FlaviusHambonius

One more: Billy Boy, Beget means to Father or Sire. Quote 1 : to procreate as the father : SIRE Merrian-Wester online Sire means: Quote 1. to Father...3 : the male parent of an animal and especially of a domestic animal And as a transitive verb: Quote 1 : BEGET -- used especially of male domestic animals The natural course of this means to create an offspring. But taking the meaning of sire, in particular of large animal breeding, it absolutely does not have to mean sexual intercourse. You continue to confuse the results and the words around the result. Jesus was born of a virgin. She was a virgin. Try to keep that in mind. In the LDS belief system, God is the literal father of the body of Jesus Christ, just as any father on earth contributes to the creation of the physical body of their offspring. But, let me say it again lest I be accused of spinning, the LDS scriptures and leaders who have spoken directly on the issue of sexual intercourse, say Mary was still a Virgin after the natural contribution of genetic material happens. Maybe you could look up the word Virgin. Maybe that will help. Quote 2 a : an absolutely chaste young woman b : an unmarried girl or woman 3 capitalized : VIRGIN MARY 4 a : a person who has not had sexual intercourse Now, just for those in Rio Linda who may have trouble grasping the LDS teaching on the subject: Quote 15 And I said unto him: A virgin, most beautiful and fair above all other virgins. 1 Ne 11:15 18 And he said unto me: Behold, the virgin whom thou seest is the mother of the Son of God, after the manner of the flesh. 1 Ne 11:18 10 And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God. Alma 7:10 Some recent teachings: Quote "Under the direction of His Father, He created this world and many others. He came to this earth as the Son of God, the Eternal Father, and the mortal virgin Mary." Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin, Christians in Belief and Action, Ensign (CR), November 1996, p.70 "This power was inherently his by virtue of his being born of the virgin Mary (a mortal), and being the Son of God (an immortal, celestialized being)." President Marion G. Romney, The Resurrection of Jesus, Ensign (CR), May 1982, p.6 "It was he then who came to this earth, in the meridian of time, born of the virgin Mary. He was the literal Son of God the Father, "the Only Begotten Son." Elder Eldred G. Smith, Conference Report, April 1968, Afternoon Meeting, p.43 "What can we do if we cannot accept such irrefutable evidence? To me their testimonies mean but one thing, and that is that Jesus Christ who was born of the Virgin Mary..." Elder David O. Mckay, Conference Report, April 1926, Afternoon Session, p.38 I have no doubt that many members of the Church, including leaders at various times, have expressed beliefs which lend support to the idea God had sex with Mary. I am not concerned with their opinions any more than I am concerned about your opinion. The scriptures, which are the highest measure of doctrine in the LDS Church, state Mary was a virgin, both before and after her interaction with the Highest. And, for those who apparently don't want to understand the plain meaning of words, a Virgin is a person who has not had sexual intercourse. So though Christ was created in a natural way, that way according to LDS scripture, did not include sex. Once again, check Harold B. Lee. And what you call "back peddling" by Bruce R. McConkie can equally be spoken of as refining his expression to remove doubt about the meaning. I do not argue against God providing the material for Jesus' human body just as any father does. I do argue that loose or careless statements about how that was accomplished are trumped by the LDS scriptures. And those scriptures state Mary was a Virgin. Until and unless the Prophet, with a sustaining vote by all General Authorities and upon submission to the General Church membership of a revelation on the subject transpires, then the speculation around this subject is just distracting chatter, and is completely unimportant to the LDS presentation of who Jesus Christ is. It's always hard to convince people of things they know so much better than me. Especially when they are not true. As I always say, I am not spinning, I am sticking to LDS doctrine as taught in the LDS scriptures and endorsed by the 1st presidency and twelve apostles. No other opinions matter. Which includes apostates from the Church who never understood how to identify doctrine and separate it from opinion. Which I know includes several people on this board who have bragged about their ignorance of how to identify authoritative LDS doctrine and separate it from the opinions of even leaders of the Church. The real impact of such doctrinal ignorance is perfectly illustrated in the tenacious clinging to this doctrine in particular, despite clear statements by LDS scriptures and leaders, and even clarifying statements by previously cited sources, which if it were concerning a matter of something like an automotive repair would be beyond debate. But some folks just hate to get their hobbies crushed. So either produce official statements of the Church telling us Mary was not really a Virgin, or just admit you are fixated by the idea of God having sex with a human being, and it is that prurient interest or some other irrational drive which makes you unwilling to accept the official and stated position of the Church as authoritative. I honestly don't know what else to say, since the issue is so blatantly obvious and easy to identify as to what is the LDS position on the subject. Remember, the word Virgin when associated with Mary means she "knew no man", which is a euphemism for she had never had sexual relations. Such scriptural passages trump any opinion you may like to produce. And that is how you know it is the doctrine of the Church. Peace.

