Methodist Church: Isn’t it true that you believe that men have many wives in the hereafter? I noticed that in Brigham Young’s “Adam-God" discourse, he mentioned Adam brought Eve "one of his wives", with him? Do you believe in the plurality of wives in the hereafter?
Missionaries: As we pointed out earlier, the greatest prophets of all times have practiced the God-given principle of plural marriage. Since "Man is not without the woman, neither woman without the man in the Lord," and since the great prophets of old had these wives, we believe that they will have them in the eternities. For the sake of time, we can refer you again to the scripture in 2 Samuel 12:8 where "God gave David his wives" and the statement in Eccl. 3:14, "Whatsoever God doeth, IT WILL BE FOREVER." God made the woman from the man, and said: "It is good that a man not be alone."
Anglican Church: You mean to tell us God has a wife?
Missionaries: Paul, in speaking to the men of Athens, said "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your poets have said, FOR WE ARE ALSO HIS OFFSPRING. FORASMUCH THEN AS WE ARE THE OFFSPRING OF GOD, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold." (Acts 17:28-29) Paul apparently said we were God's offspring. I don't see how you can have offspring without a mother. Also, if Christ were God's son, there must be a mother there. (Refer also to Eph. 3:14-15)
Church of Christ: Since you teach that whatsoever God does will be forever why doesn't He still give "many wives" and have polygamy exist?
Missionaries: I think God could answer that question better than I could. The Lord said in Isaiah 55:8-9, "For my ways are not your ways, neither are my thoughts your thoughts saith the Lord." His ways are greater and higher than our ways, but I believe what the scriptures say, that God joined man and woman together and that it would be forever. If you doubt the Lord's ways, you had better take it to him. In answer to plural wives in the hereafter, I can’t see a just God causing a good sister to lose her highest exaltation because she was the second wife to David, the 300th wife to Solomon or the 7th wife of Brigham Young.
In Defense of Truth: 21
United Church of Canada: While we are on the subject of marriage, Judge, I think it would be interesting to disclose a little Mormon history. We find in the past three religions that have been founded on sex. We learn of the Oneida Perfectionists that have been founded on sex, believing that every woman was every man's wife, in other words, they formed a free love colony. Then we had Mother Ann Lee and her Shakers, who taught that Ann Lee was none other than Jesus Christ manifest as a woman. Ann Lee, the majority of her life, walked the street as a "call girl". Then the Latter-day Saints, who taught and practiced polygamy or the giving of many wives to one man. In the "Twenty-Seventh Wife," some of the horrors that actually went on under these evil conditions were described by Mrs. Brigham Young. Now, let's examine this practice from the standpoint of the Holy Scriptures. In Matt. 19:1-9 we learn that "Man shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be one flesh," and the Savior went on to point out that it was through "hardness of their hearts" that divorces were given. He then taught if a man were to marry another while his wife lived it was adultery. We then read from in Jacob 2:23-24 which states "For behold thus saith the Lord: These people begin to WAX IN INIQUITY, they understand not the scriptures for 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." Even your Book of Mormon powerfully condemns polygamy. The Lord in that same Book of Jacob went on to say that a man must cling to one woman, and have no concubines. He said that whoredoms were an abomination before him, and the land would be cursed for their sakes by its practice. Therefore, Judge, we have presented a case before you of a people who disobeyed God's moral law and through a prophet's command went against the writings of the Bible and to satisfy the lusts of their flesh. What was it you said, elders, by their fruits ye shall know them?
Missionaries: Gentlemen I maintain that polygamy is a principle of God when He thus commands it. I challenge the representative of the United Church to dispute the points I will bring up. Paul said, "to the pure all things are pure, but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure." I believe you, sir demonstrated which category you fit under this afternoon. He first quoted "The Twenty-Seventh Wife" written by a wife of Brigham Young, I would imagine that the defense could build a stronger case than that by reading anti-Mormon trash. If you wanted to learn of Christ as He was stumbling towards the cross, would you go to the apostle John or would you go to a Roman soldier? You have used the very same logic. It would seem to me that intelligent people would go to the unbiased sources. This woman was a liar and a false witness because Brigham Young had eighteen other wives to bear witness of his tender love and affection to them and their families. Incidentally, she was the nineteenth wife, not the twenty-seventh as she stated. The truth is available from the official government documents available for anyone to investigate which should prove that the book is a worthless bunch of lies. You used Matt. 19:1-9 and your hasty interpretation completely destroyed your correct interpretation of the scripture. The Pharisees were not talking about polygamy but were talking about divorcees. Christ told them that a man and his wife were one flesh and that they were not to be put away for the cause of divorce. Those that practiced polygamy were not married before, (among the women), nor divorced and neither had husbands that were still living so they wouldn't have even figured in the explanation the Savior was giving about divorce. There is absolutely no part or parcel dealing with polygamy in either scripture merely divorce. Then you have pulled a beautiful scripture rail split, in Jacob. You got all the way to verse 29 in Jacob 2 but then stopped. Why didn't you read on to verse 30 like an honest individual seeking the truth? It would have answered your question for you. It reads "For if I will saith the Lord of Hosts raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise, they shall hearken unto these things." Notice He said "Unless I build up a seed, you shall hearken to verses 22-24."
United Church of Canada: The Lord there said that those people were excusing their deeds because of what they read of David and Solomon and their deeds. The Lord said that they had been "Abominable before him." You can't dispute it.
