Jump to content


Uber Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About anonymous

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
  1. last/leastinline, What do you believe is the reason for your refusal to answer the above posed questions here on this forum?
  2. last/leastinline, Either you have forgotten---or---weren’t paying attention---or---disregarded completely anonymous’ previous response concerning contacting you via your personal contact information. To reiterate---there is NO NEED to do so---as the questions posed should not prove to be a problem in answering here on the forum, and especially not for someone who has been delivered from darkness into THE LIGHT---that is, for a born-again believer in YESHUA, WHO is THE TRUE LIGHT (John 1:9) and THE TRUTH (John 14:6), and in whom HIS SPIRIT/THE SPIRIT of TRUTH/THE HOLY SPIRIT dwells. It is true is it not, that you claim to believe---SOLA SCRIPTURA---thus the contents therein? It is also true is it not, that you are a member of a congregation (church) that claims to be “CHRISTian,” that is, believers and followers of CHRIST/MESSIAH YESHUA, yet blatantly discriminates against non-molokans? Are these “shameful and defiant declarations, nonsensical and Pharisaic assertions,” etc.---or---are they truthful assertions/statements? Rather than going off on your [emotionally charged but SCRIPTURALLY baseless] “Pharisaic” tirades, if you do not believe they are truthful assertions/statements, simply provide the truth. The questions are simple--- If THE LORD GOD HIMSELF “…shows no partiality” (Romans 2:11)---and JESUS died to ransom people “…from every tribe and language and people and nation…,” how can a congregation (church) claim to be “CHRISTian,” that is, believers and followers of CHRIST/MESSIAH JESUS, and show partiality, i.e., nashi and nee-nashi? By and on whose authority do molokans discriminate against non-molokans? Do you believe they are inspired by THE HOLY SPIRIT to do so? So again, as someone who claims to adhere to---SOLA SCRIPTURA---and someone who, in his own words, places “great value in face to face passion for Truth,” what are the SCRIPTURAL thus truthful answers to the above questions? P.S. Unfortunately, the situation here is no different than when YESHUA asked the Pharisees to answer truthfully "face to face with THE TRUTH/HIM," and they refused to do so and instead, were offended and angry because they knew an honest/truthful answer would expose their true selves and indict them as rebels against THE TRUTH/HIM aka wrongdoers. If you are honest/truthful with YESHUA and with yourself, you cannot help but see whose actions in this situation are truly---“Pharisaic.”
  3. last/leastinline, You keep referencing---SOLA SCRIPTURA (as though you actually believe the contents)---in which is found the following: “And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders I saw a LAMB standing, as though it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of GOD sent out into all the earth. And HE went and took the scroll from the right hand of HIM WHO was seated on the throne. And when HE had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before THE LAMB, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are YOU to take the scroll and to open its seals, for YOU were slain, and by YOUR blood YOU ransomed people for GOD from every tribe and language and people and nation, and YOU have made them a kingdom and priests to our GOD, and they shall reign on the earth.’” (Revelation 5:6-10) Now if THE LORD GOD HIMSELF “…shows no partiality” (Romans 2:11)---and JESUS died to ransom people “…from every tribe and language and people and nation…,” how can a congregation (church) claim to be “CHRISTian,” that is, believers and followers of CHRIST/MESSIAH JESUS, and show partiality, i.e., nashi and nee-nashi? If, in all honesty/truth you believe what---SOLA SCRIPTURA---says above, how do you, a member of such a congregation/church, reconcile the partiality/prejudice that molokanism teaches and exercises toward all who are “non-molokan” (nee-nashi) with the truthful teaching of---SOLA SCRIPTURA (which you keep referencing as though you actually believe the contents)---and the fact/truth that by HIS blood JESUS ransomed people “from every tribe and language and people and nation”? How can humans, created in the image of THE LORD GOD, and especially those who claim to be believers and followers of JESUS [THE] CHRIST, exhibit and exercise bias/partiality/prejudice toward other humans, created in the image of THE LORD GOD, who have been redeemed by HIS blood---when THE LORD GOD HIMSELF, through HIS blood, reconciled to HIMSELF all (black, brown, red, yellow, white) who believe in and follow HIM? By and on whose authority do molokans discriminate against non-molokans? Do you believe they are inspired by THE HOLY SPIRIT to do so?
