- CreatorTopic
- December 8, 2015 at 3:33 AM#7817setufreeParticipant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxHyZTELyFk
I think we have rattled them up. 🙂
Whenever they feel the need to produce an entire new video, I take it as a win for us.
- December 17, 2015 at 6:34 PM #69081
ShugyoParticipantUntouchableJ wrote:
@mayor Yes. My old Overseer tried to equate it to the fact that God should/would want to enjoy certain aspects of being in the human experience.
Funny 1 Cor 7 (7-12) Apostle Paul pretty much refutes any notion of a "human being" marrying another unless they are "too weak" and lack self control.. Apostle Paul even said marriage isn't for him (paraphrasing). SO why would God come to earth to marry, have sex (with his own children), and then divorce and marry again? All the while he/she inspired the Apostle Paul to write this contradiction. Very strange. I would've liked to have noticed this during my last few months within the church so I could've brought it up.
December 17, 2015 at 7:04 PM #69082
UntouchableJParticipant@Shgyo..The scripture you referenced..is one they never read, or even go near in the bible.
Thats why the WMS only focuses on, Passover, Feasts etc…never anything positive or elightening. They never even deal with the commandments that deal with human reaction because you might just actually “honor your father and mother” and stop by their home and do lunch…
December 17, 2015 at 7:21 PM #69083
ShugyoParticipantWell said.
December 18, 2015 at 4:46 AM #69084
Mayor and MikeParticipantASH talked about the commands relating to God. The first 5 I think. They put emphasis on those commands, but seem not too concerned with the ones just between people.
I’ve read that contradiction before with God, and having kids. Who can take the position of God here on earth and be perfect, be completely blameless?
Another verse they don’t touch is Acts 17:11. I learned about that verse from the examiners, here on this site.
December 18, 2015 at 4:22 PM #69085
UntouchableJParticipant@mayor They try to use Acts 17:11 conveniently. When a new member is eager and studying with them..or they refer to “slanderers”. But when a member wants to examine their false doctrines, or court cases then it doesnt apply.
December 19, 2015 at 1:11 AM #69086
Mayor and MikeParticipantOh, conveniently. Of course. From my experience (exposure) they never used that one. But every zion has its differences, inconsistencies.
December 19, 2015 at 9:26 AM #69087
Kai TIngParticipantMy zion focuses alot more on the first 5 of the ten commandments and don't actually mention last 5 at all. During studies they will criticize how all other churches all don't know about the first 5 (sabbath), and how even though "Babylon" teaches how people to be good etc (from last 5) it is all wicked in God's eyes because they are not following God's commandments
December 21, 2015 at 8:02 AM #69088
AzulaParticipantIt makes obvious sense why the cult would put more emphasis on a religious ritual than it would on morality because morality is debatable but a religious ritual like the sabbath is more specific to the religion. And it uses this as means of manipulating people to a premise that has nothing to do with anything in this case a new deity mama z
I can also remember in the green book (the mystery of god) how ash dismissed commandments 5-10 saying they were of no benefit to god or something of that nature, that should have raised an immediate red flag as to the intent of the cult that could promote that cordial relations between men were insignificant.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.