What was lost or destroyed that joseph smith 'restored'

[Christian]

that was ever actually taught or believed in Christ's first century church.

NOTHING, of course. NOT ONE THING.

Prove me wrong if you think you can.

[Erundur]

that was ever actually taught or believed in Christ's first century church.
From the other thread:

Three Degrees of Glory
Nature of God
Living apostles
The Spirit World - Spirit Prion/Paradise
Open Canon
Baptism for the dead
Man's preexistence

[teenapenny]

From the other thread:

Three Degrees of Glory
Nature of God
Living apostles
The Spirit World - Spirit Prion/Paradise
Open Canon
Baptism for the dead
Man's preexistence
Where is the proof?

[Erundur]

Where is the proof?
In this thread (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?3549-Mormons-can-t-find-ONE-THING-smith-restored). And the Bible.

[teenapenny]

In this thread (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?3549-Mormons-can-t-find-ONE-THING-smith-restored). And the Bible.
Sorry, I see not proof.

[theway]

that was ever actually taught or believed in Christ's first century church.

NOTHING, of course. NOT ONE THING.

Prove me wrong if you think you can.
What is this now, your 20th thread about exactly the same topic?
I guess you don't mind being embarr***ed over and over again.

Well then I will post THE ONE THING that you can not deny, and in which you have yet to refute.

The Three Degrees of Glory

(Sometimes called the Three Heavens in the early Christian Church)

[Christian]

erunder posted: From the other thread:

Three Degrees of Glory

Of the sun, moon, and stars. NOT as joey smith's pretended 'places you go when you die.' NO first century Christians EVER taught such stupidity.
Nature of God

Joey smith's version is of a man who became a god through 'exaltation,' but was ALWAYS God from eternity to eternity. NOT the God the first century CHRISTIANS believed at all. Just some dung joey smith INVENTED.

Living apostles

We CHRISTIANS believe the Living Apostles. Ours simply live a different place. . .in Heaven. NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN EVER pretended that you should have a popularity contest and elect 'new' apostles for each generation.

More dung INVENTED BY joey smith.

The Spirit World - Spirit Prion/Paradise

I guess you have never read the Bible. Heaven, angels, and demons are all there and we have never not believed that.

of course NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN EVER pretended that you should believe Jesus was a 'spirit baby' of God the Father, OR that Jesus was a 'spirit-brother' of satan and the demons. Joey Smith INVENTED THAT.

Open Canon

Joey smith invented a bunch of dung writings that joey smith 'called' scripture. He found some suckers to go along with him. NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN EVER pretended that you should believe the mormon-specific dung smithy put in his writings.

Baptism for the dead

NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN EVER baptized anyone for anyone who had died.

joey smith INVENTED his own practice.

Man's preexistence

The Bible SAYS JESUS existed from the beginning (John 1:1-3, 14)
The rest of us were CREATED BY HIM.

NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIAN EVER pretended that any 'father god' had sex with goddesses who plunked out zillions of "spirit babies.' That is dung invented by joey smith. Nothing more.

STILL nothing from the mormon dung that joey smith didn't merely INVENT instead of 'restoring.'

[Christian]

way posted:
What is this now, your 20th thread about exactly the same topic?

Probably more like the 12th

I guess you don't mind being embarr***ed over and over again.

So far I have not been embar***ed by you or any other mormon who tried to rationalize or redefine things away.

Well then I will post THE ONE THING that you can not deny, and in which you have yet to refute.

The Three Degrees of Glory
1 Cor 15:40-41
40 There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.
NKJV

Some things you forgot to notice:
1) NO 'tellestrial' anything. . .joey smith INVENTED that one.
2) The sun, moon, and stars have glory. They are NOT destinations for Christians.
3) NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIANS EVER claimed more than one heaven where we would go when we died. Joey smith INVENTED his own theory.

(Sometimes called the Three Heavens in the early Christian Church)

NOT the same heavens. THESE heavens that the Jews believed in were
1) the sky where the clouds and birds flew
2) the sky where the sun, moon, and stars are.
3) the heaven where God lives. (ONE HEAVEN, NOT THREE)

NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIANS EVERtaught that you might go to one of THREE HEAVENS OF ANY KIND.

