Posted on 05/04/2006 7:04:55 PM PDT by Utah Girl
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints urged the federal government this afternoon to promote alternatives to nuclear waste disposal.
While Mormon leaders voiced objections last year to storing nuclear waste at the Skull Valley Goshutes Reservation in Tooele County in Skull Valley, they remained silent on the broader issues, such as the federal government's plan to bury reactor waste forever at Yucca Mountain, Nev. The latest statement appears to cover Yucca Mountain as well as the Skull Valley project, and it gives a boost to technologies such as nuclear reprocessing, as proposed by Salt Lake City-based EnergySolutions.
"The transportation and storage of high-level nuclear waste create substantial and legitimate public health, safety, and environmental concerns," said the First Presidency in a rare statement on public policy.
"It is not reasonable to suggest that any one area bear a disproportionate burden of the transportation and concentration of nuclear waste," the statement continues. "We ask the federal government to harness the technological and creative power of the country to develop options for the disposal of nuclear waste."
Church Urges Alternatives for Nuclear Waste
We can't just bury it in Utah anymore?
The First Presidency could have saved some words and simply said "not in my backyard."
I think what they are saying is why should the state of Utah have the whole burden of nuclear waste.
Although I'm a Montanan, I've known Hal Fox of EEMF for many years now. He WAS located at 3084 3300 Ave South, but is dying on the vine, awaiting european funding to develop LENR/Ken Shoulders EV technology as radioactive waste remediation. Sadly though, Yucca Mountain has a large vested interest/constituency and the DOE does NOT want to hear about quick and simple solutions to rad-waste, there's no MONEY in it for THEM. I can tell you a LOT of facts about LENR.
Sorry you feel that way about a religion.
C'mon folks, lighten up here. The LDS wants to get into the business of telling the federal government what to do about nuclear waste? (a topic I daresay they are most likely NOT authorities on)
They should be able to take a little bit of harmless ribbing. Cut me some slack, I didn't even make any cracks about the Book of Mormon being a blatant violation of Revelation 22:18 "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book."
Let the flames begin.
Is that the kremlin? I'm sorry it it's the LDS HQ but the resemblence is striking.
That was the end of the last conversation I had with the last mormon I spoke with.
Absolutely. If I hadn't been strong in the faith 2 young girls flirting with me over a holy book could have been a real temptation. Not that they were concious of the flirting but 3 horny teenagers are after all 3 horny teenagers.
Oh, great. Now we have guys with seven wives who ride bicycles and boycott cola telling the government how to deal with nuclear waste.
You are to be commended. When temptation rears it's ugly head, not only does it help to remember that God is watching, but imagine your mother is in the room with you.
That will settle things right down. ;)
If you look at the history of the Bible, scholars are not even sure that Revelation is the last book to be written. Most assume it was written at around 94-95 AD, but many scholars would also date James, I and 2 Peter, Jude, the three Epistles of John, and the Gospel of John at about the same time, or even later. Plus, the Bible didn't exist then as it does today. The different writings of the Apostles in the New Testament existed on different scrolls.
You can also find much the same wording in the Old Testament by Moses in Deuteronomy 4:2:
"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."The final irony is that the Book of Revelations is in itself very controversial.
Ranging from expressing skepticism to calling Revelation a fraud, its early cynics included Origen, Eusebius (the father of church history), Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, Saint John Chrysostom, Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, and the Synod of Laodicea. Doubt about the book was greater in the Eastern churches than the Western, for instance the Peshitta (Syrian Vulgate) excluded it. Prominent Protestants reformers cynical of or hostile to the Book of Revelation included Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Karlstadt, Oecolampadius, and Erasmus. (Should Protestants now regard their founding fathers as heretics that will receive the curses of the Revelation passage?) The Book of Revelation has clearly been one of the most disputed books in the Bible. (From Adding to the Bible)Plus, the first indication of a canon like that of modern Christians does not come until well into the fourth century, when Saint Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, recommended a list of acceptable books to his churches in his Thirty-ninth Festal Letter (A.D. 367). But Athanasius' canon did not become official until over a thousand years afterward. There is an excellent history of the New Testament by Stephen Robinson here The Canonical or Biblical Exclusion.
