Jump to content

Web Of Slime

New Member
  • Content count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Web Of Slime

  • Rank
    Newbie: Without form, and void

Recent Profile Visitors

33 profile views
  1. https://ldsmag.com/san-diego-mormon-temple-threatened-by-alleged-pro-isis-group/ http://thisweekinmormons.com/2017/12/san-diego-mormon-temple-reportedly-threatened-pro-isis-group-police-descend/ http://kutv.com/news/local/image-with-lds-temple-terrorist-circulating-online https://pamelageller.com/2017/11/islamic-threat-san-diego-mormon-temple.html/ https://imgur.com/EVsmqYy https://imgur.com/EVsmqYy
  2. ISIS threatens San Diego Temple.

    Leadership has sent emails to members instructing to stock up. Local news is reporting the rumor.
  3. Isn't there a School of Prophets based out of Salem, Utah, by the Dream Mine?
  4. Bennett shows up out of nowhere, becomes part of church leadership, performs abortions and maybe other types of birth control for the purpose of facilitating adultery (some claim not just his own adultery, but the adultery of others in church leadership), then after revealing "spiritual wifery" and that Joseph Smith Jr practices it, is excommunicated, but supposedly parts ways amicably after signing something to the effect that Bennett was practicing spiritual wifery, but Joseph Smith Jr was not. Bennett later claims the Danites tried to kill him. Though the church and Bennett seemingly parted ways amicably, the lie he told was made obvious by the Nauvoo Expositor, who made further accusations of spiritual wifery and named names. In the meantime, Bennett did turn a bit vitriolic against the church. Later, Bennett joined with the Strangites and embraced multiple wives before being excommunicated AGAIN. He is a very curious character in LDS history. He joined, left, joined another faction and, ultimately, seemed more interested in "free love" than anything else and his penchant for it repeatedly got him in trouble.
  5. Assuming honesty is the easiest way to fall for the trick of Orwellian double speak. Presuming dishonesty is the best frame in which to pursue a skeptical point of view. The alternative is the suspension of judgment, altogether, where you consciously make the decision to wait for more information before reaching any conclusions.
  6. Understanding Adam-God

    The Adam-God Doctrine seemingly borders along the "accessing god forms" ideas from the various "School of the Prophets" and Processian theology.
  7. Is the Book of Mormon Satan anachronistic?

    The serpent goes back to Ancient Egypt and has been seen as opposition to "light" for a long time. This depiction is certainly not anachronistic and, if anything, is syncretic going back a long time. Satan works against God, in Chronicles, "moving" David to number the men in the armies. So, at least in 600 BC, Satan is acting in direct opposition to God. The Slavonic Enoch, and apocryphal text, describes Satan-Sataniel having fallen from heaven and remaining above the abyss. Revelations seems to intimate some of these same ideas and concepts and there is some common thread to Isaiah, but the use of "Lucifer" seems to be debated and many claim it is obvious that "Lucifer" is the ruler of Babylon. The War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls conveys a tale about the war in heaven, but we are still a few hundred years after the Old Testament was written and "Belial" is the offending rebel, as opposed to Satan-Sataniel. Still, the story is important in the context of asking whether or not the War in Heaven is anachronistic. But, if we go back further, to the cult of the Elephantine Triad, we see that Khnum's son is the god of magic, "the cannibal pharoah" who must eat others to take on their power. As the new dynasties took over, the Trinity of Aswan morphed into other things, but the red obelisks they created (ASwan was the only place to get red granite in the Ancient World IIRC) were coveted and one even sits in the middle of St Peter's square, today, after sitting in the Circus of Nero for 1,000 years. But, Cronus also overthrew his father, so this is hardly a new way to spin out tales of divine origins. The push and pull of chaos and order is as old as human imagination. As far as "Israelites" believing in Hell and in a rebellion, " Isaiah 66:24 says "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind." I find this passage interesting because it does introduce the concept of a sort of eternal damnation as the result of rebelling against God. Whatever concept evolved, Hades and the Underworld is still a precursor to all of this. Like the Trinity of Aswan, many of these stories are rebooted versions of older stories that are designed to have more mass appeal during the times they were produced. When a religion loses relevance, the old stories are spun out in new, more relevant ways. So, is the "Satan" of the Book of Mormon anachronistic? Personally, I don't think so. As in many things Joseph Smith, I believe he tried to reconcile a great deal of doctrinal flaws found in Catholicism while trying to remove a lot of the more blatant "reboots" of mythological stories that the Catholic church retold using saints. In a way, with the elimination of symbols, sacred geometry and "secret" combinations, Joseph Smith almost created an "anti-cult." If you've never seen Paul the 6th's Audience Hall from the outside and inside, you can see the obvious serpent head and the constant retooling of dark symbology. They are still playing a game across the world using a variety of symbols and "secret combinations."
  8. Is the Book of Mormon Satan anachronistic?

    The serpent goes back to Ancient Egypt and has been seen as opposition to "light" for a long time. This depiction is certainly not anachronistic and, if anything, is syncretic going back a long time. Satan works against God, in Chronicles, "moving" David to number the men in the armies. So, at least in 600 BC, Satan is acting in direct opposition to God. The Slavonic Enoch, and apocryphal text, describes Satan-Sataniel having fallen from heaven and remaining above the abyss. Revelations seems to intimate some of these same ideas and concepts and there is some common thread to Isaiah, but the use of "Lucifer" seems to be debated and many claim it is obvious that "Lucifer" is the ruler of Babylon. The War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls conveys a tale about the war in heaven, but we are still a few hundred years after the Old Testament was written and "Belial" is the offending rebel, as opposed to Satan-Sataniel. Still, the story is important in the context of asking whether or not the War in Heaven is anachronistic. But, if we go back further, to the cult of the Elephantine Triad, we see that Khnum's son is the god of magic, "the cannibal pharoah" who must eat others to take on their power. As the new dynasties took over, the Trinity of Aswan morphed into other things, but the red obelisks they created (ASwan was the only place to get red granite in the Ancient World IIRC) were coveted and one even sits in the middle of St Peter's square, today, after sitting in the Circus of Nero for 1,000 years. But, Cronus also overthrew his father, so this is hardly a new way to spin out tales of divine origins. The push and pull of chaos and order is as old as human imagination. As far as "Israelites" believing in Hell and in a rebellion, " Isaiah 66:24 says "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind." I find this passage interesting because it does introduce the concept of a sort of eternal damnation as the result of rebelling against God. Whatever concept evolved, Hades and the Underworld is still a precursor to all of this. Like the Trinity of Aswan, many of these stories are rebooted versions of older stories that are designed to have more mass appeal during the times they were produced. When a religion loses relevance, the old stories are spun out in new, more relevant ways. So, is the "Satan" of the Book of Mormon anachronistic? Personally, I don't think so. As in many things Joseph Smith, I believe he tried to reconcile a great deal of doctrinal flaws found in Catholicism while trying to remove a lot of the more blatant "reboots" of mythological stories that the Catholic church retold using saints. In a way, with the elimination of symbols, sacred geometry and "secret" combinations, Joseph Smith almost created an "anti-cult." If you've never seen Paul the 6th's Audience Hall from the outside and inside, you can see the obvious serpent head and the constant retooling of dark symbology. They are still playing a game across the world using a variety of symbols and "secret combinations."
  9. Is the Book of Mormon Satan anachronistic?

    The serpent goes back to Ancient Egypt and has been seen as opposition to "light" for a long time. This depiction is certainly not anachronistic and, if anything, is syncretic going back a long time. Satan works against God, in Chronicles, "moving" David to number the men in the armies. So, at least in 600 BC, Satan is acting in direct opposition to God. The Slavonic Enoch, and apocryphal text, describes Satan-Sataniel having fallen from heaven and remaining above the abyss. Revelations seems to intimate some of these same ideas and concepts and there is some common thread to Isaiah, but the use of "Lucifer" seems to be debated and many claim it is obvious that "Lucifer" is the ruler of Babylon. The War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls conveys a tale about the war in heaven, but we are still a few hundred years after the Old Testament was written and "Belial" is the offending rebel, as opposed to Satan-Sataniel. Still, the story is important in the context of asking whether or not the War in Heaven is anachronistic. But, if we go back further, to the cult of the Elephantine Triad, we see that Khnum's son is the god of magic, "the cannibal pharoah" who must eat others to take on their power. As the new dynasties took over, the Trinity of Aswan morphed into other things, but the red obelisks they created (ASwan was the only place to get red granite in the Ancient World IIRC) were coveted and one even sits in the middle of St Peter's square, today, after sitting in the Circus of Nero for 1,000 years. But, Cronus also overthrew his father, so this is hardly a new way to spin out tales of divine origins. The push and pull of chaos and order is as old as human imagination. As far as "Israelites" believing in Hell and in a rebellion, " Isaiah 66:24 says "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind." I find this passage interesting because it does introduce the concept of a sort of eternal damnation as the result of rebelling against God. Whatever concept evolved, Hades and the Underworld is still a precursor to all of this. Like the Trinity of Aswan, many of these stories are rebooted versions of older stories that are designed to have more mass appeal during the times they were produced. When a religion loses relevance, the old stories are spun out in new, more relevant ways. So, is the "Satan" of the Book of Mormon anachronistic? Personally, I don't think so. As in many things Joseph Smith, I believe he tried to reconcile a great deal of doctrinal flaws found in Catholicism while trying to remove a lot of the more blatant "reboots" of mythological stories that the Catholic church retold using saints. In a way, with the elimination of symbols, sacred geometry and "secret" combinations, Joseph Smith almost created an "anti-cult." If you've never seen Paul the 6th's Audience Hall from the outside and inside, you can see the obvious serpent head and the constant retooling of dark symbology. They are still playing a game across the world using a variety of symbols and "secret combinations."
  10. Is the Book of Mormon Satan anachronistic?

    The serpent goes back to Ancient Egypt and has been seen as opposition to "light" for a long time. This depiction is certainly not anachronistic and, if anything, is syncretic going back a long time. Satan works against God, in Chronicles, "moving" David to number the men in the armies. So, at least in 600 BC, Satan is acting in direct opposition to God. The Slavonic Enoch, and apocryphal text, describes Satan-Sataniel having fallen from heaven and remaining above the abyss. Revelations seems to intimate some of these same ideas and concepts and there is some common thread to Isaiah, but the use of "Lucifer" seems to be debated and many claim it is obvious that "Lucifer" is the ruler of Babylon. The War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls conveys a tale about the war in heaven, but we are still a few hundred years after the Old Testament was written and "Belial" is the offending rebel, as opposed to Satan-Sataniel. Still, the story is important in the context of asking whether or not the War in Heaven is anachronistic. But, if we go back further, to the cult of the Elephantine Triad, we see that Khnum's son is the god of magic, "the cannibal pharoah" who must eat others to take on their power. As the new dynasties took over, the Trinity of Aswan morphed into other things, but the red obelisks they created (ASwan was the only place to get red granite in the Ancient World IIRC) were coveted and one even sits in the middle of St Peter's square, today, after sitting in the Circus of Nero for 1,000 years. But, Cronus also overthrew his father, so this is hardly a new way to spin out tales of divine origins. The push and pull of chaos and order is as old as human imagination. As far as "Israelites" believing in Hell and in a rebellion, " Isaiah 66:24 says "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind." I find this passage interesting because it does introduce the concept of a sort of eternal damnation as the result of rebelling against God. Whatever concept evolved, Hades and the Underworld is still a precursor to all of this. Like the Trinity of Aswan, many of these stories are rebooted versions of older stories that are designed to have more mass appeal during the times they were produced. When a religion loses relevance, the old stories are spun out in new, more relevant ways. So, is the "Satan" of the Book of Mormon anachronistic? Personally, I don't think so. As in many things Joseph Smith, I believe he tried to reconcile a great deal of doctrinal flaws found in Catholicism while trying to remove a lot of the more blatant "reboots" of mythological stories that the Catholic church retold using saints. In a way, with the elimination of symbols, sacred geometry and "secret" combinations, Joseph Smith almost created an "anti-cult." If you've never seen Paul the 6th's Audience Hall from the outside and inside, you can see the obvious serpent head and the constant retooling of dark symbology. They are still playing a game across the world using a variety of symbols and "secret combinations."
×