Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition [Real MormonISM]
Deseret News ^ | Aug. 14, 2011 | Nathan B. Oman

Posted on 08/15/2011 4:17:17 AM PDT by Colofornian

Last week, a Texas jury convicted Warren Jeffs, leader of the polygamist FLDS Church, of two counts of child sexual assault...For Americans who are increasingly interested in the religion of the two Mormons running for president, Jeffs' conviction raises what could appear to be difficult questions about modern Mormonism.

There is no formal connection between Jeffs' FLDS Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints... From 1852 until 1890, however, the Mormon Church did publically teach and practice polygamy...

Given that history, many Americans ask themselves whether Jeffs' cocktail of religious authority, polygamy and child sex represents some dangerous essence concealed within the apparently wholesome veneer of mainstream Mormonism...

...Many modern Latter-day Saints fear that in Jeffs they see a living relic of their own religious past, a piece of perfectly preserved 19th-century Mormonism, like a frightening prehistoric monster encased in amber. They do not like what they see, but given the enormous importance of historical memory for Mormon identity this fact presents a problem.

Answering any of these questions requires a nuanced understanding of history. If the stories they tell about their own origins are true, the spiritual progenitors of the FLDS began their split with mainstream Mormonism in the 1880s at the height of the federal government's intense legal crusade against plural marriage.

Modern Mormons and modern polygamists have thus been pursuing divergent paths for more than a century, a much longer period than the founding generation of Mormonism that they jointly claim...

...19th-century Mormonism did contain some of the elements of Jeffs' story: plural marriage, prophets with loyal followers and geographic isolation. These elements, along with utopia building and a fiery millennialism, pushed 19th-century Mormonism in upon itself, creating barriers with the outside, "gentile" world and at times earning that world's suspicion and hostility...

(Excerpt) Read more at deseretnews.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; History; Moral Issues; Other Christian
KEYWORDS: antimomonbigot; antimormonblather; antimormonfatwa; antimormonjihad; antimormonmanifesto; antimormonrant; antimormonzealot; ashamedformermormon; bitterformermormon; exmormonforchrist; flamebait; flameon; flamer; flamewar; flds; formermormon; geeihatemormons; inman; iusedtobeamormon; jeffs; josephsmith; lds; mormoaner; mormoaning; mormoanist; mormon; mormonism; mormophobia; mormophobic; polygamy; polygyny; prochristian; refutethemormonlies; themormonquestion; truemormonism; warrenjeffs; whinymormons; zealot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last
From the article: From 1852 until 1890, however, the Mormon Church did publically teach and practice polygamy...

Ah, you sly devil, you, Nathan B. Oman. First, notice a key qualifier on the supposed "jumpstart" date for polygamy?

See that word "publicly?" Joseph and Hyrum Smith were still both publicly denying this as a teaching in the early 1840s -- even though Smith was already practicing it!

The leading Lds apologist organization, FAIR says Smith had the idea of polygamy only a year after the Book of Mormon came out (1831). On Aug. 7, 2009, one of the groups some Mormon FREEPERS link to -- FAIR -- a Mormon apologetics organization -- held its annual apologetics conference. One of the presenters (Greg Smith) gave a boldly-titled workshop: Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Plural Marriage* (*but were afraid to ask) [Original Source url: http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2009_Everything_You_Always_Wanted_to_Know_About_Plural_Marriage.html]

Greg Smith was wrapping up his workshop when he took one last question: "I am a woman and NOT a fan of polygamy, although I and my husband are both descendants of it. Is the text of D&C 132-58-66 the origin of the practice?" Answer: The best historical evidence suggests that plural marriage was revealed to Joseph by 1831, and that he was teaching it to a limited circle by that year.28" (Footnote #28 went to: See discussion here: http://en.fairmormon.org/Polygamy_book/Initiation_of_the_practice)

Well, of course, it was "revealed" in the bodily shape of a minor girl -- a new 14 year-old maid (Fanny Alger) Smith had in the bedroom at least by 16 if not earlier.

* Oman could have chosen 1831 as a date to mention. (He didn't).
* Or he could have chosen when D&C 132 was placed in front of Joseph Smith's original wife's nose, Emma (July 1843). (He didn't).
* He picked the latest year possible -- the year Mormons were finally force to go "public" with the secret they had been living for 20 years! [Gunnison published a book on Utah Territory in 1852, mentioning polygamy, and forcing the mainstream LDS church to go public]

What's also interesting about the rest of Oman's article is how he tries to maintain that a key difference is how "sequestered" the fLDS church is vs. the LDS church. Yet, that's the roots of Mormonism! Smith kept moving the church from town to town because of non-receptance (NY, 1830s) to a bank bankruptcy (Kirtland, Ohio), and losing a war (Missouri, 1838). And certainly, Smith kept polygamy a secret-secret for years -- just like the secrets of Warren Jeffs!

