<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="podbean/3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Mormon Miscellaneous Worldwide Talk Show</title>
	<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com</link>
	<description>Episodes of Mormon Miscellaneous, a talk show on Mormon history, scripture, doctrine and many controversial topics, by LDS host, Van Hale, now in its 28th year. All points of view are welcomed.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:28:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://podbean.com/?v=3.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Matt Carlson</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</guid>
					<description>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &quot;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly--hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&quot; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler's take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh's position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock's account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp;#38; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph's sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &#8220;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly&#8211;hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&#8221; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler&#8217;s take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh&#8217;s position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock&#8217;s account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph&#8217;s sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Matt Carlson</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</guid>
					<description>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &quot;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly--hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&quot; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler's take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh's position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock's account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp;#38; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph's sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &#8220;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly&#8211;hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&#8221; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler&#8217;s take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh&#8217;s position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock&#8217;s account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph&#8217;s sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Matt Carlson</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</guid>
					<description>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &quot;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly--hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&quot; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler's take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh's position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock's account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp;#38; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph's sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &#8220;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly&#8211;hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&#8221; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler&#8217;s take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh&#8217;s position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock&#8217;s account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph&#8217;s sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Matt Carlson</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</guid>
					<description>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &quot;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly--hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&quot; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler's take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh's position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock's account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp;#38; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph's sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &#8220;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly&#8211;hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&#8221; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler&#8217;s take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh&#8217;s position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock&#8217;s account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph&#8217;s sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Matt Carlson</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:54:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-120880</guid>
					<description>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &quot;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly--hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&quot; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler's take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh's position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock's account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp;#38; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph's sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must agree with Andrew. Joseph was quite clear in his June 16, 1844 discourse that &#8220;Paul says that which is Earthyly is in the likeness of that which is Heavenly&#8211;hence of J. had a Far. can we not believe that he had a Far. also&#8221; (Ehat/Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, p. 380). This stands strictly opposed to Ostler&#8217;s take on the matter. I do not see how any position which contradicts Joseph can be accepted as Jospeh&#8217;s position. Of course, Ostler argues that there are scribal errors since we have only Thomas Bullock&#8217;s account of the June 16 discourse but we have the multiple accounts for the April 7, 1844 discourse. This to me is pure conjecture as we have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the June 16 Bullock account. Bullock was also the primary recorder of the April 7 account and was the author of the 1844 Bullock amalgamation (which appeared in the Times &amp; Seasons). Of course, it is more reliable since it has corroboration but this leaves a lot of Joseph&#8217;s sermons suspect. It just does not hold up without the leap of scribal error on June 16 which seems unlikely.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on LDS Church Political Policy by LDS Art Collector</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</guid>
					<description>Great Post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Post
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on LDS Church Political Policy by LDS Art Collector</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</guid>
					<description>Great Post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Post
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on LDS Church Political Policy by LDS Art Collector</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</guid>
					<description>Great Post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Post
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on LDS Church Political Policy by LDS Art Collector</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</guid>
					<description>Great Post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Post
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on LDS Church Political Policy by LDS Art Collector</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/04/04/lds-church-political-policy/#comment-115143</guid>
					<description>Great Post</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Post
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Bible: Basic Reasoning by LDS Art Show</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 18:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/01/the-bible-basic-reasoning/#comment-110648</guid>
					<description>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great thoughts will be checking back on your blog often.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormonism in Print by Mark Clifford</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</guid>
					<description>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.

Mark Clifford 
&quot;one of those Mormons&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.</p>
<p>Mark Clifford 
&#8220;one of those Mormons&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormonism in Print by Mark Clifford</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</guid>
					<description>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.

Mark Clifford 
&quot;one of those Mormons&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.</p>
<p>Mark Clifford 
&#8220;one of those Mormons&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormonism in Print by Mark Clifford</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</guid>
					<description>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.

Mark Clifford 
&quot;one of those Mormons&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.</p>
<p>Mark Clifford 
&#8220;one of those Mormons&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormonism in Print by Mark Clifford</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</guid>
					<description>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.

