Sinner
Darkslider
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:34:01 +0000
Takai_desu_yo
Darkslider
Kiritsu
Some random bullshit
Stop this, please. Every time you post something like this. . . . I get an ache in my jaw. I think it is from clenching my jaw so hard. . . . But, I am certain that if you would kindly stop posting lies, deceit, and bullshit, my jaw would stop aching.
I'm going to assume for the Moment that you are speaking of the Catholic post, since I don't see reason for you to be offended by the Anti-Mormon posts. Perhaps you now realize how many of the Mormons feel, coming here, and seeing their Religion Bashed? IT IS THE SAME THING! The moment that you see something that goes against your very own religion, you automatically conclude that they are lies. It's the easiest thing to do, as you can see that the Mormons have been doing that for the past hundred pages. You post something against their Beliefs, it's automatically a lie.
I meant all three. I despise all organized religions, and am offended by all three of those posts. First off, none of them had anything to do with what has been going on, second, just cut and pasting entire posts pisses me off, always has. Third, what was the point to posting those? To prove he can do a google search?
I agree with you on the "Anti-anything = lies" part. Sadly it is true. Unless, like me, you can step back and look at the how and why they are saying that. If they present their arguments in a logical manner, without a lot of stupid. . . . I can generaly accept it for being fact. And, I have found, most people cannot admit that they are wrong. Prove to them that they are completely off the mark. . . . They deny it and fight even more fanatically.
Se Ga Takai
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 20:51:25 +0000
Darkslider
Takai_desu_yo
Darkslider
Kiritsu
Some random bullshit
Stop this, please. Every time you post something like this. . . . I get an ache in my jaw. I think it is from clenching my jaw so hard. . . . But, I am certain that if you would kindly stop posting lies, deceit, and bullshit, my jaw would stop aching.
I'm going to assume for the Moment that you are speaking of the Catholic post, since I don't see reason for you to be offended by the Anti-Mormon posts. Perhaps you now realize how many of the Mormons feel, coming here, and seeing their Religion Bashed? IT IS THE SAME THING! The moment that you see something that goes against your very own religion, you automatically conclude that they are lies. It's the easiest thing to do, as you can see that the Mormons have been doing that for the past hundred pages. You post something against their Beliefs, it's automatically a lie.
I meant all three. I despise all organized religions, and am offended by all three of those posts. First off, none of them had anything to do with what has been going on, second, just cut and pasting entire posts pisses me off, always has. Third, what was the point to posting those? To prove he can do a google search?
I agree with you on the "Anti-anything = lies" part. Sadly it is true. Unless, like me, you can step back and look at the how and why they are saying that. If they present their arguments in a logical manner, without a lot of stupid. . . . I can generaly accept it for being fact. And, I have found, most people cannot admit that they are wrong. Prove to them that they are completely off the mark. . . . They deny it and fight even more fanatically.
*points to sig*
I am in no way supportive of Kerry, but I just enjoy pissing off hardcore Republicans.
TheNinjaGod
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:39:30 +0000
Kiritsu
Studying the fallacies of Catholicism tonight and noting some similarities with Mormonism.
The Pope is said to be infallible whenever he makes an official decree on matters of faith and morals. According to Catholic doctrine, it is impossible for the Pope to teach false doctrine. Catholics are expected to obey the Pope without question even when he is not making an "infallible" statement about doctrine. They are expected to submit their wills and minds to the Pope without question. ("Catechism" 892, 2037, 2050)
The claim for papal infallibility does not stand up to the test of history. For example, Pope Zosimus (417-418 A.D.) reversed the pronouncement of a previous pope. He also retracted a doctrinal pronouncement that he himself had previously made. Pope Honorious was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681 A.D.). He was also condemned as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. So here we have "infallible" popes condemning another "infallible" pope as a heretic. In 1870, the First Vatican Council abolished "infallible" papal decrees and the decrees of two "infallible" councils. (Note 23)
On May 13, 1981, a man shot Pope John Paul II. As the ambulance carried him to the hospital, the Pope kept praying, "Mary, my mother! Mary, my mother!" One year later, the Pope made a pilgrimage to Fatima to thank Our Lady of Fatima for saving his life and to consecrate the entire human race to her. (Note 27) The video "Catholicism: Crisis of Faith" shows the Pope kissing the feet of a statue of Mary. ( Note 28 )
http://www.catholicconcerns.com/index.html
So while there is alot of questionable material in Mormonism, there is also quite a bit in Catholicism. I'd rather follow the prophet than worship Mary, if I had to choose. sweatdrop
The Pope is said to be infallible whenever he makes an official decree on matters of faith and morals. According to Catholic doctrine, it is impossible for the Pope to teach false doctrine. Catholics are expected to obey the Pope without question even when he is not making an "infallible" statement about doctrine. They are expected to submit their wills and minds to the Pope without question. ("Catechism" 892, 2037, 2050)
The claim for papal infallibility does not stand up to the test of history. For example, Pope Zosimus (417-418 A.D.) reversed the pronouncement of a previous pope. He also retracted a doctrinal pronouncement that he himself had previously made. Pope Honorious was condemned as a heretic by the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681 A.D.). He was also condemned as a heretic by Pope Leo II, as well as by every other pope until the eleventh century. So here we have "infallible" popes condemning another "infallible" pope as a heretic. In 1870, the First Vatican Council abolished "infallible" papal decrees and the decrees of two "infallible" councils. (Note 23)
On May 13, 1981, a man shot Pope John Paul II. As the ambulance carried him to the hospital, the Pope kept praying, "Mary, my mother! Mary, my mother!" One year later, the Pope made a pilgrimage to Fatima to thank Our Lady of Fatima for saving his life and to consecrate the entire human race to her. (Note 27) The video "Catholicism: Crisis of Faith" shows the Pope kissing the feet of a statue of Mary. ( Note 28 )
http://www.catholicconcerns.com/index.html
So while there is alot of questionable material in Mormonism, there is also quite a bit in Catholicism. I'd rather follow the prophet than worship Mary, if I had to choose. sweatdrop
TheNinjaGod
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:49:05 +0000
Darkslider
TheNinjaGod
Takai_desu_yo
Woodlock
TheNinjaGod
However in the beginning it talks about how Nephi, the good son, stole a steel sword in roughly 591 b.c.. Which is fine and all except the iron age started in 1000 b.c., and at that time steel was rare and could only be processed in incredibly small amounts.
You do realize that B.C. dates go backward, so 1000 B.C. is before 591, by 409 years. That's long enough for it to become more commonplace.
1000 B.C. ----> 591 B.C. ----> 0 A.D. ----> 591 A.D. ----> 2004 A.D.
Ms. Cherrie: Where ya been? How's your Missionary friend doing?
How many times do I have to say it? Learn to speak English! God dammit!
They did have the technology to smelt gold, you ignorant b***h. They have been smelting gold for ages. Supposedly the BoM took place much after Moses, yet the people in Moses' time knew how to smelt gold. . . . So why wouldn't a (made-up) civilization thousands of years later, have the ability to smelt gold.
Please for the sake of all that is right and just and holy in this world, present an argument that has some mild basis in fact. 'Til then, shut the ******** up.
Kiritsu
Some random bullshit
Stop this, please. Every time you post something like this. . . . I get an ache in my jaw. I think it is from clenching my jaw so hard. . . . But, I am certain that if you would kindly stop posting lies, deceit, and bullshit, my jaw would stop aching.
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:20:02 +0000
Eteponge
Kiritsu:
The "God was once a Man" / "Adam-God Theory" = Highly Misinterpreted Jewish Kabbalah Theology.