BTW, Joseph Smith's nephew, Lds "prophet" Joseph F. Smith, said as a leader in the Lds church (1878) that the purpose of D&C 132 was for none other than Emma Smith:

When the revelation was written, in 1843, it was for a special purpose, by the request of the Patriarch Hyrum Smith, and was not then designed to go forth to the church or to the world. It is most probable that had it been then written with a view to its going out as a doctrine of the church, it would have been presented in a somewhat different form. There are personalities contained in a part of it which are not relevant to the principle itself, but rather to the circumstances which necessitated its being written at that time. Joseph Smith, on the day it was written, expressly declared that there was a great deal more connected with the doctrine which would be revealed in due time, but this was sufficient for the occasion, and was made to suffice for the time. And, indeed, I think it much more than many are prepared to live up to even now.
Source: PLURAL MARRIAGE FOR THE RIGHTEOUS ONLY-OBEDIENCE IMPERATIVE-BLESSINGS RESULTING DISCOURSE BY ELDER JOSEPH F. SMITH, Delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake, July 7, 1878...see PLURAL MARRIAGE FOR THE RIGHTEOUS ONLY

Of course the "personalities" he references is primarily "Emma Smith," who is referenced three times later in D&C 132.

I'd say it's pretty "odd" for a man to have been practicing extra-marital "contact" since 1831...
...have a "formal" ceremony for the first time with an extra-marital partner in 1841 (the Beasman woman)...
...and then finally get around to showing wife Emma this document in the summer of 1843...
...and how "convenient" that the Mormon god not only targeted Emma in D&C 132, but that it contains specific "anti-polyandry" behavior...showing that Emma had already threatened tit-for-tat behavior.

1 posted on 08/15/2011 4:17:27 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All; Zakeet; P-Marlowe; Godzilla; reaganaut; greyfoxx39
What about Oman focusing on 1890? And what about Oman emphasizing that a review of mainstream Mormon polygamy "requires a nuanced understanding of history?"

From the article: Given that history, many Americans ask themselves whether Jeffs' cocktail of religious authority, polygamy and child sex represents some dangerous essence concealed within the apparently wholesome veneer of mainstream Mormonism...Many modern Latter-day Saints fear that in Jeffs they see a living relic of their own religious past, a piece of perfectly preserved 19th-century Mormonism, like a frightening prehistoric monster encased in amber. They do not like what they see, but given the enormous importance of historical memory for Mormon identity this fact presents a problem. Answering any of these questions requires a nuanced understanding of history. [Oman]

Why of course! "Nuance" away, oh DesNews spinmeister!

* Oman could have mentioned that the Lds church continued to privately solemnize additional plural marriages in the 1890s and 1900s....to the tune of hundreds -- if not a few thou. (He didn't). For sample details, see the appendix of B. Carmon Hardy's book, Solemn Covenant. He lists hundreds! (And more have been uncovered since the early 1990s when the book was published).
* To the extent that the Mormon Church was forced to issue a "this time we really mean it" Second Manifesto in the early 1900s Second Manifesto (but he didn't).

* Or that ...every LDS Church President openly practiced polygamy for over 120 years...continuing through 1945 and Heber Grant...In light of the above, I find attempts by LDS members to distance themselves from their FLDS cousins on the grounds polygamy is morally and/or spiritually and/or doctrinally wrong both amusing and disingenuous. (FR poster Zakeet: Source: PLURAL MARRIAGE FOR THE RIGHTEOUS ONLY post #52)

* Or that some of the mainstream Lds polygamists who married in the early 1900s were still living together (and still accepted as mainstream Mormons) until they died in the early 1960s. I mean come on. Mainstream officials had solemnized their wedding vows. How could they kick them out? (They didn't).

But, alas, Oman failed to mention any of these "mainstream" Mormon polygamous realities.

How "convenient." How "nuanced."

2 posted on 08/15/2011 4:18:43 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
From the article: If the stories they tell about their own origins are true, the spiritual progenitors of the FLDS began their split with mainstream Mormonism in the 1880s at the height of the federal government's intense legal crusade against plural marriage. Modern Mormons and modern polygamists have thus been pursuing divergent paths for more than a century, a much longer period than the founding generation of Mormonism that they jointly claim.

So, not only does Oman try to erode Mormon polygamy's origins by over 20 years on the front edge, but he even needs to start placing the spirit of fLDSism amongst the mainstream Mormonites in the 1880s! Old Oman is trying "accordion apologetics." Squeeze mainstream Mormonism into about a 30-year period (1852-1880s) and voila! Magic! Why, polygamy, to hear Oman's "nuanced" voice, was just some flash-in-the-pan overnight fling!

What Oman also avoids mentioning is how mainstream Mormons today regard marriage as eternal. That includes the 19th & 20th century Mormon polygamists. Per today's Mormonism, these polygamists are still sleeping together as isolated polygamous clans on stars or planets near Kolob (wherever that is). I mean, hey, you can't get any more "isolated" than that. Yet, Oman's big point for differentiating the fLDS from the LDS is how isolated the fundamentalists are.