Here's another one by the same LDS Gentleman: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is such a weird topic. Harold B. Lee said it: We don't know how the conception was physically accomplished. But Br. Brigham is not saying it was a sexual act which produced Jesus. He is saying that Jesus' body was not made by mortal men. Jesus was not a mortal who became the son of god by a spiritual event, as was one of the early Christian heresies. In 1840 no one could have imagined in vitro fertilization, let alone in 1 AD. It was inconceivable, pun intended . Br. Brigham does not say there was sex, but rather that Jesus is the literal son of the Father. How that was accomplished, he does not say, and only the fact some want to think those Mormons believe it was through sex is it even discussed. Again, we have an absolute, explicit statement by Harold B. Lee who says it is inappropriate to say it was the result of sexual intercourse by which Jesus' body was created. Other than Orson Pratt there is no one else in an official position who explicitly taught it was sexual. But God can provide the chromosomes to make his own son in ways as unimaginable to us as in vitro fertilization would have been to a shepherd in Galilee 2000 years ago. I have provided you an explicit statement saying that is not what we believe, by a modern Apostle specifically talking about the subject of sexual intercourse between God and Mary being outside the doctrine of the LDS Church. Every statement by Jeremy or others requires us to read into their statements something not explicitly there. Fine. You think they meant God had sex with Mary, keep that point of view. But at least have the courtesy to acknowledge it is not the doctrine of the current LDS Church, it was just your interpretation of what their personal opinions seemed to say. I can't change your mind when you see sex because you absolutely want to see sex. It reminds me of the joke about the inkblot test. A doctor shows three ink blots to a guy, and every time the guy says it represents people engaging in sexual acts. The doctor asked him if he thought it unusual for a person to be as obsessed with sex as the man apparently was. The man replied: "Don't blame me, you're the one with all the dirty pictures." So see what you like in the statements. I prefer to stick with what they said, not what you conclude their statements must have meant.

I knew the question about sex with Mary would come up on this topic--so i thought I would provide a couple of snippets from a previous Born-Again-Christian Board I used to frequent, which no longer exists. These comments are from an LDS gentleman who I always admired his comments: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gerry, Shawn taught God had sex with Mary, and claimed it was LDS doctrine. It is not. In fact, I have written a brochure called, not surprisingly, "GOD DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH MARY". The only church leader who ever explicitly taught he did was Orson Pratt in his personal publication: "The Seer". He made many extraordinary, unofficial claims about LDS doctrines, and as a result he was nearly disfellowshipped. Moreover, his work was officially DENOUNCED by the LDS 1st Presidency and 12 Apostles, INCLUDING Orson Pratt. In their denunciation they stated they did not want to leave any chance that future readers may think Elder Pratt's statements were the doctrine of the Church. The most recent statement by an Apostle to clearly and explicitly address the issue of sexual relations was written by Elder Harold B. Lee, then an apostle. He wrote, speaking on behalf of the Church: Quote Teachers should not speculate on the manner of Christ's birth. We are very much concerned that some of our Church teachers seem to be obsessed of the idea of teaching doctrine which cannot be substantiated and making comments beyond what the Lord has actually said. You asked about the birth of the Savior. Never have I talked about sexual intercourse between Deity and the mother of the savior. If teachers were wise in speaking of this matter about which the Lord has said but very little, they would rest their discussion on this subject with merely the words which are recorded on this subject in Luke 1:34-35: "Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." Remember that the being who was brought about by [Mary's] conception was a divine personage. We need not question His method to accomplish His purposes. Perhaps we would do well to remember the words of Isaiah 55:8-9: "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Let the Lord rest His case with this declaration and wait until He sees fit to tell us more. (1/2/69) I am occasionally confronted by folks like Bill McKeever showing a Family Home Evening Manual from 1972 with a picture of two parents and a baby, and an explanation that Jesus' birth was similar. It also contains a quote from Joseph F. Smith describing Jesus' coming into the world as a natural event. Since the manual was published during the presidency of Harold B. Lee, I think you can safely assume that since these statements do not REQUIRE sexual relations to have occurred, and we have the above explicit statement by Elder Lee on how he feels about those who are guessing it was a sexual relationship, that he is simply having the manual affirm that Jesus had two parents and he was fully human. Remember, a family home evening manual was written for families with young children in mind, and is designed to teach the big principles and not be a replacement for the scriptures. Previous to this, James Talmage wrote in his book, "Jesus the Christ", that the conception of Jesus was "unprecedented" (page 77), and was done via a virgin. It goes without saying that sexual intercourse is hardly an unprecedented event at any time in human history, and the fact Elder Talmage notes it was a virgin conceiving further bolsters the explicit LDS teaching that it was not a sexual event, though the conception of Jesus was a natural occurrence, i.e., he had his origin from the normal genetic material of all humans, the same number of chromosomes, etc. How the genetic materials came into contact with each other is the mystery. So even though God begat Jesus, it did not require a sexual act. I hope this thoroughly explains my position. In a world where in vitro fertilization happens every day, I believe the Bible when it teaches "Behold, a virgin will conceive." God is greater, smarter and more capable than we are. To say he had sex with Mary is the equivalent of a Radio Shock Jock trying to get attention. It is not the doctrine of the LDS Church. As Elder Lee said, we would do well to stick to the revealed word on this subject. Peace

