Is God unable to create in kind? [Archive] - Page 2

Radix

03-09-2010, 05:41 AM

A self-existent God is actually beyond the comprehension of anyone from what I've seen, not just LDS. Most a believer in a "self existent" God does not recognize that believing in such believes in a God who is the author of all evil, as logic would dictate. Its either, believing in a self-existent God requires upon such an one to be the source of all evil, or to believe in a self existent God is to throw logic and reason out the window. Either way, the question of the OP exposes the silliness of mainstreamism.

love,
stem

Loving stem, God has given all of us some degree of choice. Including angels. The kind of god you propose is nothing more than a computer programmer. That is a god who is not looking for love, but strictly for obedience to build up himself. Love does not come from a set program. The evil comes from the decisions of men and angels.

Death came about because of sin. Now one goofy thing here is that LDS believe that their god wanted Adam to sin. So on one hand you tell us you cannot believe in a self existent god because of sin and evil, yet you believe in a god who commanded Adam to sin. Sadly you are the one who accuses us of throwing all logic out the window.

nrajeff

03-09-2010, 10:51 AM

Loving stem, God has given all of us some degree of choice. Including angels.
---That is not what some of your C-A-R-M (typing it slowly to prevent letter mixups) have said. They have said that if a person has any choice in choosing his destiny, then it would take away God's absolute sovereignty. What if God predestinated Person A for hell, but Person A chose to believe in TULIP - Trinitarianism? That person would end up saved, which would undermine God's decision to send him to hell. That's why your buds say that NO ONE is able to choose "the Jesus of the Bible" on their own--no one is able to even DESIRE to believe in Jesus--unless God "invades" or "indwells" and saves that person FIRST, after which the person wants to believe, and ends up believing, repenting, and ends up obeying God's commandments. Your buds have also said that if a person has been pre-fated for eternity in hell, there is NOTHING that person can do to change that fate. NOTHING. If your lotto number didn't get put into the Powerball barrel back when the lottery was being rigged, er, created, then your number has NO chance of being drawn out with all the other winners. Ever. You had no chance and there is nothing you can do about it. It's not as if you can go back in time and sneak your number into the barrel. You were a pre-determined LOSER. And for those lucky enough to have had THEIR numbers put into the winners' barrel, there is NOTHING they can do to mess that up and go to hell. It's IMPOSSIBLE for them to go OFF the path that leads to eternal life. They have no choice in the matter, there is no choice they could make that would send the pre-saved to hell. That is TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination in a nutshell.

The kind of god you propose is nothing more than a computer programmer. That is a god who is not looking for love, but strictly for obedience to build up himself.
--What? The god you described is not what LDS believe. It's what modern TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination teaches. If God created YOU, and YOU were born with the guilt of original sin IN YOUR DNA--which GUARANTEES that you WILL sin and rebel against God and do nothing that is good, no not one---then it's the God of TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination who is the programmer. Time once again for my "Hasbro Evil Robot Kit" parable...

James Banta

03-09-2010, 11:10 AM

---That is not what some of your C-A-R-M (typing it slowly to prevent letter mixups) have said. They have said that if a person has any choice in choosing his destiny, then it would take away God's absolute sovereignty. What if God predestinated Person A for hell, but Person A chose to believe in TULIP - Trinitarianism? That person would end up saved, which would undermine God's decision to send him to hell. That's why your buds say that NO ONE is able to choose "the Jesus of the Bible" on their own--no one is able to even DESIRE to believe in Jesus--unless God "invades" or "indwells" and saves that person FIRST, after which the person wants to believe, and ends up believing, repenting, and ends up obeying God's commandments. Your buds have also said that if a person has been pre-fated for eternity in hell, there is NOTHING that person can do to change that fate. NOTHING. If your lotto number didn't get put into the Powerball barrel back when the lottery was being rigged, er, created, then your number has NO chance of being drawn out with all the other winners. Ever. You had no chance and there is nothing you can do about it. It's not as if you can go back in time and sneak your number into the barrel. You were a pre-determined LOSER. And for those lucky enough to have had THEIR numbers put into the winners' barrel, there is NOTHING they can do to mess that up and go to hell. It's IMPOSSIBLE for them to go OFF the path that leads to eternal life. They have no choice in the matter, there is no choice they could make that would send the pre-saved to hell. That is TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination in a nutshell.

--What? The god you described is not what LDS believe. It's what modern TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination teaches. If God created YOU, and YOU were born with the guilt of original sin IN YOUR DNA--which GUARANTEES that you WILL sin and rebel against God and do nothing that is good, no not one---then it's the God of TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination who is the programmer. Time once again for my "Hasbro Evil Robot Kit" parable...

I don't believe that you are representing what the Christians on CARM believe in anything point of doctrine.. You twist my words here so I KNOW you do the same thing to those at CARM. You can't even understand TULIP though it has been clearly explained to you.. You can't believe God that ALL have sinned so I can't believe you that many that have existed are pure and sin free.. What you teach doesn't align with the scripture.. It is exactly what Smith taught.. You show that you are wiling to believe a man while you reject the teaching of the Holy Spirit He gave us in the Bible.. This is NOT the signs of being a child of God, a Christian.. IHS jim

nrajeff

03-09-2010, 01:55 PM

I don't believe that you are representing what the Christians on CARM believe in anything point of doctrine.. You twist my words here so I KNOW you do the same thing to those at CARM.
---Are you calling me a liar, Jim? Here is some logic for you: If I DISAGREE with what I say your buddies have said, but YOU say that your buddies never said such a thing, then it could mean that your buddies and I actually AGREE. Are you willing to accuse your buddies of agreeing with an LDS?

You can't even understand TULIP
---Can YOU understand it? Can YOU make sense of it? Because your buddies often end up essentially admitting that it's a "mystery, who are you to question it, God's ways are higher than our ways, etc."

though it has been clearly explained to you..
---LOL. Did you even READ Mesenja's post? Did you read Spurgeon's sermon?
It's been said that modern Calvinism (neo-Calvinism?) is so foreign to previous Christian doctrine that even John Calvin would have problems with it. And yet you want to DEFEND it? Why?

You can't believe God that ALL have sinned
---What I can't believe is that GOD ever SAID that all people, including fetuses that die before birth, HAVE sinned. Can you prove that GOD ever said such a thing? I can find where PAUL wrote something to the ROMAN SAINTS, but last I checked, Paul was not God, and Paul was not even QUOTING God.

Billyray

03-09-2010, 07:48 PM

---What I can't believe is that GOD ever SAID that all people, including fetuses that die before birth, HAVE sinned. Can you prove that GOD ever said such a thing? I can find where PAUL wrote something to the ROMAN SAINTS, but last I checked, Paul was not God, and Paul was not even QUOTING God.

Jeff, this is the doctrine of "inherited sin"--Adam's sin was imputed to mankind and thus we are considered sinful even without breaking any law (see verse 13 below). But the fact is that we do sin, everyone of us, everyday. We have an inherited sin nature--we sin because of this nature. However sin and accountability are not the same, as we have previously discussed. A child can sin but may not be accountable for that sin.

Romans 5 (NIV)
Death in Adam, Life in Christ
12Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned
13for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
14Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

Also notice David in this Psalm talks about HIS sins and verse 5 states, "I was brought forth in iniquity" and in context this is speaking about himself, not his mother which some like to incorrectly conclude.
Psalm 51 (ESV)
1 Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy
blot out my transgressions.
2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin!
3 For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
4 Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you may be justified in your words
and blameless in your judgment.
5Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
and in sin did my mother conceive me.

From the ESV Study Bible notes
"Ps. 51:5 I was brought forth (that is, from the womb) in iniquity. David thinks of himself as a sinful person from the time of his birth. in sin did my mother conceive me. The idea is not that the act of conception was itself sinful, but (as the parallel first line shows) that each worshiper learns to trace his sinful tendencies to the very beginning of his existence—not only from birth but even from before that, to conception."

Father_JD

03-09-2010, 11:18 PM

JD attempted this, trying to bring down the LDS beliefs with his own-game too.

"Attempt"?? I succeeded, stemmy. Why you can't see the obvious is beyond me!

Let's consider your point for a sec...if God to LDS "took Satan's intelligences and formed him into a spirtual child knowing full well how he would turn out" then how can one force upon God the conception of all of Satan's evil deeds and designs?

Because IF your Mormo-deity IS OMNISCIENT (which in reality you DENY, although you're still trying to affirm that he is), he KNEW ALL OF HIS LITTLE SPIRIT CHIL'S FUTURE ACTIONS..."EVIL DEEDS AND DESIGNS"...So, stem, does the Mormo-deity possess OMNISCIENCE or NOT???

You're basically saying he does NOT!!:rolleyes:

It seems you are attempting to force LDS to arrive at a conclusion what "intelligences" are exactly and how they formed our spirits--neither of which is conclusively known by LDS.

Irrelevant, stemster. But IF your Mormo-god is really OMNISCIENT, he couldn't help but KNOW ALL OF LUCIFER'S FUTURE EVIL DEEDS AND ACTIONS. Again, stem...WHY can't you see this? :confused:

The second problem with your attempt to bring LDS beliefs down with your own (a logical fallacy) is that to LDS Lucifer's rebellion was a repeat or copy of previous rebellions and evils already practiced through eternity. Seeing as they were done for eternity past, your attempted implied conclusion doesn't hold since God to LDS did not conceive of the evils that were practiced for eternity past already.

Stem, stem, stem. You just DENIED that Mormo-god is "omniscient". All mormo-god can do is GUESS what Lucifer would do BASED UPON "PREVIOUS REBELLIONS AND EVILS ALREADY PRACTICED THROUGH ETERNITY. Therefore, Mormo-god does NOT POSSESS OMNISCIENCE, NOR ANY KIND OF FOREKNOWLEDGE. You denied it, dude. THINK, stem. Please THINK!! :eek:

The third problem you face with your attempt to bring down LDS beliefs with your own is that doing such does not address the problems your belief system has. Its deflection, which most a mainstreamer resorts to when confronted with challenges of his/her faith.

love,
stem

LOL. Well, stemmy, you still don't get it, do you?? :cool:

Radix

03-10-2010, 07:31 AM

---That is not what some of your C-A-R-M (typing it slowly to prevent letter mixups) have said. They have said that if a person has any choice in choosing his destiny, then it would take away God's absolute sovereignty. What if God predestinated Person A for hell, but Person A chose to believe in TULIP - Trinitarianism? That person would end up saved, which would undermine God's decision to send him to hell. That's why your buds say that NO ONE is able to choose "the Jesus of the Bible" on their own--no one is able to even DESIRE to believe in Jesus--unless God "invades" or "indwells" and saves that person FIRST, after which the person wants to believe, and ends up believing, repenting, and ends up obeying God's commandments. Your buds have also said that if a person has been pre-fated for eternity in hell, there is NOTHING that person can do to change that fate. NOTHING. If your lotto number didn't get put into the Powerball barrel back when the lottery was being rigged, er, created, then your number has NO chance of being drawn out with all the other winners. Ever. You had no chance and there is nothing you can do about it. It's not as if you can go back in time and sneak your number into the barrel. You were a pre-determined LOSER. And for those lucky enough to have had THEIR numbers put into the winners' barrel, there is NOTHING they can do to mess that up and go to hell. It's IMPOSSIBLE for them to go OFF the path that leads to eternal life. They have no choice in the matter, there is no choice they could make that would send the pre-saved to hell. That is TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination in a nutshell.

--What? The god you described is not what LDS believe. It's what modern TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination teaches. If God created YOU, and YOU were born with the guilt of original sin IN YOUR DNA--which GUARANTEES that you WILL sin and rebel against God and do nothing that is good, no not one---then it's the God of TULIP/Sovereignty/Predestination who is the programmer. Time once again for my "Hasbro Evil Robot Kit" parable...

As expected. Nothing here addresses anything I said. Jeff once again is talking to hear his own ears roar. When you want to be a big boy and engage in a discussion, let me know. Otherwise, when even respond? Maybe its just your LDS programming. Do not actual deal with what has been brought up, do not use your own mind to discuss issues. If you use your own mind, it may not be in agreement with your bishop.

And just you your informed, no one is good enough to be forgiven. No one is capable of impressing God except those who realize who He is and fall in shame of their sin at His feet.