Today's Mormon church has a few current general authorities who have been sealed supposedly "for eternity" to more than one wife. That means that per the 1998 LDS “Church Handbook of Instructions” for LDS that these men will be sleeping with multiple wives for eternity!

Not only this, but what did many of the polygamous Lds "prophets" say would happen if Mormons eschewed/laid aside polygamy? (Ya gotta know that Wilford Woodruff, the guy that issued the 1890 manifesto not only remained a polygamist, but took on another wife after 1890).

For an interesting discussion on this, see my next post re: an 1878 Sunday morning sermon given in the Salt Lake City Mormon Tabernacle by Joseph Smith's nephew, Joseph F. Smith.

3 posted on 08/15/2011 4:19:55 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; P-Marlowe; Zakeet
A concession by Oman in the article: ...19th-century Mormonism did contain some of the elements of Jeffs' story: plural marriage, prophets with loyal followers and geographic isolation. These elements, along with utopia building and a fiery millennialism, pushed 19th-century Mormonism in upon itself, creating barriers with the outside, "gentile" world and at times earning that world's suspicion and hostility.

FR poster P - Marlowe, quoting Lds "prophet" Joseph F. Smith -- who actually was a Mormon leader in 1878 when he said this...but didn't actually become a "prophet" til during the manifesto aftermath, said: I understand the law of celestial marriage to mean that every man in this Church, who has the ability to obey and practice it in righteousness and will not, shall be damned, I say I understand it to mean this and nothing less, and I testify in the name of Jesus that it does mean that. P-Marlowe added: I wonder how many LDS members would cling to the precious words of the future prophet today? I suspect the FLDS members still cling to these words. Maybe they get their initials from Joseph F. Smith. (Source: PLURAL MARRIAGE FOR THE RIGHTEOUS ONLY, post #13)

Also from Joseph F. Smith's sermon: Some people have supposed that the doctrine of plural marriage was a sort of superfluity, or non-essential to the salvation or exaltation of mankind. In other words, some of the Saints have said, and believe, that a man with one wife, sealed to him by the authority of the Priesthood for time and eternity, will receive an exaltation as great and glorious, if he is faithful, as he possibly could with more than one. I WANT HERE TO ENTER MY SOLEMN PROTEST AGAINST THIS IDEA, FOR I KNOW IT IS FALSE. There is no blesssing [blessing] promised except upon conditions, and NO BLESSING CAN BE OBTAINED BY MANKIND EXCEPT BY FAITHFUL COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS, OR LAW, upon which the same is promised. The marriage of one woman to a man for time and eternity by the sealing power, according to the law of God, is a fulfillment of the celestial law of marriage IN PART-and is good so far as it goes-and so far as a man abides these conditions of the law, he will receive his reward therefor [therefore], and this reward, or blessing, he could not obtain on any other grounds or conditions. But this is only the beginning of the law, not the whole of it. Therefore, whoever has imagined that he could obtain the fullness of the blessings pertaining to this celestial law, by complying with only a portion of its conditions, has deceived himself. He cannot do it.

Smith, Joseph Smith's nephew, makes it quite clear that Mormons who duck polygamy are...
...out of compliance with the full measure of the Mormon god's law...
...& therefore ineligible to obtain the fullness of the blessings pertaining to this celestial law...
...and he "protests the idea" that it is considered by some "saints" to a "non-essential to the salvation or exaltation of mankind."
"Exaltation" in Mormon talk = highest degree of glory -- becoming gods.

Q What was going on in the 1870s when Smith gave this message?

A FR poster Zakeet: ...citing the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Reynolds v. United States case (98 U.S. 145), George Reynolds, Brigham Young's personal secretary, plead as follows:

On the trial, the plaintiff in error, the accused, proved that at the time of his alleged second marriage he was, and for many years before had been, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, commonly called the Mormon Church, and a believer in its doctrines; that it was an accepted doctrine of that church "that it was the duty of male members of said church, circumstances permitting, to practise polygamy; . . . that this duty was enjoined by different books which the members of said church believed to be to divine origin, and among others the Holy Bible, and also that the members of the church believed that the practice of polygamy was directly enjoined upon the male members thereof by the Almighty God, in a revelation to Joseph Smith, the founder and prophet of said church; that the failing or refusing to practise polygamy by such male members of said church, when circumstances would admit, would be punished, and that the penalty for such failure and refusal would be damnation in the life to come." He also proved "that he had received permission from the recognized authorities in said church to enter into polygamous marriage; . . . that Daniel H. Wells, one having authority in said church to perform the marriage ceremony, married the said defendant on or about the time the crime is alleged to have been committed, to some woman by the name of Schofield, and that such marriage ceremony was performed under and pursuant to the doctrines of said church>/b>."

Well, what was Brigham teaching on polygamy?

