<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who Created Huckabee? Conan, Stewart, and Colbert Fight it Out</title>
	<atom:link href="http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/</link>
	<description>The FOX News embedded producers report the latest news from the 2008 presidential campaign trail</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2008 23:11:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-41832</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 02:54:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-41832</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;free car quote&lt;/strong&gt;

Excellent post. Keep it up!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>free car quote</strong></p>
<p>Excellent post. Keep it up!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: American Conservative</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-28932</link>
		<dc:creator>American Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-28932</guid>
		<description>Hughvic:

Sorry I misunderstood your statement from your earlier post and enjoyed your thoughts from your last post.  In regards to Romney, I don't know if there was anything Romney could have said in regards to religion, that would have satisfied the minds of those who said they would never vote for a Mormon president.  It was amazing to see all the newly created anti- Romney websites, most of which were because of his faith.  When you have local pastors ( who were supporters of Huckabee) telling their congregations to visit these sites and get the word out was just sad and un-American.  I think the only way Romney could have won over these people, most of which are from the south, was to have prominent conservatives from within the Republican establishment getting behind him and endorsing him.  I guess that would be a hard thing to do when Romney said Washington was broken from top to bottom and they were getting nothing done. Which by the way, could not be more true.  Talk radio finally got behind him, including Michael Savage who is an independent conservative and rarely endorses anyone.  Unfortunately,  I never thought in a million years McCain would be representing the republican party based upon his stances on all the key issues.  It is sad to see where the direction of that party has gone to.  I agree, I would have loved to be working for Romney's campaign right now.

In regards to monotheism vs. polytheism.  We do not believe our religion to be polytheism.  Meaning we don't believe and worship several gods.  We believe the God head to consist of God the Father, his Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.  Though they are three seperate personages, they are one with the same purpose, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind.  The way I understand polytheism, is that your worship several god's and usually those god's serve different purposes.  For example the Aztec and  Incan nations of old.  I can see though why you would think that our religion would be a polytheistic faith based upon my earlier post with Dust.  It is amazing how many faiths are in the world today.  I think the underlying message is good is good and evil is evil.  Though you may be of a faith that preaches to love God and love your neighbor, does not mean you believe and live those teachings.  This is why there are so many great people in the world from so many different faiths who have one common purpose, peace and love.  And vice versa, which explains why there is so much hatred for their fellow brother.

I disagree with people who say to never talk about politics and religion, because they are usually the two most passionate things people believe in.  It is amazing how the two coincide with each other and at times they have nothing to do with each other.  By the way, I do like your sarcastic sense of humor.  If you could not tell from my earlier post, I am the same way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hughvic:</p>
<p>Sorry I misunderstood your statement from your earlier post and enjoyed your thoughts from your last post.  In regards to Romney, I don&#8217;t know if there was anything Romney could have said in regards to religion, that would have satisfied the minds of those who said they would never vote for a Mormon president.  It was amazing to see all the newly created anti- Romney websites, most of which were because of his faith.  When you have local pastors ( who were supporters of Huckabee) telling their congregations to visit these sites and get the word out was just sad and un-American.  I think the only way Romney could have won over these people, most of which are from the south, was to have prominent conservatives from within the Republican establishment getting behind him and endorsing him.  I guess that would be a hard thing to do when Romney said Washington was broken from top to bottom and they were getting nothing done. Which by the way, could not be more true.  Talk radio finally got behind him, including Michael Savage who is an independent conservative and rarely endorses anyone.  Unfortunately,  I never thought in a million years McCain would be representing the republican party based upon his stances on all the key issues.  It is sad to see where the direction of that party has gone to.  I agree, I would have loved to be working for Romney&#8217;s campaign right now.</p>
<p>In regards to monotheism vs. polytheism.  We do not believe our religion to be polytheism.  Meaning we don&#8217;t believe and worship several gods.  We believe the God head to consist of God the Father, his Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.  Though they are three seperate personages, they are one with the same purpose, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind.  The way I understand polytheism, is that your worship several god&#8217;s and usually those god&#8217;s serve different purposes.  For example the Aztec and  Incan nations of old.  I can see though why you would think that our religion would be a polytheistic faith based upon my earlier post with Dust.  It is amazing how many faiths are in the world today.  I think the underlying message is good is good and evil is evil.  Though you may be of a faith that preaches to love God and love your neighbor, does not mean you believe and live those teachings.  This is why there are so many great people in the world from so many different faiths who have one common purpose, peace and love.  And vice versa, which explains why there is so much hatred for their fellow brother.</p>
<p>I disagree with people who say to never talk about politics and religion, because they are usually the two most passionate things people believe in.  It is amazing how the two coincide with each other and at times they have nothing to do with each other.  By the way, I do like your sarcastic sense of humor.  If you could not tell from my earlier post, I am the same way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hughvic</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-28624</link>
		<dc:creator>hughvic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:43:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-28624</guid>
		<description>American Conservative,

