Billy Graham doesn't think the Melchizedek priesthood is necessary for salvation.

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

Billy Graham doesn't think the Melchizedek priesthood is necessary for
salvation. However, he has read Mormon books, and been friends with
LDS Church Presidents.

Billy Graham was my favorite preacher going up, however he had nothing
to say about his own personal shortcomings, even his son Franklin
Graham has never questioned his father about being an egotist, but
everyone knows that Billy was fond of saying, I did this, and I did
that, and that is what an egotist does!

Wanting to me admire and love by everyone is always the hardest
obstacle to overcome for the National Association of Evangelicals.
James in an epistle said that "whosoever therefore will be a friend of
the world is the enemy of God." [James 4:4]

The enemy of God wants to be in the limelight, and for Billy Graham it
meant having to trample on the Higher Priesthood of Jesus Christ to be
in the limelight.

Also Billy Graham in hindsight wishes he had stayed out of politics.
However, his hindsight, is the results of not having had the
priesthood of God, because if he had the Melchizedek priesthood then
he would have known beforehand not to get involved in politics!

I would like to be there for Billy Graham during the resurrection, for
he is going to be disappointed, for Jesus Christ stands at the door of
the highest heaven, but Billy thought he could sneak into the
celestial heaven, for he failed to understand that without the
Melchizedek priesthood Jesus will not let Billy in, because even Jesus
Christ who was perfect had to get his higher priesthood at the Mount
of Transfiguration in order to walk pass the celestial door of heaven
and into the light of God His Father. For without this no man can see
the face of God the Father, and live. EE <G><

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 21:17:27 -0500, "Erick Esquivel <G><"
<sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Billy Graham was my favorite preacher going up, however he had nothing
>to say about his own personal shortcomings, even his son Franklin
>Graham has never questioned his father about being an egotist, but
>everyone knows that Billy was fond of saying, I did this, and I did
>that, and that is what an egotist does!

correction:

>Billy Graham was my favorite preacher [growing] up, however he had nothing

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <2flu085ns69g9ll8d...@4ax.com>, Erick Esquivel <G><
says...

So...Billy Graham is an egotist, but you're not?

You write enormously long posts about how wealthy
and influential your family is, how you know and
have influenced all sorts of important people but
nobody ever talks about you but you, have supposedly
been involved in miraculous events that nobody has
ever heard of but you, are going to rule the world
with your nephew, are a direct lineal descendant of
Jesus Christ, heir apparent to the founder of Mormonism
but no Mormon leader tells anybody about this,
are going to build a futuristic temple with a frickin' laser
on top, and you belong to some cult priesthood that
has the only membership card recognized by Jesus Christ
himself when He starts giving out the luxury skyboxes.

Now tell me about how your egotism is really humbleness.

I'll bet you are or were a beneficiary of inherited wealth.
I've known guys like you. They never build anything
worth building but talk a line a shit nonstop, sometimes
for decades, as if they've actually achieved things.

[Just Wondering]

On 7/24/2012 8:17 PM, Erick Esquivel <G>< wrote:
> Billy Graham doesn't think the Melchizedek priesthood is necessary for
> salvation.

So what? No religion in the world, including the LDS, teaches that it is.

[Stormin Mormon]

Time to repost the six def'n of "saved".
==========================
From: "Guy R. Briggs" <net...@GeoCities.com>
Subject: Re: Who's really saved? And who's exalted?
Date: Sunday, July 27, 2003 9:57 PM

("Stormin Mormon") wrote:

<snip>

> Mormon term "Saved": Having body and soul reunited together
> after death. Every man, woman and child is saved from physical
> death. That was a free gift to all, due to the crucifixion and
> resurrection.
>
Erm, that's certainly one of our definitions for saved/salvation.
There are six distinct meanings used in the Church, which makes
communicating with those of other faiths difficult - we use the same
words and think we're talking about the same things, but we're not. We
end up talking past each other.

1) Overcoming (i.e. being saved from) physical death.
Synonymous with resurrection, but different than
what happened to Lazarus. As used by "Stormin" above.
Free gift to all humanity, irrespective of religion.

2) Saved from the effects and consequences of sin (i.e. made
clean from past transgressions)

3) Saved by being born again (i.e. our hearts are changed so
that we no longer naturally choose evil over good - we take
upon ourselves the name of Christ and become part of the
Christian family)

4) Overcoming (i.e. being saved from) spiritual death.
The act of being reunited with our Father in
Heaven. Happens automatically on Judgement Day (as
in: "I saw the dead, the small and the great, stand
before God") Be sure to see #4 before you start
protesting. Also happens to all humanity.

5) Overcoming (i.e. being saved from) the second death.
Making it through Judgement Day, to live forever
with God.

6) Exaltation. Not only living again with out Father in
Heaven, but actually becoming like Him.

As I understand mainstream Christianity, "saved" refers
specifically to numbers 2 and 3, and a get out of jail free card for
number 5. Regardless of how life is conducted after 2 and 3.


bestRegards, Guy.
===================================
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:500f8ee6$0$7559$882e...@usenet-news.net...

[Just Wondering]

Your basic premise supports my point, although I don't necessarily agree
with all your definitions. For example, LDS doctrine clearly teaches
that "exaltation" is not synonymous with salvation. (BTW, your
top-posting to a bottom-posted thread sows confusion.)

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

I had a visitation by Jesus Christ, and I know that I am not saved!
The bible says: "And no man hath seen God at any time, except he hath
borne record of the Son; for except it is thought him no man can be
saved." [JST, John 1:19]

The fact that I have a visitation by Jesus, one would think that I am
saved. However, Jesus said to me: "Have you done everything to not
have disappointed me?" Then he pointed his finger towards my mind, and
twelve screens appeared before me, and I could me my whole life, he
showed me everything I had done to hurt someone, every unkind word I
ever said, in a very fast speed and I could comprehend it all. All he
cared to know was if I loved others, and if I treated them with
kindness.

I was taken back, for here was Jesus in the flesh, and all I could say
to him after seeing how bad I had been, was, "It wonderful to know
that I can still have God love me, no matter what I do or say!"
Then Jesus said to me: "It's not enough to have God love you, you need
to know God to be safe within the circle of his protection." And then
he withdrew, and then an invisible being started to press upon my
body, as if it was going to snuff my life out. I quickly called out
to God for deliverance, and I said, "If you deliver me from this evil
being, I shall believe that it was a vision that you gave me!" And
instantly I awoke from the vision.

Now, I could see the hotel room perfectly in my vision, and I saw
Jesus come through the wall and glide up to my bed, he had come wall
facing Temple Square Temple, S.L.C., Utah.

Before retiring I had said a special prayer, I said, "If Thou art in
that Temple across the street, then have mercy upon me, and pay me a
visit tonight, for I cannot enter the temple, I need for you to give
me guidance, in the name of Jesus Christ I ask this. Amen."

NOW, the LDS Church teaches that only those that are saved, who had
their "election made sure"; are allowed to see the face of God.

Therefore, I am a living Witness that I could see the whole body of
Jesus Christ, but his face was over shadowed, and he at a hood over
his head, and I was not allowed to see his "face."

Therefore, I know that without the higher priesthood, I am not
permitted to see his face. Oh, how I wish I had been ready for his
visitation, Oh, how I wish I had the High Priesthood, then I could
have seen Jesus Christ, and had "my election made sure". Yes, Jesus
said, if you obtain you election made sure, and I appear before you,
and you see my face, then anything you ask of me shall be given unto
you. Oh, what a fool I have been, to think that I didn't need the
Higher Priesthood. Nobody is truly saved, unless they return to God
and see his "face".

Joshua Israel Gemmell <G><

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:04:19 -0500, "Erick Esquivel <G><"
<sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I had a visitation by Jesus Christ, and I know that I am not saved!
>The bible says: "And no man hath seen God at any time, except he hath
>borne record of the Son; for except it is thought him no man can be
>saved." [JST, John 1:19]

correction:

>I had a visitation by Jesus Christ, and I know that I am not saved!
>The bible says: "And no man hath seen God at any time, except he hath

>borne record of the Son; for except it is [through] him no man can be

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On 24 Jul 2012 20:16:45 -0700, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer

<Lydig_...@newsguy.com> wrote:

>So...Billy Graham is an egotist, but you're not?

I give you four witnesses that proves you're wrong about me.

When I was asked last year to be on the cover of an author's sequel, I
wasn't being an egotist.

Here is what book had: On the front cover was a photo of my face, on
the back cover it said this about my eyes:

"It's in your eyes lad. It is difficult to hold the gaze of a master
for long and not be profoundly changed. Too often such ones are
blinded on purpose, brutal by those who fear becoming aware of the
responsibility of every breath they themselves take and equally every
action they do if they look into such a gaze. It is sad but often the
dams in evolution of consciousness can only be broken by masters and
that is why you came, don't you see?"

-cut-

Whosoever honors himself, his honor is nothing, but when others honor
me, then that is real honor; don't you think? My face was going to be
used on the cover of a book about Jesus Christ, because I have
beautiful face, and my eyes look like the eyes of Jesus. Yes, I would
be glad post the book cover for you to see, for I don't have to give
myself honor, for I am the real thing.

This author was very spiritual person, and the last book she wrote was
about Mary Magdalene, being in love with Jesus Christ, and she wrote
the book before Dan Brown. The Dalai Lama, sent her a letter signed
in gold giving her praise for her book about Magdalene. And President
Bill Clinton sent a letter praising her book. And she asked me to on
the cover of her sequel to Magdalene, so I don't have to praise myself
when I tell you that after she sent me the cover of the book for
approval I turn down the offer, for I am not an egotist, and I could
not go along with her mystical approach to religion. If I were the
egotist you claim, I would not have turn down this offer. I can post
the cover on a binary newsgroup if you like.

The next witness I have is a man who is author on Freemasonry and the
Holy Grail. He wrote to me and told me that my family fits like a
glove, and he was wanting to use my family's history in his next book
about Mount Heredom. I also turn him down, because it's not time for
me to make myself known unto the world.

My third witness was a famous movie producer, who knows Dan Brown, and
I wrote to this famous producer and told him that the lost symbol of
the Holy Grail was my family crest, for it has all the clues to unlock
the mystery of the Holy Grail. And I told him that I would send him a
photo of my family crest, which had a Latin motto that says that
"CHRIST*DNA*MINE" - "CRUX*HEREDITAS*MEA". And that producer called my
home, but I did not pick of the phone, I told my mother to tell him, I
wasn't home. And you want to know why? Because I don't want to be
known before time. As you can see on Dan Brown latest book "THE LOST
SYMBOL" it has a wax impression of a crest, and if I had sent that
producer my family crest, I think they would have used it instead.

Yes, all you have to do is write to A.J. Morton, or buy a copy of his
fifty page thesis that was accepted at the university, I can give a
link to where you can buy it. His thesis pivotal around my family,
the Gemmill Family of Dunlop Temple, for we were the founders of
Freemasonry, and we converted the Knights Templar to Freemasonry to
continue the protection of the holy family of Jesus Christ, which was,
is, and will always be my family! We are the Holy Grail, and all the
jealousy in the world cannot undo history, and I am the only family
that is back up by the university and Freemasonry.

My reason for posting here is to make a public record, because
everything that is publicly recorded the angels make a copy.

Therefore, my reasons for posting the great things that happen in my
life, is for the Judgment Day, because God will judge me for not
having made a public record. All prophets are required to make a
record of everything that God does in their life.

If it were not for ancient prophets recording their records, there be
no bible today for us to read!
'
If I were an egotist, I would cross post to many newsgroups, but I
don't, I am happy to just post here, where very few people hang out.

For my objective is to have Google record everything I say, therefore,
it is not the limelight that I am seeking, but to obey God command to
leave a record.

NOW, I have given you four witnesses, and I can send you their names
by email if you like.

The bible says that you should not accuse anyone without two or three
witnesses, I have given you here today four on my behalf. Therefore,
where are your witnesses?

I don't even like using my real name so how can I be a egotist? But
here is my name just for the record:

Joshua Israel Gemmell <G><

[Just Wondering]

On 7/25/2012 4:04 PM, Erick Esquivel <G>< wrote:

> NOW, the LDS Church teaches that only those that are saved, who had
> their "election made sure"; are allowed to see the face of God.

Silly me, I thought the LDS Church accepts the Pearl of Great Price as
scripture. POGP Joseph Smith 17 states that at the tender age of 14,
never having prayed before and without the benefit of baptism, much less
any priesthood, Joseph Smith saw the face of God.

[Stormin Mormon]

How can you possibly suggest that Erick is mistaken? Oh, gosh, I'm in the
presence of heretics.

Next thing you'll say that I don't get personal revelation?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:50108c01$0$8614$882e...@usenet-news.net...

[Just Wondering]

You very well might get personal revelation. I wouldn't know, it's not
for me to say.

I find it kid of funny that many people speak to the Lord asking for
guidance, who would be offended by the notion that the Lord might
actually give the requested guidance to someone.

[Stormin Mormon]

I never really looked at it that way. What's the use of praying all the
time, if you don't think you'll get answers? As it happens, yes, I do get
revelations. Often more than a few times a day. Usually little stuff, like
what tools to take to jobs. But, it sure makes my life go better when I hear
and heed.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:5010949b$0$16316$882e...@usenet-news.net...

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <5010949b$0$16316$882e...@usenet-news.net>, Just Wondering says...

>
>On 7/25/2012 6:32 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
>> How can you possibly suggest that Erick is mistaken? Oh, gosh, I'm in the
>> presence of heretics.
>>
>> Next thing you'll say that I don't get personal revelation?
>>
>> Christopher A. Young
>> Learn more about Jesus
>> www.lds.org
>> .
>>
>> "Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:50108c01$0$8614$882e...@usenet-news.net...
>> On 7/25/2012 4:04 PM, Erick Esquivel <G>< wrote:
>>
>>> NOW, the LDS Church teaches that only those that are saved, who had
>>> their "election made sure"; are allowed to see the face of God.
>>
>> Silly me, I thought the LDS Church accepts the Pearl of Great Price as
>> scripture. POGP Joseph Smith 17 states that at the tender age of 14,
>> never having prayed before and without the benefit of baptism, much less
>> any priesthood, Joseph Smith saw the face of God.
>>
>>
>>
>You very well might get personal revelation. I wouldn't know, it's not
>for me to say.
>

>I find it kind of funny that many people speak to the Lord asking for

>guidance, who would be offended by the notion that the Lord might
>actually give the requested guidance to someone.

Bet I find it funnier than you do...

[Stormin Mormon]

Oh, gee, how would you measure funny?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer" <Lydig_...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:juq61...@drn.newsguy.com...

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

The reference you gave was a single passage from Verse 17 of Joseph
Smith-History.

17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy
which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two
Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing
above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and
said, pointing to the other-This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

That passage was extracted from the "History of the Church", Vol. 1
Chapter 1. Which reads:

The First Vision.

It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy
which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two
personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing
above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name,
and said-point to the other--
-cut-

The passage above was the only thing that Joseph Smith saw in the
First Vision, which was extracts from the History of the Church, Vol.
1 Chapter 1.

However, what you imagine was a face to face encounter was not
revealed.

What was reveal was that Joseph Smith saw a two very bright lights,
and he saw the arm of one of the lights point towards the other bight
light.

There is no evidence that he saw their face, nor description is given
for the faces of God the Father, nor Jesus the Son.

In fact Joseph Smith did not see God's mouth move, therefore, it could
have been telepathy that was described as "one of them sake unto me".

You can speculated all you want but that doesn't prove that Joseph
Smith had visual look at the face of God the Father, nor Jesus the
Son.