Brigham Young:
* WHY do we believe in and practice polygamy? Because the Lord introduced it to His servants in a revelation given to Joseph Smith, AND the Lord's servants have always practiced it. And is that religion popular in heaven? It is the only popular religion there, for this is the religion of Abraham. (Journal of Discourses Vol 9, p. 322)
* IT is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists - at least in your faith, OR you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 268)
* The only men who become Gods, even sons of God, ARE those who enter into polygamy (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 268)

So, here we have Oman in this article attempting to telescope mainstream Mormon polygamy to a generation; and yet Brigham Young said "the Lord's servant's have always practiced it" and "It's the ONLY popular religion" practiced in heaven! Boy, Oman would have been "fired" by Brigham Young as his PR agent!

More vintage Brigham: Hear it ye elders of Israel AND mark it down in your log-book. The fulness of the Gospel IS the united order AND PLURAL MARRIAGE, and I fear that when I am gone this people will give up these two principles which we prize so highly. (Brigham's sermon at the dedication of the Saint George Temple. He was a prophet in this sense...as the Mormons yielded both the socialistic/communistic "United Order" + polygamy!)

And, of course, Young was only following what Joseph Smith said: We have got to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of instruction (Millennial Star 5:259)

Joseph Smith's personal secretary, William Clayton: From him, Joseph Smith, I learned that the doctrine of plural and celestial marriage is the most holy and important doctrine ever revealed to man on earth, AND without obedience TO THAT principle, no man can ever attain to the fulness of exaltation in Celestial Glory. (Historical Record 6:225-227)

4 posted on 08/15/2011 4:23:56 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

“Or that ...every LDS Church President openly practiced polygamy for over 120 years...continuing through 1945 and Heber Grant...In light of the above, I find attempts by LDS members to distance themselves from their FLDS cousins on the grounds polygamy is morally and/or spiritually and/or doctrinally wrong both amusing and disingenuous.”

Ahh so people cannot renounce sin in your view. Its a good thing Jesus doesn’t take that view with Christians.


5 posted on 08/15/2011 4:24:58 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
From the article: There is no formal connection between Jeffs' FLDS Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints...

How does this college professor know which Mormons will wind up together in the same afterlife place -- and which won't?
Doesn't this imply that the fLDS won't be merged at all with the LDS?
Don't both brands of Mormons have Mormon temples?
Don't both brands of Mormonism teach "marriage is forever?"
Therefore, since Mormons can't predict which "temple Mormons" from which Mormon sect will wind up where, isn't it possible fLDS polygamous Mormons will wind up in celestial heaven per Joseph Smith's & Brigham Young's "version?"

If the first 120 years of Mormonism's "prophets" were all polygamous...on what grounds do the LDS exclude the fLDS from the highest degree of Mormon heaven? (And becoming gods?)

Didn't Brigham Young teach that: The only men who become Gods, even sons of God, ARE those who enter into polygamy (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 268)

6 posted on 08/15/2011 4:27:36 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Ahh so people cannot renounce sin in your view. Its a good thing Jesus doesn’t take that view with Christians.

Sure, they can. But current Mormon leaders don't deem past polygamy by Mormon leaders as "sinful."

You've raised an argument from silence. No Mormon apologists try the angle you've just mentioned.

7 posted on 08/15/2011 4:32:33 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: driftdiver
Are the postings false? Inaccurate? Filled with slurs? What makes you say “hate filled”?
9 posted on 08/15/2011 4:54:29 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
I'll assume intellectual or keyboard laziness on your part (vs. open lying) re: on my entire posting history, & conclude you're just mistaken...just like your earlier post.

You don't know my internal motivations; so stop judging me.

The Lord loves Mormons; and I love them with the truth: Love rejoices in the truth (1 Cor. 13:6)...it doesn't squelch it...like some advocate.

0-for-3 to start the week in two posts, eh? Keep trying. You're bound to utter truth some post.

10 posted on 08/15/2011 4:57:45 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

For a related thread just started, see: Was Polygamy, in the Nineteenth Century, Started by the FLDS Church, or the LDS Church?

It tells of how Joseph Smith landed upon the idea of presenting polygamy as a command from God...since Smith had a history of going after his maids (not only his original teen maid, Fanny Alger, but 19 year-old Eliza Partridge, whom Emma had hired to look after their two-year-old). Emma Smith found them out.

11 posted on 08/15/2011 5:02:38 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
From the article: Given that history, many Americans ask themselves whether Jeffs' cocktail of religious authority, polygamy and child sex represents some dangerous essence concealed within the apparently wholesome veneer of mainstream Mormonism...Many modern Latter-day Saints fear that in Jeffs they see a living relic of their own religious past, a piece of perfectly preserved 19th-century Mormonism, like a frightening prehistoric monster encased in amber. They do not like what they see...

Yup.

The parallels are there: Both Joseph Smith & Warren Jeffs preyed upon (vs. praying upon) 14 yos.
Both used temples & "houses of God" to do it; Jeffs inserted beds into temples to consummate religious rituals with 12 yo & young teens.

Joseph Smith had a rather convenient "revelation" from the Mormon god on Jan. 19, 1841 -- less than 3 months before Smith took his fourth plural "wife"...an event that would accelerate by Fall, 1841 where he would take at least 30 wives in a 25-month period (thru Nov. 1843).