Mark Clifford 
&quot;one of those Mormons&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.</p>
<p>Mark Clifford 
&#8220;one of those Mormons&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormonism in Print by Mark Clifford</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/06/02/mormonism-in-print/#comment-110404</guid>
					<description>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.

Mark Clifford 
&quot;one of those Mormons&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sir:
I enjoy your program tremendously. I live in Hawaii and cannot listen to it live, but I think I have heard every program on the website. I particularly appreciate your fair-handed approach. I would not have the patience to tolerate some of the calls with the equanimity that you muster. 
Keep up the good work.</p>
<p>Mark Clifford 
&#8220;one of those Mormons&#8221;
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by beeess</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-109779</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:44:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-109779</guid>
					<description>Shawn McCraney is a typical Charismatic-Pentecostal Televangelist. 
McCraney embraces the Calvary Chapel / Chuck Smith philosophy of ministry (was educated at their Bible College). Google this phrase: “Day of Reckoning+Chuck Smith”, find the article in Christianity Today about this whole corrupt movement. 

Where does McCraney / BornAgainMormon stand ? 

He believes (according to one of his own church members) that Born-Again Christians can lose their salvation. This doctrine is not taught ANYWHERE in the Bible. Certainly not a very healthy doctrine to embrace while ministering to LDS ! ! ! 

Shawn also embraces (he taught this on his Lord’s Word broadcast) the “It’s-OK-to-Speak-in-Tongues-as-Private-Prayer” nonsense. Tongues were revelatory (Revelatory = Direct &amp;#38; Immediate info from God). Tongues have ceased... The Charismatics are in the same boat as Mormons...they both believe in contemporary revelation ! ! ! Again...not a very healthy doctrine to teach while trying to win Mormons. 

McCraney teaches in his book and on TV that LDS who become genuine Born-Again believers can and/or should REMAIN in the LDS religion…hence the term, “Born Again Mormon”.   Noticeably contrary to II Corinthians 6.

Numerous followers of his are from existing local churches in Salt Lake City, not LDS whom Shawn has personally won to Christ. In other words, McCraney's &quot;church&quot; is made up of disgruntled church hoppers, who move around from one congregation to another in and around SLC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shawn McCraney is a typical Charismatic-Pentecostal Televangelist. 
McCraney embraces the Calvary Chapel / Chuck Smith philosophy of ministry (was educated at their Bible College). Google this phrase: “Day of Reckoning+Chuck Smith”, find the article in Christianity Today about this whole corrupt movement. </p>
<p>Where does McCraney / BornAgainMormon stand ? </p>
<p>He believes (according to one of his own church members) that Born-Again Christians can lose their salvation. This doctrine is not taught ANYWHERE in the Bible. Certainly not a very healthy doctrine to embrace while ministering to LDS ! ! ! </p>
<p>Shawn also embraces (he taught this on his Lord’s Word broadcast) the “It’s-OK-to-Speak-in-Tongues-as-Private-Prayer” nonsense. Tongues were revelatory (Revelatory = Direct &amp; Immediate info from God). Tongues have ceased&#8230; The Charismatics are in the same boat as Mormons&#8230;they both believe in contemporary revelation ! ! ! Again&#8230;not a very healthy doctrine to teach while trying to win Mormons. </p>
<p>McCraney teaches in his book and on TV that LDS who become genuine Born-Again believers can and/or should REMAIN in the LDS religion…hence the term, “Born Again Mormon”.   Noticeably contrary to II Corinthians 6.</p>
<p>Numerous followers of his are from existing local churches in Salt Lake City, not LDS whom Shawn has personally won to Christ. In other words, McCraney&#8217;s &#8220;church&#8221; is made up of disgruntled church hoppers, who move around from one congregation to another in and around SLC.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by beeess</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-109779</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:44:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-109779</guid>
					<description>Shawn McCraney is a typical Charismatic-Pentecostal Televangelist. 
McCraney embraces the Calvary Chapel / Chuck Smith philosophy of ministry (was educated at their Bible College). Google this phrase: “Day of Reckoning+Chuck Smith”, find the article in Christianity Today about this whole corrupt movement. 

Where does McCraney / BornAgainMormon stand ? 