Joey smith merely INVENTED that dung theory.

So unless you can find and CITE a first century writing to DISPROVE what I have said, you remain refuted.

And as in previous posts, joe smith's INVENTIONS which you seem to subscribe to is once again DEBUNKED.

So it is YOU who should be embar***ed, not me. YOU have been unable to present any of joey's cococtions that he didn't just INVENT HIMSELF instead of 'restoring' as he claimed.

[Christian]

In this thread (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?3549-Mormons-can-t-find-ONE-THING-smith-restored). And the Bible.

And IF you bother to read ALL of the posts in that thread, you find EVERY ONE of joey smith's so-called 'restorations' easily debunked and proven to be false.

And if you actually KNEW your Bible, you would KNOW that he was a false prophet.

[Erundur]

Sorry, I see not proof.
That's too bad.

[Christian]

That's too bad.

What's REALLY too bad is that erunder CANNOT DEMONSTRATE the REAL TRUTH that joey smith's junk was all made up.

[theway]

way posted:
What is this now, your 20th thread about exactly the same topic?

Probably more like the 12th

I guess you don't mind being embarr***ed over and over again.

So far I have not been embar***ed by you or any other mormon who tried to rationalize or redefine things away.

Well then I will post THE ONE THING that you can not deny, and in which you have yet to refute.

The Three Degrees of Glory
1 Cor 15:40-41
40 There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41 There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.
NKJV

Some things you forgot to notice:
1) NO 'tellestrial' anything. . .joey smith INVENTED that one.
2) The sun, moon, and stars have glory. They are NOT destinations for Christians.
3) NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIANS EVER claimed more than one heaven where we would go when we died. Joey smith INVENTED his own theory.

(Sometimes called the Three Heavens in the early Christian Church)

[COLOR=#0000FF]NOT the same heavens. THESE heavens that the Jews believed in were
1) the sky where the clouds and birds flew
2) the sky where the sun, moon, and stars are.
3) the heaven where God lives. (ONE HEAVEN, NOT THREE)

NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIANS EVERtaught that you might go to one of THREE HEAVENS OF ANY KIND.

Joey smith merely INVENTED that dung theory.

So unless you can find and CITE a first century writing THE SCRIPTURE YOU JUST POSTED IS THE FIRST CENTURY WRITING...
and here is how "they" understood the verse.


Our understanding of the p***age indeed is, that the Apostle, wishing to describe the great difference among those who rise again in glory, i.e., of the saints, borrowed a comparison from the heavenly bodies, saying, "One is the glory of the sun, another the glory of the moon, another the glory of the stars." Origen, De Principiis 2:10:2, in ANF 4:294.

And another...


And having said this, he ascends again to the heaven, saying, "There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon." For as in the earthly bodies there is a difference, so also in the heavenly; and that difference no ordinary one, but reaching even to the uttermost: there being not only a difference between sun and moon, and stars, but also between stars and stars. For what though they be all in the heaven? yet some have a larger, others a less share of glory. What do we learn from hence? That although they be all in God's kingdom, all shall not enjoy the same reward; and though all sinners be in hell, all shall not endure the same punishment. John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1 Corinthians 41:4, in NPNF Series 1, 12:251.

And another...


Conformably, therefore, there are various abodes, according to the worth of those who have believed . . . . These chosen abodes, which are three, are indicated by the numbers in the Gospel--the thirty, the sixtyi, the hundred. And the perfect inheritance belongs to those who attain to "a perfect man," according to the image of the Lord . . . . To the likeness of God, then, he that is introduced into adoption and the friendship of God, to the just inheritance of the lords and gods is brought; if he be perfected, according to the Gospel, as the Lord Himself taught.Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6:14, in ANF 2:506.

Yet we all know you are going to pretend that these do not exist... So I'm only posting for the Lurkers, which by now are embarr***ed for you, even if you are not.

[dberrie2000]

What was lost or destroyed that joseph smith 'restored'

that was ever actually taught or believed in Christ's first century church.

NOTHING, of course. NOT ONE THING.