Missionaries: Have you read the Old Testament, sir? Have you now? You must ask WHY it was abominable. Apparently, David and Solomon did something to make it that way since polygamy had been practiced by many others in the Old Testament without the Lord condemning it. Christ in Matt. 5:48 said that "God was perfect.” We then read 2 Samuel 12:8 where Nathan the Prophet speaking in the name of the Lord, said: "Thus saith the Lord God, speaking to David, I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's WIVES." It was none other than the God of Israel, the God of our fathers that gave David his wives. According to your own words, you have this day accused God of wickedness by your hasty interpretation of the Bible. If you had read the Old Testament, you would have found out why polygamy was abominable before the Lord's eyes. 2 Sam. 12:9 reads "Wherefore hast thou (David) despised the commandments of the LORD,....thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the Children of Ammon." It is pointed out again in 1 Kings 15:5 that "David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, SAVE ONLY IN THE MATTER OF URIAH THE HITTITE." That is why it was abominable, David had left those wives that God had given him, and committed adultery. The reason it was wicked with Solomon is answered in 1 Kings 11:1-11 and particularly in verses 9-11. As it points out Solomon turned his heart from the "God of Israel" and loved MANY STRANGE WOMEN of which the Lord said it had been wicked. The Son of God came from this same polygamous seed of David; and proudly I say to you as you facetiously asked me, "by their fruits I do know them". I look at Jesus Christ, David, Abraham and the greatest men of all time and say "By their fruits, ye shall know them." God sanctioned it, gave these prophets their wives, and called it righteous. He made provision for its practice in, and I know that it is a righteous commandment, and was given to the prophet by the Lord.
Missionaries: Gentlemen I maintain that polygamy is a principle of God when He thus commands it. I challenge the representative of the United Church to dispute the points I will bring up. Paul said, "to the pure all things are pure, but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure." I believe you, sir demonstrated which category you fit under this afternoon. He first quoted "The Twenty-Seventh Wife" written by a wife of Brigham Young, I would imagine that the defense could build a stronger case than that by reading anti-Mormon trash. If you wanted to learn of Christ as He was stumbling towards the cross, would you go to the apostle John or would you go to a Roman soldier? You have used the very same logic. It would seem to me that intelligent people would go to the unbiased sources. This woman was a liar and a false witness because Brigham Young had eighteen other wives to bear witness of his tender love and affection to them and their families. Incidentally, she was the nineteenth wife, not the twenty-seventh as she stated. The truth is available from the official government documents available for anyone to investigate which should prove that the book is a worthless bunch of lies. You used Matt. 19:1-9 and your hasty interpretation completely destroyed your correct interpretation of the scripture. The Pharisees were not talking about polygamy but were talking about divorcees. Christ told them that a man and his wife were one flesh and that they were not to be put away for the cause of divorce. Those that practiced polygamy were not married before, (among the women), nor divorced and neither had husbands that were still living so they wouldn't have even figured in the explanation the Savior was giving about divorce. There is absolutely no part or parcel dealing with polygamy in either scripture merely divorce. Then you have pulled a beautiful scripture rail split, in Jacob. You got all the way to verse 29 in Jacob 2 but then stopped. Why didn't you read on to verse 30 like an honest individual seeking the truth? It would have answered your question for you. It reads "For if I will saith the Lord of Hosts raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise, they shall hearken unto these things." Notice He said "Unless I build up a seed, you shall hearken to verses 22-24."
United Church of Canada: The Lord there said that those people were excusing their deeds because of what they read of David and Solomon and their deeds. The Lord said that they had been "Abominable before him." You can't dispute it.
Missionaries: Have you read the Old Testament, sir? Have you now? You must ask WHY it was abominable. Apparently, David and Solomon did something to make it that way since polygamy had been practiced by many others in the Old Testament without the Lord condemning it. Christ in Matt. 5:48 said that "God was perfect.” We then read 2 Samuel 12:8 where Nathan the Prophet speaking in the name of the Lord, said: "Thus saith the Lord God, speaking to David, I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's WIVES." It was none other than the God of Israel, the God of our fathers that gave David his wives. According to your own words, you have this day accused God of wickedness by your hasty interpretation of the Bible. If you had read the Old Testament, you would have found out why polygamy was abominable before the Lord's eyes. 2 Sam. 12:9 reads "Wherefore hast thou (David) despised the commandments of the LORD,....thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the Children of Ammon." It is pointed out again in 1 Kings 15:5 that "David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, SAVE ONLY IN THE MATTER OF URIAH THE HITTITE." That is why it was abominable, David had left those wives that God had given him, and committed adultery. The reason it was wicked with Solomon is answered in 1 Kings 11:1-11 and particularly in verses 9-11. As it points out Solomon turned his heart from the "God of Israel" and loved MANY STRANGE WOMEN of which the Lord said it had been wicked. The Son of God came from this same polygamous seed of David; and proudly I say to you as you facetiously asked me, "by their fruits I do know them". I look at Jesus Christ, David, Abraham and the greatest men of all time and say "By their fruits, ye shall know them." God sanctioned it, gave these prophets their wives, and called it righteous. He made provision for its practice in, and I know that it is a righteous commandment, and was given to the prophet by the Lord.
Kiroro: Mirai
Updates July 8, 2021
See the images below for the Music Sheets.
As requested, here are the music sheets, unfortunately, I don't have enough time in uploading them. It's too hard to use a cellphone in maintaining this blog. If you think this is helpful, please consider a little donation. That helps a lot, but if you can't, just share this blog with others to support it.
See the images below for the Music Sheets.
As requested, here are the music sheets, unfortunately, I don't have enough time in uploading them. It's too hard to use a cellphone in maintaining this blog. If you think this is helpful, please consider a little donation. That helps a lot, but if you can't, just share this blog with others to support it.
From March 17, 2017
Mirai is a Japanese word for "FUTURE". I never know about this one. Thanks to Search Engine, hahaha. Here is the Music that I had arranged. So beautiful, you may have it for free here. The song was sung by a female pop band Kiroro, I don't know if this is a name of a person or a band name. Anyway, the song belongs to the 1990's hits if you are not familiar with 90's hits, this music is one of those.
Music sheets on image below, you may grab it. Use web version for best result and resolution.
In Defense of Truth: 15
Church of Christ: Gentlemen, I maintain that the Elders of the Mormon Church are not elders. Titus
1:5-6 proves that an Elder has to be married. The husbands of one wife and have faithful
children. Timothy, writing to Titus, said, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest
set in order the things that are wanting and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee;
if any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or
unruly." Since the two young men represented here are not married, they cannot be elders.
