Female X. Gedion
Jacob 2: Wives or One Wife?
Let try to deal with this one and it looks like it has been a topic every time in the Group. It seems this has been over and over. Okay, so let's deal with it.
Was Joseph Smith Inspired to lead the Church with this kind of doctrine?
Yes, David was blessed with wives and concubines and it wasn't the reason why the Lord God was displeased about him. But what he did was abominable before God. See this chapter from [2 Samuel 12] (you can read the rest of the verse)
 |
| The quotes were in Jacob 2:23-24 and on the other side it was in Doctrine and Covenants 132:1, 39 |
Okay, so what was it all about?
When you get across to a group that was so critical in LDS doctrine, this issue is the favorite subject of all time and if some LDS realized this, they will get some complexity in their understanding about the Church in General and Polygamy.
So, the Question. The Book of Mormon had forbidden it, especially in Jacob 2. So, why did Joseph still follow the teachings of Polygamy?
You see, it is not just a question in our days. Even in Joseph Smith's times, this was also an issue that in fact members also question the same thing as today's world.
Anyway, I will not make a further explanation about this, I will just include this in some topic some other times and I got a busy day to do. let's just try to answer both the given scriptures in the image.
Jacob 2:23-24 as what it had already said and I'll quote it -
[ 23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This 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.
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord. ]
If you get to understand it as plain as it is. David and Solomon did some abominable things not pleasing in the sight of God. But if you are reading it in the old testament, David and Solomon were blessed with wives and concubines that were gaven by God. What seems to be the problem here?
 |
| King David Playing the Harp (1622) by Gerard van Honthorst |
Yes, David was blessed with wives and concubines and it wasn't the reason why the Lord God was displeased about him. But what he did was abominable before God. See this chapter from [2 Samuel 12] (you can read the rest of the verse)
And the LORD sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor.
2 The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds:
3 But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.
4 And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.5 And David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the LORD liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:6 And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.7 ¶ And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.9 Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the LORD, to do evil in his sight? 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.10 Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife.11 Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.12 For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun.13 And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.15 ¶ And Nathan departed unto his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.16 David therefore besought God for the child; and David fasted, and went in, and lay all night upon the earth.17 And the elders of his house arose, and went to him, to raise him up from the earth: but he would not, neither did he eat bread with them.18 And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died. And the servants of David feared to tell him that the child was dead: for they said, Behold, while the child was yet alive, we spake unto him, and he would not hearken unto our voice: how will he then vex himself, if we tell him that the child is dead?19 But when David saw that his servants whispered, David perceived that the child was dead: therefore David said unto his servants, Is the child dead? And they said, He is dead.20 Then David arose from the earth, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the LORD, and worshipped: then he came to his own house; and when he required, they set bread before him, and he did eat.21 Then said his servants unto him, What thing is this that thou hast done? thou didst fast and weep for the child, while it was alive; but when the child was dead, thou didst rise and eat bread.22 And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether GOD will be gracious to me, that the child may live?23 But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.24 ¶ And David comforted Bath-sheba his wife, and went in unto her, and lay with her: and she bare a son, and he called his name Solomon: and the LORD loved him.25 And he sent by the hand of Nathan the prophet; and he called his name Jedidiah, because of the LORD.
And seem like Jacob 2 got a good point about this if you carefully read it through on the following verse -
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 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.
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
David fails the Lord because of his feelings and lust toward Bath-sheba and it is not just a simple mistake, rather a gross sin in the sight of God. And the Lord God doesn't want that to happen in the Land He consecrates for his people.
While on the other hand. Solomon also got a serious error that displeased the Lord for his wives and concubines. Let's read the story -
But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites;
2 Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.
3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.
4 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.
5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.
6 And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and went not fully after the LORD, as did David his father.
7Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon.
8And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods.
9¶ And the LORD was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the LORD God of Israel, which had appeared unto him twice,
10And had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods: but he kept not that which the LORD commanded.
11Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant.
12Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it for David thy father’s sake: but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son.
13Howbeit I will not rend away all the kingdom; but will give one tribe to thy son for David my servant’s sake, and for Jerusalem’s sake which I have chosen.
And to clarify the statement as it said in Doctrine and Covenants 132:38-39 it is best to see the whole picture if you read the full statement or section. I added verse 37 to help us understand the former practice of plural marriage and was it abominable in the sight of God. (see highlighted font)
37 Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.38 David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.
Some things were written that need careful study or understanding. The very reason why the Leaders encourage the members to read, ponder and pray for the truth. If you found too many complexities, you just simply need guidance to know the truth of things that was written if it is necessary for salvation.
Other useful information you might want to see -
He passed away
This is actually a late upload. The last time that I posted about my Tarantula. I felt like everything's a waste. The effort, time and moments that was spent together. After all that has been done, I'm so devastated for his lost. You'll be missed.
Doctrine and Covenants 134
This section deals in honoring and sustaining the Law and Government. You may find it interesting since most of question in regards to the LDS standing on Government and Religion. Even myself, I never encourage everyone or anyone to be in a side where he knows only half of the story. The Articles of Faith 1:12 had said -
Sustaining and supporting our leaders are the best example of our spiritual maturity. Either in times of success or failures. I believe that the leaders has the capacity or ability to serve the people despite of personal matters and interested. It's not about it, it's all about our contribution for them to pursue their Leadership.
I believe God organize some children to take lead in each generation. Some intelligence that could serve the people in the right way or perhaps an example for goodness and an experience of failures. God gave us understanding that can help us understand the way of perfection.We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
Sustaining and supporting our leaders are the best example of our spiritual maturity. Either in times of success or failures. I believe that the leaders has the capacity or ability to serve the people despite of personal matters and interested. It's not about it, it's all about our contribution for them to pursue their Leadership.
Doctrine and Covenants Section 134
A declaration of belief regarding governments and laws in general, adopted by unanimous vote at a general assembly of the Church held at Kirtland, Ohio, August 17, 1835. Many Saints gathered together to consider the proposed contents of the first edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. At that time, this declaration was given the following preamble: “That our belief with regard to earthly governments and laws in general may not be misinterpreted nor misunderstood, we have thought proper to present, at the close of this volume, our opinion concerning the same.”
1–4, Governments should preserve freedom of conscience and worship; 5–8, All men should uphold their governments and owe respect and deference to the law; 9–10, Religious societies should not exercise civil powers; 11–12, Men are justified in defending themselves and their property.
1 We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.
2 We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.
3 We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the voice of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.
4 We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others; but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.
5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.
6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.
7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.
8 We believe that the commission of crime should be punished according to the nature of the offense; that murder, treason, robbery, theft, and the breach of the general peace, in all respects, should be punished according to their criminality and their tendency to evil among men, by the laws of that government in which the offense is committed; and for the public peace and tranquility all men should step forward and use their ability in bringing offenders against good laws to punishment.
9 We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.
10 We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world’s goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship.
11 We believe that men should appeal to the civil law for redress of all wrongs and grievances, where personal abuse is inflicted or the right of property or character infringed, where such laws exist as will protect the same; but we believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded.
12 We believe it just to preach the gospel to the nations of the earth, and warn the righteous to save themselves from the corruption of the world; but we do not believe it right to interfere with bond-servants, neither preach the gospel to, nor baptize them contrary to the will and wish of their masters, nor to meddle with or influence them in the least to cause them to be dissatisfied with their situations in this life, thereby jeopardizing the lives of men; such interference we believe to be unlawful and unjust, and dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude.
Tarantula Bad Molt
Last Night (November 17, 2021) after I got home, I saw my Fireleg Tarantula molting and it's in upsidedown position. I got so exited on his molting and plan to video record it. But then I got tired and just left it not knowing what happen during his molting stage.