NOW, the "History of the Church", Vol. 1 Chapter 1, is the evidence
you provide as proof, however, the "History of the Church" was
copyrighted by George Albert Smith in 1948. Hardly the kind of proof
we need, therefore we need to go to the original published account of
the First Vision. Don't you agree?

When the Church historian George A. Smith and Wilford Woodruff
completed their publication of the "History of Joseph Smith", it was
8th of August 1844, which history was published in instalments in the
Deseret News, Utah. And the Millennial Star, England, they expressed
themselves upon the correctness of what they had published in the
following manner:

"The History of Joseph Smith is now before the world, and we are
satisfied that a history more correct in its details that this was
never published."

NOW, I like you to consider that the First Vision is being published
not by Joseph Smith himself, but by another party, which are not being
given by the person who was at the First Vision, but by two Church
historians after Joseph Smith had been murdered. Joseph Smith was
murdered on June 27, 1844. And the account which you are using was
first published on August 8, 1844. That means that the First Vision
account was months after Joseph Smith, Jr. had been murdered at the
age of 38.

You said that Joseph Smith was fourteen when he had the First Vision,
and he was born on December 23,1805; so if Smith had that encounter
when he was 14 that would place it on the year 1820.

That means that 24 years had passed before there is a published
account of the First Vision.

NOW, I have done some searching, and found another published account
that predates the account you are using, the one you are using was
first published months after Joseph Smith was murdered, on August 8,
1844.

The earliest known public printing of an account of Joseph Smith's
First Vision was done in Scotland. Orson Pratt was a member of the
original Quorum of the Twelve Apostles under Joseph Smith. He served
as a member of the mission of the Twelve Apostles to the British Isles
between 1839 and 1841. And while serving on a mission by preaching in
Scotland, he produce an early missionary tract, "An Interesting
Account of Several Remarkable Visions." This tract contains the
earliest known public printing of an account of Joseph Smith's First
Vision.

I like to point that this tract was printed while Joseph Smith was
still alive, and when Orson Pratt returned from the mission field, in
1841, Joseph Smith would have seen the tract Orson Pratt printed about
the First Vision, and that tract would have been the only account
which Joseph Smith would have verified himself to have been correct.
The account that you are using never had Joseph Smith's seal of
approval.

Therefore, in light of what I have just told you, don't you think we
ought to read that tract that was published in Scotland 1840?

Well here is what that 1840 tract of the FIRST VISION said:


He, therefore, retired to a secret place, in a grove but a short
distance from his father's house, and knelt down and began to call
upon the Lord.
At first he was severely tempted by the powers of darkness which
endeavored to overcome him, but he continued to seek for deliverance
until darkness gave way from his mind, and he was enabled to pray in
fervency of the spirit and in faith. And while thus pouring out his
soul, anxiously desiring an answer from God, he at length saw a very
bright and glorious light in the heavens above, which at first seemed
to be a considerable distance.
He continued praying while the light appeared to be gradually
descending towards him; and as it drew nearer, it increased in
brightness and magnitude, so that by the time it reached the tops of
the trees the whole wilderness, for some distance around, was
illuminated in a most glorious and brilliant manner. He expected to
have seen the leaves and boughs of the trees consumed as soon as the
light came in contact with them, but perceiving that it did not
produce that effect, he was encouraged with the hopes of being able to
endure its presence.
It continued descending, slowly, until it rested upon the earth, and
he was enveloped in the midst of it. When it first came upon him, it
produced a peculiar sensation throughout his whole system, and
immediately his mind was caught away from the natural objects with
which he was surrounded, and he was enwrapped in a heavenly vision and
saw two glorious personages who exactly resembled each other in their
features or likeness. He was informed that his sins were forgiven. He
was also informed upon the subjects which had for some time previously
agitated his mind, viz. -- that all the religious denominations were
believing in incorrect doctrines; and, consequently, that none of them
was acknowledged of God as his church and kingdom. And he was
expressly commanded to go not after them, and he received a promise
that the true doctrine -- the fullness of the gospel -- should at some
future time be made known to him; after which the vision withdrew,
leaving his mind in a state of calmness and peace, indescribable.

-CUT-

NOW you have the only account which Joseph Smith could have rejected
or approved of.

Therefore, let examine what it says, clearly it does not say he saw
their faces, but it says he "saw two glorious personages who exactly
resembled each other in their feature or likeness."

If I saw two personages of brilliant brightness, and I was expecting
the leaves and bought of the tress to start to burn, I would
definitely had been blinded by the light. Therefore, unless you or I
experience this celestial light, we have no idea what it was and what
was not seen by Joseph Smith.

NOW, I must draw upon your personal experience with celestial light,
and my own experiences. The only experience I had was the one in Salt
Lake City, when Jesus came through the walls of the Hotel across the
street from Temple Square. And he glided up to my bed. I had the
priesthood when he came. And when we talked it was by telepathy, and
from reading the tract I get the impression that it was telepathy
which Joseph Smith experience during the First Vision. And when I
look at features or likeness of Jesus I saw that he had a body of
flesh and bones, and he was about six feet tall. And I knew it was
Jesus by the words he used, they conveyed to me that he was the Lord
Jesus Christ. This would have been the same with Brother Smith. And
when I attempted to look at his face, I saw that he had on a hood over
his head, and where the face would be was over shadowed, dark, and I

was not allowed to see his face.

Therefore, my experience took place in the nighttime, Joseph took
place in the daytime, and while my experience was not a blinding light
like Joseph, it was an overshadowed like the one that the Virgin Mary
had when the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary.

Therefore, neither your version nor mine can be proven correct.
However, I claim to have had a similar experience, and I can tell you
that it is LDS doctrine that you cannot see the face of God unless you
have had your election made sure.

Peter made it clear that a testimony of Jesus Christ is not in itself
evidence that "one's calling and election has been made sure."
Mentioning the manifestation on the Mount of Transfiguration with the
Savior and his fellow apostles James and John (see Matt. 17:1-8), he
said that although they had heard the voice of the Father declaring
that Jesus was his Son, this was not sufficient to obtain the
blessing-there was "a more sure word of prophecy"-the calling and
election made sure. (See 2 Pet. 1:16-19.)

Concerning this instruction and testimony from Peter, Joseph Smith
said:

"Though they might hear the voice of God and know that Jesus was the
Son of God, this would be no evidence that their election and calling
was made sure. … They then would want that more sure word of prophecy,
that they were sealed in the heavens and had the promise of eternal
life in the kingdom of God. Then, having this promise sealed unto
them, it was an anchor to the soul, sure and steadfast. Though the
thunders might roll and lightnings flash, and earthquakes bellow, and
war gather thick around, yet this hope and knowledge would support the
soul in every hour of trial, trouble and tribulation." (Teachings, p.
298.)

What, then, is the calling and election made sure? The following
scripture gives the definition:

"The more sure word of prophecy means a man's knowing that he is
sealed up unto eternal life, by revelation and the spirit of prophecy,
through the power of the Holy Priesthood." (D&C 131:5.)

Thus the Prophet Joseph said:

"After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is
baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost,
(by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let
him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting
after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord
will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has
thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve
Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his
election made sure." (Teachings, p. 150.)

The Prophet Joseph Smith indicated that when a person has been proved
of the Lord by "hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and
living by every word of God," he may then have the privilege of
receiving the Second Comforter. This Comforter is the presence of the
Lord Jesus Christ, "and the visions of the heavens will be opened unto
him, and the Lord will teach him face to face." Joseph Smith went on
to say that this was the condition of a number of the ancient saints,
naming Isaiah, Ezekiel, John the Revelator, Paul, and "all the saints
who held communion with the general assembly and Church of the
Firstborn." (See Teachings, pp. 150-51.)

STOP - The Spirit of God reveals that if you can't understand by now
that I have done my research well, then is it beyond you to comprehend
the things of God. And I would be working in vain to continue.

If you want to continue, you will now have to tell me if you are able
to comprehend the higher doctrine, of your calling and election made
sure, but if you feel that I am going too fast for you, then it best I
stop here.

If you want I will search the holy texts to find where it says that
you will only see the face of God once you election is made sure.
Okay?

May you not wrestle with the scriptures, I pray. Amen.

JOSHUA (Zech. 3)

[Just Wondering]

On 7/25/2012 9:35 PM, Erick Esquivel <G>< wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:14:50 -0600, Just Wondering
> <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On 7/25/2012 4:04 PM, Erick Esquivel <G>< wrote:
>>
>>> NOW, the LDS Church teaches that only those that are saved, who had
>>> their "election made sure"; are allowed to see the face of God.
>>
>> Silly me, I thought the LDS Church accepts the Pearl of Great Price as
>> scripture. POGP Joseph Smith 17 states that at the tender age of 14,
>> never having prayed before and without the benefit of baptism, much less
>> any priesthood, Joseph Smith saw the face of God.
>>
> The reference you gave was a single passage from Verse 17 of Joseph
> Smith-History.
>
> 17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy
> which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two
> Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing
> above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and
> said, pointing to the other-This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

> . . . .

> However, what you imagine was a face to face encounter was not
> revealed.
>
> What was reveal was that Joseph Smith saw a two very bright lights,
> and he saw the arm of one of the lights point towards the other bight
> light.

Uh, lights don't have arms. When a person points, the person uses his arm.

> There is no evidence that he saw their face, nor description is given
> for the faces of God the Father, nor Jesus the Son.
>

My reference was to a part of what the LDS accept as scripture. In
other words, unlike any other reference you cite, it is the ONLY
reference to the event that the LDS Church has adopted as doctrinally
correct. Because the POGP is one of the LDS "standard works," that
publication, not the others you cite, is the most authoritative one on
the point at hand, which if you will review the thread is what the LDS
Church teaches about those who may see the face of God. Their own
scripture contradicts Erick Esquivel's premise. The LDS scripture
reference does NOT say that Joseph Smith saw "two very bright lights."
It says that he saw two "Personages," whom Joseph identified as God the
Father and Jesus Christ. As for leaving out a description of their
personages, so what? He clearly said he saw their "personages," not two
"lights." Unlike you, I take what he said at face value. Joseph Smith
plainly described a face to face encounter. He went on to describe a
face to face conversation much like any two people would have. I seem
to recall that Genesis states God made man in His image. From that we
can reasonably conclude that God has a head, a face, a body, two arms,
two legs, etc. That's all the description you need. There's no need to
say whether God's nose is large or small, or the color of His hair,
etc. Indeed, it would be unwise to do so. If Joseph Smith had
described God's nose as being like a casaba melon, then large-nosed
Mormons would be inclined to give themselves airs over their pug-nosed
bretheren. There are literally hundreds of places in scripture
describing events where one person is directly addressing another person
face to face, where no description is given of the people's faces..
Indeed, there is no description of Jesus Christ in the entire New
Testament. Are we to take from that omission that the apostles and
Jesus' own mother never actually saw Jesus?

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

Being an ignostic, I find all speculations made by
deity-believers involving deities to be nonsensical
in a fundamental sense.

From my point of view, the funny really starts when
two deity-believers start arguing over the objective
reality of deities communicating, but bring no objective
points to bear.

In such an encounter, both deity-believers might think
the other's ideas are a bit nonsensical. I will always think
that both of their ideas are nonsensical.

That's funnier.


In article <qZ0Qr.23235$aF6....@news.usenetserver.com>, Stormin Mormon says...

[Stormin Mormon]

Who's speculating? I've been taught, for 20 plus years, that he did see the
faces.

What is an "arm of a light?"

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vne118pvlcjmnaibu...@4ax.com...

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 00:16:25 -0600, Just Wondering
<fmh...@comcast.net> wrote:

[What was reveal was that Joseph Smith saw a two very bright lights,

and he saw the arm of one of the lights point towards the other

[bright] light.]

>Uh, lights don't have arms. When a person points, the person uses his arm.

[There is no evidence that he saw their face, nor description is given

for the faces of God the Father, nor Jesus the Son.]

I AM GLAD THAT YOU SEE THE LIGHT OF WHAT I AM SAYING. Of course it
doesn't make sense, but that is what you're quoting, right? You are
quoting is that two bright lights were seen which is an unclear
description, and then a clear description of an arm being extent
outward. Of course it does make sense, I agree with you --- that is
why it the description you give contradicts itself. There is no
definite description as to eye color, hair color, and skin color, nor
is there positive description as to height of the personages seen,
only that he somehow knew who they were, because the First Vision that
is cannon an authorized as you claim, was the one that Brigham Young
approved. However, you have yet to prove that Brother Young was not
the "Man of Sin". We must include in your perspective this very
important point, because you insist on using ONLY Brigham Young's
version the First Vision which was approved by the church under
BRIGHAM YOUNG!

However, there is enough evidence to show that Brigham Young introduce
a new gospel, and completely change the original gospel that is
revealed by Joseph Smith.

It was Brigham Young who said that Adam was God the Father, and you
can read what he said in the Journal of Discourses that Adam was
Michael the Archangel, and he was the father of Jesus. In other
words, the Archangel Michael was now a God, and he had fathered Jesus
in the flesh. So, how can you place your faith totally in Brigham
Young description of the First Vision of Joseph Smith?

The version that you say is one we should quote because it is
scripture, is the one that Brigham Young gave us, and that version is
NOT the only version available, neither is Young's version the one
that Joseph Smith gave us originally, because the version you want to
use comes with the following statement by the LDS Church:

The most careful attention has been given to this work by those
engaged in its preparation. The manuscript has been read to the
Church Historian, President Anthon H. Lund, with constant reference to
the original manuscript history and all copies of it published in the
TIMES and SEASONS and the MILLENNIAL STAR, and also to various
editions of the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Book of Commandments,
published at Independence, Missouri, in 1833, where the revelation
received by the Prophet Joseph Smith are contained. In the course of
this work slight variations in phraseology were discovered in the
several editions of the Doctrine and Covenants, that doubtless arose
through careless proof reading; and as between the most carefully
proof-read editions and the revelations found in the manuscript
HISTORY OF THE CHURCH there were some slight differences, which were
corrected to agree with the original manuscript; but the corrections
were never made until first submitted to the First Presidency, and
carefully considered and approved by them. We therefore feel that this
great care has resulted in presenting to the Church and to the world
the revelations which the Prophet Joseph Smith received in their most
perfect form; and that a standard is created for all future
publication of these revelations.

IN OTHER WORDS: The First Presidency in 1848 was Brigham Young, and he
had the final say on what was to be construed as cannon for all future
generations. Therefore, and investigation of how Brigham Young
concluded that the edited version of the FIRST VISION which he
approved was the correct one, is in order, before one can valid
anything coming down from Brigham Young.

Do you know the protocol used by President Young to make cannon?

You speak so highly of the standard works of the main LDS church of
Salt Lake City, Utah, yet, you don't even have the faintest notion
about the mythology of Brigham Young used to canonize his heavily
edited version of the First Vision. How revealing!

The way Brigham Young made the First Vision scripture was by having
the Twelve gather together in a room and take a vote on it. How can
you place so much of your trust on the vote of Twelve Apostles? Why
didn't Brigham Young ask the Holy Ghost or God to confirm it?

You really are backwards about the proper methods of revealing what is
acceptable to God, yet, you speak as if you are the God's final word
on the matter.

You should know the revelation given through the Prophet Joseph Smith
containing the doctrine of a plurality of wives was complete
misconstrued, it was never intended on being accepted as cannon, but
it was approved by BRIGHAM YOUNG, and this revelation was publish nine
years after Joseph Smith had been slain. The people who plotted the
murder of Joseph Smith were member of the church, among which was
William Law who was member of the First Presidency, a Councilor to the
Prophet Joseph Smith. William Law was seen among the mob that
murdered Joseph Smith. And I bet that William Law was not the only
one plotting the murder of Joseph Smith, I bet Brigham Young was
another one who went unnamed.