Prove me wrong if you think you can.

The Reformation testifies against you.

[dberrie2000]

[COLOR=#0000FF]NO FIRST CENTURY CHRISTIANS EVERtaught that you might go to one of THREE HEAVENS OF ANY KIND.


2 Corinthians 12:2---King James Version (KJV)
2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

[Christian]

cog posted:

Christian, your idea that there's no open canon has a major flaw: you would have to reject the entire New Testament. Do you know how these testimonies, epistles, general epistles, and the revelation were made into the present-day New Testament?

Yes, I have studied the history of the Scriptures (along with the historicity, mathematical probabilities, preservation of scriptures, translation, etc for about 50 years now. . .

They were compiled by the early church. The canon was open during the entire compilation process which took a few CENTURIES.

The compilation into one book took about 3 centuries. The scriptures were SCRIPTURE before that. Paul's letter to Timothy pointing out that all Scripture is inspired by God (literally 'breathed out by God' in the original language texts) was one of the last letters he wrote. The rest were mostly completed before that and were in use by Christians in Christ's church.

The entirety of the scriptures were open from the time of creation until Revelation was canonized in 392 AD. Why don't you believe in the Revelation of Peter? It was part of the canon before the Revelation of John.

Which canon? Hippo? Constantine? Which?

The canon was so open that books were added which were eventually removed. Give me one good reason why God would have an open canon for millenniums and all of a sudden "OK, I'm done. I'm never giving anymore revelation."

The question you SHOULD BE ASKING is 'why should we accept joe smith's writings at all when they CONTRADICT what has been SCRIPTURE all along?

Why should we accept self-contradictory junk like the writings of smith?

There is nothing in the Bible about open or closed canon scripture, just scripture.

So joe smith's writings are supposed to be scripture just because HE SAYS SO? GOD has never said so. CHRIST'S CHURCH has never accepted joe smith's self-contradictory bible-contradicting stuff as 'scripture.' Why should we?

The pattern has always been that God reveals new scripture in dispensations.

At least that is your self-serving theory.

Do you think Exodus was written one day and Malachi was written the day after?

I have no idea how long it took to pen Exodus or Malachi. Neither do you.

Revelation wasn't put at the end to be the end of the Bible, it was put at the end because it prophesies of the end times.

Another one of your theories. . .but flawed.

Daniel prophesies of end times too.

So do many of the other books.

You have no idea of why the books of the Bible are in the order in which they are ordered. You are merely WILDLY SPECULATING junk.

Nothing from Genesis to Revelation alludes to scripture having an end. If God is eternal, and He is, then so is the amount of scripture He shall give.

But a LOT says that God does not lie (that would mean He does not contradict Himself either), which DISQUALIFIES joe smith's writings.

Sorry, but you have no case. . .

[Christian]

berry posted:

Originally Posted by ChristianWhat was lost or destroyed that joseph smith 'restored'

that was ever actually taught or believed in Christ's first century church.

NOTHING, of course. NOT ONE THING.

Prove me wrong if you think you can.


The Reformation testifies against you.[/QUOTE]

Not at all. The reformation testifies against the roman catholic religion, nobody else. We CHRISTIANS have nothing to do with that.

The fact that you STILL CANNOT FIND ANYTHING that joe smith restored that was ever lost or missing that was ever believed by the first century church STILL TESTiFIES AGAINST YOU and your false prophet.

[dberrie2000]

Not at all. The reformation testifies against the roman catholic religion, nobody else. We CHRISTIANS have nothing to do with that.

Is your claim the Reformers were not Christian?

[Christian]

Is your claim the Reformers were not Christian?

Are you 'reading challenged?'

I said we CHRISTIANS have nothing to do with the rcc. NOTHING AT ALL about any of those who tried to change the rcc back to GENUINE Christianity 'not being Christian.' You seem to have an intentional difficulty understanding the most simple of truths. . .

1 Cor 2:14
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
NASU

Yes, you DO seem to have such difficulty.

[Christian]

WOW.... simply..... WOW

All this time and this is what you thought Joseph Smith taught???

