LDS beliefs and the Bible

[uss_bigd]

Except that the Bible has polygamy too.

HOW ABOUT THE LAW OF CHRISTS YOU CLAIM YOU BELIEVE?

 

[Sola'lor]

HOW ABOUT THE LAW OF CHRISTS YOU CLAIM YOU BELIEVE?

You said the Bible not the Law of Christ.

 

[uss_bigd]

You said the Bible not the Law of Christ.

I SHOULD HAVE USED THIS VERSE FOR THE BIBLE

ISAIAH 34:16

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN, DOES THE LAW OF CHRIST, WHERE NOT A SMALLEST STROKE OF A PEN WILL DISAPPEAR CONTAIN POLYGAMY?

IF NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST STROKE OF THE PEN WILL DISAPPEAR FROM THE LAW, HOW CAN IT BE INCOMPLETE FOR A NEED OF CONTINUOUS REVELATION?

fine, i made a mistake in quoting the bible, instead of christs Law for mat 5:18.

but that does not in anyway get you off the hook. as a matter of fact, you stated you believe mat 18:5. then why did you think it was incomplete and that continuous revelation was necessary?

I am tired of repeating the same things over and over, i do not wish to make enemies out of you, for our struggle is not of flesh and blood...

let us just accept that polygamy is not accepted in the Law of Christs, the law is to have your own husband instead of burning in passion. it did not saty co-own a husband.

You are free to use your extra biblical references, that is your right. That makes "a few" LDS beliefs as not biblically founded.

ok? let us stop this ... we can all have different Christs and remain friends ... besides i already presented the truth, my responsibility is done.

 

[Katzpur]

I said your prophet has a lot of wives.. is that not a fact?

Had. That's past tense. Or don't doesn't the college where you teach English require you to know the difference? Our current prophet has only one wife.

I said he had sex with countless virgins... oh? is there a specific number?

Of course there is a specific number. A specific number is not the same thing as "countless." It's actually the opposite.

I said his wolf hungry for sex, you can only hypocritically deny that you know

You're the one that made the statement. You prove it. Prove that Joseph Smith was what you have accused him of being. Was Abraham "wolf hungrry for sex"? Did you get married because you were wolf hungry for sex? If you did, please don't tell your wife. I'm sure she wouldn't be at all flattered to think that you just see her as a sex object.

off topic? i have highlighted the difference between the bible and LDS belief. polygamy!!

Yes, ad nauseum.

really? thats all you have to say huh?

No. I have a question for you, ***_bidg. Why the fixation with sex? Is sex all you think about? It sure seems like it.

 

[uss_bigd]

Had. That's past tense. Or don't doesn't the college where you teach English require you to know the difference? Our current prophet has only one wife.

Of course there is a specific number. A specific number is not the same thing as "countless." It's actually the opposite.

You're the one that made the statement. You prove it. Was Abraham "wolf hungrry for sex"?

Yes, ad nauseum.

No. I have a question for you, ***_bidg. Why the fixation with sex? Is sex all you think about? It sure seems like it.

I CAN MAKE ALL THE GRAMMATICAL ERRORS IN THE WORLD KATSPUR... BUT I DO NOT SPEAK FOR MY SELF, I AM NOTHING BUT WORTHLESS. YOU CAN'T PUT ME DOWN ANY FURTHER....

THE GOOD THING IS THE WORDS THAT I POSTED ARE NOT MINE, THEY ARE FROM GOD, GOD DOES NOT ERR...I WOULD, BUT GOD WOULDN'T!:bow:

 

[Sola'lor]

I SHOULD USED THIS VERSE FOR THE BIBLE

ISAIAH 34:16

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN, DOES THE LAW OF CHRIST, WHERE NOT A SMALLEST STROKE OF A PEN WILL DISAPPEAR CONTAIN POLYGAMY?

When Joseph Smith recieved that revelation in the 1800s.

IF NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST STROKE OF THE PEN WILL DISAPPEAR FROM THE LAW, HOW CAN IT BE INCOMPLETE FOR A NEED OF CONTINUOUS REVELATION?

Becuase we don't know all of the Law. We know those parts that God reveales to us at any given time. It's not that it is incopmlete. The Law is complete and perfect. But God doesn't give us everything all at once. He gives us those things that will be to our best benefit.