What proof do we have that Brigham Young introduce another gospel?
Plenty of evidence.

And was that the Will of God? NO!

Joseph Smith said that the revelation on the doctrine of a plurality
of wives was being misunderstood, Joseph Smith said, "they make a
criminality for a man to a have a wife on earth while he has one in
heaven" and that "the Revelation was given in view of eternity."

Therefore, it was Brigham Young who plotted to murder Joseph Smith,
and change the revelation on plurality of wives, and it was Brigham
Young who added the revelation D&C 132:62-63 which was complete
opposite to what Joseph Smith said�

62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot
commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him;
therefore is he justified.

63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused,
shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be
destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the
earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which
was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for
their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls
of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be
glorified

You cannot justify a different gospel, Joseph Smith said that the
other wives were only for the next world, but Brigham Young had it
changed to say "to multiply and replenish the earth", which was a
compete lie, an abomination to say it. Yes, the bible reveals that
lying is an abomination. And it was Brigham Young who had lied, and
he fulfilled the prophecy of the Man of Sin.

Because Brigham Young had Doctrine and Covenants 132 added in 1876,
and in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants (first edition of the D&C)
included a section denying any practice of polygamy�.

"Inasmuch as this Church of Christ has been reproached with the crime
of fornication and polygamy, we declare that we believe that one man
should have one wife, and one woman but one husband, except in the
case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again." (History of
the Church, Vol. 2, p. 247)

Therefore, it is on record that the church under Brigham Young was
being run by liars, and Brigham Young had been practicing another
gospel by having many wives here on earth, and then the year before he
dies, he has it included in the scriptures, thus making polygamy part
of the gospel. And that is another gospel, not the so called restored
gospel of Joseph Smith, Jr�

It is interesting to note that this section in the Doctrine and
Covenants was in every single edition until 1876, when the Doctrine
and Covenants first included section 132 justifying plural marriage.

At that time the Mormon leaders inserted section 132, which permits a
plurality of wives. Obviously, it would have been too contradictory to
have one section condemning polygamy and another approving of it in
the same book! Therefore, the section condemning polygamy was
completely removed from the Doctrine and Covenants.

------------now cited by you���..

>My reference was to a part of what the LDS accept as scripture.

>In other words >unlike any other reference you cite, it is the ONLY

>reference to the event that the >LDS Church has adopted as doctrinally correct.

YOU accept it as "doctrinally correct" when there is evidence that
Joseph Smith never said it? Yes, Joseph Smith said in 1844: "they
make a criminality for a man to have a wife on earth while he has one
in heaven"

The Mormon doctrine of plural wives was officially announced by Orson
Pratt and Brigham Young, at a special conference at the Mormon
Tabernacle on August 28, 1852.

>Because the POGP is one of the LDS "standard works," that publication,
>not the >others you cite, is the most authoritative one on the point at hand,
>which if you >will review the thread is what the LDS Church teaches about
>those who may see >the face of God. Their own scripture contradicts Erick
>Esquivel's premise.

Smith was killed prior to the publication of the new translation of
the bible. At the death of Joseph Smith Jr. the manuscripts and
documents pertaining to the new translation were retained by his
widow, Emma Smith, who would not give them to the Quorum of the Twelve
although Willard Richards, apparently acting on behalf of Brigham
Young, requested the new translation from her. Consequently, when
Young's followers moved to the Salt Lake Valley, they did so without
the new translation of the Bible.

Therefore, you're wrong about this matter, because Joseph Smith before
he died was working on the "Inspired Version" of the bible. And it is
part of the so called "standard works" and this is what God said about
the coming forth of the "Inspired Version" of the bible�

Eight article of faith: "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as
far as it is translated correctly."

Originally the bible contained the "fullness of the gospel of the
Lord" but according to Joseph Smith the King James Bible did NOT
contain the "fullness of the gospel of the Lord" therefore, God had
told him to make a new translation of the Bible. And here is what God
told Joseph Smith about the coming forth of this work in progress�

(D&C 42:15) "And all this ye shall observe to do as I have commanded
concerning your teaching, until the fullness of my scriptures is
given."

"Thou shalt ask, and my Scriptures shall be given as I have appointed,
and they shall be preserved in safety; and it is expedient that thou
shouldst hold thy peace concerning them, and not teach them until thou
hast received them in FULL. And l give unto you a commandment, that
then ye shall teach them unto all men; for they shall be taught unto
all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people"

Therefore, the "FULLNESS OF LORD'S SCRIPTURES" were never completed by
Joseph Smith, it would have included the new translation of the Bible.
And that work still remains to be completed by one of the TWO
WITNESSES of the book of Revelation Chapter 11.

We are told that when we have the "fullness of the scriptures", then
we will have the "principles of translation" and the "principles of
immortality" which were a part of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, to pretend that the church today has the "Fully Restored
Gospel" is another lie!

The truth is that it is a work in progress, but not fully completed.

There are many scriptures yet to be restored, and for you to think
otherwise is not based on scriptural knowledge but on personal
opinion.

Take for example the following:

(2 Nephi 27:10) "But the words which are sealed he shall not deliver,
neither shall he deliver the book. For the book shall be sealed by
the power of God, and the revelation which was sealed shall be kept in
the book until the own due time of the Lord, that they may come forth;
for behold, they reveal all things from the foundation of the world
unto the end thereof."

NOW, who do you think will bring this new scripture forth?

I can tell you that it will not be anyone in the Church today!

The only person who can unlock a sealed book is a descendant of Jesus
Christ, a Holy Grail Prophet. And there are no such men among the
Brethren today.

It is written, (Isaiah 22:22) "And the key of the house of David will
I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he
shall shut, and none shall open."

THEREFORE only the person who a literal descendant of the House of
David, will have the "key" to unlock a sealed book. That means no
Prophet, Apostle, will be able to unlock the seal book unless they are
sons of King David. And I am the only one in the church who claims to
have proof that I am the direct descendant of Jesus Christ. My proof
is back by a famous historian. And I have documents.

NOW, you claim to believe in the King James Bible, but I say to you
that you are a liar. Because if you read Isaiah Chapter 22:20 it says
that the one who has the "key" of David to unlock seal scriptures is
called "Eliakim", and a variants spellings of Eliakim are: Elika,
Elyakim, Elyakum. Therefore you are a liar if you don't believe this.

Who can tell you that Elika is not the holder of the "key" of David?
Can anyone in the church among the Brethren tell you it is not so?

Now, who among the Brethren is called Elika? Do you know?

I am called Elika, did you know that? And I have more right to the
"key" of David then the all the Brethren today!

Elika in Hawaiian is "Eric".

http://www.babynamespedia.com/meaning/Elika/m
Therefore, if you believe in the Bible, then you cannot disagree that
"Erick" which is my birth name, is the name revealed in the scriptures
who holds the "key" of David to unlock sealed scriptures.

Therefore, the bible did not say JOSEPH, or BRIGHAM, was give the
"key" of David, but ERICK.

Therefore, I am justified by the scriptures you falsely claim to
believe.

In speaking about the King James Bible, the Book of Mormon had this to
say:

It is declared in the Book of Mormon that "many plain and precious
parts" have been taken away from the Bible:

"For behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb, many
parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of
the Lord have been taken away; and all this have they done, that they
might pervert the right ways of the Lord; that they might blind the
eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men: wherefore, thou
seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the
great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious
things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God;
and after these plain and precious things were taken away, it goeth
forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles."--1 Book of Nephi,
3:168-172--Book of Mormon.

So, what you are saying is that you prefer the Authorized King James
Version of the bible, and it doesn't bother you that King James was a
homosexual who authorized the King James Bible. How inspiring of you
are, not to challenge the King James Bible, yet not give credit to the
new translation of bible by Joseph Smith as being better!

ALSO, I want you to consider the following:

It is falsely believed among the membership of the LDS Church that
Joseph Smith, Jr. was a descendant of King David, that he was he Holy
Grail, a direct descendant of Jesus Christ.

However, I testify in the name of God that is not correct. Because if
Joseph had been a direct descendant of Jesus Christ he would had the
"key" of David, and with the key he could have translated the seal
book of the brother of Jared, Mahonri Moriancumer.

And you cannot speak evil of me, without it reflecting upon Joseph
Smith, Jr., because Robert Smith is on my family tree, but it is not
the lineage is directly connect with King David or Jesus Christ, for
that lineage is the Gemmell lineage, that change it spelling from
Gemmill to Gemmell, from Gamail to Gemmill, from Gamal to Gamail. Yes,
my family surname has it original from the Aramaic name Gamal. And do
you know where Gamal came from? It is from the highlands of Galilee,
it is the place where the royal household of King David went into
Exile from Mount Moriah. Therefore, I can prove that I am the direct
lineage of Christ Jesus of Gamal, Galilee. Yes, the Virgin Mary went
to live with her uncle, Prince Judas of Gamal, Galilee. And so did
Joseph. Therefore, you are ignorant of the name Gamal; right? Yes,
you are. For in the search of the Holy Grail, you should know that
Jesus travelled to mouth of the River Camel, with his uncle Joseph of
Arimathea, and later Joseph of Arimathea took the son of Jesus Christ,
called Joseph to the River Camel (in Cornwall, UK), and from there
they moved little eastward and founded Camelot. And from there the
Holy Grail family went into the wilderness of Scotland to a place
called Mount Heredom. Mount Heredom is the holiest ground in
Freemasonry, and it was my ancestral home. Mount Heredom was the
place that Jacob's Pillow the coronation stone of Judah was taken to,
and my family were the rightful owners of that stone, for we are the
Holy Grail. All of this can be proven with documents, and that
explains why Prophet Kimball sent a group of men from Salt Lake City
to bless my family as the Holy Grail family. And that is why I can be
excommunicated for I speak the truth. Many who give false claim are
quickly excommunicated, and rightly so. Art Bulla made that claim, and
I believe that he was excommunicated. Now, did you know that Gamal
come from the third letter of the Hebrew alphabet 'gimel' and it means
"camel"?

Therefore, it is easy to see why a city called Camelot came into
existence, for Gemmell and Camelot both had the same origins, the Holy
Grail family that came from Gamal, Galilee.

The "G" in the Masonic ring stands for my family name, and you thought
it mean "God", right? Silly you, for the very first drawings of the
Freemasonry were drawn on the ceiling of my ancestral home, and school
children were often taken there to see those painting as late as the
early 1960's.

If you want I can answer new questions, or answer the following
questions, but I think it's a moot point you're trying to make now
with the following line of interrogation about my claims�.

In the LDS Standard Works it has the following caption for Isaiah
Chapter 22: "The Messiah [ben Joseph] will hold the key of the house
of David, inherit glory, and be fastened as a nail in a sure place."
And I bet you thought there were only going to be one Messiah, the
Messiah ben David; right? You are wrong again, for the even the
Jewish nations know that there were going to be two Messiahs. One was
a great spiritual Deliverer and that was Jesus Christ, but the
physical Deliverer was called Messiah ben Joseph. Jesus Christ was
rejected by the Jews because they want the physical Deliverer.
However, the physical Deliverer is prophesized to be rejected by the
Mormon Church, and Isaiah called him the "man of sorrows". Yes, it is
something which I had to grow up with, rejection by those who should
have not been jealous of me.

>The LDS scripture reference does NOT say that Joseph Smith saw
>"two very bright lights." It says that he saw two >"Personages,"
>whom Joseph identified as God the Father and >Jesus Christ.

That is the Brigham Young version, which completely goes against the
first published version of Orson Pratt. Orson Pratt does not mention
of there being any spoken words or extended arm. It could have all be
done by telepathy.

>As for leaving out a description of their personages, so what?

Well, if you want to pretend he saw a face, then you are without any
proof, for no description of the face is given.

>He clearly said he saw their "personages," not two "lights."

It is also reveal in the second version, the one you like, the Brigham
Young version, that Joseph Smith first had an encounter with an evil
spirit who was an actual being trying to silence him form praying.
However, in the Orson Pratt version there are no such being mention,
the only thing said was that darkness in the mind of Joseph Smith was
causing him to be tempted, and he had to resist the evil thoughts of
his mind�.

"At first he was severely tempted by the powers of darkness which
endeavored to overcome him, but he continued to seek for deliverance
until darkness gave way from his mind, and he was enabled to pray in

fervency of the spirit and in faith." [Orson Pratt describing for the
first time ever published, the First Vision, in 1840; see
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Interesting_Account_of_Several_Remarkable_Visions
]

>Unlike you, I take what he said at face value.

Who's face value? Not Joseph, but Brigham face value you say?

>Joseph Smith plainly described a face to face encounter.

If that were true then why did Brigham Young say that Joseph had to
wrestle with an invisible spirit who wanted to silence him?

Orson Pratt made it very clear that there was no such being, that it
was only Joseph Smith mind that need to focus on praying, and there
was a darkness that kept tempting him to stop praying. There is no
mention of an evil invisible personage wrestling with Joseph, but
Brigham Young said there was, just like he goes on to make it even
more fantastic by talking about actually seeing God.

The facts are clear, that Joseph Smith perhaps saw God in spirit, and
not in the flesh, for no man can see God in the flesh and remain
alive�.
(Exodus 33:20) "And He [God] said, "You cannot see My face, for no man
can see Me and live !

(King James Version of Exodus 33:20) "And he said, Thou canst not see
my face: for there shall no man see me, and live."

NOW, this was God speaking with Moses, and the LDS Church caption for
that verse reads: "The Lord speaks to Moses face to face in the
tabernacle-Later, Moses sees the glory of god but NOT HIS FACE."

That what I have telling you, that even Moses who had the higher
priesthood (given to him by his father-in-law Jethro a prince and
priest of Midian), saw NOT allowed to see God face and live, but he
could only see face to face God's glory, but not his face!

That is why many churches do not believe in the lying Brigham Young
who said otherwise!

Now, the brother of Jared, Mahonri Moriancumer, who was more perfect
than Joseph Smith, was not allowed to see God's face, only his back;
then why is it that you think Joseph was more special unto God? Don't
you read the Book of Mormon, well?

Joseph Smith was not allowed to translate the visions given to the
brother of Jared, and do you know why? Because he Joseph does have
the "key" of David to unlock them, and that is not the only reason�

4 Behold, I have written upon these plates the very things which the
brother of Jared saw; and there never were greater things made
manifest than those which were made manifest unto the brother of
Jared.

5 Wherefore the Lord hath commanded me to write them; and I have
written them. And he commanded me that I should seal them up; and he
also hath commanded that I should seal up the interpretation thereof;
wherefore I have sealed up the interpreters, according to the
commandment of the Lord.

6 For the Lord said unto me: They shall not go forth unto the
Gentiles until the day that they shall repent of their iniquity, and
become clean before the Lord. [Ether 4:4-6]

THERE you now have proof that even Joseph Smith did not have the faith
of the brother of Jared. Therefore, how can you falsely claim like
Brigham Young that Joseph was allow to see God's face, while the
brother of Jared of whom it is written, was allowed to see greater
things than Joseph Smith? Yes, it said, "and there never were great
things mad manifest than those which were made manifest unto the
brother of Jared." Therefore, either Moroni is a liar, or Brigham
Young who claims that Joseph saw greater things than brother of Jared,
by seeing the face of God. Try figuring that one out; okay? Because
Jared never claim to see God's face, only his backside. The same with
Moses, he only saw the face of God's glory, his light, but not his
face!

>He went on to describe a face to face conversation much like any
>two people would have.