I wonder if perhaps there were certain traits in our intelligence in the pre-existence that determined our gender. If our Father in Heaven created us knowing what gender we would be, he surely knew that I was too weak and lacked the strength of becoming one of his precious daughters. If not for the unconditional love, strength and nurturing powers of our mothers, where would we be. Yes indeed, God was at the top of his game when he created the blessed and heavenly creature called woman. Yes, I am grateful for being created a man and feeling the love of a woman.

Thanks to you also Traveler, I have enjoyed reading your posts and your insights on many things, and have been reminded of how important covenants are, which I fall so short of the mark on, but realize I always have hope in the one who was sent.

What year were these quotes given in conference? Given the fact that Harold B. Lee served as President of the church from 1973-1974 and passing away in 1974 if memory serves me. Your taking his his quote "under penalty of racial or physical or nationalistic limitations"...... is somewhat akin to the speculations and opinions of some of the bretheren such as Bruce R. McConkie who had his own opinions about the blacks and the priestood issues which he later threw out the window with the houndog in 1978, while he was an apostle, seer and revelator. I suspect if Harold B. Lee would have lived a few more years he would have also thrown this out the window as being his speculation and his opinions----but that is just my opinion. If you insist on saying that this is doctrine because he said it in conference, your free to do so. As for me I believe the bretheren speak with the power of the spirit and we are to heed and confirm with our spirit---but until it is cannonized it is not doctrine, at least to me. You have to remember that this is a living church--not a dead one. These thought's of not being valiant enough, or being cursed with a certain skin color in a certain part of the world is all hogwash to me. I thought we as a church had gotten past these ideas, but apparently I'm wrong. Do you think that Thomas S. Monson would have the same opinion or view or inspiration as Harold B. Lee on this matter? I don't think so, as it appears James Faust has a slightly different take on the matter----Just my opinion-----ya gotta love those opinions.

everyone was told not to post this link.... ty I think your referring to this Moksha.

I'ts beyond me how anyone could condemn Emma for all of these years. Why would people do that? Is it because of her supposed unfaithfulness or lack of enduring to the end because she stayed behind while Brigham and the bulk of the saints left for the westward trek? To those people I would say get off of your self-rightous horses and please come back down to good old mother earth, simply for the fact that I seriously doubt that many of us could endure the hardships this woman went through. Unlike Mrs. Black I will not omit the issue of polygamy--whether you believe it was ordained of God or a man made doctrine of Joseph's--could you imagine having to deal with the fact that your husband is married to 33 other woman--that alone would turn you into an absolute mental case--and a heartbroken one at that. If the church reinstituted polygamy, how many of you stalwart women of the church, believing in modern revelation would jump into that can of worms? How many stalwart men of the church would embrace it? Not many people can say they walked in Emma's shoes, except perhaps some early Mormon Pioneer women, regarding hardship after hardship, plus a thing called polygamy. One last thing. I notice in the article that Mrs. Black brings up Joseph and Emma's sealing and the Patriarchal blessing from Joseph Sr. She seems to insinuate that Joseph and Emma will be together in the Kingdom. I know that this is probably just her perceptions and ideas or beliefs and I am fine with that--but what is the official church stance on that--given if she joined the reorganized church--then she is considered an apostate--correct? That would be breaking the sealing vow, would it not? If Joseph and Emma are reunited in the afterlife (and I beleive they will) it just goes to show that others who were not faithfull--still have hope in being reunited--correct? Or will it be as the church teachings suggest? Broken Temple vows = no exaltation.