James Banta

03-10-2010, 08:23 AM

[nrajeff;50450]---Are you calling me a liar, Jim? Here is some logic for you: If I DISAGREE with what I say your buddies have said, but YOU say that your buddies never said such a thing, then it could mean that your buddies and I actually AGREE. Are you willing to accuse your buddies of agreeing with an LDS?

Must I believe everything that a person says in order to ***ure them that they aren't lying? I don't think so.. I really believe that you are sincere in your post and tell the truth as you know it.. I just don't believe what you tell me is the truth. I believe you are parroting the lies you have been taught over the years.. It's strange to me that you could actually believe this stuff but you do and think you are stating truth.. None of the unique doctrines of mormonism are the truth.. They are all the lies of Joseph Smith..

---Can YOU understand it? Can YOU make sense of it? Because your buddies often end up essentially admitting that it's a "mystery, who are you to question it, God's ways are higher than our ways, etc."

Yes I agree, But God's ways are God's ways and in them there is no variance or shadow of turning.. What He has given to us as His will for our lives and salvation is His, then is no other way, no other will for us, nor can there ever be.. What His message is to us it is and it too is never changing.

---LOL. Did you even READ Mesenja's post? Did you read Spurgeon's sermon?
It's been said that modern Calvinism (neo-Calvinism?) is so foreign to previous Christian doctrine that even John Calvin would have problems with it. And yet you want to DEFEND it? Why?

Yes and so what? I have shown you FROM THE BIBLE. where the doctrines of TULIP are part of the doctrine presented in the New Testament.. It doesn't matter if another preacher disagrees or not. The Bible is the final word not anyone that disagrees with it.

---What I can't believe is that GOD ever SAID that all people, including fetuses that die before birth, HAVE sinned. Can you prove that GOD ever said such a thing? I can find where PAUL wrote something to the ROMAN SAINTS, but last I checked, Paul was not God, and Paul was not even QUOTING God.

I can show you in Gods's word what I have shown to you. Here is is one more time.

Romans 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God
Because this came by the hand of Paul you seem to want to reject it.. Fine than reject it. Just don't tell me you believe in the Bible while you do..

Yes this is from Paul but as He was moved by the Holy Spirit. That makes it God's word since the Holy Spirit is God. I would love hearing that you consider this p***age to be a lie, that it isn't God's word at all.. That will be very telling to all who read it just what it is you believe.. And that isn't a belief in God.

You reject that which has been given to us through a man who was a Real Apostle. A man who saw the risen Lord. Who others verified as having heard the evidence of that vision. Another who had been directed by God to give Paul back his sight. People who saw marvelous works of God being preformed by his hand. You go right on and deny such a man. I will hold these writings as though they were given directly by the mouth of Jesus. You go on and deny it.

IHS jim

stemelbow

03-13-2010, 03:26 AM

By this thesis you Stem would be evil as well.. You have had children and they have proved to be equal in the evil in their hearts as an murderer.. Once more you knew they would be but you brought them into the world anyway.. So are you responsible for their sins or are you merely a accessor after the fact? IHS jim

do you know what you're talking about? My argument does not rest on whether anyone knows evil will be practiced. It rests on your concept of God, by logical extension, being the sole source of evil since He obviously had to be the first one ever to conceive of the concept.

love,
stem

stemelbow

03-13-2010, 03:31 AM

"Attempt"?? I succeeded, stemmy. Why you can't see the obvious is beyond me!

Because IF your Mormo-deity IS OMNISCIENT (which in reality you DENY, although you're still trying to affirm that he is), he KNEW ALL OF HIS LITTLE SPIRIT CHIL'S FUTURE ACTIONS..."EVIL DEEDS AND DESIGNS"...So, stem, does the Mormo-deity possess OMNISCIENCE or NOT???

You're basically saying he does NOT!!:rolleyes:

Your attempt was in vain, JD, and this further attempt only furthers such. Its not a matter of whether God knew evil would be, its a matter of your beliefs forcing upon God to be the only one who originally conceived of all evil designs...long before Satan ever was.

Irrelevant, stemster. But IF your Mormo-god is really OMNISCIENT, he couldn't help but KNOW ALL OF LUCIFER'S FUTURE EVIL DEEDS AND ACTIONS. Again, stem...WHY can't you see this? :confused:

You actually make the irrelevant point. My argument does not suggest that since God knew of evil that means he's responsible for it. It suggests that evil would never be, if you take your beliefs to their logical conclusion, if He did not initially conceive of every evil design his creatures would do before He created them out of nothing. For LDS evil designs already were. evil beings already were.

Stem, stem, stem. You just DENIED that Mormo-god is "omniscient". All mormo-god can do is GUESS what Lucifer would do BASED UPON "PREVIOUS REBELLIONS AQND EVILS ALREADY PRAXCTICED THROUGH ETERNITY. Therefore, Mormo-god does NOT POSSESS OMNISCIENCE, NOR ANY KIND OF FOREKNOWLEDGE. You denied it, dude. THINK, stem. Please THINK!! :eek:

Simply you misunderstood me. We've been over this before so there's no point. You are still playing a silly game of twisting and running.

love,
stem

stemelbow

03-13-2010, 03:42 AM

Loving stem, God has given all of us some degree of choice. Including angels. The kind of god you propose is nothing more than a computer programmer. That is a god who is not looking for love, but strictly for obedience to build up himself. Love does not come from a set program. The evil comes from the decisions of men and angels.

I think you're wrong in your attempt to mischaracterize my position as proposing a God who is nothing more than a computer programmer. The last sentence of this paragraph is merely a deflection from my point. Allow me to ask you a few questions to get to the root of it.

Did God create ex nihilo in your opinion?

Did God know, and in fact, conceive of every deed any of His yet to be created creatures would do before He created them?

Thus, if God knew of every evil deed any of His creatures would do before He created them, then that would require that the evil that would be practiced originated in God's own conception, right? For instance Lucifer's rebellion has direct ties to God's knowledge before Lucifer ever was. If God did not conceive of Lucifer's rebellion before creating him from nothing, then Lucifer would never have rebelled. If that is not so, then God would not have really created lucifer from nothing knowing all that he would be.

If God created absolutely, that is from nothing essentially, then His creations are only a product of what He conceived of them to be. Taking your beliefs logically, God could very well have conceived of every non-existing creature, at the time before He created any, as that which would not do evil...But He did not. Thus, all evil is traced back to His own conception.

Death came about because of sin. Now one goofy thing here is that LDS believe that their god wanted Adam to sin. So on one hand you tell us you cannot believe in a self existent god because of sin and evil, yet you believe in a god who commanded Adam to sin. Sadly you are the one who accuses us of throwing all logic out the window.

But such is merely a matter of deflection. You see, even if as you suggest, "LDS believe that their god wanted Adam to sin", sin already was. Evil was already practiced. Thus evil itself cannot be traced back to God's conception for LDS. Logically speaking LDS are free from the conclusion that God is the source of evil, as mainstreamism, if logically considered, requires.

love,
stem

nrajeff

03-14-2010, 12:59 PM

Jeff, this is the doctrine of "inherited sin"--Adam's sin was imputed to mankind and thus we are considered sinful even without breaking any law (see verse 13 below).
----And that shows that God doesn't punish unfairly....how? This may sound crazy to Tulip-followers, but branding someone "guilty" for the crime of someone else seems somehow less than fair.

But the fact is that we do sin, everyone of us, everyday. ---Not all those fetuses. Defend your ***ertion by naming all the sins that you know all fetuses commit every day.

We have an inherited sin nature--we sin because of this nature.
----So it's fair to say that you believe God has programmed every single human being (except Adam and Eve) to automatically sin. And THAT is fair how, exactly? Does "setting us up for failure" ring a bell?

However sin and accountability are not the same, as we have previously discussed. A child can sin but may not be accountable for that sin.
---That is untrue if "sin" is the willful, knowing, deliberate rebellion against what a person knows is God's will. Just like in order for a homicide to even meet the definition of 1st-degree murder, it had to be done on purpose, by someone with the mental capacity to know it was wrong, and with premeditated malice. If it doesn't meet the definition, it's not 1st-degree murder.

You seem to want to do something ****ogous to accusing a retarded 1-year-old baby of murder, if that baby threw a rattle which hit the trigger of a gun which fired a bullet which fatally hit someone in the head.

Radix

03-14-2010, 01:26 PM

Again loving stem, the god you propose is NOTHING more than a computer programmer. The God who is creator of time and space knew he was taking a chance. If there is no choice, there is no love. You are nothing but an executable program.

I guess if you believe the god you worship also sinned, then sin was already in existence. But as for Christians, God is truly Holy. No one has to impart Holiness to Him.

Russianwolfe

03-14-2010, 02:29 PM

Again loving stem, the god you propose is NOTHING more than a computer programmer. The God who is creator of time and space knew he was taking a chance.

Interesting choice of words!!!!!!! If God was 'taking a chance', then that would mean that God did not know the outcome!!!!!????????? If God did not know the out come that makes him less than omniscient!!!!! Interesting choice of words!!!! Sure you don't want to take that back???????

Marvin

Father_JD

03-14-2010, 03:48 PM

Interesting choice of words!!!!!!! If God was 'taking a chance', then that would mean that God did not know the outcome!!!!!????????? If God did not know the out come that makes him less than omniscient!!!!! Interesting choice of words!!!! Sure you don't want to take that back???????

Marvin

I agree, Marvin. What Radix wrote is WHAT YOU BELIEVE. :D

Father_JD

03-14-2010, 03:57 PM

Russianwolfe

03-15-2010, 04:29 AM

I agree, Marvin. What Radix wrote is WHAT YOU BELIEVE. :D

Then you need to take a course in reading comprehension. He was stating his beliefs. Only I can state my beliefs.

Marvin

nrajeff

03-15-2010, 05:45 AM

Then you need to take a course in reading comprehension. He was stating his beliefs. Only I can state my beliefs.
Marvin

----Yeah, it seems that Radix has made a statement worthy of the "keeper" files.

Radix

03-15-2010, 04:52 PM

Interesting choice of words!!!!!!! If God was 'taking a chance', then that would mean that God did not know the outcome!!!!!????????? If God did not know the out come that makes him less than omniscient!!!!! Interesting choice of words!!!! Sure you don't want to take that back???????

Marvin

Another one putting unwanted words in my mouth. I NEVER said God would not know the outcome. You are forcing the issue as well that God would be nothing but a supreme programmer. No love in that.

Radix

03-15-2010, 04:53 PM

----Yeah, it seems that Radix has made a statement worthy of the "keeper" files.

Go for it. Just make sure your using my words and not what you are reading into it.

Father_JD

03-15-2010, 06:35 PM

Then you need to take a course in reading comprehension. He was stating his beliefs. Only I can state my beliefs.

Marvin

You missed my point, Marvin: What Radix wrote appears to be more in harmony with Mormon doctrine. ;)

Christians do have differing viewpoints regarding some things such as election and predestination.

We'd have to ask Radix exactly what he meant by what he wrote.

Father_JD

03-15-2010, 06:35 PM

Russianwolfe

03-15-2010, 06:59 PM

Another one putting unwanted words in my mouth. I NEVER said God would not know the outcome. You are forcing the issue as well that God would be nothing but a supreme programmer. No love in that.

When you take a change you don't know the outcome. If you know the outcome you aren't taking a chance. Its a sure thing.

You are the one who said that God took a chance. No one else.

Again, I ask if you want to take back what you said. It ain't turning out so good for ya!!.

Marvin

Father_JD

03-15-2010, 07:05 PM

You're right, Marvin. If one "takes a chance", one doesn't know the outcome. I think Radix simply misspoke.

Russianwolfe

03-15-2010, 07:15 PM

You're right, Marvin. If one "takes a chance", one doesn't know the outcome. I think Radix simply misspoke.

Thank you JD for a simple and courteous reply. Let's see if Radix will say the same thing.

Marvin.

James Banta

03-15-2010, 08:38 PM

---Not true. For a judge to be fair, he doesn't need to be everywhere simultaneously. He just needs to believe that it's important to treat people fairly, and act on that belief. I don't need to be omnipresent in order to treat each of my kids fairly. All I need to do is to take into account each child's individual circumstances, and not punish him for what he wasn't able to understand or do. In other words, I just need to be understanding and comp***ionate and empathetic. LDS believe that one of the things Jesus learned from His time on Earth as one of us, was empathy for our situation, which makes Him eminently qualified to be a fair judge of us.