For eample: The Law of the Gospel was in effect since the foundation of the world. THe People Moses lead out of egypt were supposed to have lived the Law of teh gospel. But they couldn't because they were not prepared. So God gave them the Law of Moses. Ths is still part of Christ's Law(Law of theGospel). Just different aspects were presented in different ways so that those people could get the most out of it.

Polygamy isn't something in the Law of the Gospel that says, "Everyone must live polygamy all the time, no exceptions." What I imagine the provision for polygamy is in Christ's Law is, "Polygamy may be allowed in certain circumstances at certain times."

So God may want to emphasze certain part of His law at certain times. This is why we need living prophets. Also if there is another part of His Law that we don't know yet(but is still part of His Law) he can reveal it to us through His prophets.

fine, i made a mistake in quoting the bible, instead of christs Law for mat 5:18.

but that does not in anyway get you off the hook. as a matter of fact, you stated you believe mat 18:5. then why did you think it was incomplete and that continuous revelation was necessary?

I don't believe it is incomplete. I believe it is perfect. But our understanding and knowledge of it is limited and imperfect. That's because we are imperfect beings. So God has given us living prophets to do what I described above.

I am tired of repeating the same things over and over, i do not wish to make enemies out of you, for our struggle is not of flesh and blood...

I'm actually one of those people who may disagree with someone in one thread and agree with someone on the next. I don't try to make enemies.

let us just accept that polygamy is not accepted in the Law of Christs, the law is to have your own husband instead of burning in passion. it did not saty co-own a husband.

If you want that limited view of God then that is your choice. But I accept that God can sometimes allow polygamy in His commandments for us.

You are free to use your extra biblical references, that is your right. That makes "a few" LDS beliefs as not biblically founded.

Well here we agree.

ok? let us stop this ... we can all have different Christs and remain friends ... besides i already presented the truth, my responsibility is done.

I understand you feel it is your responsibility to present what you believe to be the truth. Just as it is my responsibility to live by what I believe to be the truth.

I would still like to know where to get a perfect Bible though.

 

[McBell]

I SHOULD HAVE USED THIS VERSE FOR THE BIBLE

ISAIAH 34:16

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail, none shall want her mate: for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

There is no way in hell that this verse is referring to the currently accepted 66 book Bible.
None.

IF NOT EVEN THE SMALLEST STROKE OF THE PEN WILL DISAPPEAR FROM THE LAW, HOW CAN IT BE INCOMPLETE FOR A NEED OF CONTINUOUS REVELATION?

Huh?
This question makes no sense.
Unless you take the unsupported/unsupportable position that it was complete d in the first place AND that you have the complete law.
Mighty big leap of faith there.
Especially given your lack of knowledge concerning the assembly of the current Bible.

I am tired of repeating the same things over and over,

I seriously doubt it.

let us just accept that polygamy is not accepted in the Law of Christs, the law is to have your own husband instead of burning in passion. it did not saty co-own a husband.

Can't.
At least i can't agree with you until you present something that not only follows the rules you set in place, but actually supports your claim.

You are free to use your extra biblical references, that is your right. That makes "a few" LDS beliefs as not biblically founded.

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything other than out of context verses, irrelevant verses, rule violating opinions of men, more of your own opinions.

ok? let us stop this ... we can all have different Christs and remain friends ...

Sure can.

besides i already presented the truth,

Thus proving the point that religious truth is much to subjective to be reliable for anything other than the ratification of your beliefs.

my responsibility is done.

*bite tongue really hard*

 

[uss_bigd]

Becuase we don't know all of the Law. We know those parts that God reveales to us at any given time. It's not that it is incopmlete. The Law is complete and perfect. But God doesn't give us everything all at once. He gives us those things that will be to our best benefit.

For eample: The Law of the Gospel was in effect since the foundation of the world. THe People Moses lead out of egypt were supposed to have lived the Law of teh gospel. But they couldn't because they were not prepared. So God gave them the Law of Moses. Ths is still part of Christ's Law(Law of theGospel). Just different aspects were presented in different ways so that those people could get the most out of it.