I'm not sure about your statement that 'suicide is a declaration that you know better than God.....' What if one of the Japanese soldiers on Iwo Jima during WWII after getting flamed by an American soldier with a flamethrower and comes walking out of his cave burned beyond recognition and on fire and falls to the ground but is still alive. Does the American soldier let the Japanese soldier suffer an excruciating death or does he leave him there thinking he might survive or does he give him assisted suicide and shoot him in the head......I'm sure the Japanese soldier would prefer the latter and I'm sure declaring he knows more than God would be the last thing on his mind. I respect you PS for not condemning anyone, I also can't imagine what some folks face in their lives. One more thought, what if a Father rescues 2 of his 3 kids--he gets them to safety and by that time the home is totally engulfed--the fire dept. is still not there----does he go into the home and try and rescue his last child even though he walks into certain death along with the last child? Some would call that a suicide mission and the other two children would be Fatherless or would it be more 'Blessed is he that gives his life for another'?

I think 'great duress' as you call it can make us do things that we never would think we were capable of. For instance, the jumpers at the WTC on 9/11. While they were grasping at the edges of the building where a window once was, trying to gasp for any kind of air that they could get--What would have been the thing to say? Allright everyone, let's take a step back and take a deep breath and think about this for a minute (try not to mind the toxic black fumes and the wall of flames rapidly approaching your backside) because our afterlife depends on such reflection. Either we burn here alive or we burn in hell or if it was a LDS group, we will only make it to the Telestial Kingdom because of our choice to commit suicide. The 'Falling Man' who pictures were famous when he jumped from the WTC, was the son of a minister and he himself had recently became one or was aspiring to become one, my memory fails me. His occupation was setting up the PA system's at 'The World View' resteraunt at the top of the WTC. I'm sure this young man had high ethics and high morals and I'm sure that his family and loved ones were going through his head, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this young man probably said a prayer to his God before he jumped out of that building that day. My point is that we as human beings or children of God don't really know how we would react in a situation as extreme as that, we tend to only think on gut reaction as circumstances present themselves. I rely on a Judge who judges with mercy and judges on circumstances and events, I also hope for his tender mercies. Anyone who has an extra hour on their hands can YouTube 'The Falling Man' it may or may not give you a different perspective.

In my opinion 'The Passion' gives one a glimpse of the incomprehensible suffering that the Saviour went through for his fallen children such as ourselves. That he suffered physically, mentally and spiritually to such a degree that no man knoweth except his Father. I will say that the movie depicts the physical suffering more than I could have imagined. With a whip of many thongs laced with metal edges and bone fragments, the scourging scene was unnerving and unbearable but at the same time powerful if you believe this is what actually happened, and you have never seen a movie that has portrayed it like this. Scourging alone took the lives of many, freeing them from the horrors of crucifixtion. The movie pretty much depicted what I have always thought in my mind more realistically what took place during 'The Passion' My advice would be if you want to sit around as a family--watch 'Greatest Story Ever Told' or something of that caliber....if you want to watch something that's gut wrenching and powerful and drives home like a sledghammer what was pretty accurate historically as far as the brutality.....then watch 'The Passion' Kudos to Mel Gibson.

There are no time limitations when it comes to music as you have demonstrated by mentioning one of the most recorded songs in history by numerous artists. And to think that McCartney originally was going to call it 'scrambled eggs' thank goodness that he didn't, because I just couldn't bear you saying--'That is so scrambled eggs'.

It would definitly have to be John Winston Lennon and James Paul McCartney. Two of the greatest songwriters of all time. I'm sure that Lennon would be ribbing McCartney to no end about his aquired title of 'Sir' especially after all the things they had been through.

