Warren Jeffs and FLDS

[betsy]

That doesn't do as requested.

Why?

[Guest American Woman]

Polygamist church leader Warren Jeffs — accused of raping a 12-year-old girl and impregnating 15-year-old he'd taken as "spiritual wives" — is to continue his own defense after using his opening statements Wednesday to quote scripture at length, without once mentioning the charges against him.

He was found guilty.

Jeffs, the leader of a radical polygamist sect of Mormonism known as the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (FLDS), was found guilty of forcing two teenage girls into "spiritual marriage," and fathering a child with one of them when she was 15. The sexual assault charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison.

link

[betsy]

No, only you are saying it so it fits better in your own lil myopic world.

Rag on FLDS but of course Priests are pious....until the odd one sticks his dick where it aint supposed to go. But of course you know that, just wont admit it.

Your ignorance is legion. It sure as hell not me who believes in fairies and old books that deny how old this place is.

There he goes spitting and spewing....

I dont go to church, I dont believe one whit of what you try and espouse and science backs me up far more than you will ever admit.

Oyy.....and pray tell how science backs up your belief?

[guyser]

There he goes spitting and spewing....

Oyy.....and pray tell how science backs up your belief?

Betsy, sweet Betsy, if only you had an education.

In ways that unfortuantely only those indoctrinated by a church could not understand.

But thats ok betsy , I wouldnt expect you to understand.

[betsy]

if there was jesus and there is evidence there was, the quotes attributed to him confirm he ahd no intention of eliminating the old testament

here are some quotes in regards to the OT

Yes, He said He's not eliminating the Law, but to fulfill them.

And here are your quotes:

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” — Matthew 5:18-19

“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17)

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)

“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19)

So what was Jesus talking about in all your quotes??? The LAW.

What's the law? The Commandments!

THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY is one of them!

Furthermore, Jesus really expanded on adultery. He explained what is adultery under the law.

Edited August 5, 2011 by betsy

[g_bambino]

Why?

Because you failed to meet the request put to you.

[betsy]

Betsy, sweet Betsy, if only you had an education.

In ways that unfortuantely only those indoctrinated by a church could not understand.

But thats ok betsy , I wouldnt expect you to understand.

You don't want to discuss. And I don't wanna get down there with you. So, farewell, arrivederci. <big hug>

Ciao. <flying kiss>

Adieu. <wave hankie>

Bye-bye.

Edited August 5, 2011 by betsy

[betsy]

Because you failed to meet the request put to you.

In what way?

[g_bambino]

In what way?

By failing. You were asked to show where the New Testament forbids polygamy. You didn't do so. What part of this is confusing you?

[corr]

Edited August 5, 2011 by g_bambino

[betsy]

By failing. You were asked to show where the New Testament forbids polygamy. You didn't do so. What part of this is confusing you?

[corr]

What do you think is the meaning of adultery?

What was explained in the verses I gave MDancer?

Matthew 19

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

Ephesians 5:25-33

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Romans 7:1-3

Released From the Law, Bound to Christ

1 Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2 For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.

1 Corinthians 7:2

2 But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband.

What is so confusing and hard to understand? Did you see that even divorcing a wife in order to marry another is considered adultery!

Are you looking for the law that says specifically, "Thou shalt not commit polygamy?"

FYI: ADULTERY covers all bases! Bigamy is a big no-no too!

Edited August 5, 2011 by betsy

[g_bambino]

What do you think is the meaning of adultery?

According to your Biblical quotes, a man marrying after divorcing his wife, except if that divorce was because of "sexual immorality".

What was explained in the verses I gave MDancer?

Some Biblical rules about marriage.

Are you looking for the law that says "Thou shalt not commit polygamy?"

I'm not, but M.Dancer was. His request was pretty clear.

Durrr....

[betsy]

According to your Biblical quotes, a man marrying after divorcing his wife, except if that divorce was because of "sexual immorality".

That is one example of adultery. See? He's saying that if you divorce your wife because she cheated on you (that's the only excuse for divorce I think), and you married someone else, you are still committing adultery!

If you divorce your spouse, you're not supposed to marry any other! You remain celibate and single.

Like I said, Jesus really expanded on the meaning, or what constitutes adultery. If I'm not mistaken, He also said that coveting or lusting after a married person (or when you're married) is also committing adultery.

Even bigamy is not allowed!

I'm not, but M.Dancer was. His request was pretty clear.

His request was clear. And so is my answer.

One wife....one husband....together becomes one flesh. Plus the big issue of adultery (and Jesus' reiteration that He's come not to abolish the law but to fulfill them - Check out the quotes provided by Wyly). Can't get any clearer than that.

Edited August 5, 2011 by betsy

[g_bambino]

That is one example of adultery.

Nobody asked you anything about adultery.

One wife....one husband....together becomes one flesh.

Your quotes say nothing of one wife.