Like people have is not the same, for I had a visitation with Christ,
and he did not allow me to see his face, so who do you think knows
more, one who has never had a visitation, or me?

>I seem to recall that Genesis states God made man in His image.
>From that we can reasonably conclude that God has a head, a face,
>a body, two arms, two legs, etc. That's all the description you need.

Another falsehood, you don't read the scriptures like I do, it need to
be read by the Spirit of God, allow me to explain�

(Genesis 1:27) "So God created man in his own image, in the image of
God created he him; male and female created he them."

It clear states that the "image" is "male and female", not as you
said, a single man without a wife! In other words, the image of God
is a married couple.

>There's no need to say whether God's nose is large or small, or
>the color of His hair, etc. Indeed, it would be unwise to do so. If
>Joseph Smith had described God's nose as being like a casaba
>melon, then large-nosed Mormons would be inclined to give

>themselves airs over their pug-nosed [brethren].

Not true, I am a direct descendant of Jesus Christ, and I have a
perfect nose. Would you like for me to post a photo?

>There are literally hundreds of places in scripture describing
>events where one person is directly addressing another person
>face to face, where no description is given of the people's faces.

True, but you contradict yourself, for I talk to people face to face
all the time over the telephone, but it is not taken to be something
physical, but just a metaphor.

>Indeed, there is no description of Jesus Christ in the entire New Testament.

Also another falsehood, for Jesus gave a description of Father in
heaven, he said, �.
(John 14:9) "Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you,
and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen
the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"

In other words, Jesus was exact copy of the Father. Haven't you ever
heard of a clone?

>Are we to take from that omission that the apostles and Jesus'
>own mother never actually saw Jesus?

NOW, that is very interesting, so you saved the best for last; it show
that God's Spirit is working upon and desires for you see beyond the
blinding light of Brigham Young, yes, Brigham Young was a Mason before
he joined the church, and you know what the say about Lucifer, that a
Mason as to see beyond the blinding light of Lucifer, for he uses the
light to blind you. Now, allow me to expound about this, it written
that God is the Word, the Word is the Light, and the Light is the
Spirit, and the Spirit is the Power of God. Now, if we were to take
anything away from this link, it would not be God. For example, if I
were to the take the Spirit out, then it could not be the Light that
shines in darkness, nor could it be the Word of God. Therefore,
Lucifer uses the Light of God to blind you with, but you need to see
beyond the blinding light of Lucifer to see the Word of God that was
made flesh, which is Jesus Christ. Now, I hope that did not give you
more than you can comprehend, for I feel that you are truly searching
for answers.

But I like for you to know, that Brigham Young was the Man of Sin, for
he did change the First Vision, and that is what Satan does, he
possessed a man after there was a falling away when Joseph Smith was
murdered. And that Man of Sin was Brigham Young who is possessed of
Satan, and he used the Light of God to blind you, and you are a
servant of Brigham Young, not the servant of God for you disobey the
Paul's teaching about the coming of the Man of Sin. Look at the order
Jesus gave it, it was to happen after the church fell away when Joseph
Smith was murdered�

The LDS caption for Thessalonians Chapter 2, reads: "Apostasy is to
precede the SECOND COMING." It does not say after the Second Coming,
but to precede the Second Coming. It is clear something that did not
take place until there was a church that Joseph Smith established.

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come,
except there come a falling away first, and that Man of Sin be
revealed, the son of perdition;

4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or
that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God,
shewing himself that he is God. [Thessalonians 2:3-4]

Clear there could not have been the falling away, without a temple.
Therefore, the Man of Sin was seen sitting inside the Temple of God,
showing himself to be God. And you cannot tell me that Brigham Young
did not sit inside the Nauvoo Temple proclaiming that he was sealed up
to godhood. He was the Man of Sin, and that is why it's a lie the
First Vision account he approved of.

Joshua Israel Gemmell <G><

[Just Wondering]

On 7/26/2012 1:35 AM, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer wrote:
> Being an ignostic, I find all speculations made by
> deity-believers involving deities to be nonsensical
> in a fundamental sense.
>
> From my point of view, the funny really starts when
> two deity-believers start arguing over the objective
> reality of deities communicating, but bring no objective
> points to bear.
>
> In such an encounter, both deity-believers might think
> the other's ideas are a bit nonsensical. I will always think
> that both of their ideas are nonsensical.
>
> That's funnier.
>
>

What;s even funnier is that you think we care.

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <50117b89$0$16370$882e...@usenet-news.net>, Just Wondering says...

Depends on what you mean by "we".

Individual members of deity-believer religions are
urged to ignore or not to care about what people who
are ignostic (or others who are not deity-believers)
have to say.

However, in a very real sense every proselytizing
deity-believer religion cares -- they all study the
behavior or non-believers and have developed
methods they hope will convince and convert them.

Similarly, they all develop methods for keeping
their own people thinking along orthodox lines.

It would be funny if you never noticed that.

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:04:11 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>What is an "arm of a light?"

A fabrication of President Brigham Young. Allow me to quote President
Young:

(Discourse By President Brigham Young, Delivered in the New
Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, May 29, 1870.)

Did you not go to school? "Yes; I went eleven days, that was the
extent of my schooling."

-cut-
It is easy to see how Brigham Young had to rely upon his imagination,
since he was lacking the basic education that we now take for granted.
In fact Brigham Young received his testimony about the gospel without
having ever read the bible before. I mean, he never had a reason to
pick up the bible and read it before.

(Discourse By Elder Orson Pratt, Delivered in the New Tabernacle,
Salt Lake City, Sunday Afternoon, July 18, 1875.)

"A young man, a ploughboy, a boy that had scarcely any education,
only' as he obtained it in a country school; a man who had never
studied theology, probably had never read the Bible through in his
life. A young man of this description to be called upon to translate a
language that was spoken by the ancient inhabitants of this country!"

-cut-
However, Elder Orson Pratt, had little to say about the young
ploughboy imagination.

27 April 1838 - Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon begin preparing a
church history, with George W. Robinson as scribe. This history
describes the most well-known accounts of his First Vision and the
visits of the angel Moroni. Though the original manuscript history is
not known to exist, it was later copied into the 1839 Manuscript
History of the Church, Book A-1. (Marquardt & Walters 1994, pp. ix-x).
Contrary to earlier and later writing, the history indicates that the
angel who appeared to Smith was named "Nephi" (rather than "Moroni",
as Smith and Oliver Cowdery had separately said in 1835 publications).
Some scholars consider this to be a clerical error, though it was
never corrected by Smith in later publications. Other scholars believe
that Smith saw both Nephi and the angel Moroni. (Marquardt & Walters
1994, pp. xv, xix).

-cut-
Clearly the overworked imagination of Joseph Smith, just could not
make up his mind if it had been Nephi or Moroni who appeared to him.

1812 (after May) - Joseph Smith, Sr. has his second vision, in which
he saw a barren field representing the desolate world, a "narrow
path", a stream with a rope running along its bank leading to a
beautiful tree bearing a fruit whiter than snow that was "delicious
beyond description. While eating, he thought "I cannot eat this alone,
I must bring my wife and children, that they may partake with me."
Thus, he brought his family to eat the fruit. However, there was a
"spacious building" across the valley where the tree was, filed with
finely-dressed people looking down and mocking Smith's family. Smith's
spirit guide said that the fruit represented "the pure love of
Christ". The guide said that the spacious building represented
"Babylon, and it must fall". (Smith 1853, p. 58).

Did Joseph Smith, Jr. imagination later insert this vision into the
Book of Mormon, as Lehi's Dream?

1823 July-December - Ethan Smith, an anti-Masonic congregationalist
minister in Poultney, Vermont (and pastor of Oliver Cowdery's family),
publishes View of the Hebrews from the press of the Poultney Gazette.
The book concludes, based on reports of a parchment book, metal
artifacts, and plates found in Indian burial mounds, that the American
Indian peoples were the Ten Lost Tribes. (Brooke 1994, pp. 142-43).
See Smith, Ethan (1823), View of the Hebrews (1st ed.), Poultney,
Vermont: Smith & Shute (contains an internal date of July 1823).

Did Joseph Smith, Jr. imagination run like wildfire upon hearing about
"View of the Hebrews"?

1823 September - November - Every night, the Smith family gathers to
hear Smith tell stories of the "ancient inhabitants of this continent,
[including] their dress, mode of traveling, and the animals upon which
they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their
mode of warfare; and also their religious worship" (Smith 1853, p.
84).

Did Joseph Smith, Jr. imagination already have a clear picture about
the Book of Mormon theme, years before he had a chance to get a hold
of the Golden Plates?

-cut-
Clearly you should be questioning my imagination, when it is Joseph
Smith, Jr. who had a vivid imagination before get hold of the Golden
Plates, and a mind set for being the "Story Teller" about the ancient
inhabitants of this continent.

So, why should a "arm of light" be troubling to you? Brigham Young
made it up, just like the revelation on plural marriages. Here is a
link where you can see the original manuscript of that revelation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polygamy_Revelation_of_1831.gif
The key portion of the revelation proclaims:

"[I]t is [Jesus Christ's] will, that in time, ye should take unto you
wives of the Lamanites and Nephites [i.e., Native Americans], that
their posterity may become white, delightsome, and Just, for even now
their females are more virtuous than the gentiles."

About three years after this was given [i.e., about 1834], I asked
brother Joseph, privately, how "we," that were mentioned in the
revelation could take wives of the "natives" as we were all married
men?

He replied instantly "In the same manner that Abraham took Hagar and
Keturah; and Jacob took Rachel, Bilhah and Zilpah; by revelation-the
saints of the Lord are always directed by revelation."

-cut-
Clearly we have the typical Joseph Smith, "a work in progress" always
modifying doctrine as he went along the path of enlightenment.

Therefore, if I would tell you that an "arm of light" is nothing more
that a flash of lightening being extended, and that Joseph while
received telepathic message "This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!" It
would not have taken an overactive imagination like the one Joseph
Smith had at fourteen to conclude it was God the Father point his arm
of light at the Beloved Son!

I, Joshua Israel Gemmell, dislike all the pretending among the
Brethren. They are no more than country club custodians, and while
acting as PR men they bellow out more smoke screens to cover up the
truth, because they think the people are Gentile dogs for questioning
their divine authority. <G><

But it is written in the scripture that we are told to prove all
things:

1 Thessalonians 5:21 "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:11:52 -0500, "Erick Esquivel <G><"
<sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Clearly you should be questioning my imagination, when it is Joseph
>Smith, Jr. who had a vivid imagination before get hold of the Golden
>Plates, and a mind set for being the "Story Teller" about the ancient
>inhabitants of this continent.

correction:

>Clearly you should [NOT} be questioning my imagination, when it is Joseph
>Smith, Jr. who had a vivid imagination before [he gets] hold of the Golden
>Plates, and [he had] a mind set for being the "Story Teller" about the ancient
>inhabitants of this continent.

[Stormin Mormon]

Joseph saw two personages, and one spoke, introducing the other. If they had
been faceless blobs of light, he'd have said so.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:ge1318tlhduci433a...@4ax.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

Sure is clear to me, that they were two resurrected beings.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:kh3218hi92h51496s...@4ax.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

Isn't it wonderful? All the wisdom and facts that were revealed to Joseph?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:vt5318dklhcc3krrf...@4ax.com...

[�R.Measures]

In article <8i0Qr.536347$%w4.2...@news.usenetserver.com>, "Stormin

� The Kinderhook Plates tell us about the truthfulness of Joseph Smith, Jr.

[Stormin Mormon]

I have the witness of the Spirit of the Lord.
You have someone's interpretation of some-
thing.

We'll see who gets to the Celestial Kingdom.
(P.S. I also have the Melchizedek Priesthood.)

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

".R.Measures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
news:r-2607121...@10.0.1.3...

. The Kinderhook Plates tell us about the truthfulness of Joseph Smith, Jr.

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

Thanks, for the information.

The reason why The Kinderhook Plates didn't interest Joseph Smith was
because there was no way that an angel could come and take them away
like the Golden Plates, thus preventing the examination by experts.

Everything stinks, it only proves that it was all wishful thinking by
Smith the Dreamer.

The Smith Family wanted to build New Jerusalem by using a blend of
fantasy storytelling and biblical truths.

Smith was a puppet for the Freemasons, but once Smith became too
popular it was deemed by the Freemasons that he was now out of the
control, and had too much control over five of their Masonic Lodges.
So, a plotted to do away with Joseph Smith, Jr. an a plot was hatched
by jealous members of the church who were Masons.

I can't believe that it took me so long to see the light that Lucifer
blinds Mormons with. I guess when you are not looking for the Truth,
you become complacent with the blinding light of the church you belong
to. I doubt very much that I will ever fall again for lies, and I
doubt very much that God even cares about man exaltation, and those
the preach to us about exaltation are living in a fantasy world. <G><

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:31:00 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Isn't it wonderful? All the wisdom and facts that were revealed to Joseph?
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org

You're an optimist, Brother Young. May the Lord help you find your
way, and his angels keep you safe from harm.

I cry often for Brother Smith, for he was murdered by the church
members in high places. And I fear that now we only have the Two
Witnesses whom will finish what Joseph Smith started and never
finished for his life was cut short.

Perhaps if Brother Smith had lived a few more years he might have
repented of not gathering under the wings of Christ for protection.

O ye house of Israel whom I have spared, how oft will I gather you as
a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, if ye will repent and
return unto me with full purpose of heart. [3 Nephi 10:6] Erick <G><

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 21:17:27 -0500, "Erick Esquivel <G><"
<sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Wanting to me admire and love by everyone is always the hardest
>obstacle to overcome for the National Association of Evangelicals.
>James in an epistle said that "whosoever therefore will be a friend of
>the world is the enemy of God." [James 4:4]

correction:

>Wanting to [be] admire and love by everyone is always the hardest
>obstacle to overcome for the National Association of Evangelicals.
>James in an epistle said that "whosoever therefore will be a friend of
>the world is the enemy of God." [James 4:4]

[Stormin Mormon]

Ah, c'mon. Joseph was killed by the angry mob of disbelievers.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org

.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:81r318pa6frqhgmar...@4ax.com...

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 22:34:23 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ah, c'mon. Joseph was killed by the angry mob of disbelievers.
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org

Your sincere question deserves its own thread.

The Prophet Joseph Smith declared:
"The devil has no power over us only as we permit him. The moment we
revolt at anything which comes from God, the devil takes power." [The
Prophet Joseph Smith, page 181]

Yes, indeed, it is truly wonderful all the double talk, things said
for public consumption, and things said to the contrary within temples
or closed meetings.

While there needs no to be no explanation given of the fears the
church leaders had to endure because of the wickedness that is in the
world, however, there ought to be a different standard for openness
and transparency within the church.

Today many investigating the church are left to ponder what actually
took place among the Brethren during the close meetings, and private
interviews. One can only speculate as to which side is giving the
true account. For example, the Prophet Joseph Smith received a
revelation (see D&C 124: 98) about the Lord's servant William Law, he
"shall be delivered form those who would administer unto him deadly
poison". Therefore, that revelation spoke of a blessing upon the head
of William Law that could only have remain enforce upon William Law if
he kept his promises to God. Therefore, when Prophet Joseph plotted
to poison William Law, he was delivered from those who would
administer him deadly poison.

Here for your consideration are the words of William Law as he reveals
his side of the events:

"The letters you wrote me, made me suppose that the Smiths tried to
kill you when they saw an enemy in you?"