Any member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints who enters into a polygamous marriage is excommunicated. We cannot even have sympathies with the concept or the practice.
From From lds.org:
"Brigham Young saw the temple in vision and he described his ideas to the man he selected as the architect for the temple, Truman Angell. Truman Angell, working with William Ward, his assistant, generated an initial drawing of the Salt Lake Temple in 1855. After that time Truman Angell went to Europe to look at the great buildings of Europe, the great cathedrals and other buildings. And frankly, he wasn't terribly impressed by what he saw as it compared to what he had originally conceived with the guidance of Brigham Young. And so if you look at that 1855 drawing of the Salt Lake Temple prepared by Truman Angel and William Ward, you notice that it is very, very close to the final constructed building and doesn't represent any particular style. It's an eclectic style that gathers from several styles characterized by today’s modern building design."Some amazing facts about the temple: When President of the US decided to send out the army to quell alleged uprisings in Utah, the temple was taken apart down to the ground, then covered with straw and dirt to disguise it. It took 40 years to complete the temple. It is made of granite, quarried from the mountains east of Salt Lake City.
Of the 362 biblical manuscripts known to have been produced before the tenth century A.D., only one has a complete New Testament, and none contains the whole Bible. Of the entire corpus of 5,366 known Greek biblical manuscripts, only thirty-four contain the whole Bible, and all thirty-four were written after A.D. 1000.3-See Bruce M. Metzger, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Paleography (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981), pp. 54-55 The Bible, as we know and use it in the Christian world today, is one of the blessings of the age of printing; complete Bibles were virtually unknown before Gutenberg. Thus, when John wrote about "the prophecy of this book," he was not referring to the collection of books bound together in one volume and known as the Bible, but to the book he was then writing, the book of Revelation. Since the Latter-day Saints neither add to nor take away from the text of the book of Revelation, the passage at 22: 18-19 does not apply to their acceptance of extrabiblical scriptures.And the following information is compiled by Stephen Robinson, but he is quoting and relating information from non-LDS scholars.
Saint Gregory of Nazianzus rejected the book of Revelation in his fourth-century canon list, which was ratified three centuries later in 692 by the Trullan Synod. Even though Revelation was not included on his list, Gregory insisted, "You have all. If there is any besides these, it is not among the genuine [books].'' 10-Quoted in Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, p. 313. Were both the saint and the synod non-Christian because they deleted Revelation from the "Christian" Bible?And
The first indication of a canon like that of modern Christians does not come until well into the fourth century, when Saint Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, recommended a list of acceptable books to his churches in his Thirty-ninth Festal Letter (A.D. 367). But Athanasius' canon did not become official until over a thousand years afterward.Before the fifth century the Syrian Christian canon included 3 Corinthians and Tatian's Diatessaron, but excluded the four Gospels, Philemon, the seven general Epistles, and the book of Revelation. Syrian Christians from the fifth century on accepted the Syriac Peshitta version of the Bible, which included the four Gospels in place of the Diatessaron and excluded 3 Corinthians, but recognized only twenty-two books in all as canonical: the four Gospels, the book of Acts, the fourteen letters of Paul, James, 1 Peter, and 1 John. To this day both the Syrian Orthodox church and the Chaldean Syrian church recognize only these twenty-two books, rejecting 2 Peter, 2 and 3 3ohn, Jude, and the book of Revelation.12-See the discussion in Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, pp. 218-23 It is also interesting to note that the Greek Orthodox church has never included the book of Revelation in its official lectionary. 13- A lectionary is the official list of scriptures appointed and authorized to be read. in public worship services.
The Georgian and Armenian churches followed the Syrian churches in not accepting the book of Revelation until the tenth and twelfth centuries, respectively. The Abyssinian Orthodox church has in its canon the twenty-seven books of the modern New Testament, but adds the Synodos and Qalementos (both attributed to Clement of Rome), the Book of the Covenant (which includes a post-resurrection discourse of the Savior), and the Ethiopic Didascalia. To the Old Testament the Abyssinian canon adds the book of Enoch (cited as prophetic by the canonical book of Jude) and the Ascension of Isaiah.
Among Protestants, Martin Luther suggested that the New Testament books were of varying worth and divided them up into three separate ranks. In the prefaces of his early editions of the New Testament, Luther denied that the lowest rank (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) belonged among "the true and noblest books of the New Testament," and went so far as to call the Epistle of James "a letter of straw." He complained that Hebrews contradicted Paul by teaching that there was no repentance after baptism; that James contradicted Paul in teaching justification by works; that Jude merely copied from 2 Peter and from apocryphal books; and that Revelation dealt with material inappropriate for an Apostle, it didn't teach enough about Christ, and its author had too high an opinion of himself. (15-See W. G. K/immel, "The Continuing Significance of Luther's Prefaces to the New Testament," Concordia Theological Monthly 37 (1966): 573-81. As a direct result of Luther's judgment, some subsequent Lutheran editions of the Bible separated Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the rest of the New Testament, and even went so far as to label them "apocryphal" and "noncanonical." As Bruce Metzget points out: "Thus we have a threefold division of the New Testament: 'Gospels and Acts', 'Epistles and Holy Apostles', and 'Apocryphal New Testament' --an arrangement that persisted for nearly a century in half a dozen or more printings.''16- Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, p. 245, but see his entire discussion on pp. 241-46.
John Oecolampadius, the Reformation preacher at Basle, wrote in 1536 that "we do not consider the [book of] Revelation, together with the Epistles of James and Jude, and 2 Peter, and the last two Epistles of John, to be on a par with the rest [of the New Testament]." 17John Oecolampadius, Epistolarum libri quattuor (Basle, 1536).
After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god.
Actually we believe that all have divine potential. We also believe that we are heirs to Christ. From Romans 8:14-17
14 For as many as are led by the spirit of God, they are the sons of God.We also believe we were created in the image of God. From Genesis 1:2715 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.God had sexual relations with Mary to make the body of Jesus (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol.4, p.218, 1857; Vol.8, p.115). This one is disputed among many Mormons and not always 'officially' taught and believed. Nevertheless, Brigham Young, the second prophet of the Mormon church, taught it. From Mormon doctrine:
"And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says." (p. 742)Exactly where does it say anything about sexual relations? Christ was born as a result of conception, but official Mormon doctrine is we affirm what the scriptures indicate: that Mary was a virgin, that God the Father was the Father, and that Christ was begotten of the Father. He was the literal Father of Christ: Christ had a fleshly body that inherited divine attributes from the Father and mortal attributes from His mother. From Luke 1:34-35
"Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her. The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."The Bible also teaches that Jesus Christ is the literal Son of God. And that Christ had a body of flesh and bones. Indeed, from Luke 24:36-43
36And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.; Jesus' sacrifice was not able to cleanse us from all our sins, (murder and repeated adultery are exceptions)37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts• arise in your hearts?
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle• me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh• and bones, as ye see me have.
40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered•, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?
42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.
43 And he took it, and did eat before them.
I think we are speaking of salvation with different meanings. Salvation means saving, which Jesus Christ did by suffering and dying on the cross. He save all mankind by His actions. This is also known as justification. When we speak of salvation, we mean exaltation, which means dwelling in the highest kingom (the Celestial kingdom.) So, yes, being saved is by grace. Exaltation depends upon our actions and certain covenants made with Christ. We do all we can, then Christ makes the rest up. NOTE: This is exaltation, not salvation in our beliefs. Being saved from what would await us in the next life is for all mankind.
Baptism for the dead. Is it fair that only those who have heard of Jesus Christ have the ability to be saved? That is billions and billions of people, and I do not believe a kind and loving God would deny those people because they were born in China. Or Africa. Or somewhere in time where Jesus Christ was not known. So baptism for the dead is performed so that their sins can be washed away and they can enter into a covenant with Christ. The ordinance of baptism is performed and that person is free to accept the gift or not accept it. But it is incumbent upon us to assist in that work.
The Holy Ghost is a male personage. Not official doctrine. It is LeGrand Richards own musings.
Suffice it to say, we will have to agree to disagree on this topic, however I'm content to leave it up to King Jesus, King of kings and Lord of lords, whose Name is above every name, and through which there is no other path to salvation, not by works, not by human doctrine, but ONLY by virtue of His Blood shed upon the Cross for the Redemption of sin, Who said "No one cometh unto the Father but by Me", "The Father and I are One", and "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father".
I would remind you of another lifelong member of a religion who was as devout as the day is long, was convinced he was doing God's work, and yet when he was blinded on the road to Damascus, Saul realized that he had been utterly wrong, he then wisely answered the Voice and the Call of Jesus Himself, and that was when God began to work His Will through the Apostle Paul.
May you be so fortunate. :)
I think what you said is so unkind do you always like to be mean others you disgree with?
Excuse me your limited knowledge of how the books in the Bible were selected is showning!
Each manuscript is a book unto its self!
Revelation for speak for Revelation not any other Books in the NT or OT!
Was have you read anything yet on antipope Hippolytus in your "Early Christian Disarray"?
Mormons don't believe in baptism for the dead. They believe in proxy baptism. Baptism of the dead in NT terms was atcually baptizing a dead body
I'm not here to win any popularity contests
***
You are so unpleasant after reading your MO on your comment page speaks volumes!
One after another of smack downs and Sarcasm post after post
toot a lou!
pappy are you a comedian? LOL
I'm just telling you.
Whoa! What in the heck are you talking about?
You appear to have some serious problems.
Alahu Akbar, buddy. You don't own any big knives, I hope.
Toxic Utah: A land littered with poisons
Utah has paid high price for U.S. military might
http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,250010322,00.html
Other radiation
Utah wasn't hit by radiation only from atomic bomb fallout. The government also spread radioactive dust via artillery shells, bombs and airplane spraying — and even intentional nuclear reactor meltdowns at Dugway Proving Ground.
Horses were among animals burned by fallout in Utah. At least 74 tests of "radiological arms" were conducted at Dugway in the 1940s and 1950s. Radioactive materials would be burst and scattered in a way designed to contaminate enemy battlefields. Most the materials used had short half-lives and would have ceased to have been dangerous years ago.
Also in 1959, the Air Force secretly conducted what amounted to eight intentional nuclear reactor meltdowns at Dugway. It melted reactor fuel in high-temperature furnaces and used forced air to ensure the resulting radiation would be spread to the wind. Researchers wanted to see how far radiation from then-planned nuclear-powered airplanes might spread if meltdowns occurred.
When radiation clouds left detector range, they were headed toward the old U.S. 40 (now I-80). The communities of Wendover and Knolls might also have been in the path of those clouds, according to documents obtained and reported on by the Deseret News in 1994.
Those tests release a total of 215.57 curies of radiation, or about 14 times more than that released at the infamous Three Mile Island near-meltdown.
Also between 1959 and 1965, the Atomic Energy Commission experimented with atomic-powered rockets in Nevada, which may have spread radiation downwind to Utah.
I was talking about a discussion I had with 2 young mormon girls in a private ideallic setting. If you think that 3 good-looking 17 year olds who are celibabate and have a lot in common can congregate in private without sexual tension then I think you are the one with the problem.
ping
So, you're pretty sure that these two young mormon girls wanted you bad, huh? I hope that you resisted any urges you may have had to act on "their" feelings.
My FRiend, you and I are obviously being baited in this thread, it's the same sort of response one might expect in Clearwater Florida, if we were to be making some not so favorable comments about Scientology.
The very existence of the Book of Mormon, should be sufficient evidence that the teachings of Joseph Smith and the cult he founded have little if anything to do with the Teachings of Jesus Christ.