  4. Is Is Possible?

    They cannot support their belief/faith in mgr and his falsehoods with SCRIPTURE---precisely because the falsehoods they have accepted and believe are anti/un-SCRIPTURAL (proven on more than one occasion). Therefore, they will never be able to defend their position with THE LORD GOD’S word(s) aka THE HOLY SCRIPTURES---the two are irreconcilable---hence the silence. But instead of fessing up to the fact/truth of the matter, they continue to delude themselves, as did their beloved hero/leader/mentor/shepherd/god, with the distorted view that all who do not accept the falsehoods are apostates, unbelievers, have "left the faith of their forefathers," etc., etc., etc.---any and every excuse as absurd as it may be (and is, as seen in their posts). So sad….
  5. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    Guest newname’s silence and reluctance in providing an “accurate” translation of mgr’s originals (the ones he claims he has had for years) is deafening and speaks volumes---and it becomes even more obvious that he and his maximist brethren willfully choose to ignore the ugly truths concerning their beloved hero/leader/shepherd while continuing to lull themselves into the spiritual stupor that is their signature trademark. With the truth staring them in the face, you'd think they'd finally "get it"---but no, they volitionally do not want to do so---and so be it, their choice. Sad, very sad….
  6. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    Four (4) fairly lengthy posts, including repetitive complaints about the "elementary" and sloppy translation(s) of his beloved hero's "regurgitated" (in Guest newname's words) originals, but still no "accurate" translation from Guest newname of at least the two (2) short pages (paragraphs actually) of mgr's originals from book 10, the book wherein is found the infamous---указь (decree/edict)---which Guest newname was so worked up over. Makes one wonder concerning the credibility of Guest newname's reassurance that the Russian language would not be a hindrance to him---should be a snap for a person claiming to be proficient in Russian, yet here we are, still waiting....
  7. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    Guest newname, The time and energy put into your defensive (but inaccurate) responses, especially because of your “time constraints,” weren't necessary and actually a waste of your time and the readers’ time---all you need do is provide an “accurate” translation of mgr’s unaltered/unedited originals (“SECTION(S) MISSING” above) in English on this forum, and allow the readers to judge for themselves the content and context in which his memoirs were written. Simple…. Thank you.
  8. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    Guest newname, You may want to politely ask f/m/p to put a sock in it so that he stops embarrassing himself, you, and your kind every time he opens his mouth....
  9. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    So if Guest newname isn’t certain that the copies of THE HOLY SCRIPTURES we have today are error-free, how can he, with any certainty, believe and trust the SCRIPTURAL passages he presents as proof text for his statements? And how, on what basis, does he determine which SCRIPTURAL passages are error-free (true/truth) and which are not (erroneous/false/untrue---if that were the case, but isn't)? Guest newname’s conclusion regarding his uncertainty with respect to the veracity of THE HOLY SCRIPTURES--- ---not only speaks volumes concerning his uncertainty in the inerrancy and infallibility of THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, but highlights his [unspoken but spoken] emphasis on what, within the molokan community, is believed to be---the “spoken” word of THE LORD GOD (recall f/m/p’s insistence on “spoken” versus “written” [word]) aka what is believed by its congregants to be “prophetic utterance”---that is, when an individual comes out purportedly “in THE SPIRIT,” and utters whatever he utters. This is the reason Guest newname presented the SCRIPTURAL passages from John 16:13 above as proof text for that very perspective and belief. But one must question---does Guest newname “test” these so-called “prophets” and their so-called “prophetic utterances,” and if so, how? For example, suppose a “prophet” came out “in THE SPIRIT” during a wedding (as is typical in the molokan community) in the church Guest newname is a member of, and declared that every man in the congregation is allowed to have seven wives---as spoken by the prophet Isaiah---and even opened THE HOLY SCRIPTURES to passage 4:1 in the book of Isaiah, to “confirm” his “prophetic utterance.” How would Guest newname react? Would he accept the “prophet’s” declaration as “inspiration by/of THE [HOLY] SPIRIT,” and believe it is acceptable and approved by THE LORD GOD to acquire six more wives (presuming