On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:38:41 "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Blaine, tell me what part of what I said you do not believe, >> and I would be happy to provide more evidence for you. >> A lot of the evidence has already been discussed on >> TruthTalk, so I did not see need to repeat it in detail >> again. Do you not believe that these men you list were >> older when they married additional wives? Do you not >> believe that Joseph Smith lied about having more than >> one wife, or do you not believe that he had multiple wives >> at all? Do you not believe that the Bible teaches that an >> elder must only have one wife? I have no idea what part >> of what I said you do not believe.
Blainer wrote: > Whew!!! Talk about not being interested in the truth! > You squelch anything that might be a threat to your > logic-tight compartments before it even gets off the > starting line. I am really not interested in your "truths." > I already know what the truth is. I understand that you are not interested in my knowledge, but I am interested in your knowledge. You presented a list of Biblical characters and argued that because they had plural wives, we should not object to Joe Smith's polygamous lifestyle. I was trying to explain how we do object to their polygamy, and also how their polygamy in no way even compares to Joe Smith's polygamy. For example, none of them had plural wives before the age of 40, and even when they took plural wives, it was thrust upon them by culture and family members. None of them had as many wives as Joe Smith, and none of them married women who were married to other men. At least one of them was instructed by God to put away his other wife and he became monogamous again. These are serious objections that cause me to view what you consider as evidence for polygamy by Godly men with a very different perspective. Now I understand that you are not interested in my knowledge in these areas, but if you are going to present us with your knowledge, and we have objections in our minds about why your knowledge is slanted or biased or misleading with regard to truth, about all we can do is express how we think about what you present. It falls upon you to respond with information that might answer our objections. Surely you don't expect us to embrace your teachings without first considering them and thinking about them, right? I mean, you don't want us to accept blindly what you say is truth, do you? Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
