serapha

Well let's see. Maybe 6 million Jews died in the holocaust and you believe that a holocaust worth die every 12 years?Don't ya think that there might have been a small mention of that in the media? The LDS Church has what is likely the largest missionary force of any US denomination and it total, what, 75,000 and has, what, 1 or 2 deaths a year, if that. You need a math lesson my dear friend and don't slack off on the basics. Well, an added two cents worth. In April 614 AD, 50,000 Christians were martyred in Israel under the combined efforts of the Persians and the Jews. At that time, Christianity was the #1 religion in Israel, and the Jews wanted the Christians all dead. The Persians wanted the Jew back in control, so they combined forces to kill the 50,000 people in one day. It is estimated that 30,000 died in one day in Israel, and the record of "Simeon, the funeral director" identifies the location of mass graves in the area of Jerusalem. One of those mass graves has been located and excavated revealing countless bodies. I was present at the excavation of a mass grave relative to this same day, and the grave contained hundreds of bodies... and there is very little written about these deaths. If 50,000 people could be martyred in one day in Israel without significant reference... and millions of people died in battle in the book of Ether without any significant reference (no glyphs reference this) ... then why is it so difficult to believe that 500,000 missionaries could die in one year without a significant record? China isn't going to tell you that they killed missonaries, now are they? ~serapha~

I accidentally hit the "reply" before it was ready.... Would someone be so kind as to answer my questions on Nephi, Chapter 1? ~serapha~ A question... Do humans in glorified bodies radiate glory... or in heaven, is the "Glory" reserved for God the Father and God the Son? Now, we used the term "glorified bodies" for lack of a beter terminology, but when Christ on upon the earth with His glorified body, there is no indication that the body radiated "glory". Glory was a part of the deity of Christ which was suppressed for the 33 years He was upon the earth, never calling upon the "glory" of his deity. Exactly what is "glory"... a radiance, a brightness? But why does Christ have "glory"? Pure light perhaps? another question... http://frontpage2000.nmia.com/~nahualli/LD...phi/1Nephi1.htm Verses 19 and 20 show two phases in the reaction of the sinful to the message of righteousness. The first is to mock, and the second is to attack. Well, I guess everyone comes by "mock" and "attack" in a very scriptural manner to anyone speaking the "truth". and another question... how does one pronounce "Nephi"?? http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbm...252aWV3LnBocA== I have a question concerning the "at Jerusalem". )verse 7 also, his own house at Jerusalem) If Lehi dwelt at jerusalem in all of this days, how is that reconciled to the statement that when the Babylonians took Jerusalem, all of the skilled smiths were removed to babylonia. What is the meaning of "at Jerusalem" in this text, and when there are entries for "at _____" is it always to be taken in the same way, something like the "law of the first mentioned" and the Bible? Do angels sing? I had the understanding that only the redeemed sing in heaven. 'Which plates are these?

Hi there! :) Before defining "anti-mormon", I would like someone to define mormon. ~serapha~

source please. ~serapha~

Again, for clarity.... snow, You have made a number of personal accusation in your posting... would you mind providing the responses where I made those statement? start with these... 1. Your entire posting existence vis a vis the LDS gospel is that our faith is not acceptable to Christ and that we are going to Hell 2. that Christ agrees with your theology and therefore you are favored of God and are going to heaven. 3. You feel the need to proclaim your view of the LDS position publically, hoping to influence others to adopt your view that Mormon go to hell 4. Christ, who favors you, does not appreciate and accept them. 5. you mistate the LDS position and charge Mormons with things that are either untrue, or common to your own church - the larger Chrisitian body. 6. What you do is designed in the most personal way possible - Christ damns you because you don't interpret the way I tell you to interpret. 7. Doctrinally I think you are goofy. 8. Doctrinally, what do I think? now... what was the term you used when addressing me... oh yes... "pony up" ~serapha~

source please. Then why did Abraham's father stay in mesopotamia? Abraham was not the head of his household, his father was. His father was also polytheistic and very wealthy. Also, you seem to have forgotten that Abraham sent Eleazer 450 miles back to his home to find a wife for Isaac, and she was the daughter of Abraham's brother... so it appears that the family was doing well in mesopotamia. Abraham left mesopotamia because God called him out. For the claim that it was a land that no one else wanted, it sure has generated a lot of wars over the centuries. Dan is beautiful as is Banias, and the fertile valleys will grow anything when it has water. Ancient Galilee had wildernesses that were forested with great oaks and hardwoods. Is that the usual description of a "pit that nobody else wanted" People were living on the land and large cities were established at Hebron, Meggido, Bethshe'an, Jericho and dozens of other placed.... and the Hebrew children had to fight to gain the "pit that no one wanted". but, you are entitied to your thoughts. ~serapha~

Romans Chapter 1 and 2, for example.... the invisible qualities of God. ~serapha~