Where can we find that "commandment-revelation?" Well, it's embedded in Mormon "scripture" -- under Doctrines & Covenants 124:

Smith has just got done praising a Mormon preacher, Lyman Wight, for "preaching for Zion...and he shall beget glory and honor for HIMSELF and unto my name." (D&C 124:18)...Smith was all about preaching for self-glory & self-honor...when Smith five verses later discusses the need for a certain boarding house to be built.

"And it shall be for a house for boarding, a house that strangers may come from afar to lodge therein; therefore let it a good house, worthy of all acceptation, that the weary traveler may find health and safety while he shall contemplate the word of the Lord..." (D&C 124:23)

He adds "This house shall be a healthful habitation..." (v. 24)

Well one of those "words" from the Mormon lord that Smith contemplated there was polygamy. Many of his wives wound up boarding there. Smith indeed considered that "healthful" to his sexual desires.

Catherine Baldwin Johnston was a young woman who visited Nauvoo with her husband in the early 1840s. She had a noteworthy encounter with Emma Smith related to polygamy, recounted below by her sister, Eudocia Baldwin Marsh.

About two years after the settlement at Nauvoo it was reported that Smith had received a “revelation” in regard to “Spiritual wives” or “celestial marriages” as they were called. This was strenously denied by the better class of Mormons, but the document as put forth and circulated by Smith, among his confederates has since been published and openly advocated by Brigham Young and the Church at Salt Lake, as all the world knows. In this “revelation” great pains had been taken to conciliate Emma, Smiths wife, and to prepare her for the new dispensation. In it she is addressed by name and commanded to “obey” or she will be destroyed. She was apparently obliged to acquiesce in some degree, at least outwardly, but no doubt felt much the same degree of indignation that any other woman would under the same circumstances. That she was not at all reconciled to this state of things I think is proven by the reply she once made to a question on the subject.

Some time after my first visit to Nauvoo one of my sisters accompanied her husband on one of his business trips to that place. They went to Smith’s Hotel and after supper were shown into a large parlor where seated around the room in groups of three or four were ten or twelve well dressed young women. They were laughing and chatting together in a lively manner, some engaged with light needle work, others quite idle. Leaving his wife in the parlor her husband soon after went out into the town to attend to the business which had brought him there. He was detained until rather late, and my sister feeling somewhat fatigued asked to be shown to her room, where she began making preperations to retire for the night.

Her husband whose business to Nauvoo had been with some of the Gentile citizens–and who had been during the evening, regaled with terrible stories of kidnapping and sudden disappearences of visitors to the city–came in shortly afterwards and not finding her in the parlor where he had left her, immediately began storming around inquiring for and calling her loudly by name. As he passed through the long corridors, his wife heard his voice and much surprised opened her door and asked him what was the matter. When he saw her he ran and clasped her in his arms, exclaiming, “my dear wife I feared these wretches had spirited you away and I should never see you again.” She laughed at such an absurd idea, but he said, “If you had been listening to some of the tales I have heard to night, you too would have been alarmed. I shall never again permit you to be out of my sight when in this town.”

When they came down stairs next morning they were ushered into the parlor to await the announcement of breakfast. Most of the young women of the previous evening were again assembled there and presently Mrs. Emma Smith came in, and seated herself near my sister whom she had met before, and with whom she began talking in a friendly way. My sister’s mind however had been a good deal “wrought up” by what she had seen and heard, and she determined to express something of what she felt to some of these people. So she turned to her and said, “Mrs. Smith where do your people get this doctrine of Spiritual Wives?” The woman with a face flushed to a dark red, and with eyes blazing with fury said “Straight from Hell–Madam.” Some of the young women blushed, too. Some giggled, others looked stolid and indifferent, but a call to breakfast relieved the situation and no more was said.

(“Mormons in Hancock County: A Reminiscence,” reprinted in the Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society [spring 1971], Vol. 64 No. 1, 40-41. Punctuation minimally standardized. Paragraph breaks added for readability. Italics in the original.)
Secondary source: Mormon Coffee: Where did the Mormon doctrine of polygamy come from? Emma knew.

12 posted on 08/15/2011 6:00:58 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

facts are facts colofornian

You Cut-n-paste the same tired mantra over and over. Many times its the exact same text so obviously its a prepared agenda.

If you’re going to quote the Bible you should be more careful about it.

1 Cor 16:4-7

4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.


13 posted on 08/15/2011 6:28:12 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Where is the hate? If you don't like the discussion stay off the religion forum. What part of the article written by an lds publication is untrue?
14 posted on 08/15/2011 7:13:18 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Bottom line the flds are practicing what Joseph Smith taught. It is the current lds group that doesn't practice the original teachings. Jeffs has done nothing different than what Joseph Smith did. Interesting that the current lds, claiming to be the true lds are so nervous about Jeffs. Are they afraid people will see them for who they truly are?
15 posted on 08/15/2011 7:16:30 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
There is no formal connection between Jeffs' FLDS Church and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints...