You know.... For the past couple of days something in my mind kept telling me that because of your lack of Biblical knowledge, history, common sense, or your inability to comprehend the simplest of concepts, that you couldn't be more than 8 or 9 years old.

I was wrong.... You can't possibly be more than 5 years old.

Whether I get kicked off this forum for saying so, doesn't matter any more, I simply can not deal with such idiocy any more.... Entertainment or not, my time is too valuable to be wasted like this.

In other words, you have no answer for why joey smith took references to the wonder and beauty of the sun, moon, and stars and INVENTED a 'Celestial,' 'telestrial,' and 'terestrial' kingdom that he pretended that God's people go to?

I see, not being able to answer does make your position a waste of time. . .

And yes, I DID report your personal attack on me.

BTW, I am over 70 years old, in case you were HONESTLY interested. . .

[Christian]

STILL NOT ONE THING specific to mormonism that joey smith didn't simply INVENT.

[dberrie2000]

Not at all. The reformation testifies against the roman catholic religion, nobody else. We CHRISTIANS have nothing to do with that.


Is your claim the Reformers were not Christian?


Are you 'reading challenged?'

I said we CHRISTIANS have nothing to do with the rcc. NOTHING AT ALL about any of those who tried to change the rcc back to GENUINE Christianity 'not being Christian.'

The way it read appeared as if you were saying the Reformers were not Christian, IMO.

If the Reformers tried to change the rcc back to Christianity--then they must have thought there was an apostasy from Christianity.

[Phoenix]

The reformation testifies against the roman catholic religion, nobody else. We CHRISTIANS have nothing to do with that.
what does that mean? that Christians have nothing to do with catholicism? catholicism is one of the largest and oldest segments of Christianity. Indeed, protestantism is a faction OF catholicism. Martin Luther was happy being a catholic priest. He would have died a happy catholic priest if his recommendations for reform would have been followed.


The fact that you STILL CANNOT FIND ANYTHING that joe smith restored that was ever lost or missing that was ever believed by the first century church STILL TESTiFIES AGAINST YOU and your false prophet.
Baptism for the dead.

[Christian]

phoenix posted:
what does that mean? that Christians have nothing to do with catholicism?

Yep.

catholicism is one of the largest and oldest segments of Christianity.

catholicism hasn't been honestly 'CHRISTIAN' for many centuries. What you have today (and had in joe smith's time) was religious theater and heathenism. That is all they have.

Indeed, protestantism is a faction OF catholicism.

"Protestantism" is a made-up never-neverland invented by the rcc in which they dump ALL non-Christian folks such as mormonism, branch davidians, white supremecists, and muslims.

CHRISTIANITY however NEVER WAS ROMAN CATHOLIC.
It has ALWAYS been faithful to Jesus Christ instead.

joe smith didn't know that.
joe smith was wrong.

Martin Luther was happy being a catholic priest. He would have died a happy catholic priest if his recommendations for reform would have been followed.

Yes Luther would have been happy if the rcc had turned from its ways and come to Jesus Christ, OF COURSE.


The fact that you STILL CANNOT FIND ANYTHING that joe smith restored that was ever lost or missing that was ever believed by the first century church STILL TESTiFIES AGAINST YOU and your false prophet.

Baptism for the dead.

NOT ONE P***AGE IN THE BIBLE says that EVEN ONE CHRISTIAN ANYWHERE was ever 'baptized for the dead.' joe smith saw a short p***age about UNBELIEVERS being baptized for the dead, thought it was about believers, and invented a whole religious concoction (I mean doctrine) for his manmade religion.

STILL NOTHING FROM JOE SMITH THAT WAS LOST OR DESTROYED that he could have 'restored.' SOME 'restored church' you have!

[Christian]

The way it read appeared as if you were saying the Reformers were not Christian, IMO.

If the Reformers tried to change the rcc back to Christianity--then they must have thought there was an apostasy from Christianity.

Yep, just like if reformers had tried to change brigham youngs religion back to joe smith's religion, then they must have thought their was an apostasy from joe smith's religion too.

That is what apostasies are.