As I quite agree, I was referring facetiously to the counterproductive pontificating from upstream in this blog of despond.  The stuff that told us we were not to discuss religion, when at that very moment the nation was engaged in a more purposeful discussion of religion than it has had in generations; and also the stuff that announced the political irrelevance of Mitt Romney, from whom, as it happened, we had not heard the last.  I don't know why people come onto a blog and then presume to foreclose lines of discussion, but they do.  Perhaps there are more homeroom teachers in the world than I'd thought.

I read with pleasure and interest the very decent discussion you and Dust enjoyed---I think, for our benefit.  Frankly it was lovely.  In fact I tried---perhaps others did also---to weigh in after the second day of your conversation, but there is some glitchy filter on this blog that kicks out a post on the pretext that you already have posted it.  (Perhaps it works on keywords, like the scanning programs of NSA and its fellow travellers NeuStar &#38; AT&#38;T.)

I should think that the nub of the difference between your beliefs and Dust's is monotheism v. polytheism, in light of LDS construal of our Lord Jesus Christ as the greatest thing since sliced bread but still other than the One True God.  The difference, of course, is owing to Christian orthodoxy's understanding that Rabbi Yeshua of Nazareth taught monotheism and also said that He was It.  To my eyes it's wonderful to see orthodox Christians and Mormons simply differing, and finding and acknowledging the differences.  It breaks a kind of glass ceiling more akin to a glass wall.

I still maintain that had Mr. Romney simply done that, he'd still be in the running.  And I'd now have the pleasure of working for his election.  He is much the better exemplar than Mike Huckabee of Christian doctrine.  Ironic, but true.