he is married and has one wife already)? Would he question and “test” the “prophet” and the declaration as to whether it was truly “by inspiration of THE [HOLY] SPIRIT”? And if so, why and how? How would he know if what the “prophet” declared was “of THE LORD GOD” thus true/truth? And how would Guest newname view that so-called "prophet" when he discovered that the so-called "prophetic utterance" was a falsehood/lie/untruth? Would he consider the person a "true" prophet [from THE LORD GOD] or a "false" prophet inspired by a spirit, yes, but which spirit---THE SPIRIT of TRUTH or a lying spirit? This would be no different than when mgr did it during his day, and what the spin doctors have done---and yet mgr's proponents accept and believe it to be true/truth, "oooohing" and "aaaahing" at what they have been brainwashed to believe is "spiritual profundity." It must be pointed out that because of Guest newname’s (and his maximist brethen’s) uncertainty with respect to the written word(s) of THE LORD GOD aka THE HOLY SCRIPTURES---as seen in his statements---it is perfectly understandable that he would underestimate and/or ignore the written word(s) of THE LORD GOD (JESUS) with respect to---prophecy (foretelling) as revealed by JESUS in the book of Revelation: “The revelation of JESUS CHRIST, which GOD gave HIM to show to HIS servants the things that must soon take place. HE made it known by sending HIS angel to HIS servant John, who bore witness to the word of GOD and to the testimony of JESUS CHRIST, even to all that he saw. Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.” (Revelation 1:1-3) As well as the admonition for adding and/or “taking away from the words of the prophecy of this book,” including the consequences for doing so: “I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, GOD will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. HE WHO testifies to these things says, ‘Surely I am coming soon.’ Amen. Come, LORD JESUS!” (Revelation 22:18-20) It is THE SPIRIT of CHRIST aka THE SPIRIT of TRUTH aka THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO gives all those in whom HE dwells, the understanding concerning future events prophesied and revealed in the book of Revelation, as well as in the entire HOLY SCRIPTURES (Old and New Testaments). In other words, all that is necessary for one to know concerning past, present, and future events with respect to THE LORD GOD’S---salvation and a right[eous] relationship with HIM---is contained in HIS written word(s) aka THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. And if one is uncertain with respect to its contents aka inerrant infallible absolute truth, he is akin to a ship without a rudder carried about by every wind [of doctrine] and destined for disaster….(as are mgr's devotees).
  10. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    RE: dhs’ editing of the previously altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition To give Guest newname an idea of how much and the type of editing that was done by the [initial] spin doctors of the published 1928 Russian [second] edition prior to dhs’ “compare and correct” translation project (which included dhs' own editing), here are some examples seen in dhs’ editing markings of the already altered/edited 1928 Russian [second] edition. In book 13, dhs crossed out article 9 completely (containing verses 1-6) with an arrow pointing to his notation which reads: Obviously, this means that what is article 9, which the spin doctors placed in book 13, did not belong in book 13, but in book 10 of the originals, between articles/chapters 15 and 16. In the same book (13), under article 10, regarding verses 1-5, dhs’ notation reads: Obviously, this means that verses 1-5 of article 10, which the spin doctors placed in book 13, did not belong in book 13, but in book 10 of the originals, between articles/chapters 15 and 16. In book 14, dhs’ notations read: Obviously, this means that the content in book 14 prior to chapter 7 verse 3-3/4 (when the originals of book 14 begin), was arbitrarily inserted by the spin doctors. Following the above notations, the text that follows is the name and/or title--- ---again with an arrow from that name/title to dhs’ notation which reads: Obviously, this means that the above name/title was taken from its original place in the [original] manuscripts (i.e., after chapter 25), and inserted as a heading at the very beginning of book 14. Following this name/title is article 1---under this article 1, were fourteen (14) Roman numerals (e.g., I, II, III, IV, etc.), and under each Roman numeral was a paragraph of text---dhs crossed out all the Roman numerals and instead spelled out the numbers (e.g., First.