Anti-Mormon Tactic: Deliberately Creating Confusion

Mormanity gets plenty of comments from critics with tactics that I sometimes consider to be “anti-Mormon” (e.g., off-topic posting of a long-list of alleged beliefs mischaracterized in ways meant to shock and confuse). Disagreeing with us and having objections to LDS beliefs does not necessarily make one “anti-Mormon,” but when the goal is simply to attack and to throw out numerous objections without engaging in real dialog, then “anti-Mormon” begins to be more apt. And when a critic appears to be creating deliberate confusion about our beliefs, I tend to find the effort worthy of the “anti-Mormon” moniker that is, admittedly, often abused – but also often deserved. There is rarely any value in attempting dialog with those employing such tactics.

The tactic of creating confusion about LDS beliefs is often done by contrasting “Christian” belief with some mischaracterized LDS belief. This can be done in lengthy diatribes, but it can also be done in a short drive-by postings or list of bullet points, like the “Mormonism vs. Christianity” list at the disreputable MormonCult.org.

One critic who has come on this blog recently to post a lot of standard anti-Mormon stuff recently gave us an interesting example of a brief attack aimed at creating confusion. It came in response to another person’s comment that mentioned the Holy Spirit. Here is the attack:

What do you mean when you say “Holy Spirit”?

LDS – “A spirit man. He can only be at one place at one time… ” (Mormon Doctrine by Bruce McConkie, p. 359.)

or,

according to the Bible, the third person of the Trinity/Triune God (Acts 5:3-4).

Ah, sweet dichotomy. In typical anti-Mormon style, LDS doctrine is succinctly misrepresented and then “contrasted” with “Christian” doctrine. This person, who has “studied” the Church for a long time and has had numerous encounters with Mormons, surely knows that we believe that the Holy Ghost is the third person of the Godhead. He surely knows that we fully accept Acts 5:3,4 and every other biblical statement about the Holy Ghost. And he surely knows that we believe that the power and influence of the Holy Ghost can be everywhere and fill the immensity of space. True, we have difficulty with some aspects of the post-biblical doctrine of the Trinity, for which some man-made formulations offer imponderable metaphysics that go far beyond the Bible (or in our view, clearly contradict the Bible and earliest Christian belief), including the concept of all members of the Godhead being utterly immaterial and not being located in any one place. So we think in terms of the Holy Ghost having power and influence that can be everywhere at once, while our critic thinks that the Person himself must be everywhere at once. Fine – I can accept the difference. It’s a distinction in metaphysics and interpretation of scripture, but he presents it as if it is slam-dunk evidence that we reject the Bible. He does it in a way that I feel is aimed at deliberately creating confusion. It is looking for an argument rather than looking to understand, which I find to be essential anti-Mormonism (but in a relatively gentle form).

This person surely knows that we believe that the Holy Ghost is the 3rd Person of the Godhead. The “question” he asks is not intended to understand more or engage in discussion, but simply to attack. Further, his misleading and sloppy quotation from Bruce R. McConkie excises information to create a bone of contention. McConkie clearly explains that the Holy Ghost is the 3rd person of the Godhead and that His influence and power can be everywhere. Here is the beginning of McConkie’s actual entry on the Holy Ghost: “The Holy Ghost is the third member of the Godhead. He is a Personage of Spirit, a Spirit Person, a Spirit Man, a Spirit Entity. He can be in only one place at one time . . . though his power and influence can be manifest at one and the same time throughout all immensity.

“He is the Comforter, Testator, Revelator, Sanctifier, Holy Spirit, Holy Spirit of Promise, Spirit of Truth, Spirit of the Lord, and Messenger of the Father and the Son, and his companionship is the greatest gift that mortal man can enjoy. . . . “(Mormon Doctrine, p. 359)

We may differ on metaphysics, but there is no real basis for claiming that our beliefs regarding the Holy Ghost are non-Christian or non-biblical, in spite of the deceptive appearance he creates. This little lecture won’t change the behavior of this critic, of course, but I hope it will remind us that some of the questions we get are offered by people with no interest in understanding the answer. And answering would be a complete waste of – oops, what have I done??

