Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Companionship of the Holy Ghost - Mormon
LDS.org ^ | August 1988 | Carlos E. Asay

Posted on 07/25/2011 10:34:37 AM PDT by greyfoxx39

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 461-474 next last
To: John McDonnell
The motives of those who wanted to brand Joseph Smith as a polygamist must be critically examined before their statements can be accepted as reliable.

Please tell us the "motives" Joseph F. Smith had to lie about his uncle when he said Smith was given the go-ahead for polygamy as early as 1832. Joseph F. Smith made that statement in 1878 -- when he was not beholden to Brigham Young...Brigham died in 1877.

You do always go around slandering & insinuating things re: the close family membes of Joseph Smith?

261 posted on 07/31/2011 5:00:17 PM PDT by Colofornian (Friends don't let friends drive drunk on Joe Smith sentimentalism to an outer darkness destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Godzilla; Elsie; All
Joseph Smith Jr was not a polygamist/...

Anybody have a "head in the sand" award we could give to John???

262 posted on 07/31/2011 5:01:50 PM PDT by Colofornian (Friends don't let friends drive drunk on Joe Smith sentimentalism to an outer darkness destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell
I believe that you are twisting my reference to "wicked old Mormons" to suit your agenda. I had pointed out that the Mormon leaders involved in polygamy, to answer criticism from Latter Day Saints who claimed that polygamy was an apostate invention, lied about Joseph Smith Jr to justify their sins.

No, John, you are the distorter.

I said nothing about polygamy in post #222.

You then responded in post #228: Now that I got you to blink, I can easily dispense of your quotes of Mormon leaders doing what Elsie did by stating AGAIN that I have never been a Mormon. There is no link between me and a bunch of wicked old Mormons of the past...

Since I quoted the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and Joseph's sidekick John Taylor re: the "devilish" words tossed @ Christians, then, no, you can't "easily dispense of" the quotes I used.

In fact, you still haven't addressed most of post #222!

YOU are the one who used the term "wicked old Mormons" on a post in response to my post which said NOTHING about polygamy...so don't play word & mind games, John. You can read, can't you?

263 posted on 07/31/2011 5:08:23 PM PDT by Colofornian (Friends don't let friends drive drunk on Joe Smith sentimentalism to an outer darkness destination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
You also note that Mormonism's "jumpstart" is the Book of MORMON. I cited the Book of Mormon, which you have elevated in your life. You now concede that the content of the Book of Mormon was put together by "wicked old Mormons?"

I made no such concession, and I think that you know that. The content of the Book of Mormon could not have been put together by "wicked old Mormons", which refers to polygamists, because polygamists would never have put together a book that has the strongest polygamy in religious literature.

"... they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms because of the things which were written concerning David and Solomon his son. Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before Me, saith the Lord."

The King James Version of the Bible, in I Kings 11:4 seems to approve of the David's polygamy:

"For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father."

Joseph Smith Jr, in his revision of the Bible, made I Kings 11:4 read:

For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, his wives turned away his heart after other gods; and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, and it became as the heart of David his father."

Thus, Joseph Smith's revision of the Bible took into consideration the condemnation of polygamy in the Book of Mormon. This may explain why Brigham Young was anxious to obtain from Emma Smith the manuscripts of Joseph Smith's Bible revision. Young would no doubt have suppressed Joseph Smith Jr's revision of I Kings 11:4, and other similar revisions. Emma Smith gave the manuscripts of Joseph Smigh Jr's Bible translation to the RLDS, who published it to the joy of those contending against Mormon polygamy and to the chagrin of Brigham Young.

264 posted on 07/31/2011 5:28:56 PM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Colofornian
The content of the Book of Mormon could not have been put together by "wicked old Mormons", which refers to polygamists, because polygamists would never have put together a book that has the strongest polygamy in religious literature.

Hi John, how's the water, seeing that you are in denial. Sadly for your case, the evidence is more than adequate to show smith and others were practicing polygamy from early on - long before Young and Utah.

Joseph Smith Jr, in his revision of the Bible, made I Kings 11:4 read:

Joseph Smith's - revision - much better word than translation - is still bogus - as there is no extant ms that supports his 'revision'. Just like all else - he was a false prophet.