…; Second….; Third…., etc.), and inserted them to form the beginning of each paragraph. In other words, rather than the Roman numerals, dhs elected to begin each paragraph with cardinal numbers, spelling out the cardinal numbers, followed by the text, which looks like this: First, + [text]. Second, + [text]. Third, + [text]. Fourth, + [text]. The sentence that follows the above changes, is completely crossed out followed by dhs’ notations: “BK 14 order in manuscript--- 7:3-3/4 > 20 6:1 > 6:IV 5 all 21 > 25 1 all 26 all 3 and 4 2:1-XVII 7:1-3-3/4 27 all Not in BK 14 manuscript--- 28 XVIII 6: V 28, 29, 30 Obviously, the order of text in the altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition was not the order in book 14 of the originals, and some text added in the altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition which was not in book 14 of the originals. A few more examples and we're done for now. Under article 2 of the same book (14), there is an arrow that points to the notation: Obviously, article 2 in book 14 of the altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition, belongs after article/chapter 4 in the originals. Under this same article (2), as with article 1---all eighteen (18) Romans numerals are crossed out with the notation: Obviously, the content that is article 2 in the altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition, belongs after and/or is part of article/chapter 7 in the originals. The last paragraph under this article 2 has an arrow pointing to the notation: Obviously, this last paragraph of article 2 in book 14, belongs between articles/chapters 17 and 18 in book 10 of the originals. Article 3 of this same book (14) has an arrow pointing to the notation: Obviously, this means that article 3 in book 14 belongs after article/chapter 26 in the originals, and with corrections. And last but not least, article 5 of this same book (14) has this notation: Obviously, this means that article 5 in book 14, belongs after article/chapter 6, verse 4, in the originals. NOTE: Books 10 and 14 are the most heavily altered/edited of all the originals. One guess as to the reason? Correct---because the content in these two books in the originals is the most obscene/vile. There you are, Guest newname---a little lesson in how much and the type of editing done by both the spin doctors of the altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition, and the altered/edited published English translations (1983; 2005 second edition). (BTW, FYI---dhs' 1971 work copy consists of 204 pages---176 pages of his editing the already altered/edited published 1928 Russian [second] edition, and 28 pages of the "SECTION(S) MISSING" text, which is of course, mgr's originals.) Oh what a tangled web was woven to ensnare gullible and naive individuals like Guest newname who, to date, remain bewitched and mesmerized by the vain imaginings of a self-deluded wannabe "Christ" aka "the new Jewish Messiah"---
  11. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    No, the originals are not in photograph form---they are typewritten from the handwritten---and thank you for your offer regarding the originals, however, no need. And yes, dhs, along with the initial spin doctors (all of whom are more than likely deceased by now), will most definitely give answer to THE LORD GOD for such a heinous misdeed---more so dhs, as he continues to brazenly perpetuate the deceit to date. Woe unto him....
  12. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    ADDENDUM to the above previous post--- Almost forgot---here is a copy of the page containing book 4, article 11 from the altered/edited 1928 Russian edition (001.bmp), on which page are dhs' own editing "markings"---and again, please NOTE dhs' marking---SECTION MISSING---specifically, verse two (2) under article 11, which---SECTION MISSING---of course, is mgr's original (002.bmp) for Guest newname's "accurate" translation into English. 001.bmp 002.bmp
  13. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    Here is text from both---mgr’s unedited/unsanitized originals, and---dhs’ “sanitized” second edition of his translation of the 1928 Russian edition---for comparison: This is book 4, article 11, from the beginning---in mgr’s [unedited/unsanitized] originals: And here is book 4, article 11, from the beginning---in dhs’ edited/sanitized second edition (2005) of his 1928 Russian edition translation from Russian into English (black book): How about that omission and revamping job---everything in RED in mgr's originals has been entirely omitted, and the partial sentences in RED in dhs' perversion [of mgr's originals] have been reconstructed to give them a completely different meaning than that of the author. Deceitful, deceitful, deceitful---shameful, shameful, shameful.... P.S. If “regurgitation” is what Guest newname thinks of his beloved hero/leader/mentor/shepherd’s [unaltered/unedited original] memoirs---okay---although it is a tad disrespectful and hypocritical of his faithful one to do so, but again, his prerogative.