And this morning I woke up exited and what I witness is just so horrific. He got a bad molt. His legs got stuck and some got twisted. I tried to help him out and sadly he lost one part of his hind while I gently removing some exoskeleton. I just don't know what to do, I search on the enternet and it seems no information or helpful ideas that could give me a good tips or advice. Most of the experience ended up death of tarantula. I feel so discouraged and no chance of surviving my Fireleg that was with me for 3 years. It was his final form, he got his tibial hooks and emboli for mating and yet it end up bad molting.
 |
| His position where I left him after I remove some stocked exoskeleton. |
I hope he survive or maybe for some other time I can still give him the best care that I could. I love this tarantula as part of me as a family.
Job Bautista: Think about it, will you?
Can someone believe a preacher who doesn't know what he's saying? I mean, why would we believe in you Job Bautista? You don't even know the Scriptures?
 |
| Job Bautista, posted something he never think existed in the Bible. |
The concern is very simple. He tries to look at something in the Book of Mormon that made him think false.
There it goes as he found it as one of his best stones for Criticism -
3 Nephi 11:19 And Nephi arose and went forth, and bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet.
So, Job Bautista Thinks that Nephi's act of respect was the same act like Judas did to the Saviour who kissed his cheeks and betrayed the Saviour.
Luke 22:47 ¶ And while he yet spake, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him.
48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?
Do you think that is Job Bautista? Did you read the Scriptures? Or just simply pick up the best part for your doctrine of INCult?
So, I responded to him with the Scripture that will help him ponder about the Scripture, but yeah, I'm pretty sure he doesn't care about it. Anyway, here's the text -
Luke 7:36 ¶ And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat.
37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.
The story goes on with the parable Jesus Christ told to help them understand that he can forgive sins. But I couldn't keep that here since it was not about it.
So, my question to Job Bautista is - Was the woman also betrayed Christ because she kissed his feet? Or was her sins forgiven?
I just couldn't help to think on this subject about Job Bautista's understanding of Scriptural text. Did you read the Scriptures and understand them?
Job Bautista: Think about it, will you?
Can someone believe a preacher who doesn't know what he's saying? I mean, why would we believe in you Job Bautista? You don't even know the Scriptures?
 |
| Job Bautista, posted something he never think existed in the Bible. |
The concern is very simple. He tries to look at something in the Book of Mormon that made him think false.
There it goes as he found it as one of his best stones for Criticism -
3 Nephi 11:19 And Nephi arose and went forth, and bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet.
So, Job Bautista Thinks that Nephi's act of respect was the same act like Judas did to the Saviour who kissed his cheeks and betrayed the Saviour.
Luke 22:47 ¶ And while he yet spake, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him.
48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?
Do you think that is Job Bautista? Did you read the Scriptures? Or just simply pick up the best part for your doctrine of INCult?
So, I responded to him with the Scripture that will help him ponder about the Scripture, but yeah, I'm pretty sure he doesn't care about it. Anyway, here's the text -
Luke 7:36 ¶ And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat.
37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.
The story goes on with the parable Jesus Christ told to help them understand that he can forgive sins. But I couldn't keep that here since it was not about it.
So, my question to Job Bautista is - Was the woman also betrayed Christ because she kissed his feet? Or was her sins forgiven?
I just couldn't help to think on this subject about Job Bautista's understanding of Scriptural text. Did you read the Scriptures and understand them?
Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista: Failure understanding (Christianity = Anachronism) - Neil Andi Anderson's Attempt to comment. Fail!