265 posted on 07/31/2011 5:37:01 PM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Please tell us the "motives" Joseph F. Smith had to lie about his uncle when he said Smith was given the go-ahead for polygamy as early as 1832. Joseph F. Smith made that statement in 1878 -- when he was not beholden to Brigham Young...Brigham died in 1877.

You can't be serious! Joseph F. Smith was a polygamist. He had every incentive to justify his sins, and therefore would quite apt to twist anything to make it look like Joseph Smith Jr was a polygamist!

In the memoirs of Joseph Smith III (1832-1914), who, beginning in 1860, served as president of the Reorganized church, are poignant accounts of his encountering plural wives during his missionary trips through Utah.

"I was once invited to [cousin] Joseph F.'s. He received me kindly as I arrived, and we chatted for a little while before supper was announced.... To me the situation in which I found myself seemed very strange. For the first time in my life I was permitted to see thus at close range the domestic relations of a polygamous family and the actual operation of a doctrine which had long been unspeakably repulsive to me. The very fibers of my being seemed to cry out in protest, and so strong was my prejudice and antipathy that I seemed to feel almost physically ill as I contemplated the scene. There, at one board sat a complacent man, surrounded by three wives and a large number of children ... The women did not take much part in our conversation. I thought I detected upon the countenances of two of them, evidence of some distress of mind, and possibly, regret, as if they were conscious that the opinions I would form of their family relations were not likely to be very complimentary to them."

266 posted on 07/31/2011 5:39:53 PM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
Sadly for your case, the evidence is more than adequate to show smith and others were practicing polygamy from early on - long before Young and Utah.

Your "evidence" is tainted. The two main sources for charges of early polygamy teaching are: (1) polygamists seeking to justify their sins; (2) enemies of the church who were anxious to find anything negative about the church so that they could gleefully trumpet it.

Among the evidence against early polygamy teaching are:

(1) the continued publication of the Book of Mormon with its condemnation of polygamy.

(2) The "law of the church" in the Doctrine and Covenants revelation of February 9, 1831, which states: "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shall cleave unto her and none else; and he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her, shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not, he shall be cast out."

(3) Joseph Smith's revision of the Bible in 1833, which made revisions supporting the condemnation of polygamy in the Book of Mormon.

(4) the 1835 statement by church leaders on marriage that was from then on, until Brigham Young had it removed, published in Doctrine and Covenments: "Inasmuch as this Church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again."

(5) removals from church membership, during the presidency of Joseph Smith Jr, of persons engaging in adulterous relationships.

(6) the interview of the former Emma Smith by her son Joseph Smith III, before which she understood that the truth no matter how ugly was to be told, and she stated that she knew of no other wife, spiritual or otherwise, of her former husband (after his death, Emma remarried).

267 posted on 07/31/2011 6:25:59 PM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Colofornian
Your "evidence" is tainted.

And your 'evidence' is even more tainted John. Emma had a BIG bone to pick and when her son wasn't selected as the next prophet - she struck out at those who continued leadership. As pointed out before, even founders of RLDS acknowledged smith to be a polygamist. There is also the testimony of those women who were smith's wives and the testimony of his contemporaries - even those who were NOT involved in polygamy.

(1) the continued publication of the Book of Mormon with its condemnation of polygamy.

John, the bom was continued to be produced even AFTER smith and during the open polygamy period. Thus your evidence is invalid.

(2) The "law of the church" in the Doctrine and Covenants revelation of February 9, 1831, which states: "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shall cleave unto her and none else; and he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her, shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not, he shall be cast out."

Yes, and this wouldn't be the first time smith out and out lied John. He also lied about the bom, he lied about the Kirkland bank, he lied about his temple rituals, he lied about the wow - so it is not surprising he lied against Church law.

4) the 1835 statement by church leaders on. .

Another documented lie.

(5) removals from church membership, during the presidency of Joseph Smith Jr, of persons engaging in adulterous relationships.

LOL - adulterous indeed - just those who jumped the gun or fell into smith's disfavor.

(6) the interview of the former Emma Smith

As stated before - she lied to protect her children.