"They tried to get rid of me in different ways. One was by poisoning.
I was already out of the church when Hyrum called one day and invited
me for the next day to a reconciliation dinner as he called it, to his
house. He said Joseph would come, too. He invited me and my wife. He
was very urgent about the matter, but I declined the invitation. Now
I must tell you that I, in those dangerous days, did not neglect to
look out somewhat for the safety of my person and that I kept a
detective or two among those who were in the confidence of the Smiths.
That very same evening of the day on which Hyrum had been to my house
inviting me, my detective told me that they had conceived the plan to
poison me at the reconciliation dinner. Their object was a double
one. My going to the dinner would have shown to the people that I was
reconciled and my death would have freed them of an enemy. You may
imagine that I didn't regret having declined that amiable invitation."

"Have you had any knowledge of cases of poisoning in Nauvoo, ordered
by the authorities?"

"I know that several men, six or seven, died under very suspicious
circumstances. Among them were two secretaries of the prophet,
Mulholland and Blaskel Thompson. I saw Mulholland die and the
symptoms looked very suspicious to me. Dr. Foster, who was a very
good physician, believed firmly that those six or seven men had been
poisoned, and told me so repeatedly."

"What may have been the reason for poisoning the secretaries?"

(With a smile) "They knew too much, probably."

---CUT---

WHEN coconspirators of a High Hand exists within the church it
modifies the requirement for two or three witnesses to there just be
one witness with a legal recording of the event. Such recording were
not available in 1844, never-the-less they are available by the mercy
of God's divine providence today.

The nature of a high handed crimes are such that it is only done
whenever there are only one witness to the crime, or when a group of
High Hand Order of coconspirators have banded together to commit a
high handed crime.

The victims of the high handed crime are without a second witness
because there were only two that where at the close door interview
together, and the circumstances were such that no else was allowed to
attend the meeting.

There is a prevalence of high handed crimes within the governing
authorities of church, for there has been many times when everyone
within the authorities of the church had banded together to commit the
crime at hand.

New guidelines ought to be instituted to insure that justice prevails
among all members of the church when confronting a higher authority of
the church. I recommend the following guidelines:

" No private interview ought to be arrange without a video
recording of the event and two copies be made, one for the higher
authority, and one for the person requesting the meeting. And the
recording shall be constitute the second witness to any interview
held. This video would be made at the available after the meeting if
the meeting ended peacefully. If the meeting did not end peacefully
the recording must be held until requested by a higher authority.
Disappearance of the recording would be grounds to favor the victim's
testimony.
" No ward/stake meeting ought to be held without a sound
recording of the meeting being made available to everyone attending
the meeting. This recording would be made available online.

My inspired leadership in this matter is revealing don't you think,
because it comes from God, and I have been the victim of a High Handed
crime within the church when I went to a private interview with my
branch President Paul Gossell of Harvey chapel, Louisiana, and there
were no other witnesses to the crime that he committed against me and
the Lord.

Therefore, branch President Paul Gossell escaped justice, and I had to
withdraw from attending church services. Too offend the only
available recourse for the victim to move into another ward. In my
circumstance that solution was not available for me, since I had roots
here in the area of my birth.

If I had a video tape recording in my hands of that interview I had
with the branch President Paul Gossell then he would have been careful
to not lie in the name of God, and there could have been a swift
redress for the crime committed against me, and true order within the
church could have become its pillar.

The Holy Ghost is a pillar of heaven for he records all things, but
the Holy Ghost is not available on demand to us here upon earth, and
we require a video recording of important events, like private
interviews, and ward meetings.

Erick <G><
My meeting with branch President Paul Gossell took place on Tuesday
May 24, 2011, Brother Milton Harvey arranged the interview, it was
under my legal name Joshua Israel Gemmell. The purpose of the meeting
was my desire to become an elder, and I was told by Gossell that the
gospel was for sale, and that I would be made an elder in six months
if I did a calling. I told Gossell that I could not agree to such
terms for it amount to selling me the higher priesthood for a calling!
I told him that I would be willing to do whatever he called me to do
if I first had the higher priesthood given without a price attached.
He disagreed with my grievance, and further stated that it was too
late to submit my name for a vote, and I had to wait six month until
the next world wide General Conference of the church, because it was
new policy of the church that new candidates to receive the
Melchizedek Priesthood could only be voted on twice a year, during
General Conference. I then requested that he arrange a meeting with
the Stake Authority so I could present my grievances that he had lied
about the vote could only done twice a year, and that he was
attempting to sale me the priesthood in exchange for having done a
calling first. He agree to make the meeting with the Stake authority
for me, but the Lord told me he was lying about arranging the meeting,
and that I was to tell him that "If you lied about setting up that
meeting, the next time you see my face again it will be in heaven."
Gossell then said, "That will be fine with me!" And as I walked out
of the chapel the Lord again spoke with me and told me to shake the
dust off my feet, and that I was command never to return to that
chapel, and go and wash my feet, for the priesthood I had worked
powerful in me, for I was the rod of the Stem of Jesse. And I went
and did as the Lord commanded of me. The next day Gossell calls me to
tell me that he would not make the meeting that he promised me, and I
told him I already had been told by the Lord that he would not make
that meeting, and I also told him that he was the third offence done
by the Priesthood in the name of God. Yes, that Paul Gossell had been
the third person who had lied to me in the name of God. Yes, I was
told three times, lies when I sought to receive the higher priesthood.
And that now the Lord was going to take my side for I am now justified
in cursing in the name of God. The curse can only be broken by
Gossell seeing my face again, and if it be the Will of God that it be
broken then Gossell will find a way to see my face again. I shall do
everything in my power not to let it happened, but if it does, then so
be, Saith the Lord Our Righteousness. <G><

[Stormin Mormon]

That was a statement, not a question.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org

.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:cvg518to03a7d5te8...@4ax.com...

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:03:21 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"

<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Ah, c'mon. Joseph was killed by the angry mob of disbelievers.

>That was a statement, not a question.
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org

"Ah c'mon." is an interjection used inappropriately without an
explanation point. It should have been "Ah c'mon!" And while is it
not a question, it is definitely used when something doesn't go the
way want it to. Like when you're questioning my authority and think I
need your approval to make statements with my priesthood. Therefore,
while it is not a question, it deserves to be treated as a question by
one having authority. For if I were to completely ignore your foolish
statements, you would think yourself wise in your own conceit�

(Proverbs 26:5) "Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise
in his own conceit."

Erick <G><

[Stormin Mormon]

So, you interpret what I say, before you answer? I think this conversation
is going to get more and more disconnected.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org

.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:5bq518hq5nn4hfktd...@4ax.com...

[Stormin Mormon]

I would appreciate if you'd remind me any time
I've ever written this.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org

.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:5bq518hq5nn4hfktd...@4ax.com...

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:29:26 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"

<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Joseph saw two personages, and one spoke, introducing the other. If they had
>been faceless blobs of light, he'd have said so.
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org
>.
>
>"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:ge1318tlhduci433a...@4ax.com...
>On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:04:11 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
><cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>What is an "arm of a light?"
>
>A fabrication of President Brigham Young. Allow me to quote President
>Young:
>
>

The point I was making which you failed to grasp is that one can only
come to understand what took place in the Sacred Grove by have had a
similar encounter, of which I have never heard from you has having had
such an encounter with the Deity.

Now don't be alarmed but I had an encounter similar to the one that
Smith alleges took place on his father's farm. This strange God of
the woods, came to me while I was a hotel room facing Temple Square.

During the day I spent it inside Temple Square, mediating on personal
problems, and wondering what direction I need to take, for I was
homeless in Salt Lake City, but my faith had driven me to use my last
funds to reach Salt Lake City. I was alone, and just a teenager, but
I had faith that God was in Salt Lake City. Therefore, I went not
know how or where my next shelter would be, and I did not have enough
money for the hotel room, but I told the clerk that it did not matter
to me where he gave me a room, as long as it was facing the temple.
The clerk was touched facial countenance, for it radiated the beauty
of the gospel, and he could see spiritual that I was indeed some
special, unlike you Brother Young, who judges another not by the
Spirit of God, but by what you read here on a.r.m. newsgroup.

Know that I am not a writer, nor have I the power to change your life
for the better, but you have the will to render service unto God, I
believe in my heart. For I do not judge a man by what I see or hear,
but by what the Spirit of God reveals to me. Know that I see with the
Spirit of God a man wanting be accepted by important leaders in the
church, you are not wrong in your desires, but are using the wrong
approach, for here is one writing to you whom the Lords has the
following in his church blessing by the church Patriarch Leonard
Edward Tinnell on May 16, 1976:

"This blessing is given that you may know that the Lord loves you and
that you may know that he has had an interest in the affairs of your
life throughout your existence upon this earth."

Now, I don't expect you to care what the Lord said to me, for there
are spiritual men in the church that do care. Some men only want to
be seen as lights while others by their deed radiate the light of
Christ.

Therefore, for the benefit of those like myself, who radiate the
beauty of the gospel, I reveal the following about my church blessing:
"Be ever mindful, Brother Gemmell, of the Lord's hand in your affairs.
He shall touch your life to the extent that the success therein shall
be made manifest unto you, and the joys and happiness which are your
will be evident to all who see you. Your countenance shall radiate
the beauty of the gospel. The spirit of the Lord as He touches your
life will radiate from your very being."

Yes, Brother Young that is the sort of person I am, therefore, I don't
require someone like you to tell me I am special unto God.

Now, here is what ought to concern another member of the church about
me:

"I bless you also that you Heavenly father's Spirit shall touch you
heart and inspire your mind that you may learn from the scripture the
great meanings thereof. You shall be an inspiration for good among
the people with whom you live and work and associate. Your tongue
shall be loosed as you lead your life and gain courage in the
formulation of your opinions about the scriptures to the extent that
you shall influence others for good. Others shall see in you the good
that comes from living the principles of the gospel. You shall
therefore by the living of your life in righteousness be a missionary
for your Heavenly Father. There shall be many souls, Brother
Gemmell, as you live your life, who will be touched by your goodness,
who will be inspired by your example and will come into the Church of
Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

Therefore, Brother Young, if feel the Spirit of God compel me to say
unto you, "Christopher, Christopher, why persecutes thou me?"

Yes, you claim that only by seeing God face one knows that it is God,
however it was possible for Saul to have his encounter with the Lord,
and yet he never saw the Lord's face, so how did he know it was God?
The scriptures testify that the men that were with Saul only heard a
voice to Saul, but saw no man.

Therefore, Joseph Smith just like Saul (Paul) had a similar encounter
with the Lord. For both saw a light form heaven, and both heard a
voice, but neither one saw the face of God. Therefore, it is quite
possible for one to see a bright light and hear a clear voice, yet not
see the face of God. And then how it that one can testify it was God?
Because during the encounter it is being conveyed directly to one's
soul.

I know for I had such an encounter in a hotel room facing Temple
Square. When Jesus came gliding into my room to talk with me. And I
can tell that this conversation was done by telepathy for I was not
allow to see his face, but I knew by telepathy it was Jesus Christ.

Know that many things on my church blessing given by the Patriarch
which trouble me, of which use your help in, but since you are
determine to kick against the prick meant to heal you, I will just
convey it here in case someone who is more spiritual than myself may
want to give me some help�

Some of the blessings that troubles me are the following:

"Know that through your efforts you can attain great statue in life
through the application of your capability, and through your study of
the scriptures."

Can somebody spiritually incline tell me what "statue" means? I know
what stature means, but I don't think it means stature, because I had
a tape recording of the Patriarch giving me my blessing, and he clear
said "statue". Therefore, I am left with a puzzle, and I know it has
something to do with being someone who keeps the "laws" of God.
Something which a judge of God's House, would be required to do,
before he can take his place as a Lawgiver of Zion. Only I know it is
connected to my calling which the bible reveals the following�

6 And the angel of the Lord protested unto Joshua [Gemmell], saying,

7 Thus saith the Lord of hosts; If thou wilt walk in my ways, and if
thou wilt keep my charge, then thou shalt also judge my house, and
shalt also keep my courts, and I will give thee places to walk among
these that stand by. [Zech. 3:6-7]

Here is another blessing that troubles me:

"Your Heavenly Father will bless you with His Spirit as you establish
with Him a line of communication through prayer. Your mind will be
quickened and He will up-lift your Spirit to the extent that you shall
know that He lives. You shall know that Jesus is the Christ and you
shall accomplish much in your life for your Heavenly father through
your service unto Him."

Does that mean I am going to be called to be a special Witness of our
Heavenly Father? For how else would I "know that He lives", and "know
that Jesus is the Christ" unless I also have encounter just like the
one Joseph Smith had in the Sacred Grove?

Here is another blessing that troubles me:

"Devote yourself to the task of assembling knowledge within your mind
for great workings therein shall come forth from your study, your
efforts and applications of knowledge."

Does that mean that I am going to bring forth new scriptures? What
else could "great workings" mean, but additional standard works for
the churches.

Yes, I have constant desire to bring forth a Full And Complete
Translation Bible and bring divine order to the text. Something which
Joseph Smith began, but did not have the "key of David" to unlock the
seal parts of the bible. However, I am a direct descendant of Jesus
Christ, and I have the "key of David."

Here is another blessing that troubles me:

"Excellence of performance, Brother Gemmell, shall be your watchword
in life. All that your Father has is yours if you will devote
yourself to the fulfillment of these promises for the fulfillment of
your blessings this day is predicated upon the righteousness of your
living and your faithfulness to the principles of the gospel of Jesus
Christ. Be ever mindful of this for as you live your life in
righteousness, the blessing of the Lord shall be yours and you shall
prosper and be happy and joyful in your existence."

Does that mean that I will become like my Father in heaven? How else
could I have "All That My Father Has.."

NOW, my finial word to Brother Christopher Young, I know that there
are tares among the wheat, and I expect that those who are in the
church may not have the blessing that were given to me, and they like
you may feel "It doesn't interest me what others have, unless they
show it to me, and I am force to compare myself with them." Know
Brother Young, that is not the spirit God has given me, for I am
concern for the welfare of others, and desire not to be alone in my
quest to know God, what God is willing for me to have, I would that
others could enjoy the same. For I do not seek my own benefit, but
the welfare of others. Therefore, I understand you position, is one
of being insensitive to the needs of others, like myself. But I want
you to know, that before I went to get my church blessing by a
Patriarch, I was feeling depress and discouraged, and here is why�

I knew that I was unworthy of receiving my blessing, and I had been
forewarn that if I were not ready to receive it, then the Patriarch
instead of giving me a blessing, would reveal all my secret sins and
transgressions. And top it all, my mother was going to be there.

We traveled across the longest bridge in the world to get there, it
was going to be given to me by a Patriarch who had never seen me
before.

As we traveled across the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway, a fear of the
Lord came upon my soul, like never before, and I said a prayer to
God,�

I told God that if He didn't love me enough to give me my blessing,
without embarrassing me before my mother, then I was going to give up
being a Mormon because then I knew that God had no interest in my
affairs, and I just disappear into the woods, because if God did not
love me enough to overlook my sins and transgressions, then it was
hopeless for me to even try to serve him.

Therefore, Brother Young, while nothing I say matters to you, it does
matter to God, and He did answer me, for the very first paragraph of
the Patriarch said:

"This blessing is given that you may know that the Lord loves you and
that you may know that he has had an interest in the affairs of your
life throughout your existence upon this earth."

Therefore, I am a living Witness that God is working within the Mormon
Church, but that does not mean that there are not tares among the
fields of the Lord.

