9999

Mormon 210, I asked you the following: “Am I correct in interpreting what you have said is that salvation is bestowed upon man by other men?” You answered: "Your half correct. My explanation clearly said “bestow” and “authority”. Two words we use regularly. Particularly authority. As Christ went to be baptized (since he was perfect why was he baptized, additionally, why didn’t he just grab the local believer instead of seeking out John). Hebrews talks about authority, the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants specifically define the authority. Therefore the answer is yes someone with the authority to bestow blessing must bestow them and then with the blessing (or commitment of baptism as an outward sign and following the example of our Savior) one can if faithful receive the Kingdom of God. But only the individual and his relationship with God and his (the individual) faith in the divine gift of our Savior Jesus Christ (and most importantly the Gift of Salvation offered by Christ) can define salvation for an individual." You have placed salvation squarely on the ability of human beings! The Bible clearly teaches that salvation is in Jesus Christ and His sacrifice ALONE. Nowhere will you find in the Bible that one must look further than Jesus Christ for salvation because Christianity according to the Bible is confident that He alone is sufficient. It is a common characteristic of religious systems to add requirements for salvation (an excellent tactic for gaining leverage over church members), the Catholic church and LDS being two significant examples. Regarding your claims about outer darkness and the levels of heaven or kingdoms I'd like to ask you this: If you are sealed with your family members what does that mean if one or more family members don't live up to the standard of perfection that gets you into the celestial kingdom? Do they get there on your coat-tails? Or does that just mean that they can visit you in the celestial kingdom? And if you marry more than once in the temple who are you married to in the celestial kingdom? What if your wife hasn't been a good enough mormon? Does she pass because you are sealed? Was Elohim sealed to Mary? Will she be sealed to Him or to Joseph in the afterlife? Was Mary the daughter of Elohim or the wife? When I asked, “What does it mean to ““endure to the end?”” And just how perfect do you have to be?” you answered: "Simple. Seek to obey His commandments. Follow His example. When you goof up work it out with Him through repentance (meaning turn away from) and not do it again. By doing it again (after we repent) we are indicating that we are not fully repentant of the sin, although we may feel bad about it, we still do it. Sort of like being an alcoholic and hanging out in a bar. We set ourselves up and don’t want to fully accept the offer of repentance offered by Christ." This doesn't answer my question as to how perfect is enough to get into the celestial kingdom. How do you know when your life is measuring up? Is it possible for your prophet or an apostle to turn away to the point of missing out on the celestial kingdom? You said: "After my example of  an occurrence around when God had asked the Kings of Israel were told by the Prophet to kill people because of their religions-social structure-lineage etc., you ask: “Are you truly stating here that these two issues are equivalent? God’’s righteous anger over idolatry is justified. Your teachings of hatred are not.” You continued: "I am not judging the situation based on who was idolatrous or who was a lineal descendant of Cain. I am saying that God, in His wisdom to protect the Saints from intrusive cultures ordered Saul (as an example) to kill an entire citizenry. It is not the curse of the Black man to be killed, in fact if you will read my earlier statements, I stated, clearly, that those who abused the Black man will receive condemnation ten fold. My example here was not to equate the Judgment of God to His decisions to remove the priesthood from the lineage of Cain. My example was to offer a balanced discussion on the issue of race, culture etc." Brighham Young was also about killing other whites because of their associations with blacks. He stated unequivocally that any white with an intimate association with anyone black was required to be put to death on the spot. And he added that this would ALWAYS be so. Have you redefined the term "always"? Or do you agree with Brigham's decree? Or should it be as Joseph Smith stated when he said, "Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species." Obviously McConkie agreed with your prophet because he said, "...the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the Lord." Your prophet's claim that God restored the priesthood said nothing about an end to segregation or intermarrying so where I am supposed to get the idea that this a a balanced discussion? I stated “God does NOT change His nature. He does NOT find something an abomination one day and change His mind about it another." You obviously have problems with these statements. I'd like to know, are they true or false according to LDS theology? And why? You said: "After I explained my roommates thesis (in part) noting that he understood that there were Christian Religions, particularly Catholic and Protestant (particularly Methodist, Church of Christ and in the South the Baptists) that allowed negro conversion but he indicated that seldom if at all were they ever mixed. Clearly you don’t understand the statement. He was not looking at truth. He was looking only at the acceptance of diversity in USA religions. The LDS Church, was alone in the acceptance of diversity and the conversion (acceptance of baptism) of all races. He (my roommate) was in a sense making the argument that “a true Christian church” should be accepting of all repentant souls without regard to anything." How do you explain the statements made by your prophets calling for absolute segregation? You cannot deny the statements as they are a part of your scripture so please explain them. You claim that my statement as follows is prejudiced: “Mormon young men are expected to go on a mission. It is NOT spontaneous, but failure to go on a mission is seen as failure to follow the gospel.” I have read many statements by your leadership where they say that missions are expected, in fact a commandment of following the gospel. Are they prejudiced in making such statements? Your further statement suggests that you think only a black person (as you assume I am) would have issues with the prejudices of your church. That only furthers my contention that LDS worldview is blinded by the false teachings of their leadership. You said: "Now as for logic, You said 'Your use of logic theory is flawed. You cannot prove a negative, Mormon 210.' Your wrong. You most definitely can prove a negative in an argument. Because in an argument there is no positive until proven negative with an argument." I will assume that you have never studied argumentation or logic. In a discussion or debate the person making a claim or assertion is responsible to support that claim or assertion with evidence.   You claim that Joseph Smith saw God and you know this to be true by a personal feeling, which you call a testimony. Your personal feeling is not evidence to anyone but you. I cannot be responsible to disprove your subjective feeling. I can only respond to objective evidence. The objective evidence about the truthfulness of Joseph Smith is that he was not a reliable, consistent or truthful individual. There were multiple versions of the so called vision. There are numerous unfulfilled prophecies. There were numerous prophecies that were completely contradicted by reality. Then there's the obvious falsification of the Book of Abraham which even an LDS scholar rejects as a true translation. I believe that the next argument is one that you were having with Idaho Spud, not me: "Well here try this burden of proof on. You claim that man can’t see God and live, yet I showed you places that the Bible clearly states it is possible in fact it happened. Thus the basis of my argument is not denied and the fact remains that you can not prove by the Bible that Joseph Smith did not see God and Christ." Again, it was Idaho Spud who made the claim you are discussing. In any case I do not say that Joseph claimed to see God and lived is the reason I believe him a liar. I say he is a liar because he has made claims on God's behalf that are clearly not of God. According to the standard of the Bible, Joseph Smith has shown himself a false prophet.  Should we test a prophet? What standard should we use? Does Joseph Smith pass that test? What should we do with the standard that has already been set by the Bible for the testing of prophets? Here is your response concerning Mr. Abel:   "Back to Brother Abel- so what!?!?! I am greatful for Brother Elijah Abel. For his example of overcoming the self centered notion of self pity. He could have groveled and complained but he did not. Additionally, His ethnicity is claimed to have been less than one eighth African. He receives a patriarchal blessing and is not given a lineage simply noted that he is orphaned and the patriarch states that he will be in the Kingdom of God as one of His great ones. Additionally, as a matter of reference he was ordained a seventy of a ward in Kirtland in 1839 (of which there were a few). This is far different than a 1st Quorum of the Seventy." Have you never seen a picture of the man? The man is black! Not 1/8th.

Modeling Craze is looking for models to add to our agency. If you are needing a portfolio, training, and modeling work please contact me. www.modelingcraze.com

Gogol Bordello New York 1999-present Gypsy punk, Gypsy folk, Folk punk Links: http://www.myspace.com/gogolbordello American Wedding Start Wearing Purple

Thursday, November 27th 9:15am Dear Diary, Happy Thanksgiving! Today is going to be a bit of a stressful day, though I’m glad we’re getting the meal catered. I don’t think I could cook a Thanksgiving dinner for 60 people and maintain my sanity. This way, I’ll get to be sociable and enjoy my Thanksgiving too. And I certainly have a lot to be thankful for. Of course, the most basic things: a home, food, clothing. But more than that, I live in a society that respects women, and that allows us to pursue our dreams and live freely. I’m thankful that I live in a country founded on the tenets that all people deserve liberty and justice. Even if we’re still working on realizing those goals, at least they’re our fundamental rights. Personally, I’m thankful to have a loving husband and two beautiful girls. Barack, Sasha, and Malia are so wonderful, and I’m a lucky wife and mother. Plus, I grew up with in a loving family with a supportive mother, father, and brother. And I couldn’t be more thrilled to be the wife of the President of the United States. I know Barack will do a great job, and I’m thankful he’s been elected – by such a large majority too! I’m thankful that we have an administration that really improve the lives of the American people. Plus, Barack’s presidency will be a great boost to my own career. But for now, I’m thankful to have the opportunity to truly make a difference in this country as First Lady. Again, Happy Thanksgiving! Yours always, Michelle Originally posted in The Secret Diary of Michelle Obama