He believes (according to one of his own church members) that Born-Again Christians can lose their salvation. This doctrine is not taught ANYWHERE in the Bible. Certainly not a very healthy doctrine to embrace while ministering to LDS ! ! ! 

Shawn also embraces (he taught this on his Lord’s Word broadcast) the “It’s-OK-to-Speak-in-Tongues-as-Private-Prayer” nonsense. Tongues were revelatory (Revelatory = Direct &amp;#38; Immediate info from God). Tongues have ceased... The Charismatics are in the same boat as Mormons...they both believe in contemporary revelation ! ! ! Again...not a very healthy doctrine to teach while trying to win Mormons. 

McCraney teaches in his book and on TV that LDS who become genuine Born-Again believers can and/or should REMAIN in the LDS religion…hence the term, “Born Again Mormon”.   Noticeably contrary to II Corinthians 6.

Numerous followers of his are from existing local churches in Salt Lake City, not LDS whom Shawn has personally won to Christ. In other words, McCraney's &quot;church&quot; is made up of disgruntled church hoppers, who move around from one congregation to another in and around SLC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shawn McCraney is a typical Charismatic-Pentecostal Televangelist. 
McCraney embraces the Calvary Chapel / Chuck Smith philosophy of ministry (was educated at their Bible College). Google this phrase: “Day of Reckoning+Chuck Smith”, find the article in Christianity Today about this whole corrupt movement. </p>
<p>Where does McCraney / BornAgainMormon stand ? </p>
<p>He believes (according to one of his own church members) that Born-Again Christians can lose their salvation. This doctrine is not taught ANYWHERE in the Bible. Certainly not a very healthy doctrine to embrace while ministering to LDS ! ! ! </p>
<p>Shawn also embraces (he taught this on his Lord’s Word broadcast) the “It’s-OK-to-Speak-in-Tongues-as-Private-Prayer” nonsense. Tongues were revelatory (Revelatory = Direct &amp; Immediate info from God). Tongues have ceased&#8230; The Charismatics are in the same boat as Mormons&#8230;they both believe in contemporary revelation ! ! ! Again&#8230;not a very healthy doctrine to teach while trying to win Mormons. </p>
<p>McCraney teaches in his book and on TV that LDS who become genuine Born-Again believers can and/or should REMAIN in the LDS religion…hence the term, “Born Again Mormon”.   Noticeably contrary to II Corinthians 6.</p>
<p>Numerous followers of his are from existing local churches in Salt Lake City, not LDS whom Shawn has personally won to Christ. In other words, McCraney&#8217;s &#8220;church&#8221; is made up of disgruntled church hoppers, who move around from one congregation to another in and around SLC.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by beeess</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-109779</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:44:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-109779</guid>
					<description>Shawn McCraney is a typical Charismatic-Pentecostal Televangelist. 
McCraney embraces the Calvary Chapel / Chuck Smith philosophy of ministry (was educated at their Bible College). Google this phrase: “Day of Reckoning+Chuck Smith”, find the article in Christianity Today about this whole corrupt movement. 

Where does McCraney / BornAgainMormon stand ? 

He believes (according to one of his own church members) that Born-Again Christians can lose their salvation. This doctrine is not taught ANYWHERE in the Bible. Certainly not a very healthy doctrine to embrace while ministering to LDS ! ! ! 

Shawn also embraces (he taught this on his Lord’s Word broadcast) the “It’s-OK-to-Speak-in-Tongues-as-Private-Prayer” nonsense. Tongues were revelatory (Revelatory = Direct &amp;#38; Immediate info from God). Tongues have ceased... The Charismatics are in the same boat as Mormons...they both believe in contemporary revelation ! ! ! Again...not a very healthy doctrine to teach while trying to win Mormons. 

McCraney teaches in his book and on TV that LDS who become genuine Born-Again believers can and/or should REMAIN in the LDS religion…hence the term, “Born Again Mormon”.   Noticeably contrary to II Corinthians 6.