I know the tares in the church when I see one, they like to be seen of
men, like yourself, they are quick to tell you that they have no time
to go to temple and pray for you, and don't believe in the prophecies
of the bible, for that is all symbolic not to be taken literally. Yes,
that is the sort of Branch President I have, his name is Paul Gossell,
he fond of help people with food and supplies for the Bishop
Storehouse if it will get in praise in the newspaper, but he will not
move a finger for member of the church who is dying of cancer and is
about to lose her home, and she has been a member for over a
generation. Yes, I know her well, and if I had the means I would have
helped her without the praise the Paul Gossell requires. Now, I know
you find it hard to understand that there are men like yourself who
think the Lord's church nothing more than a country club where you go
to take care of your friends and they take care of you. So, it all
about business contacts, and about education degrees, it not about
spirituality or loving your fellow man, but looking out for No. 1.
Yes, I know your kind, better than you know yourself. And that is
what I had been told that Jesus Christ hates, for he hates the elder
that mocks God priesthood by not using his priesthood to bless others.
How long has it been since I been writing to you through years and
still you have yet to use your priesthood to bless me!

I will not fabricate lies for you or the tares you honor.

Joshua Israel Gemmell <G><

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:31:08 -0500, "Erick Esquivel <G><"
<sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Now don't be alarmed but I had an encounter similar to the one that
>Smith alleges took place on his father's farm. This strange God of
>the woods, came to me while I was a hotel room facing Temple Square.

correction:

>Now don't be alarmed but I had an encounter similar to the one that
>Smith alleges took place on his father's farm. This strange God of

>the woods, came to me while I was [in] hotel room facing Temple Square.

[Stormin Mormon]

As you close, and give me your final word.

I wish you peace, and all the blessings God has to offer. It's been
interesting, and good bye.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Erick Esquivel <G><" <sunwal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:1426189j14neh28m2...@4ax.com...

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

Here is one example of many ... it was post here on 8/24/2004

Angel Moroni is wearing drag queen's outfit!!! Time to change the
outfit, you think?

"Notes on the Possibility of Removing Angel Moroni's dress in favor of
an update garb, more suited to Life on Other Planets"

The angel Moroni has not kept up with the times, and since our modern
day prophets have push to modernize of church policy and teachings,
why not go all the way, and give us a new outfit for the ageing Moroni
as well? Who is going to look up to a man wearing a drag queen's
outfit, a dress? I think it is time to use a virile man's spacesuit,
which is more suiting to masculine angel Moroni persona, like a
masculine astronaut's outfit.

Why not be modern with everything?

The church has bend over for almost every chance to become pragmatic
and modern with decision at the top, and their modern policies for
almost everything which was once held sacred, has changed; so why not
update Moroni's outfit? They updated the temple garment, why not
Moroni's outfit?

Well, either we do this now, or someone will give him earrings and
high heels, in the future, because by the world's standards today,
Moroni is wearing a dress and that is nothing to look up too, right?
And in the future, they will think that the Mormon Church were led by
Drag Queens, right?

Now, don't be alarm, this is not anything new in Salt Lake City, where
temple square is surrounded by gay bars, all within walking distance.
There once was an attempt to climb the Salt Lake Temple, and place a
dress on Moroni, and you're still wondering why?

The Church should not be out to provoke such non-sense, so let's
change it the outfit.

Joshua Gemmell


000-=CUT=-000

Here was you reply...

Backwards, friend. Moroni is OK. It's the drag queens who dress like
angels.

21st century humans are not the trend setters. Eternal angels set the
trends.

--

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org

www.mormons.com

000-=Cut=-000

To which I replied:

Dear misinformed brother,

It is not humans that need to go around understanding an angels
behavior; but angels who once were human, should know better, and not
go around trying to messing up our minds, right?

Now, the angel was human, and did he wear a dress here upon earth? No!

So, he should know better, to avoid the very appearance of evil,
right?

Now, it is not a trend, as you say, for it is a robe of laziness. For
God is naked in heaven, and so are his angels, but because there are
people here on earth not ready for this, like the carnal minded, this
lazy angel had to put on a robe before appearing here upon earth;
therefore it is not a trend to wear clothes in the highest heaven, my
dear misinformed brother.

Joshua Gemmell


-Cut-

It shall be written that Brother Young reviled against everything that
was, is, and shall be good in the eyes of God.

Then [the Pharisees] reviled [against the blind man whom Jesus gave
sight], and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples.
Now give God the praise: we know that this Jesus is a sinner. And the
blind man who had receive vision by Jesus' authority said: "Whether he
be a sinner or not, I know not, but one thing I know, is that I was
blind, but now I see, and never has a Hebrew prophet heal the blind,
but this man Jesus fulfills prophecy, for it is written by the Prophet
Isaiah that a sign of the Messiah would be the recovering of sight to
the blind. And the more the hatred rose up among the Pharisees and
the more they sought to accuse the Lord for having healed many of the
blind.

Are you better than the Pharisees in this disrespect, for reviled
against me all the time, for I seek enlighten others, to bring them
into the fold, yet everything I do is not meeting your approval. The
same with the Pharisees who accuse Jesus of his good works, you now
chosen to taken the Pharisees stand, and point your finger of scorn at
me. How little has changed, the Jews rejected Jesus, the Gentiles say
they are better, but they rejected Joseph Smith, and now little has
changed for the Saints now reject me, for I come to prepare a kingdom
to receive our Lord's Second Coming. Jesus Christ will never return
if there is not a kingdom ready to receive him. For you delay his
return by fighting about an Elias, against the Spirit of Elijah. Like
John the Baptist who preached from the wilderness, I too much preach
to others from the wilderness of the fields, for like the Pharisees
who bar John the Baptist from testifying in the Sanhedrin, you also
join with Mormons to bar me from giving my testimony inside Mormon
chapels.

No Mormon can stand to hear the miracles of God, and you are no better
than the Pharisees who spoke up against Jesus healing the blind man.
It is not my fault that the scriptures come alive in my affairs, it
not my fault that when I asked God to bring fires down for the sky to
show that I am his servant, that a fireball instantly comes down
twenty feet from where I am standing. Can a man such as myself have
such wonderful display of God's power, and not be called to testify it
before the world? Then why do you fight against the light of God, for
God himself has told me that I hold the scepter of his light for the
convincing of men of the truth that saves. Therefore, you should be
praying to resist the evil one who tempts you and fills your mind with
darkness and to resist from praying. Can an evil spirit encourage you
to pray? Yes, I do encourage to pray, even more than the LDS Prophet
have done, for I have told it to you personally. <G><

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <aThQr.67910$BK5....@news.usenetserver.com>, Stormin Mormon says...

>>
>>".R.Measures" <r...@somis.org> wrote in message
>>news:r-2607121...@10.0.1.3...
>>

>>The Kinderhook Plates tell us about the truthfulness of Joseph Smith, Jr.
>>
>

>I have the witness of the Spirit of the Lord.
>You have someone's interpretation of some-
>thing.
>
>We'll see who gets to the Celestial Kingdom.
>(P.S. I also have the Melchizedek Priesthood.)
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more about Jesus
> www.lds.org

I have your church's own chronicles.

Mormon men, including the highest leaders in
their church, called the man who perpetrated the
Kinderhook Plates hoax a liar for nearly a century
and a half.

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:33:55 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I have the witness of the Spirit of the Lord.
>You have someone's interpretation of some-
>thing.
>
>We'll see who gets to the Celestial Kingdom.
>(P.S. I also have the Melchizedek Priesthood.)
>
>Christopher A. Young
>Learn more

My direct ancestors founded Freemasonry, the "G" on the Masonic Ring
stands for my family's surname Gemmell, which was original Gemmill,
when we created Freemasonry.

Therefore, I trump everyone's claim to "rights" of the presidency to
preside over the 'rights' to open and seal the doorway to the higher
worlds. For I am only one that holds the "key" of David. And in this
High Hand Order there can never be more than one person upon this
earth who hold that "key". At this time I alone have the "key" upon
this earth, and unless Jesus Christ is visiting this planet right now
then I am the proxy in this matter.

Christopher Young holds the Higher Priesthood, but he does not hold
the "key of David"�. The scriptures reveal that the Lord's servant
"Eliakim" shall hold the "key of the house of David"�.

"And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant
Eliakim�. [Isaiah 23:20]

"And the key of the house David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he
shall open [the doorway to heaven], and none shall shut; and he shall
shut, and none shall open." [Isaiah 22:22]

Variation of the name Eliakim, is Elika, Elyakim, Elyakum.

Elika is Hawaiian for Eric.

This passage (Isaiah 22:22) was meant to be understood in our day when
there would be an increase in knowledge and one could then search the
internet and see that in Hawaiian the name Eliakim is Erick. Erick is
my birth name.

The Latter-day Saints clear show on the caption of Isaiah Chapter 22
the following� "The Messiah will hold the key of the house of David,

inherit glory, and be fastened as a nail in a sure place."

What the Mormon do not reveal in the caption is that the Jewish nation
has a teaching that there were going to be two Messiah in the world
history. One called Messiah ben David, and the last day Messiah ben
Joseph. The word "ben" means "son", therefore the names mean Messiah
son of David, and Messiah son of Joseph. The Lord Jesus Christ was
the Messiah ben David. But the future Messiah ben Joseph, will be of
the Royal House of Judah and the Royal House of Joseph, and he will be
a High Priest. Therefore, there is no one else, who has the right to
hold the scepter of the Lord's light, but the one who is a natural
direct descendant of Jesus Christ, and I am the only one who has
traced my heritage back to Jesus Christ. Joseph Smith, Jr. has only
been traced back to Robert Smith, and then there nothing! I have
trace my lineage back to Robert Smith, and found that the Smith have
been intermarrying with the Gemmell throughout the ages. There but
the most direct lineage to Christ is the Gemmell line. No man can
steal my heritage, and when Joseph Smith sought to anoint his two sons
kings, then the wrath of God came down swiftly, and David Smith who
was chosen by Joseph Smith, Jr. to be the next king in Jerusalem died
in the nuthouse. Therefore, nobody should try and put forth their
hands to steady the ark of God judgment seat�

Joseph Smith failed to obey God's warning, and it should be a lesson
to all priesthood holders�

[Doctrine and Covenants 85:8]
8 While that man (Joseph Smith), who was called of God and appointed,
that putteth forth his hand to steady the ark of God [Judgment Seat],
shall fall by the shaft of death, like as a tree that is smitten by
the vivid shaft of lightning.

Hell broke loose and prevailed when Joseph Smith, Jr. sought to anoint
his son Joseph king of New Jerusalem, and his unborn son David king of
Jerusalem. This honor belongs to God, God alone shall pick who theses
Two Witnesses of Revelation Chapter 11 will be, not Joseph Smith, Jr.
--- the Two Witnesses are the Holy Grail, which Prophet Isaiah called
the "rod" and "branch"�.

"And there shall come forth a rod out of [family tree of Jesus Christ]
the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And shall
make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall
not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the
hearing of his ears: But with righteousness shall he judge the poor,
and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite
the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips
shall he slay the wicked. [Isaiah 11:1-4]

Clearly Joseph Smith, Jr. never fulfilled that prophecy, for the
wicked were able to slay him. Neither did the sons of Joseph Smith,
Jr. fulfilled that prophecy. Therefore, the ones who shall fulfill
that prophecy have not yet begin their mission to the world. These
two men are the Two Witnesses of Revelation Chapter 11, and the
Prophet Zechariah speaks about the Two Witnesses in Zech. Chapter 3,
Chapter 4, Chapter 6.

ERICK <G><

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <llt618h7lm3oo0n8m...@4ax.com>, Erick Esquivel <G><
says...

When one searches the Internet in our day for Eliakim,
one does not see that in Hawaiian the name Eliakim is Erick
-- one sees that in Hawaiian Eliakim means nothing.

What an Internet search for "Eliakim" -- just that alone -- reveals,
is that the first link that refers to a modern person (instead of
merely a bible reference for "Eliakim") is the blog of the prophetess
Eliakim Joseph-Sophia, the Messenger of the Covenant, who
hold the Keys in both hands in the land of Joseph.
She is the "Queen of the South" refered to by Jesus Christ,
who would come to judge this generation and he told
His followers that she would have more wisdom than Solomon.
She is the paraclete that He promised his followers would
come to help them. The advocate of the spiritual law.
When she flew into the USA, the Prince of Peace Church
in Philadelphia burned to the ground in April 2008.

http://www.academysounds.blogspot.com/2011/10/claims-of-mormons.html

Surely, it is *she* we are meant to discover today
through the power of the Internet and the pure
and simple search for "Eliakim"...whereas to find
you we must consult baby-naming web sites to
find alternate variations of a Hebrew name one
of which ("Elika") happens to be a Hawaiian
alliterative for "Eric" -- insanely contrived!

[•R.Measures]

In article <aThQr.67910$BK5....@news.usenetserver.com>, "Stormin Mormon"

<cayoung61***spam...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I have the witness of the Spirit of the Lord.
> You have someone's interpretation of some-
> thing.

*** There was no interpretation, there was a mass-spectrographic metal
analysis of the surviving Kinderhook Plate. . You have the words of a
man who married no less than 7 TEENAGERS between April and September of
1843 -- a record that will probably never be broken. .

>
> We'll see who gets to the Celestial Kingdom.

*** If you do succeed in getting to the Celestial Kingdom Mr. Young and
the LdS "God" assigns you to a harem of 100 Celestial wives,
Within a fortnight you are going to be one step beyond totally fucked out
and sorely in need of a number of spare reconditioned penises.

> (P.S. I also have the Melchizedek Priesthood.)

*** IOW you may have bought a bill of goods.

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On 28 Jul 2012 00:13:27 -0700, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer
<Lydig_...@newsguy.com> wrote:


You Don't Know Me.

If you don't believe the truth, neither would you believe it if God
were to send his angel down from heaven and tell you. Therefore, you
are left alone to figure it out on your own.

Not, that I think you are wrong for resisting the truth, but I think
you are fighting against the only person who has offered to help you.
Instead of leveling false accusations against me you ought to be
looking at my backers.

However you chosen to ignore the names I have given so far; why is
that so?

The point I was trying to make by showing that "Eliakim" meant
"Erick", was indeed lost in your petty search to disprove everything I
have said.

You did not see what it was that I was trying to say. I was trying to
show forth that I was being guided by God, God told me by revelation
that "Eliakim" meant "Erick. And if I were to do a search on the
internet I would find a confirmation that it was correct.

It was God who told me to search the internet for I would find proof
that Erick was a variant of the name Eliakim. Which I did as I was
commanded, and there was indeed a website that mention it was so.

So, instead of arguing with me, you should have wonder how I was able
to get that revelation from God. But you don't believe in revelation
I take it, therefore, you resisted the point I was making.

Now, it would do you no good to argue with the scholars that back me
up, therefore, you have chosen to ignore the names of the experts.

Also you have chosen to ignore the manifest revelations. Your problem
is that you think I am asking for you to show faith, but I am not
asking for your faith in something unproven, I am only asking that you
check out my backers I have, the experts who have proven me correct.

Everything I do is first guided by revelation, then I go and search
for a confirmation on the internet. Which is a contrived lie coming
from you that I have not done my research.

If you want we can start anew, and I will give you the links you
require, okay?

>to find you we must consult baby-naming web sites to
>find alternate variations of a Hebrew name one
>of which ("Elika") happens to be a Hawaiian
>alliterative for "Eric"

The name Elika appears in the Bible in 2 Samuel 23:25 and is said to
be online the "pelican of God." In other words Elika, means, "Pelican
of God". You lie when you say that I have to consult baby-naming web
sites to justify my position. For I told you, but you ignore it, I
consult the Spirit of God, and then I go online to see if what I am
told is back up online.

Therefore, you are wrong about me. The foundation upon which God told
Peter he would built his church kingdom was upon the ROCK OF
REVELATION, which I am a capable of person for doing just that.