The complex Divine image composed of the multiple vessels of Divine manifestation was also visualized by Kabbalah as having a unitary, anthropomorphic form. God was, by one Kabbalistic recension, Adam Kadmon: the first primordial or archetypal Man. Man shared with God both an intrinsic, uncreated divine spark and a complex, organic form. This strange equation of Adam as God was supported by a Kabbalistic cipher: the numerical value in Hebrew of the names Adam and Jehovah (the Tetragrammaton, Yod he vav he) was both 45. Thus in Kabbalistic exegesis Jehovah equaled Adam: Adam was God. With this affirmation went the assertion that all humankind in highest realization was like God: the two realities shadowed each other.
In Kabbalah the theme is, however, prominent: Adam Kadmon is indeed "God," and His form is in the image of a Man--as noted earlier. Given the evidence that Joseph did know some elements of Kabbalah and had access both to the Zohar and to a Jew familiar with a wide range of Kabbalistic materials, it seems probable that Brigham heard this concept in some form from Joseph. The Adam-God doctrine may have been a misreading (or simplistic restatement) by Brigham Young of a Kabbalistic and Hermetic concept relayed to him by the prophet.
The "God was once a Man" / "Adam-God Theory" = Highly Misinterpreted Jewish Kabbalah Theology.
The complex Divine image composed of the multiple vessels of Divine manifestation was also visualized by Kabbalah as having a unitary, anthropomorphic form. God was, by one Kabbalistic recension, Adam Kadmon: the first primordial or archetypal Man. Man shared with God both an intrinsic, uncreated divine spark and a complex, organic form. This strange equation of Adam as God was supported by a Kabbalistic cipher: the numerical value in Hebrew of the names Adam and Jehovah (the Tetragrammaton, Yod he vav he) was both 45. Thus in Kabbalistic exegesis Jehovah equaled Adam: Adam was God. With this affirmation went the assertion that all humankind in highest realization was like God: the two realities shadowed each other.
In Kabbalah the theme is, however, prominent: Adam Kadmon is indeed "God," and His form is in the image of a Man--as noted earlier. Given the evidence that Joseph did know some elements of Kabbalah and had access both to the Zohar and to a Jew familiar with a wide range of Kabbalistic materials, it seems probable that Brigham heard this concept in some form from Joseph. The Adam-God doctrine may have been a misreading (or simplistic restatement) by Brigham Young of a Kabbalistic and Hermetic concept relayed to him by the prophet.
Good job, Eteponge!
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:30:18 +0000
Darkslider
Takai_desu_yo
Darkslider
Kiritsu
Some random bullshit
Stop this, please. Every time you post something like this. . . . I get an ache in my jaw. I think it is from clenching my jaw so hard. . . . But, I am certain that if you would kindly stop posting lies, deceit, and bullshit, my jaw would stop aching.
I'm going to assume for the Moment that you are speaking of the Catholic post, since I don't see reason for you to be offended by the Anti-Mormon posts. Perhaps you now realize how many of the Mormons feel, coming here, and seeing their Religion Bashed? IT IS THE SAME THING! The moment that you see something that goes against your very own religion, you automatically conclude that they are lies. It's the easiest thing to do, as you can see that the Mormons have been doing that for the past hundred pages. You post something against their Beliefs, it's automatically a lie.
I meant all three. I despise all organized religions, and am offended by all three of those posts. First off, none of them had anything to do with what has been going on, second, just cut and pasting entire posts pisses me off, always has. Third, what was the point to posting those? To prove he can do a google search?
I agree with you on the "Anti-anything = lies" part. Sadly it is true. Unless, like me, you can step back and look at the how and why they are saying that. If they present their arguments in a logical manner, without a lot of stupid. . . . I can generaly accept it for being fact. And, I have found, most people cannot admit that they are wrong. Prove to them that they are completely off the mark. . . . They deny it and fight even more fanatically.
What the ---? Darkslider's respect dropped to -100 in my book.
First off, the point to those was to show some bits of the sermons preached by Brigham Young, and the doctrine he taught. This is a FAQ after all, and it seems to me that posting old LDS sermons is alot more on-topic than alot of crap I've seen on here.