I was in a used book store the other day picking up some books and one of the workers there brought to my attention a new book about the recently discovered photo of Joseph (the second photo)The book has many illustrations and pictures and pleads it case that the photo is Joseph. It brings out the supposed evidence as to why this is the case. I had read the article regarding this photo in the newspaper a few months ago and didn't give it much creedence as I have always thought that the first photo kind of fell in line with the more traditional depictings of Joseph Smith through portraits etc. But the emplyee said after reading this book that he is thouroughly convinced that that the second photo is indeed Joseph. I guess the book compares the death mask with the bone structure of the photo and then comparisons with his offspring, and also some other info and some church history thrown in. I asked him two or three times if he truly was convinced and each time he assured me of his conviction. I was going to call the bookstore and ask him the title since I could not remember, but they close at 5:00 p.m. on Sat. The book is thin but the body is about twice the size of a regular hardback and full of nice photos and illustrations ( that should be enough to identify it, right?) Anyway I thought about buying it but I had already made a couple of purchaces and it was about 40 smackers-- and I thought hey, that might be enough to buy a half a tank of gas and a can of Albacore Tuna Fish (on a good day) so I went with the latter. Maybe next payday--until then I will see if I can get more info on the book. On the wall the store even had a big portrait that was painted from the photo (I'll bet you never see that one at Deseret Book ) HB

Thanks Vort, very interesting. I also have the book 'Carthage Conspiracy' and pulled it off the rack and dusted it off, and will start reading. I have commited myself to start reading all these books that I have had shelved for years. My fear is I will be reading so much, that perhaps I may start a dustbowl equivilent to a scene from 'The grapes of Wrath' HB

Well I went out and bought Rough Stone Rolling a few days ago and have barely started to read it. I can't wait to get into the meat. I heard about it about a year ago and hearing about it on some of these threads has really piqued my interest. I went to a used book store today and bought Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith. I remember my Mom back in the mid-late 70's reading it and making the comment that her heart went out to her because of all the trying times that she had-- so I really want to dig into that one also. Deseret Book was all out of 'In Sacred Lonliness' by Todd Compton and Seagull doesn't carry it anymore, so I'll have to order it. They were sold out of 'Massacre at Mountain Meadows' but were getting some in soon. I have Mountain Meadow Massacre by Juanita Brooks that I need to read again-- it has been years. And while at the used book store I bought a copy of Fawn Brodies 'No Man knows my History' I know I have heard the comments and some reviews about her supposed bias's against Joseph Smith and that she was on the her way out of the church etc. but I will still give it a read. I don't know whether to read them in chronological order such as Brodie and then see how Rough Stone Rolling has evolved or just save it (Brodie) and read it last--maybe for a weekend matinee reading:confused: Another one that I started years ago and never finished was'Fate of The Persecutors of The Prophet Joseph Smith'--any opinions on that one? And last but not least as a sidenote, while I was in the used book store, the guy who worked there who seemed to be a faithful member of the church pointed out a new book about the fairly recent supposed picture of Joseph Smith. It's a bigger book with illustrations and nice pictures and he said it also contains a little church history to boot, but focuses on the death mask and how all the bone structure of Joseph's face seem to line up with the picture etc. he seems convinced that it is indeed the picture of Joseph. I can't remember the name of the book and didn't write it down, I told him I might come back and buy it. I know it doesn't matter what he looked like, but I think it sounds interesting--after all if you look at some of the illustrations and portrayal's of Joseph, especially the earliest ones they look somewhat similiar in the face, but as the years have gone by, and especially the most recent ones, they make him out to be this strikingly handsome man who's face has evolved quite a bit--I know it's just the artist's conseption--but still a litle eerie. Anyway I have a lot of reading to do to catch up with some on the board here. Many Thanks to Elphaba and HiJolly and others for their comments on the books and history. HB

I have heard it said that Christ and Joseph Smith were the 'progressives' of their day. They both had some pretty radical teachings to say the least.

Yes indeed, 'Doe' was the name and 'Hail Bop' was the train---that was taking them to another dimension. I would have much rather stayed in sunny San Diego where they were from and enjoyed the weather than catch a first class ticket on a cosmic ride.