But that isn't the whole story is it John. Smith admitted it.

"The same God that has thus far dictated me and directed me and strengthened me in this work, gave me this revelation and commandment on celestial and plural marriage, and the same God commanded me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it, and introduced it, and practiced it, I, together with my people would be damned and cut off from this time henceforth. We have got to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of instruction."
- Prophet Joseph Smith, Contributor, Vol. 5, p. 259

And if we are to take the bom witnesses seriously, then their testimony about smith's marriage to Fanny Alger should be accepted too - as it was a "a dirty, nasty, filthy affair..." (Cowdrey)

268 posted on 07/31/2011 7:00:34 PM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
And your 'evidence' is even more tainted

Your "even more" is an admission that your evidence is tainted.

269 posted on 07/31/2011 7:34:56 PM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Colofornian
Your "even more" is an admission that your evidence is tainted.

To the extent that there is personal opinion - one could say. However, you overtly avoided smith's own admission - is smith "tainted"? Further there is the scope of the evidence John. there are the testimonies of his other wives, testimonies of his closest associates, the reason for the destruction of the Expositor, etc. And speaking of tainted, how tainted were the founders of rlds WHO stated smith was a polygamist (cited previously).

Really now John, Occam's razor really comes into play here. Not all the sources stating smith was a polygamist were trying to "justify" their sinful behavior, not all the evidence is completely colored as to render it unusable. Plain and simple John.

And you have a 'testimony' of a boy who's mom hated the polygamy smith started and sought to set her son as the next prophet - creating a schism on a key point - polygamy. A myth built upon the myth of mormonism John.

The composite evidence John, outweighs the evidence you've provided to date.

270 posted on 07/31/2011 7:46:29 PM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
even founders of RLDS acknowledged smith to be a polygamist

That statement is an oversimplification, especially since the RLDS came to believe on good evidence that Joseph Smith Jr was not a polygamist. Back when they were contending against polygamy, RLDS ministers liked to quote Jeremiah 17:5-8, reading into it as follows:

"Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord [Brigham Young]. For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh [the Reorganization]; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness [beyond the reach of American law], in a salt land and not inhabited [Salt Lake City and surroundings]. Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is. For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the [Missouri] river, and shall not see when the heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit."

God loves repentance. No matter what the sins of the Mormon church were, that church is doing much more good than evil now. "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts" (Isaiah 55:7-9).

271 posted on 07/31/2011 8:23:51 PM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell
(6) the interview of the former Emma Smith by her son Joseph Smith III, before which she understood that the truth no matter how ugly was to be told, and she stated that she knew of no other wife, spiritual or otherwise, of her former husband (after his death, Emma remarried).

History has recorded a bit different story than you have related here...

Eliza was a devout Mormon.
At age 38, she became Joseph Smith's 14th plural wife (in addition to Smith's lawful wife, Emma).
In 1842, after learning Eliza was pregnant, Emma Smith beat Eliza with a broomstick and
knocked her down a flight of stairs, causing Eliza to miscarry Smith's baby.

Miss Eliza R. Snow  was one of the first (willing) victims of Joseph in Nauvoo. She used to be much at the prophet’s house he made her one of his celestial brides... . Feeling outraged as a wife and betrayed as a friend, Emma is currently reported as having had recourse to a vulgar broomstick as an instrument of revenge: and the harsh treatment received at Emma’s hands is said to have destroyed Eliza’s hopes of becoming the mother of a prophet’s son (Dr. W. Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 1886, pp.57-58).

The Mormon writer Claire Noall acknowledged: “Willard realized that Emma had refused to believe that any of the young women boarding at the Mansion when it was first used as a hotel had been married to Joseph. She had struck Eliza Snow at the head of the stairs, and Eliza, it was whispered, had lost her unborn child” (Intimate Disciple, a Portrait of Willard Richards, 1957, p.407).