Polygamy isn't something in the Law of the Gospel that says, "Everyone must live polygamy all the time, no exceptions." What I imagine the provision for polygamy is in Christ's Law is, "Polygamy may be allowed in certain circumstances at certain times."

So God may want to emphasze certain part of His law at certain times. This is why we need living prophets. Also if there is another part of His Law that we don't know yet(but is still part of His Law) he can reveal it to us through His prophets.

This is your opinion, it is not biblically founded, if there are biblical conceptes tackled in this post above, we have had discussed it a million times.

As i said two contradicting concepts cannot be both true, two contradicting laws happening one after the other cannot be both true, especially if we remain faithfull to a sole basis.

You do not believe on a sinlge basis, I do. this is the reason why this exchange has been running along for the longest time....

I don't believe it is incomplete. I believe it is perfect. But our understanding and knowledge of it is limited and imperfect. That's because we are imperfect beings. So God has given us living prophets to do what I described above.

Our understanding may not perfect, but Christs law's that are written are perfect, if he said "have you own spouse" and not co-own" I will believe it as as such, unless the same bible will tell otherwise. but you have admitted that acceptance of polygamy is extrabiblical, and i refuse to acknowledge extrra biblical reference expecially if contradicts the law of Christs. look, having one wife, is different from having more than one.

If you want that limited view of God then that is your choice. But I accept that God can sometimes allow polygamy in His commandments for us.

He accepted it in the OT, but again, the law of christs does nt accept polygamy. one wife is one wife. own means own not co=own. your justifications are extrabiblical end of argument.

Well here we agree.

You admitting that some LDS doctrine are not biblically founded is all the thread was looking for.

I understand you feel it is your responsibility to present what you believe to be the truth. Just as it is my responsibility to live by what I believe to be the truth.

Thank you, i hope you also realize i will not get a penny richer for being firm in my defense of the bible and Christ's law

I would still like to know where to get a perfect Bible though.

ISA 34:16 talked about a book of God where no one of it shall fail
mat 5:18 talked about a law where not a single stroke of a pen will disappear

How imperfect can this bible be? Have faith in the words of God in Christ Sola'lor :bow:


May you be called in God's peace as well ....

Colossians 3:15

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful."

 

[uss_bigd]

There is no way in hell that this verse is referring to the currently accepted 66 book Bible.
None.

There is no way that the verse will not refer to the 66 book bible just because you disagree

Huh?
This question makes no sense.
Unless you take the unsupported/unsupportable position that it was complete d in the first place AND that you have the complete law.
Mighty big leap of faith there.
Especially given your lack of knowledge concerning the assembly of the current Bible.

huh? this response make no sense.
Unless you take the unsupported/unsupportable position that it was incomplete in the firstplace and that you know of an incomplete law
Mighty big leap of faith there.
Especially given your lack of knowledge concerning the assembly of the current Bible.

I seriously doubt it.

I seriously doubt you will not doubt anything

Can't.
At least i can't agree with you until you present something that not only follows the rules you set in place, but actually supports your claim.

Thank you!

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything other than out of context verses, irrelevant verses, rule violating opinions of men, more of your own opinions.

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything at all

Thus proving the point that religious truth is much to subjective to be reliable for anything other than the ratification of your beliefs.

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything at all

 

[silvermoon383]

There's no way Isaiah could've been referring to the 66 books of the Bible because 1/2 of them hadn't been written yet!

 

[Sola'lor]

This is your opinion, it is not biblically founded, if there are biblical conceptes tackled in this post above, we have had discussed it a million times.

You're right, it's not biblically founded, except for it being the main principle behind every writing in the Bible.

As i said two contradicting concepts cannot be both true, two contradicting laws happening one after the other cannot be both true, especially if we remain faithfull to a sole basis.

You do not believe on a sinlge basis, I do. this is the reason why this exchange has been running along for the longest time....

What's a "single" basis. I've never heard that in the Bible before.

Our understanding may not perfect, but Christs law's that are written are perfect.

But Christ's law is independent of what is written. What is written is simply a record of Christ's doings. Even if the Bible did not exist Christ's LAw would still exist in it's perfect form.

if he said "have you own spouse" and not co-own" I will believe it as as such, unless the same bible will tell otherwise.

