Catholic Polygamy

[twopekinguys]

Not everything that puts smith and the mormon church in a less than favorable light is anti-mormon.

The term anti-mormon is thrown around so much that it has become a useless tactic.

Instead of it meaning someone is truly anti-mormon, it has come to mean…I can’t answer your statement or question with anything coherent, so your statement must be anti-mormon, so I won’t answer it.

It has been used to death, and nobody falls for it anymore.

 

[twopekinguys]

Now is you is or is you not mistaken…?

Are we going to have 5 Oh in da hood playa?



Or should I say…Don’t be a hater playa…

 

[CopticChristian]

Are we going to have 5 Oh in da hood playa?



Or should I say…Don’t be a hater playa…

Two…,

Yo we’s is doin’ dis here an’ dey is doin’ dat, dey forgot dat dey did at one tyme believe dat da balck brotha wuz not eligible fo’ priesthood and many think that they, ya’ll is mad stupid.

kinda how I be seein it from this here side…

 

[twopekinguys]

Two…,

Yo we’s is doin’ dis here an’ dey is doin’ dat, dey forgot dat dey did at one tyme believe dat da balck brotha wuz not eligible fo’ priesthood and many think that they, ya’ll is mad stupid.

kinda how I be seein it from this here side…

Word

 

[Fatboys]

Fat,

You say my nose is where?

Fat Boy say what…?

He be speaking to me…?

Well there are a few difficulties…

Where is Jerusalem ever described as a “land” in the Scriptures? The expression “land of Jerusalem” never occurs in the sixty-six books of the Bible. The fact is, Matthew, an inspired apostle, explicitly states that Bethlehem is in “the land of Judah” (Matthew 2:6; cf. Luke 2:4). Judah is the “land”; Jerusalem is a “city” (cf. Zechariah 8:3; Matthew 5:35); and so is Bethlehem (Luke 2:4). There is precision of Matthew’s descriptions elsewhere in the same chapter. Twice he refers to the “land of Israel” (2:20-21), and then to the “city of Nazareth” (v. 23). Unlike Joseph Smith, the biblical writers did not confuse “land” and “city.”

also…

If Alma, supposedly writing about 83 B.C., employed the word “Ghost,” in the passage then it should be noted that the word “ghost” was not even fashioned until the 15th century A.D. (Joseph Shipley, Dictionary of Word Origins, New York: Philosophical Library, 1945, p. 165).

So, you be from the land of Utah…or the land of Salt Lake in and around the land of Utah?

Now is you is or is you not mistaken…?

Now think guys. Don’t you think that Joseph Smith knew the story of the birth of Christ, and that he knew the city he was born in. Bethleham is a suburb of Jerusalem. You are straining at a knat and might swallow a camel. And ancient writtings refered to the land of Jerusalem.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Now think guys. Don’t you think that Joseph Smith knew the story of the birth of Christ, and that he knew the city he was born in. Bethleham is a suburb of Jerusalem. You are straining at a knat and might swallow a camel. And ancient writtings refered to the land of Jerusalem.

Suburbs didn’t exist until the 20th century.

 

[Porknpie]

Now think guys. Don’t you think that Joseph Smith knew the story of the birth of Christ, and that he knew the city he was born in. Bethleham is a suburb of Jerusalem. You are straining at a knat and might swallow a camel. And ancient writtings refered to the land of Jerusalem.

Fatboys -

I googled “Land of Jerusalem” and all links point this being a LDS held thought only. Here’s one non-Catholic link that talks to it. No where in the 66 books of the bible is “Land of Jerusalem” written.

christiancourier.com/articles/940-the-birthplace-of-jesus-bethlehem-or-jerusalem

Why does God not use this phrase in the 66 books of the bible and only use it with Joseph Smith?

 

[Fatboys]

Fatboys -

I googled “Land of Jerusalem” and all links point this being a LDS held thought only. Here’s one non-Catholic link that talks to it. No where in the 66 books of the bible is “Land of Jerusalem” written.

christiancourier.com/articles/940-the-birthplace-of-jesus-bethlehem-or-jerusalem

Why does God not use this phrase in the 66 books of the bible and only use it with Joseph Smith?

bible-history.com/jerusalem/firstcenturyjerusalem_the_land_of_jerusalem.html

 

[Porknpie]

bible-history.com/jerusalem/firstcenturyjerusalem_the_land_of_jerusalem.html

And the answer to my question is? I really don’t understand…

 

[zaffiroborant]

bible-history.com/jerusalem/firstcenturyjerusalem_the_land_of_jerusalem.html

Only mention of Bethlehem in your link is this

Jerusalem’s Surrounding Mountains

Beyond the valleys of Jerusalem were the mountains round about. The most famous mountain was the Mount of Olives which stood about 300 feet higher than the Temple Mount and over 100 feet higher than any part of the city. On the north side of the city stood the awesome Mizpeh of Benjamin. There was also Gibeon and Ramah and the ridge near Bethlehem in the distant east.

 

[CopticChristian]

Fatboys -

I googled “Land of Jerusalem” and all links point this being a LDS held thought only. Here’s one non-Catholic link that talks to it. No where in the 66 books of the bible is “Land of Jerusalem” written.

christiancourier.com/articles/940-the-birthplace-of-jesus-bethlehem-or-jerusalem

Why does God not use this phrase in the 66 books of the bible and only use it with Joseph Smith?

Pork,

Forgive me.

I want to point out the defeciency in Fatboy’s apologetics…as you recall…apologist, says he?