Share:

Author: Jeff Lindsay

74 thoughts on “Anti-Mormon Tactic: Deliberately Creating Confusion

  1. The forms of “anti-Mormonism” experienced on this or any blog are actually benign and gentle, in contrast to the kind experienced in the 19th century or that we could experience in the future. So someone gets annoying on a blog in their efforts to spook everywhere about the Church – hey, we can deal with that. It’s the people with lawyers and public officials on their team that scare me!

  2. Gentle: no underwear was waved in anybody’s face, no windows broken, no authorities hauled away any children. That’s all good.

  3. I can see the problem with saying that we are not Christian. Christians believe in One God. We believe in three Gods. Multiple Gods verses one God.

  4. Christians believe in God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, three persons who are also, in some way, “one.” Christians have different views on what that “oneness” means. Is it oneness of immaterial substance without body, parts, or passion, or is it the kind of oneness that Christ taught in his great intercessory prayer of John 17, where Christians are asked to be one in the same way that He and the Father are One? Mormons lean toward the latter and reject the Trinitarian formulations rooted in Neoplatonism and other elements of Greek philisophy. We have no difficulty in believing that Christ and the Father could be seen by Joseph Smith as two separate Beings, one on the right hand of the other, and still be “one.” That’s outrageous to some of our critics, who may be overlooking, though, the fact that Stephen provided the same witness when he saw Christ standing on the right hand of the Father in Acts 7:55,56. Two Beings, both with tangible,. physically real bodies, not the Trinitarian single Being of 3 immaterial persons – and yet God and the Father are One, as in one in heart, mind, will, etc. Perfect unity.

    Trinitarian or not, Christian notions of the Godhead of three persons are still hopelessly polytheistic to Muslims and other pure monotheists, no matter how you slice it.

  5. To me, this is just six of one, and a half dozen of the other. We literally just see God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit as three separate beings, but one in purpose. Others see them as one being, but with three different “jobs.” People could argue about this all day! In the Bible you could find almost as many scriptures to support one as the other. It just depends on how you want to interpret it.

    We always say to “ask in faithful prayer” but I find that non-Mormon Christians are hesitant to do so, especially if they are certain that they’re “right.” I prayed and got an overwhelming answer. But my dad, who’s not a member, basically refuses to. How is anyone supposed to get an answer if they refuse to ask God?

    Doesn’t make sense to me…

  6. I’ve gotten to the point where antis just make me yawn.
    It used to really bother me. It drove me nuts to see/hear them mischaracterizing our beliefs, even completely making up beliefs that aren’t just mischaracterizations of real beliefs, but claims that we believe in things that are entirely and completely out of the ballpark.
    But honestly, now I just completely ignore them. The second I can tell it’s an anti babbling on about nothing, I skip right over it as if nothing was said at all.
    As you said, it’s very obvious when it’s someone with sincere questions. And even if they adamantly disagree with our beliefs– that’s fine. Honest dialogue, even in complete disagreement is still honest dialogue.
    Antis don’t have dialogue– they just blather on and on and on and have no interest whatsoever in any real discussion.
    An insurance seminar or time share speech would be more interesting… (no offense to those in insurance or time shares…:)

  7. Before a few weeks ago, I would've eaten up anything an anti-mormon told me.

    Currently, I'm searching. I see truth in the LDS church, but I am a 17 year old evangelical Christian. I havn't read the Book of Mormon, or D&C, and I know that I need to.

    This site and others has helped me see through many of the vicious anti-mormon arguments.

    So I really just wanted to say thank you, because I think without the help of Mormons defending their faith, I'd be fine believing every word coming from an anti.

  8. Being anti-Mormon is about behavior not theology. Cerainly other Christian denominations have their own theological ideas. That is expected and understood. Focusing on what people do in expressing their theologial differences with us how one guages. Those who express their notions respectfully and acknowledge other’s views respectfully can not be considered anti. Refusing to accept the correct version of our theology and insinuating we are liars is a behavior marker.

  9. Protesting LDS events, dragging a Book of Mormon on the side walk while “street preaching” and insulting our leadership are behaviors. They are not theological expressions. One group finds the term anti-Mormon analogous to a racial slur however their behavior fits snuggly in the militant anti-Mormon category. These folks want to be known as “critics” which is a term usually reserved for legitimate reviewers of research submitted for peer review and elsewhere. However their marching and protesting at LDS events seems to this observer to be a mockery of legitimate criticism techniques. Whoever coined the term “anti-Mormon” had people these people in mind. No matter what kind of a flower one puts behind this pig’s ear it is still a porker.

    JLFuller http://mormonthing.wordpress.com/

  10. “It’s the people with lawyers and public officials on their team that scare me!”

    Jeff, I resemble that remark! Why do people always slam laywers?

    Like any other circumstance in life, people take the facts that are presented to them and use them to conform to their world view. That is why you can have so many different groups (us included) who believe in the Bible and yet have different intepretations. I am always willing to listen to one who would like honest dialogue, and seeks for to understand and then to be understood. If we show the same respect, which I hope we do, then we can really get into finding common ground and expressing ourselves in a brotherly way.

  11. april said: “We always say to “ask in faithful prayer” but I find that non-Mormon Christians are hesitant to do so, especially if they are certain that they’re “right.” I prayed and got an overwhelming answer. But my dad, who’s not a member, basically refuses to. How is anyone supposed to get an answer if they refuse to ask God?

    Doesn’t make sense to me…”

    Mormons ask, “Have you ever prayed concerning the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon?” To that I say (as I said on the thread, Ammon and the Waters of Sebus) Christians are to test the spirits, not pray over them. I John 4:1 states: “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

    The Bible presents several tests for prophets. One of them is that a true prophet of God is 100% accurate (not 99.9% accurate or 83%accurate) whenever he makes predictions in the name of God(see Deuteronomy 18: 20-22)

    David Buckna

  12. gotta love the trump card. it all leads to a playground argument about who is more spiritual, and who is more sincer.

    as for the trinity, and the god head these things are only as confusing as we want to make them. if someone were to say the trinity is impossible to understand and too confusing to try then of course it is going to be impossible to understand. If we see that it is one of those difficult things to understand, or hard but not impossible then we may see that it is not as confusing as first thought. Why do anti mormons use the Godhead? Not because it is an impossible puzzel but because it is (from what I have sen and read, and heard) it is a new hashing of arianism, which was determined to be herisy by the Church Universal.

  13. “The Bible presents several tests for prophets. One of them is that a true prophet of God is 100% accurate … whenever he makes predictions in the name of God”

    So when Jonah said the city of Ninevah was going to be destroyed, and it wasn’t, that means he wasn’t a prophet? Or when the Savior said that this generation shall not pass away until the Son of man comes in his glory? Well, you get the idea. It is like saying “the prophesy was not fulfilled the way (or when) I expected it to be. So it must be false.”

  14. Buck, what better way to “test spirits” than to ask God about them? So we are to trust our imperfect reasoning over what God can tell us?

    The Bible even tells us it’s ok to ask God. Think back to James 1:5-
    “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.”

    I see praying about something as a great test, one which does not go against the scripture you quoted.

  15. “…… them is that a true prophet of God is 100% accurate (not 99.9% accurate or 83%accurate)…”

    DB you are starting with the same old thing you were talking about on the other thread. Different post, different subject, move along.

  16. I think the best way to counter true anti-Mormons is to only address legitimate criticisms and questions about the religion.

    The problem, I feel, is that too many legitimate questions are categorized as “anti-Mormon” simply because they assume the burden of proof rests on Mormonism, as it should with any belief.

    Jeff, I don’t know know how much good it does to keep bringing up the “antis” trying to lure Mormons into a “you’re not a Christian!” trap – defend Mormonism in its own context, not in the context of other religions.

  17. Maedoc,

    I am with you on James 1:5 but I think you’ll find that many Christians are uncomfortable with James as much as Luther was.

  18. Sorry Jeff, but I may be the guilty party of sending this critic your way. He was emailing me a barrage of bulletpointed anti-Mormon fluff, with the determination of what, I’m not sure. One thing he said about there being “absolutely no archaeological evidence for Book of Mormon history or geography” sent me over the top and I sent him a link to your Ammon post. Forgive me! 🙂

  19. Answer the question that the questioner should have asked. Sometimes a questioner will actually have a legitimate point to make or question to ask inside all that twaddle. If our only intent is to respond to non-sense barbs by dismissing them we may miss the reader who would like you to answer. I think planting the seed is just as important as making the point. I get about 20 readers for ever responder on my blog. So treat everyone as though they were legitimate. There is likely a reader out there who wants an honest response. By including your source material in your remarks you send a huge and unmistakable message that you know what you are talking about and the other guy doesn’t. It softens hearts too.

  20. As to Jonah and Ninevah: The prophecy wasn’t that it would be destroyed. It was repent, or be destroyed. They repented. They were not destroyed. The prophecy was correct.

    If a prophet prophesies in the name of the Lord, and the prophesy failed to come true, that’s pretty much a sure sign they ain’t a prophet.

    The one sure thing about the LDS church is that the prophecies “in the name of the Lord” always come true. I’ve been a member my whole life (more than 4 decades now), and I’ve never heard of one prophecy by a President of the LDS church that didn’t come true in it’s time. Never. They were all true prophecies. And I’ve read all the lesson manuals and scriptures and all that.

  21. brucec said:

    “So when Jonah said the city of Ninevah was going to be destroyed, and it wasn’t, that means he wasn’t a prophet?”

    For those who didn’t see my response on the “Ammon and the Waters of Sebus” thread…

    God said in Jeremiah 18 that he wouldn’t bring judgment if that nation turns from its sin. Nineveh _did_ turn from its sin after Jonah gave them the warning from God. The people of Nineveh repented and God relented.

    Jonah 3: 1-10

    Then the word of the LORD came to Jonah a second time: “Go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you.”
    Jonah obeyed the word of the LORD and went to Nineveh. Now Nineveh was a very important city—a visit required three days. On the first day, Jonah started into the city. He proclaimed: “Forty more days and Nineveh will be overturned.” The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth. When the news reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. Then he issued a proclamation in Nineveh: “By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let any man or beast, herd or flock, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.” When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he had compassion and did not bring upon them the destruction he had threatened.
    ———————————http://www.letusreason.org/Biblexp17.htm

    [snip]
    The fulfillment of the threat of judgment was contingent on the Ninevites response. Again we must remember- Scripture says Jonah spoke what God told him to (3:2). What this shows us is that God loves to give mercy instead of judgment. Repentance appeals to God’s mercy.
    In Mt.16 Jesus tells his generation that rejected Him “The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah”
    ===
    brucec said:

    “Or when the Savior said that this generation shall not pass away until the Son of man comes in his glory? Well, you get the idea. It is like saying “the prophesy was not fulfilled the way (or when) I expected it to be. So it must be false.””

    http://www.kingmessiahproject.com/fp_main.html

    [snip]

    Another verse that Full Preterists love to use to confuse the public is Matthew 24:34. In this verse, Jesus said: “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.”

    By citing Matthew 24:34, the Full Preterists argue that Jesus was speaking to the generation that would witness ALL things being fulfilled.

    First of all, we always need to remember that, when studying all of the Scriptures, we need to understand them in their proper context. With respect to Matthew 24:34, this is certainly no exception. We need to realize that, in Matthew 24:4-51, Jesus was responding to a question that His disciples asked Him in verse 3, which was: “Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?”

    Let me go on the record by saying that nothing that Jesus described in Matthew 24:4-33 has yet to take place in our history. But it will, in the future! And, how do we know that? Let’s go to Matthew 24:29-31 and find out. This is what Jesus said:

    “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: (30) And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (31) And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, AND THEY SHALL GATHER TOGETHER HIS ELECT FROM THE FOUR WINDS, FROM ONE END OF HEAVEN TO THE OTHER.”

    Regarding this passage, verse 31 provides one of the keys when responding to the Full Preterist argument. It refers to a gathering together of His elect, which did not take place in 70 AD. Actually, in 70 AD, the Roman Empire destroyed Israel’s temple, killing over a million Jews in the process, and scattering those that remained. This was the fulfillment of Luke 21:24, when Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple as well as the scattering of Israel when He said, “And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

    In 70 AD, which was the fulfillment of Luke 21:24, Israel was led away captive into all nations. In retrospect, according to Matthew 24:29-31, a gathering of the elect is prophesied. Logically speaking, a ‘scattering’ and a ‘gathering’ cannot take place at the same time.

    Full Preterism is an empty doctrine, which offers no hope of a better life and a better future. It tears away at God’s promise to the world of everlasting peace and tranquility that will be accomplished at Jesus’ Second Coming. If Jesus came in 70 AD as the Full Preterists claim, He didn’t do a very good job establishing world peace where nation would not lift up sword against nation (Isaiah 2:1-4, Isaiah 11:9-10, Ezekiel 37:24-26 and Micah 4:3).
    ===

    David Buckna

  22. JohnW said: “If a prophet prophesies in the name of the Lord, and the prophesy failed to come true, that’s pretty much a sure sign they ain’t a prophet.

    The one sure thing about the LDS church is that the prophecies “in the name of the Lord” always come true. I’ve been a member my whole life (more than 4 decades now), and I’ve never heard of one prophecy by a President of the LDS church that didn’t come true in it’s time. Never. They were all true prophecies. And I’ve read all the lesson manuals and scriptures and all that.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Church

    In the Latter Day Saint movement, the President of the Church is generally considered to be the highest office of the church. It is the office held by Joseph Smith, Jr., founder of the movement, and the office assumed by many of Smith’s claimed successors, such as Brigham Young, Joseph Smith III, Sidney Rigdon, and James Strang. Several other titles have been associated with this office, including First Elder of the church, Presiding High Priest, President of the High Priesthood, Trustee-in-Trust for the church, Prophet, Seer, Revelator, Translator, and Ruler (in Israel). The movement’s founder, Joseph Smith, Jr., the first president of the church, was known by all of these titles in his lifetime (although not necessarily with consistency).

    [end of snip]
    ===================================
    According to Deuteronomy 18:20-22, it only takes one false prophecy to make a prophet a false prophet.

    I’ve read dozens of Joseph Smith’s prophecies and chose the following one at random. In 1841 he prophesied that the Nauvoo House in Nauvoo, IL. would be in his family “from generation to generation, forever and ever.” But the building is owned by the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

    http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/124

    1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Joseph Smith, I am well pleased with your offering and acknowledgments, which you have made; for unto this end have I raised you up, that I might show forth my wisdom through the weak things of the earth.

    56 And now I say unto you, as pertaining to my boarding house which I have commanded you to build for the boarding of strangers, let it be built unto my name, and let my name be named upon it, and let my servant Joseph and his house have place therein, from generation to generation.
    57 For this anointing have I put upon his head, that his blessing shall also be put upon the head of his posterity after him.
    58 And as I said unto Abraham concerning the kindreds of the earth, even so I say unto my servant Joseph: In thee and in thy bseed shall the kindred of the earth be blessed.
    59 Therefore, let my servant Joseph and his seed after him have place in that house, from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord.
    60 And let the name of that house be called Nauvoo House; and let it be a delightful habitation for man, and a resting-place for the weary traveler, that he may contemplate the glory of Zion, and the glory of this, the corner-stone thereof;
    ===
    David Buckna

  23. Maedoc said: “Buck, what better way to “test spirits” than to ask God about them? So we are to trust our imperfect reasoning over what God can tell us?

    The Bible even tells us it’s ok to ask God. Think back to James 1:5-
    “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.”

    I see praying about something as a great test, one which does not go against the scripture you quoted.”
    ———————————-

    Although Christians are to pray always (1 Thessalonians 5:17)nowhere in the Bible does it say prayer is a test for truth. But the Bible _does say_ NOT to trust the feelings of our hearts (Proverbs 28:26; Jeremiah 17:9), nor can a person trust every spiritual witness (1 John 4:1-6).

    The Word of God (not our feelings)is our standard for truth (2 Timothy 3:15-17). The witness of the Holy Spirit will never contradict the Word he himself inspired—the Bible (2 Peter 1:21).

    Maedoc quoted James 1:5. Keep in mind that it was written to those who were _already_ Christians (they were Jewish Christians scattered abroad–see James 1:1)

    James 1 refers to the testing of one’s faith by trials and temptations (see verses 2-3, 12, and 13). If a person lacks wisdom, he is to ask God for wisdom (not truth) when faced with trials and temptations in order to respond in a godly fashion.

    David Buckna

  24. By choice I am no longer a member of the LDS church but still have a strong testimony. If I was to leave my faith I would never become or call myself a Christian because of people like Buckna. Most Christians do not spend there time trying to tear down others faith but no sooner did I joined the LDS church over 30 years ago and Christians started trying to discredit my testimony and the LDS church using the most deceptive methods I have ever seen. I know Mormons can be some what annoying at times with their proselytizing but most of the time they are just promoting a message of the good news of the fullness of the restored gospel. Mostly Mormons talk about other religions in the context of why it was necessary for a restoration. Some members and at times the LDS church has gone over the line and say things that may be offensive to others but it is normally condemned and discouraged by most members.
    Buckna, said:
    I understand that we must test the spirits but I can find no better way than to pray to Our Heavenly Father as His son Jesus Christ did and be directed on the way we should follow His spirit. Our prophets may not be up to 100% to Buckna’s approval but at least we have latter day prophets rather than a bunch of archeological science filtered through those TV preachers giving there option of what the scriptures mean.
    Although I think Buckna is pretty much a waste of time because he is going over and over all the same tired old arguments LDS have dealt with before I did learn what Full Preterists is. I to have a internet to make me look smart. Did you get that job yet?

  25. James 1:5. Keep in mind that it was written to those who were _already_ Christians (they were Jewish Christians scattered abroad–see James 1:1)

    James 1 refers to the testing of one’s faith by trials and temptations (see verses 2-3, 12, and 13). If a person lacks wisdom, he is to ask God for wisdom (not truth) when faced with trials and temptations in order to respond in a godly fashion.

    I am so glad that I do not need to ask God for truth. That lets me off the hook. Thanks Buckna you are slowly showing me how not to be a Christian. So if a scripture is written only to one group of people it does not apply to me. O’ this just gets better and better. I am going through my Bible now and cutting out all those scriptures that I no longer need to follow. Please Buckna tell us more.

  26. ” …he is to ask God for wisdom (not truth)…”

    This is getting good. So let me get this straight. Wisdom and truth a is not the same thing or can not be the same thing? What hair spliting. I am so glad we have Buckna to help us with such little important details. I will be able to sleep better knowing Buckna is watching out for me. We love you man.

  27. Buckna, said:

    “But the Bible _does say_ NOT to trust the feelings of our hearts (Proverbs 28:26; Jeremiah 17:9), nor can a person trust every spiritual witness (1 John 4:1-6).”
    LUKE
    30After Jesus sat down to eat, he took some bread. He blessed it and broke it. Then he gave it to them. 31At once they knew who he was, but he disappeared. 32They said to each other, “When he talked with us along the road and explained the Scriptures to us, didn’t it warm our hearts?” 33So they got right up and returned to Jerusalem.

    I think that you can not except the fact that we have had this witness and we are happy and full of the spirit. We invite you to come join us and find out what you are missing.