Hello snow, After posting this morning, I had hoped to send you private message before you replied. This is my position, you can take it or leave it. You have nothing to lose when you post on this forum... or any other forum. That isn't the case for me. I have a lot to lose. I like working in archaeology, I would like to continue working in archaeology; and in three years, I hope to be working full time in archaeology. Now, the problem is, I meet "diamonds" like you all the time. You are diamonds, but rough-edged diamonds. Something really shines out about you, but your only means of communication is through powerhouse statements and condescending comments. In other words, if I want the diamond, I must go after it.... even if it is in the mire. I won't do that. I have too much to lose to lower my communication standards to that level. You might think we are "anonymous" on the internet, but we are not. As I said, I like working in archaeology and if am "quoted" from the mire with a condescending and demeaning comment, I won't find work. If you want to rise above name-calling and mud slings, then talk to me, but don't expect me to put my work now, or future work on the line for a diamond in the rough that likes staying in the mud puddle slinging mud. It's your choice whether the dialogue continues. But I'm standing my ground, you'll have to move up and leave all the condescending comments behind. I would rather have the reputation of refusing dialogue than the reputation of mud-slinger. ~serapha~

BTW, if anyone else would like to pick up the discussion, I would be glad to move forward. Of course, the same standards apply. I won't participate in childish behavior. This is a question and answer forum, or a discussion and debate forum, and not a whipping post to determine who has the most wicked tongue. ~serapha~

to the queen of sheba, The discussion is over until you grow up enough to have a conversation without your dependence upon deroggatory comments to get your point across. I can defend my points, can you defend your hateful comments? It just isn't sinking in to you that I am not gonig to play the game the way you want it. I will not participate in a contest to see who can post the most demeaning comments. I've said it before, what you do isn't apologetics. When you are ready to "discuss" rather than just "cuss'... send me a private, otherwise, we are back to the "ignore" status. Now.. have your temper tandrum... throw yourself in the floor and scream all across the forum that I'm not playing fair.. when you get done with your tandrum, take a breath, and then decide if you want to be treated like a three-year-old or a grown up. ~serapha~

Good Stephen, I am glad to here that response. That is one thing that at least you and I can agree on. Unfortunately, those over at CF, think otherwise, and say that there isn't any proof that the Lord said homosexuality is wrong. So if one does transcend(bad word to use)/bypass laws in the Bible to fullfill a position he is not qualified, what of those who not only associate, but support that ministry? Are they TRUE believers in God and can any good come from that influence. I personally cannot believe such a thing. To me, this is going to bring POLITICS into religion.Hi there! The Lord didn't have to say that homosexuality was wrong. Judaism, in the first century taught that homosexuality was wrong, and Jesus was a practicing Jew, keeping the law to the letter... He never changed the laws pertaining to homosexuality, did he? ~serapha~

Unfortunately, and you should understand this terminology, disparity of treatment is the "norm" and not the exception. I have always maintained that there needs to be better rules for the forums. I personally think that a quick "hotbed" suspension of 1 day to cool off is a lot better than a 30-day suspension for rules that haven't been consistently applied to everyone. But no one listens to me. <grins> I have seen a few multiple account holders, but every case was after a suspension. ~serapha~

New Age is not "new"... but very old... It is a discipline of concepts, not a time frame. ~serapha~

No. The CoJCoLDS comes across as a "works" program. When I say a "clear presentation"... then I mean that the person has a clear understanding of sin, the consequences of sin, and the blessed hope of eternal life through Christ. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the good news that "Jesus Saves!" Salvation is a process, being saved is only one part of the process and is not contengent upon any "work" or "work in progess". ~serapha~

Hi, real quick, there was a reference in chapter 1 to doctrine 130 which has a statement about being gods. ~serapha~

~serapha~

**sigh** another multiple account holder. Is that being honest? Well, I can relate. ~serapha~ This is the INTERNET, Serapha, multiple identities are to be expected. Besides, elderbell had to have two because his first one was banned. Ammon, I don't use multiple accounts. I just stand behind the one I have. I have a conscience. The Holy Spirit would tell me that using multiple accounts wasn't right, particularly when the site says... no multiple accounts. Don't you have respect for the rules of a forum.... just like the laws of the land? How about Romans 13 and 2 Peter 2 where you are told to submit to the governing authorities.... that doesn't apply to you? ~serapha~ I am not elderbell. Thus, you're apparetntly not talking to me... you're talking to him, I supposed. Further, you failed to notice that he did not have dual accounts. He was banned, and they he reregistered. Further, I don't see anything in the rules at CF that say you cannot have dual accounts. Can you please cite your source regarding the same? Hi ammon, I posted a question in the opening forum concerning multiple account uses. Of course, I didn't identify names... but I am certain you can catch the thread.... http://www.christianforums.com/showthread....749#post2075749 ~serapha~