Neil Andi Anderson attempted to reply to the article that I made. And it ended up a loser. How such a Christian claim religion could claim a true church that he cannot even prove, not a single word. Let's go dive in. Text in red for my comments -
Jerry Nuñez Bustillo Parang nagmamadali ka sa iyong pagkabutata Jerry boy, Iginigiit mo pa rin ang iyong maling paguunawa at maling paliliwanag. Seriously, that's it's the way you understand the writings? And what's your answer to that article? Uulitin ko na di po maaring ang isang pagbabansag na pangalang Cristianismo ay mauuna ni wala pa maiisilang ang nagpapasimuno nito. FAILED! Try again reading the text that I gave. You didn't read it. So tell me, who abridge the text? Was it Mormon or Alma? Bigyan kita ng isang ehemplo ulit, kailan ba may tinatawag na mormonismo? Noong may nangaral tungkol nito, wala pong matawag na mormon kung wala pa ang nangaral sa mormonito book. Balikan po natin mula 600bc hanggang 10bc may mga propheta ba na bumabanggit sa pangalang Cristo? And look how you failed to analyze the text, you claimed to be an LDS but you never understood the writings? Here let me give you my example -
As Paul understood the teaching of Christ in his days. Was his writing about Moses and some others who passed the sea were Baptized was wrong since there's no such thing as Baptism in Old Testament times? Did Moses write it, or does Paul knows the significance of Moses' days to his days?
Then here is the question for you to analyze the Book of Mormon text. Who abridges it, or should we say who's the Narrator of the Story?
Here let me give you some part to help you learn how to understand what you read in the scripture try to see who narrate the story, let's use Alma 47 since it best describes the scene -
 |
| See the red underlined text. |
So, tell me, Neil Andi Anderson. Who narrate the Story? Was the narrator writing that story on the same Timeline? If you think you know it, then most probably you understand what Paul's letter means to the Corinthians and why did he use such words unknown to Old Testament times.
Wala pa po at hindi po maaring bigkasin nila ito dahil ito ay isang propesya. Funny how you never notice the author of the book and the person who abridged was of a different Timeline. Also, it's not a prophecy, rather its rewriting and summarizing what was already written. So much of a failure understanding Neil Andi Anderson. Sino lang ba na mga propeta na madali nilang nabibigkas ang pangalang Kristianismo o Cristo? Walang iba kundi iyong mga propetang mga huwad na itoy isinulat sa kwentong pagong ni Lolo Junjun na ito ang pina ka idol sa mga taong kulang sa dilig ang mga kaiisipan kaya di nila mauunawaan ang nakasulat sa bibliya. FAIL! The word Christ is an ancient Origin. Means the "anointed one" and was in Hebrew "the Messiah". Though the New Testament was written in Greek so the word Christ was described to it as the Messiah, the Holy One of God. The word Messiah was mentioned twice in Old Testament found in Daniel 9:25-26 and the meaning remains the same which is, Christ. So, was Christ a modernized theologian term? Does it already exist in old testament times? I don't know for you Neil, I don't know if you understand the scripture. Kaya mali po ang mga paliwanag mo Jerry boy, pasensiya ka na talagang magkalayo ang ating agwat kung karunongan man sa bibliya ang ating babanggitin. Of course, your knowledge is based only on your copy paste Program, the bigoted study of INCult doctrine. I'm not surprised. Do you have anything new? Can't even analyze the content and context of the scriptures and embrace the wrong exegesis. Nothing new at all. Ang pagpapaliwanag mo ay wala sa katotohanan kaya malaking MALI. Sorry, Jerry boy butata ka ulit.
Sorry but you still missed the whole point and it seems like in our example you're just simply saying the Bible is wrong by just simply using words unknown in the Old Testament or Moses' Days. Butata? In your dreams!
Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista: Failure understanding (Christianity = Anachronism)
Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista were struggling to understand the author of the Book of Mormon who used words to describe the believers before his compilation. Let's dive in and see how his understanding goes of their very own illogical thinking -
Text in red for my comments and some others for quotes and Scriptural reference.
 |
| Job Bautista's comments addressed to me. |
His main concern is the word "Christian" mentioned in the book of Mormon while it was around approximately 73-70 BC. Good point, the only problem was, who made the abridgment and how was his understanding goes in abridging the record? Before I answer that let's just try some biblical examples of the same issue where Paul quoted the words unknown to the Old Testament Times. Here's the text -
1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
Take note of the usage of the following words in his letter (Baptized, the Rock was Christ). Does Moses knows something about this in the future, or was Paul's knowledge and understanding of the significance of his days?