Of course the BIBLE tells us about folks who leave CHRISTIANITY:

1 John 2:18-19
18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.
NKJV


So you must think that when the 'fundamentalist' group left the Utah mormons, the utah mormon gospel and authority was lost. SAME KIND OF apostasy. . .from your own group instead from the rcc. :p

[Christian]

Did you completely ignore the quote showing that Joseph Smith prophesied of Brigham being the next leader of the church? I guess after you hit 70 you can ignore anything, right? ;)

So your god contradicts Himself once again?

CITATION, please. . .

I guess if YOU say it happened. . .it musta gotta happened!

WHY should I believe you? CITE your evidence if you think joe smith ever said that anywhere other than the newspaper reports that also said he prophesied there were people living on the moon, wearing quaker clothing. . .

I don't think you can.

But the mormon church DID return the written patriarchial blessing to the RLDS, didn't they?

[Christian]

cog posted:
Already gave a citation. Go look on your "Which Mormonism" thread. I gave the quote and source.

I won't bother. I don't go 'web-hopping' for every moron who can't make his own case.

IF you think you can come up with the quote and source, let us know. UNTIL THEN, you have no case at all.

And who is the "your god" you keep referencing? Joseph Smith isn't our God. Our God is your God, He is the God of all.He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to atone for mankind's sins.

No, your god is NOT the God of the REAL CHRISTIANS. They are DIFFERENT. Joey's is fictional. The BIBLICAL GOD is the REAL ONE

The mormon god was invented by joe smith who said he was formerly a man (king follet discourse) and BECAME a god. According to joe smith, he is one of MANY gods extant (pgp abraham 3 and 4:1ff) Mormonism is POLYTHEISTIC (believes in the existance of more than one God)

The God of the BIBLE (the REAL ONE is the only God ANYWHERE; He doesn't even KNOW any others. (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8, etc etc etc.) CHRISTIANITY IS MONOTHEISTIC.

NOT the same

You said Joseph Smith said his son would lead the church. Where is YOUR citation?

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

[Christian]

that was ever actually taught or believed in Christ's first century church.

NOTHING, of course. NOT ONE THING.

Prove me wrong if you think you can.

STILL NOTHING 'restored' instead of merely INVENTED by joey smith.

CERTAINLY no "restored church."

INSTEAD all we have is a NEWLY INVENTED CHURCH (1800's style).

[Phoenix]

Did you not read anything I said? It's in the "Which Mormonism" thread that YOU started. Are you too lazy to go to your own thread and read the reference? Because you don't want to look at the reference I gave, something you still haven't given, you want to say I don't have a case.
"You may have posted it but I don't wanna look. Since I don't see it (because of my choice to not look) that means you automatically have no case" is a lame at***ude you are having. I guess we should all treat any reference you give as nonexistent since you like to do the same. Until you are willing to look at the source instead of turning a blind eye, you will NEVER have a case about anything.
Real Christians and trinitarians aren't the same thing. Trinitarianism comes from Paganism. We believe in the biblical God but nobody can convince you of anything. Because you're 70 you're set in your ways and don't care what others say. You have to always be right because you've lived longer. Age doesn't equal spiritual wisdom. That is something you lack.

As far as the so-called reference you gave, it has two flaws. 1, it's Wikipedia and would get you laughed at if you were to use that webpage for a college ***ignment. 2, nowhere in that is there mention of Joseph Smith saying his son would lead the church. I, however, have backed up my claim. Not my fault you're too lazy to read posts in a thread YOU started. By the way, need I remind you that you asked for a reference in the other thread. Just saying.

what i find most disappointing is not the claims of 'i disagree with your beliefs' because such claims are to be expected wherever people with differing beliefs talk to each other. indeed, even identical twins will disagree over some things. at this stage of our existence no two of us have exactly the same beliefs.
2 reasonable people can disagree over something, and still remain reasonable people.
it is not necessarily an insult to be told 'i disagree with your belief about ____.'


no, what i find most disappointing is the more insulting claim 'it is impossible that you and i could be worshiping the same God, and since i worship the real god, it's a certainty that you worship the wrong or nonexistent god.'