However, if I were charlatan I would leave out revelations from God
directing me in my search online.

Now, Roswell D. Hitchcock created the Hitchcock's Bible Names
Dictionary, which is used by Babylon's Translation Software, and this
is not as you say, "a baby-naming web site". Now, it is revealed by
Hitchcock that "Elika" means "Pelican of God", and I will add that
King David called himself a "Pelican". See Psalms 102:6 "I am like a
PELICAN of the wilderness".

Now, Louisiana's swamp are a wilderness, and the state bird is the
"Pelican", and I was born in New Orleans. And you cannot justify that
your Messenger of the Covenant was born in Louisiana! But I was, and
so was my nephew.

Not only that my nephew's family was send to New Orleans as royal
corridors to prepare a place for the royal family of France, they were
to prepare a place in Exile in New Orleans for Louis XVI and Marie
Antoinette's children to go into Exile.

Therefore, Louisiana was chosen to be the hiding place of the royal
household of the Kings of the Franks, and my family which is related
to this family was entrusted with royal money to prepare a palace here
in New Orleans. Now, you know how the French side of my family first
came to America.

Now, the Count of Saint-Germain last known residence according to the
Freemasonry Encyclopedia say that the dethrone Prince Saint-Germain
was living at my family's ancestral home, called Mount Heredom! And
this not taken from a baby-naming web site, but from the Freemasonry
Encyclopedia.

I by revelation reveal to the world that Saint-Germain was the John
the Revelator, who was adopted into the family of Christ at the cross,
when Jesus commanded John to take care of the royal family of Jesus.

The bible reveals that John did not die, but had the blessing to
continue on earth to continue the protection of the royal family of
Jesus. That is why he had an interest in warning Marie Antoinette's
because her son Louis VXII was called King of France and King of
Scots, and is a cousin of the Gemmell Family of Mount Heredom for they
have the same ancestor called Gamail Lord of Carrick.

Even Lady Daina is descendant of Lord Gamail of Carrick. And some of
the Presidents of the United States, and Winston Churchill, and also
Robert de Bruce King of Scotland.

Therefore, I don't have to pretend to royalty, like your Messenger of
the Covenant. I am well connected, even cousins whose mother was Mary
Balls were the last of Constantine lineage, and they inherit Greece,
for she married the last Emperor of Greece. And my Gemmell Family of
Mount Heredom is the most direct lineage of Gamail Lord of Carrick,
for we are the only ones to have inherited the "Lion's Paw" of
Freemasonry as our family crest, which nobody among all the royals
were allowed to do, they inherited the Lion but not the Lion's Paw,
which belong to King David who was the arm of the lion!.

Therefore, you don't have go to the baby-name website, but you can go
here to see proof…

http://fabpedigree.com/s026/f675080.htm

Also there is a prophecy in the book of the Kings of the Franks, which
is not a baby-naming website…

According to Marjorie Reeves' Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic
Future, a second Charlemagne will arise whose surname begins with 'P'.

"It was a Burgundian World Emperor that [Johann] Lichtenberger
expected to arise as a Second Charlemagne. His hint as to who this
will be is quite plain: 'And it is said in the book of the kings of
the Franks that from the stock of King Charles of France [Charlemagne]
will arise in the last days an Emperor, 'nomine P.', who will be the
monarch of all Europe and reform Church and clergy. After him there
shall be no ruler.'"

My name starts with a "G", but my nephew name starts with a "P". And
the Prophet Kimball sent a group of men to bless him as the next King
of Israel. And my nephew has a French name, and there is a prophecy
by the Cather's of France that they would rise up again in 800 years,
and my nephew's grandfather is a descendant of the Cather's of France,
he was born exactly 800 years later in America.

Therefore, the signs are many, like the 3D Star of David that appeared
at the birth of my nephew, with the earth at the center, but there is
a famous historian who is now working on making it all available in a
book. I can direct you to his website, if you like. And I will be
writing to him so he can add my royal coat of arms of family tree
which I have inherited. Yes, beside the Lion's Paw of Freemasonry on
my family crest on my father's side, I also have mother's coat of
arms, and she has Emperor's Black Eagle on a gold field. There is no
more noble and honorable charge given in coat of arms, then the
Emperor's Black Eagle on a gold field, and mother also has the royal
colors of France on her arms. And she is a direct descendant of the
Emperor Charlemagne.


There is also a Catholic prophecy which says the next Pope will be
called "Peter the Roman". And then there will be no more after him.
And my nephew last name starts with Peter. So, you are without any
proof of your own to back up another alternative that fits like a
glove to all the prophecies, only I only give a small part of what I
know, and I can do it, match all prophecies about the Holy Grail, for
I am the true son of Christ! <G><

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a
righteous BRANCH, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall
execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be
saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he
shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. - Jer. 23:5, 6

Now, do you want to know who the historian who is backing me up today?
He's working on a book about my Mount Heredom family tree, the Gemmill
family of Mount Heredom.

Erick <G><

[Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer]

In article <si1818tdca8jueuiq...@4ax.com>, Erick Esquivel <G><
says...
>

>On 28 Jul 2012 00:13:27 -0700, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer
><Lydig_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>
>You Don't Know Me.
>

What's there to know beyond that you're a crackpot
with seriously loony delusions of grandeur?

Dude, you think you're going to become the king of Israel
-- and that's the *sanest* of the insanity you claim is going to happen.

>If you don't believe the truth, neither would you believe it if God
>were to send his angel down from heaven and tell you. Therefore, you
>are left alone to figure it out on your own.
>
>Not, that I think you are wrong for resisting the truth, but I think
>you are fighting against the only person who has offered to help you.
>Instead of leveling false accusations against me you ought to be
>looking at my backers.
>

Do you even know what the word "truth" means?
"Truth" doesn't mean stuff that *might* happen
or you wish will happen. "Truth" doesn't mean
stuff that you *say* is fact but if I say it isn't
the best you can do is stand there and say "Is too!"

Substitute the word "my opinion" wherever you
write "the truth" and then what you write will be
in alignment with reality. That's the truth.

And, why is it that so many of you deity-believers
make that stupid claim that if their deity actually did
something non-believers wouldn't believe anyway?
As if a deity has *ever* done anything.
There isn't an event in history nor in ongoing current life
that requires a deity in order to be explainable.
So has it always been. So it shall be for evermore.

>However you chosen to ignore the names I have given so far; why is
>that so?
>
>The point I was trying to make by showing that "Eliakim" meant
>"Erick", was indeed lost in your petty search to disprove everything I
>have said.
>
>You did not see what it was that I was trying to say. I was trying to
>show forth that I was being guided by God, God told me by revelation
>that "Eliakim" meant "Erick. And if I were to do a search on the
>internet I would find a confirmation that it was correct.
>
>It was God who told me to search the internet for I would find proof
>that Erick was a variant of the name Eliakim. Which I did as I was
>commanded, and there was indeed a website that mention it was so.
>
>So, instead of arguing with me, you should have wonder how I was able
>to get that revelation from God. But you don't believe in revelation
>I take it, therefore, you resisted the point I was making.
>

"Revelation" is not distinguishable from a person's own
thought processes. Claiming that a deity is involved is
merely the attempt to add undeserved authority to one's
own thoughts and ideas.

The history of Mormonism has demonstrated how
vacuous the concept of revelation is, so much so
that the original Mormon leaders wouldn't even
recognize today's Mormon leaders as those
who "called down revelation" as they did.
The whole concept has been watered-down
because the risk of embarrassment has become
not worth the cachet the concept once brought
to original Mormonism in the eyes of its original
followers. What Mormons call revelations from
their leaders today is not distinguishable from
what Catholics call sermons from theirs.
This was not always the case.

>Now, it would do you no good to argue with the scholars that back me
>up, therefore, you have chosen to ignore the names of the experts.
>
>Also you have chosen to ignore the manifest revelations. Your problem
>is that you think I am asking for you to show faith, but I am not
>asking for your faith in something unproven, I am only asking that you
>check out my backers I have, the experts who have proven me correct.
>

You will die before you become the king of Israel and your
claims that anything "backed" your insane ramblings will
be seen as merely part and parcel of your insane ramblings.

[Erick Esquivel <G><]

On 29 Jul 2012 00:55:11 -0700, Lydig Avenue Kibbitzer

<Lydig_...@newsguy.com> wrote:


You Don't Know Me.

>What's there to know beyond that you're a crackpot with seriously
>loony delusions of grandeur? Dude, you think you're going to

>become the king of Israel--and that's the *sanest* of the insanity

>you claim is going to happen.

The "crackpot with seriously loony delusion of grandeur" is you - for
you have neither the historians, nor Freemasons, nor Mormon Prophets -
nor family history, nor Lost Tribes of Israel, nor angels, nor God the
Father, nor Son of God, nor Holy Spirit to back you on Day of
Judgment, or to testify on your behalf.

Are you in the habit of always putting your foot in your mouth every
time you speak? The only mistake I made with you was to say that you
were a 'sage', but I did not do it out of kindness for you for this
what the Spirit of God revealed to me about you, before I did a search
on your name, yes, the first revelation given about you was that I
should desiring to crush your spirit, for you were a spirit
insurrection, so I then asked God to reveal something good about you,
and I was told you were a "sage", but why do you attack me like an
atheist? Do you have any love for Jesus Christ? Now what the Spirit
of God reveals to me about you; required another confirmation,
therefore, I did a search online to see if you were making posts among
the people that reveal you as an atheist.

If you think I was wrong to have called you by inspiration a "sage",
let the people decide by reading your posts at soc.culture.jewish and
see if was right again. Yes, you trying to defend Gay Marriage
because a Jew has said something so evil that deserved a response from
you.

Do you think I am just a shadow of the real thing? That I can be
mocked, and have your ugly finger of scorn go unnoticed by the powers
of heaven?

I did a search of your name to see if I was right in revealing others
that you were a sage, for like I have done throughout my life, I am
always guided by revelation, then I search the internet for
confirmation.

Here is a powerful post you made…against a Jew who supported the
manner of Hitler's dealings with the Gays wanting marriage.

>So, this is some kind of performance art that is meant
>to be ironic? A Jew who rationalizes state-sponsored
>tyranny with his religious opinions -- in the same manner
>that Hitler rationalized state-sponsored tyranny with
>his religious opinions? Maybe it holds some appeal
>to New York intelligentsia who "get it" and will converse
>about it for ten minutes over fine wine before changing
>the subject. Feh.

----CUT----

>Do you even know what the word "truth" means?
>"Truth" doesn't mean stuff that *might* happen
>or you wish will happen. "Truth" doesn't mean
>stuff that you *say* is fact but if I say it isn't
>the best you can do is stand there and say "Is too!"

YOU'RE A LIAR, for you do not know me, for here is a post I made 3
March 2010, it is called:

"THE TRUTHS BY Erick Gemmell a.k.a. Joshua the Just"

God does not talk to man, because it's an imagination of
the brain that there is a talking God.

We created God in our brains, and now we cannot shake it
off.

The inner sadness that comes to me is from knowing that I
am alone in this universe.

And this universe does not care about my existence, and I
am just taking up space.

The universe may not care but many people do.

What do you attribute this quality within man?

Is this quality inherited or learned?

If you say inherited, then it speaks of a divine nature of God that
men inherit.

If you say it is learned, then why are animals born knowing how to
survive and care for their own kind?

There must be something more to this universe than what I see,
something that fills the vastness of space.

I think it's the life force that all matter has, even the rocks have
it. It's not an uncommon thing to find rocks in the barren lands that
leave trails in the ground, as if the rocks were walking slowing
across the land. This cannot be attribute to strong winds moving the
rocks, for nearby rocks leave trails in different directions.

Yes, there is something all matter inherits and it was never created,
but has always existed, and is a part of matter. Man thinks of God as
many things, but one thing all men assert of God is that God has
always existed. The Deist thinks we cannot come to know God by
revelation, but nature speaks of God when we see the goodness in life
that is not learned.

Still I wonder about it All, but when I see the cold hand of a
murderer, I wonder if that was learned after searing the goodness we
all inherit?

Are we all good at birth? Or do we also inherit evil? It's an old
question that goes back to the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.
Surely our first parents have pass it down to us from the beginning.
As I ponder upon these things that happen to us all, I then begin to
understand that both good and evil had a beginning, it was the Tree of
Knowledge, and that God never created that tree, but only planted it
here. That both good and evil have always coincided with God.

Yes, I ponder upon it All, and still I cannot figure it out, if evil
came upon man because of the Tree of Knowledge, then how do I explain
why the Devil and his angels are evil, if they never eat of the Tree
of Knowledge?

So there is more to it All than I can see and understand, so tell me
John, does it trouble you like it troubles me not knowing why man
basically good at birth, when he had no chance to learn about being
good?

Perhaps I am wrong, I shouldn't adequate goodness to innocence. All
men are born innocent but that in itself does not make them good,
their innocence comes from not being able to judge between right and
wrong.

Therefore their innocence is a state of ignorance, or should we say
that man is only good once he reaches the age of accountability when
he knows right from wrong. Still I wonder about it All, for now it
seems to me that goodness in man has much to do with the development
of his brain, as appose to the inherited nature of the
Divine. What is it that develops completely in the brain around the
age of eight that gives man the cognitive ability to know what is
good? Yes, when the child reaches the age of eight, it becomes born
to a new world, one that make him accountable before God. For now
that child know right from wrong, and is a free agent before God.

Yes, I wonder about it All, how it was that the Devil and his demons
were able to acquire this accountability before without having access
to the Tree of Knowledge. Or were they allowed to partake of the Tree
of Knowledge in the spirit world?

I know that it sounds much about nothing, but if I can get to the root
of where good and evil begins then I can come to understand why God is
real. For God exists because the Tree of Knowledge is real, for
without the tree, he would not have had his free agency.

Now, Adam and Eve were fully developed in the brain, they were adults,
but still they thought as children under the age of eight, they were
in a state of innocence. So, I can put away my foolish idea that
children have a fully developed brain at age eight, and that this
bring about their free agency. There must be something that makes us
free agents, if it is not the development of the brain, then it must
be something that we inherit, but it is not apparent to us in the
physical plane that make us account at the age we know right from
wrong. Is it God who decides when we are account and when we are
innocent?

I know that as a child, I knew what was wrong, but I felt there was no
consequences for doing wrong. I also thought that I could not die,
yes, it seems that I knew about wrong but not about its consequences.
I understood fear, and knew it was wrong to be frighten, but still I
did not understand what it all meant. The facts were clear to my
mind, but not what it meant. So, I'm still puzzled why at an early
age I could not fight evil, and was easily led to do wrong. The good
part was intact, I understood when I was good or bad. So, knowing
good and evil still did not make me a free agent, for being free to
move about and act on my own did not make me a free agent. For
animals move about on their own, but they are not free agents to
choose their destiny. Animals are forever being controlled by man.
So, there I am now, with the thought that the only thing that makes
man free agents, is having the perception that he can exalt himself or
base himself.

And at the age of eight that choice to either exalt oneself or base
oneself comes into play with baptism.

So it is baptism that makes us accountable before God, and since
little children cannot enter until reaching the age of eight, then God
cannot judge little children by the law, for they are under his mercy
until they can enter the water of baptism.

Now, I can cut out all the leaves of a tree, and just examine the
branches. The leaves are the arguments that Deist has about God
making himself known unto man, and the branches are the underline
sources for these arguments. If I examine the branches, I see that
its baptism that makes God known to man.

One cannot enter heaven without baptism, and where do we find God if
not in heaven?