I say this because the Bible is so clear that God has predestined some to salvation an some to wrath.. Unless God knows how these people will respond to His offer of salvation through the Blood of Jesus it would be unjust to make such an arbitrary choice.. Thats what it would be for the Mormon god Not for the God of Christianity than knows all things and is everywhere in all times present.. Of course you can always deny the Bible AGAIN.. IHS jim

nrajeff

03-16-2010, 06:06 AM

I say this because the Bible is so clear that God has predestined some to salvation an some to wrath.

---If unconditional predestination were totally clear, you'd think that half of Christendom wouldn't think they see Arminianism in it.

Unless God knows how these people will respond to His offer of salvation through the Blood of Jesus it would be unjust to make such an arbitrary choice..
---So you're saying that Radix is wrong to believe that

"The God who is creator of time and space knew he was taking a chance. If there is no choice, there is no love. (It would make each person) nothing but an executable program."

Of course you can always deny the Bible AGAIN.. IHS jim
---So you're accusing Radix of denying the Bible.

akaSeerone

03-16-2010, 07:41 AM

Where is your reference for that Radix quote?

Andy

Radix

03-16-2010, 11:38 AM

Thank you JD for a simple and courteous reply. Let's see if Radix will say the same thing.

Marvin.

There is frequently a better way to state something (at least with me), I should have stated that God does not predetermine for us whether we love Him or not.

Chance was not used in the sense of any unknown. It was used in the sense of risk.

nrajeff

03-16-2010, 11:41 AM

Look it up, Andy, I ain't doing your homework for you today.

James Banta

03-16-2010, 12:09 PM

---If unconditional predestination were totally clear, you'd think that half of Christendom wouldn't think they see Arminianism in it.

---So you're saying that Radix is wrong to believe that

"The God who is creator of time and space knew he was taking a chance. If there is no choice, there is no love. (It would make each person) nothing but an executable program."

---So you're accusing Radix of denying the Bible.

I have shown you how Arminianism works within the foreknowledge of God. They see things from man's perspective while trusting that God will save all who come to Him. Radix never said that he disagreed with me on that point. God takes no chances. He solved the problem of sin once for all. He did it all Himself so that it would be 100% PERFECT 100% truth.

Tell me if you went to a playground and offered every boy there the choice between a large Hersey bar and a small bit sized one which one do you KNOW they will choose? The Large one every time! Did that take away their choice because you already knew what they would choose? NO, they could have the small one if that is what they wanted.. Can't you see it yet? We have a choice to make, Life with God forever, or Death in the Lake of fire. It's still a choice unfettered by the fact that God already knows what you will choose.. IHS jim

James Banta

03-16-2010, 12:25 PM

Where is your reference for that Radix quote?

Andy

Jeff won't do any of the work to support his posts. He just tells people to read a book, or like this case sift through all the posts until you find the one he wants you to see so he can make his point..

While I don't believe a word he says about Radix it doesn't matter if he looks though Calvinistic lens or Armenian lens. Both believe that a person is saved by the Grace of God through faith in Jesus plus NOTHING.

While the Calvinistic person would say that a person who leaves the church to live in unbelief was never saved, the Armenian would say that they fell from grace.. Ok that is semantic. Unsaved of dropped from salvation either one will say that such a person needs to have Jesus in their heart.. Jeff is straining at a gnat.. IHS jim

Russianwolfe

03-16-2010, 07:02 PM

There is frequently a better way to state something (at least with me), I should have stated that God does not predetermine for us whether we love Him or not.

Chance was not used in the sense of any unknown. It was used in the sense of risk.

Using risk instead of chance changes nothing. It is a risk only if you cannot determine the out come. Risk or change, it is the same.

Marvin

Radix

03-16-2010, 07:36 PM

Using risk instead of chance changes nothing. It is a risk only if you cannot determine the out come. Risk or change, it is the same.

Marvin

Not hardly, otherwise your just a predetermined program.

I'm ***uming from your comments you do not think God has any insights what so ever about anything happening in the future.

Russianwolfe

03-16-2010, 08:32 PM

Not hardly, otherwise your just a predetermined program.

I'm ***uming from your comments you do not think God has any insights what so ever about anything happening in the future.

You ***ume wrong.

Marvin

nrajeff

03-16-2010, 08:35 PM

Jeff won't do any of the work to support his posts.

----Doesn't my survey, (which I did for Billyray so he could see the falsity of his claim to know exactly what LDS believe, and his claim to know that LDS believe those doctrines he listed) prove that you aren't telling the truth, Jim?

While I don't believe a word he says about Radix
--That's because you are in denial.

Billyray

03-16-2010, 10:22 PM

----Doesn't my survey, (which I did for Billyray so he could see the falsity of his claim to know exactly what LDS believe, and his claim to know that LDS believe those doctrines he listed) prove that you aren't telling the truth, Jim?

[/COLOR]
Just because you do not believe something does not mean that the LDS church does not teach that particular teaching. Your own leaders have taught many things in the past. Just because you are embarr***ed about them and deny that they were taught does not change the fact that they were taught by your inspired leaders.

nrajeff

03-17-2010, 06:20 AM

Just because you do not believe something
---Well, do you claim to know "exactly" what I believe...or don't you? :confused:

does not mean that the LDS church does not teach that particular teaching.
---So is your boast that you know exactly what LDS scriptures TEACH as official doctrine? Or is your boast that you know exactly what LDS members BELIEVE? Can you keep your story straight?

Your own leaders have taught many things in the past.
---Here we go with "Orson Pratt said....the Seer published..."

Hello? Question for you: Do you claim to know that LDS BELIEVE that what Pratt stated is true? That it's official doctrine? That it's TAUGHT as true, official doctrine? Or what? Just WHAT are boasting that you "KNOW, exactly"?

Just because you are embarr***ed about them and deny that they were taught does not change the fact that they were taught by your inspired leaders
---The only one who should be embarr***ed is YOU. Tell, me, Mr. "I know exactly what LDS believe about God" -- when you were on your alleged mission for the LDS church, did YOU believe those 7 supposed doctrines? Did YOU teach them to YOUR investigators? If the missionaries aren't teaching it, and if the Sunday School teachers aren't teaching it, then how credible, how TRUTHFUL, is your claim that LDS members BELIEVE what you claim we believe? How, in your mind, do people come to believe stuff that isn't taught? And how truthful can your NEW claim that we TEACH it be, really, if we're not teaching it?

Let's summarize: You claimed we believe things that we apparently DON'T believe, and so when you were caught in THAT false ***ertion, you changed your claim--you started saying, essentially "Well, it was allegedly ONCE TAUGHT, long ago, so that makes my claim that LDS believe it (present tense) somehow not a lie."

stemelbow

03-17-2010, 07:27 AM

Again loving stem, the god you propose is NOTHING more than a computer programmer. The God who is creator of time and space knew he was taking a chance. If there is no choice, there is no love. You are nothing but an executable program.

I notice you have run from the opportunity to respond directly to my post, and have chosen to deflect instead. Oh well...that's pretty typical around here. Anyway, I was wondering if you would expand upon your concept of God taking a chance. If God was taking a chance by creating, what chance was he taking? In what way was the very one who conceived of all evil deeds long before anyone or anything was created, according to your beliefs, taking a chance?

I guess if you believe the god you worship also sinned, then sin was already in existence. But as for Christians, God is truly Holy. No one has to impart Holiness to Him.

You have mischaracterized my words again. I understand your need to do such when faced with the logical arguments showing the foolishness of your beliefs...But such attempts are merely deflections--your attempts, in other words, are wrought with logical fallacies.

love,
stem

nrajeff

03-18-2010, 08:49 PM

Billyray

03-18-2010, 10:19 PM

Well, do you claim to know "exactly" what I believe...or don't you?

Jeff again you are caught in a lie. I was LDS and I know exactly what LDS believe about god and what you said is not what I said, but what YOU said.

Just so you know--these are characteristics of the LDS god.
1. A man who became a god
2. Was not god from everlasting to everlasting
3. Progressed in knowledge
4. Is married to many women
5. Had sex with his wifes in heaven to produce spiritual babies
6. Had sex with his daughter Mary to produce Jesus
7. Is one of many gods--polytheism.

Here is my quote in context. Recall the exchange. You made up a fabrication about your god and attributed it to me which was completely false. I then proceeded to give you a list of LDS beliefs about your god. You have yet to disprove this list. You may or may not believe what your leaders have taught.

Here we go with "Orson Pratt said....the Seer published..."

BTW I quoted your prophet Brigham Young from the Journal of Discourses.

But I find it odd that you throw one of your own leaders under the bus if you do not agree with what they have said. Orson Pratt was one of your own leaders. "Orson Pratt (September 19, 1811 – October 3, 1881) was a leader in the Latter Day Saint movement and an original member of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles." (Wikipedia) Do you think that Orson Pratt was wrong? What about your other inspired leaders were they wrong as well?

Billyray

03-18-2010, 10:23 PM

Billy, are you sensing that your allegations and attacks just ain't gonna fly here? Did you think you could come storming in here and bulldoze right over us? Did you think you'd have an easy time bee essing us into abandoning beliefs that we have been defending probably since before you were out of high school? Did you think you could attack with impunity? Did you think that we'd be handicapped by unfairly applied moderating, so we'd be unable to pick out inconsistencies in your attacks? If you thought that, I trust you are becoming disabused of those mistaken ***umptions.
I don't think it is easy to pry people away from false religions. These people have served false prophets and a false gospel most of their lives and most will not change even though it may become obvious to them that what their leaders have taught is false. Again you are using the a common LDS tactic of trying to discredit the messenger rather than the message. The LDS church is false. It teaches doctrine that are not Biblical. Yet the best you can do is to try and find a "gotcha" from one of my posts to try and bolster your belief in Mormonism. You are avoiding the real issue and that is the LDS believe a false god that has characteristics that are clearly not Biblical.

Billyray

03-18-2010, 10:34 PM

. . .when you were on your alleged mission for the LDS church, did YOU believe those 7 supposed doctrines?

I sure did.

Did YOU teach them to YOUR investigators?

Absolutely not.

If the missionaries aren't teaching it, and if the Sunday School teachers aren't teaching it, then how credible, how TRUTHFUL, is your claim that LDS members BELIEVE what you claim we believe?

Jeff you know the answer to this question. Milk before meat. You would never teach investigators these deeper doctrine. There are a lot of things that the LDS church teaches or has taught in the past that are not brought up with investigators or in a routine Sunday School lesson. Polygamous relationships of Joseph Smith was never brought up in a Sunday School cl*** that I ever attended and never brought up in missionary discussion--yet this is certainly a fact of history. Details of the Temple endowment are clearly not taught to investigators or in a Sunday School cl***--yet this is clearly taught by the LDS church.

nrajeff

03-19-2010, 11:27 AM

I sure did.

---And you ***umed that the vast majority of all the OTHER LDS believed all 7? Why? Even if they were taught as "secret" truths restricted to temple goers, that would only mean that a small minority of LDS believed them. Of course, the FACT is that at least 4,5, and 6 aren't taught in the temple or in any other place as doctrine. So WHY did YOU believe them? And, perhaps as least as important: Why do you think most of US do NOT subscribe to them? Are we just less-informed than you were? Are we less gullible? Or what?

Jeff you know the answer to this question. Milk before meat. You would never teach investigators these deeper doctrine.
--I would never teach people stuff that I myself don't subscribe to.

There are a lot of things that the LDS church teaches or has taught in the past that are not brought up with investigators or in a routine Sunday School lesson. Polygamous relationships of Joseph Smith was never brought up in a Sunday School cl*** that I ever attended and never brought up in missionary discussion--yet this is certainly a fact of history.
--But not a doctrine. History is for history cl*** sometimes. The issue is whether the church teaches all your 7 as doctrine, and if you could prove it does (which you can't, of course), your next step would be to show that the vast majority of LDS BELIEVE them. Which of course you can't do.

grindael

03-20-2010, 05:35 PM

Brigham Young gave a reason why his followers would not believe his doctrines:

"Some years ago, I advanced A DOCTRINE with regard to Adam being our Father and God. That [doctrine] will be a curse to many of the Elders of Israel, because of their folly with regard to it. They yet grovel in darkness, and will. It is one of the most glorious revealments of the economy of Heaven, yet the world hold[s] it [in] derision. Had I revealed the doctrine of Baptism for the dead instead of Joseph Smith, there are men around me who would have ridiculed the idea until doomsday, but they are ****** and ****** like the dumb ***." (10/8/1861, M****cript addresses of Brigham Young)

nrajeff

03-20-2010, 06:23 PM

Radix

03-21-2010, 07:15 AM

Well loving Stem, I'll answer your question again.

