too lazy to
hit my spellchecker. Also my brain moves much faster than my finger will type.
Please forgive me.
Rev. John
Rev. John McKee
Williams wrote:
> Reverend McKee, I'd appreciate it if you'd clue me in on what religion this
> was. I know it wasn't the Methodists, so who else do we have to add to the list
> of denominations that Joseph Smith is alleged to have signed up with before
> printing the Book of Mormon?
> -
> Reverend McKee alleged:
> f> The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
> f> religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
> f> and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS if
> f> fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
> f> togather and decieved the people.
> -
> If this is your opinion about where Mormonism comes from, be careful that
> you don't discuss Christianity with Jewish people.
> George (who sees the irony in bold statements)
> --
> |Fidonet: Williams 1:106/7861
> |Internet: Will...@7861.conchbbs.com
> |
> | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
I'm in the process of looking for it now. Please stand by.......
I beleive that it could have been the Shakers, founded by Ann Lee in 1774. Also
known as "Mother Lee"
I could be wrong, but I'm still looking. There were alot of different
religions that Joseph Smith was involved with in his early years.
Rev. John
Mark Hines
In <6i0b8a$i19$1...@camel29.mindspring.com> net...@mindspring.com (Guy R.
Briggs) writes:
>
>
>For instance, the people you're talking to and trying to convince are
>Mormons and believe in the existence of golden plates. You will never
>repeat *never* convince us of anything unless you first address and
>acknowledge the things we *do* believe.
Guy, skeak for yourself. You may never visit the below sites and
honestly evaluate articles there, but others may. Many people have left
the Mormon church because articles at the below sites and elsewhere
have addressed what Mormons believe. Is not a person's soul worth the
time it takes to read the below articles?
www.teachingministry.com/ldswit3.htm
www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm
religion-cults.com/Cults/Christian/C-CULTS.htm
www.users.on.net/mec/answers
www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/mormonis.html
users.uniserve.com/~suncrest/mormon.htm
www.exmormon.org/whylft73.htm
www.utlm.org/lib/order1.htm
www.pnc.com.au/~mandate/mormons.htm
Mark Hines
DanDanite
In article <3543CB6B...@bellsouth.net>, "Rev. John McKee"
<fm...@bellsouth.net> writes:
I have a different problem, My fingers and mouth sometimes move faster than my
brain.
Dan
Jacobugath
In article <3543CEF2...@bellsouth.net>, "Rev. John McKee"
<fm...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>
>I beleive that it could have been the Shakers, founded by Ann Lee in 1774.
>Also
>known as "Mother Lee"
> I could be wrong, but I'm still looking. There were alot of different
>religions that Joseph Smith was involved with in his early years.
>
>Rev. John
John, I found this on the arm.religion.mormon.fellowship newsgroup where
anti-mormon stuff is not only off topic, it is also rude and unwanted. How
about confining the anti propaganda to newsgroups where it is expected. In
other words, stop cross posting. It is not a Christian thing to do.
Jake
DanDanite
> I'm in the process of looking for it now. Please stand by.......
>
>I beleive that it could have been the Shakers, founded by Ann Lee in 1774.
>Also
>known as "Mother Lee"
> I could be wrong, but I'm still looking. There were alot of different
>religions that Joseph Smith was involved with in his early years.
>
>Rev. John
You can learn all about the other religions that Joseph was interested in by
calling for LDS missionaries and asking them for the story, It's no secret.
Dan
Williams
q
f> I could be wrong, but I'm still looking. There
f> were alot of different
f> religions that Joseph Smith was involved with in his early years.
f> Rev. John
-
Fair enough, Reverend, but I will have to have a reference to give credence
to it. Thanks.
George
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
: Reverend McKee, I'd appreciate it if you'd clue me in on what religion this
: was. I know it wasn't the Methodists, so who else do we have to add to the list
: of denominations that Joseph Smith is alleged to have signed up with before
: printing the Book of Mormon?
The masons. Compare the Temple Ordinances.
san...@widowmaker.com
In article <3543CEF2...@bellsouth.net>,
fm...@bellsouth.net wrote:
> Williams wrote:
>
> > Reverend McKee, I'd appreciate it if you'd clue me in on what religion
this
> > was. I know it wasn't the Methodists, so who else do we have to add to the
list
> > of denominations that Joseph Smith is alleged to have signed up with
before
> > printing the Book of Mormon?
> > -
> > Reverend McKee alleged:
> > f> The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
> > f> religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
> > f> and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS
if
> > f> fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
> > f> togather and decieved the people.
Snip, for bandwidth's sake!
> I beleive that it could have been the Shakers, founded by Ann Lee in 1774.
Also
> known as "Mother Lee"
> I could be wrong, but I'm still looking. There were alot of different
> religions that Joseph Smith was involved with in his early years.
I seem to remember something from when I took the discussions, oh, yeah.
Joseph Smith spent a considerable time searching for the true religion before
his prayer that lead to the formation of the church. D'ya think that could
explain that. Nah.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Craig Anderson
On 26 Apr 1998 20:15:28 GMT, mjh...@ix.netcom.com(Mark Hines) wrote:
>net...@mindspring.com (Guy R. "BrickWall" Briggs ) writes:
>
>>I know what you're thinking - there were *never* any golden plates -
>>but you're talking to Mormons who truly believe that they existed.
>
>Of course, there never were any gold plates. According to court
>records, Joseph Smith was convicted of an occult peep-stone treasure
>hunting scheme.
Nice smear campaign, but the fact is, Joseph was never convicted of any
such thing. You need more up-to-date facts and information, IMHO.
Craig
Peter Walsh
Mark Hines (mjh...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: net...@mindspring.com (Guy R. "BrickWall" Briggs ) writes:
: >I know what you're thinking - there were *never* any golden plates -
: >but you're talking to Mormons who truly believe that they existed.
: Of course, there never were any gold plates. According to court
: records, Joseph Smith was convicted of an occult peep-stone treasure
: hunting scheme. He functioned as a medium, through which demons
: dictated the Book of Mormon. According to testimonials, he had a
: peep-stone, or seer-stone as he called it, in his hat. He put his face
: in the hat and saw words. He dictated these messages to an accomplice
: who wrote them down. Smith was demon possessed. In a similar manner,
: people have become demon possessed fooling with Ouija Boards. Any time
: one deceives oneself and allows unknown spirits to communicate
: messages, demons take advantage.
: The Bible strictly warns against occult practices as being of Satan.
: God severely condemns divination, automatic writing, soothsaying,
: enchantments, fortune telling, magic arts, etc., as of the devil. Here
: are some links that expose Mormonism:
: www.teachingministry.com/ldswit3.htm
: www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm
: religion-cults.com/Cults/Christian/C-CULTS.htm
: www.users.on.net/mec/answers
: www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/mormonis.html
: users.uniserve.com/~suncrest/mormon.htm
: www.exmormon.org/whylft73.htm
: www.utlm.org/lib/order1.htm
: www.pnc.com.au/~mandate/mormons.htm
Subject: Re: Bible Codes
Newsgroups: alt.religion.mormon,alt.religion.mormon.fellowship
Followup-To: alt.religion.mormon,alt.religion.mormon.fellowship
References: <01bd6bbf$83d2d580$9c3a1d26@wakeupcall> <353A9889...@mindspring.com> <35436EEA...@bellsouth.net> <6i04l0$t...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com> <6i0b8a$i19$1...@camel29.mindspring.com> <6i0osa$m...@sjx-ixn11.ix.netcom.com>
Distribution:
Mark Hines (mjh...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: In <6i0b8a$i19$1...@camel29.mindspring.com> net...@mindspring.com (Guy R.
: Mark Hines
I assume you are the big defender of these so called "bible code".
If that is the case, have you checked out the following web site?:
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html
And have you applied the same software used in the aledged
"bible code" findings to other books like "War and Peace",
"Gone with the Wind", or maybe even "One Flew Over the Coo-Coos
Nest"?????????
Pete
Williams
Wow. I didn't know that Joseph Smith joined the Masons before he printed the
Book of Mormon.
Do you need glasses, Robert, or just a course in English as a second
language?
-
Robert quotes George, with emphasis added by George:
r> : was. I know it wasn't the Methodists, so who else
r> do we have to add to the list
r> : of denominations that Joseph Smith is alleged to
r> have signed up with *before*
r> : printing the Book of Mormon?
Robert adds his own comment:
r> The masons. Compare the Temple Ordinances.
Hower Corp
got to give that one to you
Mark Hines
In response to a criticism, I have corrected an error in this message I
posted earlier. A few days ago Chuck Missler had on his daily radio
broadcast interesting Bible codes shows. The RealAudio file of them
perhaps will be at Chuck's K-house website soon if it follows the usual
pattern. He brought out that the eight distinguished mathematicians who
rechecked Dr. Doron Witztum's findings spent six years going over their
methodology and calculations before publishing the Statistical Science
articles. Dr. Harold Gans, who was a senior mathematician at the NSA
and who is now a private consultant, also verified the Wiztum findings.
Although these nine gentlemen started as skeptics, to their credit,
they were sane enough to accept the impartial evidence. So impressive
are the results that all nine of these people, according to Chuck, are
now teaching the Torah codes. Dr. Gans even improved on the Witztum
results (from p = 0.000016 to p = 0.000000013), after he found over 30
additional famous rabbi's names encoded.
Chuck also brought out the clustering effect of the ELS codes. For
instance, in the relatively short Genesis passage (Genesis 2:4-10) that
deals with plants in the Garden of Eden, there are encoded the names of
25 trees. These trees were evidently all in the Garden of Eden: wheat,
vine, grape, chestnut, forest, date, acacia, bramble, cedar, nut, fig,
willow, pomegranate, aloe, tamarisk, oak, poplar, cassia, almond,
mastic, thorn, hazel, olive, citron and fir. The probability of these
25 plant names occurring withing this short space is about 0.00001.