Another nice qualifier.


Any jury, looking at the EVIDENCE, would rule that the Flds folks follow the Sriptures and DOCTRINES of MORMONism more closely than the LARGER group, based in Salt Lake City.

16 posted on 08/15/2011 7:17:43 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change; driftdiver
What makes you say “hate filled”?

Uh, the inability to DEFEND MORMONism on it's merits?

17 posted on 08/15/2011 7:20:10 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
You Cut-n-paste the same tired mantra over and over. Many times its the exact same text so obviously its a prepared agenda.

Hey...new copy arrives every week. And that which I do resurrect from a previous post -- if you've read it before and now are reading it again, just goes to show you it takes more than one reading from folks for it to sink in. And it can't be too tiring if you're back readin' that which is posted again...again.

Of course, no "prepared...mantra" accusation comes from your keyboard about the 52,000+ Mormon missionaries out there. That means since they do 2-year missions, they are re-infusing over 25,000 missionaries each year...missionaries who undergo "prepared...mantra" training sessions @ the Missionary Training Center. These "prepared...mantra" training lessons are then regurgitated upon the public-at-large for two years' runnin' by 52,000+ Mormon mishies...

That means, 6 days per week, if a pair of missionaries made 250 contacts a week...that would be a million contacts by 4,000 missionary teams alone. Maybe 6.5 million contacts per week by all their teams put together. All regurgitating roughly the same thing -- with only slight variations.

So here you're not bothered by those mantra lessons intensified by thousands of Morbots-on-the-loose in white shirts & ties...but a single poster postin' some things electronically bothers you. Interesting perspective.

From my "thanks-for-sharing" cut-n-paste prototype:

Thanks for sharing, Mr. Anonymous Freeper Poster __________ (fill-in-the-blank)

18 posted on 08/15/2011 7:23:16 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
You Cut-n-paste the same tired mantra over and over. Many times its the exact same text so obviously its a prepared agenda.

Howdy, Maam!

When would be a good time to stop by your home and explain to you why ALL of so-called Christianity is apostate?

Why yes; there ARE about 50,000 more of us; repeating the same message.

19 posted on 08/15/2011 7:23:39 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
If you’re going to quote the Bible you should be more careful about it.

If you’re going to quote the Bible you should be less selective about it...



 
Acts 17:18-19
 18.  A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, "What is this babbler trying to say?" Others remarked, "He seems to be advocating foreign gods." They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.
 19.  Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting?
 
Acts 18:11
    So Paul stayed for a year and a half, teaching them the word of God.
 
 
 
 
 
Romans 15:4
 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
 
 
Romans 16:17
   I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.
 
 
1 Corinthians 4:17
   For this reason I am sending to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church.
 
 
1 Corinthians 11:2
 2.  I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the teachings,  just as I passed them on to you.
 
 
Ephesians 4:14-15
 14.  Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming.
 15.  Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.
 
 
2 Thessalonians 2:15
   So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings  we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.
 
 
2 Thessalonians 3:6
  In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching  you received from us.
 
 
1 Timothy 1:3-4
 3.  As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer
 4.  nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith.
 
 
1 Timothy 1:7
  They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.
 
 
1 Timothy 2:7
   And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle--I am telling the truth, I am not lying--and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.
 
 
1 Timothy 4:1-2
 1.  The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.
 2.  Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.
 
 
1 Timothy 4:6
   If you point these things out to the brothers, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, brought up in the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed.
 
 
1 Timothy 4:11
  Command and teach these things.
 
 
1 Timothy 6:3-5
 3.  If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching,
 4.  he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions 
 5.  and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.
 
 
2 Timothy 1:13
  What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus.
 
 
 2 Timothy 2:15-17
 15.  Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.
 16.  Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly.
 17.  Their teaching will spread like gangrene.
 
 
2 Timothy 3:16-17
 16.  All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
 17.  so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
 
 
 2 Timothy 4:3-4
  3.  For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
  4.  They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.
 
 
Titus 1:11
   They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach--and that for the sake of dishonest gain.
 
 
Titus 2:1
  You must teach what is in accord with sound doctrine.
 
 
Titus 2:15
  These, then, are the things you should teach. Encourage and rebuke with all authority. Do not let anyone despise you.
 
 
 Hebrews 13:9
 Do not be carried away by all kinds of strange teachings.
 
 
 2 Peter 2:1-3
 1.  But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
 2.  Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
 3.  In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
 
 
2 John 1:10
  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him.



20 posted on 08/15/2011 7:25:09 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I was showing where the OP quoted the Bible incorrectly. Get a clue


21 posted on 08/15/2011 7:31:09 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I notice you aren’t spreading the mesage of Gods love or that Jesus is the way.

No, just cut-n-paste the same tired hate filled mantra. Yep thats the way to win people over.


22 posted on 08/15/2011 7:32:59 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; Colofornian

Just wanted to say thanks again to Colo and all the FI’s who persisted in demonstrating their “hate”.