That's how Satan operates: he can quote scripture when it fits his purpose, and he creates counterfeits and imitations of the Truth (which is Jesus Christ), wraps it up all neat and tidy with fake scriptures and utterances and pronouncements from "prophets", when the actual goal is to delude and fool the masses into following a path which has nothing to do with Jesus Christ, Who said "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, NO one cometh unto the Father except by ME".
It's the same identical tactic used to propagate the death cult known as Islam. And like any cult, the deluded masses gobble it up.
I shouldn't be worried about a guy who recounts a story of an encounter with two under-age girls, whom he sees as cultist dupes, where he dreams up an atmosphere of sexual tension in a private setting. O.K.
UG,
Don't even worry about getting to Revelation - take an early epistle like Galatians:
6 I marvel that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different "good news";
7 and there isn't another "good news." Only there are some who trouble you, and want to pervert the Good News of Christ.
8 But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any "good news" other than that which we preached to you, let him be cursed.
9 As we have said before, so I now say again: if any man preaches to you any "good news" other than that which you received, let him be cursed."
That settles it.
Of coarse they wanted me, that's the object of proselytizing, to gather, I know, I did it. If you are fishing for an outright charge of "they were trying to use sex to lure me into their relign" or a denial of such charge you aint' gonna get either one. I am pretty sure it was just celibate 17 year old sexual tension all around and find it odd that you are stuck on it.
I hope that you resisted any urges you may have had to act on "their" feelings.
Silly. I don't have two wives. (ask a silly question...)
It sure is settle for it was dealing with the early Christian Church at the time!
****
Saint Hippolytus of Rome (was a "great-grandson" of St. John the Apostle.)
born c. 170
died c. 235, , Sardinia; Western feast day August 13, Eastern feast day January 30
Christian martyr who was also the first antipope (217/218–235).
Hippolytus was a leader of the Roman church during the pontificate (c. 199–217) of St. Zephyrinus, whom he attacked as being a modalist (one who conceives that the entire Trinity dwells in Christ and who maintains that the names Father and Son are only different designations for the same subject). Hippolytus, rather, was a champion of the Logos doctrine that distinguished the persons of the Trinity.
***
He conceived of God as a unit who, while indivisible, was plural.
***
In ethics he was conservative—being scandalized when Calixtus (successor of Zephyrinus) took measures to extend absolution to graver sins such as adultery—and he regarded the church as a society composed exclusively of the just.
Although Hippolytus' reputation as a scholar and his literary talent were assets to his cause, the church chose Calixtus for the papacy when Zephyrinus died. In disgust, Hippolytus withdrew from the Roman community and headed a dissident group that consecrated him.
He reigned in opposition to the succeeding pontificates of Saints Urban I (222–230) and Pontian (230–235), with whom he was exiled to the mines of Sardinia in 235 during the persecution of Christians by the Roman emperor Maximinus. There he became reconciled with Pontian and exhorted his supporters to unite with Rome.
Before dying as martyrs, both resigned to allow for a successor, St. Anterus (235–236), thus ending the schism. Pope St. Fabian (236–250) had their corpses brought to Rome for solemn burial.
Rather than an original theologian, Hippolytus was a laborious, learned compiler whose writings were often marred by an embittered, controversial tone.
The West soon forgot him because he was a schismatic and because he wrote in Greek.
***
His most important work is considered to be Philosophumena (one part of a larger work called Refutation of All Heresies), which seeks to show that the various Christian heresies are traceable to false pagan philosophies.
***
The church order, known as the Apostolic Tradition (extant only in later versions; Eng. trans. by G. Dix, 1937), is now generally attributed to him and illuminates the rites and liturgies in use at Rome in the early 3rd century AD.
restornu,
please don't just copy and paste things as if you
dealt with the actual words of scripture. You did not.
Paul delivered the gospel. He clearly said that if anyone
else tries to pawn off a different gospel, that that
person should be cursed. He adds that he includes angels
too.
That covers the different gospel of mormonism and it's angel.
best,
ampu
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.