Paul was the writer of that epistle could be wrong to understand the events or the scripture since such things could not exist in Old Testament times. Can our Friends Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista help us with this thing? Let's see if they can.
There are things that you need to know first using your logical thinking. When did the writer write it and how was his understanding of the doctrine of Christ while abridging their history?
Scripture Source
Here are the Comments from our very friend Neil Andi Anderson addressed to me of course. See my comments in red.
Jerry Nuñez Bustillo Ayon daw sa baluktot niyong pangangaral pwede daw tawaging Christiano iyong wala pa ang Cristo. And do you analyze how it was said and who said it? If you know who said it, then was it after Christ or Before Christ?
 |
| Mormon abridging the writings. |
 |
| I will add the definition to help Job Bautista in his study with Neil Andi Anderson. |
The word Christian was mentioned a couple of times in the Book of Mormon, and most numbers were found in the Book of Alma Chapters 46 and 48 (see Reference at the sources) as the group of people who believe in the Son of God or Christ who will soon Come for the sins of the world or the Atonement. In our days, normally we call it Christians, same thing with Mormon who has a pure understanding of their belief.
 |
| Chapter Heading of Alma 46 |
And for the record, these chapters were written as an abridged account by Mormon during their final Battle of Nephites and Lamanites. The Book of Alma was the account before Christ's ministry around 73-72 BC. This means Christianity is not yet established during those times as our Friend Neil Andi Anderson made his comments. A sure answer, yes it is true, but the question goes, who wrote it that way?
 |
| Books that were abridged by Mormon were found in the Large Plates. |
There are things that you need to know first using your logical thinking. When did the writer write it and how was his understanding of the doctrine of Christ while abridging their history?
Mormon (of course) was born after the ascension of Christ and it is even the days when people have already forgotten the importance of Christ teaching during his ministry to them. People during his times were started to be divided and no sooner did they start a war.
 |
| Mormon's words before he turns over the records to his son Moroni. He inserted these words Between the Large and the small plates. Around 385 AD (See the red-underlined text of the image) |
The writer (who is Mormon) understood the doctrine of Christ and knows how the people who were ahead of his time practiced the teachings of Christ before he came. It was prophesied before him, which means Mormon already knew what teachings and what's best describes to the reader which he wrote in the plates that were prepared for future purposes, that perhaps it could help them understand who was the Christ who was their saviour to look upon.
Does it sound anachronistic? Maybe, if you don't know where to start. The only problem with these people was their useful cherry-picking ideology. They won't notice how things were written and what the context was all about, they just simply pick it up somewhere in some common lines and declare it false. In the Book of Mormon, Mormon inserted his words while abridging the records, and here's the best part of it -
Words of Mormon 1
3 And now, I speak somewhat concerning that which I have written; for after I had made an abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin, of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also many of the words of Nephi.
4 And the things which are upon these plates pleasing me, because of the prophecies of the coming of Christ; and my fathers knowing that many of them have been fulfilled; yea, and I also know that as many things as have been prophesied concerning us down to this day have been fulfilled, and as many as go beyond this day must surely come to pass—
5 Wherefore, I chose these things, to finish my record upon them, which remainder of my record I shall take from the plates of Nephi; and I cannot write the hundredth part of the things of my people.
6 But behold, I shall take these plates, which contain these prophesyings and revelations, and put them with the remainder of my record, for they are choice unto me; and I know they will be choice unto my brethren.
To continue here are the last parts and we'll just update it on our part 2.
