• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Need to learn

  • Thread starter Thread starter RussianPolyGirl
  • Start date Start date
FollowingHim said:
It is Russian, but deliberately written so that only a native Russian speaker could read it and Google Translate will fail.
@IshChayil's found a sneaky way to pass secret notes under the desk to the new girl in the class. I just wonder if she'll pass a note back. :)
Click to expand...
Did the new girl transfer schools?
 
It seems like our friend here is not able to read the notes being sent to her/him and may be here under false pretenses. Be careful in how you interact.

@RussianPolyGirl, you need to address the messages being sent to you in a language you should understand if you truly are who you claim to be.
 
I am curious about this particular Mormon family. We know mainline Mormonism has abandoned the practice of polygamy, but there are offshoots of Mormonism that have made inroads in converting mainline Mormons to their particular offshoot. I have read I and II Nephi and have gotten more than a few chuckles out of it, so I would take everything you hear from your interactions with Mormons, with a grain of salt, or perhaps a shaker full of salt. The Book of Mormon itself, condemns polygamy and refers to it as sin and an abomination. The Holy Bible OTOH, gives no such condemnation, and there is plenty of Scriptural evidence to show that polygamy is acceptable. Of course, we could go into Egyptian papyrus, and discuss how Joseph Smith supposedly translated that into the Book of Abraham. The Mormon church still holds to the authenticity of the Book of Abraham, even though it can be clearly shown that the Egyptian papyrus from which it was supposedly translated, has nothing to do with what it was supposedly translated into.

We at BF love Mormons, and agree with them on many of the family values that they stand for, but by and large, we disagree with them on Theological issues. It's sad, because those offshoots are well established, and if they had a proper understanding of the nature of God, Jesus, Satan, the authority of the Holy Scriptures as genuinely revealed by the Holy Spirit to the prophets and apostles, and if they understood the means of salvation correctly, we could have great fellowship and communion with them!
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE="Daniel DeLuca, post: 201665, member: 2243"e at BF love Mormons, and agree with them on many of the family values that they stand for, but by and large, we disagree with them on Theological issues. It's sad, because those offshoots are well established, and if they had a proper understanding of the nature of God, Jesus, Satan, the authority of the Holy Scriptures as genuinely revealed by the Holy Spirit to the prophets and apostles, and if they understood the means of salvation correctly, we could have great fellowship and communion with them![/QUOTE]
We could actually commune with them without expecting them to have our supposedly identical take on Scripture!

I suspect, though, that I've just inadvertently commented on something that isn't the main thrust of the original thread. If so, I apologize.
 
Keith Martin said:
We could actually commune with them without expecting them to have our supposedly identical take on Scripture!
Click to expand...

I have always wondered the same thing. Different doctrinal beliefs don't stop others from participating. I myself have also wondered why we don't get involved with thier efforts to bring polygamy out of the shadows. Let them know who we are.
 
That is not a totally wrong headed idea/approach. They seem to have quite a bit of organizational structure that we could benefit from, but they also have a nasty reputation that we don't wish to be stained with.
 
Daniel DeLuca said:
That is not a totally wrong headed idea/approach. They seem to have quite a bit of organizational structure that we could benefit from, but they also have a nasty reputation that we don't wish to be stained with.
Click to expand...
Why on Earth do we think we're able to justify worrying about such a thing as being stained by the 'reputations' of others. The reputations belong to them, and, besides, if we're going to limit ourselves to associating only with the pure of heart and those of stainless reputations, we're going to be very, very lonely.

Now, if our only criteria were to limit ourselves to fellowship with the pious, we'd have opportunities that would overflow the rivers . . .

I prefer the sincerely broken to the brokenly sincere.
 
Daniel DeLuca said:
That is not a totally wrong headed idea/approach. They seem to have quite a bit of organizational structure that we could benefit from, but they also have a nasty reputation that we don't wish to be stained with.
Click to expand...

Keith Martin said:
Why on Earth do we think we're able to justify worrying about such a thing as being stained by the 'reputations' of others. The reputations belong to them, and, besides, if we're going to limit ourselves to associating only with the pure of heart and those of stainless reputations, we're going to be very, very lonely.

Now, if our only criteria were to limit ourselves to fellowship with the pious, we'd have opportunities that would overflow the rivers . . .

I prefer the sincerely broken to the brokenly sincere.
Click to expand...

2nd John answers this question. Do they believe and teach the real messiah? If not don't invite them into your house...
 
Keith Martin said:
Why on Earth do we think we're able to justify worrying about such a thing as being stained by the 'reputations' of others. The reputations belong to them, and, besides, if we're going to limit ourselves to associating only with the pure of heart and those of stainless reputations, we're going to be very, very lonely.

Now, if our only criteria were to limit ourselves to fellowship with the pious, we'd have opportunities that would overflow the rivers . . .

I prefer the sincerely broken to the brokenly sincere.
Click to expand...
I don't need stainless reputations. I simply don't want to be associated with that reputation. FLDS is so secretive and secluded, that reaching out to them is problematic. I would love to associate with FLDS groups that are not involved in irreputable behavior. I would love to dialogue with them and endeavor to lead those people to the truth. I would love to lead those that are from groups like YFZ, to the truth, but I don't think we could benefit from a group like that in any other way than to swell our ranks, yet in the process of even doing that, we pose great risk to our movement.
 
In my opinion the enemy of our souls has used them to denigrate righteous polygyny in an effort to keep people in the status quo.

We already struggle with enough bad press.
 
If they claim that Jesus, or whatever name they call the Son of God is acknowledging that they believe in the Son of Good then all we have to worry about is the fruit they produce and that's it. God is the judge of all hearts. The thing about fruit is you have to get to know someone to actually see if there are any. What if they are secretive because they have learned from real persecution? What if they knew there was a group who accepted thier lifestyle but lived it with a different focus?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cap said:
What if they are secretive because they have learned from real persecution? What if they knew there was a group who accepted thier lifestyle but lived it with a different focus?
Click to expand...
What if the enemy has perverted who “Jesus” is to them and they are headed for the hell that you don’t believe in?
What if they need salvation worse than we need their support?
What if partnering with them makes unequally yoked with unbelievers?
 
steve said:
What if the enemy has perverted who “Jesus” is to them and they are headed for the hell that you don’t believe in?
What if they need salvation worse than we need their support?
What if partnering with them makes unequally yoked with unbelievers?
Click to expand...

Thank God that attitude wasn't present when the seventy were sent out.

Nobody said anything about 'partnering' with them, but being the Christians we are suppose to be to the world. Especially ones who believe in marriage like we do.

It's ok if you don't want to, I just think it's an opportunity if it presents itself, at least to me. And just think, there is a multitude of women who believe like we do about marriage.

And by the way, I believe there is a hell, it's just not eternal like we think.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cap said:
Thank God that attitude wasn't present when the seventy were sent out.
Click to expand...
Ah but it was. "This man casts out devils by the prince of the devils BELZEBUB!"
:eek:o_O

Fellowship is hardly being yoked with them imho. I mostly want to laugh when I run into anti mormon (of any stripe) paranoia. I grew up in "the church" and thought it was silly and sad then, I see the doctrines and foundation with a lot more clarity now then then... don't believe it, but I can explain my why's and I am not afraid.
They are their own organization(s). Even if I think they would benefit from fellowship with this diverse a group, they wouldn't want to. Y'all don't need to worry 'bout that. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top