serapha

.Agreed, who wants to post when they are "threatened" ... all I did was confront a moderator to be placed on moderator status, then the moderator says, "I didn't do it!" okay. Who wants to post when they are "threatened" and not lied to. ~serapha~

Jenda... your posting is "brinking"... because if I reply publicly that I have a message in my file that says differently, I am in violation of the rules. I'm sending you a private message and then tell me if you aren't the same Jenda that sent me that message as moderator of this forum. ~serapha~

Well, snow, you can rejoice, and you can post in peace at Christian forums...I've been banned for who knows how long by the courtesy of Catholic moderators who "brinked" me.... you see... a member posted to me that the moderators had been "warned" and would be looking for my postings... And I did post this to laurel tree a few weeks ago... there are problems at Christian forums with the deceptive nature of the moderator postions. I sent an apology to Laureltree for having defended Christianforums as "Christian" when I found out that CF did, in fact, encourage their moderators to have two accounts... one for the public image of "our moderators are good Christians" and one account for the heated debate forums... and then... there's no controlling the alternate accounts. The rules don't seem to apply to the alternate accounts. Christianforums does support deceit when it involves their moderators. The biggest problem at Christianforums now... is their continued refusal to tell people who apply for moderator positions why their application is refused.... in the meantime... my favorite moderator posts venemous postings against all denominations except his own... with a particular phrase that truly exemplies his personality... <I'm quoting here, this is not ~serapha says~> "blowing it up the butt" That's acceptable for moderators who are setting the example for others while good, exemplary Christians are turned away from being moderators without explanation. I do like Christianforums, but not for the moderation... for it is lacking in consistent application of the rules.... but for the opportunities in outreach ministries there... seeing people saved on a regular basis. People are saved there in spite of the poor moderation. God doesn't need good moderators to reach lost souls... ~serapha~

Snow... None of the passages you quoted applied to Christians.... There are no examples in the Bible where God tells a believer to "lie" ... no where... so when one choses to lie, it is their choice to lie... No other reason. That would include the sin of omission... when one intentionally avoids answering questions because it would cause them to make false statements..... therefore, they remain silent... but the intent of the heart has already committed the sin even though the words are never spoken. ~serapha~

Serapha, you imply that "all the moderators" go over to CF and lie. Please tell me who "all the moderators" are that go over to CF and lie. And please don't lie in the process.Thanks. Jenda, Read the posting... "imply" would be the word you used.... re-read the posting and read it in the literal sense without putting thoughts and emotions into the picture. I asked this question... I didn't specify any particular forum or any particular moderator.... if you conscience is guilty ... well, don't put words in my mouth... okay? ~serapha~

Oh, it's okay.... I keep asking him if he is a mormon or not, and he keeps avoiding the question... and I keep telling him that he is living a lie and he tells me to stop calling him a liar.. There... I think that settles it... Snow is publicly denouncing membership in the CoJCoLDS's by his insistence that I not call him a liar when I ask him if he is a mormon. and I've agreed to stop telling him that he is living a lie... I won't call him a liar anymore... but a convert to mainstream Christianity. Do all the moderators on this site lie when they go to other forums? just curious... ~serapha~

Gee... I didn't want to point the finger... but I just want to know if you support LDS's who live a lie simply because they are your fellow "saints"???? So.... is it okay to live a lie or not? Is a "lie" ever justified? ~serapha~

Hi there! Well, I was looking for responses in relation to theology... rather than reference to viagra and passing gas. ~serapha~

Gee.. I would reply to Jenda's posting but she would probably put me on moderator status as she did the last time I confronted her on a posting... using her position of power to control the response of people she doesn't like. We been there before, Jenda... The difference between me and snow is that I am not lying about anything when I post here. ~serapha~

Hi there! Is there ever a time when you felt that it was necessary and justified to "lie?" You know... maybe just a small white lie, like holding back on the truth... not really making the statement but not correcting it either. Sometimes, this is called the "sin of omission"... any guilt parties here? ~serapha~

Hi Nina, Trolling is when someone goes to a forum simply to disrupt the harmony there. If you want to see Snow in action go to .... http://www.christianforums.com/f130 and you may see his profession of faith.. a denial of mormonism.... ~serapha~