The Deist refuses to be baptized, and remains the Deist he was. He is
past the age of eight, yet not baptized, but still he is accountable
before God for his refusal to be baptized. Now, I can cast away the
idea that baptism makes us accountable.

My last conclusion considering everything I have said, is that nothing
on earth makes man accountable, only our relationship with God. It is
God that makes us free agents, it is the obeying or disobeying of his
will.

If God does not say "Don t Do This" then there is nothing wrong about
do it. For it is God that makes it wrong or right. And since man
knows right and wrong, it is proof that God exists, for man cannot
have known it to be wrong without there having been a God who said it
was wrong.

So, yes, we could carry this on to another level, and say that God is
not needed for an understanding of what wrong is. That we can be good
to one another without the use of religion or a belief in God.

And so after I seen the universe in its entirety, I arrive at you
John, are you not such a person? You believe in doing goodness by
your own reasoning, and do not attribute your powers of reasoning to
there being a God. Am I wrong in saying this about you?

To Be Continued....

Blessed is My God who is everything to me, for I stand Witness that
whatever I become was God's gift to me, and what I become shall be my
gift to God. For everything I do the God of Israel bears witness of
me, and I am sent to the Jewish Nation as God's Last Day Witness, for
he has risen me up for the very purpose.

>Substitute the word "my opinion" wherever you
>write "the truth" and then what you write will be
>in alignment with reality. That's the truth.

>And, why is it that so many of you deity-believers
>make that stupid claim that if their deity actually did
>something non-believers wouldn't believe anyway?
>As if a deity has *ever* done anything.
>There isn't an event in history nor in ongoing current life
>that requires a deity in order to be explainable.
>So has it always been. So it shall be for evermore.

Then how do you explain my birth? Has it not dawn upon you that there
are no coincidences in life? I am one of God's Two Witness (See
Revelation Chapter 11), there has never been one like me before, nor
shall there come another of the likes of me again. I am raise up to
the Jewish Nation, and I shall restore the Kingdom of Israel.

If you are right, then what man on earth has not been able to do this
in thousands of years?

I shall accomplish it in 42 months. I am going to reclaim the land
that belongs to Jesus Christ, for I am his most direct descendant, and
my family has never sold away Mount Moriah. And I shall build the
Temple of Jerusalem in 3 ˝ years, and you are wrong when you said,

"There isn't an event in history nor in ongoing current life that
requires a deity in order to be explainable."

A Christian Temple on Mount Moriah has never been built.
And anyone who says it can be done without a DEITY is a cracked head,
without being grounded to reality of world affairs. For the Jews will
not allow it, and they now control the Temple Mount Moriah, and the
Dome of the Rock now stands there. And it would take the TWO WITNESSES
of God, whom God backs up, to be able to perform this task.

If you are right, then present to us your wisdom to the fullest - How
Us How That CAN Be Accomplished without the Manifestation of God's
Power?

My whole life has the hand of God in its affairs, and you can with all
the demons of hell, and Satan at your side, ever be one step ahead of
God. For Moses already prove that before, but here today are Two
Witnesses that will far exceed the works of Moses. Moses parted the
sea, I shall make the Pacific Ocean disappear. Moses brought down the
power of Egypt by the Word of God, and he was just One Man with God's
power in his hand. But I am Two Witnesses, for I am not alone, the
other Witness is the Ensign for the gathering of God's people from all
nations and kingdoms upon this earth. Even the Lost Tribes of Israel
under the earth, and City of Enoch above the earth. And when we begin
to preach in Jerusalem then shall the mystery of God be finished, for
I am the voice of the seventh messenger of God.

(REVELATION 10:7) "But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel,
when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished,
as he hath declared to his servants the prophets."

You will see the power of God in our hands, you will see the promises
of God fulfilled about Jerusalem Temple. And the restoration of the
Kingdom of Heaven on earth. And a restoration of the earth has it was
before God divided the earth. You shall see third of everything lost
so because of wickedness and evil coconspirators like yourself.

Has not the storms of your delusion risen up a stink upon the land?
For fishes without living water are stink upon the land, so shall the
wicked be when the rains are withdrawn for resisting the Truth of God.
And you say, with devilish wisdom that these are the things that can
be done without God's Power Being Manifested? You're a bigger fool
than I thought.

However you chosen to ignore the names I have given so far; why is

that so? It is because, I am commanded by God, and I shall now obey
him,…

(Matthew 7:6) "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast
ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet,
and turn again and rend you."

How can I give you wisdom when you are reprobate concerning the truth
that saves, and like "Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do you
also resist the Truth.

However Moses was always one step ahead of Jannes and Jambres, and
when Moses made his staff turn into a serpent, Jannes and Jambres cast
down their staffs and made serpents also, but Moses serpent swallowed
the serpents of Jannes and Jambres, for God was always one step ahead
of Satan's servants.

>"Revelation" is not distinguishable from a person's own
>thought processes. Claiming that a deity is involved is
>merely the attempt to add undeserved authority to one's
>own thoughts and ideas.

Another lie, are you Satan's mouthpiece? For he is the Father of All
Lies.

Can you bring down Wormwood upon the Amazon Rivers?

That is Revelation 8:11

(REVELATION 8:11) "And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and
the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the
waters, because they were made bitter."

Today no one has been able to reveal where Wormwood is going to fall,
I am he first in world history to identify it to be the Amazon Rivers
Basin by REVELATION.

I did a search online, and it was confirmed again, like all my
revelations, that 1/3 of the fresh waters in the world are indeed
found in the Amazon Rivers. Therefore when you see this fulfilled,
then you shall know I spoke the Truth by Revelation. And you will
find the plant wormwood in the Amazon River. And it does not take a
genius to know that the Light of God coming down from the sky appears
like a star falling, and when that light falls it the Angel of God,
unleashing wormwood upon the Amazon Rivers, and bitter it shall
become, therefore, I the first in the world to reveal how that is
going to happen. For if it was an actual star from the sky it would
kill all living things. Therefore, it can only happen as I foretold
it by revelation.

>The history of Mormonism has demonstrated how vacuous the
>concept of revelation is, so much so that the original Mormon
>leaders wouldn't even recognize today's Mormon leaders as those
>who "called down revelation" as they did.

Liar, for Prophet Kimball on January 1980 sent a group of men from
Salt Lake City to New Orleans to bless my family with the power of God
to establish the Kingdom of Heaven. And he did it after I said a
silent prayer that God would sent the next king of Israel to my
family. I never told anyone, and hundreds of signs were given, and
the group of men that came said, "We have sent by the God of Israel.
We have come to bless the child for he is special unto God and has a
mission to do for the world." Yes, I am God's Witness and he shall
back me up. For He has given his angels charge over me, they go behind
me and before me, Thus Saith the Lord Our Righteousness, the Holy One
of Israel.

>The whole concept has been watered-down
>because the risk of embarrassment has become
>not worth the cachet the concept once brought
>to original Mormonism in the eyes of its original
>followers. What Mormons call revelations from
>their leaders today is not distinguishable from
>what Catholics call sermons from theirs.
>This was not always the case.

How foolish you are, for the signs of God's hand are not always
visible to the wicked, for God has no interest in rubbing His light in
your face, for if He did, you would be faceless. For God is a
refiner's fire, and no sinful person and withstand His glorious light.

Therefore, I declare you foolish and bitter, for you think that if
God's existed He would be at your beck and call, but you are wrong,
for God is Holy Personage, and He is not a respecter of men, but your
spiritual father Satan is often flying to my side instantly when I
feel like calling him to debate with me over the souls of men. Satan
is so eager to impress me that he has never once failed to come flying
at my feet, but it is not the same with God, for God comes not
whenever I call Him, but whenever I honor Him. Yes, God draws near to
me whenever I draw near to Him. Therefore, if it not the same with My
Heavenly Father, as it is with your master Satan; were it not for the
Spirit of understanding in me, I would succumb to your plot to
distance me from my God's presences.

>You will die before you become the king of Israel and your claims
>that anything "backed" your insane ramblings will be seen as merely
>part and parcel of your insane ramblings.

Liar, for I am already King in His Service before the eyes of God, for
my God's Kingdom is Spiritual, and it comes not by visible sight, but
it comes unto the hearts of men, for my heart is the Temple of My God.
And these are not the ramblings of insanity, but the sincere thoughts
of the servant of God who has seen the power of God who has seen the
power of God manifested in his affairs, yes, if God did not back me up
in the past, I would have fade away a long time ago before you came
around. But what can I do but be that Witness of what I have seen.
When I asked God, "If I be thy servant of thy hand then bring down
fire from the sky." An instantly a greenish blue fireball came gliding
slowing before me only twenty feet from where I was standing. And
this happen at the local mall, in the parking lot, and if you had been
there you would have seen it like everyone else that was there.

Therefore, you speak as one who imagines I am not I am not telling the
truth, but when My God tells me that it time to start my mission to
the Jewish Nation, then the world shall know if I am back by angels
from God or not. And it matters not to me, for I have already talked
with real angels, and they showed me their powers of telepathy. In
fact I was in a Gay Bar on Bourdon Street, when John the Revelator and
James came to see me, and as I watch them enter the front door and
headed straight towards me, looking at me, John said, "I know what you
are thinking, I can read your mind, you think we are two Mormon
missionaries without name tags." Yes, that was exactly what I was
think, and John and James allowed me to test their power to read my
mind, and yes, they could read, and they also knew that a few hour
earlier I had been with Satan at Harrah's Casino, and I thought I had
out smart Satan, but I was wrong. Yes, Satan appeared before me, in
front of everyone at the casino, and was showing me all the machines
that would hit instant jackpots on the first coin. And I was making a
fortune, and I was foolish to think that because God gave me vision,
and I could see Satan standing a foot off the ground talking to
another man, whom Satan was going to have him follow me out the door
and murder me for the fortune I was given. I thought in my foolish my
mind that "knowledge is power" and since I had revelation about
Satan's plan, I could take the money and escape the danger. But I was
wrong, because I was never able to stop the man I saw in vision, so I
went to a Gay Bar on a crowded street of the French Quarters. I went
into a Gay that had doors all around so I could escape if I saw that
man who was going to follow me, but I did it because I thought in my
foolish mind that my winning jackpots would continue, and there were
video machines in the bar so I could win money. James took the
machine next, I was having no luck now, because Satan was there
showing me which machine to play, but James began playing the machine
next to me and he had full control of the machine, he would make it
hit ten dollars on hit, then lose seven dollars, then hit back up to
ten dollars, then lose back to seven dollars, then hit back up to ten
dollars, this went on with no end, and I told him, you don't want to
win do you? And I was thinking, why these angels don't just come out
and say it. That they are angels! Then James turn around and looked
at me and said, "How many quarters are there in ten dollars?" And
then I said, "You are from another time and place, and you have come
to warn me that my life is in danger. I am going straight home!" And
James and John smiled and walked away, and the Peter came in and they
gave their report to Peter.

Yes, I had a long talk with John the Revelator, and when I said in my
mind, if there two are angels they will go right now and order
themselves two soda pops, because angels do not drink liquor. James
immediately went to the bar and order to two soda pops. And when I
looked at John, and said something evil, you should have seen his
face, I thought he was going to kill me, and I quickly prayed to God
and told Him "These two angels you sent to protect are about to kill
me, doing something quick!" And John face turn very nice and smiled at
me. Yes, this went on for a long time, we talked about things, and it
was clear to me that they had been sent to protect me for I was still
not out of harm's way.

So, you see I know that what I say is true, and I know that when God
tells me to go to Jerusalem it is not going to on an airplane, but I
am going to fly to Jerusalem on a white flying horse, there is not
going to be any doubts about whom I am and who I represent, and I will
not be alone, the next king of Jerusalem with me. The Jewish Messiah,
Our Leader, the center light of the holy menorah. Now, I will
continue speak with you again, for it is not fit for me to speak of
holy things to dogs.

If you are offended, it is only your fault, for barking at me like
dog, yes, everything I say to you, you think that by barking at me you
prove your point, but you don't. Only in your mind, have you gained
anything, but in the eyes of the people, they are thinking that you
are headed to hell.

That your prerogative, you can go where you choose, except heaven,
because lying tongues are an abomination to heaven, and expect you
repent, you are barred from entering heaven.

I wish you well, and I pray that God will bless you, but if you want
to be sent to hell that is your choice to make.

For God will not force us to do what is right, but God will send his
angels from time to time to reveal the truth that all things that men
do in secret that are wrong shall God bring in Judgment, and there is
no place wherein we can completely hide from God in this universe.
Therefore God is merciful to provide a time wherein we can repent of
our sins and transgression, so that we can be washed of our guilt, and
become clean vessels of God's light.

May you find your way, while there is still time. Good-bye.

-FILE UNdER: - [Posted to lost soul in the woods of despair.]

[Stormin Mormon]

We'd best define "salvation" before too much longer. There was a list, see
if I can find it on my drive.
===========================
From: "Guy R. Briggs" <net...@GeoCities.com>
Subject: Re: Who's really saved? And who's exalted?
Date: Sunday, July 27, 2003 9:57 PM

cayo...@hotmail.com ("Stormin Mormon") wrote:

<snip>

> Mormon term "Saved": Having body and soul reunited together
> after death. Every man, woman and child is saved from physical
> death. That was a free gift to all, due to the crucifixion and
> resurrection.
>
Erm, that's certainly one of our definitions for saved/salvation.
There are six distinct meanings used in the Church, which makes
communicating with those of other faiths difficult - we use the same
words and think we're talking about the same things, but we're not. We
end up talking past each other.

1) Overcoming (i.e. being saved from) physical death.
Synonymous with resurrection, but different than
what happened to Lazarus. As used by "Stormin" above.
Free gift to all humanity, irrespective of religion.

2) Saved from the effects and consequences of sin (i.e. made
clean from past transgressions)

3) Saved by being born again (i.e. our hearts are changed so
that we no longer naturally choose evil over good - we take
upon ourselves the name of Christ and become part of the
Christian family)

4) Overcoming (i.e. being saved from) spiritual death.
The act of being reunited with our Father in
Heaven. Happens automatically on Judgement Day (as
in: "I saw the dead, the small and the great, stand
before God") Be sure to see #4 before you start
protesting. Also happens to all humanity.

5) Overcoming (i.e. being saved from) the second death.
Making it through Judgement Day, to live forever
with God.

6) Exaltation. Not only living again with out Father in
Heaven, but actually becoming like Him.

As I understand mainstream Christianity, "saved" refers
specifically to numbers 2 and 3, and a get out of jail free card for
number 5. Regardless of how life is conducted after 2 and 3.


bestRegards, Guy.
==================
Greetings, sir, and great respect.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Just Wondering" <fmh...@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:500f8ee6$0$7559$882e...@usenet-news.net...
On 7/24/2012 8:17 PM, Erick Esquivel <G>< wrote:
> Billy Graham doesn't think the Melchizedek priesthood is necessary for
> salvation.

So what? No religion in the world, including the LDS, teaches that it is.

[Mulligan]

On Jan 4, 6:12 am, "Stormin Mormon"

<cayoung61***spambl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We'd best define "salvation" before too much longer. There was a list, see
> if I can find it on my drive.
> ===========================

> From: "Guy R. Briggs" <netz...@GeoCities.com>

> Subject: Re: Who's really saved? And who's exalted?
> Date: Sunday, July 27, 2003 9:57 PM
>

When they bandy about the term saved, what would be similar in our
faith is calling and election made sure.

[Logan Sacket]

Then you don't understand Christianity.

As to #6, that was Adams sin, wanting to be like God. Yet Mormonism
uses it as a carrot.

[Mulligan]

On Jan 4, 3:20 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:

> As to #6, that was Adams sin, wanting to be like God.

Call for evidence.