Numerous followers of his are from existing local churches in Salt Lake City, not LDS whom Shawn has personally won to Christ. In other words, McCraney's &quot;church&quot; is made up of disgruntled church hoppers, who move around from one congregation to another in and around SLC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shawn McCraney is a typical Charismatic-Pentecostal Televangelist. 
McCraney embraces the Calvary Chapel / Chuck Smith philosophy of ministry (was educated at their Bible College). Google this phrase: “Day of Reckoning+Chuck Smith”, find the article in Christianity Today about this whole corrupt movement. </p>
<p>Where does McCraney / BornAgainMormon stand ? </p>
<p>He believes (according to one of his own church members) that Born-Again Christians can lose their salvation. This doctrine is not taught ANYWHERE in the Bible. Certainly not a very healthy doctrine to embrace while ministering to LDS ! ! ! </p>
<p>Shawn also embraces (he taught this on his Lord’s Word broadcast) the “It’s-OK-to-Speak-in-Tongues-as-Private-Prayer” nonsense. Tongues were revelatory (Revelatory = Direct &amp; Immediate info from God). Tongues have ceased&#8230; The Charismatics are in the same boat as Mormons&#8230;they both believe in contemporary revelation ! ! ! Again&#8230;not a very healthy doctrine to teach while trying to win Mormons. </p>
<p>McCraney teaches in his book and on TV that LDS who become genuine Born-Again believers can and/or should REMAIN in the LDS religion…hence the term, “Born Again Mormon”.   Noticeably contrary to II Corinthians 6.</p>
<p>Numerous followers of his are from existing local churches in Salt Lake City, not LDS whom Shawn has personally won to Christ. In other words, McCraney&#8217;s &#8220;church&#8221; is made up of disgruntled church hoppers, who move around from one congregation to another in and around SLC.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Andrew Miller</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 01:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</guid>
					<description>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Andrew Miller</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 01:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</guid>
					<description>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Andrew Miller</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 01:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</guid>
					<description>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Andrew Miller</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 01:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</guid>
					<description>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Theology With Blake Ostler by Andrew Miller</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 01:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/08/27/theology-with-blake-ostler/#comment-105540</guid>
					<description>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frankly, Blake is wrong on the issue of whether the Father had a father.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by J. Acevedo</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</guid>
					<description>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by J. Acevedo</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</guid>
					<description>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by J. Acevedo</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</guid>
					<description>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by J. Acevedo</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</guid>
					<description>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by J. Acevedo</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</guid>
					<description>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by J. Acevedo</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 23:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-104142</guid>
					<description>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah's Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was only wondering if you have had the opportunity of reading the Bible published by the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses. IF I remember correctly, they say this translation is the most accurate, based on original manuscripts, or something.
Any comments?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by Dallas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</guid>
					<description>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by Dallas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</guid>
					<description>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by Dallas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</guid>
					<description>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by Dallas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</guid>
					<description>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by Dallas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</guid>
					<description>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Strange Elements of the Old Testament by Dallas</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2008/03/30/strange-elements-of-the-old-testament/#comment-92241</guid>
					<description>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks for keeping the podcasts coming.  I look forward to\ it every week.  I only wish you posted a couple episodes a week.  Oh well.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by mormonmisc</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-77131</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-77131</guid>
					<description>Bob Aarness is speaking without knowledge. I have discussed LDS views on the plurality of Gods many times. I have written several articles, which have been published, addressing the fine points of this concept, its origin and development within Mormon thought. I have compared and contrasted LDS views with the widely divergent views of God found in the many controversies of early and modern segments of non-LDS Christianity.

Further, I have discussed many times the development of the concept of God within the Bible drawing from the work of many Protestant and Catholic scholars who acknowledge and comment extensively upon the concept of a plurality of gods found in a number of Biblical passages.

Van Hale</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob Aarness is speaking without knowledge. I have discussed LDS views on the plurality of Gods many times. I have written several articles, which have been published, addressing the fine points of this concept, its origin and development within Mormon thought. I have compared and contrasted LDS views with the widely divergent views of God found in the many controversies of early and modern segments of non-LDS Christianity.</p>
<p>Further, I have discussed many times the development of the concept of God within the Bible drawing from the work of many Protestant and Catholic scholars who acknowledge and comment extensively upon the concept of a plurality of gods found in a number of Biblical passages.</p>
<p>Van Hale
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by mormonmisc</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-77131</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-77131</guid>
					<description>Bob Aarness is speaking without knowledge. I have discussed LDS views on the plurality of Gods many times. I have written several articles, which have been published, addressing the fine points of this concept, its origin and development within Mormon thought. I have compared and contrasted LDS views with the widely divergent views of God found in the many controversies of early and modern segments of non-LDS Christianity.