Hi Snow... I guess you hate it so much so... that you created an account posing as a Christian (Chaucer) and then have been over there bashing on your "brothers and sisters" in Christ... Good job... and another excellent example of how members on this forum can troll with the best of them. If anyone needs moderating here... it would be moderators who live a lie on other forums. ~serapha~

If the ark exists, once the wood is exposed to the air, it will crumble in their hands like dust... the cells of the wood will have deteriorated to being "fluff" that will be crushed to the touch. The only way to recover a piece of wood such as the ark is to isolate it in "foam" and then re-saturate the wood cells by soaking the wood with chemicals to harden to wood to a point that it might be "touchable". That would take 10+ years of continuous soaking. It would be interesting, though, to see pictures of the construction of the ark. The boards of the ark were probably sewn together with rope rather than using nails as we imagine it to be. Actually, the ossuary box is not a fraud. The second inscription is brought into question, but the first inscription is not being questioned. I don't look like Larry Bird. ~serapha~

Wouldn't it be hard to find anyone to take you up on the bet? I mean, the odds on lion-vs.-Christian would be about the same as those on me vs. Tyson, no? Killing Christians was a sport, perhaps that is the point that I didn't get across..... ~serapha~

Somehow, I just can't see Jesus sitting at the slots or playing blackjack. WWJD ~serapha~ **note** In the first-century, it was common for the Romans to bet on the gladiator fights, etc. Can you imagine the "bets" made on Christians going into the arena? "How big is your god, will he save you today!" "I'm betting on the lion!" The soldiers cast lots for Christ's clothes. That could have been tesserae (mosaic floor squares) designed similar to dice... or it could have been casting lots as in straw lengths.. So, when you gamble by throwing dice or casting lots, think of this... some of the early history of gambling was over the death of Christians, and more importantly, the death of Christ. Talk about pagan roots. Gambling is "of the world". Christians are called out of the world. So, WWJD?

Serapha,Think through that for just a minute. As contentious as this place get, admittedly pretty contentious, there is nowhere the bigotry and hate mongerging against other religions as there is on christianforum. If your point is that CF converts people because it isn't contentious, your flat out wrong. It may help in conversions despite the ugliness but not because the ugliness isn't there. Snow, I just ran across this in looking for something else... and this posting needs addressing. Myself, personally.... I was banned from Christianforums because I demanded publicly that the "unorthodox" forum needed the consistent application of rules, that the rules, as established, were not fair to everyone. In particular was "word usage"... and the particular word was "cult"... Now... I was banned for rule 7... flaming a moderator and for continuing to post publicly that there was a problem. 30 days... no previous official warnings. More than once on the "unorthodox" forum, I went to bat FOR the mormons against stevej, momm7 (sic), calgal, and Wrigley. More than one, I was criticized and told that I was "coddling the mormons".. and "holding their hands as they entered hell".... those are some of the nicer comments.... More than once, I asked moderators to step in and stop the practices that you describe... so much so that my "reports" would go unattended. And even worse, every time I filed a report, the moderators would lay it back on me... I should consider it to be an evangelism opportunity. If I moved one inch, I heard about it from either the moderators in public postings (this happened several times) or in private (or public) from the evangelicals. I have numerous PM's in my files at CF from members of the CoJCoLDS's because I didn't participate in the nastiness that does go on there. Several times I posted information from the LDS official site for discussion, and it would be removed. I posted the first two "missionary discussions" on the open forum, and they were "closed" by moderators. I asked for discussion/debate on the book of mormon, and that was refused by the owner of the site. I was in a tremendous discussion on the book of Ephesians with both mormons and "non-mormons" that got shut down by the evangelicals because they thought that a mormon was leading the discussions. I just get tired of being bashed for all that goes on at another forum when I didn't participate in that conduct but ONE TIME... and that was the "troll day"... when the moderator told me, once again, to use it as an evangelism tool.... If you don't like the "bigotry and hate mongerging" on that forum, you have two choices... 1) do nothing. 2) change the mindset. there But don't post to me as though I was a part of it or that I condoned it... my record, if anyone checked it, says differently... I told you... I am not sinking to the level of personal insults... I'm not doing it here... and I don't do it there. I am a on a high horse..... and I'm staying there. I see conversions... so someone must see through all my "bigotry and hate mongering" enough to see the love of Christ in me while I ride my high horse. So... just can it. I don't want to hear it any more. I've been "crucified" for mormonism on that forum (banned and ostracised)... I have to agree, that "usually" the members of the CoJCoLDS's does not express hatred toward a denomination. "you guys" don't have any hate left when you are done bashing the "anti-mormons"... which, I have learned, is anyone outside mormonism. Why focus on a denomination when you can hate the whole world and justify it? I've said it before... don't you people know what you look like here???? There's never "love" here.... never compassion... Or, if there is love, it must be through the pm's.... because publicly, this forum is filled with contention and hate. Go to Christianforums and read tomnossor's stuff. All of you could learn from tom an effective way to communicate mormonism to the world. I would tell you to go read tom white's stuff, but he left the same time I did... when "you guys" trolled the forum. He got "fed up" with everying that day just as I did. Me and a mormon in agreement... wow. I'm done venting.... but don't shovel CF to me and their rules and how they look on the Unorthodox forums.... there are hundreds of forums there that aren't like the unorthodox forums, and where people get a lot of help. I've already paid the price for "standing up" at CF and demanding change... now.. why don't you pay the price.... I've already had my 39 lashes... and they have all been from the tongue. If you don't like what you see and read... do something about it rather than blame me for it. You can be a part of the solution or a part of the problem.... Sitting here griping about somewhere else..... that's not a solution.... so it must be a part of the problem. ~serapha~