I think you're wrong in your attempt to mischaracterize my position as proposing a God who is nothing more than a computer programmer. The last sentence of this paragraph is merely a deflection from my point. Allow me to ask you a few questions to get to the root of it.

Can you explain how you are not trying to make God into nothing more than a programmer in these discussions?

Did God create ex nihilo in your opinion?

Yes He did. He also created love and choice. Your series of questions does not seem to allow for that.

Did God know, and in fact, conceive of every deed any of His yet to be created creatures would do before He created them?

Does God design that we do evil? No. God has the foreknowledge to know what we will do. But He is not the author of our sin. We are the author of our sins.

Thus, if God knew of every evil deed any of His creatures would do before He created them, then that would require that the evil that would be practiced originated in God's own conception, right? For instance Lucifer's rebellion has direct ties to God's knowledge before Lucifer ever was. If God did not conceive of Lucifer's rebellion before creating him from nothing, then Lucifer would never have rebelled. If that is not so, then God would not have really created lucifer from nothing knowing all that he would be.

Already answered.

If God created absolutely, that is from nothing essentially, then His creations are only a product of what He conceived of them to be. Taking your beliefs logically, God could very well have conceived of every non-existing creature, at the time before He created any, as that which would not do evil...But He did not. Thus, all evil is traced back to His own conception.

With no choice, there is no love. Only executable computer programs.

But such is merely a matter of deflection. You see, even if as you suggest, "LDS believe that their god wanted Adam to sin", sin already was. Evil was already practiced. Thus evil itself cannot be traced back to God's conception for LDS. Logically speaking LDS are free from the conclusion that God is the source of evil, as mainstreamism, if logically considered, requires.

love,
stem

LDS may not believe their God conceived evil, but your god seems to condone it as he did in your belief about Adam.

stemelbow

03-21-2010, 09:26 AM

Well loving Stem, I'll answer your question again.

Again would require you actually answered them to being with. But I'll take anything I can get from you folks.

Can you explain how you are not trying to make God into nothing more than a programmer in these discussions?

If I am not, I am not. There is no explanation. Your effort was to suggest my beliefs make God into a programmer. I am not trying to make God into anything, in fact. I am merely challenging your claims in this thread, so far.

Yes He did. He also created love and choice. Your series of questions does not seem to allow for that.

Great.

Does God design that we do evil? No. God has the foreknowledge to know what we will do. But He is not the author of our sin. We are the author of our sins.

I see you side-stepped the question and hence failed to answer it again. here it is again: "Did God know, and in fact, conceive of every deed any of His yet to be created creatures would do before He created them?"

Care to try again?

Already answered.

Actually no. My questions were quite direct, but your answers did not address them in every case. I do not see an answer to my questions here. Here is this question again:

"Thus, if God knew of every evil deed any of His creatures would do before He created them, then that would require that the evil that would be practiced originated in God's own conception, right?"

I add to that this one:

"If God did not conceive of Lucifer's rebellion before creating him from nothing, then Lucifer would never have rebelled, right?"

With no choice, there is no love. Only executable computer programs.

Interesting. I just explained how your beliefs force God, if taken logically, to be the very source of all evil, and your response was, it seems, that there had to be choice because without such there is no love? You do realize that the very logical conclusion that I laid out for you explains how, in essence, if your beliefs are true, no one has absolute choice (I'll re-explain below just for you). Thus, according to your logic, now, there is no love at all. Now its obvious, all according to your logic, God did not create love, even though you tried to sneak that in earlier.

All according to your beliefs, if taken logically: God created all things out of nothing. Before creating out of nothing, God conceived of every single deed, good or bad (but since no one does good then in actuality only bad), that each of His creations would do. For instance, before creating satan out of nothing, before Satan was in existence, God conceived of every evil act Satan would do long before Satan ever had the opportunity to conceive of those evil acts. On top of that, if God did not conceive of every evil act Satan would do, according to your beliefs, then Satan would not have done one evil act. All because God had to know, had to conceive of, really, every deed each of his creations would do before they exist[ed]. As a result, we all do only that which God conceived that each of us would do. Thus, any actual "choice" we make is traced back to God's conception.

These are the only conclusions to draw from your errant belief system.

LDS may not believe their God conceived evil, but your god seems to condone it as he did in your belief about Adam.

Not true. Nice attempted deflection though.

love,
stem

James Banta

03-21-2010, 10:52 AM

----Doesn't my survey, (which I did for Billyray so he could see the falsity of his claim to know exactly what LDS believe, and his claim to know that LDS believe those doctrines he listed) prove that you aren't telling the truth, Jim?

--That's because you are in denial.

I have been though every post you made in this thread and I saw no survey. I know you never asked me anything about mormon doctrine that I haven't known or wasn't able to look up quickly.. There have been many things you have said here that are NOT official LDS doctrine and if I tried to pin it on other mormons they would bock and say "That isn't official mormon doctrine".. There is a very wide divide between "official" LDS doctrine and what mormons actually believe.. It is a very wide gulf between the two..

I have a list of Unique mormon beliefs, while it isn't all inclusive it does explain that I do know what mormonism teaches, official or not.. Most of these were taken from what I was taught as a mormon. I have listed references from mormon doctrine as they apply..

1. Melchizedek priesthood offices of Elder and Seventy, High Priests, Seventy, and Apostles.. ( D&C 107) A man must be a Melchizedek priesthood holder to enter the temple. (Temple ceremony First and second tokens of the Melchizedek priesthood)
2. Temple work. (D&C 138: 48)
3. Temple marriage, this is over and above the endowment. (D&C 132: 19-20).
4. Becoming a God (I don't believe that becoming a god on earth is a requirement for exaltation. It is the goal of all mormon men and uniquely mormon but not a requirement for exaltation.. Most mormons believe it will take a lot longer than this life to become a god of their own world. Most hold they will move from precept to precept learning how to become like the Father.. The fist few million years or so of exaltation will be sort of being enrolled in a god school). (History of the Church Vol 6)
5. Being LDS (Elder Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine p 670)
6. Laying on of hands (D&C 10:55)
7. God has a body as tangible as man's (D&C 130:22)
8. There are three different degrees of Glory. Three separate heavens for differing degrees of individual righteousness. (D&C 76)
9. Jesus is the spiritual brother of not only all mankind but Satan and all the demons as well.. (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young, 243)
10. Everything was formed spiritually in a preexistence before being formed here on earth naturally.. (PofPG, Moses 3:5)
11. Jesus was not always God but became a god by obedience to the Father (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young, 243)
12. The Father was not always God. He once lived in a mortal existence like we are now. He became a god through obedience to the Laws and ordinances given to Him by his god.. (History of the Church, vol. 6)
13. He is not the only God in existence. He himself has a god.. There are an infinite number of Gods all related to each other.. (The Ensign, Nov. 1975, page 80)
14. While god is not eternally god, the elements eternal and there is an infinite quan***y of such.. (D&C 93: 33)
15. The Holy Ghost is a god that was able to skip all the requirements of the gospel and become a god without receiving a body first. No one knows how this is possible according to Joseph Smith getting a Body is a requirement in advancement to godhood. (While it is not know how this could be it is clear that the Holy Ghost is a god in mormonism; GUIDE TO THE SCRIPTURES
God, Godhead, LDS.org)
16. God will not allow his prophets to go astray and teach error to the church. When the prophets does do that God will correct the error after that prophet is gone.. This contradiction is proven in Brigham Young's teaching of Adam-God.. (BYU Devotional ***embly on February 26, 1980, President Ezra Taft Benson; Sermon delivered on June 8, 1873. Printed in the Deseret Weekly News, June 18, 1873.)
17. God is subject to time and space as we are. He can only be in one place at one time. He is not present in the past or the future.
(The Articles of Faith, pg. 39).
18. While mormon will tell you that Jesus said it is finished just before His death on the cross they believe that God has not revealed all that he wants to reveal and he will continue to reveal more.. (Artical of faith #8)

If these prove me to be the liar you make me out to be please show me how.. IHS jim

Radix

03-21-2010, 04:18 PM

. Thus, any actual "choice" we make is traced back to God's conception.

These are the only conclusions to draw from your errant belief system.

love,
stem

Loving Stem,

Only if God is nothing more than a computer programmer.

nrajeff

03-22-2010, 04:23 AM

....Your effort was to suggest my beliefs make God into a programmer. I am not trying to make God into anything, in fact. I am merely challenging your claims in this thread, so far.

"Thus, if God knew of every evil deed any of His creatures would do before He created them, then that would require that the evil that would be practiced originated in God's own conception, right?"

I add to that this one:

"If God did not conceive of Lucifer's rebellion before creating him from nothing, then Lucifer would never have rebelled, right?"

Interesting. I just explained how your beliefs force God, if taken logically, to be the very source of all evil, and your response was, it seems, that there had to be choice because without such there is no love? You do realize that the very logical conclusion that I laid out for you explains how, in essence, if your beliefs are true, no one has absolute choice (I'll re-explain below just for you). Thus, according to your logic, now, there is no love at all. Now its obvious, all according to your logic, God did not create love, even though you tried to sneak that in earlier.

All according to your beliefs, if taken logically: God created all things out of nothing. Before creating out of nothing, God conceived of every single deed, good or bad (but since no one does good then in actuality only bad), that each of His creations would do. For instance, before creating satan out of nothing, before Satan was in existence, God conceived of every evil act Satan would do long before Satan ever had the opportunity to conceive of those evil acts. On top of that, if God did not conceive of every evil act Satan would do, according to your beliefs, then Satan would not have done one evil act. All because God had to know, had to conceive of, really, every deed each of his creations would do before they exist[ed]. As a result, we all do only that which God conceived that each of us would do. Thus, any actual "choice" we make is traced back to God's conception.

These are the only conclusions to draw from your errant belief system. ...

---I am still in agreement with you, Stem, that these Augustinian/Calvinistic beliefs, if taken to their logical conclusion, lead to the idea that God MUST be the "First Cause" of all the evil in the universe, including the rebellion of a third of the host of heaven.

PS--Good catch, noting that if "There are none that do good" is universally, literally true, then God isn't responsible for all the good that people do since there aren't any people who do any good! I didn't think of that.

Fig-bearing Thistle

03-23-2010, 02:29 AM

---I am still in agreement with you, Stem, that these Augustinian/Calvinistic beliefs, if taken to their logical conclusion, lead to the idea that God MUST be the "First Cause" of all the evil in the universe, including the rebellion of a third of the host of heaven.

PS--Good catch, noting that if "There are none that do good" is universally, literally true, then God isn't responsible for all the good that people do since there aren't any people who do any good! I didn't think of that.

This is just weird. How can people believe such weird stuff? Calvinism must be a "CULT", is all I can say.

Father_JD

03-23-2010, 04:32 AM

Nope. You keep ignoring SECONDARY CAUSES.

stemelbow

03-27-2010, 09:05 AM

I appreciate your attempted escape-hatch route for what it is. Instead of dealing with my argument you deflect, vaguely exclaiming that you've made a case for your claim of computer programmer when you have not. Sadly, that is probably the best a mainstreamer can do when faced with an argument explaining the silliness of his/her beliefs. Your response is typical.

love,
stem

stemelbow

03-27-2010, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Father_JD
"Attempt"?? I succeeded, stemmy. Why you can't see the obvious is beyond me!

Because IF your Mormo-deity IS OMNISCIENT (which in reality you DENY, although you're still trying to affirm that he is), he KNEW ALL OF HIS LITTLE SPIRIT CHIL'S FUTURE ACTIONS..."EVIL DEEDS AND DESIGNS"...So, stem, does the Mormo-deity possess OMNISCIENCE or NOT???

You're basically saying he does NOT!!

We've been down this deflection road of your's, JD. remember? The argument I've raised is not fully reliant on whether God know all the deeds, its that not only did He know they were coming but He actually conceived of the evil deeds, if you take mainstreamism to its logical conclusion. Of course God is omniscient. He knows all things, even things to come. Now, that we've established that for the hundredth time, how about we move on to the bulk of the argument that you keep avoiding?