The word "Eden" itself is encoded 16 times within this (Genesis 2:4-10)
passage. The probability of these 16 "Edens" closely grouped together
is about 0.0001.
Another example of clustering is found in the first chapter of
Leviticus, a chapter dealing with the Levitical priesthood (Aaron, the
High Priest of Israel, was of the tribe of Levi, the only tribe from
which God chose priests). Aaron is mentioned four times on the surface
of the text and 25 times beneath the surface. The probability of these
25 ELS names of Aaron occurring by chance is less than p = 0.0000025.
Here are some of these skip distances for Aaron: -4, -6, -9, 18, -21,
26, -26, -32, 36, -44, 62, -64, 76, -78, 87, -87, 109, 136, -139, 141,
150 and 180.
It is this clustering effect, the fact that the encoded names are
directly and logically associated with the text, and the fact that they
are all within a short distance of each other, that drives the
probabilities through the roof. The skeptics cannot adequately address
the significance of the clustering.
The 24 Greek alphabet letters (alpha beta gamma, etc.) stand for the
following numbers: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70,
80, 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800. If one adds up the values
of letters, one can assign numbers to words. An interesting observation
about the Bible is that if a number is mentioned on the surface of the
text, one can find the same number under the surface. For instance,
under the surface of the passage starting at John 21:11, in which
Christ's disciples caught exactly 153 fish, various words associated
with fishing have gematria divisible by 153: FISHES has a value of 153
x 8, THE NET has the same 153 x 8 value, MULTITUDE OF FISHES is 153 x 8
x 2, FISHERS OF MEN is 153 x 14, etc.
The word "Torah" is encoded in a revealing way in the Torah, the first
five books of the Bible. In the book of Genesis, if one takes the
first "T," then counts 49 letters, the next letter, the 50th, is "O,"
the next 50th is "R," and the next 50th is "H." In the Book of Exodus,
the same pattern occurs. In the fourth book of the Torah, the Book of
Numbers, there are the same 49-space skip distances between letters,
but the word is spelled backwards (HROT). Likewise with the Book of
Deuteronomy! The middle book in the Torah, Leviticus, has the sacred
and unpronounceable name for God "YHWH" spelled out with a skip
distance of seven. Visually the patterns would look like this.
Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy
TORH TORH YHWH HROT HROT
-----> -----> <----- <-----
In other words, the Torah (TORH), the Word of God, always points
towards God.
One does not even need to look beneath surface of the text to find
God's clever use of hidden meanings. For example, here are the names
of the first ten men who passed along the genealogy to Messiah, along
with the Hebrew meanings of the roots of their names: Adam (man), Seth
(appointed), Enosh (mortal), Kenan (sorrow), Mahalelel (The Blessed
God), Jared (shall come down), Enoch (teaching), Methusalah, (his death
shall bring), Lamech (the despairing) and Noah (rest or comfort). If
one looks at the meanings of the names, in the chronological order each
man was born, one will see the basic message of the Bible: Man (is)
appointed mortal sorrow (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching.
His death shall bring the despairing rest and comfort.
Mark Hines
Steve Monson
See ye here Mark Hines's writings:
>
>Guy, speak for yourself. You may never visit the below sites and
>honestly evaluate articles there, but others may. Many people have left
>the Mormon church because articles at the below sites and elsewhere
>have addressed what Mormons believe.
That's as may be, but many millions more have joined the LDS because of what
they read in the Book of Mormon. One day many of them whom you have
deceived will learn the folly of their decision. Then they'll be thanking
you and others like you, for providing them the trial of their faith,
which preceded their witness of the truth.
Thanks for your work,
Steve Monson
--
Doctor to a patient just out of anesthesia:
The bad news is that we had to aputate both your legs.
The good news is that the guy in the next bed wants to buy your shoes.
Rev. John McKee
Mark Hines wrote:
Brother Mark,
Why do you post here for the LDS? We know and they know that the codes
will not work with any of their writtings because they are false. A bunch
of lies written by an occultist named Joseph Smith.
I challange any LDS member prove that their writtings can stand the test
of the codes. I know that no LDS will put the Book of Mormon through the
test. I will convert to LDS if the codes work in the Book of Mormon.
Good Luck
Rev. John
Theodore M. Seeber
On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Rev. John McKee wrote:
> Why do you post here for the LDS? We know and they know that the codes
> will not work with any of their writtings because they are false. A bunch
> of lies written by an occultist named Joseph Smith.
>
> I challange any LDS member prove that their writtings can stand the test
> of the codes. I know that no LDS will put the Book of Mormon through the
> test. I will convert to LDS if the codes work in the Book of Mormon.
Moby Dick passed your "test" of the Bible Codes. Tell me, is it thus
inspired?
The BOM would pass with flying colors. As does the Tibetan Book of the
Dead (my personal test), or just about any >100k document off of Project
Gutenberg.
The Bible Codes are more hogwash than fact.
Ted
mailto:seebe...@bigfoot.com
http://www.teleport.com/~seebert
Peter Walsh
Rev. John McKee (fm...@bellsouth.net) wrote:
: Mark Hines wrote:
: > In response to a criticism, I have corrected an error in this message I
: > posted earlier. A few days ago Chuck Missler had on his daily radio
: > broadcast interesting Bible codes shows. The RealAudio file of them
<snipped Mark's ridiculous claims>
: > man was born, one will see the basic message of the Bible: Man (is)
: > appointed mortal sorrow (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching.
: > His death shall bring the despairing rest and comfort.
: >
: > Mark Hines
: Brother Mark,
: Why do you post here for the LDS? We know and they know that the codes
: will not work with any of their writtings because they are false. A bunch
: of lies written by an occultist named Joseph Smith.
: I challange any LDS member prove that their writtings can stand the test
: of the codes. I know that no LDS will put the Book of Mormon through the
: test. I will convert to LDS if the codes work in the Book of Mormon.
: Rev. John
This is pathetic.... So Rev. John, are you going to convert to being
a whale hunter if you find "codes" in "Moby Dick"???
The following challenge was made by Michael Drosnin
(author of "Bible Codes" I assume) :
"When my critics find a message about the assassination of a prime
minister encrypted in Moby Dick, I'll believe them."
(Newsweek, Jun 9, 1997)
Well...... it's been found.... lots of them..
PLEASE.... all you "Bible Code" idiots out there please check the
following AND it's links before you spout off stupid statements:
http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html
Pete
Mark Hines
<6i2hl7$ff8$2...@nonews.col.hp.com> p...@col.hp.com (Peter Walsh) writes:
>I assume you are the big defender of these so called "bible code".
>If that is the case, have you checked out the following web site?:
>
>http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html
>
>And have you applied the same software used in the aledged
>"bible code" findings to other books like "War and Peace",
>"Gone with the Wind", or maybe even "One Flew Over the Coo-Coos
>Nest"?????????
>
>
>Pete
The Apocrypha, War and Peace, and other popular works have been
analyzed. They do not contain ELS and Panin codes above random chance.
The Bible is the only Book that sends probabilities through the roof.
The noisiest critic of Panin and ELS codes is Australian Brendan McKay,
whose link you gave and whose sleight of hand tricks are exposed at
Professor Robert M. Haralick's site: www.quantgen.com/haraw_p.htm
Robert M. Haralick of the Department of Electrical Engineering,
University of Washington, refers to Brendan McKay's attempts at
confusion and smoke screen as follows, "In summary, just because
Bar-Natan and McKay see fit to do data selection does not imply that
WRR also did data selection. If we want to be serious about answering
the question about whether or not the Torah code phenomena exists, we
need to move away from games, sleight of hand tricks, and accusations."
Sleight of hand tricks is an excellent summation of McKay's analysis.
Robert Haralick does an excellent job exposing McKay's faulty math and
logic.
Here is paper By Dr. Doron Witztum, who also refutes McKay:
www.torahcodes.co.il/mckay.htm
Mark Hines
Mark Hines
Joseph Smith, with his "peep stone" and belief that men with Quaker
hats lived on the Moon--here it is, and one can read all about it at
these links:
www.xmission.com/~country/reason/news1.htm
www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm
www.users.on.net/mec/answers/71_mor.htm
www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/mormonis.html
www.utlm.org/lib/bks/chwld/CW01.htm
Concerning LDS founder Joseph Smith, this was written by Oliver B.
Huntington in The Young Woman's Journal, a Mormon church publication,
3:1892, pp. 263-264:
"As far back as 1837, I know that [Smith] said the moon was inhabited
by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a
greater age than we do-that they live generally to near the age of a
1000 years. He described the men as averaging near six feet in height,
and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style."
Brigham Young had the same views as Joseph Smith about the Moon in this
July 24, 1870 statement in a sermon (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13,
p. 217):
"Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines
of an evening called the moon? . . . . when you inquire about the
inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as
ignorant in regard to them as the ignorant of their fellows. So it is
in regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited?
I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question
of it; it was not made in vain. . . ."
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
: Wow. I didn't know that Joseph Smith joined the Masons before he printed the
: Book of Mormon.
: Do you need glasses, Robert, or just a course in English as a second
: language?
Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the Masonic Lodge at any time?
Craig Anderson
> Why do you post here for the LDS? We know and they know that the codes
>will not work with any of their writtings because they are false. A bunch
>of lies written by an occultist named Joseph Smith.
Trolling, trolling, trolling ....
Craig
Guy R. Briggs
fm...@bellsouth.net (Rev. John) wrote:
|
| I challange any LDS member prove that their writtings can stand the test
| of the codes. I know that no LDS will put the Book of Mormon through the
| test. I will convert to LDS if the codes work in the Book of Mormon.
|
Life? Why limit yourself to a single Hebraic form?