Second, CUT AND PASTE? I hand-typed those, idiot, from the 30+ books I have on Mormonism. Plus proof-reading each one. Google search, whatever.
Quote:
...that if you would kindly stop posting lies, deceit...
What lies? What deceit? There's so much emphasis on telling people to back up their claims, why don't you do it as well, fool, and point out what you are referring to so that your issues might be properly addressed. Also, for Takai, I don't think I bash mormons at all on here. That would be counterproductive, sorta like what Darkretard here is doing. If anyone deserves to be trashed, its him. All your false assumptions really annoy and insult me. You are the one who is "completely off the mark". I'm going to keep posting tidbits on Mormonism, Catholics, whatever I want, and if you don't like it, as Joseph Smith once said, you can just lump it! stressed
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 23:36:42 +0000
TheNinjaGod
Darkslider
TheNinjaGod
Takai_desu_yo
Woodlock
TheNinjaGod
However in the beginning it talks about how Nephi, the good son, stole a steel sword in roughly 591 b.c.. Which is fine and all except the iron age started in 1000 b.c., and at that time steel was rare and could only be processed in incredibly small amounts.
You do realize that B.C. dates go backward, so 1000 B.C. is before 591, by 409 years. That's long enough for it to become more commonplace.
1000 B.C. ----> 591 B.C. ----> 0 A.D. ----> 591 A.D. ----> 2004 A.D.
Ms. Cherrie: Where ya been? How's your Missionary friend doing?
How many times do I have to say it? Learn to speak English! God dammit!
They did have the technology to smelt gold, you ignorant b***h. They have been smelting gold for ages. Supposedly the BoM took place much after Moses, yet the people in Moses' time knew how to smelt gold. . . . So why wouldn't a (made-up) civilization thousands of years later, have the ability to smelt gold.
Please for the sake of all that is right and just and holy in this world, present an argument that has some mild basis in fact. 'Til then, shut the ******** up.
Kiritsu
Some random bullshit
Stop this, please. Every time you post something like this. . . . I get an ache in my jaw. I think it is from clenching my jaw so hard. . . . But, I am certain that if you would kindly stop posting lies, deceit, and bullshit, my jaw would stop aching.
He's that and a lot more.
Quo Girl
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 04:16:47 +0000
Talk about the world being filled with carnally-minded, waste of flesh and bones "human beings" that don't know the difference between "of the world" and "in the world."
Cheri
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 21:06:32 +0000
Quo Girl
Talk about the world being filled with carnally-minded, waste of flesh and bones "human beings" that don't know the difference between "of the world" and "in the world."
Darlin', did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning or are you always so articulate? Come now, what standard are you judging these people by?
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:00:05 +0000
And now I present to you, as given by Ezra Taft Benson,
<center>The Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet</center>
First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works [Bible, Book of Mormon, D&C, etc].
Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
Fourth: The Prophet will never lead the Church astray.
Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
Sixth: The Prophet does not have to say "Thus Saith the Lord," to give us scripture.
Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men's reasoning.
Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.
Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
Thirteenth: The Prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency--the highest quorum in the Church.
Fourteenth: The Prophet and the presidency--the living prophet and the First Presidency--follow them and be blessed--reject them and suffer.
I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord thenlet us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain--how close do our lives harmonize with the words of the Lord's anointed--the living Prophet--President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.
May God bless us all to look to the Prophet and the Presidency in the critical and crucial days ahead is my prayer.
Ezra Taft Benson
14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophets
pages 1-16
Feb 26, 1980
<center>The Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet</center>
First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
Second: The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works [Bible, Book of Mormon, D&C, etc].
Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
Fourth: The Prophet will never lead the Church astray.
Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
Sixth: The Prophet does not have to say "Thus Saith the Lord," to give us scripture.
Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men's reasoning.
Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.
Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
Thirteenth: The Prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency--the highest quorum in the Church.
Fourteenth: The Prophet and the presidency--the living prophet and the First Presidency--follow them and be blessed--reject them and suffer.