About 20 years ago I was studying bits and pieces about the Mark of the Beast and that you would of course have to have the mark of course to be able to function in society--that you would have to have an implant of a chip the size of a grain of rice into most likely your wrist--it would have all the information needed to transact purchaces from your account to the item being purchaced whether it be groceries, gas etc. It would have all the information about your medical history, your religious background and on and on. Basically everything about your life would be on that chip. You would basically have to have this chip to function in your daily lives--several years ago they developed fiber optic the size or slightly bigger than a hair strand that could be implanted. They supposedly have a giant super computer in Denmark if I remember right called 'The Beast' that has everyone's status in the world who work for an income-- SSN etc programed in it. The Bar Code was suspect I remember because it had the 666 in the code and was kind of a pre-cursor to the scanning method for the chip that would come at a later date. Of course animals have had implants for several years now. It all tied into the 'New World Order'--One World economy, Religion, Military etc. I remember hearing as a kid that the 666 added up to the numbers on the Popes headress. I'm sure that there are some far fetched idead what the mark of the beast is, who is the anti-christ etc. Here is a link to a guy named Steve Wohlberg, an evangelical that goes totally against the grain of who I would call evangelicals. He pretty much de-bunks the Jerry Jenkins and Tim LaHaye 'Left Behind' series ie 'The Rapture'--The Tribulation--The Anti-Christ. I only listened to 'The Rapture' and found it pretty much going along the lines of LDS mindset if memory seves me about the events of the second coming. He does believe the anti-christ period was over around the time of Nero--again if memory serves--give it a listen if you have a few minutes. Just click on 'End Time Delusions'---then click 'Rapture Delusions' Video On Demand - White Horse Media

Yes, that was on my list and I forgot to put it down, i.e. that the LDS faith do of course believe in additional scripture to the Bible.

'The Godhead' vs. 'The Trinity' is a biggie in the departure from 'historic orthodox' teachings. That the Father is a 'Exalted Being' possessing a spirit and having a tangible body of bone and substance rather than spirit alone. That Christ is a seperate 'Exalted Being' seperate from the Father. That Joseph Smith had a heavenly vision of two seperate beings. That man may become Exalted is up there on the list as well as 'sealings' for time and eternity in The Temple. Baptisms for the dead. Three different degrees of glory or heavens as oppossed just heaven or hell. These are perhaps, some of the reasons why the world deem the 'Mormons' to be 'cultish'. It can be a frustrating journey seeking ones spirituality but also can be joyful and rewarding. Seek and let the chips fall where they may for you as an individual would be my advice.

What a dark and desolate world, the world of prostitution and pornograpy is and has been since the beggining. Yes we have porno stars such as Jenna Jamison who has made millions and millions off of the several billions that go into the porn industry. It's an industry that just keeps getting bigger and bigger and more lucrative every day with no end in sight. We have thousands of mostly young girls from all walks of life and from various nations who have been caught up in the sex-slave trade who were told they were coming to different countries to better themselves with jobs and the hope of a better future just to be snared in a web of deceit and either put into brothels as sex slaves or to be bought off like cattle by some men at the end of the line. Then we have the young runaways coming from broken homes, who find themselves on the streets prostituting there bodies in order to eat and have some kind of shelter. Many of them become addicted to drugs in order to cope and then the desire for the drugs become bigger than the desire to eat and have shelter in many instances. And then of course we have the high society hookers who make six figures annually. Of course this is just breaking the surface of the industry and I'm not stating anything here that most of you are not aware of. Several years ago I met a girl while out with some freinds. We talked and exchanged numbers. A few days went by and she called me and we conversed a while. As time went on she began to tell me her lifes story. Her Mother, who suffered from schizophrenia and who was homeless, walking the streets, was raped one night and that is how my freind came into this world. The rapist was never caught. Shortly after my freind was born, she was sent into the home of her half-brother and half sister to be raised. She lived there until she was six or seven until the Father of her brother and sister wanted no part of her anymore, because she wasn't his blood daughter, thus sending her off to a foster home. She lived under the roof of a woman who showed no love or compassion towards her whatsoever and was forced to stay outside all day only to let her in at lunchtime for perhaps a sandwitch if she was lucky, then it was back outside so this foster mother could watch TV undisterbed untill Dad came home. Of course the foster Mother hid very well the fact of what was going on and played stupid. My freind told me if it were not for the love of her foster Dad she would have never made it. She loved him very much and always considered him her Dad until the day he died in about 2003. Her foster mother passed away in the early 80's according to my recollection, and needless to say, she didn't shed one tear--she had only distain for that woman. She ran away at 14 years of age with a girlfreind for many months, had a sugardaddy who took care of her and her freind, then made there way back home. After awhile she ran away again, this time when she was 15 to get married to her boyfreind who was 16. They settled in Las Vegas. Her husband was working as a cook on a graveyard shift and as she was walking to meet him at work early one morning, a man grabbed her and drug her to a remote area and raped her. Not long after this the marriage dissolved, she hit the road again with her girlfreind, this time traveling to the Northeast for awhile then living in Florida for about four years. Again, she had a Sugardaddy that took care of her during the time in Florida. Then she ventured off to the LA area for a brief time and while there was involved in prostitution for a short time--as you can see a pretty messed up life to this point. During this time her sister got discharged from the Air Force in Texas and moved to Utah. Shortly after my freind moved to Utah to be with her sister and her life slowly changed for the better--she met a good guy and got married for almost eight years, then sadly divorced. She then pursued college and got her degree and a few years later moved to San Diego where she is doing well. She always had a strong belief in Christ over the years during all of this disfunction. She started to go to church a few years ago, she's a non-denominational Christian and even went to the Holy Land on a tour a few years back and was baptized in the Jordan River, and loved her time spent over there. I have talked about the LDS faith with her over the years and some things make sense to her while others don't--she has a problem accepting the Joseph Smith story. I guess the reason I posted this is because we simply do not know or have walked in someone else's shoes. We all have different circumstances and events that occur in our lives to shape this journey we call life. To simply call a person 'A Whore' while being ignorant of ones life story is well, just that....ignorance. We are all children of the most high and blessed because of he who was sent. HB