If it wasn’t for them and their “hatred”, I wouldn’t have made the decision to leave mormonism.

You see, the LdS church “warns” their members not to peruse any non-church sanctioned materials or media.

Now why do you suppose that would be? Well, as they tell it, it could shake a member’s “testimony”. Really? If the church were “true”®, what could be shaken?

What’s the harm in posting all this “hatred” if the church is really true®? Should be like water off a duck’s back right?

Anyway, disruptors, trolls, crybabies, etc. are typically shallow in their attempts to slander folks with the “hatred” label.

Try a new schtick, it’s been done too many times before. Pointing out the fallacies, lies and inconsistencies of mormonism is not “hate”. No matter how shallow one’s pond of reason is.


23 posted on 08/15/2011 7:35:03 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

It is almost entertaining when mormons and their defenders quote Bible without any idea what they are quoting or what the quote means and are so agitated by the posting of articles written by mormons on a religion thread for discussion.

PLACE MARKER

24 posted on 08/15/2011 7:36:37 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

A position that is indefensible should be abandoned.


25 posted on 08/15/2011 7:40:33 AM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Joseph F. Smith only stated that HE would submit, he didn't say the church stopped believing in the "ordinance" of polygamy.

""Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I heareby declare my intention to submit to those laws, to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise."

Use his "influence"? Doesn't he supposedly speak for god? Why wouldn't the members obey forthwith if he's the prophet?

All you need for proof is that D&C 132 has been kept in their scripture since the announcement and that many of the mormons and their "leaders" kept on engaging in polygamy even after their "prophet" gave the pronouncement.

In fact, they never even condemned it in the "Manifesto". They "reproved" the individual, but not the practice.

""There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land. "

It just states we're not going to acknowledge doing it, we're not going to endorse it, we're not going to renounce it.

Now if they supposedly obeyed their "prophet", why did they keep on engaging in polygamy for all those years after?

Simple, it was just one man, who instead of acting in the capacity of "prophet", was only stating his personal position. (Wink, wink)

26 posted on 08/15/2011 7:51:49 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SZonian

Whats the harm? It drives more people away from salvation then it saves.


27 posted on 08/15/2011 7:54:20 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; SZonian

How so? How does exposing mormonISM drive people from (Biblical) Salvation?


28 posted on 08/15/2011 8:00:51 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: svcw

read the Bible, the answer is in there


29 posted on 08/15/2011 8:06:26 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

I have and guess what we are commanded to expose false teachings and profits. What Bible are you reading?


30 posted on 08/15/2011 8:11:01 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

I posted my thanks and appreciation, an indicator that I had been directed towards, not away from salvation because of Colo and the FI’s. Did you miss that?

I’m posting here to tell you that you’re statement cannot be proven. It’s an assertion that has no basis in fact.

There are a few others who would tell you the same thing.

I could also refer you to the numerous ex-mormon websites counseling and supporting ex-mormons and soon to be ex-mormons in how to turn to Christ for their salvation.


31 posted on 08/15/2011 8:11:36 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

I just caught on to something...

You believe there is salvation in mormonISM? That to educate mormons about the truth and for them to leave places their eternal souls in peril?

If so, I’m going to have to disagree. The Bible is quite clear on what is needed for salvation. Mormonism, not so much.


32 posted on 08/15/2011 8:14:49 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; Colofornian

Really?

Shame?

Hate?

No, there is not hate just a clarification of the truth and illuminating the difference in doctrines.

Hate?

LDS has been preaching against all of Christianity for 150+ years.

Fine, but there is an opinion on our side and we don’t have take comments like yours without a response.


33 posted on 08/15/2011 8:34:26 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; Colofornian
1 Cor 16:4-7

Yes, but God is not single faceted drift - remember too:

Luk 11:44 KJV - Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over [them] are not aware [of them].

2Pe 2:1 KJV - But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

1Jo 4:1 KJV - Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

1Ti 4:1 KJV - Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2Pe 2:9 KJV - The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

Jud 1:15 KJV - To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

Mat 11:22 KJV - But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you.

Mat 11:24 KJV - But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.

Mar 6:11 KJV - And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

So if you are going to quote the bible - make sure you understand the whole of the bible. Perhaps too, you should pay even closer attention to what you cite as well:

6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.

So you want to delight in evil because of a misdirected concept of God's "love". Think again.

34 posted on 08/15/2011 9:14:07 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

So now I’m a false teacher eh. get over yourself


35 posted on 08/15/2011 9:21:33 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SZonian

“I just caught on to something.”

Good for you

“You believe there is salvation in mormonISM?”

I do? Where do I state that? Nowhere, in fact I state the reverse. Can’t see straight through your hate can you?


36 posted on 08/15/2011 9:23:33 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
So now I’m a false teacher eh. get over yourself

If that is how you characterize yourself. Perhaps you could use additional bible study to prevent further foolish posts.

37 posted on 08/15/2011 9:30:34 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Satan knows the Bible very well.

Is that who taught you?


38 posted on 08/15/2011 9:39:06 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Satan knows the Bible very well. Is that who taught you?