such a claim implies knowledge about God that the person probably doesn't really have, plus it implies, to an extent, that one person can read the other's mind and thus knows exactly that person's feelings and beliefs.

using this arrogant, presumptuous reasoning, a protestant and a catholic could tell each other 'you and i worship different gods and yours is the wrong one.'

a southern baptist and an episcopalian could tell each other 'you and i worship different gods and yours is the wrong one.'

a 5-pointer and an arminian could tell each other 'you and i worship different gods and yours is the wrong one.'

and on and on, to the point where the flaw in the reasoning becomes really obvious.

an ABA baptist and an SBA baptist....

it might make more sense to look for things people have in common, instead of ways they can be divided.

[Christian]

Phoenix posted:

what i find most disappointing is not the claims of 'i disagree with your beliefs' because such claims are to be expected wherever people with differing beliefs talk to each other. indeed, even identical twins will disagree over some things. at this stage of our existence no two of us have exactly the same beliefs.
2 reasonable people can disagree over something, and still remain reasonable people.
it is not necessarily an insult to be told 'i disagree with your belief about ____.'


no, what i find most disappointing is the more insulting claim 'it is impossible that you and i could be worshiping the same God, and since i worship the real god, it's a certainty that you worship the wrong or nonexistent god.'

How do YOU RECONCILE the TRUTH that there is only ONE REAL GOD EXISTING ANYWHERE and the god of joseph smith which HIS CHURCH tells you is one of MANY REAL GODS extant? (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8, etc etc etc. VERSUS the king follet sermon, pgp chapters 3 and 4 where it says 'and they, (that is the gods). . .' over and over again?

There CANNOT BE and at the same time NOT BE REAL GODS OTHER THAN THE ONE SINGLE GOD OF THE BIBLE. To exist and not exist at the same time is simply a fallacy, a LIE. The gods added by joseph smith's INVENTION were lies.

such a claim implies knowledge about God that the person probably doesn't really have,

EXCEPT THAT I have shown you difinitively in the references above that we CHRISTIANS really DO HAVE THAT KNOWLEDGE. Smith's god was INVENTED BY SMITH.

plus it implies, to an extent, that one person can read the other's mind and thus knows exactly that person's feelings and beliefs.

No, it simply demonstrates that we believe you when you indicate you believe the mormon doctrines.

using this arrogant, presumptuous reasoning, a protestant and a catholic could tell each other 'you and i worship different gods and yours is the wrong one.'

a southern baptist and an episcopalian could tell each other 'you and i worship different gods and yours is the wrong one.'

a 5-pointer and an arminian could tell each other 'you and i worship different gods and yours is the wrong one.'

and on and on, to the point where the flaw in the reasoning becomes really obvious.

an ABA baptist and an SBA baptist....

it might make more sense to look for things people have in common, instead of ways they can be divided.

It doesn't matter if we have EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE WORLD IN COMMON, if we follow the WRONG GODS we will go to Hell..

[Phoenix]

it doesn't matter that you think the LDS worship a different and wrong God. What matters is whether you are judging them in violation of Jesus' teachings in matt 7.

if the LDS have beliefs about YOUR God that differ from YOUR beliefs about YOUR God, it's still the SAME God to a major degree.

[Christian]

phoenix posted:

it doesn't matter that you think the LDS worship a different and wrong God. What matters is whether
whether you are judging them in violation of Jesus' teachings in matt 7.


You don't think it 'matters' that your religion worships a different and wrong god?

I think it does.

As for what Matthew 7 says about judging:

Matt 7:1-5
"Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. 3 And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.
NKJV

As is true of the GOD OF THE BIBLE
The God I love, worship, and serve is THE ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE; NO OTHERS EXIST IN REALITY. (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 etc etc)

According to mormonism, THEIR god is one of MANY gods extant. (pgp abraham 3 and 4)

if the LDS have beliefs about YOUR God that differ from YOUR beliefs about YOUR God, it's still the SAME God to a major degree.

The lds do not worship MY GOD. They follow their own gods. MY GOD is NOT their god to ANY 'degree.'

He either IS the same GOD as yours or IS NOT the same god as yours. THERE ARE NO 'degrees.' They are either THE SAME, OR THEY ARE NOT.