Further, I have discussed many times the development of the concept of God within the Bible drawing from the work of many Protestant and Catholic scholars who acknowledge and comment extensively upon the concept of a plurality of gods found in a number of Biblical passages.

Van Hale</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob Aarness is speaking without knowledge. I have discussed LDS views on the plurality of Gods many times. I have written several articles, which have been published, addressing the fine points of this concept, its origin and development within Mormon thought. I have compared and contrasted LDS views with the widely divergent views of God found in the many controversies of early and modern segments of non-LDS Christianity.</p>
<p>Further, I have discussed many times the development of the concept of God within the Bible drawing from the work of many Protestant and Catholic scholars who acknowledge and comment extensively upon the concept of a plurality of gods found in a number of Biblical passages.</p>
<p>Van Hale
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by mormonmisc</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-77131</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 16:00:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-77131</guid>
					<description>Bob Aarness is speaking without knowledge. I have discussed LDS views on the plurality of Gods many times. I have written several articles, which have been published, addressing the fine points of this concept, its origin and development within Mormon thought. I have compared and contrasted LDS views with the widely divergent views of God found in the many controversies of early and modern segments of non-LDS Christianity.

Further, I have discussed many times the development of the concept of God within the Bible drawing from the work of many Protestant and Catholic scholars who acknowledge and comment extensively upon the concept of a plurality of gods found in a number of Biblical passages.