Paano ka maging Cristiano kung ang taong tinutukoy mo hindi pa eksistedo o hindi pa nagsisimulang nangaral? Good question, so back to the question that I ask, who said it, and when was it when he said it? Before Christ or after Christ? Kung sa bisaya pa na salita nangabuang na kayo dahil sa pinuno niyong sex predator. His arrogance shows he knows nothing about Joseph Smith and the Polygamy Issue rather he keeps living his hocus-pocus ideology of Joseph's life as a sex predator as he said it. Do you have documented evidence, Neil? The INC members were mostly brainwashed by their ministers to avoid mingling with the people not of their belief and hate them. Most of the time, they include in their Masses about other religions and twist it such as this guy who doesn't know anything at all. But will just leave it to that. Saan niyo makikita sa diktiyonaryo na ikaw ay naging followers sa wala? Wrong, Abraham saw Christ's days and rejoice in it. Those people or prophets who saw the Saviour already follow the teachings of God and since Christ was already the God they're serving. But of course, they don't want to understand it as their Unitarian view differs from their understanding of Christ deity. Ang mga tarantado lang ang mga nangangaral iyan pero di tayo magtataka dahil matagal na ang mga mormons na mga ganyan. And look at that kind of Christian who uses swear words? Does anyone know who claims Christian that doesn't act as Christian? These people need to understand what discipleship means and what great impact does it affect on their lives. But no, I could not see anything more Christlike to this kind of Religion. They just simply attack and proclaim their very own bigoted doctrine no one even cares. Such a childish and low standard doctrine of INC. Bigyan kayo ng ehemplo mga mormonic people, bakit may tinatawag na followers of Islam? dahil silay tagasunod sa aral ni Muhammad, ikalawang ehemplo bakit may mga tinatawag na followers of Judaism? Dahil sila ay naniwala sa banal na aklat na Torah na itoy pinaghahawakan na karamihan ay mga Hudyo. Bakit may followers ng mga Buddhism dahil may aral na kanilang sinusunod na ang original teachings ay attributed kay Gautama Buddha. Kaya di ka maging followers kung wala pa nating marinig ang aral nito. Have you seen the problem here? The followers of Christ will never be called Christian not until Christian is already established. For your information, Neil Andi Anderson, Christ never said anything about Christianity or Christian Religion to those who follow him, the follower of Christ was simply called Disciples. But yes of course, since they follow Christ it is best described or distinguished as Christians, and some other apostles like Paul and Peter preached his words and claimed it as a Christian doctrine. But does this simply mean those who were before Christ are not his followers or does God teach different principles until Christ changes it to Christianity? I guess no, this is one of the best church name game strategies of INC, but never understood the ancient teaching of God. Okay, so I'll give you my example, if Christianity was only recognized in the New Testament times, why use the Old Testament? You people quoted a lot in the Old Testament as the fulfillment of your said Messenger. So, those prophets recognized it as different from what they learned about the teachings of God back them? So, how do you reconcile that? Hindi tulad ng mormonito sa kanilang maling paliwanag na may followers ang hindi pa nila marinig. Just Go back to the main question that I gave and understand it, you lack of logical thinking proves how poor you people receive the teachings of your religion. I guess your religion taught you to understand the scripture or maybe they don't. Care to teach me about it? Pitty on your Organization and I hope your ministers will help you in your study. Ang mga taong ito ay nanaginip ng gising. Maybe, if you're still asleep, good try though but you missed the whole point of your bigotry study. Thanks and have a great day.
Scripture Source
- The mention of the Word Christian (Plural Term)
[Alma 46]
13 And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land—
...15 And those who did belong to the church were faithful; yea, all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians as they were called, because of their belief in Christ who should come.16 And therefore, at this time, Moroni prayed that the cause of the Christians, and the freedom of the land might be favored.[Alma 48]10 And thus he was preparing to support their liberty, their lands, their wives, and their children, and their peace, and that they might live unto the Lord their God, and that they might maintain that which was called by their enemies the cause of Christians.
- New Testament Phrases Found in the Book of Mormon (Video)
Marrying a Sibling?