LOL. It's ALL ABOUT "whether God KNEW evil would be", stem. The issue has been Mormo-god's OMNISCIENCE or lack thereof. You're DEFLECTING. You've said in so many words that the Mormo-god is NOT omniscient, although you continue to play your game of "Nuh-uh"!! :eek:

You know as well as I that I've never suggested God is not omniscient. Your game, in your mind, has worked well in you avoiding the issue. But most people can see the silliness of your game for what it is. I too would hate to be in your shoes running from every opportunity to engage in hopes no one notices the hollow beliefs you have. Its true...you are in a very tough position. No wonder you play games in hopes of sounding clever.

Quote:
Irrelevant, stemster. But IF your Mormo-god is really OMNISCIENT, he couldn't help but KNOW ALL OF LUCIFER'S FUTURE EVIL DEEDS AND ACTIONS. Again, stem...WHY can't you see this?

And that's MY argument, stem. It's YOU who's decided to play this inane game of BLAMING God for evil.

I know your argument is an effort to suggest well LDS believe similarly as me;therefore they are just as guilty. sadly it just doesn't hold any water. For one, it hardly releases you of the burden of addressing the argument. For two, it doesn't even respond to the crux of the argument.

Ya just can't have it both ways, Stemster, although you Mos ALWAYS try to have your cake (Mormo-god is OMNISCIENT) and eat it too (Mormo-god didn't know his spirit chil' Lucifer was gonna be evil).

Silly strawmen will, seemingly, always be the hallmark of JD's apologetic. I have resigned myself to accepting that notion.

LOL. And just how did I "misunderstand" you, stem? I understand you only too well. You're a product of Pavlovian conditioning which makes it somehow possible for you to hold to two mutually-exclusive truth claims simultaneously.

You can't even begin to see your illogical thinking here. :rolleyes:

The explanations have already been laid before you, JD. Your tricky sounding rhetoric has been exposed again. Go back and re-read the argument, and perhaps you'll be able to address it head-on this time, instead of silly attempts to side-step followed by absurd conclusions about what I believe in some vain hope to bring my beliefs down the tubes with your own. Why you concede your beliefs belong down the tubes is somewhat valiant of ya, but to presuppose mine must follow yours is not proposing a sound argument.

love,
stem

stemelbow

03-27-2010, 09:24 AM

Haha...funny hypocrisy biting another critic of LDS on the caboose--claiming Jeff attacked you when all he really did was point out the inconsistent way in which you replied. Now, if'n ya could actually engage the arguments presented to you then you could start gaining credibility to your claim of knowing LDS Christianity is false and that its not biblical. So far, all I see is mainstreamism as being the main culprit of falsehood. Thus, I challenge you. If ya can't deal with the challenges then outta the kitchen you ought to go.

love,
stem

stemelbow

03-27-2010, 09:28 AM

Talk about ignoring, JD. You've been ignoring the arguments in favor of running to deflections such as SECONDARY CAUSES, along with silly attempts to bring down LDS belief with your own--tacitly conceding the errors in your own beliefs. If'n ya actually think about it, your beliefs are indeed weird, as Fig pointed out. Not enough thinking about it amongst you and your fellow mainstreamers, sadly. Dem brains weren't made for thinking is the apparent theme of mainstreamism.

love,
stem

James Banta

03-27-2010, 10:22 AM

[stemelbow;51706]We've been down this deflection road of your's, JD. remember? The argument I've raised is not fully reliant on whether God know all the deeds, its that not only did He know they were coming but He actually conceived of the evil deeds, if you take mainstreamism to its logical conclusion. Of course God is omniscient. He knows all things, even things to come. Now, that we've established that for the hundredth time, how about we move on to the bulk of the argument that you keep avoiding?

Here then is the real straw man Stem. You want your God to be omniscient but when we confirm that our God is you lay the world's sin on Him as the cause all the while denying that the god of mormonism is guilty of anything.. Yet what does it say in your own scripture?

Abraham 2:22-24
And it came to p*** when I was come near to enter into Egypt, the Lord asaid unto me: Behold, Sarai, thy wife, is a very fair woman to look upon;
Therefore it shall come to p***, when the Egyptians shall see her, they will say—She is his wife; and they will kill you, but they will save her alive; therefore see that ye do on this wise:
Let her say unto the Egyptians, she is thy sister, and thy soul shall live.
Commanded to lie by God Himself.. This wasn't the only time God Commanded a man to commit sin. Nephi was commanded to execute Laban while he lay unable to defend himself. Before he had the LAW given right to face his accusers. NO God in that case commanded murder. And there was Adam. He was given two commandments both of which there was no way to keep.. God forced his into sin.. Then Stem chimes along and says that because the God of the Bible knows all the sin any one will ever commit that instead of the man being guilty it is God's wickedness..

Stem the unforgivable sin is to say that Jesus has a demon. You sir are getting VERY VERY close to that sin.. Please repent of this wickedness and come to the God revealed in the Bible the God of ALL creation, Jesus the Christ. IHS jim

nrajeff

03-27-2010, 11:53 AM

... Then Stem chimes along and says that because the God of the Bible knows all the sin any one will ever commit that instead of the man being guilty it is God's wickedness.. Stem the unforgivable sin is to say that Jesus has a demon. You sir are getting VERY VERY close to that sin..

---The big mistake in the above accusation is the part I bolded. The other mistake is thinking that Stem is accusing Jesus of having a demon, which is just nonsense.

It's not merely the Tulipitarian belief that God KNOWS all people's sins, that is the problem. It's that omniscience COMBINED with the doctrines of absolute sovereignty and omnipotence and arbitrary predestination that lead, inexorably, to the conclusion that the God of Tulipitarianism is 100% responsible for all the evil done in the universe. I think Stem and Fig add "creatio ex nihilo" to list of problems, which makes the responsibility even more clear. You guys believe that salvation is unconditional--that nothing WE do makes one person qualified for salvation, and nothing we FAIL to do makes another person unqualified for salvation. You believe that it's ALL GOD, ALL His doing, ALL His totally unmerited grace, and that it would be blasphemy or heresy for a person to believe that it's only 99% God, and that people need to do 1% in order to qualify for salvation.

Therefore, you guys believe that not only does God know all the sins people commit--God also DECREED or willed all those sins, since He had all power to create NON-evil people had He wanted to (doctrine of omnipotence). And there was nobody who could tell God to create people a DIFFERENT way than He wanted them created, such as part good and part evil (doctrine of sovereignty). And we have ZERO say in whether we will end up in heaven or hell, because God MADE some of us to BE nothing but vessels of wrath, designed by the Potter to be shattered after being created (doctrines of sovereignty and predestination). How can a pot that was designed, from the beginning, by the Potter to be discarded, magically turn into a pot that was destined to be saved from the pottery s**** pile? IT CAN'T. It has NO say in that, and the Potter's decisions are FINAL, since the Potter NEVER changes his mind. Which leaves the pot 100% helpless in deciding or changing his fate.

Behold the horrible travesty that IS Tulip-Trinitarianism. Plus, it's illogical. And how does ANY of the refutation of Tulip-Trinitarianism equal an accusation that Jesus has a demon? Hello?

akaSeerone

03-27-2010, 12:13 PM

God chose to create people with a free choice, not non evil robots.

Sorry Jeff, mormonism simply denies what the Bible plainly tells us and tries to redefine the very words of the Bible to hopelessly try to make mormoism seem true.

BTW: God will not answer a prayer to find out if the BofM is true....2 Peter, the first chapter.....so what ever spirit told you it was true was a demon and that proves you were deceived and went down hill from there because you bought into the lie.

Andy

Vlad III

03-27-2010, 12:18 PM

BTW: God will not answer a prayer to find out if the BofM is true....2 Peter, the first chapter.....so what ever spirit told you it was true was a demon and that proves you were deceived and went down hill from there because you bought into the lie.

Andy

Well, i guess all those CLDS who retort with "Yeah, well I asked God and he told me it was false" must've been deceived by a lying demon. Then it was all downhill from there for them.

akaSeerone

03-27-2010, 12:24 PM

Obviously you did not read 2 Peter the first chapter.

Andy

nrajeff

03-27-2010, 03:40 PM

God chose to create people with a free choice, not non evil robots.
---Then you reject the Calvinistic doctrine of Predestination. LDS believe that God chose to create people with a free choice, not non-evil robots, and not EVIL robots either. He left it up to US whether we would become evil or not. That is what free choice is all about, and that is what TULIP contradicts.

Sorry Jeff, mormonism simply denies what the Bible plainly tells us
---But Mormonism claims the same as YOU claim--that God gave us free will and the freedom to choose good or evil, with no pre-destining of those things. So if you agree with the LDS, but the LDS deny what the Bible tells us, then YOU deny what the Bible tells us, too.

BTW: God will not answer a prayer to find out if the BofM is true....2 Peter, the first chapter
---I just finished reading that chapter, and I didn't see a verse that says "God will not answer a prayer to find out if the BOM is true." But I DID find:

Matthew 7:8
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

Matthew 21:22
And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

plus others.

akaSeerone

03-27-2010, 06:25 PM

The verses you gave are out of context for what I was talking about.

Peter said that the Bible was a more sure word than hearing from God Himself and add to that the account that Jesus talked about with the rich man and Lazarus, where Abraham told the rich man that it would do no good to send anyone back because they have the Law and the Prophets just like you do. In other words you have the Bible and since the BofM contradicts the Bible, mormonism is false.

And that tells us that God will not answer a prayer to know if the BofM is true and if Smith was a Prophet....The Bible tells us that Smith was not a Prophet and that another Gospel know as mormonis is not true.

Think about it....where you spend eternity depends on it.

Andy

nrajeff

03-27-2010, 07:57 PM

Peter said that the Bible was a more sure word than hearing from God Himself
---Peter said that? Wow. Paul seemed to be more impressed by hearing from Jesus Himself, than Paul ever did reading the Bible.

And that tells us that God will not answer a prayer to know if the BofM is true and if Smith was a Prophet
---As Vlad pointed out: There are CLDS who say "I prayed to find out whether the BOM was true, and God told me it was false."

Are you saying those people were deceived by a lying demon? Or that those people are just lying?

stemelbow

03-28-2010, 06:59 AM

James Banta

03-28-2010, 07:40 AM

James,

"Then Stem chimes along and says that because the God of the Bible knows all the sin any one will ever commit that instead of the man being guilty it is God's wickedness.. "

You missed my argument, Jim. Perhaps an effort to go back and revisit it will help you understand the points I've made. So far its obvious you haven't grasped them. Please revisit them.

Problem being, and this is quite obvious to those who actually think for themselves, the God you preach is not the God of the Bible. The god you preach is teh very source of all evil. I can't follow such silliness....sorry Jim.

You ought to repent of the notions you place upon God because its nothing but a subtle effort to make the real God look bad. Please do so, seek God in ways you never though possible before and you may very well be enlightened. I pray for this.

love,
stem

love,
stem

Is the real God indeed the God of the mind of a man, is He a created thing? Is He the work of another god/man's hand and that god in turn the work of yet another god/man and so on back into eternity past? This is not what the Bible tells me. It says that God is from everlasting to everlasting not just as my coequal intelligence in some distant past time, but as God:

Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
And Stem has the brazen to say that his god, his idol made in the depths of Joseph Smith's mind is the real God.. A God that is NOT been God from everlasting. That will form others to become gods in the future. Defying the word of the Eternal. And when I reject this god this other Savior you scoff..

Dear Lord melt this hardend heart, open this blind eye to your glory, and bring him to yourself.. IHS jim

stemelbow

03-31-2010, 01:20 PM

Indeed, James, I'm sure it will take you an effort to seek God in ways you never thought possible for you to come to an understanding of His nature. I hope it comes sooner rather than later.

love,
stem

Father_JD

03-31-2010, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Father_JD
"Attempt"?? I succeeded, stemmy. Why you can't see the obvious is beyond me!

Because IF your Mormo-deity IS OMNISCIENT (which in reality you DENY, although you're still trying to affirm that he is), he KNEW ALL OF HIS LITTLE SPIRIT CHIL'S FUTURE ACTIONS..."EVIL DEEDS AND DESIGNS"...So, stem, does the Mormo-deity possess OMNISCIENCE or NOT???

You're basically saying he does NOT!!