  14. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    This has to be one of the top ten jokes of the century--- Guest newname must be jesting---“the faith that they were born in….abandoned the faith of your forefathers”? If that is the case, Simeon Uklein and every person who is a member of the molokan community and considers himself “molokan,” including Guest newname, are "apostates" who have “abandoned the faith of their forefathers,” namely---Russian Orthodoxy. And according to Guest newname’s way of thinking, if a Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, Mormon, etc., who was “born into” his respective belief system (Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, Mormonism, etc.), but at some point in life, accepts JESUS as LORD and SAVIOR, is born again by THE HOLY SPIRIT/SPIRIT of TRUTH, thereby converting to CHRISTianity, he is an “apostate.” Really….Guest newname’s intelligence has been overestimated---he’s beginning to sound like f/m/p even though a tad more articulate. Goodness, the foolish ideas maximisti foster and entertain….simply incredible. P.S. BTW, those "sinistral molokans," as Guest newname's beloved hero/leader/mentor/shepherd referred to them in his memoirs, were those individuals who opposed (and did the right thing to report him to the authorities) the pedophilic megalomaniac's lewd/sinful behavior and demands made upon the young "chaste maidens" and their parents (threatening and cursing both the daughters and parents if they didn't comply with his wanton ways) on whom he cast his eyes for his fantasy fiefdom aka "New Israel" aka his "Zion" which he attempted to model after King Solomon along with his multiple wives and concubines. That---was the reason for the authorities' involvement and consequently, his incarceration. He went to prison and "suffered" for---women, two in particular (his first two "spiritual wives") that he himself names in his memoirs---his "first" wife---Marafina, and his "second" wife---Stenya/Sterafina (the so-called "prophetess"---if so, who was Marafina? Another "prophetess"? And then there were---Varya, Leksya, Vasilisa, Manya, and Grunya---"prophetesses" as well?), as he so lovingly refers to them in his unaltered/unedited memoirs---until---they (and the other [new] seven girls) married normal young men (whom he referred to as "sons of satan incarnate")---then all hell broke loose (literally), and this too, he spewed in filthy language in his unaltered/unedited memoirs, cursing them, their husbands (whom he called "sons of satan incarnate"), and their children. And to his perverted way of thinking, he believed that in his incarceration [which in truth, was for his lascivious behavior which he attempted to masquerade as "spiritual," and terrorizing families], he was "suffering" for---the truth. It is also the reason he was livid with his two so-called "prophets," Emilian and Fetice, who allowed the girls to marry normal young men in his absence, especially after his specific instructions to save them for him since he was their "eternal husband"---all this and more contained within the unaltered/unedited memoirs of an arrogant narcissistic pedophile aka mgr.