I'd came across to a post in a social media group with this question -
Why do Mormons marry their siblings? 😳
 |
| A post from a Random Group of Christian and Mormon Discussions. |
Found this post from one of the groups that I'd been and this one has something that needs to be understood.
I have been in a church for my entire life and I never heard such teaching about marrying a Sibling. But yes, we address everyone as brothers and sisters. The scripture had said that we are God's children his offspring. And if you take it literally, it's clearly understood that we are Brothers and Sisters.
I don't understand how the teaching biblically was applied to each Christian. I am not sure what he meant to be Siblings (literally? I don't know) but something is clear, every one of us are God's children of the same species spiritually.
So, my questions are -
- Who are we going to marry?
- If he or she is not the son or daughter of God, who's son/daughter is he/she?
- Do Christian world understood the same passage of Scripture and accept it as God's word?
- If so, then there's no question about marrying God's children, since we all are God's Children?
The scripture was given for us to know the mystery of the kingdom of God and the principles we need to practice to earn salvation. And as the scripture taught us that God is our Father in heaven no further revelations need to be revealed but to accept it as his words.
Here are some of the reference of this topic -
[ Revelation 1:9] - I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
John address himself as our brother and companion...
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.
We are God's Offspring. Was it mean to translated literally or something else?
[Psalm 82:1,6-7] God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
...
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
We are gods, which means we inherit a characteristic just like our Father and has that same potential to be like him.
This certain doctrine will just simply conclude that God is not a different species as we are, and that we are created in the image of God and its likeness having the potential to be like him.
Neil Andi Anderson: How the INC Teaching would reflect in the Hearts of INC members?
Some of the screenshots were collected of some INC garbage talks. Their technique is to provoke someone and then they will post comments that would make them clean in the eyes of many. So, I Collect some of Neil Andi Anderson's trash comments and judge for yourself.
 |
| See how he's so mean? Ad Hominem uses words in judging someone because of his looks. Nice One Neil. |
The only thing that these trolls keep hiding in their account, because it's against the teachings of INC, and they can't keep their doctrine in their daily lives and conversations. These people are struggling to be more Christlike or be real Christian. After provoking, they have to prove someone in Social Media and claim their victory. What a shame, so many selfish acts, and vainglory.
Philippians 2:3 Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
Nothing much of your religion Neil Andi Anderson, I expect worse. Change my mind.
Neil Andi Anderson: How the INC Teaching would reflect in the Hearts of INC members?
Some of the screenshots were collected of some INC garbage talks. Their technique is to provoke someone and then they will post comments that would make them clean in the eyes of many. So, I Collect some of Neil Andi Anderson's trash comments and judge for yourself.
 |
| See how he's so mean? Ad Hominem uses words in judging someone because of his looks. Nice One Neil. |
The only thing that these trolls keep hiding in their account, because it's against the teachings of INC, and they can't keep their doctrine in their daily lives and conversations. These people are struggling to be more Christlike or be real Christian. After provoking, they have to prove someone in Social Media and claim their victory. What a shame, so many selfish acts, and vainglory.
Philippians 2:3 Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.
Nothing much of your religion Neil Andi Anderson, I expect worse. Change my mind.
Part 8 - Job Bautista's on the topic about Minister
There are things you need to know before making a conclusion brother Job Bautista.
 |
| He made some of his poor studies. |
The text below is his comments -
Tuligsa ng mga alagad ni Joseph Smith, bakit daw Ministro o Pamamahala ang tawag namin kay ka EVM?
First of all, I or maybe some LDS attack you (Tuligsa). I never said or made any comments about it or maybe there's someone you want to address on your claim. Seems like you take it too personally. Was this also a part of your INC program of defaming other beliefs?