Sometime during February of 1843 Emma evidently became aware that Joseph had taken her best friend, Eliza R. Snow, as a plural wife. Eliza was currently living in the Smith home, which housed a number of boarders. LDS historians Linda Newell and Valeen Avery wrote:

When the full realization of the relationship between her friend Eliza and her husband Joseph came to her, Emma was stunned. . . . Although no contemporary account of the incident between Emma and Eliza remains extant, evidence leads to the conclusion that some sort of physical confrontation occurred between the two women. In 1886 Wilhelm Wyl published the first known version of the incident in his book, Joseph Smith the Prophet: His Family and His Friends:

They say . . . there is scarcely a Mormon unacquainted with the fact that Sister Emma . . . soon found out the little compromise arranged between Joseph and Eliza. Feeling outraged as a wife and betrayed as a friend, Emma is currently reported as having had recourse to a vulgar broomstick as an instrument of revenge; and the harsh treatment received at Emma’s hands is said to have destroyed Eliza’s hopes of becoming the mother of a prophet’s son...

Another story, attributed to LeRoi C. Snow, Eliza’s nephew, is an oral family tradition that tells of Emma knocking Eliza down the stairs with a broom, the fall resulting in a miscarriage for Eliza. . . .

Whether Eliza fell down the stairs or whether Emma pushed her or pulled her down by the hair, or whether Emma only turned her out of the house, the result seems to be documented in Eliza’s terse journal entry for February 11, 1843:

‘Took board and had my lodging removed to the residence of br. [Jonathan] Holmes.’

Eliza did not make another entry in her journal for five weeks and wrote no explanation for either the gap in her diary or her abrupt departure from Emma’s home. . . .

Several acquaintances of Eliza spoke of Emma discovering Eliza’s relationship with Joseph, leading to her departure.

 

The incident between Emma and Eliza forced the issue of plural marriage into the open. Emma could no longer believe that Joseph was not involved, and he could no longer deny it. Emma had not acted with violence before; now her determined opposition might show up again with unexpected force. Joseph resolutely tried to bring Emma around (Mormon Enigma: Emma Hale Smith, by Linda King Newell and Valeen Tippetts Avery, 1994, pp. 134-137).



http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no106.htm

 



 
 

272 posted on 07/31/2011 9:01:53 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell
No matter what the sins of the Mormon church were, that church is doing much more good than evil now.

 
They would not listen, however, but persisted in their former practices.
Even while these people were worshiping the Lord, they were serving their idols.
To this day their children and grandchildren continue to do as their fathers did.
 
 2 Kings 17:40-41 


273 posted on 07/31/2011 9:04:15 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
"To this day their children and grandchildren continue to do as their fathers did."

Elsie applied this to the present Mormon church. Since the Mormon church no longer practises blood atonement and polygamy, it is not continuing to do as their fathers did. Therefore, the application is false.

The application is true, however, concerning baptism for the dead, which is not mentioned in the fullness of the gospel. Here, the Mormon church, even if it came to realize that baptism for the dead is a false doctrine, could not discard it without offending its membership. The RLDS was correct to reject Joseph Smith Jr's "revelations" on baptism for the dead, because Community of Christ believes in the principle of common consent. The president of the church, past or present, cannot force on her anything claiming to be of divine origin. The church, must, through delegates to a general conference, either accept or reject communications claiming divine origin, and without such acceptance, they cannot have scriptural authority for the church. The documents on baptism for the dead, as first presented, were never given approval by a general conference of the church.

274 posted on 08/01/2011 5:11:20 AM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell
Therefore, the application is false.

You got the speck and missed the mote.

I am at a disadvantage on knowing which SLC doctrines the RLDS folks do not accept.

Likewise; I am at a disadvantage on knowing which SLC PRACTICES the RLDS folks do not participate in.

Setting the minutia aside, the very basis for ALL of the MORMONic sects is faulty, so just exactly how many angels are dancing on which heretical point is moot to me.


The application is true, however, concerning baptism for the dead, which is not mentioned in the fullness of the gospel.

Perhaps you, John, can show us just where, in the BoM, this so called FULLNESS is found.

NONE of the SLC MORMONs on FR have been able to do it.

275 posted on 08/01/2011 6:08:36 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell
The documents on baptism for the dead, as first presented, were never given approval by a general conference of the church.

Religion by commitee.

Who needs it?

Do they ALL put their faces into a hat to discern the TRUENESS or 'revelation'?