We've been down this deflection road of your's, JD. remember? The argument I've raised is not fully reliant on whether God know all the deeds, its that not only did He know they were coming but He actually conceived of the evil deeds, if you take mainstreamism to its logical conclusion. Of course God is omniscient. He knows all things, even things to come. Now, that we've established that for the hundredth time, how about we move on to the bulk of the argument that you keep avoiding?

But the argument is precisely that, stem: FULLY reliant on whether God knows ALL the deeds of anyone IN ADVANCE. If so, then even Mormo-god KNEW IN ADVANCE that his little spirit-chil' Lucifer was gonna become a bad egg...even BEFORE he and one of his goddess honies PROCREATED him. THEN, according to YOUR thinking, even Mormo-god is OMNISCIENT and is RESPONSIBLE...and also CONCEIVED OF LUCIFER'S EVIL. Why you FAIL to grasp this is nothing short of amazing, stem. :eek:

In reality, you've DENIED Mormo-god's omniscience, having chalked up his "knowledge" of Lucifer's future actions UPON PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE OF MORMO-GOD. What does this MEAN, stem? That Mormo-god made and EDUCATED GUESS of what Lucifer would do, based upon his PAST EXPERIENCE.

Therefore you have in essence NEGATED Mormo-god's omnscience. Do I really need to spell it out to you yet again??? :confused:

Quote:
LOL. It's ALL ABOUT "whether God KNEW evil would be", stem. The issue has been Mormo-god's OMNISCIENCE or lack thereof. You're DEFLECTING. You've said in so many words that the Mormo-god is NOT omniscient, although you continue to play your game of "Nuh-uh"!!

You know as well as I that I've never suggested God is not omniscient. Your game, in your mind, has worked well in you avoiding the issue. But most people can see the silliness of your game for what it is. I too would hate to be in your shoes running from every opportunity to engage in hopes no one notices the hollow beliefs you have. Its true...you are in a very tough position. No wonder you play games in hopes of sounding clever.

You're deflecting yet again. See answer above, stem. :rolleyes:

Quote:
Irrelevant, stemster. But IF your Mormo-god is really OMNISCIENT, he couldn't help but KNOW ALL OF LUCIFER'S FUTURE EVIL DEEDS AND ACTIONS. Again, stem...WHY can't you see this?

And that's MY argument, stem. It's YOU who's decided to play this inane game of BLAMING God for evil.

I know your argument is an effort to suggest well LDS believe similarly as me;therefore they are just as guilty. sadly it just doesn't hold any water. For one, it hardly releases you of the burden of addressing the argument. For two, it doesn't even respond to the crux of the argument.

This is nothing but non-thinking blather, stem. I've demonstrated several times now WHY your response "doesn't hold water".

Quote:
Ya just can't have it both ways, Stemster, although you Mos ALWAYS try to have your cake (Mormo-god is OMNISCIENT) and eat it too (Mormo-god didn't know his spirit chil' Lucifer was gonna be evil).

Silly strawmen will, seemingly, always be the hallmark of JD's apologetic. I have resigned myself to accepting that notion.

Is that all you can do, stem? Offer more, worthless "nuhuh!" responses?

Quote:
LOL. And just how did I "misunderstand" you, stem? I understand you only too well. You're a product of Pavlovian conditioning which makes it somehow possible for you to hold to two mutually-exclusive truth claims simultaneously.

You can't even begin to see your illogical thinking here.

The explanations have already been laid before you, JD. Your tricky sounding rhetoric has been exposed again. Go back and re-read the argument, and perhaps you'll be able to address it head-on this time, instead of silly attempts to side-step followed by absurd conclusions about what I believe in some vain hope to bring my beliefs down the tubes with your own. Why you concede your beliefs belong down the tubes is somewhat valiant of ya, but to presuppose mine must follow yours is not proposing a sound argument.

And it's been explained to you WHY your argument has NO MERIT, stem. :rolleyes:

Father_JD

03-31-2010, 01:58 PM

nrajeff

04-01-2010, 06:30 AM

Do you even KNOW what "secondary causes" SIGNIFIES, stem?

---I think Stem knows what the term means. But as we have shown, the one deity in the universe who CAN'T cry "It's not my fault--secondary causes!" as an excuse, is the God of Tulipitarianism. "How so?" you ask? Well, you believe in a deity who is "the author of EVERYTHING," and who is also absolutely sovereign, literally omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent (in all places and permeating all things). And, as we have shown, any deity who is all that, and whose act of ex-nihilo creating results in the horribly flawed, evil universe that you believe exists right now, is like the designer/***embler/programmer of the Hasbro Evil Robot. "How so?" you ask? Well, if Hasbro's chief toy engineer designs, programs, and ***embles a robot that is guaranteed to do evil once it's turned on, and then--surprise--the robot does exactly that, how lame would it be for the designer/***embler/programmer to say "Hey, I'm not PRIMARILY responsible for what MY CREATION did!" ???? VERY lame.

"How so?" you ask? Well, the designer/***embler/programmer is the Number One Boss of the company--he has no boss over him (Sovereign), so what he says, happens. And he is also literally all-knowing, so he can't use "I didn't know that the robot was gonna do evil" as an excuse. And he is also literally omnipotent, so he can't use "I was unable to make a robot that WOULDN'T do evil" as an excuse. And he PREDESTINED his creation to do evil. That means he PLANNED on the robot doing evil once it was built and programmed by him. He could have chosen to create them WITHOUT that programmed evil-nature DNA, but He didn't WANT to (sovereign means no one can tell Him what to do or override His choices).

Voila: The God of Tulipitarianism--Top Boss of everything, totally omniscient and sovereign, who predestines people to act the way they do and had all power to create them to be benevolent--but chose not to. How convincing is the excuse "It's not primarily my fault" in such a case? Not at all.

Face it: The MEN who made up these doctrines and conned much of Christendom into believing they are true, BLEW IT. If they didn't KNOWINGLY make up this stuff as a deliberate attempt to portray God as the source of evil, then they made it up without thinking the whole scheme through to its logial conclusion. Take your pick: either they made up these doctrines on purpose, or through a lack of logical acumen. Either way, there's no good reason people should keep believing these doctrines are true and logical--not in a century when we should be sufficiently educated to make more logical decisions than people who lived in less enlightened, more supers***ious times.

James Banta

04-01-2010, 10:47 AM

---I think Stem knows what the term means. But as we have shown, the one deity in the universe who CAN'T cry "It's not my fault--secondary causes!" as an excuse, is the God of Tulipitarianism. "How so?" you ask? Well, you believe in a deity who is "the author of EVERYTHING," and who is also absolutely sovereign, literally omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent (in all places and permeating all things). And, as we have shown, any deity who is all that, and whose act of ex-nihilo creating results in the horribly flawed, evil universe that you believe exists right now, is like the designer/***embler/programmer of the Hasbro Evil Robot. "How so?" you ask? Well, if Hasbro's chief toy engineer designs, programs, and ***embles a robot that is guaranteed to do evil once it's turned on, and then--surprise--the robot does exactly that, how lame would it be for the designer/***embler/programmer to say "Hey, I'm not PRIMARILY responsible for what MY CREATION did!" ???? VERY lame.

"How so?" you ask? Well, the designer/***embler/programmer is the Number One Boss of the company--he has no boss over him (Sovereign), so what he says, happens. And he is also literally all-knowing, so he can't use "I didn't know that the robot was gonna do evil" as an excuse. And he is also literally omnipotent, so he can't use "I was unable to make a robot that WOULDN'T do evil" as an excuse. And he PREDESTINED his creation to do evil. That means he PLANNED on the robot doing evil once it was built and programmed by him. He could have chosen to create them WITHOUT that programmed evil-nature DNA, but He didn't WANT to (sovereign means no one can tell Him what to do or override His choices).

Voila: The God of Tulipitarianism--Top Boss of everything, totally omniscient and sovereign, who predestines people to act the way they do and had all power to create them to be benevolent--but chose not to. How convincing is the excuse "It's not primarily my fault" in such a case? Not at all.

Face it: The MEN who made up these doctrines and conned much of Christendom into believing they are true, BLEW IT. If they didn't KNOWINGLY make up this stuff as a deliberate attempt to portray God as the source of evil, then they made it up without thinking the whole scheme through to its logial conclusion. Take your pick: either they made up these doctrines on purpose, or through a lack of logical acumen. Either way, there's no good reason people should keep believing these doctrines are true and logical--not in a century when we should be sufficiently educated to make more logical decisions than people who lived in less enlightened, more supers***ious times.

Did Hasbro give their robot, their creation, free will? Or was it set up to operate in very limited parameters? Is this how God created man? Did he create Him evil or did He give Him a perfect existence a perfect life of total communion with Him only to know that the freedom He gave would be used to make himself corrupt? How did Hasbro's robot do that? There is no doubt God knew what man would do. This is why God prepared man's salvation before the foundation of the world. Saying that God was surprised by man's actions is limiting the power and scope of God's knowledge and authority over all things, Yes Even Time.. So man isn't at all like the creation that man can contrive. Nothing man creates has the freedom that God has given mankind. Yes God could have made us the way you seem to have wanted Him to, but if that were the case there would be no real love exchanged. Yes He could have made us repeat "I LOVE GOD, I LOVE GOD" over and over like a babydoll saying Momma ever time it is moved, but is the little Girl who plays with that doll really it's Momma or would a robot of God's design really love God? NO!!!

No where in the Bible does it say that God predestined anyone to be evil, but instead only for salvation. Sin corrupted the perfect nature God created in man. Sin and therefore death that man chose instead of Joy and life with Him. That was part of the choice God had created in us. A creation that allows us to respond to God as our King, our Lord, our God, and our FATHER. Without being able to make that choice we would remain as children of the devil..

I have personally shown you from scripture how each point of TULIP fits into the Scripture. All you have done is to make up words like "Tulipitarianism" You have made it up so only you can make up it's meaning. But since you made it up it will be like so many terms mormonism uses to poke fun at Christianity the meaning will turn and twist to meet your attacks against the Jesus of the Bible and His works on man's behalf.. IHS jim

nrajeff

04-01-2010, 01:13 PM

Did Hasbro give their robot, their creation, free will?
---Hasbro programmed the robot so that it was GUARANTEED to do evil. Something called a "sin nature" was installed into its DNA. Sound familiar? Yep, that's what Calvinists teach that GOD did to the human race. Or are you claiming that YOU were NOT born with a sin nature--a nature that would guarantee that you were a born sinner? A nature that would make it IMPOSSIBLE for you to NOT do evil?

nrajeff

04-01-2010, 01:19 PM

No where in the Bible does it say that God predestined anyone to be evil, but instead only for salvation.
---You're saying that God predestined everyone for salvation? What about your Carm friends who claim that the Bible teaches that God CREATED some people to be vessels for destruction? And that David said he was born in iniquity, a sinner right from the womb? Are you saying your Carm friends, and FJD and Libby are wrong? That they believe non-Christian doctrines?

Sin corrupted the perfect nature God created in man
---You are a man, correct? God created you, correct? Are you saying that God created you with a perfect nature?

I have personally shown you from scripture how each point of TULIP fits into the Scripture.
--What you have said--that we were created with the ability to choose our own destiny, that it wasn't predestinated before the world was created, that we were made with a perfect nature--all that CONTRADICTS TULIP.

akaSeerone

04-01-2010, 01:40 PM

You are twisting things again and it proves the you do not know your Bible and you have no idea what you are talking about.

God created Adam and Eve perfect.

Adam sinned and creation took on the fallen nature.

If God chooses to use some of the fallen men one way and some another, who are you to question and mock God?

Once again Jeff, you are lying and twisting what has been told to you and then trying to throw it back and use it against James.

I hope Jill permanently bans the likes of you.

Andy

James Banta

04-02-2010, 11:19 AM

---Hasbro programmed the robot so that it was GUARANTEED to do evil. Something called a "sin nature" was installed into its DNA. Sound familiar? Yep, that's what Calvinists teach that GOD did to the human race. Or are you claiming that YOU were NOT born with a sin nature--a nature that would guarantee that you were a born sinner? A nature that would make it IMPOSSIBLE for you to NOT do evil?

The sin nature came about though the actions of the creation not the creator. Your robot had the evil placed in him by the manufacture (creator). Your example is still flawed..

Please try to understand, God created man totally pure. It was because man rebelied against Him by an act of their own will that he became evil. God didn't create man evil!!! IHS jim

James Banta

04-02-2010, 11:32 AM

OK, when you said this:

Do you see what is misrepresentation about this?