Ang Dating Biblia (1905) Colosas 1:25 Na ako'y ginawang ministro nito, ayon sa pamamahala na mula sa Dios na ibinigay sa akin para sa inyo upang maipahayag ang salita ng Dios
Second, the word minister in the King James Version alone is mentioned about 98 times, 24 times in plural form and about 22 times on the word Ministry and about 9 for the word Ministering. All of it was of different subjects and usages. Say for example of the scripture you used. Paul spoke as the Minister called of God and at the same time, he was an apostle according to the letters he mentions in the first chapter and first verse of the same epistle. In the other scriptures, we found out that Aaron and his children also served as ministers in the office of the Levitical Priesthood (see Exodus 28:41-43). Also, Hebrews 1:13-14 which said about the Angels as the Ministering Spirits. Matthew 27:55-56 also tells us that there were women who ministered during the apostles' time. In, the LDS Church we call and assign men or women to visit and minister to someone as Ministering Brothers and Sisters. So, this subject alone could lead us to various topic that has nothing to do with your criticism or maybe it could lead us to different matters depending on your understanding. So, if we are to deal with your comments, I don't think it could lead us to building a common ground. Everyone could be a minister not just the ones whom you call a church leader or church founder. It depends on how you used to understand it.
Mga Hebreo 13:17. Pasakop kayo at sumunod sa mga namamahala sa inyo. Sila'y may pananagutang mangalaga sa inyo, at mananagot sila sa Diyos ukol diyan. Kung sila'y susundin ninyo, magagalak sila sa pagtupad ng kanilang tungkulin; kung hindi, sila'y mamimighati, at hindi ito makakabuti sa inyo.
Hebrews 13:17Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
Seems like this verse says nothing about your comments. I just don't know what are you up to. But perhaps we can simply arrange it as the authority of your religious leader or prophet or maybe if you don't want to call it that way since you address them as ministers. But like what id opened up, everyone can be ministers.
INC troll: The Greatest Strategy of Hiding on Fake Accounts
Here's another Troll of INC Warriors (as they call themselves hiding in a fake account). See how this INC member makes himself proud of being a Provoker. do you think a Christlike Christian Claimed organization was taught to keep a conversation this way? Calling INC General Manager. Come on? did you train these people that way?
I'll just post some other comments of our discussions and see for yourself who this guy claim to be a Christian with their very own Christ-centered Doctrine. In Let's go dive in -
There's a Rule on this Group, and the Admin Kick me out by not abiding on it. But here it goes some fishy group rules.
I'll just post some other comments of our discussions and see for yourself who this guy claim to be a Christian with their very own Christ-centered Doctrine. In Let's go dive in -
 |
| He used his New Alias in another account I guess. And here's his post in their owned INC Trademark group. |
 |
| While Looking at the Post using this scripture. It's a normal Discussion that can easily be debunk in examining INC's Ministerial Line of Authority. |
 |
| The Troll starts his Comments with a criticism. |
There's a Rule on this Group, and the Admin Kick me out by not abiding on it. But here it goes some fishy group rules.
 |
| Quoting Something that has nothing to do with his Post. |
 |
| Bruce Wall try to point him to the issues, But it seems this guy's close-minded. |
 |
| I made my first attempt addressing Bruce Wall about the issue of this Group. |
 |
| We made a few conversations Try to warn him about this group Of INC and their owned doctrine. |
 |
| Calling someone an adulterer without any evidence shows how this guy's poor mental capacity in a formal discussion. |
 |
| Bruce Wall is correcting him But to end it, he doesn't care. |
 |
| And he seems to have authority over his claim. See, nothing happens but such a Bigot. |
 |
| I try to get his answers and it seems he's trying to escape it. But I don't expect much about him. He doesn't answer you straight rather fallacious arguments. |
 |
| He said I'm a self-righteous And added some immature Comments for me. I asked him about his claim but he never proves it. Empty at all. It's all but just scorning. |
 |
| He's trying to justify his point that I'm not the admin which means he can do whatever he wants. |
 |
| Not a good shot for offenders. This proves they aren't Christians In their heart or truly converted. |
 |
| And my sarcastic response of laughing and scorning. |
INC members are will trained on disrespect and defaming. Even in Pasugo, most of their Messages are directly attacked and deprivation on other faiths.