Your gods are false; the creations of your false prophet joey smith.

STILL NOTHING LOST OR DESTROYED FROM CHRIST'S ORIGINAL CHURCH.

No "restoration" of Christ's church demonstrated by joey smith's followers either. Not even a NEED for such 'restoration' demonstrated by them.

Yet they 'claim' to be a 'restored church.'

[Phoenix]

You don't think it 'matters' that your religion worships a different and wrong god?

i said it doesn't matter whether you think that. try to be a better reader.

[alanmolstad]

well.......as for the hair?

Unless the color is completely all fake a the result of a dye ***,I got to say that if I say that "ChildOfGod" has red hair"....and you say, "No its black", that chances are we better make sure we are actually talking about the same guy,cuz chances are we are not.


Now personal traits are different.
I can say "ChildOfGod is a nice guy"and you can say, "No he (or she) is a real ****" and we could be talking about the very same person, just differing on our personal views of the same person...

[alanmolstad]

it doesn't matter that you think the LDS worship a different and wrong God. What matters is whether you are judging them in violation of Jesus' teachings in matt 7.

if the LDS have beliefs about YOUR God that differ from YOUR beliefs about YOUR God, it's still the SAME God to a major degree.


It does matter if a person things another religion worships a false god to be sure...matters a great deal.

When a person says he is a "Prophet" and claims to have a message from god,then we are instructed to put the words of that prophet to the test of scripture and judge that prophet and his words.

Doing less would be wrong....

[Phoenix]

Let me try to help here Phoenix.

Christian, Phoenix isn't saying it doesn't matter if we worship different gods. What Phoenix is saying is we worship the SAME God, we just have different beliefs about His characteristics.
Example: some people say I have red hair, others say brown and some people say nearly black. Does that mean they're talking about 3 different people? No. Same person, different views.
Thanks, I do appreciate the help. Sometimes extra help is needed in order to help some people understand a point or concept.

[Christian]

i said it doesn't matter whether you think that. try to be a better reader.

Neither does it mater what YOU think; smith was STILL a false prophet, leading you to a false god.

About the reading. . .practice what you preach! :p

[Christian]

cog posted

Let me try to help here Phoenix

It appears phoenix needs all the help he/she can get!

Christian, Phoenix isn't saying it doesn't matter if we worship different gods. What Phoenix is saying is we worship the SAME God, we just have different beliefs about His characteristics.
Example: some people say I have red hair, others say brown and some people say nearly black. Does that mean they're talking about 3 different people? No. Same person, different views.

Not true at all. We aren't comparing personal traits. We are comparing GODS. Yours is one of many, a man who was 'exalted' into being a god, but was always a god, never changing from eternity to eternity (NOW THAT'S AN OXYMORON!).

CHRISTIAN God however is THE ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE, WAS NEVER A MAN, AND DOESN'T EVEN KNOW OF ANY OTHER REAL GODS ANYWHERE.

NOT the same God. NOT the same 'Person.' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EN***IES.

Yours is a fraud, a self-contradictory oxymoron.

The God of the Bible is ALWAYS the same.

YOUR GOD was invented by joey smith.

The God of the BIBLE IS NOT SMITH'S GOD.

[Christian]

Thanks, I do appreciate the help. Sometimes extra help is needed in order to help some people understand a point or concept.

And if you both tell the same lie, someone might believe it. . .

[Phoenix]

yes, childofgod. it's not a lie to say that he wasn't understanding what i said. so i don't see why 'christian' would accuse you of lying about that.

[Christian]

cog posted:

Phoenix needed help because you weren't understanding what was being said.

I understood what he said just fine. Your obfuscation just created mud in the waters for him.

You can claim Joseph Smith was a false prophet all you want. God, the same God of the Bible, answered my prayers and told me the Book of Mormon is true and that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God.

We believe in the same God you do, the difference is your beliefs come from early councils and ours come from Jesus Christ.

Another lie. No you do not believe in the same God I do. YOUR god was invented by joey smith. No, my beliefs do NOT come from early councils, but FROM THE BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD.