Vote On The First Vision At Sunstone

[CASteinman]

And they want everybody else to be miserable like unto themselves.

I have seen what appears to me to be almost exactly the same phenomenon -- the same spirit -- among so-called evangelicals who learn that the Bible is not perfect and become virulently atheistic.

They are in a weird sort of hell and insist that others much join them there. It is actually rather perverse.

[Robert F. Smith]

Let me be clear then: She seeks to destroy the Peace and Faith of the Saints, tearing them from the Church of Jesus Christ and the source of their Salvation and Exaltation. She does this because she believes profound evil of the Lord's anointed. Whether she is sincere or not (and I will not judge that) it is very bad.

Many a sincere evangelical christian out there may have spoken evil of the Lord's Anointed, but none of the the ones I'm thinking of (including Sandra Tanner) have made covenants not to do so in an LDS temple. So we generally try to get along with the evangelicals, even treating them with kindness and respect. I don't think of Rob Bowman, for example, as "very bad" or even just "bad." I assume that he and his family live the Gospel as best they know how. We should speak and think of them as good people, even if misinformed in some respects. After all God judges by the heart.

[Robert F. Smith]

She's not exactly evangelical. She is more precisely anti-Mormon.

I have some friends who are evangelical -- and we don't agree as to doctrine (I find that sometimes they are pretty unschooled in things-- and so I avoid getting to deep into discussions with them out of a desire not to embarrass them in scriptures) but I get along with them and after we have gotten to know each other, we accept one another as believers... and pray together.

I don't feel she fits in the same boat.

Edited to add:

The reason I think she is more an anti-Mormon than an evangelical is that she rarely really discusses her religion compared to how often she discusses her dislike of things Mormon.

HOWEVER, there is a counter argument that could be made: She never applies the same types of analysis and criticism to her evangelical beliefs as she does to Mormonism and in that way, I think a case could be made that she is Evangelical -- so Evangelical that she does not even look at it critically.

Yes, and one must bear in mind that she and Jerald had no academic training in critical thinking or historiography.

[Ron Beron]

I agree with what you say about her and some ex mormons and even those on the fringe. They are living a personal hell in their thinking. It's like they can't leave the church alone because they left on what they believe are good reasons, and it's hard for them to watch other mormons living what they have determined is a lie, and maybe deep down think they might be wrong, and seeing that every bad thing they say about the church doesnt phase the TBM's seems to verify it. So I feel sorry for them. They have it much worse than Evangelicals that have never been LDS.

Exactly. Faith in God, regardless of the theological differences, shouldn't be so derisive.

[CASteinman]

Many a sincere evangelical christian out there may have spoken evil of the Lord's Anointed, but none of the the ones I'm thinking of (including Sandra Tanner) have made covenants not to do so in an LDS temple. So we generally try to get along with the evangelicals, even treating them with kindness and respect. I don't think of Rob Bowman, for example, as "very bad" or even just "bad." I assume that he and his family live the Gospel as best they know how. We should speak and think of them as good people, even if misinformed in some respects. After all God judges by the heart.

You misunderstand. I did not say Sandra Tanner was bad. She might be. She might not be. But what she does is very bad.

I can certainly understand how people might feel that as a person acts -- so are they. This might be true. But it is not my place to judge this.

However, Jesus has spoken about how He will judge and He does not mention the "heart". He mentions words and deeds. See #267.

Edited July 30, 2012 by CASteinman

[Robert F. Smith]

You misunderstand. I did not say Sandra Tanner was bad. She might be. She might not be. But what she does is very bad.

I can certainly understand how people might feel that as a person acts -- so are they. This might be true. But it is not my place to judge this.

However, Jesus has spoken about how He will judge and He does not mention the "heart". He mentions words and deeds. See #267.

I Samuel 16:7 " for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart." Cf. Jer 4:4, 9:26, Ezk 11:19, 18:31, 36:26, Matt 7:6, 19, 21, etc.

[CASteinman]

I Samuel 16:7 " for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart." Cf. Jer 4:4, 9:26, Ezk 11:19, 18:31, 36:26, Matt 7:6, 19, 21, etc.

So, I notice you can quote scriptures that do not describe how God will judge people in their destiny, which was what I spoke about. Did you want to talk about something different? Looks like you want to discuss the ability to use the Topical Guide to research words. Or maybe about the criteria God uses to call His servants.

Do you value Sandra Tanner as a called servant of God?

Edited July 31, 2012 by CASteinman

[USU78]

Yes, and one must bear in mind that she and Jerald had no academic training in critical thinking or historiography.

And yet made and continue to make a nice, comfortable living from doing precisely that . . . or things that approximate, in their own estimation, that.

[Robert F. Smith]

So, I notice you can quote scriptures that do not describe how God will judge people in their destiny, which was what I spoke about. Did you want to talk about something different? Looks like you want to discuss the ability to use the Topical Guide to research words. Or maybe about the criteria God uses to call His servants.

Do you value Sandra Tanner as a called servant of God?

That scripture happens to have been one of my favorite of all time, and I have been using it (and closely related scriptures) for about 40 years. For those who judge by outward appearance, it is always important to note that God does not do so. His interest is in the heart, just as He was always less interested in offerings and circumcision of the flesh, and always more interested in obedience to his commandments and in circumcision of the heart (= new heart). These are supreme interests of God as communicated by the prophets.

I think it very risky to be harsh in judgment, for with what judgment we judge so shall we be judged. I believe that kindness and forbearance is called for, whether dealing with Sandra Tanner or anyone else. That is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Steinman.

[Robert F. Smith]

And yet made and continue to make a nice, comfortable living from doing precisely that . . . or things that approximate, in their own estimation, that.

Sandra and her late husband worked very hard over the years to "save" Mormons, and I wouldn't say that they made a nice, comfortable living from it. The irony is, of course, that they both did a great favor to Mormonism, strengthening it far more than any damage they may have done. You ought to thank them for the unintended consequences of their sincere, hard work.

[CASteinman]

For those who judge by outward appearance, it is always important to note that God does not do so.

You have yet to produce any evidence that Jesus says so. And Jesus is judge.

Don't get me wrong, I do not object to the idea per se. But where does Jesus say that is how He will judge us? It seems that we might be putting words in Jesus' mouth.

His interest is in the heart

Oh, I agree with that. 100%. It is very clear that God wants a change of heart and a cleansing of the inner vessel. But I have not seen Jesus claim that he will judge us on any other basis than our works and our words.

I think it very risky to be harsh in judgment, for with what judgment we judge so shall we be judged. I

Who said anything about being harsh in judgment? But let me point something out: If the intent of my heart is love for fellow man and for God, then it does not matter does it? Or does it?

By the standards of "intent of heart" all and any sin may be excused.

kindness and forbearance is called for, whether dealing with Sandra Tanner or anyone else. That is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Steinman.

Not according to Jesus and I rather consider Him to be more of an authority on what constitutes His Gospel:

Verily I say unto you, that ye are built upon my gospel; therefore ye shall call whatsoever things ye do call, in my name; therefore if ye call upon the Father, for the church, if it be in my name the Father will hear you; and if it so be that the church is built upon my gospel then will the Father show forth his own works in it. But if it be not built upon my gospel, and is built upon the works of men, or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you they have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh, and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return. For their works do follow them, for it is because of their works that they are hewn down; therefore remember the things that I have told you.

Behold I have given unto you my gospel, and this is the gospel which I have given unto you:

• that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me.
  
• And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross;
  
• and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me,
  
• that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up by the Father,
  
• to stand before me,
  
• to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil—
  
• And for this cause have I been lifted up; therefore,
  
  • according to the power of the Father I will draw all men unto me,
    
  • that they may be judged according to their works.
    

  [*]And it shall come to pass, that whoso repenteth and is baptized in my name shall be filled;

  [*]and if he endureth to the end, behold, him will I hold guiltless before my Father at that day when I shall stand to judge the world.

  [*]And he that endureth not unto the end, the same is he that is also hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence they can no more return, because of the justice of the Father. And this is the word which he hath given unto the children of men. And for this cause he fulfilleth the words which he hath given, and he lieth not, but fulfilleth all his words.

  [*]And no unclean thing can enter into his kingdom; therefore nothing entereth into his rest save it be those who have washed their garments in my blood, because of their faith, and the repentance of all their sins, and their faithfulness unto the end.

  [*]Now this is the commandment: Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me and be baptized in my name, that ye may be sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost, that ye may stand spotless before me at the last day.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my gospel; and ye know the things that ye must do in my church; for the works which ye have seen me do that shall ye also do; for that which ye have seen me do even that shall ye do; Therefore, if ye do these things blessed are ye, for ye shall be lifted up at the last day. Write the things which ye have seen and heard, save it be those which are forbidden. Write the works of this people, which shall be, even as hath been written, of that which hath been.

For behold, out of the books which have been written, and which shall be written, shall this people be judged, for by them shall their works be known unto men.

And behold, all things are written by the Father; therefore out of the books which shall be written shall the world be judged.

And know ye that ye shall be judges of this people, according to the judgment which I shall give unto you, which shall be just. Therefore, what manner of men ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am.

And now I go unto the Father. And verily I say unto you, whatsoever things ye shall ask the Father in my name shall be given unto you. Therefore, ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you; for he that asketh, receiveth; and unto him that knocketh, it shall be opened.

I believe that this passage is the only instance in all of Scripture where Jesus expounds and explains the elements of His Gospel. It is full of the word "works" and "judgment".

I know that there are many passages of exhortation where we are encouraged to be kind. I do not disagree with those. I might disagree with what constitutes kindness, but I don't disagree with those passages. However, Jesus was pretty explicit about what His Gospel is and He does not mention "kindness". He mentions "righteousness", "Spirit", "lifted up", "judgment", "works" "The Father" and Himself. But kindness is not there and when it comes to Jesus, I like to pay attention to what He says.

Incidentally, on a related matter Jesus also described His Doctrine as follows. It seems to fit pretty much with His Gospel:

Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine. And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me:

• I bear brecord of the Father,
  
• and the Father beareth record of me,
  
• and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me;
  
• and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me.
  
  • And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.
    
  • And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned.
    

Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost. And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one.

And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things. And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them.

And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them.

Edited August 2, 2012 by CASteinman

[The King's Servant]

SUNSTONE THEOLOGICAL SYMPOSIUM

Student Union, University of Utah, Salt Lake City

Friday, 27 July 2012, 5:00 p.m.- 6:30 p.m.

“Diagnosing the Seer: An Assessment of the First Vision”

Presenters: Dan Vogel, Mark Thomas, Todd Compton, and John-Charles Duffy

Abstract: Mormons consider Joseph Smith’s first vision one of the most significant events in religious history; it is by far the most controversial of his visions. many Mormons maintain that the accounts of the vision are historically accurate, while critics of Mormonism assert that different accounts are inconsistent and historically inaccurate. This session will summarize the various accounts and give an overview of the evidence for and against the historicity of various parts of the vision, including a summary of eight criteria for assessing historical authenticity. After hearing this summary of evidence, the session audience will vote on the historicity of each major section of the vision. The session will conclude with a tabulation of the voting results by the audience.

Interesting. Did the two spirit beings who supposedly visited Joseph in the grove ever identify themselves?

[Pahoran]

Interesting. Did the two spirit beings who supposedly visited Joseph in the grove ever identify themselves?

Joseph didn't describe them as "spirit beings" but as personages.

Still opposing the kingdom of the King you purport to serve, I see.

Regards,

Pahoran

[USU78]

Sandra and her late husband worked very hard over the years to "save" Mormons, and I wouldn't say that they made a nice, comfortable living from it. The irony is, of course, that they both did a great favor to Mormonism, strengthening it far more than any damage they may have done. You ought to thank them for the unintended consequences of their sincere, hard work.

I cannot get past their willful, serial thievery.

A thief will lie.

A liar steals.

[Robert F. Smith]

I cannot get past their willful, serial thievery.

A thief will lie.

A liar steals.

Years ago, a friend of Jerald Tanner stole a microfilm from the LDS Church Archives. Jerald got hold ot it and took it directly to the office of the head of the Archives and put it on his desk, turned and left, not saying a word. That head of Archives immediately spread the false story that Jerald had stolen the microfilm (I know who actually stole it).

On another occasion, an evangelical Presbyterian minister (a man I knew very well) and his friend managed to obtain an interview with Elder LeGrand Richards. The minister came in with a tape recorder going in his briefcase, without permission. The interview was excellent, and the guileless Richards was very forthcoming and honest. Afterward the tape was copied and circulated and a false transcript made and circulated. It took Jerald & Sandra Tanner an hour on the phone with that minister to convince him to apologize directly to Elder Richards and to stop circulating the tapes and transcripts. No one is perfect, but credit should be given when credit is due.

Liars do lie, and thieves do steal, but sometimes it's hard to tell the players without a program.

[Robert F. Smith]

You have yet to produce any evidence that Jesus says so. And Jesus is judge.

Don't get me wrong, I do not object to the idea per se. But where does Jesus say that is how He will judge us? It seems that we might be putting words in Jesus' mouth.

Matthew

7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

. . . . . .

38 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.

41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Oh, I agree with that. 100%. It is very clear that God wants a change of heart and a cleansing of the inner vessel. But I have not seen Jesus claim that he will judge us on any other basis than our works and our words.

Who said anything about being harsh in judgment? But let me point something out: If the intent of my heart is love for fellow man and for God, then it does not matter does it? Or does it?

By the standards of "intent of heart" all and any sin may be excused.

False. Such a claim would make God out to be a liar.

Not according to Jesus and I rather consider Him to be more of an authority on what constitutes His Gospel:

I believe that this passage is the only instance in all of Scripture where Jesus expounds and explains the elements of His Gospel. It is full of the word "works" and "judgment".

I know that there are many passages of exhortation where we are encouraged to be kind. I do not disagree with those. I might disagree with what constitutes kindness, but I don't disagree with those passages. However, Jesus was pretty explicit about what His Gospel is and He does not mention "kindness". He mentions "righteousness", "Spirit", "lifted up", "judgment", "works" "The Father" and Himself. But kindness is not there and when it comes to Jesus, I like to pay attention to what He says.

Incidentally, on a related matter Jesus also described His Doctrine as follows. It seems to fit pretty much with His Gospel:

Selective quotations and proof-texting constitute text abuse and should not take place. Kindness/mercy is a work upon which we all shall be judged.

[Tacenda]

Years ago, a friend of Jerald Tanner stole a microfilm from the LDS Church Archives. Jerald got hold ot it and took it directly to the office of the head of the Archives and put it on his desk, turned and left, not saying a word. That head of Archives immediately spread the false story that Jerald had stolen the microfilm (I know who actually stole it).

On another occasion, an evangelical Presbyterian minister (a man I knew very well) and his friend managed to obtain an interview with Elder LeGrand Richards. The minister came in with a tape recorder going in his briefcase, without permission. The interview was excellent, and the guileless Richards was very forthcoming and honest. Afterward the tape was copied and circulated and a false transcript made and circulated. It took Jerald & Sandra Tanner an hour on the phone with that minister to convince him to apologize directly to Elder Richards and to stop circulating the tapes and transcripts. No one is perfect, but credit should be given when credit is due.

Liars do lie, and thieves do steal, but sometimes it's hard to tell the players without a program.

You are very kind to show the real story here. I'm sure Sandra Tanner, if she knew what you did, would be very thankful to you for clearing this allegation up instead of having her and her dead husbands name drug in the mud.

I'm interested to know why anyone didn't CFR the comment about them being liars and theives, including myself. Maybe they have the terrible image because of the lies brought against them.

Edited August 4, 2012 by Tacenda

[Calm]

I'm interested to know why anyone didn't CFR the comment about them being liars and theives, including myself. Maybe they have the terrible image because of the lies brought against them.

I believe it is because of materials they have actually published. Can't cut and paste this interview, the comment about use of stolen microfilm (stolen by others) and copyright violations is down at the bottom:

http://webcache.goog...8;client=safari

Also this: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=336&dat=19860409&id=4j5TAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OoQDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5157,3552499

The wiki article states that they were sued for posting the copyrighted CHI on their website.

Edited August 4, 2012 by calmoriah

[USU78]

I believe it is because of materials they have actually published. Can't cut and paste this interview, the comment about use of stolen microfilm (stolen by others) and copyright violations is down at the bottom:

http://webcache.goog...8;client=safari

Also this: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=336&dat=19860409&id=4j5TAAAAIBAJ&sjid=OoQDAAAAIBAJ&pg=5157,3552499

The wiki article states that they were sued for posting the copyrighted CHI on their website.

As always, Cal > '78 in the charitable reconstruction department . . . me, I'm much more cynical.

I was actually referring to something else, something Allen Wyatt researched in connection with the lawsuit by the Tanners against FAIR, Allen and FAIR's fine president: The Tanners bought up and squatted on several LDS-related URLs in violation of the Lanham Act. It was that thievery [as defined by Federal Law] that I was referring to. The Tanners were compelled to convey those URLs to the Church. They had done so in order to divert internet traffic away from the Church's websites and to their own.

The Lanham Act calls such behavior cybersquatting . . . harking back to the times when miners and farmers in the days of Ye Olde West would "squat" on others' mining claims and homesteads in order to steal them from the rightful owners.

[Calm]

Since I hadn't known about it or forgot about it, I don't think it was any overabundant charity, lol.

Okay, now I remember...it was somewhat amusing because their complaint against the parody site was that it directed traffic away from their site and thus robbed them of income, IIRC.

Edited August 5, 2012 by calmoriah

[CASteinman]

7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

(and more)

Once more... I see no quotes showing Jesus saying that He will judge by anything other than works and words.

False. Such a claim would make God out to be a liar.

Just saying it is not particularly convincing. If you were to show how that was a valid conclusion by some sort of presentation, it would have some weight.

Selective quotations and proof-texting constitute text abuse and should not take place.

I have not done that and you have not shown that I did and cannot show that I did. It is a false accusation by innuendo and should be beneath you.

Kindness/mercy is a work upon which we all shall be judged.

If you mean that we are expected to show kindness and mercy I agree. However, the overwhelming -- I would say unanimous -- statements by Jesus on how He will judge is all focused on Works and Words.

I have encouraged you to show otherwise and you do not seem to be able. I recognize that there are scriptures about kindness but none of the related to how Jesus will judge us. Mostly they relate to our duty to one another. And in that regard, We are never going to ever be as kind as Jesus in dying for us and giving us some degree of eternal glory. However, when it comes to which degree -- He has said -- its works and words. That is the overwhelming bulk of His words on the matter --if not the absolute unanimous record.

Edited August 5, 2012 by CASteinman

[blackstrap]

Is the act of showing kindness,not an expression of "works" that one will be judged on? Usually ,but not always,kindness is demonstrated by some act. Often it is shown by refraining from an act.Such refraining would probably fall under the " intent of the heart" type of situation.

[Robert F. Smith]

You are very kind to show the real story here. I'm sure Sandra Tanner, if she knew what you did, would be very thankful to you for clearing this allegation up instead of having her and her dead husbands name drug in the mud.

I'm interested to know why anyone didn't CFR the comment about them being liars and theives, including myself. Maybe they have the terrible image because of the lies brought against them.

Of course the Tanners published a lot of misinterpretations over the years, and they frequently assumed the worst of the Brethren. They were correctly described as "career apostates," and we might not agree at all on their evangelical conclusions as to correct theology. But that shouldn't make us enemies. In fact all the more reason for us to be kind to one another.

Your heart is in the right place, Tacenda.

[Robert F. Smith]

Once more... I see no quotes showing Jesus saying that He will judge by anything other than works and words.

Just saying it is not particularly convincing. If you were to show how that was a valid conclusion by some sort of presentation, it would have some weight.

I have not done that and you have not shown that I did and cannot show that I did. It is a false accusation by innuendo and should be beneath you.

If you mean that we are expected to show kindness and mercy I agree. However, the overwhelming -- I would say unanimous -- statements by Jesus on how He will judge is all focused on Works and Words.

I have encouraged you to show otherwise and you do not seem to be able. I recognize that there are scriptures about kindness but none of the related to how Jesus will judge us. Mostly they relate to our duty to one another. And in that regard, We are never going to ever be as kind as Jesus in dying for us and giving us some degree of eternal glory. However, when it comes to which degree -- He has said -- its works and words. That is the overwhelming bulk of His words on the matter --if not the absolute unanimous record.

I have frequently encountered the same obsessive compulsive focus on narrow aspects of the full Gospel many times over the years. It is a tendency particularly evident among evangelicals, but Mormons often do it as well. I realize that the Sermon on the Mount is hard to take, especially the Beatitudes, the demands being described by some as "impossible," but that doesn't negate their power.

I can only recommend that you read and consider all the words of the Bible and the remainder of the standard works, rather than just some particular aspect. The prophets, Jesus, Paul, James, and the rest did not speak only of narrow issues. They dealt with the entirety of the human condition, and rightly so.

[CASteinman]

I have frequently encountered the same obsessive compulsive focus on narrow aspects of the full Gospel many times over the years. It is a tendency particularly evident among evangelicals, but Mormons often do it as well. I realize that the Sermon on the Mount is hard to take, especially the Beatitudes, the demands being described by some as "impossible," but that doesn't negate their power.

I can only recommend that you read and consider all the words of the Bible and the remainder of the standard works, rather than just some particular aspect. The prophets, Jesus, Paul, James, and the rest did not speak only of narrow issues. They dealt with the entirety of the human condition, and rightly so.

So, you are critical of me for exactly and precisely the error you engage in. Meanwhile you never answer the questions -- the very clear and simple question put to you: Where does Jesus ever say anything other than what I have said? When does Jesus OR ANY OF THE PROPHETS ever teach any other method of judgment before the Great Bar of God?

You have not and cannot answer this question, because there is simply no support for your view -- certainly none from the Judge Himself.

None. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

It does not exist. Instead you want to avoid the issue by reframing the question and then you accuse me by innuendo. I would have thought this sort of thing would be beneath you.

Edited August 5, 2012 by CASteinman