And yet the same Bible does contain instances of polygamy and does not condemn polygamy. Well mine does. Perhaps your perfect one contains verses that condemn it.

but you have admitted that acceptance of polygamy is extrabiblical, and i refuse to acknowledge extrra biblical reference expecially if contradicts the law of Christs.

It may contradict your understanding of Christ's Law. But Christ's Law exists independent of our understanding of it. Therefore it is not only possible, but it is the way things are, that we do not have a complete understanding of God's Law.

look, having one wife, is different from having more than one.

Oh it is? I didn't know that.

He accepted it in the OT, but again, the law of christs does nt accept polygamy.

But I thought God's law was perfect. Why would He change it. I thought God never changed.

one wife is one wife. own means own not co=own. your justifications are extrabiblical end of argument.

I personally don't believe in owning women. They aren't property to be owned. They are the Daughters of God, they are equals. But If your Christ believes you can own a woman then that's fine with me.

You admitting that some LDS doctrine are not biblically founded is all the thread was looking for.

Actually this thread was about expounding on those LDS doctrines that ARE in the Bible. The concept that LDS believe in things outside of the Bible was completely understood at the start of this thread.

Thank you, i hope you also realize i will not get a penny richer for being firm in my defense of the bible and Christ's law

Neither will I.

ISA 34:16 talked about a book of God where no one of it shall fail
mat 5:18 talked about a law where not a single stroke of a pen will disappear

Yep. I'm not disagreeing.

How imperfect can this bible be?

Look in that bible contradictions thread to see. Personally I only think that less than three percent is in error. And I also believe that it doesn not contain every book that we written before by God's Prophets. Therefore it is not a compllete record of God's interactions with Mankind. I wish that I could have every record ever written by every prophet that ever lived. I would have a hay day with reading God's word.

Have faith in the words of God in Christ Sola'lor :bow:

I do.

You don't have to bow to me btw.

May you be called in God's peace as well ....

Colossians 3:15

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful."

I'm trying to.

 

[uss_bigd]

There's no way Isaiah could've been referring to the 66 books of the Bible because 1/2 of them hadn't been written yet!

He wouldn't be a prophet if he referred to something that exists already. He made a Prophecy

 

[uss_bigd]

What's a "single" basis. I've never heard that in the Bible before.

Christians will base on the bible alone, hence they have only one basis.

But Christ's law is independent of what is written. What is written is simply a record of Christ's doings.

wrong, "Love your wife as your own flesh" is not his doing because he was never married. "Love your wife as your own flesh" is a doctrine, a teaching.

Even if the Bible did not exist Christ's LAw would still exist in it's perfect form

how would you know it then if it wasn't written perfectly? God is righteous and does not create anything thats non-sense.

He desires that all men be saved, logic will conclude since he is a righteous God he will leave a perfect inerrant tool to salvation.

And yet the same Bible does contain instances of polygamy and does not condemn polygamy. Well mine does. Perhaps your perfect one contains verses that condemn it.

gee, you still refuse to distinguish the OT and the NT, or the law of moses from the law of Christs.

It may contradict your understanding of Christ's Law. But Christ's Law exists independent of our understanding of it. Therefore it is not only possible, but it is the way things are, that we do not have a complete understanding of God's Law.

it does not mean you will add to it....

But I thought God's law was perfect. Why would He change it. I thought God never changed.

Heb 8:7

"For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another" :bow:

I personally don't believe in owning women. They aren't property to be owned. They are the Daughters of God, they are equals. But If your Christ believes you can own a woman then that's fine with me.

You can pretend not to understand, but i hope you just honestly didn't understand, otherwise you will be like the pharisees:

John 9:41

Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

Actually this thread was about expounding on those LDS doctrines that ARE in the Bible. The concept that LDS believe in things outside of the Bible was completely understood at the start of this thread.

ok, then you agree that there are LDS doctrines that ARE NOT in the bible... we're good

Yep. I'm not disagreeing.

are you sure? they did not refer to your extra biblcal reference if i i may warn you ...

Look in that bible contradictions thread to see. Personally I only think that less than three percent is in error. And I also believe that it doesn not contain every book that we written before by God's Prophets. Therefore it is not a compllete record of God's interactions with Mankind. I wish that I could have every record ever written by every prophet that ever lived. I would have a hay day with reading God's word.