I understand your position and you certainly have every right to respond or not for any reason or no reason.Personally I think it is giant cop out and passive aggressive. Your entire posting existence vis a vis the LDS gospel is that our faith is not acceptable to Christ and that we are going to Hell but that Christ agrees with your theology and therefore you are favored of God and are going to heaven. You feel the need to proclaim your view of the LDS position publically, hoping to influence others to adopt your view that Mormon go to hell because Christ, who favors you, does not appreciate and accept them. It's an ugly position especially when you mistate the LDS position and charge Mormons with things that are either untrue, or common to your own church - the larger Chrisitian body. What you do, far from the high road of addressing issues, is designed in the most personal way possible - Christ damns you because you don't interpret the way I tell you to interpret. That's not an issue, that's personal. So when you act offended when I cut through the niceities and treat you equally badly - say bull, you can't have it both ways. My position towards you is this: Doctrinally I think you are goofy; whether Christ recognizes the validity of your relationship with him... can't say, wouldn't say, shouldn't say. It's morally wrong. snow, You have made a number of personal accusation in your posting... would you mind providing the responses where I made those statement? start with these... 1. Your entire posting existence vis a vis the LDS gospel is that our faith is not acceptable to Christ and that we are going to Hell 2. that Christ agrees with your theology and therefore you are favored of God and are going to heaven. 3. You feel the need to proclaim your view of the LDS position publically, hoping to influence others to adopt your view that Mormon go to hell 4. Christ, who favors you, does not appreciate and accept them. 5. you mistate the LDS position and charge Mormons with things that are either untrue, or common to your own church - the larger Chrisitian body. 6. What you do is designed in the most personal way possible - Christ damns you because you don't interpret the way I tell you to interpret. 7. Doctrinally I think you are goofy. 8. Doctrinally, what do I think? now... what was the term you used when addressing me... oh yes... "pony up" ~serapha~

And, please, where might I find information on this? And another questions, is the denomination of the CoJCoLDS's not a Christian faith? ~serapha~

Snow, I'm praying that you will come to know the Word of God as truth... for if there is one lie in the book, then one cannot accept any of it as truth. I probably will not be able to be back online here until early Friday morning. Please, go ahead and post your questions. I only ask that you be fairly specific with them. ~serapha~

We don't have to use the Mark passage, we can use the Matthew... or for the five thousand, we can use Luke. Did I claim to be the eyewitness to the writing of the Gospels? You don't know that Mark or Luke were not eyewitnesses. We can continue to talk about what we don't know, or we can talk about what we do know. I do know this. The aramaic translation uses different terms in Matthew for the word "basket". In Chapter 14, it is translated "basket" for the feeding of the five thousand, and in chapter 15, it is translated "panniers" for the feeding of the four thousand. Now... you have sincerely convinced me that you don't accept the Bible as having any sort of credibiltiy, either in archaeological or historical evidences. Usually it is only athiests or agnostics, sometimes muslims who argue so hard against the Bible. I am amazed to see a "professing Christian" press so hard to discredit God's Word. amazed. ~serapha~

I don't intend to take on the world... if you want the article which you cited addressed ... then just say so. If you want the entire world taken on... itemize your questions, so I may itemize my answers. That's fair enough. Now... just tell me what you want... but be specific... because, as I said, I'm not taking on the entire archaeological world as well as every artifact ever recorded, every manuscript, every historical event.... I do have a specific question I would like answered.... is there any part of the Bible that you accept as true? If so, which part. I just want to know what part I can skip over. ~serapha~

You stated, I think I must know something that you don't. And on the same basis, then, the book of mormon isn't true? I realize the conversation isn't about the book of mormon... and that isn't a fair statement, but concerning the accountability you want from the Bible, you don't mind that I start a new thread with the same accountablity concerning the book of mormon, do you? It is rare to see a professing Christian question the credibility of the Bible as you have.... really rare. Obviously, not everyone's faith is in the Word of God. ~serapha~

Well, it wasn't me that posted that Abraham and Moses didn't exist. I believe they did exist, and I believe the exodus did occur. 1. If Abraham doesn't exist, then don't reference the God of Abraham. That's a simple enough logic. It was you who indicated that Abraham never existed, nor Moses, and that the Exodus never occurred. I believe they did. 2. Actually, archaeology does affect the teaching of the greatest commandment. If you want to hear that lecture, then ask politely. Faith moving mountains... is that a "central claim"... that's based upon archaeology. That Jesus was born in Bethlehem, lived in Nazareth, sojourned to Capernaum, and was crucified in Jerusalem. There are evidences, though I admit, not strong evidences, and they are "complex correlations". That Jesus is God... oh yeah, there's archaeological evidences for that statement. 3. There is a continuous flow of manuscripts from the first century that support the teachings of the Bible concerning the atonement through Christ. That would prove an interesting discussion. I love to talk about archaeology and the Bible... but I only discuss items with attentive students. BTW... when we are done talking about archaeology and the Bible, can we apply the same principles to the book of mormon? ~serapha~

and, knowing that there is a better use for my talents and time.... I think I will go study my Greek. ~later~ ~serapha~