Durrr...

[c/e]

Edited August 5, 2011 by g_bambino

[The_Squid]

Nobody asked you anything about adultery.

Your quotes say nothing of one wife.

Durrr...

[c/e]

As much as I don't agree whatsoever with Betsy on pretty much anything.... you are picking nits. Seems pretty obvious from the quotes provided that Jesus meant for 1 man to be with 1 woman.

[pinko]

As much as I don't agree whatsoever with Betsy on pretty much anything.... you are picking nits. Seems pretty obvious from the quotes provided that Jesus meant for 1 man to be with 1 woman.

However reasonable that interpretation may be I am wondering if the Book of Mormon codified polygamy for those following that belief system.

I notice that Warren Jeffs has elected not to attend the penalty phase of the trial. In his absence he will be represented by legal counsel. This case highlights incidents of human trafficking from and within mulitiple cult locations in the USA and Canada. and as well shows such an environment to be a pedophile's paradise.

Edited August 6, 2011 by pinko

[Oleg Bach]

Yes, He said He's not eliminating the Law, but to fulfill them.

And here are your quotes:

So what was Jesus talking about in all your quotes??? The LAW.

What's the law? The Commandments!

THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY is one of them!

Furthermore, Jesus really expanded on adultery. He explained what is adultery under the law.

Don't betray your mate..It was the begining of marriage between a man and a woman - multiple marriage was replaced by Christwith one on one union...although - Jesus like to hang out and live with two woman at a time...Martha and her sister...he concentrated his affection on one and not both.

[g_bambino]

Seems pretty obvious from the quotes provided that Jesus meant for 1 man to be with 1 woman.

It's not obvious at all. That's the point.

What betsy quoted talks about a man and his wife; but, nowhere does it say "his wife" means "his one wife". Each of a man's five wives would be "his wife".

[sp]

Edited August 6, 2011 by g_bambino

[wyly]

let me further complicate this, slaves weren't considered people in those days and having sex with your female(or male) slave wasn't considered adultery...yes the jews had slaves...

[WIP]

As much as I don't agree whatsoever with Betsy on pretty much anything.... you are picking nits. Seems pretty obvious from the quotes provided that Jesus meant for 1 man to be with 1 woman.

And yes there was a pretty clear change in public morality in New Testament times that is supported in the texts. I'm not sure what the point is of those questioning the NT Jesus's negative attitude regarding polygamy, but supporting historical evidence of 1st century Judea indicates that the practice of polygamy was extremely rare, even among wealthy Pharisees - it was something that was falling into social disfavour even if there hadn't been any religious rules forbidding plural marriage.

When it comes to slavery, nothing in the NT will directly condemn slavery because it was still widely used and practiced, and the concept of personhood and personal rights and freedoms had to wait till the Renaissance and the philosophy of humanism started to become popular. Christian church leaders took in some of these concepts and were at the forefront of the fight to abolish slavery. In the U.S., the anti-slavery advocates could use the spirit of Christian philosophy - that all are created equal, to make a case that slavery was immoral and unChristian; while the pro-slavery church leaders where the institution was still part of the economy, could use a strict reading of biblical texts to support their case. But, the mostly Southern ministers could not support slavery with cultural notions that some races are superior and some are inferior, and as America became an industrialized nation, slavery was less important economically...and that may have been the crucial factor in the end.

[WIP]

let's get to the point he's pedophile leading a ring of pedophiles masquerading as a religious cult...

I have no issues with polygamy if a man can withstand the constant torment of multiple wives but when it includes kids it's a cover for pedophilia...

I don't know whether I want to get involved in this issue again...I went all up and down polygamy back when the Bountiful case in B.C. was up for discussion. The one thing that really grinds me when this topic is discussed is that liberals usually stick with moral relativist arguments that are afraid of restricting a personal freedom to marry more than one woman...usually out of fear that it might threaten the legitimacy of same-sex marriage. There's no reason why two issues can't be examined on their own merits or lack of merits, but that's the way it usually is. In brief, what we learn from Bountiful and the other FLDS communities, is that allowing polygamy will inevitably lead to highly stratified patriarchal societies, where a few men - like Warren Jeffs, has dictatorial powers, followed by his right-hand men. Democracy cannot work in a society if polygamy becomes widespread. And this talk of 'pedophilia' completely misses the point of why Jeffs and other Mormon patriarchs are always after young girls - young women become a lucrative commodity, and the elders who have the money and power in the community, buy up the available brides before other, younger men have a chance to defile them. These reasons are why reformers in the Muslim World have worked to chip away at the institution of polygamy, even though they have to work against the acceptance of polygamy of their religion.

I just wish we could get past the post-modernist bullshit that makes everything relative and forbids condemnations and restrictions on private behaviour. If there are clear social harms caused by allowing plural marriage, then personal desires should not be allowed to supersede what's best for well functioning society.