Van Hale</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob Aarness is speaking without knowledge. I have discussed LDS views on the plurality of Gods many times. I have written several articles, which have been published, addressing the fine points of this concept, its origin and development within Mormon thought. I have compared and contrasted LDS views with the widely divergent views of God found in the many controversies of early and modern segments of non-LDS Christianity.</p>
<p>Further, I have discussed many times the development of the concept of God within the Bible drawing from the work of many Protestant and Catholic scholars who acknowledge and comment extensively upon the concept of a plurality of gods found in a number of Biblical passages.</p>
<p>Van Hale
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by bob aarness</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-76365</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:53:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-76365</guid>
					<description>Typically Mormon,Van refuses to be even slightly honest about this situation. He won't even acknowlodge that the single most widely difference between mainstream Christianity and Mormonism is the absolute clear fact that mainstream Christianity believes in ONE God Almighty and their church teaches that God Almighty is only one of billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of God Almighties existing in the universe. And that's the BOTTOM LINE. Not ONCE did or does he even concede this fact. SHAME ON YOU, VAN, try to be honest at least one time in your life, will ya?!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typically Mormon,Van refuses to be even slightly honest about this situation. He won&#8217;t even acknowlodge that the single most widely difference between mainstream Christianity and Mormonism is the absolute clear fact that mainstream Christianity believes in ONE God Almighty and their church teaches that God Almighty is only one of billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of God Almighties existing in the universe. And that&#8217;s the BOTTOM LINE. Not ONCE did or does he even concede this fact. SHAME ON YOU, VAN, try to be honest at least one time in your life, will ya?!!!!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by bob aarness</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-76365</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:53:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-76365</guid>
					<description>Typically Mormon,Van refuses to be even slightly honest about this situation. He won't even acknowlodge that the single most widely difference between mainstream Christianity and Mormonism is the absolute clear fact that mainstream Christianity believes in ONE God Almighty and their church teaches that God Almighty is only one of billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of God Almighties existing in the universe. And that's the BOTTOM LINE. Not ONCE did or does he even concede this fact. SHAME ON YOU, VAN, try to be honest at least one time in your life, will ya?!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typically Mormon,Van refuses to be even slightly honest about this situation. He won&#8217;t even acknowlodge that the single most widely difference between mainstream Christianity and Mormonism is the absolute clear fact that mainstream Christianity believes in ONE God Almighty and their church teaches that God Almighty is only one of billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of God Almighties existing in the universe. And that&#8217;s the BOTTOM LINE. Not ONCE did or does he even concede this fact. SHAME ON YOU, VAN, try to be honest at least one time in your life, will ya?!!!!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Anti-Mormon Vs Mormon by bob aarness</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-76365</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 20:53:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/04/17/anti-mormon-vs-mormon/#comment-76365</guid>
					<description>Typically Mormon,Van refuses to be even slightly honest about this situation. He won't even acknowlodge that the single most widely difference between mainstream Christianity and Mormonism is the absolute clear fact that mainstream Christianity believes in ONE God Almighty and their church teaches that God Almighty is only one of billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of God Almighties existing in the universe. And that's the BOTTOM LINE. Not ONCE did or does he even concede this fact. SHAME ON YOU, VAN, try to be honest at least one time in your life, will ya?!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typically Mormon,Van refuses to be even slightly honest about this situation. He won&#8217;t even acknowlodge that the single most widely difference between mainstream Christianity and Mormonism is the absolute clear fact that mainstream Christianity believes in ONE God Almighty and their church teaches that God Almighty is only one of billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions of God Almighties existing in the universe. And that&#8217;s the BOTTOM LINE. Not ONCE did or does he even concede this fact. SHAME ON YOU, VAN, try to be honest at least one time in your life, will ya?!!!!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by kitty</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</guid>
					<description>will never accept POLIGAMY</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>will never accept POLIGAMY
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by kitty</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</guid>
					<description>will never accept POLIGAMY</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>will never accept POLIGAMY
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by kitty</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</guid>
					<description>will never accept POLIGAMY</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>will never accept POLIGAMY
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by kitty</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-63406</guid>
					<description>will never accept POLIGAMY</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>will never accept POLIGAMY
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Polygamy Discussion with Author, Carmon Hardy by Alan</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 03:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</guid>
					<description>This was very interesting, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was very interesting, thanks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Polygamy Discussion with Author, Carmon Hardy by Alan</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 03:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</guid>
					<description>This was very interesting, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was very interesting, thanks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Polygamy Discussion with Author, Carmon Hardy by Alan</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 03:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</guid>
					<description>This was very interesting, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was very interesting, thanks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Polygamy Discussion with Author, Carmon Hardy by Alan</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 03:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</guid>
					<description>This was very interesting, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was very interesting, thanks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Polygamy Discussion with Author, Carmon Hardy by Alan</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 03:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/07/25/polygamy-discussion-with-author-carmon-hardy/#comment-63281</guid>
					<description>This was very interesting, thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was very interesting, thanks.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Defining Mormon Concepts of Deity by Lincoln Cannon</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:33:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/17/defining-mormon-concepts-of-deity/#comment-60787</guid>
					<description>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An important difference between Mormon and most other concepts of deity is that the God of Mormon faith can (and should, in my estimation) be understood and revered in entirely naturalistic terms.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by Nate</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</guid>
					<description>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -

The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser's recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.

Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &quot;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&quot; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley's honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)

Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism..., 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)

The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)

In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)

I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -</p>
<p>The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser&#8217;s recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.</p>
<p>Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &#8220;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&#8221; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley&#8217;s honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)</p>
<p>Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism&#8230;, 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)</p>
<p>The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)</p>
<p>In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)</p>
<p>I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by Nate</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</guid>
					<description>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -

The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser's recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.

Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &quot;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&quot; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley's honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)

Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism..., 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)

The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)

In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)

I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -</p>
<p>The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser&#8217;s recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.</p>
<p>Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &#8220;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&#8221; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley&#8217;s honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)</p>
<p>Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism&#8230;, 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)</p>
<p>The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)</p>
<p>In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)</p>
<p>I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by Nate</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</guid>
					<description>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -

The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser's recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.

Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &quot;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&quot; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley's honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)

Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism..., 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)

The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)

In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)

I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -</p>
<p>The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser&#8217;s recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.</p>
<p>Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &#8220;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&#8221; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley&#8217;s honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)</p>
<p>Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism&#8230;, 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)</p>
<p>The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)</p>
<p>In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)</p>
<p>I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Mormon Fundamentalism by Nate</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/11/12/mormon-fundamentalism/#comment-60611</guid>
					<description>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -

The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser's recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.

Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &quot;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&quot; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley's honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)

Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism..., 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)

The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)

In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)

I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whilst the issue of who wrote the Manifesto is less important than why the Manifesto was written and what its intention was, I think there may be some credibility to the idea that Penrose was involved in the writing of the Manifesto, for the following reasons -</p>
<p>The dates and locations and people involved in Thomas Rosser&#8217;s recollection are confirmed by the Millennial Star - Volume 70, page 348.</p>
<p>Apostle Matthias Cowley testified that Penrose told him the very same thing - &#8220;Brother Penrose told me once in the city of Mexico, that he had written the Manifesto, and it was gotten up so that it did not mean anything and President [Joseph F.] Smith had told me the same.&#8221; (Matthias F. Cowley, Minutes of the Quorum of the Twelve, 10 May 1911. Cowley&#8217;s honesty was never questioned in his disfellowshipment trial.)</p>
<p>Ada L. Shepherd made a statement before William J. Barette, Notary Public, Salt Lake County, 7 December 1912, which stated she had heard Charles W. Penrose say it was he who wrote the Manifesto. (A World-Wide Survey of Present Day Mormonism&#8230;, 3 July 1913. Admittedly this is not a pro-Mormon source, yet it is doubtful she knew either Cowley or Rosser.)</p>
<p>The Editorial for the Deseret News in which the Manifesto first appeared admitted that the Manifesto had been condensed, and only “poorly” expressed “the sentiments of the writer.” Charles W. Penrose was the editor of that newspaper. (Deseret News, 25th September 1890.)</p>
<p>In 1935 Joseph Musser also claimed that Penrose had taken part in writing the Manifesto, and that he had learnt this from his father, A. Milton Musser, who was assistant Church historian. (Joseph W. Musser, Truth 1:2:8, July 1935)</p>
<p>I believe that these points show that the idea that Penrose helped write the Manifesto (or at least claimed to) is a credible one.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bits and Pieces by Art Bulla</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</guid>
					<description>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.

Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &quot;strong censorship&quot; then says &quot;it is time to move on&quot;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &quot;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&quot; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.

The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &quot;darkness rather than light&quot;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &quot;high heads&quot; and &quot;stiff necks&quot; and depend on the &quot;precepts of men&quot;.

 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none--and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

			(2 Ne  28:11-30)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.</p>
<p>Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &#8220;strong censorship&#8221; then says &#8220;it is time to move on&#8221;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &#8220;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&#8221; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.</p>
<p>The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &#8220;darkness rather than light&#8221;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &#8220;high heads&#8221; and &#8220;stiff necks&#8221; and depend on the &#8220;precepts of men&#8221;.</p>
<p> 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well&#8211;and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none&#8211;and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.</p>
<p>			(2 Ne  28:11-30)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bits and Pieces by Art Bulla</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</guid>
					<description>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.

Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &quot;strong censorship&quot; then says &quot;it is time to move on&quot;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &quot;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&quot; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.

The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &quot;darkness rather than light&quot;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &quot;high heads&quot; and &quot;stiff necks&quot; and depend on the &quot;precepts of men&quot;.

 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none--and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

			(2 Ne  28:11-30)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.</p>
<p>Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &#8220;strong censorship&#8221; then says &#8220;it is time to move on&#8221;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &#8220;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&#8221; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.</p>
<p>The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &#8220;darkness rather than light&#8221;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &#8220;high heads&#8221; and &#8220;stiff necks&#8221; and depend on the &#8220;precepts of men&#8221;.</p>
<p> 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well&#8211;and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none&#8211;and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.</p>
<p>			(2 Ne  28:11-30)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bits and Pieces by Art Bulla</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</guid>
					<description>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.

Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &quot;strong censorship&quot; then says &quot;it is time to move on&quot;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &quot;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&quot; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.

The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &quot;darkness rather than light&quot;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &quot;high heads&quot; and &quot;stiff necks&quot; and depend on the &quot;precepts of men&quot;.