No Mormonism teaches that God created our spirits and placed them into. First the spirit then the physical body later.. The Bible says (Very clearly) that God Created the spirit of man within him (Zech 12:1) By saying that Mormonism is teaching other than that it is NOT a misrepresentation unless you want to tell me that God didn't create the the spirit of man in a pre-existence.. I am willing to talk about this teaching if you an tell me something new that I am not aware of.. But if the mormon god created the spirits of man before there was a body to created it in I am solid in my statements. IHS jim

James Banta

04-02-2010, 11:37 AM

You didn't address my specific questions again, James. Please try again.

love,
stem

I believe I have, Sorry you can't seem to understand the answer. Go read it again... IHS jim

James Banta

04-02-2010, 11:55 AM

---You're saying that God predestined everyone for salvation? What about your Carm friends who claim that the Bible teaches that God CREATED some people to be vessels for destruction? And that David said he was born in iniquity, a sinner right from the womb? Are you saying your Carm friends, and FJD and Libby are wrong? That they believe non-Christian doctrines?

---You are a man, correct? God created you, correct? Are you saying that God created you with a perfect nature?

--What you have said--that we were created with the ability to choose our own destiny, that it wasn't predestinated before the world was created, that we were made with a perfect nature--all that CONTRADICTS TULIP.

Listen it's because we are predestined to salvation not to wrath. This is what I find as I look into predestined:

Rom 8:29-30
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Moreover whom he did predestined, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Eph 1:5,11
Having predestined us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will

Not one mention of being predestined to wrath.. That is what I meant not that all were predestined to life.. Just that no one is predestined to wrath. IHS jim

akaSeerone

04-02-2010, 01:38 PM

You continue to twist what the Bible says so you can mock God and the Bible and then try to use what you have twisted against us Jeff....you should be permanently banned for continuing to do that.

God Created Adam and Eve.

The rest of mankind was born evil. Out of those God choose some to be vessels of wrath for His Glory and some were chosen to serve Him. The rest just remain in the sin nature because of Adam's sin.

So quit with your mocking God and judging Him.

What mormons have is idol worship because they created the God they worship and that is without argument idol worship.

You are setting yourself up for a great fall by judging God.

Andy

nrajeff

04-02-2010, 08:52 PM

The sin nature came about though the actions of the creation not the creator.
---So you believe that mere humans have the power to change the nature that God created into them? What about the doctrine of God's Sovereignty, which teaches that NO ONE can undermine God's will, and therefore if a person does evil, it's because God WANTED them to be evil (Predestination)?

Your robot had the evil placed in him by the manufacture (creator). Your example is still flawed..
---Who placed evil in the Garden of Eden? Satan's manufacturer, right?

Please try to understand, God created man totally pure.
---Did God create YOU totally pure? If you say yes, you're agreeing with LDS doctrine. If you say no, then you believe that God only created 0.0000000001% of the human race totally pure--the rest He created like you, with a nature that guarantees that you can't do anything good. That's what Calvinism teaches.

It was because man rebelied against Him by an act of their own will that he became evil. God didn't create man evil!!!
---So you believe that God didn't create YOU evil? You believe that God created YOU good but your rebellion against Him caused you to BECOME evil?

nrajeff

04-02-2010, 09:09 PM

Listen it's because we are predestined to salvation not to wrath.
----So you believe that God has predestinated all people to be saved? That is an interesting idea, one that I think your Carm friends will have "issues" over. Besides, I thought you said you believe that God gave everyone free will, the freedom to choose. If He predestinated us all to be saved, how can we have any choice in whether we are saved or not?

Not one mention of being predestined to wrath.. That is what I meant not that all were predestined to life.. Just that no one is predestined to wrath.
---But you said "we are predestined to salvation not to wrath." Now you're saying the opposite--that NOT all of us are predestined to "life" which I presume you equate with salvation. As for "no one is predestined to wrath" I guess you haven't paid attention to your Calvinistic Carm friends when they claimed that the CHRISTIAN doctrine is that God, in His sovereignty, MADE some of us to be nothing BUT vessels fated for wrath. They cite the Bible parable about the pot maker (not the marijuana kind) who intended SOME of his pots to be lasting things of treasured beauty, but who intended OTHER pots--even before he MADE them--to be "mistakes" that were destined to be shattered. It's in Father JD's favorite part of the Bible, Romans 9:

20 The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?

21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,

nrajeff

04-02-2010, 09:16 PM

You continue to twist what the Bible says so you can mock God and the Bible
---Where have I done any of that?

God Created Adam and Eve.
--That's the first true thing I have seen you say in a while. Congrats!

The rest of mankind was born evil.
---Oh-oh, Paging Jim Banta: Andy has "issues" with your beliefs.

Out of those God choose some to be vessels of wrath for His Glory and some were chosen to serve Him.
---I wonder which of those 2 castes you fall into.

The rest just remain in the sin nature because of Adam's sin
--So you believe there are THREE possible fates for a human being--Predestinated for wrath, predestinated to serve God, and predestinated to remain in the sin nature? Doesn't that throw them in with "predestinated for wrath" folks?

So quit with your mocking God and judging Him.
---I am just judging the reasonableness of your beliefs. Unless you are God, I am not judging God.

Father_JD

04-03-2010, 02:58 PM

jeff...how many times do I need to correct your twisted understanding of "Calvinistic" i.e. biblical teaching?

Once again, jeff, just for YOU:

1. God did NOT create evil beings.
2. He declared ALL to have been created "good".
3. God DID foreknow the future corruption of his creation, i.e. Lucifer, et al.
4. ALL evil, etc. has been perpetuated by these beings, HENCE THEY ARE SECONDARY CAUSES
4. Since God KNEW this, then one asks WHY.
5. The biblical answer is "according to his own pleasure", i.e. designs, purposes.
6. You've consistently affirmed that the Mormo-diet is NOT:

a. Omnisicient
b. Omnipotent
c. Sovereign

You may believe what you want, but remember that Mormo-god is NOT THE OMNISCIENT, OMNIPOTENT AND SOVEREIGN GOD OF THE BIBLE.

James Banta

04-03-2010, 03:09 PM

do you know what you're talking about? My argument does not rest on whether anyone knows evil will be practiced. It rests on your concept of God, by logical extension, being the sole source of evil since He obviously had to be the first one ever to conceive of the concept.

love,
stem

And knowing that evil could or will take place makes the God who created ALL things evil, right? IHS jim

nrajeff

04-03-2010, 11:50 PM

jeff...how many times do I need to correct your twisted understanding of "Calvinistic" i.e. biblical teaching?
---So "Calvinism" equals "Biblical" now? What does "Arminianism" equal, then? Satanic? This could be a fun debate.

[QUOTE]Once again, jeff, just for YOU:
---Maybe one of these times I will see the light. Not THIS time, though.

1. God did NOT create evil beings.
--Did God create YOU?
a) yes
b) no

Were you a sinner right from the womb, as Calvinism teaches?
a) yes
b) no

2. He declared ALL to have been created "good".
--I thought He declared "There are NONE good except for God."

Father_JD

04-05-2010, 06:42 PM

FJD: jeff...how many times do I need to correct your twisted understanding of "Calvinistic" i.e. biblical teaching?

---So "Calvinism" equals "Biblical" now? What does "Arminianism" equal, then? Satanic? This could be a fun debate.

So-called "Arminianism" is in error, that's for sure. Error does not necessarily mean "Satanic", jeff. :rolleyes:

Quote:
Once again, jeff, just for YOU:

---Maybe one of these times I will see the light. Not THIS time, though.

It's up to you, dude.

Quote:
1. God did NOT create evil beings.

--Did God create YOU?
a) yes
b) no

I'm refererencing BEFORE the Fall, jeff. And NO, God did NOT directly create me. Only Adam and Eve were "created by God", i.e. directly.

Were you a sinner right from the womb, as Calvinism teaches?
a) yes
b) no

The Bible teaches we are BORN IN SIN. We have the sin nature, and BECAUSE we possess the sin nature, we WILL sin.

Quote:
2. He declared ALL to have been created "good".

--I thought He declared "There are NONE good except for God."

Again, I'm referring to ORIGINAL CREATION BEFORE SIN ENTERED THE COSMOS. No one is "good" in our NATURAL, FALLEN STATE, jeff.

Did you purposely equivocate my remarks?? :eek:

nrajeff

04-06-2010, 04:59 AM

FJD: jeff...how many times do I need to correct your twisted understanding of "Calvinistic" i.e. biblical teaching?
---Until it ceases to be fun bantering with you.

So-called "Arminianism" is in error, that's for sure. Error does not necessarily mean "Satanic", jeff. :rolleyes:
---But if it is contra-Biblical, how can Arminianism NOT be "another gospel," which therefore teaches "another Jesus," which is therefore "non-Christian"? Come on, stand up to those anti-Bible Arminians who dare to call themselves Christians! Let's start a T.E.A. party to oppose them! (Trash Everything Arminian)

I'm refererencing BEFORE the Fall, jeff.
--Ah, so you believe that God was only able to create non-evil things BEFORE that dang Fall ruined His abilities? What happened to omnipotence?

And NO, God did NOT directly create me. Only Adam and Eve were "created by God", i.e. directly.
--Ah, yes, God is now merely a "secondary creator." So you believe that after the 6th day of creation, God said "That's it, I'm done creating, let someone else take over the *** from here on out, and good luck to them, whoever they are." :D

The Bible teaches we are BORN IN SIN.
---But not created in sin, you say. How can you be born without being created? Sounds like a case of anti-equivocation: Creating an imaginary difference between two words that are actually synonymous. Hey, you are a creator--you created a fallacious argument! (But just a secondary creator, right? )

We have the sin nature, and BECAUSE we possess the sin nature, we WILL sin.
---So if God --"the father of spirits," according to the Bible--didn't create your spirit, then who did? Did Mr. and Mrs. FJD Sr. really have the power to create spirits? I thought it was supposed to be the MORMONS who ascribe superhuman powers to mere mortals. Or is it "only a deity can create spirits" that those pesky Mormons believe?

Again, I'm referring to ORIGINAL CREATION BEFORE SIN ENTERED THE COSMOS.
--Interesting statement. So you believe that sin entered our cosmos from some...other...cosmos? Who let it in? Why didn't they put up some cherubim with light sabers to keep this sin from entering our cosmos? Seems like our cosmos was a pretty utopian place, until sin entered from the "sin cosmos" and nobody tried to stop it. Look what a disaster our cosmos has turned into, and it could have been prevented, if only our cosmos had not been invaded by "The sin from another cosmos." Wasn't that the ***le of an old, black-and-white sci-fi movie?

No one is "good" in our NATURAL, FALLEN STATE, jeff.
---Not even Mother Teresa? It's hard for me to make myself say out loud "Mother Teresa was not good." Maybe it's easier for you to form the words. How about the men who infallibly, inerrantly wrote each book that's now in the official (non-Catholic) Bible? Not good men? Again, it's hard for me to make myself say "The Bible was written by evil men." It just doesn't seem right to me. How much "training" (conditioning) did you have to undergo, before "The Bible was written by evil men" was easy for you to say? Isn't that a symptom of a cult mentalilty---being conditioned to say incorrect things until the subject genuinely believes he is saying something that is true?

Did you purposely equivocate my remarks??
---Why--am I good at it? (Remember there are none that are good....)

Father_JD

04-06-2010, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by Father_JD
FJD: jeff...how many times do I need to correct your twisted understanding of "Calvinistic" i.e. biblical teaching?

---Until it ceases to be fun bantering with you.

So, it MUST be fun correcting you, jeff.:p

Quote:
So-called "Arminianism" is in error, that's for sure. Error does not necessarily mean "Satanic", jeff.

---But if it is contra-Biblical, how can Arminianism NOT be "another gospel," which therefore teaches "another Jesus," which is therefore "non-Christian"? Come on, stand up to those anti-Bible Arminians who dare to call themselves Christians! Let's start a T.E.A. party to oppose them! (Trash Everything Arminian)

Arminians believe in sola gratia, sola fide. THAT is the gospel, jeff. You on the other hand, don't believe the biblical gospel.

Quote:
I'm refererencing BEFORE the Fall, jeff.

--Ah, so you believe that God was only able to create non-evil things BEFORE that dang Fall ruined His abilities? What happened to omnipotence?