Missionaries: Sir, I challenge your interpretation of that scripture, and will show you and prove that
you do not have Elders in the Church of Christ and that we do. In answer to Titus 1:5-6 our
friend did not ever bother to go on and read verse 7. This proves plainly that this passage was
talking about presiding elders, or bishops. I refer you to the first four words in verse 6, and the
first six in verse 7. Notice that the Elder (verse 5) had to be blameless (verse 6) to be a
Bishop (verse 7) which was blameless. 1 Tim. 3:2 reaffirms this claim. Sir, was Paul the
Apostle married? How many bishops are married? Based on this chapter alone the Catholic
Church is false because their Bishops are not married nor are their elders.
Church of Christ: Absolutely not! 1 Cor. 7 is a direct indication that Paul was single. He was not an
elder, either.
Missionaries: By your own admission, Paul was single. We read in 1 Tim. 4:14 Paul's advise to his
former companion in the ministry, Timothy. He tells him not to neglect the gift that is in him,
which was given him by prophecy, by the laying on of hands of the Presbytery. Any Bible
dictionary will tell you that Elder and Presbytery are the same. We read in 2 Tim. 1:16 where
Paul tells Timothy "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God,
which is in thee by THE PUTTING ON OF MY HANDS." There it is in black and white. The
Presbytery gave Timothy this gift of God, and Paul was one of the Presbytery or Elders, and
since Paul was not married, by your own admission, Elders can be single. If you question this
scripture, look at the little Bible aids of reference and you will find that 2 Tim. 1:6 refers you to
1 Tim. 4:14. These scriptures answer your question, and prove that Titus 1:5-6 was referring
to presiding elders, or bishops. It also establishes that elders can be single or married but
bishops must be married. Now, sir, I promised you that I would prove you do not have elders
in the Church of Christ. I refer you to James 5:15 which reads "is any sick among you. Let
him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him, ANNOINTING HIM WITH OIL
IN THE NAME OF THE LORD. AND THE PRAYER OF FAITH WILL SAVE THE SICK, AND THE LORD WILL RAISE HIM UP, AND IF HE HATH COMMITTED SIN, THEY SHALL BE
FORGIVEN HIM." First of all, your elders do not anoint sick. Second, you do not have the
spiritual gifts in your church, and neither do these associates of yours from the other
denominations. It was Alexander Campbell, founder of the Church of Christ, that stated,
"Where the Bible speaks, we speak, where the Bible is silent, we are silent." I ask you why
don't you have elders in your church that can heal the sick? Before you answer the question, I
might point out by way of interest that Mark 6:12-13 establishes that the apostles were also
Elders. We read, "And they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick
and healed them." We go on to read in John 20:23, "Whosoever sins ye remit they are
remitted unto them; and whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained." Compared with James
5:14 we find identical qualifications in the elders and apostles, 1: Anointing the sick, and 2:
Remitting sins through inspiration of the Lord. How do you answer James 5:1-7?
Church of Christ: Our elders do not heal the sick, because when the perfect work of God came in, the
miracles ceased.
Missionaries: Please show me in writing where the scriptures say they were to cease? No I guess
you can’t which is why what you have just said is ridiculous! Jesus clearly taught that greater
works would be done by the apostles after He left them. There are No scriptures to support
your stand, and in view of Mark 16:17-18, the spiritual gifts were TO FOLLOW. Since you
don't have them you don't even resemble in the least the original Church of Christ, of which
you can't trace your authority within 1800 years. I am sure we will discuss the authority later in
our discussion.
In Defense of Truth: 15
Church of Christ: Gentlemen, I maintain that the Elders of the Mormon Church are not elders. Titus
1:5-6 proves that an Elder has to be married. The husbands of one wife and have faithful
children. Timothy, writing to Titus, said, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest
set in order the things that are wanting and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee;
if any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or
unruly." Since the two young men represented here are not married, they cannot be elders.
Missionaries: Sir, I challenge your interpretation of that scripture, and will show you and prove that
you do not have Elders in the Church of Christ and that we do. In answer to Titus 1:5-6 our
friend did not ever bother to go on and read verse 7. This proves plainly that this passage was
talking about presiding elders, or bishops. I refer you to the first four words in verse 6, and the
first six in verse 7. Notice that the Elder (verse 5) had to be blameless (verse 6) to be a
Bishop (verse 7) which was blameless. 1 Tim. 3:2 reaffirms this claim. Sir, was Paul the
Apostle married? How many bishops are married? Based on this chapter alone the Catholic
Church is false because their Bishops are not married nor are their elders.
Church of Christ: Absolutely not! 1 Cor. 7 is a direct indication that Paul was single. He was not an
elder, either.
Missionaries: By your own admission, Paul was single. We read in 1 Tim. 4:14 Paul's advise to his
former companion in the ministry, Timothy. He tells him not to neglect the gift that is in him,
which was given him by prophecy, by the laying on of hands of the Presbytery. Any Bible
dictionary will tell you that Elder and Presbytery are the same. We read in 2 Tim. 1:16 where
Paul tells Timothy "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God,
which is in thee by THE PUTTING ON OF MY HANDS." There it is in black and white. The
Presbytery gave Timothy this gift of God, and Paul was one of the Presbytery or Elders, and
since Paul was not married, by your own admission, Elders can be single. If you question this
scripture, look at the little Bible aids of reference and you will find that 2 Tim. 1:6 refers you to
1 Tim. 4:14. These scriptures answer your question, and prove that Titus 1:5-6 was referring
to presiding elders, or bishops. It also establishes that elders can be single or married but
bishops must be married. Now, sir, I promised you that I would prove you do not have elders
in the Church of Christ. I refer you to James 5:15 which reads "is any sick among you. Let
him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray over him, ANNOINTING HIM WITH OIL
IN THE NAME OF THE LORD. AND THE PRAYER OF FAITH WILL SAVE THE SICK, AND THE LORD WILL RAISE HIM UP, AND IF HE HATH COMMITTED SIN, THEY SHALL BE
FORGIVEN HIM." First of all, your elders do not anoint sick. Second, you do not have the
spiritual gifts in your church, and neither do these associates of yours from the other
denominations. It was Alexander Campbell, founder of the Church of Christ, that stated,
"Where the Bible speaks, we speak, where the Bible is silent, we are silent." I ask you why
don't you have elders in your church that can heal the sick? Before you answer the question, I
might point out by way of interest that Mark 6:12-13 establishes that the apostles were also
Elders. We read, "And they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick
and healed them." We go on to read in John 20:23, "Whosoever sins ye remit they are
remitted unto them; and whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained." Compared with James
5:14 we find identical qualifications in the elders and apostles, 1: Anointing the sick, and 2:
Remitting sins through inspiration of the Lord. How do you answer James 5:1-7?
Church of Christ: Our elders do not heal the sick, because when the perfect work of God came in, the
miracles ceased.
Missionaries: Please show me in writing where the scriptures say they were to cease? No I guess
you can’t which is why what you have just said is ridiculous! Jesus clearly taught that greater
works would be done by the apostles after He left them. There are No scriptures to support
your stand, and in view of Mark 16:17-18, the spiritual gifts were TO FOLLOW. Since you
don't have them you don't even resemble in the least the original Church of Christ, of which
you can't trace your authority within 1800 years. I am sure we will discuss the authority later in
our discussion.
In Defense of Truth: 05
Jehovah Witnesses: Elder, I have a question for you that will require detailed explanation. If I am not mistaken, the Latter-day Saints claim that Jesus of the New Testament was Jehovah of the old. Now, if this is the case, I have two scriptures that definitely prove your own theory of the Godhead false. We find in Psalms 110:1-2 “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies as thy footstool. The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion.” Now, who sat at the right hand of the Lord Jehovah – Acts 7:55-56 tells us it was Christ – and the capital letters in the scripts refers to Jehovah. Now, Acts 3:13 establishes once and for all that Jehovah is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It reads: “The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, and the God of our fathers hath glorified HIS SON JESUS; whom ye delivered up.” I refer you to Exodus 6:13 which shows that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was none other than Jehovah. These two scriptures absolutely prove the Mormon theory of God false.
Missionaries: You are to be commended for your choice of scriptures, because both are excellent questions and will require detailed explanations. We do believe Christ of the New Testament was Jehovah of the old. In answer to Psalms 110:1-2 would you please turn to 1 Cor. 15:24-25 which proves the Lord in capital letters was Christ. It reads, “Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the Kingdom of God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rules and all authority and power. FOR HE MUST REIGN, TIL HE HATH PUT ALL ENEMIES UNDER HIS FEET.” So, it was Christ that was to put all the enemies under His feet, and since you said the LORD in capital letters referred to Jehovah, and Jehovah was to reign until all enemies were under this feet, then Jehovah, by your own admission, must be Christ. If you ask who the Lord was in small letters, you will find in Acts 3:19-21 that God our Heavenly Father is referred to by the small letters “Lord”. Note that in Isa. 43: 1-15, it refers to the LORD as the redeemer and savior. That would be Christ of the New Testament. Now, Acts 3:13 will require a more detailed explanation. We must first establish that Jehovah of the Old Testament was Christ of the New using other scriptures. Isa. 12:1-2 informs us that the God of our Salvation, the Lord Jehovah, was Isaiah’s strength and His song, and it also says “HE ALSO IS BECOME MY SALVATION.” Acts 4:12 informs us that, (speaking of Christ), “There is salvation by none other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby men may be saved.” Therefore, as we have clearly established, Jehovah was Isaiah’s salvation and Jesus was Peter’s salvation, and since Jesus was the only name given under heaven whereby man could be saved, Jesus was Jehovah. In Zech. 12:10 the Lord Jehovah was speaking, and said “and they shall look upon ME whom they have pierced.” In John 19:37 we find out who it was speaking of, when we read, “They shall look on him whom they have pierced” referring to Christ on the cross. In your own New World translation, we read in Rev. 22:12-13, “Look, I am coming quickly, and the reward I give is with me, to render to each on as his work is. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” Verse 16 tells us who was “coming quickly” – Jesus Christ. Therefore as the scriptures pointed out, Christ was the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. We then turn to Rev. 1:8 in your New World translation, and it reads, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, says Jehovah God, the one who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.” Here it proves without any doubt that the Alpha and the Omega was Jehovah, and who, in Chapter 22, was Christ – so by the New World translation of the scripture, it clearly points out Jehovah was Christ. If you still doubt that Christ was Jehovah, turn to Rev. 1:8 and read carefully until you come to verse 17 and 18, which reads, “Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last, (the definition of Alpha and Omega), and the living one; and I BECAME DEAD, BUT LOOK: I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.” Now, we have established Christ as Jehovah from both translations. We then read, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), and Paul pointed out in Col. 1:16 that “By him (Christ) were all things created that are in Heaven, and that are in earth.” Now, in Acts 3:3, Peter was faced with a difficult situation, because he had to testify of Christ, and still put over the point that though He was Jehovah it was God the Father that had raised him from the dead. The people understood clearly that men had a spirit, so Peter spoke of their Spiritual Creator – WHO WAS THE CREATOR OF THE SPIRITS OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB, and, therefore, could be called the “Father of the Spirits” or Christ’s Father. Then He would not confuse them with the creator of all physical bodies, Christ, who as Colossians 1:16; John 1:1-3; Heb.1;1-3 all pointed out “Created all things that are in heaven and that are on earth.” Making this distinction, He easily pointed out that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s spirits, had glorified His son (Whom, with His Father, created our physical bodies, and therefore the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob also) whom they had delivered up and crucified. Heb. 12:9 speaks of the “Father of our Spirits” which is the Father of our Lord, Jesus Christ. So you see, both God and Christ were the “Gods of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” only God the Father was the creator of spirits, and Christ the Creator of Bodies under the direction and assistance of the Father. If you had “all truth” you would have known this. The only way you can have “all truth” is to accept what the prophet Amos said which is to accept living prophets who are the only people to whom God will give revelation.
Jehovah Witnesses: That is ridiculous, because you will notice that Jehovah breathed into men the “Breath (or Spirit) of life.” Therefore Christ would have been the creator of their spirits, and your argument collapses.
Missionaries: Just because Christ placed the spirit in man doesn’t make him the Creator of that Spirit. And we already established that breath and spirit were not the same thing. Therefore, by reading the scriptures, we can place the correct interpretation when we take the scripture in its context. Notice Eccl. 12:7 when the body dies and returns to the earth, the spirit of man returns to the God who gave it.
Jehovah Witnesses: You know this scripture reaffirms our conviction of only a spiritual resurrection. The LDS plan of salvation teaches that a man’s spirit leaves his body and goes to a spirit world to await resurrection. This is both illogical and absurd. Eccl. 9:5 informs us “that the living know that they shall die, but the DEAD KNOW NOT ANYTHING, NEITHER HAVE THEY ANY MORE REWARD: for the memory of them is forgotten.” We go on to read in Eccl. 9:10 “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, no Knowledge, nor wisdom in the grave, whither thou goest.” How, if there is no more wisdom, knowledge, work or device and the dead know not anything, why do you teach “work in the spirit world” and baptism for the dead? Why is your doctrine so contrarily opposed to the word of God?
Missionaries: I believe that one of the many doctrines that are taught in the Holy Scriptures, the doctrine of the spirit leaving the body is perhaps the clearest of all, along with the Godhead. I maintain that the two scriptures you have just referred to are speaking only of our physical bodies, and we believe that they will “return to the dust” and that in the grave they will not know anything nor have wisdom, because our spirits will not be in the grave with our bodies, but will “have returned unto God who gave it.” (Eccl. 12:7) You see, by such a doctrine, you have created a major problem in your movement. We read in Matthew 17:3 that Moses and Elias appeared to Christ, Peter, James and John “talking with them” yet Deut. 34:5-6 teaches us that “Moses, the servant of the LORD, died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord.” This means Moses had been dead for hundreds of years, and “Christ was the first fruits of them that slept, (1 Cor. 15:20), so how did Moses possibly talk with them if He had not yet been resurrected, and he was still in the grave, (spirit and body)? This scripture proves without a doubt that the spirit does leave the body, and can talk, and in this case, communicate with man. Also, this teaches that there has not yet been any resurrection, yet Matthew 27:51-53 informs us that “The veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; AND THE GRAVES WERE OPENED; AND MANY BODIES OF THE SAINTS WHICH SLEPT AROSE, and came out of the grave after His (Christ’s) resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.” How clear do you want the scripture to read? 1 Cor. 15:6, along with many other passages, refers to “sleep” as death. Now, if the dead have no reasoning, then Peter should have learned the gospel from the Jehovah Witness, because He taught “For this cause was the Gospel preached also TO THEM THAT ARE DEAD, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” Why would the gospel be preached to the dead if they had no reasoning, nor knowledge, nor wisdom? The answer is found in the last seven words of that scripture, because they “live according to God in the spirit.” And since they await a literal and physical resurrection as was experienced in Matthew 27:51-53, they will be resurrected with their bodies “that returned to the dust”. Paul taught this doctrine in ancient time to the Philippians, when he said that Christ would “Change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body,” (Phil. 3:21), which was flesh and bones, (Luke 24:36-39). It was my understanding that you gentlemen teach the doctrine that only 144,000 will stand before the throne of God, and that they will be righteous souls. The rest of the righteous will “inherit the earth”. In light of these scriptures you would have a problem explaining your 144,000. However if you really want to understand this you would have to accept living prophets and modern revelation including “The Book of Mormon”.
Jehovah Witnesses: We teach that 144,000 will stand before the throne of God as special witnesses. These 144,000 have already been chosen, and not all can be numbered with them. This is taught in the Book of Revelation. In Rev. 8:4 we read “Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the tress, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads, and I heard the number of them which were sealed; and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand, of all the tribes of the children of Israel.” We read where they were “married” to the church and therefore in Rev. 14:4 “were not defiled with women, for they were virgins.” It was the 144,000 that stood on Mount Zion with the mark of the Father in their foreheads, (Rev.14:1), and sung “as it were a new song before the throne and before the four beasts, and the elders, and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, WHICH WERE REDEEMED FROM THE EARTH.” So you can see they were special servants, redeemed from the earth, and as such were the only ones that were before the throne night and day. It goes on to say that “these follow the Lamb (Christ) whithersoever He goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the first fruits unto God and to them Lamb. And in their mouth was found no guile; for they are without fault before the Throne of God.” I think these scriptures clearly support our stand.
Missionaries: Thank you for your explanation. I would like to now show you that the 144,000, though they were special, were not the only ones that would live before the throne. Careful examination of the scriptures would reveal this, and I declare that those of the Church of Jesus Christ were the only ones that could stand before the throne, and they were far more numerous than 144,000. You quoted in Rev. 7:1-8 and then skipped to verse 15 and said this had reference to the 144,000. This is absolutely false. Another scriptural rail split. John was taken in a vision, and after seeing 144,000 (verse 9) he records “Behold and lo, I beheld a great multitude which no man could number, of all nations, kindreds, tongues and people which STOOD BEFORE THE THRONE AND BEFORE THE LAMB, CLOTHED WITH WHITE ROBES.” How many is it that can not be numbered? Then in verse 13 one of the “four and twenty Elders” asked “who are these which are arrayed in white robes? and when came they?” John answered and said, “Sir, thou knowest.” The angel then said, speaking of those in white robes, (Which was the multitude which no man could number), “These are they which came out of the great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. THEREFORE ARE THEY BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD, AND SERVE HIM DAY AND NIGHT IN HIS TEMPLE: AND HE THAT SITTETH ON THE THRONE SHALL DWELL AMONG THEM.” So the 144,000 would not only stand before the throne, but also the great multitude, representing the twelve tribes. They were members of the “Church of the Firstborn” (Heb. 12:24) as was a requirement of the multitude. If they were not members of the Church, as Hebrews points out, crossed with Revelations, then they had no hope of heaven. Again in modern day revelation and scriptures we could shed even additional light on this subject, if you really wanted to have “all truth”.
Missionaries: You are to be commended for your choice of scriptures, because both are excellent questions and will require detailed explanations. We do believe Christ of the New Testament was Jehovah of the old. In answer to Psalms 110:1-2 would you please turn to 1 Cor. 15:24-25 which proves the Lord in capital letters was Christ. It reads, “Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the Kingdom of God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rules and all authority and power. FOR HE MUST REIGN, TIL HE HATH PUT ALL ENEMIES UNDER HIS FEET.” So, it was Christ that was to put all the enemies under His feet, and since you said the LORD in capital letters referred to Jehovah, and Jehovah was to reign until all enemies were under this feet, then Jehovah, by your own admission, must be Christ. If you ask who the Lord was in small letters, you will find in Acts 3:19-21 that God our Heavenly Father is referred to by the small letters “Lord”. Note that in Isa. 43: 1-15, it refers to the LORD as the redeemer and savior. That would be Christ of the New Testament. Now, Acts 3:13 will require a more detailed explanation. We must first establish that Jehovah of the Old Testament was Christ of the New using other scriptures. Isa. 12:1-2 informs us that the God of our Salvation, the Lord Jehovah, was Isaiah’s strength and His song, and it also says “HE ALSO IS BECOME MY SALVATION.” Acts 4:12 informs us that, (speaking of Christ), “There is salvation by none other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby men may be saved.” Therefore, as we have clearly established, Jehovah was Isaiah’s salvation and Jesus was Peter’s salvation, and since Jesus was the only name given under heaven whereby man could be saved, Jesus was Jehovah. In Zech. 12:10 the Lord Jehovah was speaking, and said “and they shall look upon ME whom they have pierced.” In John 19:37 we find out who it was speaking of, when we read, “They shall look on him whom they have pierced” referring to Christ on the cross. In your own New World translation, we read in Rev. 22:12-13, “Look, I am coming quickly, and the reward I give is with me, to render to each on as his work is. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” Verse 16 tells us who was “coming quickly” – Jesus Christ. Therefore as the scriptures pointed out, Christ was the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. We then turn to Rev. 1:8 in your New World translation, and it reads, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, says Jehovah God, the one who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.” Here it proves without any doubt that the Alpha and the Omega was Jehovah, and who, in Chapter 22, was Christ – so by the New World translation of the scripture, it clearly points out Jehovah was Christ. If you still doubt that Christ was Jehovah, turn to Rev. 1:8 and read carefully until you come to verse 17 and 18, which reads, “Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last, (the definition of Alpha and Omega), and the living one; and I BECAME DEAD, BUT LOOK: I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.” Now, we have established Christ as Jehovah from both translations. We then read, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), and Paul pointed out in Col. 1:16 that “By him (Christ) were all things created that are in Heaven, and that are in earth.” Now, in Acts 3:3, Peter was faced with a difficult situation, because he had to testify of Christ, and still put over the point that though He was Jehovah it was God the Father that had raised him from the dead. The people understood clearly that men had a spirit, so Peter spoke of their Spiritual Creator – WHO WAS THE CREATOR OF THE SPIRITS OF ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB, and, therefore, could be called the “Father of the Spirits” or Christ’s Father. Then He would not confuse them with the creator of all physical bodies, Christ, who as Colossians 1:16; John 1:1-3; Heb.1;1-3 all pointed out “Created all things that are in heaven and that are on earth.” Making this distinction, He easily pointed out that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s spirits, had glorified His son (Whom, with His Father, created our physical bodies, and therefore the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob also) whom they had delivered up and crucified. Heb. 12:9 speaks of the “Father of our Spirits” which is the Father of our Lord, Jesus Christ. So you see, both God and Christ were the “Gods of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” only God the Father was the creator of spirits, and Christ the Creator of Bodies under the direction and assistance of the Father. If you had “all truth” you would have known this. The only way you can have “all truth” is to accept what the prophet Amos said which is to accept living prophets who are the only people to whom God will give revelation.
Jehovah Witnesses: That is ridiculous, because you will notice that Jehovah breathed into men the “Breath (or Spirit) of life.” Therefore Christ would have been the creator of their spirits, and your argument collapses.
Missionaries: Just because Christ placed the spirit in man doesn’t make him the Creator of that Spirit. And we already established that breath and spirit were not the same thing. Therefore, by reading the scriptures, we can place the correct interpretation when we take the scripture in its context. Notice Eccl. 12:7 when the body dies and returns to the earth, the spirit of man returns to the God who gave it.
Jehovah Witnesses: You know this scripture reaffirms our conviction of only a spiritual resurrection. The LDS plan of salvation teaches that a man’s spirit leaves his body and goes to a spirit world to await resurrection. This is both illogical and absurd. Eccl. 9:5 informs us “that the living know that they shall die, but the DEAD KNOW NOT ANYTHING, NEITHER HAVE THEY ANY MORE REWARD: for the memory of them is forgotten.” We go on to read in Eccl. 9:10 “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, no Knowledge, nor wisdom in the grave, whither thou goest.” How, if there is no more wisdom, knowledge, work or device and the dead know not anything, why do you teach “work in the spirit world” and baptism for the dead? Why is your doctrine so contrarily opposed to the word of God?
Missionaries: I believe that one of the many doctrines that are taught in the Holy Scriptures, the doctrine of the spirit leaving the body is perhaps the clearest of all, along with the Godhead. I maintain that the two scriptures you have just referred to are speaking only of our physical bodies, and we believe that they will “return to the dust” and that in the grave they will not know anything nor have wisdom, because our spirits will not be in the grave with our bodies, but will “have returned unto God who gave it.” (Eccl. 12:7) You see, by such a doctrine, you have created a major problem in your movement. We read in Matthew 17:3 that Moses and Elias appeared to Christ, Peter, James and John “talking with them” yet Deut. 34:5-6 teaches us that “Moses, the servant of the LORD, died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord.” This means Moses had been dead for hundreds of years, and “Christ was the first fruits of them that slept, (1 Cor. 15:20), so how did Moses possibly talk with them if He had not yet been resurrected, and he was still in the grave, (spirit and body)? This scripture proves without a doubt that the spirit does leave the body, and can talk, and in this case, communicate with man. Also, this teaches that there has not yet been any resurrection, yet Matthew 27:51-53 informs us that “The veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; AND THE GRAVES WERE OPENED; AND MANY BODIES OF THE SAINTS WHICH SLEPT AROSE, and came out of the grave after His (Christ’s) resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.” How clear do you want the scripture to read? 1 Cor. 15:6, along with many other passages, refers to “sleep” as death. Now, if the dead have no reasoning, then Peter should have learned the gospel from the Jehovah Witness, because He taught “For this cause was the Gospel preached also TO THEM THAT ARE DEAD, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” Why would the gospel be preached to the dead if they had no reasoning, nor knowledge, nor wisdom? The answer is found in the last seven words of that scripture, because they “live according to God in the spirit.” And since they await a literal and physical resurrection as was experienced in Matthew 27:51-53, they will be resurrected with their bodies “that returned to the dust”. Paul taught this doctrine in ancient time to the Philippians, when he said that Christ would “Change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body,” (Phil. 3:21), which was flesh and bones, (Luke 24:36-39). It was my understanding that you gentlemen teach the doctrine that only 144,000 will stand before the throne of God, and that they will be righteous souls. The rest of the righteous will “inherit the earth”. In light of these scriptures you would have a problem explaining your 144,000. However if you really want to understand this you would have to accept living prophets and modern revelation including “The Book of Mormon”.
Jehovah Witnesses: We teach that 144,000 will stand before the throne of God as special witnesses. These 144,000 have already been chosen, and not all can be numbered with them. This is taught in the Book of Revelation. In Rev. 8:4 we read “Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the tress, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads, and I heard the number of them which were sealed; and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand, of all the tribes of the children of Israel.” We read where they were “married” to the church and therefore in Rev. 14:4 “were not defiled with women, for they were virgins.” It was the 144,000 that stood on Mount Zion with the mark of the Father in their foreheads, (Rev.14:1), and sung “as it were a new song before the throne and before the four beasts, and the elders, and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, WHICH WERE REDEEMED FROM THE EARTH.” So you can see they were special servants, redeemed from the earth, and as such were the only ones that were before the throne night and day. It goes on to say that “these follow the Lamb (Christ) whithersoever He goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the first fruits unto God and to them Lamb. And in their mouth was found no guile; for they are without fault before the Throne of God.” I think these scriptures clearly support our stand.
Missionaries: Thank you for your explanation. I would like to now show you that the 144,000, though they were special, were not the only ones that would live before the throne. Careful examination of the scriptures would reveal this, and I declare that those of the Church of Jesus Christ were the only ones that could stand before the throne, and they were far more numerous than 144,000. You quoted in Rev. 7:1-8 and then skipped to verse 15 and said this had reference to the 144,000. This is absolutely false. Another scriptural rail split. John was taken in a vision, and after seeing 144,000 (verse 9) he records “Behold and lo, I beheld a great multitude which no man could number, of all nations, kindreds, tongues and people which STOOD BEFORE THE THRONE AND BEFORE THE LAMB, CLOTHED WITH WHITE ROBES.” How many is it that can not be numbered? Then in verse 13 one of the “four and twenty Elders” asked “who are these which are arrayed in white robes? and when came they?” John answered and said, “Sir, thou knowest.” The angel then said, speaking of those in white robes, (Which was the multitude which no man could number), “These are they which came out of the great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. THEREFORE ARE THEY BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD, AND SERVE HIM DAY AND NIGHT IN HIS TEMPLE: AND HE THAT SITTETH ON THE THRONE SHALL DWELL AMONG THEM.” So the 144,000 would not only stand before the throne, but also the great multitude, representing the twelve tribes. They were members of the “Church of the Firstborn” (Heb. 12:24) as was a requirement of the multitude. If they were not members of the Church, as Hebrews points out, crossed with Revelations, then they had no hope of heaven. Again in modern day revelation and scriptures we could shed even additional light on this subject, if you really wanted to have “all truth”.
In Defense of Truth: 04
Lutheran Minister: Young man, you have done a splendid job in defending your faith by twisting our doctrines. Now, we are going to put you on the defense and are not going to move until you answer this Book of Mormon contradiction. Alma 7:10 it reads that “He (Christ) shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers” while the Bible informs us in Luke 2:4-11 that Christ was born at Bethlehem in the City of David. Now, just look on any Bible map and you will happen to see Bethlehem happens to be five miles South of Jerusalem. How can Bethlehem be Jerusalem?
Missionaries: I will show you just how ridiculous your logic is. Would you please turn to 2 Kings 14:20, so we can follow out your contradiction and prove the Bible false. By claiming false, you have just proven without a doubt the Bible is false. It reads, “And they brought him on horses; and He was buried at Jerusalem with His Fathers in the City of David.” Now, if the City of David, according to the New Testament, is Bethlehem, how could He be buried at both Jerusalem and Bethlehem? I will answer your question and show you how ridiculous your contradiction really is. If you had read, you would have learned that Alma’s descendants were from Jerusalem, and Alma knew that Jerusalem was in the Old World. The Lord had to tell Alma where the Son of God was to be born. Of course, Alma had never been to Bethlehem, so the Lord had a small difficulty in attempting to tell Alma where the Son of God was to be born so He told Alma that Christ would be born “at Jerusalem” so Alma could link that up with the land of his forefathers. Now if you would look up the word “at” in the dictionary. The Oxford Dictionary defines the word “at” as a word which expresses “exact or approximate position.” Therefore, by the wisdom of the Lord, He chose the approximate position where Christ should be born. So in answering your question, is the Bible false?
Judge: It is not! You have made your point well.
Lutheran Minister: I assure you that there are more than one or two contradictions in their book. How any man can accept that book as divinely inspired is beyond me. Upon the crucifixion of Christ, we read in Luke 23:44 that “It was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness all over the earth until the ninth hour.” Then we turn to in 3 Nephi 8:20-23, where it reads that darkness covered that land for three days. Now, was it three hours as the Bible stated, or three days as pointed out?
Missionaries: Reverend, you mean to tell me you think that is a contradiction? I see you like the tear down the face of the Bible beyond what it has been already. Mark informs us that He was placed upon the cross at the third hour, (Mark 15:25), although John records it was the sixth hour. That would qualify under your definition and make the Bible false. We also have identical experience in the Bible where darkness prevailed for unusual periods of time in one area and was light at the same time in other areas. We read in Exodus 10:21 “And the Lord said unto Moses, stretch out thine hand toward heaven, that there may be darkness over Egypt, even darkness which may be felt. And Moses stretched forth his hand towards heaven; and there was a thick darkness in the land of Egypt three days.” You will notice that the incident was nothing but a repeat performance of the experience suffered “in the land of Egypt.” In “The Book of Mormon” 3 Nephi points out (8:19) the corresponding three hours to Luke 23:44 were among the most perilous of the three-day ordeal. However, the wisdom of the Lord prevailed as it did in Egypt, and this continent remained for three days in darkness. There is another reason why the American Continent had three days of darkness, but we will point this out later as our discussion progresses. As you can see, however, your Bible would have answered the question for you. The Book of Mormon clears up any confusion, which is why we need this additional volume of scripture to testify of Christ.
Missionaries: I will show you just how ridiculous your logic is. Would you please turn to 2 Kings 14:20, so we can follow out your contradiction and prove the Bible false. By claiming false, you have just proven without a doubt the Bible is false. It reads, “And they brought him on horses; and He was buried at Jerusalem with His Fathers in the City of David.” Now, if the City of David, according to the New Testament, is Bethlehem, how could He be buried at both Jerusalem and Bethlehem? I will answer your question and show you how ridiculous your contradiction really is. If you had read, you would have learned that Alma’s descendants were from Jerusalem, and Alma knew that Jerusalem was in the Old World. The Lord had to tell Alma where the Son of God was to be born. Of course, Alma had never been to Bethlehem, so the Lord had a small difficulty in attempting to tell Alma where the Son of God was to be born so He told Alma that Christ would be born “at Jerusalem” so Alma could link that up with the land of his forefathers. Now if you would look up the word “at” in the dictionary. The Oxford Dictionary defines the word “at” as a word which expresses “exact or approximate position.” Therefore, by the wisdom of the Lord, He chose the approximate position where Christ should be born. So in answering your question, is the Bible false?
Judge: It is not! You have made your point well.
Lutheran Minister: I assure you that there are more than one or two contradictions in their book. How any man can accept that book as divinely inspired is beyond me. Upon the crucifixion of Christ, we read in Luke 23:44 that “It was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness all over the earth until the ninth hour.” Then we turn to in 3 Nephi 8:20-23, where it reads that darkness covered that land for three days. Now, was it three hours as the Bible stated, or three days as pointed out?
Missionaries: Reverend, you mean to tell me you think that is a contradiction? I see you like the tear down the face of the Bible beyond what it has been already. Mark informs us that He was placed upon the cross at the third hour, (Mark 15:25), although John records it was the sixth hour. That would qualify under your definition and make the Bible false. We also have identical experience in the Bible where darkness prevailed for unusual periods of time in one area and was light at the same time in other areas. We read in Exodus 10:21 “And the Lord said unto Moses, stretch out thine hand toward heaven, that there may be darkness over Egypt, even darkness which may be felt. And Moses stretched forth his hand towards heaven; and there was a thick darkness in the land of Egypt three days.” You will notice that the incident was nothing but a repeat performance of the experience suffered “in the land of Egypt.” In “The Book of Mormon” 3 Nephi points out (8:19) the corresponding three hours to Luke 23:44 were among the most perilous of the three-day ordeal. However, the wisdom of the Lord prevailed as it did in Egypt, and this continent remained for three days in darkness. There is another reason why the American Continent had three days of darkness, but we will point this out later as our discussion progresses. As you can see, however, your Bible would have answered the question for you. The Book of Mormon clears up any confusion, which is why we need this additional volume of scripture to testify of Christ.
God is There
The Song Lyrics was actually a poem I made for my Sweet Child Shammahel who passed away last 2012. She's the beloved that I couldn't forget.
The Introduction music was from the Hymn called "How Great The Wisdom And The Love" and the Lyrics go on with a Hymn Title "Each Life That Touches Ours For Good". If You need the PDF and the WAV format you may get it below -
The Introduction music was from the Hymn called "How Great The Wisdom And The Love" and the Lyrics go on with a Hymn Title "Each Life That Touches Ours For Good". If You need the PDF and the WAV format you may get it below -
Humana OTC
 |
| Some Humana OTC mates |
 |
| I am Tired Pausing |
 |
| Nice Gift on C3 Anniversary |
 |
| Nice Gift on C3 Anniversary 02 |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| 2015 Christmas Party |
 |
| Find Me. |
 |
| Match Difference from above |
 |
| I am so Dead |
 |
| Very Dead |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)