serapha

Well, It's pretty simple... people send me all these sites that pertain to the book of mormon and archaeological or historical supports, and then they ask for my comments pertaining to the significance of the evidence. It started out that I would be answering questions on Christian forums, and someone would ask me to read some "evidence" on a Mormon forum. So, I would research the information and then I would post the "facts" of the findings. I haven't found any real "evidences" that support the book of mormon.... that ought to bring on an onslaught of insults. ... thus... Lehi's 81 evidences are the strongest argument as a documented "evidence" for the book of mormon that is "current'. No one (in archaeology) has addressed the information in the book concerning the credibility of the "evidences". Most of the information I receive is the type of references that usually require some type of knowledge or understanding of archaeology or historical supports. The types of things that aren't found on any of the "anti-" sites.... because I don't frequent the "anti-sites". BYW.... I don't need to go to "anti-" sites. If I have an "anti-" question, I just email one of the "anti-" persons and they reply ... else I email the LDS's specialist.... or ask on the mormon forums. Currently, I am reading Brant Gardner's web page because I was given an outline from one of his presentations as a "proof" of the book of mormon. The outline is so "vague" that it is difficult to determine what is being said, let alone what the evidences are. For example, "food stuffs" was given as a "proof". Well? Okay. So he (Brant Gardner) has been so kind to allow me to use his information as long as I tell him where I am posting. He has a pretty good commentary going on the book of mormon with archaeological and historical supports... I have at least 15 books backed up on archaeology that are a "must read", and a ton of research to work on... and now, I have even more books to read on mesoamerican cultures and videos to view... etc. plus I need to be reading some critical works in archaeology before I work in archaeology this year. I just haven't had the time to read the book of mormon. I read the book of Ether not too long ago... and I have read large segments of other books in doing research. Basically, if I have a question on the book of mormon, I just ask. More questions? I have about 40 files on different "evidences" or proofs, articles, etc.... many still "works in progress"... like looking for barley reports in New Mexico or an iron sword found in Jericho in 1986, reading mayan glyphs, all that "boring" kind of stuff. ~serapha~

Hi there! Ever heard of New Age? ~serapha~

yes....ever read the Book of Mormon? <span style='color:red'>No, I haven't read the the book of mormon. Does that text answer the question, "Do you worship Jesus?" 2 Ne. 11: 7 7 For if there be no Christ there be no God; and if there be no God we are not, for there could have been no creation. But there is a God, and che is Christ, and he cometh in the fulness of his own time. So you aren't progressive enough to get the updated information about God....what can we do about it? After all we have a living prophet and records from ancient prophets you don't have.... address issues, not people I think Acts 17:28 explains our true relationship with Christ/God....Also ...if a dog has offspring...will they or will they not be dogs...??? <span style='color:red'>Acts 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. FYI, "your own poets" is believed to be Aratus of Tarsus, and "For we are also his offspring" is a referece tht Aratus made of Jove (Jupiter or Zeus). Therefore, yes, there is an inference to being offspring of God, spiritual children of God who is "spirit" In 1 Jn. 4: 8 8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. 1 Tim. 1: 5 5 Now the end of the commandment is charity/love unfeigned out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: If God is love and love is charity....and the end of the commandment/obedience to such is charity/pure love of Christ/God who is Love.....then indeed through obedience we can become like, as, God Himself....as any good parent would want his offspring to be....like, as, himself... <span style='color:red'>BTW... do you have a "clue" where Jesus learned the "great commandment"? Or, would you care to know the origination of that thought? It doesn't pertain to anything relative to "knowing God". It pertains to the incarnate Christ growing in wisdom and knowledge. The commandments of Jesus/Jehovah are the same...but different for different people in different eras. When God told Moses....to call Him I AM or IOW existent....He was reinterating His title Jehovah which also means to exist or to be. Christ is Jehovah incarnate. Mosiah 15 explains this...: THE BOOK OF MOSIAH CHAPTER 15 How Christ is both the Father and the Son—He shall make intercession and bear the transgressions of his people—They and all the holy prophets are his seed—He bringeth to pass the resurrection—Little children have eternal life. [About 148 B.C.] 1 AND now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. 2 And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son— 3 The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son— 4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. 5 And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people. What does eventually coming to know God have to do with listening to prayers of the repentant sinner only? I don't see any connection. The Lord listens to whom He will...He may not answer them...and he may indeed answer them...He only knows why and when.... John 3:16 applies gives everyone ressurrection into an imortal state....He conquered death....for all. But Eternal life as Eternal is God's name because it is His life.....that comes from new birth/being born again....through the Spirit....becoming new in Christ...new life....as long as we are humbly repentant, submissive as a child to Christ and His Spirit...we will stay new in the LIFE of Christ's love. He is the living water....the bread of life....NEW LIFE, ETERNAL LIFE. <span style='color:red'>Well, the quote statement is that you will come to know God if you pray to him... There are five passages in the Bible that state that God only hears the prayers of repentent sinnser. Therefore, if one is not a sinner, then one is saved, and will know God... ergo, the statement "as we do these thing, we will come to know God"... isn't biblical. There's answers for starters. And unsolicited personal insults... let's try to address issue and not people in future postings, okay? ~serapha~