276 posted on 08/01/2011 6:10:43 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell
The documents on baptism for the dead, as first presented, were never given approval by a general conference of the church.

The SLC mormon church has latched onto every possible method of making money from tithing from members...from baptism for the dead to not allowing "unworthies" to attend family weddings to coercing members to scrub toilets in the name of "service"...I imagine that already the savings from firing paid janitors has shown up in the claims of mormon benevolence to the needy.

277 posted on 08/01/2011 7:09:56 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (My God can't be bribed by money or good works or bound by manmade "covenants". Romney's can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
you overtly avoided smith's own admission

If I had the date of the first publication of it, the name and motives of the publisher of it, and some commentary on it from persons other than enemies of the church, for balance, then I might be able to deal with it. My guess is that it was fabricated by polygamists to justify their sins, or by enemies of the church who thought they could get away with "making things up".

Some lies are so impressive that they are taken as fact. For example, Tina Fey's imitation of Sarah Palin saying, "I can see Russia from my house," is taken by many as being something that Sarah Palin actually said, and many will never, because they are closeminded, believe that she did not say it.

278 posted on 08/01/2011 8:06:35 AM PDT by John McDonnell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell

The application is true, however, concerning baptism for the dead, which is not mentioned in the fullness of the gospel. Here, the Mormon church, even if it came to realize that baptism for the dead is a false doctrine, could not discard it without offending its membership.
___________________________________________________

How about offending the non-members who are members of other religions, say Christianity ???

The Mormons sont seem worried about that little inconvenience...

The following answers on dead dunking Catholics around the world are from the Poland forum of a geneological website ...

_______________________________________________________

The Vatican objects to the Mormons practice of using the information from the records to do posthumous rebaptisms.

A January 29, 2008 letter from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith expressed “grave reservations”.

The April 5, 2008 letter was from the Vatican Congregation for Clergy. Both are legitimate groups with in the Catholic Church. Jewish leaders also consider this practice to be disrespectful to the dead.

In 2001, the Catholic Church published a document stating that it does not consider any baptisms by Latter-day Saints to be valid.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20010605_battesimo_mormoni_en.html

http://genforum.genealogy.com/poland/messages/45444.html
_____________________________________________

Gilberto,

Here is the official stance on the LDS records. Hopefully
will answer your questions:

Vatican Orders Records Withheld from Mormons

The Catholic News Service has published an article about new Vatican orders to not cooperate with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the microfilming of records. The Vatican wishes to block posthumous rebaptisms by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a practice that Catholics, Jews, and some others find objectionable.

Catholic dioceses throughout the world have been directed by the Vatican not to give information in parish registers to the Mormons’ Genealogical Society of Utah.

An April 5 letter from the Vatican Congregation for Clergy, obtained by Catholic News Service in late April, asks episcopal conferences to direct all bishops to keep the Latter-day Saints from microfilming and digitizing information contained in those registers.

The order came in light of “grave reservations” expressed in a January 29 letter from the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the clergy congregation’s letter said.

You can read more at

http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0802443.htm.

http://genforum.genealogy.com/poland/messages/45423.html


279 posted on 08/01/2011 8:08:30 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: John McDonnell; Colofornian
even founders of RLDS acknowledged smith to be a polygamist
That statement is an oversimplification,. . .

No simplification involved - it is a statement of fact. Additionally -

June 7, 1844 -- William Law, 2nd counselor in the 1st presidency, leaves the church over polygamy and Joseph's denial of it. Soon thereafter, he publishes the 1st and only edition of the Nauvoo Expositor, which claims 1st-hand testimony from several sources that Joseph was practicing polygamy, counter to his public denials. This was NOT an individual attempting to justify their "sin" John. As such is not one of your 'tainted' sources'.

In 1838,Oliver Cowdery is excommunicated, at least in part, for accusing Joseph Smith of adultery with Fanny Alger. He was NOT trying to justify his sins John

D&C 132 was written while emma was still alive - you may argue exactly when, but it states "52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God." I believe that the use of the PAST TENSE here makes it clear.

280 posted on 08/01/2011 8:18:51 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 461-474 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