subgenius wrote:or perhaps from their parents using them as "shields" - such despicable behavior. and are we assuming that the FBI has no ability to exhume bodies if they want to?.....seems like a naïve assumption.
Typical Mormon behavior - blame the victims of Mormonism.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Dr. Shades wrote:When a number of graves were accidentally disturbed by a backhoe in 1999, a number of infants' and childrens' skulls showed exit wounds from high-caliber firearms at short range. In other words, little kids had their brains blown out, execution-style. This was a major reason why Mike Leavitt, Utah's governor at the time, ordered the remains hastily reburied before the FBI had a chance to conduct a thorough forensic analysis.
or perhaps from their parents using them as "shields" - such despicable behavior.
So, the parents of the slaughtered children displayed "despicable behavior," **NOT** the Mormons who pulled the triggers?
and are we assuming that the FBI has no ability to exhume bodies if they want to?.....seems like a naïve assumption.
Whether they exhume or don't exhume, children younger than eight years old had their brains blown out. No amount of exhumation, or lack thereof, will change that fact.
inquiringmind wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:Sure; if God exists, it's His prerogative. It's not the prerogative of a bunch of backward hicks in Southern Utah.
agreed, but it is an error to assume knowledge of how God chooses to take life....backward hicks (as opposed to forward ones) may have been the appropriate option at the time.
So God isn't powerful enough to do his own dirty work? He has to make His children into murderers in order to get the effect He wants?
inquiringmind wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:No, it isn't. The immigrants were from Arkansas, not Illinois.
so, yes it is possible...unless there is some sort of evidence that excludes that possibility?
Well, it's also possible that Sidney Rigdon hired the Carthage Greys to take out Joseph and Hyrum so that he could take over the church . . . unless there is some sort of evidence that excludes that possibility?
inquiringmind wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:It's impossible for innocent people to be "accountable" for a crime they never committed.
"allegedly" never committed.
Oh, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent?"
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
gdemetz, what glee you get from your last post to me but I am afraid it is wasted on me. You write as if somehow the only true Bible is the KJV, written in outdated language and with far less scholarship than many modern translations. I supposed it fits nicely with the Book of Mormon, supposedly written by people in the Americas whose language supposedly translated perfectly into this out of date English. It is also amusing sometimes to hear LDS people trying to mimic all the thees, thous and thines getting all tongue tied with wrong tenses and such a
Okay Albion! Just check out other versions (besides Papa Joe's) such as the New International Version:
Psalms 82:6 "I said, you are gods; you are all sons of the Most High." (I think you can understand this one. It's modern English!)
Revelation 20:6 "Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years."
Check out any other reputable translation! Your doctrine is definitely not Biblical!
gdemetz wrote:Polygamy is nothing new. That is no reason to move; very few knew about polygamy then. It was the persecution.
You must get tired of responding to questions from people who have an axe to grind. I know I get tired of it. All of these people who ask you about the details of the persecution know more about church history than I do. They are just fishing for the next post where they will attack you and your character. I find most of it a total waste of my time. So I keep on supplying the detail of what I wish to say and leave most of the questions from others unanswered. They will not bother to read the response anyway. But then again every once in a while they do bring up something I find interesting.
gdemetz, have you heard of the theology of the "priesthood of all believers"? It is a major, major jump from the simple term priesthood to Mormom claims of holding the priesthood that only Jesus thought the offering of himself is entitled to hold. Jesus, the only high priest we need, who demonstrated the end of the temple with its ritual sacrifice of animals by offering himself as the final sacrifice, "once for all". Clearly, Mormonism has usurped the priesthood only Jesus is entitled to and has restored the veil of the temple which his atonement rent from top to bottom.
You are really ignorant, Albion! Yes, I have heard of that stupid apostate teaching! If Christ's priesthood was all that was needed, then why did He bother to make others priests?!? I showed you a clear Biblical reference to where this priesthood was given by the laying on of hands showing that it is just not automatically given to anyone who believes, including the devils who also believe! I give you quotes from the Bible as well as non Mormon scholarly commentaries about those scriptures, and all you give me is some Papa Joe's evangelical non BIblical hogwash!
Last edited by Guest on Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.