But then we mustn't discuss religion here, nor the irrelevant Mike Huckabee.  Those topics are out.  Did you not get the memo?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>American Conservative,</p>
<p>As I quite agree, I was referring facetiously to the counterproductive pontificating from upstream in this blog of despond.  The stuff that told us we were not to discuss religion, when at that very moment the nation was engaged in a more purposeful discussion of religion than it has had in generations; and also the stuff that announced the political irrelevance of Mitt Romney, from whom, as it happened, we had not heard the last.  I don&#8217;t know why people come onto a blog and then presume to foreclose lines of discussion, but they do.  Perhaps there are more homeroom teachers in the world than I&#8217;d thought.</p>
<p>I read with pleasure and interest the very decent discussion you and Dust enjoyed&#8212;I think, for our benefit.  Frankly it was lovely.  In fact I tried&#8212;perhaps others did also&#8212;to weigh in after the second day of your conversation, but there is some glitchy filter on this blog that kicks out a post on the pretext that you already have posted it.  (Perhaps it works on keywords, like the scanning programs of NSA and its fellow travellers NeuStar &amp; AT&amp;T.)</p>
<p>I should think that the nub of the difference between your beliefs and Dust&#8217;s is monotheism v. polytheism, in light of LDS construal of our Lord Jesus Christ as the greatest thing since sliced bread but still other than the One True God.  The difference, of course, is owing to Christian orthodoxy&#8217;s understanding that Rabbi Yeshua of Nazareth taught monotheism and also said that He was It.  To my eyes it&#8217;s wonderful to see orthodox Christians and Mormons simply differing, and finding and acknowledging the differences.  It breaks a kind of glass ceiling more akin to a glass wall.</p>
<p>I still maintain that had Mr. Romney simply done that, he&#8217;d still be in the running.  And I&#8217;d now have the pleasure of working for his election.  He is much the better exemplar than Mike Huckabee of Christian doctrine.  Ironic, but true.</p>
<p>But then we mustn&#8217;t discuss religion here, nor the irrelevant Mike Huckabee.  Those topics are out.  Did you not get the memo?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: American Conservative</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-28582</link>
		<dc:creator>American Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 05:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-28582</guid>
		<description>hughvic:  
Actually there is alot that can be gained by discussing religious affairs on a blog.  If you have actually read any the post that myself and Dust have written, you would know exactly why it is important to discuss religious affairs.  There is alot of misconseptions of " Mormonism ", and since Dust had a sincere desire to learn what we believe in I answered some questions and shared some of my personal thoughts of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  As a matter of fact, I think blogs are a terrific way to share the gospel.  It is one good way technology is being used.  If you ready any of our post from the very beginning this article was written you will see that he and I differed greatly on the Republican canidates, and eventually agreed to disagree and decided to talk about something we both believe in.  I would hope that is not something you disagree with.  If you are really concerned with our discussions, I would suggest going back and reading all of our post to each other.  I think  you would find some enlightenment amongst all this political maddness.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hughvic:<br />
Actually there is alot that can be gained by discussing religious affairs on a blog.  If you have actually read any the post that myself and Dust have written, you would know exactly why it is important to discuss religious affairs.  There is alot of misconseptions of &#8221; Mormonism &#8220;, and since Dust had a sincere desire to learn what we believe in I answered some questions and shared some of my personal thoughts of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  As a matter of fact, I think blogs are a terrific way to share the gospel.  It is one good way technology is being used.  If you ready any of our post from the very beginning this article was written you will see that he and I differed greatly on the Republican canidates, and eventually agreed to disagree and decided to talk about something we both believe in.  I would hope that is not something you disagree with.  If you are really concerned with our discussions, I would suggest going back and reading all of our post to each other.  I think  you would find some enlightenment amongst all this political maddness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hughvic</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-27442</link>
		<dc:creator>hughvic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 05:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-27442</guid>
		<description>Umm, I believe that when we left off we were pontificating about Romney's irrelevance and about what cannot be gained by discussing religious affairs in a blog...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Umm, I believe that when we left off we were pontificating about Romney&#8217;s irrelevance and about what cannot be gained by discussing religious affairs in a blog&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: American Conservative</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-25380</link>
		<dc:creator>American Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:18:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-25380</guid>
		<description>Dust: 
There are some things that can be proven and there are somethings that require faith.  I think we would both agree that the Bible is made up of different prophets and apostles ministries among their respective people.  You brought up a good point about Joseph not being in the bible.  You could say the same thing about the men who would hundreds of years after the death of Christ and his Apostles, would translate and compile their records or books, and put them all in one book.  Nowhere in the Bible does it make mention that men would do that.  However, just because it does not say that in the Bible, you still know their writings to be true because the Holy Spirit manifest it our spirits that they are Gods words.  Again, just because I can not provide all of the original manuscripts of the prophets and apostles does not mean their words are not true.  All of lifes answers are found in the scriptures though they may not be spelled out in black and white.  I know the story of Joseph sounds out there at first, but that is why I feel the Lord had to bring forth that ancient book of scripture of the inhabitants of the of the ancients Americas.  That's what is so neat.  We can hold it in our hands and read it, and try to disprove it if we like.  But again, the only way we will know of its truthfulness, is by the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Ghost.  Believe me, there are people who have spent their lives trying to disprove this book as have people done with the Bible.  That is why I invited you to get one from the missionaries in your area or by ordering one at mormon.org. Read it from cover to cover with an open mind and heart.  You will find that it is not much differnent from the Bible.  The only difference is one was recorded in the Holy land and one was recorded in the Ancient Americas.  They are history books that contain the plain and precious things of the Lord written by his chosen Prophets and Apostles.  You will then know for yourself if Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God.  One thing I caution you not to do.  That is to go to Anti-Mormon websites or literature to get your information about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  I have seen and read them.  They manipulate, distort, and take things out of context.  They will then try to uses sources from Church literature to claim they are facts. If you want true information, you have to go straight to the source.  If you want to use the net, go to the offical websites of the Church.  They are mormon.org and lds.org.  I really enjoy hearing your thoughts and questions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dust:<br />
There are some things that can be proven and there are somethings that require faith.  I think we would both agree that the Bible is made up of different prophets and apostles ministries among their respective people.  You brought up a good point about Joseph not being in the bible.  You could say the same thing about the men who would hundreds of years after the death of Christ and his Apostles, would translate and compile their records or books, and put them all in one book.  Nowhere in the Bible does it make mention that men would do that.  However, just because it does not say that in the Bible, you still know their writings to be true because the Holy Spirit manifest it our spirits that they are Gods words.  Again, just because I can not provide all of the original manuscripts of the prophets and apostles does not mean their words are not true.  All of lifes answers are found in the scriptures though they may not be spelled out in black and white.  I know the story of Joseph sounds out there at first, but that is why I feel the Lord had to bring forth that ancient book of scripture of the inhabitants of the of the ancients Americas.  That&#8217;s what is so neat.  We can hold it in our hands and read it, and try to disprove it if we like.  But again, the only way we will know of its truthfulness, is by the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Ghost.  Believe me, there are people who have spent their lives trying to disprove this book as have people done with the Bible.  That is why I invited you to get one from the missionaries in your area or by ordering one at mormon.org. Read it from cover to cover with an open mind and heart.  You will find that it is not much differnent from the Bible.  The only difference is one was recorded in the Holy land and one was recorded in the Ancient Americas.  They are history books that contain the plain and precious things of the Lord written by his chosen Prophets and Apostles.  You will then know for yourself if Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God.  One thing I caution you not to do.  That is to go to Anti-Mormon websites or literature to get your information about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.  I have seen and read them.  They manipulate, distort, and take things out of context.  They will then try to uses sources from Church literature to claim they are facts. If you want true information, you have to go straight to the source.  If you want to use the net, go to the offical websites of the Church.  They are mormon.org and lds.org.  I really enjoy hearing your thoughts and questions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dust</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-24940</link>
		<dc:creator>dust</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 13:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-24940</guid>
		<description>American Conservative: I agree with you 100% in regards to the nature of God. And my church also believes in the Trinity of God(and we also us the KJV).I 've looked  up the Greek word for "heard" in those verses in Acts, the Greek word is Akouw, it seems to have two meaning. 1 to be endowed with the faculty of hearing,not deaf. And the other meaning is 2. to hear something and to perceive by the ear what is announced in ones presence. I have not figured out which description he he was using in ethier verse because the same word is used in both. So I think I would propably have to understand Greed more. The reason I have such a hard time with this is that the men of the past chech their works for errors over and over, and I usaully don't think God would let an imperfection in His Word. I will do some futher study of Joseph but I would like you to also question what you were taught by him, prove it out and thoughly study if it goes hand in hand with the Bible</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>American Conservative: I agree with you 100% in regards to the nature of God. And my church also believes in the Trinity of God(and we also us the KJV).I &#8216;ve looked  up the Greek word for &#8220;heard&#8221; in those verses in Acts, the Greek word is Akouw, it seems to have two meaning. 1 to be endowed with the faculty of hearing,not deaf. And the other meaning is 2. to hear something and to perceive by the ear what is announced in ones presence. I have not figured out which description he he was using in ethier verse because the same word is used in both. So I think I would propably have to understand Greed more. The reason I have such a hard time with this is that the men of the past chech their works for errors over and over, and I usaully don&#8217;t think God would let an imperfection in His Word. I will do some futher study of Joseph but I would like you to also question what you were taught by him, prove it out and thoughly study if it goes hand in hand with the Bible</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: American Conservative</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-24857</link>
		<dc:creator>American Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 07:02:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-24857</guid>
		<description>Dust: 