God has ONLY created "good" creation. The Fall changed all that, jeff. Isn't Mormo-god "omnipotent"? Or is it he couldn't do a thing? :confused:

Quote:
And NO, God did NOT directly create me. Only Adam and Eve were "created by God", i.e. directly.

--Ah, yes, God is now merely a "secondary creator." So you believe that after the 6th day of creation, God said "That's it, I'm done creating, let someone else take over the *** from here on out, and good luck to them, whoever they are."

Right. God CEASED His creation on the 6th day. NOW He SUSTAINS His creation.

Quote:
The Bible teaches we are BORN IN SIN.

---But not created in sin, you say. How can you be born without being created? Sounds like a case of anti-equivocation: Creating an imaginary difference between two words that are actually synonymous. Hey, you are a creator--you created a fallacious argument! (But just a secondary creator, right? )

Only Adam and Eve were CREATED directly by God...and NOT PRO-created as Mormons believe!!!

Quote:
We have the sin nature, and BECAUSE we possess the sin nature, we WILL sin.

---So if God --"the father of spirits," according to the Bible--didn't create your spirit, then who did? Did Mr. and Mrs. FJD Sr. really have the power to create spirits? I thought it was supposed to be the MORMONS who ascribe superhuman powers to mere mortals. Or is it "only a deity can create spirits" that those pesky Mormons believe?

I didn't say He didn't "create" my spirit...but the question that the bible does NOT answer is how the "spirit" comes about in the human body. Primary creation or secondary creation...we don't KNOW, but God "created" us one way or another.

Quote:
Again, I'm referring to ORIGINAL CREATION BEFORE SIN ENTERED THE COSMOS.

--Interesting statement. So you believe that sin entered our cosmos from some...other...cosmos? Who let it in? Why didn't they put up some cherubim with light sabers to keep this sin from entering our cosmos? Seems like our cosmos was a pretty utopian place, until sin entered from the "sin cosmos" and nobody tried to stop it. Look what a disaster our cosmos has turned into, and it could have been prevented, if only our cosmos had not been invaded by "The sin from another cosmos." Wasn't that the ***le of an old, black-and-white sci-fi movie?

Meaning, sin didn't exist in this one and only "universe", jeff. Ultimately, the answer lies with God Himself as to why He permitted sin/evil to come about.

Quote:
No one is "good" in our NATURAL, FALLEN STATE, jeff.

---Not even Mother Teresa?...

Are you declaring Mother Teresa has NEVER having been REGENERATED or "born again"?? Do you really believe that Mother Teresa NEVER sinned, either before regeneration or ***uming she was, afterwards? :confused:

...It's hard for me to make myself say out loud "Mother Teresa was not good." Maybe it's easier for you to form the words. How about the men who infallibly, inerrantly wrote each book that's now in the official (non-Catholic) Bible? Not good men? Again, it's hard for me to make myself say "The Bible was written by evil men." It just doesn't seem right to me. How much "training" (conditioning) did you have to undergo, before "The Bible was written by evil men" was easy for you to say? Isn't that a symptom of a cult mentalilty---being conditioned to say incorrect things until the subject genuinely believes he is saying something that is true?

You judge others by men's standards, jeff...and definitely NOT God's.

Quote:
Did you purposely equivocate my remarks??

---Why--am I good at it? (Remember there are none that are good....)

Yeah. You're good at doing BAD things ( like equivocation), jeff. :p

alanmolstad

01-26-2013, 09:57 AM

All of God's creations (speaking of living creations) are a testimony of life producing life after its kind. That life begets life, in kind.

Is the God of orthodoxy unable to do this himself?...yes....god , the only being beyond time, is unable to make another god that would also be beyond time.......there is only one......the moment you think something that called itself 'god' is said to have reproduced you know you are dealing with a false god

alanmolstad

03-25-2014, 01:22 PM

James Banta

03-25-2014, 08:00 PM

yes, you can not make a "new" eternal non-made, non-created, from everlasting to everlasting God"

If God puts limits on Himself that He would not allow a being like Him to exist before Him, and have the same restriction about one being allowed to be formed after Him then it is impossible because what God says, He will do. He gives no excuses for the operation of His will.. IHS jim

BigJulie

04-22-2014, 09:22 PM

No. God does that through the biological process He created.

I'm just saying, it's not logical that an "uncreated" being could be created. God has no beginning or end, so He was not created...He has always existed. How could, even HE, "create" something that has always existed?

Interesting thought Libby, as I am sure you are aware that LDS believe that our natures (intelligences) are not created, but always were. In this way, our nature to sin was not created by God---but always was.

Libby

04-22-2014, 09:37 PM

Interesting thought Libby, as I am sure you are aware that LDS believe that our natures (intelligences) are not created, but always were. In this way, our nature to sin was not created by God---but always was.

Interesting. I never really understood the "nature" of "intelligences". I know some were supposed to be "brighter" or above the others, in some way (like Christ)...but, never really grasped the concept very well.

BigJulie

04-22-2014, 11:28 PM

Interesting. I never really understood the "nature" of "intelligences". I know some were supposed to be "brighter" or above the others, in some way (like Christ)...but, never really grasped the concept very well.

It is the part of us that is eternal. As is described in the book of Abraham, while there are some that are "brighter" than others, God's is brighter then all.

The way I explain this to non-members is the concept that God is eternal and everlasting without beginning and without end. As such, there is no beginning and no end. I believe when the Bible reads "in the beginning"---it is speaking of the beginning of time as measured here on earth. So, if God is eternal, then we are eternal to God...or at least, some part of us is eternal to God. To me, that is our intelligence--the basis of who we are.

Because of this, God does not cause sin. He did not create sin. Sin was not created because of the absence of good--because even in that absence, something would have to have some basis to do evil---to make the choice to turn away from God. If God created our nature, then he created this "sin" within us, so to speak. Yet, he did not do that. Instead, he gave us power to act on our own natures. The fall did not create our natures---the fall was because of our natures.

God explains to us that His nature is brighter than all of us. He understands that our natures will keep us from experiencing what He experiences. So, he set a plan in motion that would allow us to both discover our natures and to overcome our natures---through Jesus Christ. Through Jesus Christ, we have the freedom to see who we really are.

Then, once we realize we fall short of the glory of God, he provided a way for our nature to be purified----through love, through the atonement. Once we choose this, total submission, he can sanctify us and purify us so that we can be like Him. In this way, we can experience the total joy, peace, and happiness that He experiences because of His perfect ability to love.

Billyray

04-23-2014, 12:18 AM

. . .LDS believe that our natures (intelligences) are not created, but always were. . .
Mormonism
1. Intelligences were not created by God but rather have co-existed-- in some form--for eternity past
2. Intelligences are somehow taken and packaged into a spirit body which was begotten and born to heavenly parents in a pre earth life
3. The gods in Genesis 1 formed man in the image of the many gods.

One major issue--which I have tried to get you to elaborate more fully--is in Genesis 1. You said that the "US" are gods such as Jesus and other gods. Can you tell me who are these other gods that you are speaking about? And what does it mean when it speaks of all of these gods creating man after OUR image?

Libby

04-23-2014, 12:46 AM

It is the part of us that is eternal. As is described in the book of Abraham, while there are some that are "brighter" than others, God's is brighter then all.

The way I explain this to non-members is the concept that God is eternal and everlasting without beginning and without end. As such, there is no beginning and no end. I believe when the Bible reads "in the beginning"---it is speaking of the beginning of time as measured here on earth. So, if God is eternal, then we are eternal to God...or at least, some part of us is eternal to God. To me, that is our intelligence--the basis of who we are.

Because of this, God does not cause sin. He did not create sin. Sin was not created because of the absence of good--because even in that absence, something would have to have some basis to do evil---to make the choice to turn away from God. If God created our nature, then he created this "sin" within us, so to speak. Yet, he did not do that. Instead, he gave us power to act on our own natures. The fall did not create our natures---the fall was because of our natures.

God explains to us that His nature is brighter than all of us. He understands that our natures will keep us from experiencing what He experiences. So, he set a plan in motion that would allow us to both discover our natures and to overcome our natures---through Jesus Christ. Through Jesus Christ, we have the freedom to see who we really are.

Then, once we realize we fall short of the glory of God, he provided a way for our nature to be purified----through love, through the atonement. Once we choose this, total submission, he can sanctify us and purify us so that we can be like Him. In this way, we can experience the total joy, peace, and happiness that He experiences because of His perfect ability to love.

So, God's creation in the Garden story is just about creating physical bodies...not the creation of the souls that enter these bodies. Yes, I actually do remember this.

I just hadn't thought about the "sin" aspect of it.

Billyray

04-23-2014, 01:09 AM

So, God's creation in the Garden story is just about creating physical bodies...not the creation of the souls that enter these bodies. Yes, I actually do remember this.

Gen 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.

A big problem that BigJ has with this concept (from the mormon perspective) is that in Genesis 1 it states "Let US" made man in "OUR image" after "OUR likeness". When I ask her about who exactly are these gods that created man's physical body she stated that Jesus was one of these gods that was spoken about along with other gods. She would not tell me who these other gods were but I can only ***ume from prior discussions that these other gods are other spirit children. Since it says "LET US" make man this means that these other gods were involved in the creation of physical bodies. But none of these other gods had physical bodes so "OUR image" and "OUR likeness" could not be a physical body since spirit children did not have physical bodies yet. I would like to hear what BigJ has to say about this.

Libby

04-23-2014, 01:28 AM

Billy, did you ever take out your endowments in the Temple? If you did, you should know what Julie is talking about, in regards to "other gods".

Billyray

04-23-2014, 02:01 AM

Billy, did you ever take out your endowments in the Temple? If you did, you should know what Julie is talking about, in regards to "other gods".
I did go through the temple a long time ago just prior to my lds mission.

But what you have said does nothing to help her predicament with respect to the p***age in Genesis 1. So I am not sure how you think that it does. Perhaps you could elaborate a little bit for me. BTW your are not sharing any secrets about the temple ceremony because a word for word transcription is available for anyone to view on the web.

Libby

04-23-2014, 02:07 AM

I did go through the temple a long time ago just prior to my lds mission.

But what you have said does nothing to help her predicament with respect to the p***age in Genesis 1. So I am not sure how you think that it does. Perhaps you could elaborate a little bit for me. BTW your are not sharing any secrets about the temple ceremony because a word for word transcription is available for anyone to view on the web.

Yes, I know that. I was responding to the question you keep asking Julie about "what gods" were there with Elohim. I thought maybe you didn't really know.

James Banta

04-23-2014, 09:10 AM

Yes, I know that. I was responding to the question you keep asking Julie about "what gods" were there with Elohim. I thought maybe you didn't really know.

I don't believe we do know what Gods were with Elohim (God).. maybe you can tell us, not what mormons believe but what other Gods exist beyond the one true and living God.. IHS jim

alanmolstad

08-02-2016, 04:16 AM

alanmolstad

08-02-2016, 04:21 AM

So you believe God cannot create in kind.very true...he can not do that as he is not a "kind".

BigJulie

08-02-2016, 07:10 AM

very true...he can not do that as he is not a "kind".

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

Berean

01-24-2017, 11:13 AM

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

Nonsense.

An image is a reflection. When you look in the mirror, does the image you see have the same "nature" and "character" that you have? No, it does not. It does not contain any of the physical characteristics nor the nature that you posses. It looks exactly like you but what you see is not really you, it's only an image of you that is being reflected off of you.

The same is true of the word "likeness." A likeness is a representation or a semblance of appearance and does not contain any of the material or physical characteristics of the original.

"Kind" refers to a group or cl*** of objects with the same nature or character.

Clearly, man is not made after God's "kind."

dberrie2000

02-06-2017, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by BigJulie View Post Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:

Nonsense.

What do you consider nonsense about Gen 1:26?

An image is a reflection. When you look in the mirror, does the image you see have the same "nature" and "character" that you have? No, it does not. It does not contain any of the physical characteristics nor the nature that you posses. It looks exactly like you but what you see is not really you, it's only an image of you that is being reflected off of you.

The same is true of the word "likeness." A likeness is a representation or a semblance of appearance and does not contain any of the material or physical characteristics of the original.

"Kind" refers to a group or cl*** of objects with the same nature or character.

Clearly, man is not made after God's "kind."

All offspring are of the same species as their Father:

Acts 17:29---King James Version (KJV)
29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

Does anyone have any exceptions to that?

Hebrews 12:9---King James Version (KJV)
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?