Now... this is a personal, public posting to AFDaw so there is no misunderstanding. Hello AFD :) 1. Could perhaps you be mistaking "pride" for "arrogance"? Yes, I know pride is one of the 7 deadly sins, but there's a difference between "I'm LDS and I'm happy!" and "I'm LDS and I am better than everyone who isn't."2. You are questioning the church aren't you? Am I expressing hatred towards you? 3. What site? the CF site? Did you post it on any pro-LDS sites? If you are truly investigating the church, even if it's only for the sake of information, you need to get in touch with the missionaries. That's what they're there for. This... is an example of "smugness".... or maybe that is "pride"... or "arrogance" as you implied. I view it as "smugness". That was a reply to a serious question. Now... I view that responder as unable to address the issues, therefore they address the person. Not good apologetics. But you seemed to want an example... there's one for you. ~serapha~

Hi there! Just for the record. The above comments were not directed to any particular person. If I were were directing the comment to a particular person, I would open the note with Hello (name) :) ..... but I didn't. For people who claimed to have read so many of my postings... I certainly am misunderstood. 95% of my postings begin... Hi there! and 5 percent go directly to a person... like such: Hello Ammon :) Thanks for welcoming me to the forum. ~serapha~ I am more of an <span style='color:blue'>"address issues, not people" poster. Therefore, I do ignore a lot of "people comments'. The just aren't constructive to bostering communications. Oh, yes, one more thing.... my apologies to the person who felt I was addressing them personally. I was not. ~serapha~

for those that agreed to a discussion on the Gospel Principles, the first reference was to read the First Article of Faith Page 306, First Article of Faith We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. Then, I have my first question. Page 9 "God is the one supreme and absolute being in whom we believe and whom we sorship. He is the Creator, Ruler, and Preserver of all things." 1. Is Jesus God? 2. Do you worship Jesus? Page 9 "Because we are made in his image ... we know that God has a body that looks like ours." "His eternal spirit is housed in a tangible body of flesh and bones" (D& C 130:22) 22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. 1. Who is God? 2. Or maybe, what is God? 3. Doctrine #130 came into being in April 1843, right? So what was the description of God before this time, and what happened to change the personage of God into a human body of flesh and bones? "Everything that he does is to help his cildren become like him--a god." 1. Is that to be taken that the CoJCoLDS's teaches that you may be like god. Genesis 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 2. Is man made in the image of God or in the likeness of God. Which is to be taken to be "like him" in the above statement? page 10 "By keeping his commandment we can become like him." 1. Please explain that the text means. How is keeping God's commandments causing one to be like God. 2. Is this "God" ... the Heavenly Father? 3. BTW... the commandments of God are different than the commandments of Jesus (Matthew 23:37) There are at least six words for commandments in the Bible, two in Hebrew and four in Greek. Each word relates a different type of commandment, therefore the commandments of God and the commandments of Christ, and the commandments of the apostles, etc are all identified by different words.. but that also identifies that the commandments of God and the commandments of Jesus are different because different word meanings are used and implied. Page 10 "We can know God if we will--- 3. Pray to him" "as we do these thing, we will come to now God and eventually have eternal life" 1. Do you believe that God only hears the prayers of repentant sinners? 2. If so, why doesn't John 3:16 apply to give the believer eternal life. Well, there's questions for starters. ~thanks~ ~serapha~

How untrue. Roman Catholicism accepts any baptism that was done with the trinitarian Godhead... whether sprinkling, pouring, or immersion. They do no accept baptisms performed by those denomination that do not believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity. Protestant denominations that believe in baptismal regeneration accept a catholic baptism.; howver, those Protestant denominations that adhere to a strict "immersion only" baptism do not accept the baptism of infants. How untrue again Communion in the Roman Church is closed because of the confirmation that is required for the acceptance of the Eucharist. BTW... communion in the RCC is not closed to anyone who adheres to transubstantiation.... or to those of the Lutheran faith. strike three All mainstream Protestant churches believe that the universal church is the body of believers, that would include those in Catholicism who profess a personal relationship with Christ. I think you need to study Catholicism and Protestantism before making more postings that are easily disproven by published church dogma or disciplines. ~serapha~

Hello Snow, I am ignoring all your postings. That's okay, isnt' it? Or, is there a rule that say I have to give as good as I get? "Rise above"... that my motto. God give me a grace that is sufficient for every need... a coutinuously flowing river of grace. ~serapha~

No, not one time. I have talked to missionaries... at the ward meetings and on the street. There isn't an answering machine on the telephone. If you don't "catch" someone at the office, there's no contact. I drove out to the building twice last week. I have a Gospel principle book.... unit one tomorrow or Tuesday? ~serapha~

Let me see if I remember right from a Relief Society speech... "I wish that I could share with my co-workers. I feel so sorry for them because we have so much more and they will never experience that" That's a "step above" attitude. BTW... my experiences tells me that it doesn't matter what the articles of faith say.. it doesn't matter what the doctrines are... the prophets teach outside the doctrines. Will you be exalted to godship or not? Where's that in the doctrines of the church? Another "step above" ... only this time, a step above what doctrines really say. ~serapha~

okay, let me bck up. someone asked for my comments... and when I posted what I have seen over the past year. I get blasted. thanks... I don't answer questions any more if I get blasted for providing what someone wants to hear. ~serapha~

I'm sorry, the image I see of the two young men in white shirts and ties riding those bicyles for 48 miles just to see little ol' me is more than I can comprehend at the moment. Can they ride after dark? on interstates? Mercy, that's the first comment that got a smile out of me on this forum. ~serapha~

Mercy, Contact the missionaries? For a visit? It's an hour drive by automobile, how long would it take on a bicycle? ~serapha~

Hi there! I read that ad on Ebay, but I thought that there was a statement saying that the garments would be offered as a group first, for someone from the church to purchase them back. Was I dreaming about that statement? ~serapha~

And I tend to use "fact" rather than "feeling" i.e. archaeology, researched materials ~Bible thumper~

Hi there! 1. The "attitude" is a smugness... the inference that being a member of the CoJCoLDS is a "step above" mainstream Christianity. At times, there is a condescendence. 2. On the internet, I have yet to meet a member of the CoJCoLDS who didn't express hatred itowards anyone who questions the church. There's always a lot of mud slinging. It is rare to see a discussion. (think venom). In a Gospel Principles class, the teacher said something to the effect (concerning reading religious materials outside the church)... "If you know a cake has arsenic in it, are you going to eat it?" I never forgot that comment..... there's a lot of arsenic being swallowed in various forms in mormonism, aka goddess worship, teaching exaltation to Godship in the GP book when it isn't a doctrine of the church. etc. etc. 3. Sure.... I read the book of Ether one night, and then next day, I posted questions on the internet about what I had read..... no member of the CoJCoLDS's answered the questions... they were just slinging mud. When I asked why no one answered, I was told that I had gotten the questions off an "anti-" site. You see, I find that the members of the CoJCoLDS's don't beleive that those outside the church are capable of intelligent deduction. always "screaming" that information has been taken from an "anti-" site rather than addressing the issue. This is a ~red herring~ ~serapha~

well, I use my sword more... and my tongue less ~serapha~

Hi there! I just purchased the book, Lehi in the Wilderness, 81 New Evidences.... I just received it yesterday, and I have started reading it. Has anyone read the book, and, if so, what are your specific comments. Also, the videos on Lehi in the Wilderness... they cost $80. Before I buy them, could someone tell me if they contain any information that is not in the book, Lehi in the Wilderness? I was told that all the information on the videos is in the book? ~serapha~

Hi there! :) I'm not laughing... I'm a calvinist... Not every calvinist is a drsteve or wrigley. Your are the same group of people, who back on page five, and on every page since.... chided me for using the term "all" relative to the members of this board... and then you group "ALL" calvinists together. okay... ~serapha~

Hi there! You know... I don't laugh at other people. Maybe I should? So I can fit in here? Let me give you a little history on me and the CoJCoLDS's... I started studying mormonism about a year ago. I was going to the ward meetings and the relief society meetings as well as reading the discussions and books on mormon history. I was in a discussion group on Gospel Principles. I had to stop going to the CoJCoLDS's because of personal commitments with my family. Now, the purpose of going to the meetings was to learn about the CoJCoLDS's. My college major now is Bible Studies, and I have been dedicating a year of my time to different religions. I spend a year studying Roman Catholicism.... I went to Mass almost every Sunday, went through training sessions, religious retreats, and read everything that I was told would help me understand Catholicism better. I think I have a fair understanding of what Roman Catholicism teaches and what is "traditional" understanding, yet not a part of the catechism of the church. I know the right terms and where to find the answers. I said right "upfront" that I wasn't interested in converting to Catholicism, but I wanted to learn as much as I could, and to learn where the answers are. BTW... I have been back to the catholic school system to teach special classes in religion since I spent the year studying with the deacon and priests. I started on mormonism right after easter last year. My year is almost up, and I can honestly say... I have learned very little from the members of the CoJCoLDS as far as their teachings go. I have learned the "attitude" and I have observed the "hatred"... but no one has been willing to share the restored gospel in 11 months of inquiring aka "investigating" That speaks volumes to this Baptist. The time allocated to mormonism is almost over. If you want to share your beliefs, that is fine... if not, that is fine also. When I teach religion, I can only teach it as I have learned it from the official church doctrines and from that members have shared. My questions are serious, and none of you are serious. I don't intend to convert to mormonisim, but I will teach it as I have learned it. You throw away opportunities every day to express your religion as something "good". ~just my thoughts~ ~serapha~

My friend, I wasn't asking about christianforums. I was was asking about the terms "marginalize" in relation to exaltation, particularly the comment, "denounce and marginalize other to exhalt yourself" Those are terms that are "foreign" to me, and I simply wanted an explanation. I do understand "exaltation" (Discussions for New Members, Lesson 2; Eternal Progression, discussion 4, Uniform System for teaching the Gospel) It is "marginalize" and "denounce" in relation to exaltation that I haven't comprehended. but you don't have to answer. I can just continue to wonder. ~serapha~

Let me tiptoe across eggshells..... If you are into goddess worship as a member of the CoJCoLDS's, would you be interested in joining a forum for members of the church who are active in goddess worship? and I am not laughing... but serious. no LOL here. ~serapha~

Hi there! I appreciate your comments, and that you took the time to read the article. That article is presently being used as a evidence that the book of mormon is true. That would be why it was given to me by a member of the CoJCoLDS's to address the content of the article. I have seen this particular article cited as an evidence when the statement is made that there are no historical evidences for the book of mormon--historical evidences being the history or written word. I suggest is is an invalid evidence. ~serapha~

When you stop the practice of presuming what I think... then I will talk to you. Until then, stew in your own juices. I rise above your type of conduct. That means... I just ignore you. ~serapha~

Seriously, would you explain this to me... either by the D&C or whichever prophet teaches this? I don't really that is a church doctrine. It might be a church teaching, but I don't think that is a doctrine. Anyway.... I want to understand it. ~serapha~