here's a couple along the same vein: mormonfortress.com gapages.com byubroadcasting.org fortress and gapages have many links to other pro-mormon-sites:thumbsup:

I was reading through this thread last night and a couple of things struck me if I can remember them without having to backtrack. Feel free to correct me, for I know so very little about Masonry. I have watched the episodes on 'The History Channel' about Masonry and if I recall the show explained Freemasonry to be a breakoff of Masonry and which became much more of a secret society than Masonry--almost a corrupt version of Masonry or something to that effect. Then the Knights Templars and the crusades enter the picture and the famous trickery of the Pope and subsequent execution of most all of the Knights Templars on Friday the 13th (don't recall the year) And of course the Illuminati is in there in the mix with Freemasonry if I remember right. Someone mentioned that Joseph Smith was a 3rd degree Mason. From the reading I did many moons ago and from what I recall an uncle telling me in the late 80's that JS was a 33rd degree Mason, the highest degree, and not only that he attained that virtually overnight (exageration) that it takes years to aquire such a distinction. Also if I remember correctly during the expansion of Nauvoo and after it had been turned into the beautiful shining city from the previous mosquito infested swamp that it was beforehand, that the Brethren started attending the Masonic Lodges there with some of the locals. Eventually they started to build several more Lodges and the next thing you know the city of Nauvoo has more Lodges and Masons than the whole rest of the state of Illinois combined if memory serves me--which it probably doesn't--but am I in the Ballpark? So again, if I remember correctly during this time Joseph is getting some of the Temple Ceremony assimilated to which the local Masons of Nauvoo (non-Mormon Masons) get a whiff of whats going down regarding Joseph supposedly ripping off some of the Masonic ritual and implementing it into the Mormon Temple Ceremony--thus royally PO the local non-Mormon Masons and putting another nail in the coffin as far as justifying in their minds as to why these Mormons must go--among other reasons. I could be way off on all of this-- like I say it was quite awhile back. One other thing, as far as I have known you cannot be a Mormon and a Mason--again, I was told that back in the late 80's--don't know if that holds water or not--and I dont know if that was a Mason or LDS decision. And lastly, there was someone mentioning that the Temple Ceremony was online, and I thought that was a little odd to mention. I can imagine non-members checking something like that--but I would hope no LDS member who has never been to the Temple (like myself) would ever stick their nose into something that sacred at the whim of a mouse button...If I ever go I will find out at that day. HB

I'ts kind of like having a hot cup of Folgers de-caf on a chilly morning or a chilly bottle of O'Douls on a hot summer's day. Or like slick Willy used to say 'I didn't inhale'