Speaking lies of me now driftdriver - tell us then who's your daddy?

39 posted on 08/15/2011 9:46:40 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Jesus is my savior.

You’re the one throwing around heresy.


40 posted on 08/15/2011 9:49:49 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

“It’s a shame you are so filled with hate.”

-> Disagreement is not hate - that is a democrat tactic. This is a conservative website
-> You are mind-reading to imply you know the motives of others - that is a democrat tactic used to pass “hate-crime legislation”
-> You completely ignored the facts of the article and went to ad hominem attacks - that is a democrat tactic

-> YOU were judgmental of another based on your own imaginings. Why are you so filled with hate?

Why so Democrat?


41 posted on 08/15/2011 9:50:38 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (This message carfully checkd to misteakes by powerful softwhere)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
"I notice you aren’t spreading the mesage of Gods love or that Jesus is the way."

Tell that to the Apostle Paul, who wrote the passage you quoted in I Corinthians 13

"And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about."

II Corinthians 11:12

42 posted on 08/15/2011 9:54:32 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (This message carfully checkd to misteakes by powerful softwhere)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

“Whats the harm? It drives more people away from salvation then it saves.”

Oh. Citation please? Assuming you have one to prove your claim. You might also take a moment to tell the Apostle Paul. He would be amused.

“And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about.” II Cor. 11:12


43 posted on 08/15/2011 9:56:36 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (This message carfully checkd to misteakes by powerful softwhere)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

“So now I’m a false teacher eh.”

First true post you’ve made...


44 posted on 08/15/2011 9:58:08 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (This message carfully checkd to misteakes by powerful softwhere)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver; SZonian
Can’t see straight through your hate can you?

This is disgusting, Driftdiver. Presumptive inner judgments on your part -- like this one upon a former Mormon, Szonian.

Are you aware Szonian is still married to a Mormon and loves her dearly? And yet you superimpose "hate" upon all posters who disagree with you because you can't get over your judging other people and spreading false gossip & false slanders & engaging in mind-reading.

And yet you have to nerve to call yourself "Christian?"

Here Szonian loves his Mormon wife & extended family. Here, Szonian loves his Mormon contacts.

And somehow, you think you can come in here and judge complete strangers' inner motives.

Repent, driftdiver. Openly. Publicly. The same way Satan has used you to false accuse others!

45 posted on 08/15/2011 10:11:48 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Your comment; "Whats the harm? It drives more people away from salvation then it saves."

So tell me, do you believe there is salvation in mormonISM?

Again, if there is not salvation in mormonISM, what's the harm of exposing the heresies and theological fallacies contained therein?

"Hate"? Hardly sport. You're writing more check than your account can cash. Try again.

46 posted on 08/15/2011 10:33:39 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

It never ceases to amaze that disagreement somehow begins to equal hatred.

Especially amongst so-called conservatives. Using statist, alinskyite tactics in an attempt to shut down discussion.

Isolate and freeze your opponent with personal attacks. Get them off topic, force them to defend the spurious and libelous statements.


47 posted on 08/15/2011 10:37:55 AM PDT by SZonian (July 27, 2010. Life begins anew.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
You’re the one throwing around heresy.

Oh really? Where is all your love passages drift?

It is ok to make false accusations against Christians but not Mormons - got it,check.

48 posted on 08/15/2011 10:47:55 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
I notice you aren’t spreading the mesage of Gods love or that Jesus is the way.

 


 
Matthew 15:16
   "Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them.

Matthew 23
 
  1.  Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples:
  2.  "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.
  3.  So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
  4.  They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
  5.  "Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries  wide and the tassels on their garments long;
  6.  they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues;
  7.  they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them `Rabbi.'
  8.  "But you are not to be called `Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers.
  9.  And do not call anyone on earth `father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
 10.  Nor are you to be called `teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ.
 11.  The greatest among you will be your servant.
 12.  For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
 13.  "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. 
 14.  Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. 
 15.   "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. 
 16.  "Woe to you, blind guides! You say, `If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.'
 17.  You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred?
 18.  You also say, `If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath.'
 19.  You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?
 20.  Therefore, he who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it.
 21.  And he who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it.
 22.  And he who swears by heaven swears by God's throne and by the one who sits on it.
 23.  "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
 24.  You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
 25.  "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.
 26.  Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
 27.  "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites!  You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean.
 28.  In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
 29.  "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous.
 30.  And you say, `If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.'
 31.  So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets.
 32.  Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers!
 33.  "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?
 34.  Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.
 35.  And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
 36.  I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation.
 37.  "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.
 38.  Look, your house is left to you desolate.
 39.  For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, `Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' "
 


Mark 7:26-27
 26.  The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.
 27.  "First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
 

And St. Paul chimes in...

Galatians 5:12
   As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!
 


49 posted on 08/15/2011 11:04:16 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
A position that is indefensible should be abandoned.

I predict:

"You folks are all haters. I'm outta here!"

50 posted on 08/15/2011 11:05:35 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson