Could you give me, say, five examples of good fruit and five examples of bad fruit? TIA

Your jezzus is not coming back. Your church is a joke. The revelations of Joseph Smith are a hoax. Or perhaps you can tell me the name of the king written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 and why Joseph Smith called the Egyptian god a slave?

If you can't do that then f*** off and shove your temple tokens up your ass. Then let the holy ghost fill you with pleasure.

Paul O

Daniel was a d***a** and was eaten by lions. Jonah was eaten by a fish. Jezzus was crucified. All your prophets were f*****g losers!

Then there was bitchy St. Paul who deserved every beating he ever got. f*** those guys. They are NOT coming back. They are history. Jezzus is dead and there is no resurrection. It's a joke. Just like the name of the king written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 is a joke.

Pay lay ale!

Paul O

Shulem, you are one of those unhallowed hands, as well as being an ignorant troll!

It is amusing to see that the apologetic on this statement is that it now means having a couple of Mormons in each part of the world regardless of the billions of non Mormons.

Daniel does not state when it will happen, I personally don't think that will happen until the end of the millennium. The Book of Revelations tells of the entire group of the saints being encamped about and assaulted by the wicked at the end of the millennium, and then fire comes from heaven and destroys them, and guess what? There are nothing but saints left!

It ain't going to happen, dude. Just like there is no real kings name in Facsimile No. 3 and all of the Explanations therein offered by Joe Smith were total lies. Face up. Your prophet lied to you. You can't and won't defend those Explanations because you know you're stuck and I'm laughing at you. Also, the god Anubis is not a black slave as Joseph said. The Mormon prophet was an ignorant troll! And you're his sucker boy. So, pay your 10 percent and do the bidding of your silly pretended prophets.

Come on you silly little boy. Defend the Facsimile No. 3 and bear your testimonkey that you know the Explanations are true. Make me laugh. Provide intertainment. Mormon testimonkeys are a total joke and you're a clown.



Joe Smith the liar! Facsimile No. 3!

Paul O

Despite Paul's broken-record argument the fact is there hasn't been an effective counter-argument. He's onto something, and the Mormons who come here need to pay attention to what he's saying.

- VRDRC

They might benefit from it, if he would change his avatar. They see that, and <blink> on ignore.

Yea, the critics were saying the same thing about the Book of Mormon's "at Jerusalem" statement regarding Christ's birth until new evidence showed that the critics were the trolls!

Care to rebut (using any source or reference material you like) Paul's claim that Joseph's translation of facsimilie 3 is made up nonsense?

Your faith is shaken you mindless bent. There is no king's name in Facsimile No. 3. No new evidence will make one magically appear. You only lie to yourself in the idea that new evidence could produce a name and vindicate your lying prophet. Don't you see how you're lying to yourself? The writing is already on the wall for everyone to read. The name is not there. Joseph Smith thought to fool everyone by saying a king's name was in the writing -- how simple for you to even understand! You've been duped.

Who is the troll here? YOU! You would have people believe there is still a king's name writtin in the writing even though there isn't. What the hell is wrong with you? Do you have any values at all that pertain to being honest or are you altogether born in lies?

Your Book of Abraham is a joke. Joseph Smith made it up. Worse, he called an Egyptian god a slave and your church has not apologized for this insult towards another religion. YOU, like your church are deceivers. How does it feel to be wagged by the devil, you little imp?



I mock your Book of Abraham and ram Facsimile No. 3 down your throat and stuff it down with my little finger. Choke on it. Your apologetic responses are utterly DOA. You've lost. There is no king's name. And would you care to elaborate on the other Explanations of Facsimile No. 3? Bear your testimonkey?



Paul O

The lying jackass can't. Not even Hugh Nibley can help him. Doesn't he know that the church has conceded this issue and more or less confessed that their is no king's name in the Egyptian writing? The church offers no explanation to why there is no name. The church doesn't explore the ramifications resulting in this obvious error from their founding prophet. The church is headed by men who are afraid to face up. So, they just ignore it and hope that the faithful members won't think about it or ask questions. If someone were to ask questions about this in Sunday School, they would appear as if they are questioning their testimonkey and challenging the authority of the church. So, nothing is said while all along Mormons continue to practice their faith in Facsimile No. 3 in fear.

Shall we look for the words PAY LAY ALE in the writing of Facsimile No. 3 and raise our hands 3 times while doing it? Wouldn't that be a waste of time? So also are Joseph Smith's Explanations a waste of time because they aren't real -- they are lies straight from his mouth.

Paul O

Yep, the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are iron clad proof that Joseph Smith was a false revelator and that he couldn't understand Egyptian, let alone read a single word from it.

Just imagine how poor John Gee must feel knowing he can't read a king's name even though Joseph Smith said it was written therein. And just imagine how poor John Gee feels about Joseph Smith calling Anubis (mighty god of Egypt) a slave! Surely it irks him. But, John Gee will continue to live in the lies because lies sustain him, literally

Paul O

What flavor of expert do you like? There have been some that say it's authentic and some who say it's a sham. It's just like the BofM debate.

Tuck tail and run you coward. Even LDS Egyptologist John Gee from BYU can read the writing in Facsimile No. 3 correctly. He's an expert Egyptologist and I trust his reading of the same. Do you? But do I trust Joe Smith to read Egyptian? Hell no! He was a liar and a fraud. Modern science has proven it, including BYU's own Egyptologist.

There is nothing authentic about the Joseph Smith Explanations of Facsimile No. 3. They are a total sham. Only a fool would even attempt to defend those ridiculous lies. And for you to even think that it's debatable proves you have s*** in your brain.

Paul O

You f*****g dumb ass! The Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are not debatable in any manner. They are total lies.

Debate me, if you like.

1. What's the king's name?
2. Why is the god Anubis called a slave?

If this debate is just like the Book of Mormon then you should have something to say. Otherwise, pack your Mormon ass up and shake the s*** out of your brain and move on -- you troll.

Paul O

You are trying to make it sound like an even split, which is erroneous.

Your statement, if meant to be accurate, should say:
"There have been very, very few that say it's authentic and the overwhelmingly vast majority who say it's a sham. It's just like the BofM debate."

I've yet to hear a single Latter-day Saint bear their testimony that they know the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are true and correct. Not a single Mormon has ever expressed their belief in those answers provided by Joseph Smith. Heck, President Monson doesn't even believe them because he has never testified of them in public to my knowledge. I'd like to see Monson get his sorry ass up in Conference and tell the saints that the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 are true and that the Holy Ghost can make your heart burn with those truths as you read them. But Tommy-boy remains silent, for good reason.

Mormonism is a sham. Can anyone prove me wrong in saying that? If so, give me the name of the king and tell me why the god Anubis is a slave.

Paul O

I'm not an Egyptologist, and probably the prophet is not either. Why don't you ask FAIR and see what they tell you?

Are FAIR Egyptologists?