 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none--and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

			(2 Ne  28:11-30)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.</p>
<p>Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &#8220;strong censorship&#8221; then says &#8220;it is time to move on&#8221;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &#8220;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&#8221; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.</p>
<p>The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &#8220;darkness rather than light&#8221;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &#8220;high heads&#8221; and &#8220;stiff necks&#8221; and depend on the &#8220;precepts of men&#8221;.</p>
<p> 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well&#8211;and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none&#8211;and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.</p>
<p>			(2 Ne  28:11-30)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bits and Pieces by Art Bulla</title>
		<link>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:44:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://mormonmisc.podbean.com/2007/06/27/bits-and-pieces/#comment-59573</guid>
					<description>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.

Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &quot;strong censorship&quot; then says &quot;it is time to move on&quot;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &quot;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&quot; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.

The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &quot;darkness rather than light&quot;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &quot;high heads&quot; and &quot;stiff necks&quot; and depend on the &quot;precepts of men&quot;.

 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none--and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

			(2 Ne  28:11-30)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>THE GOLDEN RULE OF DISINFORMERS: Always accuse your adversary of whatever is true about yourself.</p>
<p>Mr. Hale is the one guilty of over-talking and insults.  He has a habit of droning on and on, and after a lengthy soliloquy in the mode of &#8220;strong censorship&#8221; then says &#8220;it is time to move on&#8221;, thinking that his supercilious disparagement of objective facts  have disposed of the matter.  How dishonest can one be?  As the Lord has said, &#8220;Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.&#8221; If he treated me in person the way he does behind a microphone I would probably give him a boxing lesson, it is true.</p>
<p>The man has absolutely no revelation from God but depends on the learning of men who disagree among themselves concerning the truth, taking absolute delight in &#8220;darkness rather than light&#8221;.  The Lord says this is in fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the OMS, who would be turned aside as a thing of naught because they wear &#8220;high heads&#8221; and &#8220;stiff necks&#8221; and depend on the &#8220;precepts of men&#8221;.</p>
<p> 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the way; they have become corrupted.
 12 Because of pride, and because of false teachers, and false doctrine, their churches have become corrupted, and their churches are lifted up; because of pride they are puffed up.
 13 They rob the poor because of their fine sanctuaries; they rob the poor because of their fine clothing; and they persecute the meek and the poor in heart, because in their pride they are puffed up.
 14 They wear stiff necks and high heads; yea, and because of pride, and wickedness, and abominations, and whoredoms, they have all gone astray save it be a few, who are the humble followers of Christ; nevertheless, they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men.
 15 O the wise, and the learned, and the rich, that are puffed up in the pride of their hearts, and all those who preach false doctrines, and all those who commit whoredoms, and pervert the right way of the Lord, wo, wo, wo be unto them, saith the Lord God Almighty, for they shall be thrust down to hell!
 16 Wo unto them that turn aside the just for a thing of naught and revile against that which is good, and say that it is of no worth! For the day shall come that the Lord God will speedily visit the inhabitants of the earth; and in that day that they are fully ripe in iniquity they shall perish.
 17 But behold, if the inhabitants of the earth shall repent of their wickedness and abominations they shall not be destroyed, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 18 But behold, that great and abominable church, the whore of all the earth, must tumble to the earth, and great must be the fall thereof.
 19 For the kingdom of the devil must shake, and they which belong to it must needs be stirred up unto repentance, or the devil will grasp them with his everlasting chains, and they be stirred up to anger, and perish;
 20 For behold, at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men, and stir them up to anger against that which is good.
 21 And others will he pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well&#8211;and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell.
 22 And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none&#8211;and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance.
 23 Yea, they are grasped with death, and hell; and death, and hell, and the devil, and all that have been seized therewith must stand before the throne of God, and be judged according to their works, from whence they must go into the place prepared for them, even a lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
 24 Therefore, wo be unto him that is at ease in Zion!
 25 Wo be unto him that crieth: All is well!
 26 Yea, wo be unto him that hearkeneth unto the precepts of men, and denieth the power of God, and the gift of the Holy Ghost!
 27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more!
 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall.
 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough!
 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.</p>
<p>			(2 Ne  28:11-30)
</p>
]]></content