I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord thenlet us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain--how close do our lives harmonize with the words of the Lord's anointed--the living Prophet--President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.
May God bless us all to look to the Prophet and the Presidency in the critical and crucial days ahead is my prayer.
Ezra Taft Benson
14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophets
pages 1-16
Feb 26, 1980
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:06:58 +0000
Miss Cherie
Quo Girl
Talk about the world being filled with carnally-minded, waste of flesh and bones "human beings" that don't know the difference between "of the world" and "in the world."
Darlin', did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning or are you always so articulate? Come now, what standard are you judging these people by?
She's on a spiritual high at the moment, Cherie, give her a break, lol.
Cheri
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 11:52:05 +0000
Kiritsu
Miss Cherie
Quo Girl
Talk about the world being filled with carnally-minded, waste of flesh and bones "human beings" that don't know the difference between "of the world" and "in the world."
Darlin', did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning or are you always so articulate? Come now, what standard are you judging these people by?
She's on a spiritual high at the moment, Cherie, give her a break, lol.
Do I ever give breaks? Anyway...
Quote:
of-
# Derived or coming from; originating at or from: customs of the South.
# Caused by; resulting from: a death of tuberculosis.
# Away from; at a distance from: a mile east of here.
# So as to be separated or relieved from: robbed of one's dignity; cured of distemper.
# From the total or group comprising: give of one's time; two of my friends; most of the cases.
# Composed or made from: a dress of silk.
# Associated with or adhering to: people of your religion.
# Belonging or connected to: the rungs of a ladder.
#
1. Possessing; having: a person of honor.
2. On one's part: very nice of you.
# Containing or carrying: a basket of groceries.
# Specified as; named or called: a depth of ten feet; the Garden of Eden.
# Centering on; directed toward: a love of horses.
# Produced by; issuing from: products of the vine.
# Characterized or identified by: a year of famine.
#
1. With reference to; about: think highly of her proposals; will speak of it later.
2. In respect to: slow of speech.
# Set aside for; taken up by: a day of rest.
# Before; until: five minutes of two.
# During or on a specified time: of recent years.
# By: beloved of the family.
# Used to indicate an appositive: that idiot of a driver.
# Archaic. On: “A plague of all cowards, I say” (Shakespeare).
# Derived or coming from; originating at or from: customs of the South.
# Caused by; resulting from: a death of tuberculosis.
# Away from; at a distance from: a mile east of here.
# So as to be separated or relieved from: robbed of one's dignity; cured of distemper.
# From the total or group comprising: give of one's time; two of my friends; most of the cases.
# Composed or made from: a dress of silk.
# Associated with or adhering to: people of your religion.
# Belonging or connected to: the rungs of a ladder.
#
1. Possessing; having: a person of honor.
2. On one's part: very nice of you.
# Containing or carrying: a basket of groceries.
# Specified as; named or called: a depth of ten feet; the Garden of Eden.
# Centering on; directed toward: a love of horses.
# Produced by; issuing from: products of the vine.
# Characterized or identified by: a year of famine.
#
1. With reference to; about: think highly of her proposals; will speak of it later.
2. In respect to: slow of speech.
# Set aside for; taken up by: a day of rest.
# Before; until: five minutes of two.
# During or on a specified time: of recent years.
# By: beloved of the family.
# Used to indicate an appositive: that idiot of a driver.
# Archaic. On: “A plague of all cowards, I say” (Shakespeare).
Quote:
in-
\In\, prep. [AS. in; akin to D. & G. in, Icel. [=i], Sw. & Dan. i, OIr. & L. in, Gr. 'en. [root]197. Cf. 1st In-, Inn.] The specific signification of in is situation or place with respect to surrounding, environment, encompassment, etc. It is used with verbs signifying being, resting, or moving within limits, or within circumstances or conditions of any kind conceived of as limiting, confining, or investing, either wholly or in part. In its different applications, it approaches some of the meanings of, and sometimes is interchangeable with, within, into, on, at, of, and among. It is used:
1. With reference to space or place; as, he lives in Boston; he traveled in Italy; castles in the air.
The babe lying in a manger. --Luke ii. 16.
Thy sun sets weeping in the lowly west. --Shak.
Situated in the forty-first degree of latitude. --Gibbon.
Matter for censure in every page. --Macaulay.
2. With reference to circumstances or conditions; as, he is in difficulties; she stood in a blaze of light. ``Fettered in amorous chains.'' --Shak.
Wrapt in sweet sounds, as in bright veils. --Shelley.
3. With reference to a whole which includes or comprises the part spoken of; as, the first in his family; the first regiment in the army.
Nine in ten of those who enter the ministry. --Swift.
4. With reference to physical surrounding, personal states, etc., abstractly denoted; as, I am in doubt; the room is in darkness; to live in fear.
When shall we three meet again, In thunder, lightning, or in rain? --Shak.
5. With reference to character, reach, scope, or influence considered as establishing a limitation; as, to be in one's favor. ``In sight of God's high throne.'' --Milton.
Sounds inharmonious in themselves, and harsh. --Cowper.
6. With reference to movement or tendency toward a certain limit or environment; -- sometimes equivalent to into; as, to put seed in the ground; to fall in love; to end in death; to put our trust in God.
He would not plunge his brother in despair. --Addison.
She had no jewels to deposit in their caskets. --Fielding.
7. With reference to a limit of time; as, in an hour; it happened in the last century; in all my life.
In as much as, or Inasmuch as, in the degree that; in like manner as; in consideration that; because that; since. See Synonym of Because, and cf. For as much as, under For, prep.
In that, because; for the reason that. ``Some things they do in that they are men . . .; some things in that they are men misled and blinded with error.'' --Hooker.
In the name of, in behalf of; on the part of; by authority; as, it was done in the name of the people; -- often used in invocation, swearing, praying, and the like.
To be in for it. (a) To be in favor of a thing; to be committed to a course. (b) To be unable to escape from a danger, penalty, etc. [Colloq.]
To be (or keep) in with. (a) To be close or near; as, to keep a ship in with the land. (b) To be on terms of friendship, familiarity, or intimacy with; to secure and retain the favor of. [Colloq.]
\In\, prep. [AS. in; akin to D. & G. in, Icel. [=i], Sw. & Dan. i, OIr. & L. in, Gr. 'en. [root]197. Cf. 1st In-, Inn.] The specific signification of in is situation or place with respect to surrounding, environment, encompassment, etc. It is used with verbs signifying being, resting, or moving within limits, or within circumstances or conditions of any kind conceived of as limiting, confining, or investing, either wholly or in part. In its different applications, it approaches some of the meanings of, and sometimes is interchangeable with, within, into, on, at, of, and among. It is used:
1. With reference to space or place; as, he lives in Boston; he traveled in Italy; castles in the air.
The babe lying in a manger. --Luke ii. 16.
Thy sun sets weeping in the lowly west. --Shak.
Situated in the forty-first degree of latitude. --Gibbon.
Matter for censure in every page. --Macaulay.
2. With reference to circumstances or conditions; as, he is in difficulties; she stood in a blaze of light. ``Fettered in amorous chains.'' --Shak.
Wrapt in sweet sounds, as in bright veils. --Shelley.
3. With reference to a whole which includes or comprises the part spoken of; as, the first in his family; the first regiment in the army.
Nine in ten of those who enter the ministry. --Swift.
4. With reference to physical surrounding, personal states, etc., abstractly denoted; as, I am in doubt; the room is in darkness; to live in fear.
When shall we three meet again, In thunder, lightning, or in rain? --Shak.
5. With reference to character, reach, scope, or influence considered as establishing a limitation; as, to be in one's favor. ``In sight of God's high throne.'' --Milton.
Sounds inharmonious in themselves, and harsh. --Cowper.
6. With reference to movement or tendency toward a certain limit or environment; -- sometimes equivalent to into; as, to put seed in the ground; to fall in love; to end in death; to put our trust in God.
He would not plunge his brother in despair. --Addison.
She had no jewels to deposit in their caskets. --Fielding.
7. With reference to a limit of time; as, in an hour; it happened in the last century; in all my life.
In as much as, or Inasmuch as, in the degree that; in like manner as; in consideration that; because that; since. See Synonym of Because, and cf. For as much as, under For, prep.
In that, because; for the reason that. ``Some things they do in that they are men . . .; some things in that they are men misled and blinded with error.'' --Hooker.
In the name of, in behalf of; on the part of; by authority; as, it was done in the name of the people; -- often used in invocation, swearing, praying, and the like.
To be in for it. (a) To be in favor of a thing; to be committed to a course. (b) To be unable to escape from a danger, penalty, etc. [Colloq.]
To be (or keep) in with. (a) To be close or near; as, to keep a ship in with the land. (b) To be on terms of friendship, familiarity, or intimacy with; to secure and retain the favor of. [Colloq.]
Explain to me how this is at all applicable to the topic at hand. It reminds me vaguely of "Silly mortals" and it is about as descriptive as that rather short phrase. It would seem to me that discussing a religious topic is hardly being "of the world". We are, as a matter of fact, discussing this topic within the M&R, both a moral and a religious forum. How, exactly, does that make us "of the world"? Incidentally, I have found this phrase on Christian sites, on "Pagan" sites, and on meditation sites... with so many different interpretations of the same phrase, how can one possibly be "of the world"?
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 19:47:18 +0000
Quote:
Explain to me how this is at all applicable to the topic at hand. It reminds me vaguely of "Silly mortals" and it is about as descriptive as that rather short phrase. It would seem to me that discussing a religious topic is hardly being "of the world". We are, as a matter of fact, discussing this topic within the M&R, both a moral and a religious forum. How, exactly, does that make us "of the world"? Incidentally, I have found this phrase on Christian sites, on "Pagan" sites, and on meditation sites... with so many different interpretations of the same phrase, how can one possibly be "of the world"?
I know, I don't really get it either. Sometimes she doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. *shrug*
Kiritsu
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Report Post
- Posted: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 20:12:48 +0000
Thus said Brigham Young:
"Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the vail in the great work of the last days. I can tell our beloved brother Christians who have slain the Prophets and butchered and otherwise caused the death of thousands of Latter-day Saints, the priests who have thanked God in their prayers and thanksgiving from the pulpit that we have been plundered, driven, and slain, and the deacons under the pulpit, and their brethren and sisters in their closets, who have thanked God, thinking that the Latter-day Saints were wasted away, something that no doubt will mortify them--something that, to say the least, is a matter of deep regret to them--namely, that no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance in to the mansion where God and Christ are--I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation--the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim--"Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!" But it is true."
Brigham Young
Journal of Discourses
Volume 7,Page 289, 1869.
"Joseph Smith holds the keys of this last dispensation, and is now engaged behind the vail in the great work of the last days. I can tell our beloved brother Christians who have slain the Prophets and butchered and otherwise caused the death of thousands of Latter-day Saints, the priests who have thanked God in their prayers and thanksgiving from the pulpit that we have been plundered, driven, and slain, and the deacons under the pulpit, and their brethren and sisters in their closets, who have thanked God, thinking that the Latter-day Saints were wasted away, something that no doubt will mortify them--something that, to say the least, is a matter of deep regret to them--namely, that no man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance in to the mansion where God and Christ are--I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation--the keys to rule in the spirit-world; and he rules there triumphantly, for he gained full power and a glorious victory over the power of Satan while he was yet in the flesh, and was a martyr to his religion and to the name of Christ, which gives him a most perfect victory in the spirit-world. He reigns there as supreme a being in his sphere, capacity, and calling, as God does in heaven. Many will exclaim--"Oh, that is very disagreeable! It is preposterous! We cannot bear the thought!" But it is true."
Brigham Young
Journal of Discourses
Volume 7,Page 289, 1869.