  15. Clark Street Is Recruiting

    Guest newname, In the process of providing an “accurate” English translation of mgr’s claim in book 10, namely, that the decree/edict originated with and was commanded by---THE SPIRIT of CHRIST---it would be greatly appreciated if you would be kind enough to provide an “accurate” English translation of the decree/edict itself. Here is mgr’s original said decree/edict (two pages---page one: 002.bmp & page two: 003.bmp): 002.bmp 003.bmp Edited book 10 (between articles 17 & 18).docx Accompanying mgr’s originals above is the preceding page (Edited book 10 between articles 17 & 18.docx) from the---published 1928 Russian [second] edition with dhs’ editing “markings.” Please NOTE dhs’ “marking”---SECTION MISSING---between articles 17 and 18 on this page, which SECTION MISSING is of course, mgr’s originals above, confirmed by dhs himself in his 1971 work copy in his preface to this particular section (seen in mgr's originals of the decree/edict above)--- Guest newname may wish to ask himself the question---what does this say about the published 1928 Russian edition from which dhs translated the published English editions (1983; 2005)? If he is honest with himself, he will see and need to admit that obviously the published 1928 Russian edition was altered/edited, and some sections [of mgr’s originals] were entirely omitted (as seen in this one example of many) by spin doctors prior to dhs’ involvement. The purpose of dhs’ 1971 work copy, expressed in his own words on the cover page of his 1971 work copy, confirms this: 005.bmp dhs’ mission was to---compare---the published 1928 Russian [second] edition with---the existing available original manuscripts, and correct---the published writings of mgr, which of course, was the published 1928 Russian [second] edition (shown on the cover page of dhs’ 1971 work copy above), on which dhs made his own editing markings, and from which he translated his “compared and corrected” edited version into English. It is also obvious that dhs’ translated English editions are not “complete error-free” copies by any means, as they too, have been altered/edited and the---SECTION MISSING---text has been completely omitted. So when Guest newname makes reference to the published 1928 Russian [second] edition and/or the published English edition(s) (1983; 2005) as proof text for his argument(s), as he did below--- ---it becomes obvious that he does not know of what he speaks since what he speaks of is not, repeat, not mgr’s unaltered/unedited originals, but the altered/edited forgery that is the published 1928 Russian [second] edition and/or the published English editions (1983; 2005). But translating mgr’s originals above is an opportunity for Guest newname to actually learn the truth concerning mgr’s claims, including but not limited to, the claim in question---that the decree/edict in book 10 came from and was commanded by---THE SPIRIT of CHRIST. And if courageous enough, be willing to compare mgr's claim and the details of the decree/edict with THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, and share his findings with the readers here on this forum. However, unless Guest newname is truly a believer and follower of---THE TRUTH/JESUS (John 14:6a), and HIS SPIRIT (THE SPIRIT of CHRIST aka THE SPIRIT of TRUTH) resides within him, he too, like his predecessor spin doctors aka so-called “elders” (including the “elder-by-default,” dhs), and his maximist brethren---will deny/reject, continue to make excuses, and attempt to camoflauge the ugly facts concerning their beloved hero/leader/mentor/shepherd, etc., etc., etc.---to the extent of disbelieving, spinning, and suppressing the truths of THE HOLY SCRIPTURES ([Western] Protestant and/or [Eastern] Orthodox [minus the Apocrypha]). P.S. Here is a bit of background info from book 10 that may provide Guest newname with some insight into the decree/edict above. These sections are not as lengthy as the decree/edict (with the exception of book 10, article 15, beginning with verse 8---which is three pages of mgr's originals), and shouldn't prove to be a problem for Guest newname to read and provide "accurate" translations of these---SECTION(S) MISSING---into English before he embarks on doing so with the decree/edict itself. Here, in the following format, is: 1) Book 10, article 10, verses 1-2 011.bmp --- altered/edited 1928 Russian [second] edition with dhs' editing "marking"---SECTION MISSING* (*mgr's originals) 005.bmp --- mgr's originals 2) Book 10, article 11, verse 6 & article 12, verse 1 012.bmp --- altered/edited 1928 Russian [second] edition with dhs' editing "marking"---SECTION MISSING* (*mgr's originals) 013.bmp --- mgr's originals 3) Book 10, article 13, verses 2-5 014.bmp --- altered/edited 1928 Russian [second] edition with dhs' editing "marking"---SECTION MISSING* (*mgr's originals) 015.bmp --- mgr's originals 4) Book 10, article 15, verses 8-10 016.bmp --- altered/edited 1928 Russian [second edition] with dhs' editing "marking"---SECTION MISSING* (*mgr's originals) 017.bmp --- mgr's originals 018.bmp --- mgr's originals 001.bmp --- mgr's originals Happy reading and translating, Guest newname....looking forward to your "accurate" translation(s) into English.