Speaking of visions.  As I mentioned in my earlier post, we believe that Christ called Joseph Smith to be a prophet of God and instructed him how to restore the same Church Christ had established while he was on the earth.  It all started when Christ and Heavenly Father appeared to him.  They appeared to him outside his home in a near by grove of trees in up-state New York in a small town called Palmyra.  This was in the year 1820 when he was just 14 years old.  During that time their was much religious excitement in regards to Christianity.  Their were churches at every corner telling their members that there's was the only one true church and were the only ones that interpreted the scriptures correctly.  Joseph and his family would visit the different churches.  Joseph was confused as to which one of these churches he should join and was the true church of Christ,.  The one that was established by Christ in the New Testament.  Through much contemplation and studying of the scriptures he came across a scripture in James 1:5. It reads " If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." He knew that the only way to receive his answer was to ask God and knew that the Lord would not scorn or upbraideth him.  So that is when he went to the near by grove of trees and pray to know which of all those churches he should join.   That is when Heavely Father and Christ appeared to him and told him to join none of the churches, though there were truths in all of them, none of them contained the fullness of the Church that Christ had established. That through him they would restore their Church here again on the earth.  

I share this with you so you have a backround of how it all started.  The thing I always found interesting was that this very experience tells us the nature of God and how it coincides with the Bible.  Joseph said that he saw two personages ( Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ) and that they had glorified bodies of flesh and bone.

  If you read in Luke Chapter 24:33-43,  this is after Christ death and his resurrection.  It reads "33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, 34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? 42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 43 And he took it, and did eat before them.

  Here we learn that Christ has a glorified body of flesh and bone with a glorified spirit.  The apostles were afraid because they had thought they had seen a ghost or a spirit.  Then after Christ comforted them, showed them his hands and feet and told them to feel for themselves.  He then told them that a spirit does not have flesh and bones, but that he does have a body of flesh and bones.  He even began to eat with them. We know that Christ is God and took upon him a mortal tabernacle of blood, flesh, and bone.  We know that he was eventually crucified and resurrected to his mortal body without blood, but with flesh and bone.  This is important because most Christian denominations and Christianity in general believes that God is a spirit and Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one in the same.  This is derived from the Nicene Creed that  was formed at the council of Nicea in Rome. It was formed by religious leaders and other noble men of that day. I believe it was around 400 A.D.  Anyway, this is where the trinity doctrine was formed that God does not have a body but is a spirit.  However, we learn in Luke that the Resurrected Jesus does have a body and if he was God in the Flesh before his crucifiction, than he is also God in the Flesh after his resurrection with a body of flesh and bone without blood. Therefore if Christ is God, than God does have a glorified spirit with a glorified body with flesh and bones.  We do also believe that Heavenly Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are One.  They are One in purpose.  To bring to pass the imortality and Eternal life of mankind.

 Blood represents life and death.  Without it we can not live. Through Christ resurrection he conquered death.  Because of his resurrection all man kind will be resurrected.  But, in order to overcome spiritual death and live with him in the Kingdom of God, we must be made clean.  This is why Christ payed the price for our sins and is the mediator between us and God.  Only through him can we be made clean.  This is why we must always repent of our wrong doings and do our best to be obedient to all of Gods commandments.  Even then, we will still fall short of perfection.  This is why Christ grace is so important.  It is the only bridge that can fill the space between unperfection and perfection.  We can only receive this grace through faith and obedience to all of God's commandments.  This is why James states that faith without works is dead.  Faith can not save us alone.  I am so grateful for repentance because without out in we would remain unclean.  

  My main point is that  Christ did nothing but what he saw his Father do, as we read in the New Testament.  Thus we know that Joseph was correct in regards to the nature of God.   That Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ do have  separate glorified and perfected bodies and spirits.  That the Holy Ghost is a separate personage of Spirit without flesh and bone and is to comfort,guide, and testify of Heavenly Father and Christ.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dust: </p>
<p>Speaking of visions.  As I mentioned in my earlier post, we believe that Christ called Joseph Smith to be a prophet of God and instructed him how to restore the same Church Christ had established while he was on the earth.  It all started when Christ and Heavenly Father appeared to him.  They appeared to him outside his home in a near by grove of trees in up-state New York in a small town called Palmyra.  This was in the year 1820 when he was just 14 years old.  During that time their was much religious excitement in regards to Christianity.  Their were churches at every corner telling their members that there&#8217;s was the only one true church and were the only ones that interpreted the scriptures correctly.  Joseph and his family would visit the different churches.  Joseph was confused as to which one of these churches he should join and was the true church of Christ,.  The one that was established by Christ in the New Testament.  Through much contemplation and studying of the scriptures he came across a scripture in James 1:5. It reads &#8221; If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.&#8221; He knew that the only way to receive his answer was to ask God and knew that the Lord would not scorn or upbraideth him.  So that is when he went to the near by grove of trees and pray to know which of all those churches he should join.   That is when Heavely Father and Christ appeared to him and told him to join none of the churches, though there were truths in all of them, none of them contained the fullness of the Church that Christ had established. That through him they would restore their Church here again on the earth.  </p>
<p>I share this with you so you have a backround of how it all started.  The thing I always found interesting was that this very experience tells us the nature of God and how it coincides with the Bible.  Joseph said that he saw two personages ( Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ) and that they had glorified bodies of flesh and bone.</p>
<p>  If you read in Luke Chapter 24:33-43,  this is after Christ death and his resurrection.  It reads &#8220;33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, 34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 35 And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? 42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 43 And he took it, and did eat before them.</p>
<p>  Here we learn that Christ has a glorified body of flesh and bone with a glorified spirit.  The apostles were afraid because they had thought they had seen a ghost or a spirit.  Then after Christ comforted them, showed them his hands and feet and told them to feel for themselves.  He then told them that a spirit does not have flesh and bones, but that he does have a body of flesh and bones.  He even began to eat with them. We know that Christ is God and took upon him a mortal tabernacle of blood, flesh, and bone.  We know that he was eventually crucified and resurrected to his mortal body without blood, but with flesh and bone.  This is important because most Christian denominations and Christianity in general believes that God is a spirit and Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are one in the same.  This is derived from the Nicene Creed that  was formed at the council of Nicea in Rome. It was formed by religious leaders and other noble men of that day. I believe it was around 400 A.D.  Anyway, this is where the trinity doctrine was formed that God does not have a body but is a spirit.  However, we learn in Luke that the Resurrected Jesus does have a body and if he was God in the Flesh before his crucifiction, than he is also God in the Flesh after his resurrection with a body of flesh and bone without blood. Therefore if Christ is God, than God does have a glorified spirit with a glorified body with flesh and bones.  We do also believe that Heavenly Father, Christ, and the Holy Spirit are One.  They are One in purpose.  To bring to pass the imortality and Eternal life of mankind.</p>
<p> Blood represents life and death.  Without it we can not live. Through Christ resurrection he conquered death.  Because of his resurrection all man kind will be resurrected.  But, in order to overcome spiritual death and live with him in the Kingdom of God, we must be made clean.  This is why Christ payed the price for our sins and is the mediator between us and God.  Only through him can we be made clean.  This is why we must always repent of our wrong doings and do our best to be obedient to all of Gods commandments.  Even then, we will still fall short of perfection.  This is why Christ grace is so important.  It is the only bridge that can fill the space between unperfection and perfection.  We can only receive this grace through faith and obedience to all of God&#8217;s commandments.  This is why James states that faith without works is dead.  Faith can not save us alone.  I am so grateful for repentance because without out in we would remain unclean.  </p>
<p>  My main point is that  Christ did nothing but what he saw his Father do, as we read in the New Testament.  Thus we know that Joseph was correct in regards to the nature of God.   That Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ do have  separate glorified and perfected bodies and spirits.  That the Holy Ghost is a separate personage of Spirit without flesh and bone and is to comfort,guide, and testify of Heavenly Father and Christ.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dust</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-24853</link>
		<dc:creator>dust</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 06:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-24853</guid>
		<description>To American Conservative:Thanks once again. I glad we could have this conversation. You have shown me a lot and given me food for thought. You have shown a lot of wisdom and even if we disagree on canidates, we agree on whats important, our love for Christ. I will study the Acts 22:9 and 9:7, I have heard people say there are contradictions in the Bible before. The problem is the reader overlooks something important or fails to understand the Greek. God Bless You.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To American Conservative:Thanks once again. I glad we could have this conversation. You have shown me a lot and given me food for thought. You have shown a lot of wisdom and even if we disagree on canidates, we agree on whats important, our love for Christ. I will study the Acts 22:9 and 9:7, I have heard people say there are contradictions in the Bible before. The problem is the reader overlooks something important or fails to understand the Greek. God Bless You.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: American Conservative</title>
		<link>http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/06/who-created-huckabee-conan-stewart-and-colbert-fight-it-out/#comment-24818</link>
		<dc:creator>American Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Feb 2008 05:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://embeds.wordpress.com/?p=1126#comment-24818</guid>
		<description>Dust: 

I apologize and was wrong about Paul, it was the men that were traveling with him what I meant.  If you turn to Acts 9:7 ( King James Version)  it reads " And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." Obviously the voice they heard was that of the Lord, but they did not see the person in which it came from.  However, in Acts 22:9 it reads " And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me."  So according to Paul the men saw the same light Paul saw, but did not hear the voice of the Lord.  Again this is a clear contridiction, but is done by men that translated it.  I guarantee you if we walked side by side with Paul during his ministry, his experience would have always been the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dust: </p>
<p>I apologize and was wrong about Paul, it was the men that were traveling with him what I meant.  If you turn to Acts 9:7 ( King James Version)  it reads &#8221; And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.&#8221; Obviously the voice they heard was that of the Lord, but they did not see the person in which it came from.  However, in Acts 22:9 it reads &#8221; And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.&#8221;  So according to Paul the men saw the same light Paul saw, but did not hear the voice of the Lord.  Again this is a clear contridiction, but is done by men that translated it.  I guarantee you if we walked side by side with Paul during his ministry, his experience would have always been the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