It's really useless to try to find ELS in the BofM, because (as I've
already pointed out to Mark) the Book of Mormon is supposed to ba a
*translation*. The "Bible Codes" wouldn't show up in the BofM any more
than they'd show up in the KJV.
Logically, there are only two choices WRT the BofM. It's either true
or false. If it's false, the "Bible Codes" won't show up for the reasons
you and Mark have already expressed. If it's true, they won't show up
because it's a translation.
Either way, they won't show up.
But just for fun, let's look at the first verse of the BofM and
choose a skip code of 17, 1 Nephi 1:1 ends up looking like this:
I N E P H I H A V I N G B E E N B
O R N O F G O O D L Y P A R E N T
S T H E R E F O R E I W A S T A U
G H T S O M E W H A T I N A L L T
H E L E A R N I N G O F M Y F A T
H E R A N D H A V I N G S E E N M
A N Y A F F L I |C| T I O N S I N T
H E -C- -O- -U- -R- -S- -E- +O+ -F- -M- -Y- -D- -A- -Y- -S- N
E V E R T H E L |E| S S H A V I N G
B E E N H I G H L Y F A V O R E D
O F T H E L O R D I N A L L M Y D
A Y S Y E A H A V I N G H A D A G
R E A T K N O W L E D G E O F T H
E G O O D N E S S A N D T H E M Y
S T E R I E S O F G O D T H E R E
F O R E I M A K E A R E C O R D O
F M Y P R O C E E D I N G S I N M
Y D A Y S
Notice that I've already highlighted a target - the surname of British
long distance runner Sebastian Coe (highlighted by the pipe symbol). The
words crossing his name spell out "course of my days" (highlighted by
the hyphen).
Thus, by "The Bible Code" Nephi knew about runner Coe almost 2600
years ago!
Seriously, Hebrew is well suited to a "Bible Code" because of the
nature of the language. They ain't any vowels! Thus the spelling for the
word "milah" (which means "circumcision") is the same as the word for
"word". It gives you a whole bunch of choices for any given combination
of consonants. Much in the same way that you can make various words out
of any given phone number.
ezl...@douchebag.com
In article <3543CEF2...@bellsouth.net>,
fm...@bellsouth.net wrote:
>
>
> Williams wrote:
>
> > Reverend McKee, I'd appreciate it if you'd clue me in on what religion
this
the list
> > of denominations that Joseph Smith is alleged to have signed up with
before
> > Reverend McKee alleged:
> > f> The coffee thing that LDS practice were the views taked from another
> > f> religion that Smith was apart of. Smith had a habbit of barrowing bit
> > f> and peices form other religions to come up with the LDS. So the LDS
if
> > f> fact is a religion basted on other religions with lie to tie it all
> > f> togather and decieved the people.
>
> I beleive that it could have been the Shakers, founded by Ann Lee in 1774.
Also
> known as "Mother Lee"
> I could be wrong, but I'm still looking. There were alot of different
> religions that Joseph Smith was involved with in his early years.
In other words, you are pulling these "facts" out of thin air to support your
opinion.
--Chris
Williams
Question:
r> Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the Masonic Lodge at any time?
-
No, I'm not. I'm just pointing out that I was having a discussion with
another concerning Joseph Smith's early religious affiliations, and you decided
that, to show you know something or other, you'd but in with something that
didn't have anything to do with the subject at hand.
George
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
: Question:
: r> Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the Masonic Lodge at any time?
: -
: No, I'm not.
Are you denying the Joseph Smith plagairized the temple rites of the
Masonic Lodge and used them in his Temples, and that such rites only
appeared AFTER his inclusion in the Lodge?
rob...@internetmci.com
In article <6i8e0l$cpc$1...@Masala.CC.UH.EDU>,
The temple ceremony was received and written in Kirtland, OH,(Comprehensive
History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,. B.H Roberts,
Volume 1) Joseph and Hyrum joined the Masons in Nauvoo. Their reasoning was
the social aspects. The church had been severly persecuted and driven out of
Missouri. Joseph wanted to establish friends in the community to avoid
another Missouri situation. The masonic argument is a tired argument that
simply lacks merit and just serves as another futile effort to stop what
can't be stopped and that is the spread of the gospel of Jesus Christ to all
corners of the earth. When Joseph was martyred the headline in the paper
read "And so ends Mormonism" . It just goes to show you can fight it, you
can mock it, you can try to tear it down, but the message of the gospel rolls
forth undeterred and will continue until it fills the whole earth and the
Savior comes again. Peace All!
Williams
Boy, Robert, not only can't you stay on the subject, but you don't even know
with whom you are trying to converse:
-
r> Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
r> : Question:
: r> Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the
r> : -
r> : No, I'm not.
-
I give you a very simple answer to a very simple question, despite the
fact that it was off the subject.
-
Then you come back with this:
-
r> Are you denying the Joseph Smith plagairized the temple rites of the
r> Masonic Lodge and used them in his Temples, and that such rites only
r> appeared AFTER his inclusion in the Lodge?
-
It's still off the subject, but now the question becomes compound.
But since I'm RLDS, and don't have temple rites, I don't know any more about
the subject than you do.
However, there is a slight difference between the two of us. I don't know
anything, but I'm not pretending that I do. Come to think of it, that is a BIG
difference.
But, the line of questioning is even more abusive, since I was having a
discussion with someone else about what religious bodies influenced young
Joseph Smith prior to the publication of the Book of Mormon. If you want to
start another thread, fine, but don't get pissed off at me just because I don't
happen to be talking about what you happen to be obsessed with at the moment.
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
91...@conchbbs.com> <6i8e0l$cpc$1...@Masala.CC.UH.EDU> <6i8pea$550$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution:
rob...@internetMCI.com wrote:
: In article <6i8e0l$cpc$1...@Masala.CC.UH.EDU>,
: rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.) wrote:
: >
: > Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
: > : Question:
: > : r> Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the Masonic Lodge at any time?
: > : -
: > : No, I'm not.
: >
: > Are you denying the Joseph Smith plagairized the temple rites of the
: > Masonic Lodge and used them in his Temples, and that such rites only
: > appeared AFTER his inclusion in the Lodge?
: >
: >
: The temple ceremony was received and written in Kirtland, OH,(Comprehensive
: History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints,. B.H Roberts,
: Volume 1) Joseph and Hyrum joined the Masons in Nauvoo. Their reasoning was
: the social aspects.
As well as the opportunity to copy the temple rites. If you deny this, you
are welcome to compare the two.
I understand they are being changed AGAIN (last time it was in 1990).
I wonder if President Hinckley will finally stop the standard practice
of treating women as lower-class beings and allow them to hold the
Priesthood.
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
: Boy, Robert, not only can't you stay on the subject, but you don't even know: r> : Question:
: : r> Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the
: r> : -
: r> : No, I'm not.
: -
: I give you a very simple answer to a very simple question, despite the
: fact that it was off the subject.
: -
: Then you come back with this:
: -
: r> Masonic Lodge and used them in his Temples, and that such rites only
: r> appeared AFTER his inclusion in the Lodge?
: -
: It's still off the subject, but now the question becomes compound.
: But since I'm RLDS, and don't have temple rites, I don't know any more about
: the subject than you do.
That's fine. Even though the RLDS is not the "True Church" and "Restored
Gospel," I'm sure you will eventually see the error of your ways, return
to Salt Lake, and repent.
Pontus & Ian
So what is this RLDS stuff all about?
> But since I'm RLDS, and don't have temple rites, I don't know any more
about
>the subject than you do.
>
(I presume R denotes Reformed, like in many other denominations?)
Broder Pontus (LDS)
Mark Hines
There are various books that help educate folks about Mormonism. By
visiting links below and reading articles and books, one may come to
realize that only the Bible is God's word and that one should chuck the
Book of Mormon. I have no affiliation with the kind people below:
www.xmission.com/~country/reason/news1.htm
www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm
www.users.on.net/mec/answers/71_mor.htm
www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/mormonis.html
MORMONISM - SHADOW OR REALITY? by Jerald and Sandra Tanner. 1987
EDITION. Our most comprehensive and revealing work on Mormonism. Deals
with: new discoveries relating to Mormon history, changes in Joseph
Smith's revelations, Joseph Smith's 1826 trial for 'glass looking,'
proof that the Book of Mormon is a product of the 19th century, changes
in the Book of Mormon. archaeology and the Book of Mormon, changes in
Joseph Smith's History, the First Vision, the Godhead, the Adam-God
doctrine,, the Priesthood, the missionary system, false prophecy,
Joseph Smith's doctrine of polygamy, polygamy after the Manifesto and
in Utah today, changing the anti-black doctrine, the rediscovery of
the Joseph Smith Papyri and the fall of the Book of Abraham, Mormon
scriptures and the Bible, changes in the Pearl of Great Price, Blood
Atonement among the early Mormons, the Word of Wisdom, Council of 50,
the Danites, the temple ceremony, changes in the temple ceremony and
garments, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, Mormonism and money, plus
hundreds of other important subjects.
Mark Hines
In <573_980...@conchbbs.com> Will...@7861.conchbbs.com (Williams)
writes:
>
>Question:
> Are you denying that Joseph Smith join the Masonic Lodge at any
time?
>
> No, I'm not. I'm just pointing out that I was having a discussion
>with another concerning Joseph Smith's early religious affiliations,
>and you decided that, to show you know something or other, you'd but
>in with something that didn't have anything to do with the subject at
>hand.
> George
George, the gentleman was showing you a kindness, by helping you to
learn that Smith is a false prophet. This is very important information
for Mormons to know. There are informative books written about the
Smith/Masonic connection, such as the one below:
EVOLUTION OF THE MORMON TEMPLE CEREMONY, 1842-1990, by J. & S. Tanner.
Contains the actual text of the 1990 revision of the highly secret
endowment ritual and other accounts of the ceremony dating back to
1846. Shows that Joseph Smith borrowed from Masonry in creating the
ritual and that it has evolved over the years. Also shows all of the
serious changes made in the ceremony in 1990.
Mark Hines
owest3
Mark Hines wrote:
Get a life Mark and give up trying to do anything meaningful with posts
like this one. I have discovered that you can't change the beliefs of
others by attacking them. It only makes people dig in their heels and
become even more entrenched in error. What has to happen is an experience
of God that is inconsistent with current belief, an experience strong
enough to create a level of ambiguity necessary to challenge current
beliefs. Until this happeneds and we take the chance to question what we
think we know is true, we will never be able to find real truth.
Owen
Elizabeth & Dale
"Pontus & Ian" <mfrx...@fs1.go.man.ac.uk>
<6ia30t$aqg$1...@yama.mcc.ac.uk>
===============================================
I'll leave the door open to one of the other armite
"Josephites" to answer the question-- but your guess in
the reason for the "R" is funny. My Jewish wife insists on
calling us the "Reformed" Mormons, despite knowing better.
I call us the "Our-LDS"-- who obviously must somehow be
better in some way than the "Their-LDS."
At the spring meeting of the John Whitmer Historical
Society this year some of us were bandying about the
initials with various degrees of humor. I sorta liked
the suggestion for "Reduced LDS" kinda like LDS (light)
I suppose. "Reactionary LDS" didn't stike any chords in
my heart. "Realized LDS" was fun, as was "Remarkable LDS."
Unfortunately the one closest to the current truth was
"Reformation-blinded LDS."
Ah, for the simpler days-- when it was just Joe and Ollie
and their "frontier bible"--
Unka Dale
mta...@vialoggroup.com
In article <6ia30t$aqg$1...@yama.mcc.ac.uk>#1/1,
"Pontus & Ian" <mfrx...@fs1.go.man.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> So what is this RLDS stuff all about?
>
> > But since I'm RLDS, and don't have temple rites, I don't know any more
> about
> >the subject than you do.
> >
>
> (I presume R denotes Reformed, like in many other denominations?)
>
> Broder Pontus (LDS)
You'll probably get inundated with replies to this, but here goes anyway.
The "R" stands for "Reorganized". The formal name of the organization is the
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, with headquarters in
Independence, Missouri.
Without getting into a long historical and doctrinal discussion, suffice it
to say that the RLDS Church understands the Restoration in ways that are
sometimes very similar to our LDS cousins and at other times very
differently.
The RLDS Church is the second largest of slightly over fifty Latter Day Saint
denominations currently functioning in the United States. While much smaller
than the LDS Church, the Reorganization does have slightly over 250,000
members (this is baptized members; we do not count children who have been
blessed in our membership figures) in 42 countries.
Mike
Steve O'Neil
On Thu, 30 Apr 1998 14:18:43 +0100, "Pontus & Ian"
<mfrx...@fs1.go.man.ac.uk> wrote:
>So what is this RLDS stuff all about?
>
>> But since I'm RLDS, and don't have temple rites, I don't know any more
>about
>>the subject than you do.
>>
>
>(I presume R denotes Reformed, like in many other denominations?)
Re-organised but the meaning is arguably similar. The LDS and the RLDS
separated after the death of the founder of Joseph Smith. It was
mainly a question of who the next leader should be.
Clifford Statum
Robert L. Coyle Jr. <rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU> wrote in article
<6i9111$ftn$1...@Masala.CC.UH.EDU>...
> Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
> : Boy, Robert, not only can't you stay on the subject, but you don't even
know
> : with whom you are trying to converse:
> : : r> Masonic Lodge at any time?
> : r> : -
> : r> : No, I'm not.
the
> : fact that it was off the subject.
the
> : r> Masonic Lodge and used them in his Temples, and that such rites
only
> : r> appeared AFTER his inclusion in the Lodge?
more about
> : the subject than you do.
> That's fine. Even though the RLDS is not the "True Church" and "Restored
> Gospel," I'm sure you will eventually see the error of your ways, return
> to Salt Lake, and repent.
Would that you would see the error of your ways, and repent.
>
Clifford Statum
Mark Hines <mjh...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<6ia547$l...@sjx-ixn8.ix.netcom.com>...
> There are various books that help educate folks about Mormonism. By
> visiting links below and reading articles and books, one may come to
> realize that only the Bible is God's word and that one should chuck the
> Book of Mormon. I have no affiliation with the kind people below:
[[snip]]
To which Bible do you refer ? If you refer to anything other than the
Masoretic
Text, you'll hear howls of laughter from Naomi and Bekus. If you have done
any reading at all, you'll discover (if you're honest with yourself) that
KJV
English is woefully inadequate for the OT. On the other hand, if you wish
to restrict your reading to the NT, we find KJV, RSV, the Catholic edition,
etc, from which to chose. Which one do you suggest ? And if you have any
experience at all in a foreign language, you'll realize that translation
can be
a very tricky business.
--Clifford
bekus (bruce)
On Thu, 30 Apr 1998 06:11:08 +0000, Elizabeth & Dale
<dbro...@gte.net> wrote:
>At the spring meeting of the John Whitmer Historical
>Society this year some of us were bandying about the
>initials with various degrees of humor. I sorta liked
>the suggestion for "Reduced LDS" kinda like LDS (light)
>I suppose. "Reactionary LDS" didn't stike any chords in
>my heart. "Realized LDS" was fun, as was "Remarkable LDS."
>
>Unfortunately the one closest to the current truth was
>"Reformation-blinded LDS."
Hey Dale, so does church security monitor the internet? If not,
should we send them some of your reflections? Maybe it's time they
heat up the tar. It's been a while, they may need to practise . . . .
be well,
bekus
Elizabeth & Dale
"Clifford Statum" <clif...@netdoor.com>
<01bd7473$25a6ee80$88d294d0@default>
================================================
> If you have done
> any reading at all, you'll discover
> (if you're honest with yourself) that KJV
> English is woefully inadequate for the OT.
True, alas and alack-- but isn't it beautifully
written, for the most part-- Some of the psalms
stuff comes across better than Shakespeare (who
wrote in the same general dialect). The book will
always have a place on my shelf-- right next to
my Anchor Bible Commentary books, the Schocken
Bible series, and various inter-linear printings
(like the LXX) in English.
For quick reference I pick up my Oxford College
Edition of the RSV-- but I can't trust it like
I do the Anchor versions.
Think of what Joseph Smith, jr. might have
produced if he could have studied these gems
in Manchester c. 1825!
Unka Dale
AKICITA
Steve O'Neil wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Apr 1998 14:18:43 +0100, "Pontus & Ian"
> <mfrx...@fs1.go.man.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >So what is this RLDS stuff all about?
> Re-organised but the meaning is arguably similar. The LDS and the RLDS
> separated after the death of the founder of Joseph Smith. It was
> mainly a question of who the next leader should be.
The famous cause of the split was "mainly" over leadership, but not
entirely. oday the primary reason that the RLDS exists apart from the
Mormons is becaus eof distinct theological differences that remain
unreconcilable between the two churches. I mention this now because of
the general belief that the two churches are basically the same with
only minor differences, when in fact the theology of both are vastly at
odds. Although we both (LDS and RLDS) freely discuss/debate these
differences, the relationship between the two churches today is amicable
and respectful, in contrast to the sense of competition that marked
earlier years.
Elizabeth & Dale
bks...@is8.nyu.edu (bekus (bruce))
<3548dd49.58095253@news>
================================================
> Hey Dale, so does church security monitor the internet? If not,
> should we send them some of your reflections? Maybe it's time they
> heat up the tar. It's been a while, they may need to practise . . . .
>
> be well,
> bekus
Arrrgh, Bosun, what see ye thar on the horizon?
Why, bless me bodkins, Cap'n, 'tis a ship-o-the-line!
Arrrgh! Fetch me up me spyglass, matey. Aye, 'tis
a four-master alright! An' a'flyin' the Digital Danite
flag, she is!
Hard to port! All hands to yer battle-stations!
Fire in the hold! Grapeshot at thar sails, me lads!
Blue-beard Broadhurst
(often hunted; never boarded--)
Spirit Explorer
On 30 Apr 1998 15:24:55 GMT, mjh...@ix.netcom.com(Mark Hines) wrote:
>
>There are various books that help educate folks about Mormonism. By
>visiting links below and reading articles and books, one may come to
>realize that only the Bible is God's word and that one should chuck the
>Book of Mormon. I have no affiliation with the kind people below:
Mormons or Christians...really no difference...especially in the way
they treat other religions and other people not of their religion.
Spirit Explorer
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Williams (Will...@7861.conchbbs.com) wrote:
: This would make a nice thread:
: -
: r> That's fine. Even though the RLDS is not the "True
: r> Church" and "Restored
: r> Gospel," I'm sure you will eventually see the error
: r> of your ways, return
: r> to Salt Lake, and repent.
: -
: If you try to start it up, you'll get lots of takers, if you leave out the
: sarcasm and look for honest answers.
Just stating facts, George.
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Elizabeth & Dale (dbro...@gte.net) wrote:
: Ah, for the simpler days-- when it was just Joe and Ollie
: and their "frontier bible"--
: Unka Dale
It's nice to know that you're keeping Elizabeth in her place, Dale.
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
: > But since I'm RLDS, and don't have temple rites, I don't know any more
: about
: >the subject than you do.
: >
: (I presume R denotes Reformed, like in many other denominations?)
: Broder Pontus (LDS)
Another bright LDS member...
bekus (bruce)
>Arrrgh, Bosun, what see ye thar on the horizon?
>
>Why, bless me bodkins, Cap'n, 'tis a ship-o-the-line!
>
>Arrrgh! Fetch me up me spyglass, matey. Aye, 'tis
>a four-master alright! An' a'flyin' the Digital Danite
>flag, she is!
>
>Hard to port! All hands to yer battle-stations!
>
>Fire in the hold! Grapeshot at thar sails, me lads!
Hey, Bluebeard, hate to tell you, but last I checked they had a
stealth destroyer not a four-master . . . . . better watch your
backside.
see ya,
Capt. Bligh (is that how you spell it???)
Williams
No, Robert, you are not.
-
: r> That's fine. Even though the RLDS is not the "True
: r> Church" and "Restored
: r> Gospel," I'm sure you will eventually see the error
: r> of your ways, return
: r> to Salt Lake, and repent.
r> : If you try to start it up, you'll get lots of
r> takers, if you leave out the
r> : sarcasm and look for honest answers.
r> Just stating facts, George.
-
The *facts* are, that a Federal Court (during the famous "temple lot" suit)
ruled that the RLDS Church is the legitimate surviving relic of the original
church, and that the LDS Church is not.
This is an absolute fact. It is not an opinion. I do not know where you get
your opinions, but don't pass them off as fact, please. There's enough of that
bull-hockey going around already.
Mark Hines
In <35488E2A...@ix.netcom.com> owest3 <owe...@ix.netcom.com>
writes:
>I have discovered that you can't change the beliefs of others by
>attacking them.
Owen, it is more a matter of education than "attack." sometimes the
people who resist education are the ones who need it the most. Here is
another book woth reading:
JOSEPH SMITH'S BAINBRIDGE, N.Y., COURT TRIALS, by Wesley P.
Walters. Important discoveries concerning Joseph Smith's 1826 and 1830
trials. Proves beyond all doubt that Joseph Smith was a money-digger
who used a "peep stone" to find buried treasures at the very time he
was supposed to be preparing himself to receive the gold plates from
which the Book of Mormon was translated.
In addition to the above book, there are other books that help educate
folks about Mormonism. By visiting links below and reading articles
and books, one may come to realize that only the Bible is God's word
and that one should chuck the Book of Mormon. I have no affiliation
with the kind people below:
www.xmission.com/~country/reason/news1.htm
www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm www.agape7.com/cult/mormon1.htm
www.users.on.net/mec/answers/71_mor.htm
www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/8449/mormonis.html
Mark Hines
Craig Anderson
On 30 Apr 1998 03:22:43 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
wrote:
[referring to temple rites]
>I understand they are being changed AGAIN (last time it was in 1990).
Souns like rumor to me.
>I wonder if President Hinckley will finally stop the standard practice
>of treating women as lower-class beings and allow them to hold the
>Priesthood.
Trolling, trolling, trolling ...
Craig
Mark Hines
In <01bd7473$25a6ee80$88d294d0@default> "Clifford Statum"
<clif...@netdoor.com> writes:
>To which Bible do you refer ?
>
>--Clifford
Thank you for your mannered question. Before I answer it, I would ask
anybody who has the Holy Spirit to pray for this ryfyrman91aol.com
youngster. Whether his problems are emotional or demonic, there is
healing power in prayer.
I agree with you that some of the language in the KJV is archaic,
obsolete and difficult. I'm currently reading the updated NASB. It is
considered accurate, as it follows the original Aramaic, Hebrew and
Greek as closely as possible without losing readability. In trying to
know God, one should try to get as close as possible to Him. With the
Updated NASB's literal accuracy, one has an advantage in seeking God's
mind and face. Best, of course, would be learning Hebrew and Greek.
WHY EGYPTOLOGISTS REJECT THE BOOK OF ABRAHAM.
Photo-reprint of Joseph Smith, Jr., As A Translator, by F. S. Spalding,
D.D., 1912, and Joseph Smith As an Interpreter And Translator, by
Samuel A.B. Mercer, Ph.D. Mr. Spalding sent the Book of Abraham
(containing the facsimiles purported to have been copied from the
writings of Abraham) to eight prominent Egyptologists and Semitists and
asked them to pass judgment on the translation made by Joseph Smith.
All of these scholars denounced the Book of Abraham as a
fraud.
Elizabeth & Dale
bks...@is8.nyu.edu (bekus (bruce))
<354ba820.63112816@news>
==================================================
> Hey, Bluebeard, hate to tell you, but last I
> checked they had a stealth destroyer not a four-master
> . . . . . better watch your backside.
There you go again, getting the two churches mixed up
in your thinking. It's the big boys' security forces who
have the world-class, state of the art airforce. We Reorgs
could only afford a cast-off from the Estonian Navy's
third annual nautical auction and home-quilting exhibit.
Unka Dale
(who was approached by the CIA to fill out a position
application while studying at Weber State College-- then
advised not to when his "apostate" status was discovered)
Craig Anderson
On 1 May 1998 14:57:10 GMT, mjh...@ix.netcom.com(Mark Hines) wrote:
>Owen, it is more a matter of education than "attack." sometimes the
>people who resist education are the ones who need it the most. Here is
>another book woth reading:
Yeah, if you like a bunch of lies.
>JOSEPH SMITH'S BAINBRIDGE, N.Y., COURT TRIALS, by Wesley P.
>Walters. Important discoveries concerning Joseph Smith's 1826 and 1830
>trials. Proves beyond all doubt that Joseph Smith was a money-digger
>who used a "peep stone" to find buried treasures at the very time he
>was supposed to be preparing himself to receive the gold plates from
>which the Book of Mormon was translated.
Bzzzt! Sorry, no cigar and no cookie. We hashed this one over last fall.
If you care to do any _objective_ research into this event, you'll find
that:
1) The 1826 event was an "examination", NOT a "trial"
2) Joseph wasn't convicted. Or at least, there is insufficient evidence
to conclude that he was convicted, and what evidence exists is
contradictory.
3) The things that should have occured, were he actually found guilty,
did not happen. Specifically:
a. Since it was an examination, if he were found sufficiently "guilty",
he should have been held over for trial.
b. If he were held over for trial, he should have been kept in holding
until a panel of three judges could be convened to hear his case. This
never happened.
c. There are no court records for charges, either by the judge hearing
the examination, nor the constable who brought Joseph in, for detaining
Joseph for a trial. Yet we do have charges for bringing him in and for
hearing the case.
And on and on. The infamous Walters wants Joseph to be guilty so we
twists everything to give that particular slant on things since there is
no hard evidence. He simply extrapolates it to be so. No, you're off
base on this one.
Craig
---------------------------------------------------
Remove the 'X' from brigadoon when replying by mail
DunnRon
>From: AKICITA <Aki...@nstar.net>
>Date: Thu, Apr 30, 1998 22:25 EDT
>Message-id: <354932...@nstar.net>
>
>Jason Roberts wrote:
>>
>> In article <3548EA...@nstar.net>, AKICITA <Aki...@nstar.net> wrote:
>
>> > > Re-organised but the meaning is arguably similar. The LDS and the RLDS
>> > > separated after the death of the founder of Joseph Smith. It was
>> > > mainly a question of who the next leader should be.
>>
>> of JS, but many years later.
>
>Many years? The "Reorganization" didn't happen for many years (1860),
>but the separation was immediate. Brigham Young led a larger colony
>westward, and many people stayed behind. At the death of Joseph Smith,
>the young and immature church splintered.
>
>
>> > The famous cause of the split was "mainly" over leadership, but not
>> > entirely. oday the primary reason that the RLDS exists apart from the
>> > Mormons is becaus eof distinct theological differences that remain
>> > unreconcilable between the two churches. I mention this now because of
>> > the general belief that the two churches are basically the same with
>> > only minor differences, when in fact the theology of both are vastly at
>> > odds. Although we both (LDS and RLDS) freely discuss/debate these
>> > differences, the relationship between the two churches today is amicable
>> > and respectful, in contrast to the sense of competition that marked
>> > earlier years.
>>
>> These days the RLDS aren't even on the LDS agenda, while many RLDS strain
>> to create a place for themselves that is seperate and distinct from the
>> LDS.
>
>Naturally. The LDS church, as two Mormon missionaries told me just
>yesterday, hardly even talk about the RLDS--some don't even know it
>exists! And why would they? Do they ever get mistaken for the RLDS? No,
>but the reverse is almost always true. the assumption (by both
>Protestants and many other Mormons) is that the LDS and RLDS are very
>similar, with only a few minor differences. So much so, in fact, that
>these two LDS missionaries told me that in their congregation they don't
>worry about not possessing land for a temple in Independence because
>they believe the RLDS will eventually rejoin the larger Mormon church.
>They were actually quite stunned to hear the breadth of the theological
>differences between us!
>
>I'm not sure that the RLDS is straining for that identity within
>ourselves--we know who wer are, and we know what we believe as
>individuals and as a church. The struggle is for the outside world to
>also come to an understanding of the identity that we already have.
I've always kind of seen the difference between LDS/RLDS as similar to the
difference between US/Canada: an outsider couldn't readily tell the two apart,
the larger group keeps wondering why all this fuss about maintaining a separate
identity, and the smaller group fiercely independent, but too polite to do
anything nasty about it.
AKICITA
DunnRon wrote:
> I've always kind of seen the difference between LDS/RLDS as similar to the
> difference between US/Canada: an outsider couldn't readily tell the two apart,
> the larger group keeps wondering why all this fuss about maintaining a separate
> identity, and the smaller group fiercely independent, but too polite to do
> anything nasty about it.
As a Canadian, I really like this analogy!
DunnRon
>From: AKICITA <Aki...@nstar.net>
>Date: Fri, May 1, 1998 13:33 EDT
>Message-id: <354A07...@nstar.net>
>
<snip>
>
>As a Canadian, I really like this analogy!
Eh?
Elizabeth & Dale
dun...@aol.com (DunnRon)
<199805011724...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
=======================================================
> I've always kind of seen the difference between LDS/RLDS
> as similar to the difference between US/Canada: an outsider
> couldn't readily tell the two apart, the larger group keeps
> wondering why all this fuss about maintaining a separate
> identity, and the smaller group fiercely independent, but
> too polite to do anything nasty about it.
May have seemed that way in the past-- but probably never
really was. As early as 1860-1861 some LDS who were passing
through SW Iowa visited the district (perhaps even the branch)
where my ancestors were living. I believe that Joseph III and
some of his associates were there at the time. After some
polite conversation the LDS wrote the folks back home in the
Valley that they could barely distinguish the RLDS from the
local Methodists-- they seemed to have disgarded every single
doctrine and practice unique to Mormondom.
However you might care to view the past, the present is even
more clear-cut. The RLDS are becomming so Protestant in their
orientation and outlook that it would be hard to pick most
of them out as being anything special at a Regional Remember
the Reformation Festival. Those who have even a taste of
old fashioned Nauvoo Latter Day Saintism in them are probably
in a break-away "restoration branch" or here on arm whining
away under such monikers as George and Dale.
Oh Zion!
Dear Zion!
U. D.
Steve O'Neil
On 30 Apr 1998 23:13:27 GMT, jkro...@students.wisc.edu.nolongpig
(Jason Roberts) wrote:
>In article <3548EA...@nstar.net>, AKICITA <Aki...@nstar.net> wrote:
>
>> Steve O'Neil wrote:
>
>> > On Thu, 30 Apr 1998 14:18:43 +0100, "Pontus & Ian"
>> > <mfrx...@fs1.go.man.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> > >So what is this RLDS stuff all about?
>
>
>> > Re-organised but the meaning is arguably similar. The LDS and the RLDS
>> > separated after the death of the founder of Joseph Smith. It was
>> > mainly a question of who the next leader should be.
>
>This is a big simplification.
I assumed that a simple explanation was all that was asked for.
DunnRon
>From: Elizabeth & Dale <dbro...@gte.net>
>Date: Fri, May 1, 1998 04:05 EDT
>Message-id: <6id2be$is9$1...@gte2.gte.net>
>
<snip>
>> RD: I've always kind of seen the difference between LDS/RLDS
>> as similar to the difference between US/Canada: an outsider
>> couldn't readily tell the two apart, the larger group keeps
>> wondering why all this fuss about maintaining a separate
>> identity, and the smaller group fiercely independent, but
>> too polite to do anything nasty about it.
>
>
>UD: May have seemed that way in the past-- but probably never
>really was.
My experiences with Reorgs in Utah have always been positive.
>UD: As early as 1860-1861 some LDS who were passing
>through SW Iowa visited the district (perhaps even the branch)
>where my ancestors were living. I believe that Joseph III and
>some of his associates were there at the time. After some
>polite conversation the LDS wrote the folks back home in the
>Valley that they could barely distinguish the RLDS from the
>local Methodists-- they seemed to have disgarded every single
>doctrine and practice unique to Mormondom.
>
I suspect they may have been protesting too much. This would have been during
the time of the war of words over the "New and Everlasting", when Brig was
calling down hailstones on JIII's head. I wonder what the local Methodists
would have thought about this? <g>
>UD: However you might care to view the past, the present is even
>more clear-cut. The RLDS are becomming so Protestant in their
>orientation and outlook that it would be hard to pick most
>of them out as being anything special at a Regional Remember
>the Reformation Festival. Those who have even a taste of
>old fashioned Nauvoo Latter Day Saintism in them are probably
>in a break-away "restoration branch" or here on arm whining
>away under such monikers as George and Dale.
>
Well, I cain't comment on the protestantization that you and George have
mentioned so many times. We hear about it out here in the Basin, but it never
did seem to concern us too much. I'm disappointed at what we hear [the
increasing disuse of the BOM, and the near-total abandonment of the BOA]. This
"restoration branch" phenomenon is really fascinating. How long, oh Unka,
before you start more than flirting in that direction, I wonder?
>UD: Oh Zion!
>Dear Zion!
>
"Thine oppressors shall die!"
>U. D.
DunnRon, getting ready to abandon the Box Elder fort and move South to St.
George . . . those dang federalistas are threatening to rape all unmarried
girls over the age of 15 and I won't stand for it! Let's hope Lot and the boys
can keep them bottled up above Echo Canyon for a while longer.
Elizabeth & Dale
dun...@aol.com (DunnRon)
<199805011909...@ladder01.news.aol.com>
================================================
>DunnRon, getting ready to abandon the Box Elder
>fort and move South to St.
>George
Way down south in Dixie, eh?
Dale
(from the southernmost point of the country, unless
you care to count American Samoa and such)
DunnRon
bekus (bruce)
On 1 May 1998 08:16:37 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
wrote:
>Elizabeth & Dale (dbro...@gte.net) wrote:
>
>: Ah, for the simpler days-- when it was just Joe and Ollie
>: and their "frontier bible"--
>
>It's nice to know that you're keeping Elizabeth in her place, Dale.
Robert,
I'm curious . . . once you stated that Dale was LDS, when he isn't.
Then you said that Elizabeth is LDS, when she isn't. He's RLDS, and
she's Jewish. And, based on the things that Dale has said about his
wife, I don't think he could keep her in her place - wherever her
place is . . . why be so inflammatory?? Don't tell us you are one of
those BAC's???? Or, worse yet, pentecostals????
see ya,
bekus
p.s. if you are a pentecostal, maybe you should be praying for that
word of knowledge they are always talking about . . . sounds like you
need it.
Elizabeth & Dale
> >Dale
> >(from the southernmost point of the country, unless
> >you care to count American Samoa and such)
>
> What about Guam?
Hilo is at about 19 degrees 44 minutes North
and the tip of the island a bit more south than that
Agana, Guam is at 13 degrees 28 minutes North
Garapan, Saipan is at about 16 degrees twelve minutes North
So, in moving from Saipan to Hawaii last year I went
up north myself. Never been to American Samoa, but it's
in our missionary region out here and I may get sent
down there (and/or Tahiti) one of these days to help
out with some in-service priesthood training or such.
Dale
Elizabeth & Dale
> I don't think he could keep her in her place -
> wherever her place is
Out bringing home the bacon (opps, lox and bagels)
these days, while her disabled, retired old-man sits
on his butt all day making innane arm posts (and
writes a sermon or two on Saturday nights after all
intelligent life has nodded off.)
d.
AKICITA
Elizabeth & Dale wrote:
> However you might care to view the past, the present is even
> more clear-cut. The RLDS are becomming so Protestant in their
> orientation and outlook that it would be hard to pick most
> of them out as being anything special at a Regional Remember
> the Reformation Festival. Those who have even a taste of
> old fashioned Nauvoo Latter Day Saintism in them are probably
> in a break-away "restoration branch" or here on arm whining
> away under such monikers as George and Dale.
I wonder if you could be more specific? I hear a lot of talk about the
RLDS becoming more "Proestant," but I've never been told how. I
personally don't see it. It is true that we are expanding our attention
beyond the concerns of only our church to begin dialogue with other
churches, cultures, and regions, but I'm not sure I see a
protestantization of beliefs.
I see the Book of Mormon in continued and effective use, despite the
myth that it has been de-emphasized (it remains as present as our other
2 books in the church publications, worship program helps, and hymnal
scripture references). We maintain the priesthood as it was restored. We
still follow prophetic leadership (how protestant is THAT?), although we
do not agree with everything that Joseph Smith ever did, we continue to
uphold him as a prophet and agent of God's restoration of the gospel,
and so on. I am aware that there will always be certain individuals in
the church who may voice an opinion which is uncharacteristic of the
general church beliefs, but that doesn't indicate that the entire church
is shifting toward that individual's philosophy. Lord knows Wayne Ham
and I have disagreed!
AKICITA
DunnRon wrote:
> Well, I cain't comment on the protestantization that you and George have
> mentioned so many times. We hear about it out here in the Basin, but it never
> did seem to concern us too much. I'm disappointed at what we hear [the
> increasing disuse of the BOM, and the near-total abandonment of the BOA]. This
> "restoration branch" phenomenon is really fascinating. How long, oh Unka,
> before you start more than flirting in that direction, I wonder?
near-total abandonment of the BoA? Impossible, since the BoA (Book of
Abraham) has never been accepted by the RLDS. The Book of Mormon
suffered a decrease in use in the late 80s and early 90s, but is
actually INCREASING in use right now. The Herald (RLDS magazine), for
example, recently conducted a poll about what church members wanted to
see in the church, and received an overwhelming call for "More Book of
Mormon." Every RLDS church I've ever been to--there it is! Our branch
has a long-term adult sunday school BoM class.
Well, I don't agree that it's falling into disuse. As for the BoA,
that's like asking the Catholics why they're close to abandoning the
Book of Mormon.
DunnRon
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: RLDS
>From: AKICITA <Aki...@nstar.net>
>Date: Fri, May 1, 1998 17:07 EDT
>Message-id: <354A39...@nstar.net>
>
>DunnRon wrote:
>
>> Well, I cain't comment on the protestantization that you and George have
>> mentioned so many times. We hear about it out here in the Basin, but it
>never
>> did seem to concern us too much. I'm disappointed at what we hear [the
>> increasing disuse of the BOM, and the near-total abandonment of the BOA].
>This
>> "restoration branch" phenomenon is really fascinating. How long, oh Unka,
>> before you start more than flirting in that direction, I wonder?
>
>near-total abandonment of the BoA? Impossible, since the BoA (Book of
Book of Mormon
>suffered a decrease in use in the late 80s and early 90s, but is
>actually INCREASING in use right now. The Herald (RLDS magazine), for
>example, recently conducted a poll about what church members wanted to
>see in the church, and received an overwhelming call for "More Book of
>Mormon." Every RLDS church I've ever been to--there it is! Our branch
>has a long-term adult sunday school BoM class.
Glad to hear it! From what Dale and George have been saying, I'd gotten the
impression that it's mostly in the Restoration Branches that this was
happening, while everybody else was lockstepping over into ecumenical heaven.
lol
>
>Well, I don't agree that it's falling into disuse. As for the BoA,
>that's like asking the Catholics why they're close to abandoning the
>Book of Mormon.
I hadn't known this. The Utah Reorgs tend to be a little more up on their BOA,
I guess. <g>
What, pray, is precisely its status amongst y'all?
The_Ske...@yahoo.com
In article <6i8qq3$f66$2...@Masala.CC.UH.EDU>#1/1,
[snip]
> As well as the opportunity to copy the temple rites. If you deny this, you
> are welcome to compare the two.
You don't get it--the time frame is written in Kirtland, BEFORE the Nauvoo
Masonic involvement.
Why is it that you have such DIFFICULTY with having a modern-day prophet
confirm that the Masonic story is true? They did have the ceremony and kept
it alive, albeit without proper priesthood authority. Gee whiz, if Amos or
Malachi in the Old Testament had restored true practices of the Mosiaic Law
after seeing how the Samaritans were worshipping in their unathorized temple,
you guys would go ballistic and dump part of the Bible, too.
Of course, we all *know* that ancient Israel *never* strayed from the true
path and *never* had to be brought back to proper observance of the Mosiaic
Law! (If you don't get this irony, then please don't bother posting any more
anti-Mormon messages.)
> I understand they are being changed AGAIN (last time it was in 1990).
> I wonder if President Hinckley will finally stop the standard practice
> of treating women as lower-class beings and allow them to hold the
> Priesthood.
>
Yeah, about the same time that God stops treating me like a lower-class being
and gives me a womb. I just LOVE babies, but have to endure the misery of
seeing others growing one inside their bodies when I can't. That's a
violation of my reproductive rights, you know!
If God gives a directive modifying our forms of worship, I'll go along with
it. Were turtle doves an acceptable offering in the days of Cain and Abel?
Was it anything goes back then? Did Moses change the Law of Sacrifice by
laying down some rules of who would get the leavings after the wave offerings
and heave offerings were completed? Or, maybe, just maybe, we have a Living
God who can give us directions for this day and age.
God does not change, but His instructions to us occasionally have. Grow up
and get used to the idea of letting Him be in charge. He's always worked by
sending His Spirit to prophets who speak to the whole world. Pray about it!
T.S.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Elizabeth & Dale
> I wonder if you could be more specific?
Will come back to this thread with some thoughts
on that particular topic a little later on-- it's one
I'm thinking about while I'm doing a few other things.
D.
bekus (bruce)
>Unka Dale
>(who was approached by the CIA to fill out a position
>application while studying at Weber State College-- then
>advised not to when his "apostate" status was discovered)
Are you serious??????? That's great. Hate to have one of those
Reformed guys in an all Mormon organization, right?!
see ya,
bekus
Elizabeth & Dale
bks...@is8.nyu.edu (bekus (bruce))
<354a480d.398401@news>
========================================================
Won't go into the details, as I later got a US Gov't security
clearance for other purposes and agreed not to discuss such
things much until well after the year 2020.
When I was at Weber State in undergrad studies I was a
teaching assistant in the Aerial Photography Recon. course
and the Photogrammetry course (of which I ended up teaching
about 99%). I'd just landed a part-time position as the
Staff Cartographer when I was approached about the Gov't. job.
At that time Dion Greer was our resident "spook"-- he'd
served a LDS mission along the Finnish-Russian border in the
1950's and was fluent in both languages. Several of his
students were "recruited."
I wasn't too serious about the application. And I didn't
ask the details of why it had been sent back from Virginia.
But one of the professors took me aside at that exact time
and asked some very detailed questions about my "fundamentalist"
relatives. I suspect they had me (as of then still unbaptized)
confused with a LeBaron follower or something.
A year later I was doing graduate work at the U of U and saw
some privately circulated requests for applications-- the kids
who signed up were of the same ilk as those recruited at
Weber-- clean-cut, square-jawed, RM's who were smart but
not very imaginative or creative. I suspect that dozens, if
not hundreds were signed up between 1970 and 1990.
When I gave a paper before the MHA in Utah (1982) the
respondant was Dr. Lester Bush, who then was a forensic
specialist for the CIA in Australia-SE Asia area, (Singapore
Desk, perhaps). I wanted to ask him a little about the
"Company's" recruitment of Utahans, but he did not respond
to my softly voiced question at all.
I think if you were to check closely into the LDS Church
security folks you'd find a number of ex-FBI and ex-CIA
fellows working there. I'm not saying these are bad guys
or anything-- but one can't help but wonder what the life
is of an "agent" who spends 10 years with Hughes Areospace
(recon satellite divison), then another 10 years in Arlington,
and is hired out of a ward there to work directly for the
Church in security-related work. Seems that there's a bit
of a good-old-boys network that nobody ever talks about.
Let's get back to mindless armite horseplay-- this stuff
gives me the willies--
Dale
san...@widowmaker.com
In article <6icq5s$j...@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>#1/1,
mjh...@ix.netcom.com(Mark Hines) wrote:
>
>
> In <01bd7473$25a6ee80$88d294d0@default> "Clifford Statum"
> <clif...@netdoor.com> writes:
>
> >To which Bible do you refer ?
> >
> >--Clifford
>
> Thank you for your mannered question. Before I answer it, I would ask
> anybody who has the Holy Spirit to pray for this ryfyrman91aol.com
> youngster. Whether his problems are emotional or demonic, there is
> healing power in prayer.
Of course I'll pray for him, and every LDS member on this NG.
I'll pray that they aren't distracted by the nay saying on this group from
the truth that the prophet taught. And that they hold fast to what the
spirit has shown them to be true.
I don't understand why some people have a need to attack us, when we all
preach the same essentials of salvation written in Romans. It seems that we
have a bigger enemy out there than petty squabbles between Christian
Churches (LDS included).
Williams
I'm sorry to bring up this analogy, since it's so old, but it's applicable.
-
One cannot toss a frog into a pot of boiling water. He'll hop out. But if
you put him in a pot of cool water, and turn the heat on very gradually, his
sensory systems are not capable of adapting to the very slight minute to minute
change in temperature, and he will not react. He will stay there and cook.
That is what has been happening since the Position Papers were drawn up in
the 1960's. The RLDS leadership is embarrassed by the Book of Mormon. At that
time they suggested dropping all doctrines based solely on the interpretation
of Book of Mormon passages. They also suggested that S.S. literature not use
the Book of Mormon stories as lesson material, except from occasional transient
quotes that are little more than maxims.
President McMurray has decided that he is uncomfortable being a "prophet"
and has asked that his Letters of Counsel not be treated as inspired documents
nor be put into Doctrine and Covenants.
I suggest that you pick up F. Henry Edward's THE POWER THAT WORKETH WITHIN
US and see just exactly how many citations to the BoM that he lists in an
exposition of the Restoration faith.
Articles in the Herald over the six years that I've been a member have
discussed that the JST is not really essential to the doctrine of the RLDS
Church, in such a way as to suggest that it could be dispensed with
effortlessly.
I've talked with several elders at Houston Restoration Church of Jesus
Christ, who told me that before they were excommunicated from the RLDS Church
for questioning the decisions to deemphasize the Book of Mormon, they were told
that they must not mention the Book of Mormon to a prospective convert and to
derail any discussion of it until sometime after baptism.
Two of the elders at my RLDS branch were overheard by me at "House Church"
discussing the scriptures. One told the other that it was no wonder that our
church was thought to be hokey, since we didn't have legitimate "ancient"
scriptures as other churches, but that we revered the text of the Book of
Mormon and D&C for years with the mistaken belief that it was on the same
footing with the Bible. Makes me wonder why they joined the RLDS Church in the
first place.
So, while you are technically correct with this statement:
-
A> I see the Book of Mormon in continued and effective use, despite the
A> myth that it has been de-emphasized (it remains as present as our other
A> 2 books in the church publications, worship program helps, and hymnal
A> scripture references). We maintain the priesthood as
A> it was restored. We
A> still follow prophetic leadership (how protestant is
A> THAT?), although we
-
The Book Steward at my local branch took all the BoM's and JST's in the
glass display case by the entrance to the sanctuary and moved them to the top
shelf in the case where they are completely concealed by the double doors to
the sanctuary when those are open. Thus, the only time people, especially
visitors to the church, would pass by this display, (entering and leaving the
sanctuary) the Restoration Scriptures are completely concealed. If you want to
buy one, she'll sell you one, but God forbid that you should see them there if
you didn't already know about them. Our pew bibles are now NRSV, and all my
Sunday School teachers teach from the NIV, RSV, or Living Bible, depending on
their personal preference.
Dale has remarked that the main college supported by the church no longer
even offer courses of study in the Book of Mormon, although it has a course on
the Book of the Law of the Lord, which is one of the later scriptures of the
Strang Organization, and nothing to do with RLDS.
I'm afraid that if you stay in the church, your grandchildren will not know
what the Book of Mormon is, unless they happen to see a worn-out one on the
bookcase while visiting.
The change is oh, so gradual, and has to be backpeddled when anyone notices
and protests, but the change is inexorably moving away from RLDS doctrine and
practice to a form of "pseudoprotestantism" that no real protestant would
believe in. The leadership of the church has just decided that the story of
Joseph Smith is a difficult sales job, since they are skeptical of it
themselves, and would just as soon not have to tell it, except to classes in
church history taken by doctoral candidates.
Oh, well. They'll push your buttons one of these days, but, if you're like
me, it won't take you long to get your ruffled feathers smoothed down and go
back to sleep.
This letter is not about how "evil our liberal leaders are." This post is
just to let you know that they have stated that they are going to change the
church, and they are doing it. Maybe it isn't a bad thing, but there is no
plausible deniability here. They are doing it.
Blessings,
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
bekus (bruce) (bks...@is8.nyu.edu) wrote:
: On 1 May 1998 08:16:37 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
: wrote:
: >Elizabeth & Dale (dbro...@gte.net) wrote:
: >
: >: Ah, for the simpler days-- when it was just Joe and Ollie
: >: and their "frontier bible"--
: >
: >It's nice to know that you're keeping Elizabeth in her place, Dale.
: Robert,
: I'm curious . . . once you stated that Dale was LDS, when he isn't.
: Then you said that Elizabeth is LDS, when she isn't. He's RLDS, and
: she's Jewish.
Well, I'm sure Dale will eventually see the light and abandon the RLDS for
the True LDS is Salt Lake City.
I didn't know Elizabeth was a Jewish name.
Clifford Statum
Robert L. Coyle Jr. <rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU> wrote in article
<6ien44$jtg$7...@Masala.CC.UH.EDU>...
Is there such a thing as Cognitive Disassociative Disorder. Coyle (or
whoever
you are), broadhurst has made no secret of the fact that Elizabeth is
Jewish.
Perhaps if you spent more time actually reading the threads before making
one of your juvenile comments you might learn something. Probably not, but
hope does spring eternal. In the meantime, try not to be such a schmuck.
As far as Dale seeing the light goes, I trust his abilities to do so far
more than
I do yours.
Elizabeth & Dale
> I didn't know Elizabeth was a Jewish name.
Suggust you buy and read a Bible. You might want to
start reading with the first page of Luke.
Dale
bekus (bruce)
>When I gave a paper before the MHA in Utah (1982) the
>respondant was Dr. Lester Bush, who then was a forensic
>specialist for the CIA in Australia-SE Asia area, (Singapore
>Desk, perhaps). I wanted to ask him a little about the
>"Company's" recruitment of Utahans, but he did not respond
>to my softly voiced question at all.
Wow, I didn't know that Dr. Bush had been in the CIA, though I am not
surprised at his reticence to answer such a question.
>
>I think if you were to check closely into the LDS Church
>security folks you'd find a number of ex-FBI and ex-CIA
>fellows working there. I'm not saying these are bad guys
>or anything-- but one can't help but wonder what the life
>is of an "agent" who spends 10 years with Hughes Areospace
>(recon satellite divison), then another 10 years in Arlington,
>and is hired out of a ward there to work directly for the
>Church in security-related work. Seems that there's a bit
>of a good-old-boys network that nobody ever talks about.
>
>
>Let's get back to mindless armite horseplay-- this stuff
>gives me the willies--
Though I agree that it would be an interesting study to see the
influences of such a background on the corporate environment of church
security . . . . I would hate to be the one to do such a study . . . .
a little to scarey for me. I'll stick to medieval mystical texts . .
. .
see ya,
bekus
bekus (bruce)
On 2 May 1998 08:56:36 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
wrote:
>bekus (bruce) (bks...@is8.nyu.edu) wrote:
>: Robert,
>: I'm curious . . . once you stated that Dale was LDS, when he isn't.
>: Then you said that Elizabeth is LDS, when she isn't. He's RLDS, and
>: she's Jewish.
>
>Well, I'm sure Dale will eventually see the light and abandon the RLDS for
>the True LDS is Salt Lake City.
>
First, hopefully Dale will stay right where he is. It sounds like he
is doing just fine . . . though you still never admitted that you were
wrong in your characterization of him, nor why you erred.
Second, what does your knowledge of Jewish or non-Jewish names have to
do with anything? It appears that this is just one in a number of
assumptions you've made that have been wrong . . . .
see ya,
bekus
KBPOSTALC9
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: FREE COFFEE
MH>From: mjh...@ix.netcom.com(Mark Hines)
MH> George, the gentleman was showing you a kindness,
Oh yes. Bashing the religious beliefs of others is such a "kind" and loving
act. So very christian.
<snip the rest>
Postal
Who is truly amazed at the "loving kindness" here on a.r.m.
TheJordan6
>I think if you were to check closely into the LDS Church
>security folks you'd find a number of ex-FBI and ex-CIA
>fellows working there.
Dale,
That's true. My mission president, J. Martell Bird, was a higher-up in the
FBI. His last church job was chief of church security, which job he held
during the Hoffman fiasco. His name was mentioned in books on the subject.
Randy J.
Lance Ferm
...for he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures
that Jesus is the Christ. Acts 18:28
http://home.earthlink.net/~wakeupcall/#mormon
KBPOSTALC9 <kbpos...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199805030231...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Lance Ferm
Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD; though they
join forces, none will go unpunished. Proverbs 16:5
http://home.earthlink.net/~wakeupcall/#mormon
RYFYRMAN91 <ryfyr...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199805012349...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>
> Ryan H. Turner
> LDS in Orange County, CA.....and PROUD OF IT!!!
>
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution:
Elizabeth & Dale (dbro...@gte.net) wrote:
: > I didn't know Elizabeth was a Jewish name.
: Suggust you buy and read a Bible. You might want to
: start reading with the first page of Luke.
The New Testament? Oh yes, that's the part where Jesus Christ is
identified as the Saviour, where he died for our sins, and where
we are promised eternal life if we believe.
I thought the Jews didn't believe in all that. What kind of Jewish wife do
you have, Dale?
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
Clifford Statum (clif...@netdoor.com) wrote:
: Robert L. Coyle Jr. <rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU> wrote in article: > : On 1 May 1998 08:16:37 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
: > : wrote:
: > : >Elizabeth & Dale (dbro...@gte.net) wrote:
: > : >: Ah, for the simpler days-- when it was just Joe and Ollie
: > : >: and their "frontier bible"--
: > : >It's nice to know that you're keeping Elizabeth in her place, Dale.
: > : Then you said that Elizabeth is LDS, when she isn't. He's RLDS, and
: > : she's Jewish.
: > Well, I'm sure Dale will eventually see the light and abandon the RLDS
: for
: > the True LDS is Salt Lake City.
: Is there such a thing as Cognitive Disassociative Disorder. Coyle (or
: whoever
: you are), broadhurst has made no secret of the fact that Elizabeth is
: Jewish.
Give him a cigar!
Robert L. Coyle Jr.
bekus (bruce) (bks...@is8.nyu.edu) wrote:
: On 2 May 1998 08:56:36 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
: wrote:
: >bekus (bruce) (bks...@is8.nyu.edu) wrote:
: >: Robert,
: >: I'm curious . . . once you stated that Dale was LDS, when he isn't.
: >: Then you said that Elizabeth is LDS, when she isn't. He's RLDS, and
: >: she's Jewish.
: >
: >Well, I'm sure Dale will eventually see the light and abandon the RLDS for
: >the True LDS is Salt Lake City.
: >
: >I didn't know Elizabeth was a Jewish name.
: First, hopefully Dale will stay right where he is. It sounds like he
: is doing just fine . . . though you still never admitted that you were
: wrong in your characterization of him, nor why you erred.
I will admit my error. I was under the impression that he was a member of
the True Church. He is not. He is a member of the RLDS.
bekus (bruce)
On 3 May 1998 07:38:54 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
wrote:
Robert originally wrote:
>: > I didn't know Elizabeth was a Jewish name.
>
>: start reading with the first page of Luke.
>
>The New Testament? Oh yes, that's the part where Jesus Christ is
>identified as the Saviour, where he died for our sins, and where
>we are promised eternal life if we believe.
>
>I thought the Jews didn't believe in all that. What kind of Jewish wife do
>you have, Dale?
Robert,
Are you always so dense????
What does Jews not believing in such a myth, have to do with
whether there are Jewish names there or not? If you are a Xtian, and
I figured that you are, of sorts, then you should have known this -
that Elizabeth is a Jewish name . . . . duh.
I guess it makes more sense to count you as a non-Xtian, then
it would not have been a fair assumption to make, that you have read
the Xtian scriptures.
see ya,
bekus
bekus (bruce)
On 3 May 1998 07:46:11 GMT, rco...@Bayou.UH.EDU (Robert L. Coyle Jr.)
wrote:
>I will admit my error. I was under the impression that he was a member of
>the True Church. He is not. He is a member of the RLDS.
First, I am amazed that you were able to admit one of the
errors you've made. Good job. Now, you still have to admit that you
screwed up on assuming that his wife was also Mormon, since we all
know she is Jewish.
Second, last time I checked, Dale is already a member of the
True Church. So it would be a problem for him not to be a member, yet
be a member. It violates Aristotle's law of non-contradiction . . .
then again, I've always thought Aristotle's law was garbage . . . oh
well.
see ya,
bekus
Elizabeth & Dale
==========================================================
> Elizabeth & Dale (dbro...@gte.net) wrote:
> : > I didn't know Elizabeth was a Jewish name.
>
>
> : Suggust you buy and read a Bible. You might want to
> : start reading with the first page of Luke.
>
> The New Testament? Oh yes, that's the part where Jesus Christ is
> identified as the Saviour, where he died for our sins, and where
> we are promised eternal life if we believe.
>
> I thought the Jews didn't believe in all that. What kind of Jewish wife do
> you have, Dale?
One who would honor John the Baptist as a teacher who lived
within the bounds of the Torah, called Jews to repentance,
and whose mother was named Elizabeth.
No Jew who has closely studied the historical John the
Baptist would condemn him. Elizabeth just believes that
one of his followers (Jesus the son of Mary) was accepted
as a false god by Greeks who never understood Judaism in
the first place. For more on this you might want to look
into the writings of the 1st century Jewish turncoat to
the Roman oppressors-- Flavius Josephus.
D.