However, at the time of Paul's writings, there was only an oral tradition, perhaps Mark, and maybe "Q" (the theoretical document which Matthew and Luke may have used to write their gospels. So what was Paul's idea of the gospel? Correct me if I am wrong, but from what I remember: Mark, Q, and Paul do not mention most of the miracles, including a virgin birth, or a physical resurrection (although Paul mentions some kind of resurrection). Paul obviously believes that Jesus is divine, but is vague about the specifics. Paul speaks mostly of practical matters...morality....not of doctrine. Later we have "new gospels"...Matthew and Luke...who tell us of a virgin birth, physical resurrection, a clearer picture of who Jesus was. Then there is John who gave us all kinds of new doctrine, along with the revelations. What if Paul was telling the truth in Gal 1:6 ??? Then, theoretically, we need to take Matthew, Luke and John (at the very least) out of the Bible, because they are false gospels! The consequence would be that we would need to study only Mark, Q and Paul to get the true Christian doctrine...and the result would be a very different Christianity than both the LDS and Evangelicals are familiar with!

However, at the time of Paul's writings, there was only an oral tradition, perhaps Mark, and maybe "Q" (the theoretical document which Matthew and Luke may have used to write their gospels. So what was Paul's idea of the gospel? Correct me if I am wrong, but from what I remember: Mark, Q, and Paul do not mention most of the miracles, including a virgin birth, or a physical resurrection (although Paul mentions some kind of resurrection). Paul obviously believes that Jesus is divine, but is vague about the specifics. Paul speaks mostly of practical matters...morality....not of doctrine. Later we have "new gospels"...Matthew and Luke...who tell us of a virgin birth, physical resurrection, a clearer picture of who Jesus was. Then there is John who gave us all kinds of new doctrine, along with the revelations. What if Paul was telling the truth in Gal 1:6 ??? Then, theoretically, we need to take Matthew, Luke and John (at the very least) out of the Bible, because they are false gospels! The consequence would be that we would need to study only Mark, Q and Paul to get the true Christian doctrine...and the result would be a very different Christianity than both the LDS and Evangelicals are familiar with! However, at the time of Paul's writings, there was only an oral tradition, perhaps Mark, and maybe "Q" (the theoretical document which Matthew and Luke may have used to write their gospels. So what was Paul's idea of the gospel? Correct me if I am wrong, but from what I remember: Mark, Q, and Paul do not mention most of the miracles, including a virgin birth, or a physical resurrection (although Paul mentions some kind of resurrection). Paul obviously believes that Jesus is divine, but is vague about the specifics. Paul speaks mostly of practical matters...morality....not of doctrine. Later we have "new gospels"...Matthew and Luke...who tell us of a virgin birth, physical resurrection, a clearer picture of who Jesus was. Then there is John who gave us all kinds of new doctrine, along with the revelations. What if Paul was telling the truth in Gal 1:6 ??? Then, theoretically, we need to take Matthew, Luke and John (at the very least) out of the Bible, because they are false gospels! The consequence would be that we would need to study only Mark, Q and Paul to get the true Christian doctrine...and the result would be a very different Christianity than both the LDS and Evangelicals are familiar with!