I posted that the phrase does not exist in the 66 books of the Bible…and as of now no one has pointed out that this is the Protocanonicals…sorry for doing that…

So what FatBoy has to argue with is facts…

Dead Sea Scrolls confirm most of the Old Testament…

Protocanonicals…66 books
Catholic Canon 73 books

Now FatBoy has to recognize the failure to see this and then has to argue with

Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox

Whose Canon are larger but consistent with the Catholic Canon and the Protocanonical…

All Fatboy has to offer for comparison for the book of Mormon is a guy with his face in a hat…

So do I accept that the Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant…all have copied the Bible wrong…

or do I go with the guy in the hat??

 

[twopekinguys]

Pork,

Forgive me.

I want to point out the defeciency in Fatboy’s apologetics…as you recall…apologist, says he?

I posted that the phrase does not exist in the 66 books of the Bible…and as of now no one has pointed out that this is the Protocanonicals…sorry for doing that…

So what FatBoy has to argue with is facts…

Dead Sea Scrolls confirm most of the Old Testament…

Protocanonicals…66 books
Catholic Canon 73 books

Now FatBoy has to recognize the failure to see this and then has to argue with

Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox

Whose Canon are larger but consistent with the Catholic Canon and the Protocanonical…

All Fatboy has to offer for comparison for the book of Mormon is a guy with his face in a hat…

So do I accept that the Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant…all have copied the Bible wrong…

or do I go with the guy in the hat??

Can I get back to you on this? LOL

 

[Porknpie]

Pork,

Forgive me.

I want to point out the defeciency in Fatboy’s apologetics…as you recall…apologist, says he?

I posted that the phrase does not exist in the 66 books of the Bible…and as of now no one has pointed out that this is the Protocanonicals…sorry for doing that…

So what FatBoy has to argue with is facts…

Dead Sea Scrolls confirm most of the Old Testament…

Protocanonicals…66 books
Catholic Canon 73 books

Now FatBoy has to recognize the failure to see this and then has to argue with

Oriental Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox

Whose Canon are larger but consistent with the Catholic Canon and the Protocanonical…

All Fatboy has to offer for comparison for the book of Mormon is a guy with his face in a hat…

So do I accept that the Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant…all have copied the Bible wrong…

or do I go with the guy in the hat??

Very strange theology.

Believing that this Catholic Church went into apostasy sometime, somewhere, somehow before 325 AD…based on…no recorded history, just the words of a man who sold snake oil, con’d people saying that he could find buried treasure using a rock and a hat, an adulterer multiple times over, a polygamist, etc.

So this Catholic Church that is in apostasy canonizes the 73 books in the bible in 397 AD…and the LDS use these 73 Catholic books less 7 that were removed by a printing company.

Then adds more books of their own by…JS…with more problems in them than stars in the heavens. All this occurs some 1800 years after the death of Christ and 1500 years after the latest date that the church went into apostasy (supposedly). So this is what Christ meant when he said he would be with his church until the end of time? Leave it in apostasy for 1,500 years?

Then, even with all these books, trying to understand what is “doctrine” is next to impossible…and then “doctrine” can change.

So in the end, Mormons “hope” that Joseph Smith was telling the truth. Yet scripture says in Galatians 1:8 (I added Moroni) :

8 But even if we or an angel (Moroni) from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!

Is Galatians 1:8 the inspired Word of God or not? Or is it just a suggestion?

With all this said…we have strayed from the thread topic. I’m still not clear if there remains confusion on this or not. I did vote for Romney today and pray that he does get elected and that he does not change his mind on abortion. I also had lunch today with a Mormon friend of mine…a wonderful person. Great lunch. He had a diet Coke and didn’t worry about it. Eventually, sometime in the future, I am going to talk to him more about this guy with his face in the hat.

 

[CopticChristian]

Very strange theology.

Believing that this Catholic Church went into apostasy sometime, somewhere, somehow before 325 AD…based on…no recorded history, just the words of a man who sold snake oil, con’d people saying that he could find buried treasure using a rock and a hat, an adulterer multiple times over, a polygamist, etc.

So this Catholic Church that is in apostasy canonizes the 73 books in the bible in 397 AD…and the LDS use these 73 Catholic books less 7 that were removed by a printing company.

Then adds more books of their own by…JS…with more problems in them than stars in the heavens. All this occurs some 1800 years after the death of Christ and 1500 years after the latest date that the church went into apostasy (supposedly). So this is what Christ meant when he said he would be with his church until the end of time? Leave it in apostasy for 1,500 years?

Then, even with all these books, trying to understand what is “doctrine” is next to impossible…and then “doctrine” can change.

So in the end, Mormons “hope” that Joseph Smith was telling the truth. Yet scripture says in Galatians 1:8 (I added Moroni) :

8 But even if we or an angel (Moroni) from heaven should preach [to you] a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!

Is Galatians 1:8 the inspired Word of God or not? Or is it just a suggestion?

With all this said…we have strayed from the thread topic. I’m still not clear if there remains confusion on this or not. I did vote for Romney today and pray that he does get elected and that he does not change his mind on abortion. I also had lunch today with a Mormon friend of mine…a wonderful person. Great lunch. He had a diet Coke and didn’t worry about it. Eventually, sometime in the future, I am going to talk to him more about this guy with his face in the hat.

Pork,

Romney did not win.

Paul was on to something…note…not written…preached…

The power of thought was clearly a power understood by Paul…look at what the power of thought and a hat has done for the world…makes you wonder does it not?