Then the God that went your bible is a careless god, he didn't care if your tool for salvation is corrupted or not.

my GOD is righteous, he will not allow his main tool to save mankind to be corrupted just like what is written in ISA 34:16

 

[Sola'lor]

Christians will base on the bible alone, hence they have only one basis.

Where is this in the Bible?

wrong, "Love your wife as your own flesh" is not his doing because he was never married. "Love your wife as your own flesh" is a doctrine, a teaching.

Yes and teach what what Jesus did. Therefore the Bible is a record of Christ's doings.

how would you know it then if it wasn't written perfectly?

Because we have living prophets to teach us what God's word is for us today. That way even if corruption occurs in ancient records God can still reveal the truth to us.

God is righteous and does not create anything thats non-sense.

I agree.

He desires that all men be saved, logic will conclude since he is a righteous God he will leave a perfect inerrant tool to salvation.

But God did leave anything. God ordained prophets to write what he reveals to them. These prophets are imperfect people. Thus their writings cannot be perfect. They can be very good but never perfect. I believe the only perfect being to live on this Earth was Jesus Christ. The rest of us are imperfect beings. and those things we do are imperfect.

gee, you still refuse to distinguish the OT and the NT, or the law of moses from the law of Christs.

Yes I do distingush them. The Law of Moses was a more 'watered down' version of the Law of the Gospel.

it does not mean you will add to it....

I've never added to anything. Only God can reveal more of His word to us.

Heb 8:7

"For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another" :bow:

So you believe there was something wrong with the Law of Moses?

You can pretend not to understand, but i hope you just honestly didn't understand, otherwise you will be like the pharisees:

John 9:41

Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

I'm just reading what you wrote. You worte about owning spouses.

ok, then you agree that there are LDS doctrines that ARE NOT in the bible... we're good

Are we really good?

are you sure? they did not refer to your extra biblcal reference if i i may warn you ...

Nor do they refer to a perfect Bible if i may warn you.

Then the God that went your bible is a careless god, he didn't care if your tool for salvation is corrupted or not.

Actually the God I believe in is a perfect God. And He understands that we are imperfect beings. He loves us all and has given us living prophets to tell us of His will for us this very day.

my GOD is righteous, he will not allow his main tool to save mankind to be corrupted just like what is written in ISA 34:16

Wow. You really do have a different God than me. The main tool to save mankind of the God I believe in, is His perfect Son, Jesus Christ. He would never rely on a historical record to be passed down for thousands of years and corrputed by imperfect Humans. The God I believe in is a perfect and loving God and gives us prophets to act as His mouthpiece.

Hopefully you'll tell me where to get a Perfect Bible in the other thread.

 

[Apex]

I said your prophet has a lot of wives.. is that not a fact?

I said he had sex with countless virgins... oh? is there a specific number? or he never had sex with his wives?

I said his wolf hungry for sex, you can only hypocritically deny that you know

[QUOTE]You are off-topic and uninformed [/QUOTE]

off topic? i have highlighted the difference between the bible and LDS belief. polygamy!!



really? thats all you have to say huh?

Dude, you have some serious issues.

 

[Mister Emu]

Christians will base on the bible alone, hence they have only one basis.

The Bible itself call the Church "the pillar and ground of the truth".

 

[uss_bigd]

Where is this in the Bible?

1 Cor 4:6 "do not go beyond what is written"

Because we have living prophets to teach us what God's word is for us today. That way even if corruption occurs in ancient records God can still reveal the truth to us.

The prophets and apostles in the bible were the last.... your prophets and apostels are part the apostes masquerading to be of Christs.

I agree that God is righteous and does not create anything thats non-sense.

Then you must agree that God will leave a perfect and inerrant tool to salvation. free of any corruption or perversion. i agree that Jesus is the main tool, but his teachings are in the bible, and no where else because none of it will be lost(ISA 34:16) and it is where his perfect law is written for it is written "not a the smallest stroke of the pen will by any means dissapear from the law" (mat 5:18)

But God did leave anything. God ordained prophets to write what he reveals to them.

He left the bible, and none of your prophets are part if it. there is not continuous revelation as the law is already perfect when christ came.