Me personally?I don't have a problem believing that salvation entails more than accepting Christ or having plain faith but the idea is completely at odds with the evangelical doctrine of faith only - meaning ONLY faith, not faith and someting else (like correct understanding of doctrine). A few examples. Kid in Patagonia living in some ranchito. A traveling shoe brush salesman passes though, teaches kid about Christ. Kid doesn't have time to learn all the details. Completely confused about the trilogy thing, maybe believes it differently than Bob and Nancy Nicene, same with other doctrines but is sincere in his faith in Christ. Has a change of heart... dies, saved or not? Christians at and shortly after the time of Christ had no clear idea of doctrine, which was not to become standardized for several hundred years or more. Saved or not. Bottom line, if a person has a fundamental change of heart and is born again, according to your doctrine, he is saved -- regardless of his doctrinal position. and thank you, snow for advising me on what I believe. I would never have known. ~serapha~

and, I'm still looking at the "filthy rags" statement. (which I have never used so I must not be an evangelical) ~serapha~ Think syllogism Serapha, All those who use the term filty rags may be evangelical but it does not follow that all evangelicals use the term filty rags. For example: Fairs is an LDS apologetic organization. Some scumbag bigots have purchased a domain name similar to Fairs to trap careless websufers and divert them to their own site; much like pornographers by domain names similar to Dr. Laura Schlessinger's website to trap and corrupt careless websurfers. www.fair-lds.com Click the link at the redirected site... and, I'm still looking at the "filthy rags" statement. (which I have never used so I must not be an evangelical) ~serapha~ Think syllogism Serapha, All those who use the term filty rags may be evangelical but it does not follow that all evangelicals use the term filty rags. For example: Fairs is an LDS apologetic organization. Some scumbag bigots have purchased a domain name similar to Fairs to trap careless websufers and divert them to their own site; much like pornographers by domain names similar to Dr. Laura Schlessinger's website to trap and corrupt careless websurfers. www.fair-lds.com Click the link at the redirected site... Well, I've never been to the site you referenced. But, they do identify right up front that they are not LDS... BTW... I have only contacted FAIRs on one occasions.... I was seeking permission to use something from one of their discussions with copyright citation... and they knew who I was... I just took a step back... it intimidated me. ~serapha~

*(Faints)* ~thanks~ One of the most entertaining postings I have seen on this forum. ~serapha~

Hello Ammon, Give my regards to Ben and OS.... And yes.... there are "double standards" there... The "orthodox Christians" are held more accountable than the "unorthodox" members.... so I am not surprised that they removed all of your past warnings. I grew weary of hearing Ben telling me to consider the abusive people and abusive posts as opportunities for evangelism. enjoy the unorthodox forum, ammon... remember ... "be nice" ~serapha~

I couldn't agree more.... I just read the posting that was removed from this forum the day that CF was trolled by this site... so far today, I have read that "you", Jenda, Snow, Peace/starsky, AFDaw, Spencer, Ammon (with two accounts), elderbell (with two accounts), and a couple of other people I don't recognize from here.. All of you seem to have visited Christianforum on a regular basis... and then return to this forum to bash THAT forum and the people and responses there... and the "humor"... is that you do the very same thing that you criticize there. You spread malicious "gossip" and believe that what you are doing is Christ-centered. It isn't and "you" aren't. ~serapha~

Sorry I bored you. good night. ~serapha~

Pre-destine means determine in advance. Determine means to decide authoritatively. If all men aren't saved, then God can't have predetermined, by definition, that all are saved, as you admit they are not.<span style='color:red'>Don't you believe the Bible when it says (in Ephesians 2) that we are predestined to be children of God and not children of wrath? Just becasue we are "predestined" to a position in Christ doesn't mean that the position is accepted by the person. God can do mighty works, but he cannot change the will of man.