[wyly]

I just wish we could get past the post-modernist bullshit that makes everything relative and forbids condemnations and restrictions on private behaviour. If there are clear social harms caused by allowing plural marriage, then personal desires should not be allowed to supersede what's best for well functioning society.

if you haven't noticed all those laws mean bugger all to stop polygamy...it's the push for a more open accepting society that will end polygamy not attempting to restrict it with laws...public secular education breaks down the barriers that means eliminating private religious schools...

[Oleg Bach]

if you haven't noticed all those laws mean bugger all to stop polygamy...it's the push for a more open accepting society that will end polygamy not attempting to restrict it with laws...public secular education breaks down the barriers that means eliminating private religious schools...

When a guy can look at another guy and say - this is my wife..then I* say let men have 50 wives - I mean real ones - like female ones. lol

[betsy]

let me further complicate this, slaves weren't considered people in those days and having sex with your female(or male) slave wasn't considered adultery...yes the jews had slaves...

Again, let me bring this article up.

An interesting read.

Excerpt from The Bible Teaching on Slavery

We need to know what slavery was like in New Testament times so that we can know how to apply the New Testament instructions to situations in our own day. Kent Hughes, in his commentary on Ephesians (Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL), page 206, documents much helpful information on Roman slavery. It is estimated that there were 60,000,000 slaves in the Roman Empire, but the average slave was not abused and exploited. Some slaves did suffer at the hands of their owners, but slaves under Roman law could usually count on being set free. While slaves remained their owners property, they themselves could own propertyincluding other slaves.

We note too that being a slave did not indicate ones social class. Slaves were accorded the social status of their owners. And outwardly, one could scarcely ever distinguish a slave from a free person. A slave could be a custodian, a merchant, a salesman, a teacher, or a government official. Slaves were often highly educated. There were a few slaves who were elders in the church, and thus had authority over the masters whom they served all week. Selling oneself as a slave was commonly used as a means of gaining Roman citizenship.

Roman slavery in the first century was far more humane and civilized than the African-American slavery practiced in the he United States during the seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries. This does not suggest that ancient slavery was not evil. Slaves were still considered property and could be bought and sold and severely punished-but understanding the nature of slavery in New Testament times helps us to understand why the apostolic writers were not as quick to attack slavery.

The Apostle Paul respected the civil law and the social patterns of his day, and did not militate against the law of slavery. William Barclay, in his commentary, The Letters to Timothy and Titus, Westminster, 1960, says:

In those early days, the Church did not emerge as the opponent and the would-be destroyer of slavery by violent and sudden means. And the Church was wise. There were something like 60,000,000 slaves in the Roman Empire For the Church to have encouraged slaves to revolt and rebel and rise against their masters would have been fatal. It would simply have caused civil war, mass murder, and the complete discredit of the Church. (Instead), what happened was that as the centuries went on, Christianity so permeated civilization that in the end the slaves were freed voluntarily and not by force. Here is a tremendous lesson. It is the proof that neither men nor the world nor society can be reformed by force and by legislation. The reform must come through the slow penetration of the Spirit of Christ into the human situation. Things have to happen in Gods time, not in ours. In the end, the slow way is the sure way, and the way of violence always defeats itself.

More....

http://www.brfwitness.org/?p=865

Furthermore, in the OT God had given specific laws to the Jews (aside from the 10 Commandments)how to treat their slaves/servants.

[betsy]

The one thing that really grinds me when this topic is discussed is that liberals usually stick with moral relativist arguments that are afraid of restricting a personal freedom to marry more than one woman...usually out of fear that it might threaten the legitimacy of same-sex marriage.

Ahh...I found something that I agree with.

If society accepts same-sex marriage....why not polygamy, if all involved are consenting adults?

Btw, I remember debating eons ago in this forum that legitimizing sodomy and homosexuality based on "sexual orientation" is opening a can of worms. Just recently in the news, someone was interviewed (I don't know who he is) and he's saying that Pedophilia should be accepted as a sexual orientation.

As for social harms, I've also discussed NAMBLA ages ago, and that homosexual activity can include pedophilia since there seems to be the attraction and desire to initiate young lads.

Furthermore, the investigative report on sexual abuse within the Catholic church had unearthed a "cabal" among homosexual pedophiles.

Edited August 7, 2011 by betsy

[pinko]

if you haven't noticed all those laws mean bugger all to stop polygamy...it's the push for a more open accepting society that will end polygamy not attempting to restrict it with laws...public secular education breaks down the barriers that means eliminating private religious schools...

Add to that the Criminal Code prohibits polygamy and the equality provisions of the Charter suggest the activities within these compounds work at cross purposes in liberating women from these arcane rituals. Were it not for the indoctrination of these people at birth I am reasonably certain most women would not tolerate these oppressive relationships.

Edited August 7, 2011 by pinko