Posted on 10/25/2010 4:50:55 AM PDT by Colofornian
Grip the IRON rod, mine Daugther; nay - not the rod of BRASS.
Even John Bunyan’s CHRISTIAN was not safe from MORMONism’s grasping hand!
The Iron Rod ~ Priesthood Choir from BYU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhf_FylX9jk&NR=1
Jesus, Once of Humble Birth ~ Mormon Tabernacle Choir
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsWghokARb8&NR=1
Uhm, I'm not sure I understand...
I suspect Resty is trying to say that unless one is lacking in understanding, one is not capable of receiving or comprehending "revelation" that is essentially provided to their level of comprehension. (dumbed down?)
Since I don't believe I need an intermediary here on earth (prophets), the statement is of little value or consequence to me.
Interesting post E. Funny how for decades lds did not want to be called Christian and now want to be called Christian maybe someone actual read what their book said last year.
Now M you are correct that suit is so tight there could be no magical underwear, I mean my goodness you can tell the guy isn’t Jewish.
David McCullough Tells a WW II Christmas Story w/ Mormon Tabernacle Choir
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91Y8uDrvKLU&feature=player_embedded
“...when receiving a revelation it is related to understand of the recipient”
Uhm, I’m not sure I understand...
I suspect Resty is trying to say that unless one is lacking in understanding, one is not capable of receiving or comprehending “revelation” that is essentially provided to their level of comprehension. (dumbed down?)
Since I don’t believe I need an intermediary here on earth (prophets), the statement is of little value or consequence to me.
***
I suspect Resty is trying to say that unless one is lacking in understanding, one is not capable of receiving or comprehending “revelation” that is essentially provided to their level of comprehension. (dumbed down?)
__
Is it not better to ask than to assume or assign intent...
Uhm, let be more clear ok.
That’s why I pinged you to my response.
If it was my intent to not solicit “clarification”, only to post a smarmy comment by omitting the FReeper name when I posted my comment, I would have done so.
Uhm, let be more clear ok.
That’s why I pinged you to my response.
If it was my intent to not solicit “clarification”, only to post a smarmy comment by omitting the FReeper name when I posted my comment, I would have done so.
***
Now this is confusing since you made it clear you did not believe in an intermediary and that is was of no value to you so why are you always taking pop shots at me and acusing me of things I never said but assume and in the the same breath as stated in this reply?
Since I don’t believe I need an intermediary here on earth (prophets), the statement is of little value or consequence to me. ~ SZonian
Placemark
This is what I posted in response to your smarmy question. I also provided my response if my understanding of your comment was correct.
I pinged you as a courtesy. I will not make the same mistake again since you have now taken the tact that I'm "taking pop shots at you and accusing you of things."
I stated a fact that you PURPOSEFULLY removed my FReeper name in your reply post. Is there an "accusation" in there? Only you would know.
This attitude of yours makes it impossible to have a discussion and at no time was I the one being smarmy or taking pop shorts at you and as the RM said
...need to grow some skin.
laughing at post 255 place marker
Good hunting! It’s deer season up here this week...Send them boys over!
Amen to that. Priests too.
Dumbed down. I get it.
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.