These prophets are imperfect people. Thus their writings cannot be perfect. They can be very good but never perfect. I believe the only perfect being to live on this Earth was Jesus Christ. The rest of us are imperfect beings. and those things we do are imperfect

That perfect Christ is found in the bible, so be consistent with your statements, have faith with mat 5:18. there is no need or continuous revelations.

I've never added to anything. Only God can reveal more of His word to us.

acceptance to polygamy is an addition, if not a perversion of the law of Christs

So you believe there was something wrong with the Law of Moses?

Heb 8:7
"For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another


Did i write the book of Hebrews Sola'or????

I'm just reading what you wrote. You worte about owning spouses.

ok play dumb

Actually the God I believe in is a perfect God. And He understands that we are imperfect beings. He loves us all and has given us living prophets to tell us of His will for us this very day.

God already revealed everything in the bible, be carefull God might find it an insult that you keep saying he did not do a good enough job on the bible.

Wow. You really do have a different God than me. The main tool to save mankind of the God I believe in, is His perfect Son, Jesus Christ. He would never rely on a historical record to be passed down for thousands of years and corrputed by imperfect Humans. The God I believe in is a perfect and loving God and gives us prophets to act as His mouthpiece.

You really have a way of perversing my words dont' you? when I said bible, I of course mean Christ whose teachings are written there in.

 

[McBell]

There is no way that the verse will not refer to the 66 book bible just because you disagree

huh? this response make no sense.
Unless you take the unsupported/unsupportable position that it was incomplete in the firstplace and that you know of an incomplete law
Mighty big leap of faith there.
Especially given your lack of knowledge concerning the assembly of the current Bible.

I seriously doubt you will not doubt anything

Thank you!

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything at all

Opinion.
And an opinion that has not been supported with anything at all

This the best you can come up with in reply?

 

[Apex]

1 Cor 4:6 "do not go beyond what is written"

I believe this is relevant even though it is about a different scripture. But I think you are trying to get the same argument across.
You Tube Video

 

[Sola'lor]

1 Cor 4:6 "do not go beyond what is written"

Prove, using scripture, that that is talking about the Bible.

The prophets and apostles in the bible were the last...

No they weren't. Prove it.

your prophets and apostels are part the apostes masquerading to be of Christs.

No they aren't. They are ordained of God to reveal and run His church in these days.

Then you must agree that God will leave a perfect and inerrant tool to salvation.

Yes, and that is Christ. God will also give us those things we need to learn of His word. From the beginning of the world this has been prophets. Since the God I believe in is perfect and doesn't change He will still call prophets today.

free of any corruption or perversion. i agree that Jesus is the main tool, but his teachings are in the bible, and no where else because none of it will be lost(ISA 34:16) and it is where his perfect law is written for it is written "not a the smallest stroke of the pen will by any means dissapear from the law" (mat 5:18)

Prove, using scripture, that those verses are referring to the Bible.

He left the bible, and none of your prophets are part if it.

And neither Christ nor the Apostles were part of it when they were alive either.

there is not continuous revelation as the law is already perfect when christ came.

The purpose of continuing revelation isn't to bring additions to or change the already perfect law. It is to help our understanding of that law. It is also to know specifically what God want's us to be doing at any given time. Modern Prophets alswo allow us to have God's priesthood on the earth.

That perfect Christ is found in the bible, so be consistent with your statements, have faith with mat 5:18.

I do have believe in Matt 5:18

there is no need or continuous revelations.

Yes there is.

acceptance to polygamy is an addition, if not a perversion of the law of Christs

Prove it, using scripture.

Heb 8:7
"For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another


Did i write the book of Hebrews Sola'or????

You didn't answer my question.

God already revealed everything in the bible, be carefull God might find it an insult that you keep saying he did not do a good enough job on the bible.

No. God reveal His will to the ancient prophets. Those prophets wrote those things down. What they wrote down were later assembled as the Bible by the Catholics. So I'm not saying God didn't do good enough with the Bible. I'm saying the Catholics and the translators didn't do a good enough jobs. Since they are the ones who made the Bible.

You really have a way of perversing my words dont' you? when I said bible, I of course mean Christ whose teachings are written there in.

Riiiiiiight.