LionHeart

Make up your mind. First you say that you believe in the bible then you say it is mythology. Which is it going to be? It can't be both true and false. And I don't think Ray was saying that Mary was literaly white. And you accuse me of being foolish. Just because the caucasion race is also called 'the whites' doesn't make us a clan of freaky albinoes. And for the last time, NOT BLACK. DARK. Do you not know how to read? Or perhaps you just thought you already knew how to read during reading class in grade school; calling the teacher an absurd idiot. No matter how hard I try to exclude the whole racist issue from this discussion, you always seem to drag it back in. It causes me to wonder what your obsession is with racism. You know, when someone takes such a strong stand against a certain wrong principle, it often means that they are guilty of that very thing. They strongly oppose it so as to appear not to be guilty of it. They might also accuse some one else of it in an attempt to convince theirself that they are not alone in thier sin. After all, misery loves company. So how about it Holmes? Why don't you fess up? I think you are racist in the extreme. Burn any crosses out in some black guy's yard lately? I suppose no one would have suspected you due to your pointy, white hood.

I believe we had no choice but to declare war. Saddam was suspected of posessing weapons of mass destruction. He was not co-operating with the inspectors which only strengthened our suspicions of him having the weapons. Iraq is a big place. Just because we didn't find anything in any of the facilities, doesn't rule out the possibility of weapons being buried out in the desert somewhere. Although, it apparently turned out that he didn't have any, we can ask ourselves: "What if he did?" What if he did have a nuclear bomb and he used it on New York? We just didn't know, and Saddam's un-co-operative actions only raised the suspicions higher. In my opinion, we couldn't afford the risk. On the one side, we have a few hundred thousand people in Iraq. Only a small fraction of them were killed in the war. On the other hand, if Saddam would have nuked New York, millions would have died; and not just from the original blast, but also from the nuclear fallout. So again, with the information we had, I don't think we could afford the risk of not taking action. If Saddam didn't want to get wasted, he should have co-operated.

Yes, the book of genesis is a little vague on exactly what that "mark" is. However it says in the Book of Jasher that Cain's son and grandson were out hunting, and they saw Cain off in the distance, and thinking he was a beast, they shot him with an arrow and he died. If Cain appeared to be a beast, one might conclude that he had dark skin.

Actually, on the contrary, I have presented much obvious evidence. If you can't see that, it's not my responsibility. I don't know what's the matter with you. I mean, if my eyes were broken I would go get them fixed. But I can't make someone else go and fix their eyes.

All sarcasm laid aside, let's not lose sight of what this debate is about. It is about whether Jesus was caucasion or arabic. I have presented my biblical evidence, and you have presented your scientific evidence. With both viewpoints out in the open, everyone can choose which one they want to believe. The whole racial issue is beside the point and has no place in this discussion. But I will make myself clear on one point which I appear to have been mis-understood on. I mentioned that Cain was cursed and had his skin turned dark. Did he pass the dark skin onto his offspring? Obviously. Did he pass the condemnation onto his offspring? No. I do not believe that God punishes anyone for the sins of their fathers. Let that suffice.

I knew you would eventually come to terms with it. Perhaps there is a light shining after all. I must say, I'm glad you've learned something from all of this.

I'm sorry to hear that marsha. I would like to offer my condolences. Be strong, and God bless.

Actually I admit, I haven't read the whole bible yet. I read as far as proverbs and then I have read the first four books in the new testament. And you are right about the bible not saying anything about the Jews being white. One must use the process of elimination to come to that conclusion. If they are not dark then they must be light. See what I am getting at? You are also right about the bible not saying that the Canaanites were black. I never said they were black either. It does say that Cain was cursed, yes, CURSED. Does it make me racist to quote the bible? The bible also says that Noah CURSED Canaan. There's that word again. These darn racists who wrote the bible. They should've known better. Now, since we know that Canaan's seed settled Syria and Egypt and roudabout, and that those people were dark complected, (not black. I admit I don't know how the blacks originated) it is logical to assume that somewhere along the line, someone, somewhere was turned dark. Wouldn't it be most logical to assume that it happened when the cursings took place? Especially since books like the Book of Jasher say that this is when it happened? And yes, I have read the Book of Jasher. So you see, it's not so silly after all. Quite logical actually. As for me being racist, I would say no more so than Joseph Smith was. I beleive that all men should be treated equally. I have also known a few black people. These ones that I knew were quite respectable in my opinion. These remarks of yours about me being being racist seem to be no more than attacks on my personality because you know I'm right and you refuse to admit it. So you then resort to foul play.

Could you elaborate on this further? If he comes a second time, would that not be a second coming? Or are you taking into consideration the times he came to Joseph Smith and others? Also, what do you mean by "the conditions are right?"

According to the book of revelation, the second coming will be after the calamities that come with the opening of the seventh seal. In the D&C, Joseph Smith say's that the seven seals represent the seven thousand years that make up the life of the Earth. Also in the D&C, Joseph Smith say's that the Saviour's first coming was in the meridian of time; or during the fourth millenium. I did some research on bilical chronology and found many conclusions as to how old the Earth really is acording to the bible; all ranging within 3500 years. But the only one I could find that placed Jesus's birth in the fourth millenium, places the calendar year of 2006 in the 5963 year of the world. This means that in the calendar year of 2043, the seventh seal will be opened; according to this figure. Now if the time periods given in the book of revelation are to be taken literally, that would place the Saviour's second coming around the calendar year of 2050; give or take.

So, despite your earlier protestations, your views are racist. Thank goodness most Mormons have left that kind of thinking on the trash heap. So you admit that you believe that every one who believes in the bible is racist. I see no flaws in the account that I gave. It is according to the bible.

Okay, so this blonde is walking with a friend along the beach. The blonde hears a seagull squawk above her, and out of instinct she looks up. Just as she does so, the seagull lums a trum right in her eye. Her friend says "that's digusting. I'll go get some toilet paper." To which, the blonde replies "Don't worry about it. That bird's probably long gone by now."

Here's one that's kind of on the other side of the circumstance: (I really admire this guy) A man, from a mid-sized town, was at home spending a lovely evening with his wife and children. This man didn't own any guns; he didn't want his children to be in any danger. So they were at home, and three perpetrators came barging into the house with guns. They held the whole family at gun point while they duct taped their hands and feet. They then proceeded to rummage around the house in search of anything of value. While this was going on, one of the perpetrators came back to the room where the family was taped up and drug the man's wife into the next room. Upon hearing her scream, the man had an adrenaline rush and tore the duct tape. He then went into the next room, took away the perpetrators gun, and killed him with it. After this, he went around the house, hunting the other two, and upon finding them, he killed them as well. The authorities didn't even attempt to press any charges because this man didn't even own any guns. The perpetrators brought their own demise with them. Any charges would have been dropped immediately. This incident did, however, cause the crime rate in that town to drop by 50%

I could be wrong about this but it sounds to me like this cell group leader's opinion means alot to you; and that it's the opinions of other people that caused you to feel the way you did. I'm not going to advise you to join any particular Church, but I will advise that when you do, make sure it's not because of other people's opinions, but because it's where you are guided to by the holy spirit. The Lord prizes someone who is willing to sacrifice their good name among men in order to serve him.

Okay, you've given us the scientific viewpoint, but remember, science also claims that humans evolved from monkeys. This, in my opinion is absurd. So let's refer to the biblical account: In the beginning, God created man in his own image. So then Adam has children. Two of them are Cain, and Abel. Cain kills Abel and gets his skin turned dark as a punishment. Okay, for one thing, how could his skin be turned dark if it was not light to begin with? For another thing, where did the whites come from? God cursed someone and made him white? I think not. Now, to continue, Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Ham was married to a descendant of Cain. Ham had a son named Canaan; the father of all of the Canaanites. Canaan saw Noah naked so as a result, Noah cursed him saying his seed would be a despised people; and as a result of his preisthood authority, the curse stuck. Hence the instructions from the Lord to Abraham not to allow his children to mix with the Canaanites. (Although this was not always followed, however, anyone who violated this was usually cut off) So, the seed of Shem, the "Semites" and later called the "Israelites" eventually settled in the land of Israel. The seed of Ham, or the "Canaanites" settled in the lands of Egypt and Arabia and such. The seed of Japheth or the "Gentiles" settled in the European isles. During the perilous time of Israel, a group of the tribe of Ephraim broke off from Israel and went north among the Gentiles. This is what justifies Joesph Smith in claiming to be descended from Ephraim. In summary: Since we have three basic groups of people, the Semites, the Canaanites, and the Gentiles, and we have an account of only one of these groups getting their skin turned dark, it is reasonable to conclude that the other two were white. Especially since the Gentiles are the only ones who did not mingle with the Canaanites because they settled so far away, these would be the most accurate example of man in his original form. Since we have a modern historical account of the Israelites mixing with the Canaanites, it is only obvious that they would resemble the Canaanites; especially since the historical account also says that most of the inhabitants of jerusalem were slaghtered. Another account I read (not a biblical account) was of someone who was foreign to the land of israel who had traveled there to see Jesus. After his visit, he described Jesus as being "The Handsomest Man In The World" also pointing out that he had the "Bluest Eyes He Had Ever Seen" You don't see Canaanite descendants with blue eyes. Also, if Jesus had Canaanite blood in him, why did he refuse to heal the Canaanite woman's child; saying the food of his table was not fit to give to the dogs? Much evidence here, I would say. For one to say that I'm racist because of this, would mean that they brand every believer in the bible a racist. This account holds as much water as yours does as you said yourself " The proto-typical Hebrew was LIKELY dark." My version is based on the bible, yours is based on scientific assumption. So you can stand by your scientific version if you want; but in doing so, you will also be admitting that you are descended from a long line of monkeys.

What makes you so sure that he wasn't? If it's just the fact that Arabic people occupy Jerusalem today, you're being a little presumptuous, wouldn't you say? Like I mentioned before, Jerusalem was conquered by the Turks; an Arabic empire. Whatever Jews were spared, were mixed in with the new occupiers. But you say; "Wait, what did the people look like before the Turks got there?" Well, if you knew your bible, you wouldn't wonder about this. And FYI, I hold no racial malice against any race. Saying someone of importance was caucasion does not make someone racist. I just happen to know my history concerning this matter. But again, one would have to assume the bible is correct for my story to be true. So the question becomes "What do you get when you mix a presumptuous Know-It-All with a cocky response?" The One, The only, "SNOW DON VON LICHTENSTIEN" :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

That is amazing. I never thought of it that way. I always believed that the Lord operated on successful principles but I never imagined selflessness as being one of the highest ones. It is quite interesting to compare success in business with success in life and the fact that if the right principles are applied, it will lead to success in both.

You neednt believe in the Bible to understand that the Jews in Israel date back thousands of years and are near or middle eastern in their origen. DNA evidence is available on the matter. http://foundationstone.com.au/HtmlSupport/...icGenetics.html Are you aware of any credible evidence (I already know the answer to this) that Jews are European in origen? Not European, just resembled "White Europeans." And no, you don't need to believe in the bible to know that the Jews date back thousands of years, however you do need to believe in the bible to understand the origins of the Jews, the Gentiles, and the Canaanites.

Okay, here's another one: Some guy visits his summer home every year except every time he arrives, he finds the place vandalized, broken into, and robbed clean. Finally he became fed up with it, so he rigged a shot gun on the front door to cap anyone who broke in. A couple of months later, he is being sued by some guy who is missing an arm. In everyones opinion, does the man who owns the house deserve to go to prison?

Joseph Smith copied the characters onto a paper and then gave it to Martin Harris to show to professor Anthon.

I, however, disagree with this statement. I do believe that Jesus did look like a white European. The true blood jews are of the caucasian race. People assume that Jesus was of the Arabic race because that is who occupies Jerusalem and Israel today, however, Jerusalem and Israel were conquered by the Turkish nation during the dark ages. This was the purpose for the European crusades; to re-take the holy land. The Europeans from the first crusade conquered Jerusalem and massacred the inhabitants. It was later conquered by the turks again. It changed hands several times until the '60s when it was established as a safe haven for persecuted jews. By this time however, the jewish people had mixed with the Arabic people so much that they were basically all of the Arabic ethnicity. That's an interesting idea. Completely untrue but interesting. You know, you don't have to guess at this stuff - you can look it up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew Actually, I did look it up. This wikipedia article appears to talk about Jews as a religion, however, I'm referring to the jews that actually live in jerusalem. This is more understandable if one knows about the origins of the jews, the gentiles, and the canaanites. This, however, requires a belief in the bible. Just on another note: There was an old woman who lived in a shoe. She had so many children she didn't know what to do. (I love fairy tales too.) Nobody requires anyone to believe this stuff. Some of us choose to keep an open mind however.

Actually, no one was allowed to see the plates until the time that the Lord appointed. Only then, were the first three witnesses allowed to see them; who were showed them by an angel. And then later, the eight witnesses were showed them by Joseph Smith. Another inaccuracy about the painting is that in reality, there was a curtain dividing the room; Joseph Smith on one side and the scribe on the other. Emma Smith was his first scribe, who was later replaced by Martin Harrris, who was also later replaced by Oliver Cowdery. Sometimes, when Oliver Cowdery couldn't be present, David Whitmer filled in for him. So the painting is literally inaccurate. Not to say it is not a lovely painting though. Like I mentioned before, the true scene probably would have been less appealing. The painting would give the wrong impression to someone who didn't know the facts about the incident.

So this dude is in his car with his wife and kids and a semi pulles up behind him. He then begins to have a cranial-rectal association and decides that he can get a new car and some money by committing insurance fraud. He then proceeds to slam on his brakes and gets rear ended by the semi. However, he didn't anticipate the laws of physics concerning extremely large and heavy objects combined with high velocity. Tragically, some of his family were killed. Things were going quite well for him getting a settlement, but eventually, his conscience caught up with him over losing his family members and he fessed up. What a high price to pay for a little greed and dishonesty. I can't imagine anyone putting their family in harms way to satisfy their own selfishness. This goes without mentioning the hardships inflicted on the truck driver.

Here is another attribute of God: God will make the best out of every situation. Although sometimes our actions may change what the "best" is for us, He will see to it that we get the best possible, considering our situation.

I agree with unorthodox. It is a lovely picture, however it is historically inaccurate; either because the artist was not up to speed with his/her history, or he/she had a great desire to paint such a picture, however the image of Joseph Smith with his face in a hat was not particularly appealing. I, however, disagree with this statement. I do believe that Jesus did look like a white European. The true blood jews are of the caucasian race. People assume that Jesus was of the Arabic race because that is who occupies Jerusalem and Israel today, however, Jerusalem and Israel were conquered by the Turkish nation during the dark ages. This was the purpose for the European crusades; to re-take the holy land. The Europeans from the first crusade conquered Jerusalem and massacred the inhabitants. It was later conquered by the turks again. It changed hands several times until the '60s when it was established as a safe haven for persecuted jews. By this time however, the jewish people had mixed with the Arabic people so much that they were basically all of the Arabic ethnicity. Just on another note; and a little off topic but very interesting, there is speculation that Jesus spent his unaccounted years in Euorope; and that he actually raised a family, and built a church house there. I have heard that there is an old church house in Glastonbury England which, when asked about it, the locals say "it is the church that Jesus built." So if you are of English descent, it is slightly possible that you are descended from Jesus.