no need to restore the truth

[disciple]

Greetings,
Paul wrote the following,
“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Gal 1:6-9
The Gospel message preached by the Apostles and recorded in the New Testament was and is true and complete, and can be either accepted or rejected. There has never been a need for a "restored" gospel. I do not say this with disdain, as I am sure Joseph Smith was indeed searching for truth and you who are Mormons are sincere in your belief as I am in mine, but only one can be right. And since Joseph Smith seems to have done the exact thing Paul warned against, adding to a Gospel that was already complete and declared finished by Jesus Christ and receiving new information form an angel, wouldn't the New Testament account be more reliable than extra-biblical books added in the 1800's? The Gospel didn't need to be restored just preached.

[disciple]

You should add "when we can just change the truth" to the ***le since that's what happened when different false doctrines were introduced like the trinity.
Paul didn't say the Gospel wouldn't be lost. In fact, this was him foretelling of the Great Apostasy, something you don't believe in.

Thanks for your reply. How can you cite what Paul "didn't say", he didn't say a lot of things. The Gospel preached by Paul was the one and only true Gospel and if you believe it was lost then you must also believe that God is inept and weak and Jesus died in vain, for many people surely perished waiting for Joseph Smith to restore what was lost. I understand your zeal to prove your beliefs are true, that is human nature but you are trusting the word of Joseph Smith and disregarding the word of Jesus Christ who proclaimed He was God.

[Christian]

You should add "when we can just change the truth" to the ***le since that's what happened when different false doctrines were introduced like the trinity.
Paul didn't say the Gospel wouldn't be lost. In fact, this was him foretelling of the Great Apostasy, something you don't believe in.

Of course Paul NEVER foretold of any COMPLETE apostasy, any 'loss of the gospel,' or any need to 'restore' Christ's church that could never be lost.

Do you REALLY BELIEVE that joe smith could invent a religion that could outlast what Jesus Christ HIMSELF built?

HOW ARROGANT must smithy be? That he thought HE would do a 'better *** of it' than Jesus (GOD) did?

[disciple]

False. Jesus prophesied of the falling away too. Knowing the Great Apostasy happened doesn't mean we believe God can't do all things. It's simply the fact that man has changed the true gospel into a distorted version of it. The gospel of Jesus Christ is true, we deny the gospel that has been created through men's intervention. Doctrines such as the Trinity and ex niliho have been created by men, not taught by God, Jesus, or the prophets and apostles.

Ok, let's put everything else aside except for this one thing, the deity of Christ. Jesus claimed to be equal with the Father, how can you ignore that and relegate Him to brother of Lucifer?

[Christian]

This IS the church Jesus founded the same Jesus that is of the Bible. You have it backwards. Protestants keep believing that prophets, apostles, more scripture, modern revelation, temples aren't necessary even though they're part of God's order.

Let's see now. . .just because YOU say it, we must believe in the fairytales of joe smith? Naah. You aren't that convincing.

But unless you can show a COMPLETE apostasy from Christianity, SOME basis for joey smith's fallacious claim that we 'musta lost' some of our authority to speak/act for God, SOME basis for joey smith's fallacious claim that HIS RELIGION, STARTED IN THE EARLY 1830's IS the church Jesus Christ built in BIBLICAL TIMES, you have NOTHING TO OFFER ANYBODY.

NOBODY needed to restore the TRUTH of GOD. GOD said IN SCRIPTURE,

John 17:16-17
17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.
NKJV

Even your false prophet joey smith acknowledged that the BIBLE is the Word of God (no 'translation problems here, btw, so you have no excuse). And we have every word of the BIBLE handy every day.

Your made up modern-day prophets, apostles, more scripture, 'modern' revelation (that hasn't happened in over 75 years from your 'prophets' that can't prophesy, and temples, secret handshakes, magic underwear are nothing more than manmade fairytales. They were made up by joey smith. They were NOT in the first century church, the church JESUS CHRIST BUILT.

Your heathen religion is an abomination to the REAL GOD. Your false gods, false christ, false religions, false writings such as the bom and book of abraham are all fantasies that you have been suckered to believe in.

I am sorry for you. I will pray for your soul to the REAL GOD, the ONLY GOD EXTANT ANYWHERE, not the 'gods' that joey smith invented.

[Christian]

You should add "when we can just change the truth" to the ***le since that's what happened when different false doctrines were introduced like the trinity.
Paul didn't say the Gospel wouldn't be lost. In fact, this was him foretelling of the Great Apostasy, something you don't believe in.

Your false prophet tried to 'just change the truth' when he wrote his fantasies including his fantasies about
a god who was a man, but became a god, but was a god from all eternity to eternity
a jesus who was popped out of the womb of a heavenly goddess along with a satan who is supposedly his 'spirit brother.'
forever families
marriage for eternity
baptism for the dead
temples for Christians
secret temple rituals
secret handshakes
magical undeerwear
etc
etc
etc

When Paul talked a GREAT apostasy (which we certainly DO believe), he NEVER SAID ONE WORD about a COMPLETE apostasy. Paul never said ANYTHING wouldn't be lost. Not your car keys. Not your hat. Not the gospel. He didn't write to disprove things that WOULDN'T HAPPEN. He wrote about things that WOULD happen, that YOU seem not to believe. Stuff like:

1 Peter 1:22-25
22 Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, 23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever, 24 because
"All flesh is as gr***,
And all the glory of man as the flower of the gr***.
The gr*** withers,
And its flower falls away,
25 But the word of the Lord endures forever."
Now this is the word which by the gospel was preached to you.
NKJV

Matt 24:24-25
24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand.
NKJV


YOU seem to be deceived into thinking the gospel (which endures forever, from about 2,000 years ago, didn't 'get lost' or 'restored' at all) was lost to the church JESUS built.

YOU seem to be deceived into thinking that your false prophet could do better than JESUS CHRIST (GOD) at building a church, one that would last forever.

Sorry, but YOU have been suckered.

[Christian]

child posted:


Originally Posted by disciple

Thanks for your reply. How can you cite what Paul "didn't say", he didn't say a lot of things. The Gospel preached by Paul was the one and only true Gospel and if you believe it was lost then you must also believe that God is inept and weak and Jesus died in vain, for many people surely perished waiting for Joseph Smith to restore what was lost. I understand your zeal to prove your beliefs are true, that is human nature but you are trusting the word of Joseph Smith and disregarding the word of Jesus Christ who proclaimed He was God.

False. Jesus prophesied of the falling away too. Knowing the Great Apostasy happened doesn't mean we believe God can't do all things. It's simply the fact that man has changed the true gospel into a distorted version of it. The gospel of Jesus Christ is true, we deny the gospel that has been created through men's intervention. Doctrines such as the Trinity and ex niliho have been created by men, not taught by God, Jesus, or the prophets and apostles.[/QUOTE]


PLEASE SHOW US THE SCRIPTURE that says Jesus prophesied any great falling away by HIS CHURCH.

INDIVIDUALS left.

The Apostle John addressed that:

1 John 2:19
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

Those who left were NOT OF us at all. They were not CHRISTIANS.

Of course you are AFRAID to address the GREAT APOSTASIES of the MORMONS. In less than 200 years there have been OVER 150 APOSTASIES in YOUR MORMON RELIGION. I can list them if you wish.

Does THAT MEAN YOU LOST YOUR AUTHORITY TO ACT FOR GOD? DOES THAT MEAN YOUR SCRIPTURES GOT LOST?

Yet you FALSELY CLAIM that is what happened in the church JESUS CHRIST BUILT. AND HE IS GOD. Joey smith built a MAN-made religion. And you are sucker for it!

[Christian]

child posted:


Originally Posted by disciple

Thanks for your reply. How can you cite what Paul "didn't say", he didn't say a lot of things. The Gospel preached by Paul was the one and only true Gospel and if you believe it was lost then you must also believe that God is inept and weak and Jesus died in vain, for many people surely perished waiting for Joseph Smith to restore what was lost. I understand your zeal to prove your beliefs are true, that is human nature but you are trusting the word of Joseph Smith and disregarding the word of Jesus Christ who proclaimed He was God.

False. Jesus prophesied of the falling away too. Knowing the Great Apostasy happened doesn't mean we believe God can't do all things. It's simply the fact that man has changed the true gospel into a distorted version of it. The gospel of Jesus Christ is true, we deny the gospel that has been created through men's intervention. Doctrines such as the Trinity and ex niliho have been created by men, not taught by God, Jesus, or the prophets and apostles.[/QUOTE]


PLEASE SHOW US THE SCRIPTURE that says Jesus prophesied any great falling away by HIS CHURCH.

INDIVIDUALS left.

The Apostle John addressed that:

1 John 2:19
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

Those who left were NOT OF us at all. They were not CHRISTIANS.

Of course you are AFRAID to address the GREAT APOSTASIES of the MORMONS. In less than 200 years there have been OVER 150 APOSTASIES in YOUR MORMON RELIGION. I can list them if you wish.

Does THAT MEAN YOU LOST YOUR AUTHORITY TO ACT FOR GOD? DOES THAT MEAN YOUR SCRIPTURES GOT LOST?

Yet you FALSELY CLAIM that is what happened in the church JESUS CHRIST BUILT. AND HE IS GOD. Joey smith built a MAN-made religion. And you are sucker for it!

[Phoenix]

Ok, let's put everything else aside except for this one thing, the deity of Christ. Jesus claimed to be equal with the Father,

so you are saying that the question "Did Jesus claim to be equal with His Father?" is the question to ask, and a person's answer (yes or no) to that question determines whether the person has the correct understanding of the deity of Christ.

The LDS can answer "No" to the question, and can back up their answer by quoting Jesus, in the Bible, saying that His Father is greater than Jesus Himself is.

Since your answer to the question is "yes" but you can't back up your answer by quoting Jesus, then you have a false understanding of the deity of Christ.

[disciple]

so you are saying that the question "Did Jesus claim to be equal with His Father?" is the question to ask, and a person's answer (yes or no) to that question determines whether the person has the correct understanding of the deity of Christ.

The LDS can answer "No" to the question, and can back up their answer by quoting Jesus, in the Bible, saying that His Father is greater than Jesus Himself is.

Since your answer to the question is "yes" but you can't back up your answer by quoting Jesus, then you have a false understanding of the deity of Christ.

I don’t usually like to list so many references because people just don’t read them but these are relevant to my answer so I hope you will read them. Jesus openly and clearly ***umed the prerogatives of deity. He claimed to have control over the eternal destinies of people (John 8:24; Luke 12:8-9; John 5:22, 27-29), to have authority over the divinely-ordained ins***ution of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5), to have the power to answer prayer (John 14:13-14; Acts 7:59; 9:10-17), and to have the right to receive worship and faith due to God alone (Matt. 21:16; John 14:1; John 5:23). He also ***umed the ability to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-11)--something which, as His outraged opponents correctly understood, only God can do (v. 7).
Jesus also called God's angels (Gen. 28:12; Luke 12:8-9; 15:10; John 1:51) His angels (Matt. 13:41; 24:30-31); God's elect (Luke 18:7; Rom. 8:33) His elect (Matt. 24:30-31); and God's kingdom (Matt. 12:28; 19:24; 21:31; Mark 1:15; Luke 4:43; John 3:3) His kingdom (Matt. 13:41; 16:28; Luke 1:33; 2 Tim. 4:1).
In John 8:58 we read this,” Jesus said to them, “Most ***uredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” In John 20:28 Thomas refers to Jesus as “my Lord and my God” and he is not rebuked by Jesus.
All of the above scripture shows that Jesus Christ claimed absolute equality with God. Thus He could say, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30); "He who sees Me sees the One who sent Me" (John 12:45); and "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (14:9-10). And thus we can conclude that "in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9), and we can worship Him accordingly as "our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus" (***us 2:13). These are not mistakes or verses taken out of context but the truth of God’s word.

[theway]

I don’t usually like to list so many references because people just don’t read them but these are relevant to my answer so I hope you will read them. Jesus openly and clearly ***umed the prerogatives of deity. He claimed to have control over the eternal destinies of people (John 8:24; Luke 12:8-9; John 5:22, 27-29), to have authority over the divinely-ordained ins***ution of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8; Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5), to have the power to answer prayer (John 14:13-14; Acts 7:59; 9:10-17), and to have the right to receive worship and faith due to God alone (Matt. 21:16; John 14:1; John 5:23). He also ***umed the ability to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-11)--something which, as His outraged opponents correctly understood, only God can do (v. 7).
Jesus also called God's angels (Gen. 28:12; Luke 12:8-9; 15:10; John 1:51) His angels (Matt. 13:41; 24:30-31); God's elect (Luke 18:7; Rom. 8:33) His elect (Matt. 24:30-31); and God's kingdom (Matt. 12:28; 19:24; 21:31; Mark 1:15; Luke 4:43; John 3:3) His kingdom (Matt. 13:41; 16:28; Luke 1:33; 2 Tim. 4:1).
In John 8:58 we read this,” Jesus said to them, “Most ***uredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” In John 20:28 Thomas refers to Jesus as “my Lord and my God” and he is not rebuked by Jesus.
All of the above scripture shows that Jesus Christ claimed absolute equality with God. Thus He could say, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30); "He who sees Me sees the One who sent Me" (John 12:45); and "He who has seen Me has seen the Father" (14:9-10). And thus we can conclude that "in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9), and we can worship Him accordingly as "our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus" (***us 2:13). These are not mistakes or verses taken out of context but the truth of God’s word.You are right... I have no intention of reading any of your references. This is not because I am afraid to discover something that will make me lose my faith. It's because I have seen all these references before and can see right away you are all over the board; misapplying scripture, misinterpreting scripture, and bringing in scripture which has nothing to do with your point. This along with the many other logical fallacies I see you have employed just by scanning your post. Not the least of which is your "Shotgun argumentation" tactic.
Ironically, the basic point you are trying to make has been torpedoed by your own follow up argument.

Using your own reasoning....
If the Jesus and the Father are "ONE" and therefore equal, then when Jesus tells us to become "ONE" with Him as He and the Father are "ONE" then that will make us EQUAL with God the Father.... Right?

[disciple]

You are right... I have no intention of reading any of your references. This is not because I am afraid to discover something that will make me lose my faith. It's because I have seen all these reference before and can see right away you are all over the board misapplying scripture, misinterpreting scripture, and bring in scripture which has nothing to do with your point. This along with the many other logical fallacies I see you have employed, just by scanning your post. Not the least of which is your "Shotgun argumentation" tactic.
Ironically, the basic point you are trying to make has been torpedoed by your own follow up aurguement.

Using your own conclusions, then....
If we are to be "ONE" with the Son as the Father and Jesus are "ONE" then that will make use EQUAL with God the Father.... Right?

Hello Way,
I see you are your usual disrespectful self. But anyway why not just deal with a few verses like ***us 2:13. ***us under inspiration of the Holy Spirit called Jesus "our great God and Savior, did ***us make a mistake? What about the Prophet Isaiah he wrote under inspiration of the Holy Spirit "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Are these fallacies?

[theway]

Hello Way,
I see you are your usual disrespectful self. As is.... You see, I don't pretend to be someone I am not.
However I would not mock or ridicule someone for merely asking a question, only those that question.

But anyway why not just deal with a few verses like ***us 2:13. ***us under inspiration of the Holy Spirit called Jesus "our great God and Savior, did ***us make a mistake? What about the Prophet Isaiah he wrote under inspiration of the Holy Spirit "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Are these fallacies?First, I need you to be more specific on your premise.
You said "under inspiration of the Holy Spirit"; I will need you to explain who exactly the Holy Spirit is?

[disciple]

As is.... You see, I don't pretend to be someone I am not.
However I would not mock or ridicule someone for merely asking a question, only those that question.
First, I need you to be more specific on your premise.
You said "under inspiration of the Holy Spirit"; I will need you to explain who exactly the Holy Spirit is?

Do you think God would have you mock or ridicule someone who you believe needs to know the truth?

The Holy Spirit of God as in 2 Peter 1:21,"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." And who Jesus spoke of in John 14:26,"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you."

[theway]

Do you think God would have you mock or ridicule someone who you believe needs to know the truth?
Nope... That's why I said I will not mock someone who merely asks questions. However you are not doing that... You are questioning. Which means you are not interested in knowing the truth. You are only interested on trying to school us Mormons on your version of it.
That being the case, I will continue to point out the obvious flaws, contradictions, and faulty logic of your "schooling"

[disciple]

Nope... That's why I said I will not mock someone who merely asks questions. However you are not doing that... You are questioning. Which means you are not interested in knowing the truth. You are only interested on trying to school us Mormons on your version of it.
That being the case, I will continue to point out the obvious flaws, contradictions, and faulty logic of your "schooling"

But Way here's the thing, nothing I have posted is my opinion its what the Bible says and the Bible has no flaws or faulty logic.

[disciple]

You didn't answer theway's question. He asked WHO the Holy Spirit is. We know the Holy Spirit is who inspired the prophets and whom Jesus sent, but who do you believe the Holy Spirit is? Characteristics.
I too have seen all the references you've given and also know of your misuse of said scriptures. Modern Christianity teaches we will become gods while also denying that such a doctrine is true. Every Christian believes we can gain eternal life. God is eternal. To gain eternal life is to gain a life like God. If that is not eternal life, what do you believe it could possibly be?
Listing references is great but useless if the person does so out of context. In your case, you just listed them with no context at all, you just plopped them all down on your post. We know how you understand these though as we have seen these used before.
"The Father is greater than I." Jesus also said He keeps the commandments of the Father and doesn't do His own will but that of the Father.

I didn't get an answer to why Jesus is referred to as great God in ***us 2:13 and The mighty God and The everlasting Father in Isaiah 9. Still waiting.

[theway]

But Way here's the thing, nothing I have posted is my opinion its what the Bible says and the Bible has no flaws or faulty logic.
No... It is not the Bible I have an issue with... It is your interpretation of it.
If your interpretation of the Bible is the correct one, (***uming the Bible has no flaws in it) then you have just as much of a problem with your fellows Christian as you would with us.
Before you think to school us, you need to go huddle up with other Christians first, to come up with only one interpretation you can all agree with.

[disciple]

No... It is not the Bible I have an issue with... It is your interpretation of it.
If your interpretation of the Bible is the correct one, (***uming the Bible has no flaws in it) then you have just as much of a problem with your fellows Christian as you would with us.
Before you think to school us, you need to go huddle up with other Christians first, to come up with only one interpretation you can all agree with.

You got it all wrong Way, I'm not trying to "school" you or anyone else. This is still a free county and you have the right to believe anything you want without me degrading or criticizing your integrity. I know you are sincere in your belief, I'm just trying to understand why you believe things I don't see in the Bible and for that matter why the Bible was not enough. The Gospel of Jesus Christ was being preached a very long time before Joseph Smith came on the scene, do you believe that all those people who read and believed the Bible and the testimony concerning Jesus had wrong information?

[theway]

You got it all wrong Way, I'm not trying to "school" you or anyone else. This is still a free county and you have the right to believe anything you want without me degrading or criticizing your integrity. I know you are sincere in your belief, I'm just trying to understand why you believe things I don't see in the Bible and for that matter why the Bible was not enough. Oh please.... If you were only after an understanding of what we believe, then you would not be telling us we are wrong, nor would you be offering your opinion. You then claim you are not here to criticize, yet all anyone has to do is go back over your posts to see that all you do is criticize us and our beliefs.
At least I'm honest about why I am here, you can not even own up to your own intentions.


The Gospel of Jesus Christ was being preached a very long time before Joseph Smith came on the scene, do you believe that all those people who read and believed the Bible and the testimony concerning Jesus had wrong information?Yes and no, depends on what information you are talking about.

But then that's an odd question coming from you as you believe Christains throughout the ages got it wrong on many issues

For example, which do you believe?
Water Baptism a requirement... Yes or no?
Faith Alone for salvation... Yes or no?
Priesthood authority how is it given?
This is just three small questions, yet no matter how you answer, somebody within the Christian community got it wrong, if not everybody.

[disciple]

Oh please.... If you were only after an understanding of what we believe, then you would not be telling us we are wrong, nor would you be offering your opinion. You then claim you are not here to criticize, yet all anyone has to do is go back over your posts to see that all you do is criticize us and our beliefs.
At least I'm honest about why I am here, you can not even own up to your own intentions.


Ok Way, just trying to be respectful. I'm guessing your not one of the guys going door to door, your not real personable. My intention is to have a discussion and that's pretty much it.

[theway]

Ok Way, just trying to be respectful. I'm guessing your not one of the guys going door to door, your not real personable. My intention is to have a discussion and that's pretty much it.
Quite the contrary... I'm very nice and respectful, just not to Pretenders who are trying to sell me doctrine I know is trash, or try to tell me what it is I really believe.
If you really wanted a discussion, then why not start by answering my question to your ***ertion.
You stated that the verse which said that Jesus and the Father are one, mean that they were "equal" I.e. One and the same person. If true, then how do you reconcile the verse which tells us we are to be one with Christ the same way Christ is one with The Father? Are you implying we are equal to the Father?... .I won't even go into the verses which say Christ is eternally subordinate to the Father and what that means to you.

[Phoenix]

I don’t usually like to list so many references because people just don’t read them but these are relevant to my answer so I hope you will read them.
Yes, they are relevant to your answer, but they are not the same thing as an answer. You said that Jesus claimed to be equal with His Father, and I said that Jesus claimed that His Father is greater. Can we both be right? I don't think so. I think I am right, and if we can't both be right, then you must be wrong.

Did Jesus claim to know the hour and minute of His Second Coming? yes/no
Did Jesus claim that only His Father knows such a thing? yes/no

Right there you have lost this debate. And, using your rules for accusing someone of having a false understanding of the deity of Christ, this means that you have a false understanding of the deity of Christ. Sorry to be the one to have to tell you.

[disciple]

Hello Phoenix, Way and Cog,

Thanks for your reply's. I guess I could answer your post's using scripture but we all know what would happen; my answers would be called trash, heresy and false doctrine and I get that, that's what you believe. Everything I say is either out of context, accusatory or a lie. Ok I guess we all think that about people who believe different than we do. So how about you guys tell me something I don't know about what you believe. I would like to know how you believe people were saved before Joseph Smith. How did God get the truth to people between 33AD and 1830? Serious question.

[disciple]

This:
... doesn't answer anything. It is nothing but a list of random scriptures. I may as well copy and paste the entire Topical Guide. Explanations you give come because of traditional looks at them, not by the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost has never testified to ideas such as the trinity, ex niliho, the idea of being sinners when we are born, etc.
New Age Christianity says its heresy to become like God yet you claim Jesus is equal to the Father and Christ prays for us to be one in Him as He is in the Father. Your own doctrines contradict one another. People did not have all of the truth during the Great Apostasy because it didn't exist. Amos prophesied of this when he said there would be a time when the word of God would not be found anywhere.
Here's a question for you, have you asked God if the Book of Mormon is true?

Come on Cog, how did people get saved between 33AD and 1830? Can you answer or not, all you do is tell me how wrong I am but you never tell me why you are right.

[Phoenix]

I guess I could answer your post's using scripture but we all know what would happen;
no, we don't know what would happen if you actually backed up your ***ertion (that Jesus claimed to be equal with His Father) with a quote of Jesus contradicting what He said in John 14:28

"...I am going to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.”

but if if you did that, i can guess what would happen--we'd probably say 'well done, you supported your ***ertion.'


my answers would be called trash, heresy and false doctrine
if you merely backed up your claim with a bible quote, how could we call that bible verse trash, heresy, and false doctrine?

[disciple]

no, we don't know what would happen if you actually backed up your ***ertion (that Jesus claimed to be equal with His Father) with a quote of Jesus contradicting what He said in John 14:28

"...I am going to the Father, for My Father is greater than I.”

but if if you did that, i can guess what would happen--we'd probably say 'well done, you supported your ***ertion.'


if you merely backed up your claim with a bible quote, how could we call that bible verse trash, heresy, and false doctrine?

My answer to that is in post #13, read the scriptures it won't take too long.

[disciple]

Your answer is the big list of random scriptures of which you don't understand yourself? The Father and Son are one in the sense that they have the same purpose, not substance. You don't refute the scriptures with scriptures for that is not what they are here for.

Hello Cog,
Even a child could see that these scriptures are not random and the explanation of why they are listed together is apparent.

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." Col 1:15-17

"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" Col 2:9

Also, how did people get saved between 33AD and 1830?

[theway]

Hello Cog,
Even a child could see that these scriptures are not random and the explanation of why they are listed together is apparent.

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." Col 1:15-17

"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" Col 2:9

Also, how did people get saved between 33AD and 1830?You've had three people tell you now that your post was a hodge podge of unrelated verses, taken out context or misinterpreted.

So either we are right and you refuse to admit it; at which point you are wasting everybody's time...
Or you are completely unable to communicate with your target audience; at which point you are wasting everybody's time.

[theway]

..........................

[disciple]

You've had three people tell you now that your post was a hodge podge of unrelated verses, taken out context or misinterpreted.

So either we are right and you refuse to admit it; at which point you are wasting everybody's time...
Or you are completely unable to communicate with your target audience; at which point you are wasting everybody's time.

Hello Way,

Fine, it is your right to consider my post a waste of time but the listed verses are not my words but scripture and absolutely relate to the deity of Jesus Christ.


"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Cor 1:18

[theway]

Hello Way,

Fine, it is your right to consider my post a waste of time but the listed verses are not my words but scripture and absolutely relate to the deity of Jesus Christ.


"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Cor 1:18
LOL... you can't even own up to your own mistakes, you instantly blame God.
It just couldn't possibly be you, could it? Instead you blame God and the Holy Ghost for not confirming to us your understanding of His Word.

I have no problem with the verses you posted nor do I see "the message of the cross" as foolishness. You are the one foolishly taking the Lord's name in vain by carelessly posting en m***e his Word, just to hide your own inability to prove your case.

[disciple]

LOL... you can't even own up to your own mistakes, you instantly blame God.
It just couldn't possibly be you, could it? Instead you blame God and the Holy Ghost for not confirming to us your understanding of His Word.

I have no problem with the verses you posted nor do I see "the message of the cross" as foolishness. You are the one foolishly taking the Lord's name in vain by carelessly posting en m***e his Word, just to hide your own inability to prove your case.

Hello Way,

I can live with your laughter and criticism, although I am dismayed at the depth of your deception. You relegate the Lord Jesus Christ to the position of brother of satan and you accuse me of taking His name in vain?
Incidentally can you tell me how people got saved between 33Ad and 1830?

[theway]

Hello Way,

I can live with your laughter and criticism, although I am dismayed at the depth of your deception. You relegate the Lord Jesus Christ to the position of brother of satan and you accuse me of taking His name in vain?LOL.... what happened to your only wanting to learn about what we believe?
Like I said, you are only here to try and school those who know a lot more than you do, at least own up to who you are and why you are here.


Incidentally can you tell me how people got saved between 33Ad and 1830?Simple.... By obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I.e. Faith, repentance, baptism, receiving the Holy Ghost, etc.
That is the short version, however even in the long version I see nothing about NOT believing Jesus was a spirit brother of satan in order to be saved??? Where did that requirement come from?

[disciple]

Simple.... By obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I.e. Faith, repentance, baptism, receiving the Holy Ghost, etc.
That is the short version, however even in the long version I see nothing about NOT believing Jesus was a spirit brother of satan in order to be saved??? Where did that requirement come from?

Ok, so why the need for Joseph Smith and the extra biblical books. All the information you needed about Jesus and salvation resides in the Bible.

[theway]

Ok, so why the need for Joseph Smith and the extra biblical books. All the information you needed about Jesus and salvation resides in the Bible.Why the need for the books of Mark, Luke, and John when you have The book of Matthew detailing the same life span, teachings and salvation requirements of Jesus Christ?

Also, what happens in modern Christianity when you have a question about doctrine written in the Bible?
For example; Is water baptism a requirement of salvation or not?

Answer these questions and you will have your answers.

[disciple]

Why the need for the books of Mark, Luke, and John when you have The book of Matthew detailing the same life span, teachings and salvation requirements of Jesus Christ?

Also, what happens in modern Christianity when you have a question about doctrine written in the Bible?
For example; Is water baptism a requirement of salvation or not?

Answer these questions and you will have your answers.

So do you personally need Joseph Smith and the extra-biblical books for salvation or not?

[alanmolstad]

we question all things, and compare scripture with scripture...
Thats how you find truth...

[theway]

So do you personally need Joseph Smith and the extra-biblical books for salvation or not?
Quid pro quo, I fairly and honestly answered your questions knowing beforehand that it would amount to nothing... I'm afraid if want me to go any further you will have to answer my questions in post #43 first.

[theway]

we question all things, and compare scripture with scripture...
Thats how you find truth...No wonder you're lost when it comes to truth and the gospel of Jesus Christ; you are doing the complete opposite of what you show be doing.

First, Christ never said it was OK to "question". To question means you have doubt. Only Satan works with doubt, God never does. If you lack information, then "Ask a question".

Second, comparing scripture with scripture is nonsensical... It's nothing more than circular logic.
Notwithstanding the fact that what you are really saying is that you "compare your interpretation of scripture with your interpretation of scripture"????

[disciple]

Why the need for the books of Mark, Luke, and John when you have The book of Matthew detailing the same life span, teachings and salvation requirements of Jesus Christ?

Also, what happens in modern Christianity when you have a question about doctrine written in the Bible?
For example; Is water baptism a requirement of salvation or not?

Answer these questions and you will have your answers.

Ok. Why the need for 1&2 Chronicles when we have 1&2 Kings? The scriptures were decided upon by God. The gospel writers each had a specific audience to reach and each writer was guided by the Holy Spirit to give a different perspective on the same portion of the life of Jesus.

Well first of all, doctrine written in the Bible is true so whether modern or not, true followers of Jesus Christ defer to the teaching of the scriptures. Sometimes we don't understand it all but "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2nd Peter1:20-21

Baptism is for believers, it is an act of obedience to a command of Jesus but it is not a requirement for salvation.

[alanmolstad]

Ok. Why the need for 1&2 Chronicles when we have 1&2 Kings? The scriptures were decided upon by God. The gospel writers each had a specific audience to reach and each writer was guided by the Holy Spirit to give a different perspective on the same portion of the life of Jesus.

Well first of all, doctrine written in the Bible is true so whether modern or not, true followers of Jesus Christ defer to the teaching of the scriptures. Sometimes we don't understand it all but "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2nd Peter1:20-21

Baptism is for believers, it is an act of obedience to a command of Jesus but it is not a requirement for salvation.

well said!.......

[theway]

Ok. Why the need for 1&2 Chronicles when we have 1&2 Kings? The scriptures were decided upon by God. The gospel writers each had a specific audience to reach and each writer was guided by the Holy Spirit to give a different perspective on the same portion of the life of Jesus.Then you answered your own question. Any scripture on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ is important and needed for learning and edifying. The Book of Mormon does not say it is a replacement to the Bible, but a second witness to Christ. In fact in several places within the Book of Mormon it refers back to the Books in the Bible as the sole source for certain revelations.



Well first of all, doctrine written in the Bible is true so whether modern or not, true followers of Jesus Christ defer to the teaching of the scriptures. Sometimes we don't understand it all but "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2nd Peter1:20-21Pla***udes and Word Soup... Nothing here answers any questions I asked of you. In fact, I don't even know what your point is???


Baptism is for believers, it is an act of obedience to a command of Jesus but it is not a requirement for salvation.
Maybe I wasn't clear, I could care less what your opinion is of water baptism. What I wanted to know is how do you determine which group is right when one group says that baptism is a requirement of salvation, while the other group says that baptism is not a requirement of salvation, yet both use the Bible as the sole doctrinal source?

[alanmolstad]

...... All the information you needed about Jesus and salvation resides in the Bible.

This is so true!

[alanmolstad]

Explain why Jesus said we CANNOT enter the kingdom of God without baptism.



and the Lord said, "Truly ,truly I say to you, Today you will be with me in Paradise, I mean if you can jump off that cross and find some magic water that is....cuz unless you can do that I am helpless to save anyone" ....

[Phoenix]

My answer to that is in post #13, read the scriptures it won't take too long.

No, you never did back up your ***ertion.

I provided a quote, from the Bible, of Jesus saying that His Father is greater than Jesus is.

You did NOT provide a quote, from the Bible, of Jesus saying "I am just as great as my Father is."
until you do that, you haven't backed up your claim. i guess you could post a quote of Jesus saying "I am greater than My Father" if such a verse existed, and then you might have something interesting to discuss.

your other fallacy was the straw man of implying that the deity of Jesus is something that mormons don't believe in.

mormons believe that BOTH Jesus AND His Father are worthy of being called deities. And the Holy Spirit as well.

[alanmolstad]

edit , slow server today...

[alanmolstad]

..... Something being omitted from scripture doesn't mean it didn't happen, it may have and just wasn't recorded.


In your full post you raise a few different issues, and rather than lumping my answers into one monster post, (That no one would bother reading anyway) I will keep my answers short and to the post in a few different posts that I hope will be more easy to skim and get the point Im aiming at.



Now in the above clip I took first from your post yopu raise an issue that I have seen Mormons do on this forum from time to time.

You are attempting to use a LACK of supporting verses as a means to support your views.

Its like saying, "Jesus drove a FORD TRUCK, because there is no clear verse in the Bible that says he did not drive a FORD TRUCK"




So in other words according to this "Mormon idea" about how to view things that the Bible does not say, - the lack of a verse teaching that Jesus drove a FORD can be used to actually support the idea that he did drive a truck.


Lets build on that idea:
"Jesus drank Koolaid, because there is no verse in the Bible that teaches he did not drink Koolaid"

Mary the mother of Jesus was 12 feet tall, because there is no verse in the Bible that says she was not 12 feet tall"

"Peter had 3 arms, because there is no verse in the Bible that teaches that Perter did not have 3 arms....after all something being omitted from scripture doesn't mean it didn't happen, it may have and just wasn't recorded."



In a very real way if you fall into this trap/poor way to study the Bible you will have very little in the way of things you cant find a way to believe in, if all you need to support your faith is a "lack" of things to support your faith..... LOL

[alanmolstad]

Jesus said PARADISE, not the kingdom of God.


Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last.
The body of Christ died and went into the grave, but the spirit of Christ went into the loving hands of the Father.
This is a Fact.
This is what the Bible teaches.
This is what happened.

This also is what happens...

This same thing is what happens to all Christians who have put their faith in the Lord.
You die and your dead body goes into the grave just like the dead body of Christ died a normal death and went into a normal grave.
And when we die while the dead body is like the dead body of Christ and is put under the ground, we also are just like Christ in that our spirit goes to the father.
So that where the father is, that is where we will be.

Call it Paradise...call it heaven...call it the Kingdom or whatever you want, but the key thing to remember about it is that this is the same place where Christ's spirit went to along with the thief on the cross, and its where I will also go to at the moment of my own death too!

[alanmolstad]

Jesus tells Mary, 3 days later, that he hadn't been to the Father yet..

well.....thats not really what he said...
Lets look and see what Jesus was actually talking about :

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"


The thing to remember is that while some versions have the words, "Touch me not" this is an error.
Its an error because in our English it gives us the natural idea that Mary could not even touch the body of Jesus.
I have had to listen to whole sermons based on that error....on and on some guys go with this whole complected reason why Mary was not even allowed to touch Jesus.

All such sermons are based on error...


The truth is that Jesus tells Mary that she cant just hold on to him...and that she should not be afraid that he would suddenly disappear, rather he tells her that even their friends would be also able to see him .

So the idea is that Mary was hugging the stuffing out of Christ, and this is very easy to understand given the context in that he was stone cold dead a few moments ago.

So that is the first issue I wanted to clear up about the risen body of Christ.

[alanmolstad]

Jesus tells Mary, 3 days later, that he hadn't been to the Father yet..

well.....thats not really what he said...
Lets look and see what Jesus was actually talking about :

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"


The thing to remember is that while some versions have the words, "Touch me not" this is an error.
Its an error because in our English it gives us the natural idea that Mary could not even touch the body of Jesus.
I have had to listen to whole sermons based on that error....on and on some guys go with this whole complected reason why Mary was not even allowed to touch Jesus.

All such sermons are based on error...


The truth is that Jesus tells Mary that she cant just hold on to him...and that she should not be afraid that he would suddenly disappear, rather he tells her that even their friends would be also able to see him .

So the idea is that Mary was hugging the stuffing out of Christ, and this is very easy to understand given the context in that he was stone cold dead a few moments ago.

So that is the first issue I wanted to clear up about the risen body of Christ.

[alanmolstad]

so what did he say then?

He talked about the fact that he had not "ascended" to the father yet.
This is a fact.
He had not yet ascended, for we know that this "ascending" was to happen another 40 some days into the future.
When he did ascend, he did so in the open, where people watched him ascend.
This means that what they saw was the "BODY" of Christ go up in to the air and a cloud received him at that point.

So this means that to "ascend" to the father, Jesus needed a body to go UP!.
In fact, this ascending is all concerned with the "BODY" of Christ.


It is the "BODY" that ascends....for it is the thing people see go "up">

No body?...no seeing anything go up,
therefore no ascending.


So when Jesus talked about not yet having "***ent"to the father, he was simply and only talking about his body.

The body of Christ had not yet ascended, and this is why Jesus told Mary that she didn't need to worry that he would suddenly disappear and no one would get to see him any more.
The Body of Christ was going to be around for a while yet, and He told her that their friends would even get to see him too!


So in other words, what was Jesus really saying in today's English?
The following:
What he said was that Mary could let go on him right now, for he was not gone yet.
And that she did not need to worry that she had to hold firmly on to him so that others could see him, because he would be sticking around for a time to allow all their friends to also see him and hold him as she was right then and now.


So, the ascending that Jesus was talking about was only concerning his risen body?......yes!

So this means that at his death his SPIRIT did go to be with the Father at the time of his death?......YES!!!!!!


It works out in the following way for both Jesus, and for all Christians at the time of their death and resirrection.
We all die.
We all have our dead bodies go into the grave.
The Lost have their Spirits go to hell to await the resurrection and judgement
The Christians have their spirits go to be with the lord, as happened also to the spirit of jesus at his death.

So while we are dead, our spirits are away from our bodies.
This happened to Christ, it will happen to me also.

Now at the resurrection My Spirit will come with Christ and I will rise up out of the grave in a new everlasting body of flesh and bone,.
I will at that point "ascend" into the air and meet the Lord there.


So this means that while I might be with the Lord in heaven after my death, I will not be there in a "BODY"...and it is only after I have been returned to a BODY that I speak of a person being able to "ascend" to heaven to be with the Lord.

[theway]

Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last.
The body of Christ died and went into the grave, but the spirit of Christ went into the loving hands of the Father.
This is a Fact.
This is what the Bible teaches.
This is what happened.

This also is what happens...

This same thing is what happens to all Christians who have put their faith in the Lord.
You die and your dead body goes into the grave just like the dead body of Christ died a normal death and went into a normal grave.
And when we die while the dead body is like the dead body of Christ and is put under the ground, we also are just like Christ in that our spirit goes to the father.
So that where the father is, that is where we will be.

Call it Paradise...call it heaven...call it the Kingdom or whatever you want, but the key thing to remember about it is that this is the same place where Christ's spirit went to along with the thief on the cross, and its where I will also go to at the moment of my own death too!
No Christ did not go into the loving hands of His Father when He died, that is abundantly clear from the scriptures.
I have no idea where you got that idea?
The Grave, as those during Christ's time understood it,was the temporary abode where the spirit of ALL those who die go, good or bad.
It was also called Hell, Hades, Paradise, Abraham's bosom but never Heaven. The verse would have been just as correctly translated had it read "Today you will be with me in Hell" as it meant the same thing.
Do some research first before you think to school others who know better.
The only difference with Christ is that death could not hold Him because He was not tainted by sin. Yet even then He remained in Hel (the temporary one) for three days before ascended to His Father.

[alanmolstad]

So lets then now review what i have answered so far:

When Jesus died his body went into the grave and his spirit went into paradise ...this is also called being in the "hands" of the father....in other words "Heaven"

When after the resurrection Jesus told Mary that he had no yet ascended this was talking about the body that was now raised from the dead.
the new body had not yet ascended and would not for some 40 days .

So this means that when I die my dead body goes into the grave and my spirit goes to heaven to be with the Lord.

Then at the 2nd coming of Christ i return with Christ and rise up in a new body.

In this new body I finally ascend in body form into heaven to meet the Lord in the air.
and where Christ is now, is where I will forever be...

[theway]

So lets then now review what i have answered so far:

When Jesus died his body went into the grave and his spirit went into paradise ...this is also called being in the "hands" of the father....in other words "Heaven"Well so far, all you have shown is that you have answered wrong on several different points.
First, you ***ume that "the grave" only refers to the place where a person's body was placed; this is incorrect. "The Grave" has many different meanings in the Bible. Sheol or Hades is translated as the grave 31 times, yet Shoel or Hades is rendered to mean a place where our spirit goes when we die. It NEVER is meant as the place where the body goes. The place were the body is put when you die is called 'queber' which is sometimes rendered as the grave also.
Likewise paradise can mean heaven, however it can also mean a place in Hades, hell, or Shoel and is also called Abraham's bosom.
PARADISE noun
1.heaven, as the final abode of the righteous.
2.an intermediate place for the departed souls of the righteous awaiting resurrection.
3.(often initial capital letter) Eden (def 1).
4.a place of extreme beauty, delight, or happiness.
5.a state of supreme happiness; bliss.

The only way to know which is which, and who went where, is by going back to the original context and understanding of the verses. From it we know for a fact that Jesus did not go to Heaven for those three days He was in the grave or hell.


When after the resurrection Jesus told Mary that he had no yet ascended this was talking about the body that was now raised from the dead.He meant both the spirit and the body had not yet ascended.

the new body had not yet ascended and would not for some 40 days .The scriptures do not bare that out. Remember that He told Mary "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17, KJV)... Yet later He not only has a problem with people touching Him, yet even invites them to.
If you don't believe that, then at the very least you must admit that it can not be determined by these verses.

So this means that when I die my dead body goes into the grave and my spirit goes to heaven to be with the Lord.Wiseful thinking on your part.


Then at the 2nd coming of Christ i return with Christ and rise up in a new body.Again, nothing more than wishful thinking. But I wish you all the luck at your salvation lotto spin.


In this new body I finally ascend in body form into heaven to meet the Lord in the air.
and where Christ is now, is where I will forever be...Wait a minute??? Don't you guys believe that God is everywhere? If true, then it doesn't really matter where you go, does it?

[Christian]

You should add "when we can just change the truth" to the ***le since that's what happened when different false doctrines were introduced like the trinity.
Paul didn't say the Gospel wouldn't be lost. In fact, this was him foretelling of the Great Apostasy, something you don't believe in.

Paul didn't say joseph smith would molest children either. Nor did Paul say anything about 'holy underwear' to keep away evil spirits. Neither did he 'foretell of any 'COMPLETE' apostasy either, in which ANYTHING would be lost/removed/spilled/misplaced by CHRIST'S church.

Joey smith had to LIE about that to make his made-up religion look plausible.

[Phoenix]

Paul didn't say joseph smith would molest children either.

of course paul didn't say that. paul wouldn't have said something that was so false. he left that *** for 21st-century anti-mormons.

[disciple]

of course paul didn't say that. paul wouldn't have said something that was so false. he left that *** for 21st-century anti-mormons.

You are right that Paul would not say something false. He wrote the following in regard to Jesus and because we know it is true then Jesus cannot be a brother to satan, as He created all the angles and you will also notice Jesus is the head of the true church of which He said that even the gates of hell would not prevail against it. So the church was alive and spreading the Gospel from 33Ad right up to 1830 and is still doing it. No need for an addition to the Bible.
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence."

[Phoenix]

You are right that Paul would not say something false.
but 2000 years later, some people are saying false things about what paul said. keep reading for examples.


He wrote the following in regard to Jesus and because we know it is true then Jesus cannot be a brother to satan, as He created all the angles
example number one--i bolded it for you


and you will also notice Jesus is the head of the true church of which He said that even the gates of hell would not prevail against it. So the church was alive and spreading the Gospel from 33Ad right up to 1830 and is still doing it. No need for an addition to the Bible.
but the bible has had things added to it. things such as the new testament, which was added to the bible that had been complete (according to israel) since the book of malachi was finished and added to it.


"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
don't you mean "the firstborn OF all creation" ?

it's written that way in the bible that many christians use. so how can it be a lie?



For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible,
so you believe that jesus created every single invisible thing that is in heaven?
but don't you believe that Jesus' Father in heaven is invisible, and in heaven?

then you believe that Jesus created His Father.

paul never said that.

example number two, i guess.

[disciple]

but 2000 years later, some people are saying false things about what paul said. keep reading for examples.


example number one--i bolded it for you


but the bible has had things added to it. things such as the new testament, which was added to the bible that had been complete (according to israel) since the book of malachi was finished and added to it.


don't you mean "the firstborn OF all creation" ?

it's written that way in the bible that many christians use. so how can it be a lie?



so you believe that jesus created every single invisible thing that is in heaven?
but don't you believe that Jesus' Father in heaven is invisible, and in heaven?

then you believe that Jesus created His Father.

paul never said that.

example number two, i guess.

Come on Phoenix, I gave you Colossians 1:15-18 right from the Bible, the New Testament is part of the Bible last I checked.
If you disagree with Col 1:15-18 you are disagreeing with God not me.

[alanmolstad]

so you believe that jesus created every single invisible thing that is in heaven?
.

God is not a "thing"
God is not created...

God created all "things"

So there is God.....and there are "things"
The two are totally different and should not be confused with each other...

[alanmolstad]

but don't you believe that Jesus' Father in heaven is invisible, .

Jesus Christ is the image of the "invisible God"

[alanmolstad]

And you just admit God and Jesus are separate beings.
The Father is God Almighty
The Son is God Almighty
The Spirit is God Almighty....yet there are not 3 gods ,just the One God!

The 3 persons are the One God.

[alanmolstad]

3 persons...One God....someone can't read...

[Christian]

3 persons = 3 Gods
Nothing in scripture supports Paganism

TRUE, NOTHING IN SCRIPTURE SUPPORTS MORMONISM.

NOTHING IN SCRIPTURE SUPPORTS 3 REAL GODS EITHER.

3 GODS contradicts Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44,10 etc etc etc

Yet mormonism teaches 3 GODS ANYWAY (pbp abraham 4:1ff)

Mormonism contradicts JESUS CHRIST. Mormonism contradicts GOD. Mormonism is a PAGAN religion, invented (made-up) by joey smith. Mormonism is NOT CHRISTIAN, DOES NOT WORSHIP THE GOD OF THE BIBLE.

[Christian]

You mean the invisible God Stephen saw for himself as described in Acts? Not just God's glory, but God himself. You know, the part where he knew there was a difference between the Father and Son?

Try again. . .you failed on this one.

GOD DOES NOT LIE; HE DOES NOT CONTRADICT HIMSELF. Only pagans like the mormons believe He does.

[Christian]

No I didn't. Have you ever made it to Acts? Stephen sees the Father and Son both just before his martyrdom.

You mean AS HE DIED?

AND LET'S SEE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS. . .
Acts 7:54-56
54 When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 56 and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
NKJV


You think this was all PHYSICAL 'seeing?'

FULL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. . .means nothing to you?

You think GOD CONTRADICTS HIMSELF?

1 Tim 1:17
17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.
NKJVCol 1:15-16
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
NKJV

YOUR gods may contradict themselves (and each other), but the REAL GOD, THE ONLY GOD, THE GOD OF THE BIBLE does not.

YOUR CULT'S INVENTER lied, of course.

[Grandma]

Greetings,
Paul wrote the following,
“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Gal 1:6-9
The Gospel message preached by the Apostles and recorded in the New Testament was and is true and complete, and can be either accepted or rejected. There has never been a need for a "restored" gospel. I do not say this with disdain, as I am sure Joseph Smith was indeed searching for truth and you who are Mormons are sincere in your belief as I am in mine, but only one can be right. And since Joseph Smith seems to have done the exact thing Paul warned against, adding to a Gospel that was already complete and declared finished by Jesus Christ and receiving new information form an angel, wouldn't the New Testament account be more reliable than extra-biblical books added in the 1800's? The Gospel didn't need to be restored just preached.

Grandma reads it and shouts, "Amen!"

[disciple]

“God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds.” Heb 1:1-2

The last days begin with the coming of the Son into the world. We have been living in the last days since the days of Christ - that is, the last days of history as we know it before the final and full establishment of the kingdom of God. The point for the writer of Hebrews is this: The Word that God spoke by his Son is the decisive Word. It will not be followed in this age by any greater word or replacement word. This is the Word of God the person of Jesus, the teaching of Jesus, and the work of Jesus.

[MickeyS]

Greetings,
Paul wrote the following,
“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Gal 1:6-9
The Gospel message preached by the Apostles and recorded in the New Testament was and is true and complete, and can be either accepted or rejected. There has never been a need for a "restored" gospel. I do not say this with disdain, as I am sure Joseph Smith was indeed searching for truth and you who are Mormons are sincere in your belief as I am in mine, but only one can be right. And since Joseph Smith seems to have done the exact thing Paul warned against, adding to a Gospel that was already complete and declared finished by Jesus Christ and receiving new information form an angel, wouldn't the New Testament account be more reliable than extra-biblical books added in the 1800's? The Gospel didn't need to be restored just preached.

I have a question, in total curiosity, because I haven't heard it asked. Is there anything at all in the Bible that states God will NEVER speak to man again? Because while I understand what Paul is saying, if God speaks to man regardless, we have to listen. And I still can see where the gospel could have been distorted from what Paul is saying already...since Paul isn't around to give any one sect the seal of approval lol. Anyway....is it a widely held belief that God would never speak to man again after the death of Christ, and if so, where is that spoke of in the Bible?

Thank you :)


Edit....I guess you are addressing that with the verse from Hebrews...is that what you're saying states God will never speak through men again?

[MickeyS]

You mean AS HE DIED?

AND LET'S SEE WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS. . .
Acts 7:54-56
54 When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 56 and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
NKJV


You think this was all PHYSICAL 'seeing?'

FULL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. . .means nothing to you?

You think GOD CONTRADICTS HIMSELF?

1 Tim 1:17
17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.
NKJVCol 1:15-16
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
NKJV

YOUR gods may contradict themselves (and each other), but the REAL GOD, THE ONLY GOD, THE GOD OF THE BIBLE does not.

YOUR CULT'S INVENTER lied, of course.

Invisible means "unseen" not that He is actually invisible. There's plenty of biblical verses that show He is not invisible.

It begins from the creation of man made in the "image" of God

Definition of image
a representation of the external form of a person or thing.
synonyms: likeness, resemblance;

Jesus says if you have seen Him you have seen God. Jesus looks just like His Father.

Plus Jesus has seen what His Father has done.

Please explain how this is so if God is invisible. And how you know for a definite fact that your interpretation of these verses are the correct ones.

Thanks~

[Christian]

Mickey posted:

Invisible means "unseen" not that He is actually invisible. There's plenty of biblical verses that show He is not invisible.

Invisible doesn't mean invisible? You think God lied when He led Paul to write:

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
NKJV

It begins from the creation of man made in the "image" of God

The INVISIBLE IMAGE, of God.


Definition of image
a representation of the external form of a person or thing.
synonyms: likeness, resemblance;

Now for the REAL definition of the word used in Genesis 1:27, instead of YOUR SELF-MADE-UP PIECE OF MODERN ENGLISH daffynishun:

OT:6754
tselem (tseh'-lem); from an unused root meaning to shade; a phantom, i.e. (figuratively) illusion, resemblance; hence, a representative figure, especially an idol:
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Of course IN YOUR IGNORANCE you would not know that was what the word REALLY meant. And IF YOU CAN READ, you should notice there is NOTHING THERE about "external" anything at all.

Jesus says if you have seen Him you have seen God. Jesus looks just like His Father.

Please explain how this is so if God is invisible.

ONLY if you 'read into the text' junk that is NOT THERE. Of myself, I can say if you have seen my son, you have seen me too. He doesn't look a BIT like me (and he is glad. . .:) ) But he LIVES like me, THINKS like me, ACTS A LOT like me.

That IDIOM does NOT need to refer to ANYTHING PHYSICAL AT ALL.

Your ignorance is showing.

[disciple]

I have a question, in total curiosity, because I haven't heard it asked. Is there anything at all in the Bible that states God will NEVER speak to man again? Because while I understand what Paul is saying, if God speaks to man regardless, we have to listen. And I still can see where the gospel could have been distorted from what Paul is saying already...since Paul isn't around to give any one sect the seal of approval lol. Anyway....is it a widely held belief that God would never speak to man again after the death of Christ, and if so, where is that spoke of in the Bible?

Thank you :)


Edit....I guess you are addressing that with the verse from Hebrews...is that what you're saying states God will never speak through men again?

Speaking of the Gospel, the gospel revelation is excellent above anything former and there is no need for any other in the future; in that it is a revelation which God has made by his Son.

[MickeyS]

Speaking of the Gospel, the gospel revelation is excellent above anything former and there is no need for any other in the future; in that it is a revelation which God has made by his Son.

I still don't see where it says that. I see Paul explaining the nature of Jesus Christ to the Hebrews..and in the context of that whole section it speaks of Christ's nature, not specifically of the gospel or that God will never again speak to man. How do you know that's what it means? I'm just asking because it doesn't say that, no rudeness implied. And if God speaks to man, I don't think we can ignore it. Thanks~

[MickeyS]

Mickey posted:

Invisible means "unseen" not that He is actually invisible. There's plenty of biblical verses that show He is not invisible.

Invisible doesn't mean invisible? You think God lied when He led Paul to write:

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
NKJV

It begins from the creation of man made in the "image" of God

The INVISIBLE IMAGE, of God.


Definition of image
a representation of the external form of a person or thing.
synonyms: likeness, resemblance;

Now for the REAL definition of the word used in Genesis 1:27, instead of YOUR SELF-MADE-UP PIECE OF MODERN ENGLISH daffynishun:

OT:6754
tselem (tseh'-lem); from an unused root meaning to shade; a phantom, i.e. (figuratively) illusion, resemblance; hence, a representative figure, especially an idol:
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Of course IN YOUR IGNORANCE you would not know that was what the word REALLY meant. And IF YOU CAN READ, you should notice there is NOTHING THERE about "external" anything at all.

Jesus says if you have seen Him you have seen God. Jesus looks just like His Father.

Please explain how this is so if God is invisible.

ONLY if you 'read into the text' junk that is NOT THERE. Of myself, I can say if you have seen my son, you have seen me too. He doesn't look a BIT like me (and he is glad. . .:) ) But he LIVES like me, THINKS like me, ACTS A LOT like me.

That IDIOM does NOT need to refer to ANYTHING PHYSICAL AT ALL.

Your ignorance is showing.

Thank you for the information about the word tselem and actually these are the definitions

images (of tumours, mice, heathen gods)
image, likeness (of resemblance)
mere, empty, image, semblance (fig.)

So go a little further down in the Strongs Concordance and you'll see the different definitions and the verses affiliated with each definition

2 image, likeness, of resemblance, ׳בְּצ (בָּרָא) עָשָׂה, of God's making man in his own image, Genesis 1:26("" כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ), Genesis 1:27; Genesis 1:27; Genesis 9:6, ׳כְּצ Genesis 5:3 ("" בִּדְמוּתוֺ; all P).

3 figurative = mere, empty, image, semblance, ׳בְּצ Psalm 39:7 as (ב essentiae) a (mere) semblance man walks about; צַלְמָם תִּבְזֶה Psalm 73:20 thou wilt despise their semblance.

So the verse in Genesis means the actual resemblance, not figurative. And invisible means "unseen" as in He does not show Himself, not that He cannot show Himself.

And in the case of God and Jesus Christ, they do look alike.

How is Jesus God with a physical body if God doesn't and never will have a physical body?

Thanks!

[Christian]

Mickey posted:

Originally Posted by Christian http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=165615#post165615)

Mickey posted:

Invisible means "unseen" not that He is actually invisible. There's plenty of biblical verses that show He is not invisible.

Invisible doesn't mean invisible? You think God lied when He led Paul to write:

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
NKJV

It begins from the creation of man made in the "image" of God

The INVISIBLE IMAGE, of God.


Definition of image
a representation of the external form of a person or thing.
synonyms: likeness, resemblance;

Now for the REAL definition of the word used in Genesis 1:27, instead of YOUR SELF-MADE-UP PIECE OF MODERN ENGLISH daffynishun:

OT:6754
tselem (tseh'-lem); from an unused root meaning to shade; a phantom, i.e. (figuratively) illusion, resemblance; hence, a representative figure, especially an idol:
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)


Of course IN YOUR IGNORANCE you would not know that was what the word REALLY meant. And IF YOU CAN READ, you should notice there is NOTHING THERE about "external" anything at all.

Jesus says if you have seen Him you have seen God. Jesus looks just like His Father.

Please explain how this is so if God is invisible.

ONLY if you 'read into the text' junk that is NOT THERE. Of myself, I can say if you have seen my son, you have seen me too. He doesn't look a BIT like me (and he is glad. . .:) ) But he LIVES like me, THINKS like me, ACTS A LOT like me.

That IDIOM does NOT need to refer to ANYTHING PHYSICAL AT ALL.

Your ignorance is showing.

Thank you for the information about the word tselem and actually these are the definitions

With NO SOURCE other than your own made up junk given, of course.

images (of tumours, mice, heathen gods)
image, likeness (of resemblance)
mere, empty, image, semblance (fig.)

So it still can mean an actual physical resemblance. And invisible means "unseen" as in He does not show Himself, not that He cannot show Himself.

BUT of course, NOBODY HAS EVER SAID HE CANNOT show Himself. Your baby-games don't work, mickey.

You STILL have to "read into" your daffynishuns. Invisible does NOT mean 'unseen,' BUT DOES MEAN 'UNSEEABLE.' Once again your ignorance shows along with the brain-washing you have received from your heathen cult.

And in the case of God and Jesus Christ, they do look alike.

YOU have no 'authority' to pretend they do. ALL you have is YOUR OWN MADE-UP OPINION, no SCRIPTURE AT ALL.

How is Jesus God with a physical body if God doesn't and never will have a physical body?

Phil 2:5-8
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
NKJV

GOD said it. That settles it. You are following a false god, a false prophet (who cannot prophesy at all), and a bunch of LIES that joey smith invented.

I'll pray for your soul, that the ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE (Isaiah 43:10, etc etc etc) will save your poor lost soul and bring you to the REAL Jesus Christ.

IF you can't find HIM, you are condemned to Hell (not just a 'terrestrial kingdom.')

[MickeyS]

Mickey posted:

Originally Posted by Christian http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=165615#post165615)
Thank you for the information about the word tselem and actually these are the definitions

With NO SOURCE other than your own made up junk given, of course.

images (of tumours, mice, heathen gods)
image, likeness (of resemblance)
mere, empty, image, semblance (fig.)

So it still can mean an actual physical resemblance. And invisible means "unseen" as in He does not show Himself, not that He cannot show Himself.

BUT of course, NOBODY HAS EVER SAID HE CANNOT show Himself. Your baby-games don't work, mickey.

You STILL have to "read into" your daffynishuns. Invisible does NOT mean 'unseen,' BUT DOES MEAN 'UNSEEABLE.' Once again your ignorance shows along with the brain-washing you have received from your heathen cult.

And in the case of God and Jesus Christ, they do look alike.

YOU have no 'authority' to pretend they do. ALL you have is YOUR OWN MADE-UP OPINION, no SCRIPTURE AT ALL.

How is Jesus God with a physical body if God doesn't and never will have a physical body?

Phil 2:5-8
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
NKJV

GOD said it. That settles it. You are following a false god, a false prophet (who cannot prophesy at all), and a bunch of LIES that joey smith invented.

I'll pray for your soul, that the ONLY REAL GOD ANYWHERE (Isaiah 43:10, etc etc etc) will save your poor lost soul and bring you to the REAL Jesus Christ.

IF you can't find HIM, you are condemned to Hell (not just a 'terrestrial kingdom.')

Actually you'll need to read further in the Strongs Concordance

2 image, likeness, of resemblance, ׳בְּצ (בָּרָא) עָשָׂה, of God's making man in his own image, Genesis 1:26("" כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ), Genesis 1:27; Genesis 1:27; Genesis 9:6, ׳כְּצ Genesis 5:3 ("" בִּדְמוּתוֺ; all P).

3 figurative = mere, empty, image, semblance, ׳בְּצ Psalm 39:7 as (ב essentiae) a (mere) semblance man walks about; צַלְמָם תִּבְזֶה Psalm 73:20 thou wilt despise their semblance.

As you can see, the figurative definition does not apply to the Genesis verses

Thanks ~

[MickeyS]

And in the case of God and Jesus Christ, they do look alike.

YOU have no 'authority' to pretend they do. ALL you have is YOUR OWN MADE-UP OPINION, no SCRIPTURE AT ALL.


You have no authority to pretend they don't.

[MickeyS]

Thank you for the information about the word tselem and actually these are the definitions

With NO SOURCE other than your own made up junk given, of course.

images (of tumours, mice, heathen gods)
image, likeness (of resemblance)
mere, empty, image, semblance (fig.)

These are the definitions in the Strong's Concordance that you directed me to

[MickeyS]

How is Jesus God with a physical body if God doesn't and never will have a physical body?

Phil 2:5-8
5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.
[COLOR=#b22222]

"Being in the form of God"
Again...The Son looks like The Father...see Hebrews 1:3

"Did not consider it robbery to be equal with God"
He thought it was not taking away from God's status to call Himself "equal" to God, now that He Himself is in His resurrected body, like His Father, having completed the mission He was sent on, while during His mortal ministry He constantly referred to Himself as "less than" the Father in His mortal body.

"But made Himself of no reputation"
He had not taken the glory for Himself...

"and took upon him the form of a servant"
....when He became the servant of all providing the Atonement for everyone...

"and was made in the likeness of man"
....when He took a mortal body for His mission

And remember man is made in the likeness of God..so..again...God has...a body

Where does this say Jesus doesn't look like God? Or that God doesn't have a physical body?

Thanks~

[MickeyS]

GOD said it. That settles it.

I completely agree that if God says it...that settles it. Did you speak to God?

[MickeyS]

Christian said



Invisible doesn't mean invisible? You think God lied ..?

BUT of course, NOBODY HAS EVER SAID HE CANNOT show Himself.

Does invisible mean invisible or doesn't it?

[MickeyS]

I'll pray for your soul,
I do appreciate the sentiment, and I sincerely hope you mean it. In the end, we are all trying to do our best to move in the right direction. We need to not let our differences keep us from fulfilling the new commandment to love one another. I truly mean that. I'm not going to let this be a negative experience.

Thank you, I do pray for you as well...and me....I'm definitely a work in progress lol

[alanmolstad]

I will now talk about what it means when we say "image of the invisible God"



In Bible School we had to study this part of the text.
We talked about it and learned what concepts it deals with.
What I remember goes like this-



There is a box in front of you.
You pickup the box,and its light in weight, but there is something inside it you can tell.
At this moment your mind starts to create a "IMAGE" of what is inside the box.
But this image in unclear.
The object inside the box can not be seen, but you still have in your mind an "image" of what that object is.

You shake the box.
You feel and listen to the object inside the box as you shake the box.
The "Image"of the invisible object starts to become more clear to you.
The image starts to take shape in your mind.
You tilt the box and listen to see if the unseen object rolls inside the box?
You tilt the box the other way to see if that changes what the object does?

All this information will cause you to constantly review the mental image of the invisible object.

The more information you gather the more you refine the mental image of the unseen object inside the box.





Christ has two natures.
Christ is both God and Man.
The human body of Christ reflects the human nature of Christ.
But the spirit of Christ reflects that he is the image of God, for that is his hidden nature too!

for spirit is invisible, and will always be so.
The spirit cant ever be seen, cant ever be felt, cant ever ....never ever...

but flesh can be seen
flesh can be felt.

human flesh can be....both natural human flesh, and eternal resurrected human flesh can be seen and felt.

this means that although my body will rise out of the grave and i will be alive again, I yet still will always be simply human...
I do not change into another form of life.
I do not become a god.

Rather I am and will always be human.



Christ has 2 totally complete natures.
Christ is both God and man.


all that we can ever learn about God, is given to us in the man Christ Jesus.

[theway]

I will now talk about what it means when we say "image of the invisible God"



In Bible School we had to study this part of the text.
We talked about it and learned what concepts it deals with.
What I remember goes like this-



There is a box in front of you.
You pickup the box,and its light in weight, but there is something inside it you can tell.
At this moment your mind starts to create a "IMAGE" of what is inside the box.
But this image in unclear.
The object inside the box can not be seen, but you still have in your mind an "image" of what that object is.

You shake the box.
You feel and listen to the object inside the box as you shake the box.
The "Image"of the invisible object starts to become more clear to you.
The image starts to take shape in your mind.
You tilt the box and listen to see if the unseen object rolls inside the box?
You tilt the box the other way to see if that changes what the object does?

All this information will cause you to constantly review the mental image of the invisible object.

The more information you gather the more you refine the mental image of the unseen object inside the box.





Christ has two natures.
Christ is both God and Man.
The human body of Christ reflects the human nature of Christ.
But the spirit of Christ reflects that he is the image of God, for that is his hidden nature too!

for spirit is invisible, and will always be so.
The spirit cant ever be seen, cant ever be felt, cant ever ....never ever...

but flesh can be seen
flesh can be felt.

human flesh can be....both natural human flesh, and eternal resurrected human flesh can be seen and felt.

this means that although my body will rise out of the grave and i will be alive again, I yet still will always be simply human...
I do not change into another form of life.
I do not become a god.

Rather I am and will always be human.



Christ has 2 totally complete natures.
Christ is both God and man.


all that we can ever learn about God, is given to us in the man Christ Jesus.
The major problem with your ****ogy is that it has man creating God in our image, or more exactly, our "invisible virtual image" of what's in the box.
But your ****ogy actually works if you compare it to what the Bible says.
It was God who created man and put him in the box... It is dark in the box and we can only guess as to what we look like. If then, we want to know what we "really" look like, there is no guessing, as we need only know what our Creator looks like.

[MickeyS]

I will now talk about what it means when we say "image of the invisible God"

There is a box in front of you.
...there is something inside it you can tell.
....But this image in unclear.
The object inside the box can not be seen,

This is actually what I've been taught about the "Invisible" God. He is invisible because He cannot be seen, not because He is actually "invisible".

So the image part is real...but the "invisible" means unseen...the word
aóratos (from 1 /A "not" and 3708 /horáō, "see")

So it means "not" "see" (not to be confused with Nazi :D yeah I crack myself up )

So the actual image of a Being we cannot see, because He doesn't regularly show Himself to man.

That's what I was taught :)

[alanmolstad]

Spirit is totally invisible.
.God is spirit. And that is why all will ever know of the Father is shown us in the Son.

When we will see Jesus one day we will see him in a human body just like our own...for christ has 2 natures...both god and man..

[MickeyS]

Spirit is totally invisible.
.God is spirit. And that is why all will ever know of the Father is shown us in the Son.

When we will see Jesus one day we will see him in a human body just like our own...for christ has 2 natures...both god and man..

How are there accounts of God being seen if He's invisible? Also, again, I'm curious as to your take on the importance if a physical body. So important that the entire ministry, suffering, atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ is centered around His mortal body? And now He is an exalted physical Being for eternity? If the body isn't important, why do we get ours back? I'm not sure if you explained this before...I didn't think we got that far.

[alanmolstad]

How are there accounts of God being seen if He's invisible? Also, again, I'm curious as to your take on the importance if a physical body. So important that the entire ministry, suffering, atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ is centered around His mortal body? And now He is an exalted physical Being for eternity? If the body isn't important, why do we get ours back? I'm not sure if you explained this before...I didn't think we got that far.
Abraham looked forward to seeing my day...saw it and was glad...

[MickeyS]

Abraham looked forward to seeing my day...saw it and was glad...

....I know him...and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar...

No, seriously though, I'm not sure what you were saying with this verse lol

[alanmolstad]

....I know him...and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar...

No, seriously though, I'm not sure what you were saying with this verse lol, ok ,ok...
I posted that while at work on my phone....and so it was way too short for you to likely catch the connection to your question, so let me build on my idea.

My verse is very relevant to your question when you drop back and remember what my verse was dealing with.
Remember when Jesus spoke the words i quoted?
Remember what Jesus was talking about in that verse?

Jesus was telling people that Abraham had looked forward to seeing him, AND........Abraham did see Jesus!!!!


that is why the people reacted so badly to what Jesus was saying, and wanted to kill him, because they knew that Jesus had just claimed to be God.

This is because Jesus had just claimed to be the very same God that appeared to Abraham and had talked to him face to face during the whole issue with Lot and his family living in clearly the wrong place at the wrong time.

How does this connect to your question?.....like this-

What it means and what Jesus was teaching us for today is how to understand all the stories in the Old test where we see an appearance of God happen.

Jesus is saying, "Hey that was me"

[alanmolstad]

so that answers the very first part of your post about "seeing" the invisible god in the Old test.


Now later today I will start to address the rest of your post and we shall see how i do at that? :)

[theway]

Spirit is totally invisible.
.God is spirit. And that is why all will ever know of the Father is shown us in the Son.

When we will see Jesus one day we will see him in a human body just like our own...for christ has 2 natures...both god and man..The spirit is only invisible to those who do not have spiritual eyes to see.

[alanmolstad]

How are there accounts of God being seen if He's invisible? Also, again, I'm curious as to your take on the importance if a physical body. So important that the entire ministry, suffering, atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ is centered around His mortal body? And now He is an exalted physical Being for eternity? If the body isn't important, why do we get ours back? I'm not sure if you explained this before...I didn't think we got that far.

Was it on this topic or another that gave you the idea that the body is not important?

I need to know the context.
Where did I teach you that?

[alanmolstad]

Jesus has two natures.
Both fully human and fully god.
The body is fully human and is a sign that he is fully human.
God is spirit and the spirit of christ is of his nature as God almighty.

[MickeyS]

Was it on this topic or another that gave you the idea that the body is not important?

I need to know the context.
Where did I teach you that?

It was the other thread....I may have misunderstood your comments.

I said this
"So the body is not important then? Where do we find this in the Bible?"

And you said this
"You mean ashes to ashes, dust to dust?"

Like I said though...we didn't get further than that, so I don't know if that was an answer?

[MickeyS]

, ok ,ok...
I posted that while at work on my phone....and so it was way too short for you to likely catch the connection to your question, so let me build on my idea.

My verse is very relevant to your question when you drop back and remember what my verse was dealing with.
Remember when Jesus spoke the words i quoted?
Remember what Jesus was talking about in that verse?

Jesus was telling people that Abraham had looked forward to seeing him, AND........Abraham did see Jesus!!!!


that is why the people reacted so badly to what Jesus was saying, and wanted to kill him, because they knew that Jesus had just claimed to be God.

This is because Jesus had just claimed to be the very same God that appeared to Abraham and had talked to him face to face during the whole issue with Lot and his family living in clearly the wrong place at the wrong time.

How does this connect to your question?.....like this-

What it means and what Jesus was teaching us for today is how to understand all the stories in the Old test where we see an appearance of God happen.

Jesus is saying, "Hey that was me"

Ughhhh!! I had a whole response penned and I lost it...site can be so
glitchy sometimes :(

Lol...it's ok...I guess I just wasn't sure what to take out of that verse but I get it.

I'll have to get back when I have a minute and try to re-pen what I was saying...I'm still on my little "vacay"

Cliff notes version...I know Christ is the Jehovah of the OT...I know He is God's agent here on earth and everything that's been done by The Father was through The Son. (Except for through the creation of man & when God appeared to Adam & Eve, introduced His Son, and when Stephen saw Him) I didn't realize you believed that, so...that's what I get for ***uming. Or as Chris would say "***uming" lol. So you believe every time God appeared to man in the OT it was really Christ. But that was before Jesus had a body and (I'm ***uming again ;)) wouldn't that have made Him pure spirit?? How would He have been seen? Again, I'm asking from what I would think your viewpoint would be, because I believe the Father & the Son literally look alike (if you've seen one, you've seen the other...etc..) and both have bodies.

I'm not saying there's NO WAY you should ever be able to interpret scripture the way you do, I can see the reasoning, I'm just trying to follow it when I'm seeing very obvious verses showing what I believe...I'm just looking for the biblical backup, you could say, for what you believe, that God is an immaterial purely invisible spirit. (Which again makes the Holy Ghost kinda redundant)

Sorry, had to type this fast, hope it's sensical (Omyword, my phone almost corrected that to "sensual" eeeek)

Oh....PS...how do you explain God appearing to Stephen?

[alanmolstad]

It was the other thread....I may have misunderstood your comments.

I said this
"So the body is not important then? Where do we find this in the Bible?"

And you said this
"You mean ashes to ashes, dust to dust?"

Like I said though...we didn't get further than that, so I don't know if that was an answer?



what came before that in the conversation?

All I see is me quoting what we all know to be true...


The body is but ash....the body is but dust...
it never is more than ash and dust...

it does not change and become ash and dust, rather it returns to what it always was...

[alanmolstad]

Ughhhh!! I had a whole response penned and I lost it...site can be so
glitchy sometimes :(


on almost every post as of late I get error messages and stuff...many of my posts simple do not appear on the forum and are also lost..

[alanmolstad]

So you believe every time God appeared to man in the OT it was really Christ.


What I believe is that everything we know about God, is though the Son....
I believe that every listing of God in the Old Test is the Son.

[alanmolstad]

. But that was before Jesus had a body

Out of a burning bush a voice spoke...and said."I am"

Not "He is___"


In Bible school we learned about such things...they are called a theophany.

[alanmolstad]

God is pure spirit.
God is and always will be, totally invisible...

But so we can come to understand God, God the Son wrapped himself in the flesh of humanity , becoming a man.

Jesus never stopped being Pure spirit, for that is his nature as God...

Thus God the Son never stopped being God in his nature,never stopped being pure spirit.
(and as we learned above pure spirit is and always will be totally invisible)

But for us and our salvation he wrapped himself in human flesh...
This is why we believe that Jesus has two natures...he is 100% God Almighty, and 100% man.

[alanmolstad]

now in the Bible there are many times when God appears in different physical forms to men.

a voice.

a dove

a burning bush.

a column of fire

a column of smoke.

a man walking with friends.

We call these moments a "theophany"

[alanmolstad]

It was the other thread....I may have misunderstood your comments.


I did a little searching and tracked down the conversation in question -
http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?3698-God-Never-Sinned-Do-Mormons-Agree

Its post number #20 there that caused you to ask about my views on the importance of the human body.

At the time you can see I was talking about how when the Bible tells us that Adam and Eve were made in the image of God, that this was not talking about our body of flesh.
that caused you to ask if the body was not important then?

My answer was to point out that the human body in the Bible is over and over told to us to be nothing but dust,
Even Adam who was clearly said to be the very person made in the image of God, was told later that when he died his dead human body would "return" to the ground from where it was taken from.


However we are also told that the "spirit" goes to the Lord who gave it to us.


The human Body suffers corruption, but the human spirit is unchanged by the p***ing of time.

In the resurrection, I will be given a new body, for the old body is gone.




So it goes like this:
Right now I am a spirit that is within a ever-failing human body.
When I die my dead body will return to dust and become part of future bodies of all kinds of things and people, for that is how nature works.
What is a body today is part of the cycle of life and becomes the body for something else, and so on, and so on, and so on...

however when I die my spirit goes to be with the Lord...
My spirit is made in God's image, and God draws me to himself at my death.

When the resurrection happens, I come with the Lord from Heaven and rise up from the dead in a new body that is still a human body, but it's nature is different than the human body i had before.

Still fully human, but now in a body of flesh that does not fall into corruption.

I will rise up off the Earth (as Jesus did) and meet the Lord.






after that, it gets kinda fuzzy as to what happens next...







what I also said in that other topic's post number #20 was dealing with the moment that you might watch them lower my dead body into my grave.
While I sure there will be tears, and you likely will want to toss yourself down too, like the young maidens were said to toss themselves onto the burning Viking funeral ships of a great and handsome leaders of old, yet I must also point out one thing before you do....


My dead body is not made in the image of God.
No human body was made in the image of God.

the human body is dust,,,,,from dust to dust, ashes to ashes....





That is what we are to think of this body.

[alanmolstad]

so does that clear things up as to my thoughts on the human body?...as well as what I believe it means to be made in the image of God?

[MickeyS]

so does that clear things up as to my thoughts on the human body?...as well as what I believe it means to be made in the image of God?

Omygoodness I responded to this...it's not showing again... I'm not ignoring you, I'll get back later, catching my flight back today :)

[alanmolstad]

Omygoodness I responded to this...it's not showing again... I'm not ignoring you, I'll get back later, catching my flight back today :)where you flying to?

[alanmolstad]

where you flying to?



oh thats right...no one much posts on the weekends when Im off work and COULD POST!!!!!!

[MickeyS]

oh thats right...no one much posts on the weekends when Im off work and COULD POST!!!!!!

Lol...again?? We're TRYING to get home to the Atlanta area and we are STUCK in Dallas....stupid nasty weather...had to get a room...extended unwelcome vacation :(

[MickeyS]

where you flying to?

We're FINALLY back home in GA...now I need a vacation from my vacation :( that was hell...like I would picture hell to be...an indefinite layover in an airport that's under construction ... There was this TV show called Reaper I used to watch years back about this guy who had to gather souls for the devil...dark comedy, hilariously irreverent..but one of the portals to hell was at a DMV ;) ;) my trip reminded me of that haha

[BigJulie]

I did a little searching and tracked down the conversation in question -
http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?3698-God-Never-Sinned-Do-Mormons-Agree

Its post number #20 there that caused you to ask about my views on the importance of the human body.

At the time you can see I was talking about how when the Bible tells us that Adam and Eve were made in the image of God, that this was not talking about our body of flesh.
that caused you to ask if the body was not important then?

My answer was to point out that the human body in the Bible is over and over told to us to be nothing but dust,
Even Adam who was clearly said to be the very person made in the image of God, was told later that when he died his dead human body would "return" to the ground from where it was taken from.


However we are also told that the "spirit" goes to the Lord who gave it to us.


The human Body suffers corruption, but the human spirit is unchanged by the p***ing of time.

In the resurrection, I will be given a new body, for the old body is gone.




So it goes like this:
Right now I am a spirit that is within a ever-failing human body.
When I die my dead body will return to dust and become part of future bodies of all kinds of things and people, for that is how nature works.
What is a body today is part of the cycle of life and becomes the body for something else, and so on, and so on, and so on...

however when I die my spirit goes to be with the Lord...
My spirit is made in God's image, and God draws me to himself at my death.

When the resurrection happens, I come with the Lord from Heaven and rise up from the dead in a new body that is still a human body, but it's nature is different than the human body i had before.

Still fully human, but now in a body of flesh that does not fall into corruption.

I will rise up off the Earth (as Jesus did) and meet the Lord.






after that, it gets kinda fuzzy as to what happens next...







what I also said in that other topic's post number #20 was dealing with the moment that you might watch them lower my dead body into my grave.
While I sure there will be tears, and you likely will want to toss yourself down too, like the young maidens were said to toss themselves onto the burning Viking funeral ships of a great and handsome leaders of old, yet I must also point out one thing before you do....


My dead body is not made in the image of God.
No human body was made in the image of God.

the human body is dust,,,,,from dust to dust, ashes to ashes....





That is what we are to think of this body.

So, is this resurrected glorified body in God's image? Is Christ's?

[alanmolstad]

So, is this resurrected glorified body in God's image? Is Christ's?

Its a human body....before and after the resurrection, still 100% human body...


Here is a story I will tell you about to show how this is-

I went to a funeral of a friend who had died due to cancer.
I remember standing at the grave and thinking about the whole situation.

It was then that it dawned on me...all that we put into the ground, all that "stuff"...you know, the dead flesh and bones...all that stuff...all of it is NOT made in the image of God.

Because -
"The spirit returns to the God who gave it"....

"And God said, Let us make man in our image"

"God is spirit"

-for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have

[BigJulie]

Its a human body....before and after the resurrection, still 100% human body...


Here is a story I will tell you about to show how this is-

I went to a funeral of a friend who had died due to cancer.
I remember standing at the grave and thinking about the whole situation.

It was then that it dawned on me...all that we put into the ground, all that "stuff"...you know, the dead flesh and bones...all that stuff...all of it is NOT made in the image of God.

Because -
"The spirit returns to the God who gave it"....

"And God said, Let us make man in our image"

"God is spirit"

-for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have

Let's keep going that verse: In Luke:

"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit...

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."

So, Christ himself had a body of flesh and bones in his glorified resurrected state.

I will ask you again. Is Christ in the image of God? Is he created in the image of God? Is he resurrected in the image of God?

[alanmolstad]

Let's keep going that verse: In Luke:

"And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit...

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."

So, Christ himself had a body of flesh and bones in his glorified resurrected state.

I will ask you again. Is Christ in the image of God? Is he created in the image of God? Is he resurrected in the image of God?
again...I would refer you to my story of the funeral....


God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh.
For it says the Word was God, and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.








So when Jesus appears in the flesh after the resurrection in his body, and tells his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see I have"...and we know that God is Spirit, guess who Jesus was including about not having a body of flesh and bone?



That's right, the Father!

[BigJulie]

again...I would refer you to my story of the funeral....


God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh.
For it says the Word was God, and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.






But you are ignoring the fact that Christ's flesh and bones did not stay in the ground.

We have God is spirit, but who says that is not referring to the Holy Ghost? Or to the spirit of Christ? Why do you insist that this must be God the Father when we have Jesus Christ teaching us who God the Father is?

So, once again, is Christ's resurrected body in the image of his Father? This is a simple yes or no?

[alanmolstad]

Your answer is at #114

[BigJulie]

By the way, reading up on the words "spirit"--there is no difference between the word "spirit" and "ghost" in the New Testament Greek. There are also no caps. So, the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit and the Spirit versus the spirit does not exist in the original writings. This was also not there for Jerome, but was added later to keep with the "traditions" of the trinity.

The Jewish argument (and my own confusion as well) is, if God the Father is a spirit, then the Holy Ghost is redundant.

And if you did not have Christ in explaining he has a body of flesh and bones, would you use this scripture "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11) to argue that Christ also did not have a resurrected body?

[BigJulie]

Your answer is at #114

Actually, it isn't. Why are you sure that God is spirit is not referring to the Holy Ghost?

The truth is, the more I read the scriptures in the NT, the more I realize you have to ignore so many teachings of Christ to make the ***umption that Christ is not the express image of His Father.

[alanmolstad]

Actually, it isn't. Why are you sure that God is spirit is not referring to the Holy Ghost?


there are not 3 gods...... :)

There is only one God, and God is spirit....

and God never stops being pure spirit.

and a Spirit does not have arms and legs...thats silly. :)

[alanmolstad]

The Jewish argument (and my own confusion as well) is, if God the Father is a spirit, then the Holy Ghost is redundant.



Im sure you will have plenty of time to take that point up with Him.......or perhaps not :)

[BigJulie]

there are not 3 gods...... :)

There is only one God, and God is spirit....

and God never stops being pure spirit.

and a Spirit does not have arms and legs...thats silly. :)

But, Jesus Christ is God and he is spirit and a resurrected body of flesh and bones. There is no reason to take one verse and use it to ignore all of Christ's other teachings or use it to nullify his other teachings or make them metaphorical.

You haven't made your point scriptural-ly and just restating it over and over does not make it.

Listen to this verse again ""Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11) to argue that Christ also did not have a resurrected body?"

How was the Spirit of Christ within them? Once again, we know Christ had a body and currently has a glorified resurrected body, but this does not deter one from referring to HIS spirit that teaches rather than his body.

So, then would you argue that the Spirit of Christ means that Christ CANNOT have arms and legs and that any such belief would be silly?

[BigJulie]

Im sure you will have plenty of time to take that point up with Him.......or perhaps not :)

But you have argued that I need to back my beliefs by the scriptures. So far, the scriptures do not back using one verse "God is spirit" to void every other things Christ said. In fact, there are so many times he teaches us that we learn of the Father by him, that God the Father is NOT invisible to Christ, the Christ does as He sees the Father do, that He is the express image of the Father, that there is NOTHING to support this version your belief that one verse nullifies all other teachings.

Looking into this further, here is an interesting view from another church:

http://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/is-god-a-trinity/the-surprising-origins-of-the-trinity-doctrine

Here is a quote "Anglican churchman and Oxford University lecturer K.E. Kirk revealingly writes of the adoption of the doctrine of the Trinity: “The theological and philosophical vindication of the divinity of the Spirit begins in the fourth century; we naturally turn to the writers of that period to discover what grounds they have for their belief. To our surprise, we are forced to admit that they have none . . ."

[alanmolstad]

God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh........(it seems a lot of people miss this important point)

For it says the "Word was God", and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.




So to review:
The Word became flesh.
The Word became human.
This means that the Word was NOT flesh before.
This means that the Word was not human before.
This means that the Word became flesh
This means that the Word became human!!!!!









Now for the question....is the human body made in the image of God?....ever?
The spirit returns to the God who gave it"....

"And God said, Let us make man in our image"

"God is spirit"

-"for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have"




There is your answer....God is Spirit, and when he made us in his image this spiritual-ness was what we are made in the image of.
and as Christ taught, a Spirit does not have even glorified flesh and bones.




Now we can go on on-and-on-and on.....but that is the answer we get from the Bible.





That is the only answer the Bible has.

All other answers come from some other source.....

[BigJulie]

God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh........(it seems a lot of people miss this important point)

For it says the "Word was God", and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.




So to review:
The Word became flesh.
The Word became human.
This means that the Word was NOT flesh before.
This means that the Word was not human before.
This means that the Word became flesh
This means that the Word became human!!!!!









Now for the question....is the human body made in the image of God?....ever?
The spirit returns to the God who gave it"....

"And God said, Let us make man in our image"

"God is spirit"

-"for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have"




There is your answer....God is Spirit, and when he made us in his image this spiritual-ness was what we are made in the image of.
and as Christ taught, a Spirit does not have even glorified flesh and bones.




Now we can go on on-and-on-and on.....but that is the answer we get from the Bible.





That is the only answer the Bible has.

All other answers come from some other source.....

You know Alan, all of your repeating and making your font larger does nothing to change what the scriptures say.

And all of your repeating has caused me to do my own researching. What I found is that history does not support that the trinity came from doctrines found within the Bible but is a man-made concept. People can do their own research. It is there to be found.

[Phoenix]

You know Alan, all of your repeating and making your font larger does nothing to change what the scriptures say.

And all of your repeating has caused me to do my own researching. What I found is that history does not support that the trinity came from doctrines found within the Bible but is a man-made concept. People can do their own research. It is there to be found.

that is some good research you have done. i agree with your persuasive conclusions.

[alanmolstad]

and making your font larger does nothing to change what the scriptures say.

.
Being a lot more on top of what the Bible says make my posts true....
The large print just makes them easy for my eyes to read.


One of the main criticisms I have with people who on forums like this is that they tend to post in a style that is hard to read and follow along.

I try to post in a style that is easy for me to read.

[BigJulie]

Being a lot more on top of what the Bible says make my posts true....
The large print just makes them easy for my eyes to read.


One of the main criticisms I have with people who on forums like this is that they tend to post in a style that is hard to read and follow along.

I try to post in a style that is easy for me to read.

"Being a lot more on top of the Bible"? That is how you back your beliefs?

I have given you scripture after scripture that points to Christ being in the image of His Father (not just spiritually). You decide that one verse is concrete and then decide that all the others are merely metaphorical to make your point.

Then I give you history regarding your beliefs and that they are not Bionically determined, but man-made.

And all you have to say it that you are "a lot more on top of what the Bible says"? I don't see it. I suppose this is how the Pharisees justified crucifying Christ---I am sure they saw themselves as a lot more on top of the scriptures.

[alanmolstad]

You seem kinda upset...
Perhaps you should try talking to someone else for a bit...

[alanmolstad]

So to review....


God is spirit,
always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..
So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd natire of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!

[BigJulie]

So to review....


God is spirit,
always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..
So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd natire of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!

And absolutely no scriptures to back it except one, really You like reading up on history. Read up on the history of the trilogy. You will find you really have nothing to stand on here.

And you know the beauty of it is? As I read up on John 1:1, I find that when read in Greek, you don't have that one right either. I had really no idea of how flimsy your belief system about this really is. Clearly, you have done far more research on my religion then on your own.

[alanmolstad]

God is SPIRIT !


always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..


So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd nature of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!






I was just noticing that not only do I fill my posts with listings of the scriptures that support my views,I actually quote scripture greatly in my posts!
In fact, if you color the parts of my posts to show what comes directly from the Scripture, you dont really have much left that is not taken directly from the Bible...:)[/B]

[BigJulie]

God is SPIRIT !


always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..


So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd nature of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!






I was just noticing that not only do I fill my posts with listings of the scriptures that support my views,I actually quote scripture greatly in my posts!
In fact, if you color the parts of my posts to show what comes directly from the Scripture, you dont really have much left that is not taken directly from the Bible...:)[/B]

You seem to think that making your font bigger or putting it in red will make it read differently.

In order to come up with your trilogy definition, you have to ignore all other teachings of Christ.

As I stated before, there is no reason to take these teachings metaphorically as you do.

Is God the Father invisible to Christ? After learning that we are made in the image of God, we have this verse And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. (Genesis 5:22). Is this a metaphor to you again?

And even in John 1:1. We have the Word was God and the Word was WITH God. Once again, no reason to believe that Christ does not see the "invisible God".

Then we have "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." John 5:19.

So, once again, another reason to believe that one can walk with God, see God, and sit on the right hand of God.

But the biggest argument is that Christ has a body of flesh and bones. That alone should be enough to teach you the God CAN have a body of flesh and bones. Because John 1:1 says and the Word was God! In other words, right there, you know that Jesus Christ (God) has a body of flesh and bones.

Then to top it off, we learn that Christ is the express image of God.

What more can Christ do to teach you that to see him is to see the Father? Why do you have to keep arguing against His own words? Why do you insist everything be a metaphor that does not support your position? Especially in light that history shows us that the notion of the trinity is not based on Biblical teachings, but was a minority vote?

[BigJulie]

To answer your question, what was Christ teaching the disciples? He was teaching them to understand what resurrection means. He was teaching them what exalted means. He was teaching them what to be glorified and perfected means. He was glorifying his Father (making it clear to them who his Father is and who He is that they may we may be one with them!)

Jhn 17 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was...

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

It doesn't get much clearer than that (and Christ word's should once again make you recognize that your man-made trinity is incorrect.)

[alanmolstad]

You seem to think that making your font bigger or putting it in red will make it read differently.

Ah yes, that's the point.

When I write my posts I want them to be easy for me to read later.
In that way I do try to make the words appear to me to be more clear, I try to make the sentences in sections around the same idea,,,(paragraphs).

I also try to use space between main points so as to make it more easy for me to find something later.

[BigJulie]

Ah yes, that's the point.

When I write my posts I want them to be easy for me to read later.
In that way I do try to make the words appear to me to be more clear, I try to make the sentences in sections around the same idea,,,(paragraphs).

I also try to use space between main points so as to make it more easy for me to find something later.


Not sure why you have to have the big red font. It comes across as screaming. So does bold font.

That said, here is an interesting paragraph I found while researching the differences between Hebrew and Greek:

Greek thought refers to the writings of Plato and Aristotle as well as their intellectual heirs the Gnostic heretics. From Greek thought we have the whole dualistic heresies that try to pit everything into black/white or either/or thinking rather than recognizing the fuller balance. Greek thinking pits the physical against the spiritual, leading either to asceticism where the tainted and dirty physical is punished while the enlightened spiritual is developed or to hedonism, where the corruption of one’s physical body through promiscuity or gluttony is unimportant because it is only the mind and spirit and not the body that matter anyway. In Hebrew thought, the body, heart, mind, and spirit are all an interconnected whole, none of which can be neglected.

Everything I research regarding the making of the trinity to understanding Hebrew and Greek, point to the fact that there is no basis for you to not believe the words of Christ when he prayed prior to his atonement or when He taught us that to see Him is to see the Father.

Everything points to knowing that any argument we make regarding the nature of Christ can be applied to the Father.

Everything points to understanding that it would be redundant to have the Holy Ghost if God is a spirit only.

Everything points to that Spirits can have bodies and while our spirits are invisible, our bodies can be seen, and that Christ has seen the Father.

Everything points to the fact that we are made in the image of God.

John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

(There you go, the big red bold font.)

[alanmolstad]

Not sure why you have to have the big red font. It comes across as screaming. So does bold font.

Oh I never expected others to like my posts..... :)

I write for myself...

And so far, I like my posts the way they are.

[alanmolstad]

"God is spirit"
"a spirit does not have flesh and BONE..."





Shall I go over that again?...:)

[BigJulie]

"God is spirit"
"a spirit does not have flesh and BONE..."





Shall I go over that again?...:)

And shall I go over it again? You have to take this scripture concretely and then take the rest of Christ's teaching metaphorically to stick with this belief.

But because Christ has a spirit, do you also ***ume he does not have a body?

For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Phil 1:19.

Why do you ignore the other teachings of Christ for a Greek influence rendition of God created a few hundred years after Christ? When it is so clear that Christ came to teach us who the Father is by example, why are you so bent on one scripture to ignore all others?

Clearly, we are made in the image of God.

Clearly, Christ glorified the Father so we can understand who He is.

Clearly, when we meet God, we will find we are like him.

I'll tell you what. Why not repeat to me again that God is Spirit--make it in bold, and ignore all other scriptures. Ignore the history of the trinity. Ignore the influence of Greek though. Ignore Christ's words.

[alanmolstad]

"God is spirit"
"a spirit does not have flesh and BONE..."





Shall I go over that again?...:)


the word "became" flesh.....


The word was not always flesh and bone...rather the Word "became" something it was not beforehand.



So to review-

God is spirit.
A spirit does not have flesh and bone.
The Word was God
The Word "became" flesh...

[BigJulie]

the word "became" flesh.....


The word was not always flesh and bone...rather the Word "became" something it was not beforehand.



So to review-

God is spirit.
A spirit does not have flesh and bone.
The Word was God
The Word "became" flesh...



Yes, the Word became flesh--took on flesh and bones and then died and was resurrected into a glorified, resurrected body with flesh and bones who was exalted and sat on the right hand of God. And what does Christ teach us? That he does nothing that he does not see the Father do. He also teaches us that to see Him is to see the Father? When He came in his resurrected glorified body, do you think he didn't mean his words? Why keep his body?

Do you know that in the ten commandments, there is a word taken out from the Hebrew when saying that there should be no older gods before me---do you know how it really reads? It reads, thou shalt have no other gods before my face. Look it up.

One other thought--do you realize we are 200 years past the writing of the cons***ution. How has politics affected it? Yet the trinity was a political decision more than 300 years after Christ. Why do you cling to making so many scriptures metaphorical to make this one scripture concrete? If I was to read the New Testament according to Alan (or the trinity), it would be that this scripture "God is Spirit" is the only one to believe Christ. All of Christ's other words and example, just toss.

[alanmolstad]

Yes, the Word became flesh--took on flesh and bones .

Thats all the Bible is saying...

That God is spirit....
and knowing that a spirit does not have flesh and bones we understand that God does not have flesh and bones.

Then the Word "became"flesh....

[BigJulie]

Thats all the Bible is saying...

That God is spirit....
and knowing that a spirit does not have flesh and bones we understand that God does not have flesh and bones.

Then the Word "became"flesh....



Okay, let me try this another way since you seem so caught on this scripture as to ignore all others.

Do you have a spirit?

If you did not have a spirit, would your body have life?

When people get to know you, how do they know you?

What if they could only talk to you on the phone and could not see you, how would they know you? By your body or by your spirit?

[alanmolstad]

Do you have a spirit?


"Let us make man in our own image"

"God is spirit"

"a spirit does not have flesh and bones"


(it's a connected, just follow the dots...)

[BigJulie]

"Let us make man in our own image"

"God is spirit"

"a spirit does not have flesh and bones"


(it's a connected, just follow the dots...)

Keep holding onto that belief Alan. Ignore all the other scriptures. Jesus Christ has flesh and bones. Jesus Christ is God. That should be enough to let you know your interpretation is wrong.

And certainly ignore the fact that your concept of God is man-made created 300+ years after the death of Christ. It is the equivalent of repeating the line in the Cons***ution "we have a right to bear arms" and insisting that it means only the government-military because some group 300 years later came up with that definition and exiled or killed anyone who did not agree.

[alanmolstad]

Jesus Christ has flesh and bones. Jesus Christ is God.


YES!!!!


"and the Word BECAME flesh..."



Jesus has 2 natures.
The first nature is the nature of God, and God is spirit.
The 2nd nature is something that Jesus "became"....for the Word became flesh.

The Word was not always flesh...

The Word became flesh means it once was not flesh,then later it was flesh...

But the Word never stopped being spirit too...

[BigJulie]

YES!!!!


"and the Word BECAME flesh..."



Jesus has 2 natures.
The first nature is the nature of God, and God is spirit.
The 2nd nature is something that Jesus "became"....for the Word became flesh.

The Word was not always flesh...

The Word became flesh means it once was not flesh,then later it was flesh...

But the Word never stopped being spirit too...

Okay, so the Word NEVER stopped being spirit too! That is great. You are starting to get the Jesus Christ can be God, have flesh AND be a spirit too.

So, let's take a look at your conclusions:

If this is true: "Let us make man in our own image"

and this is true: "God is spirit"

and this is true"a spirit does not have flesh and bones"


And this is true: "the Word became flesh"

And this is true: Jesus Christ has a resurrected body of flesh and bones

Then (to interpret "God is Spirit" the way you do):

The only conclusion one can make from your interpretation is , Jesus Christ is NOT God (or he stopped being spirit too)

And that you must believe that Jesus Christ is not in the image of God.

But, we know that:

This is true: Jesus Christ is the express image of God

and this is true: Jesus Christ is God

Then the only conclusion one can make is that your statement "a spirit does not have a body of flesh of bones" has to be incorrect. As even you state Christ is a Spirit too!!

[BigJulie]

Can I say Alan, typing up all these different colors and fonts is time consuming. I am surprised at the lengths you will go to stick with your belief that Jesus Christ is NOT the same as God the Father--that they are different and that you cannot really KNOW the Father--even after everything Jesus Christ has done so that you can know the Father.

[alanmolstad]

again....

Christ has two totally different natures.
this is why he is called in the church the "God/Man"

For Jesus is both God and Man in completeness.


The Scriptures teach this as I have shown.



God is spirit.
and as Christ has taught, "a spirit does not have flesh and bones"


But who has a body of flesh and bones?....
a resurrected Human!




Did the Word always have a body of flesh?.....

no,


What single word proves that the Word did not have a body before the incarnation?

"became"


We learn that Jesus did not always have a body of flesh when it says the Word "became flesh".
By telling us the Word became flesh we are also shown that in order for something to "become" another thing it had to once not be it, then later became it.




The Word was God, and God is a spirit.....So no body of flesh.

Then the Word "became" flesh, and that is the moment when the Word starting having a body of flesh.

[BigJulie]

again....

Christ has two totally different natures.
this is why he is called in the church the "God/Man"

For Jesus is both God and Man in completeness.


The Scriptures teach this as I have shown.



God is spirit.
and as Christ has taught, "a spirit does not have flesh and bones"


But who has a body of flesh and bones?....
a resurrected Human!




Did the Word always have a body of flesh?.....

no,


What single word proves that the Word did not have a body before the incarnation?

"became"


We learn that Jesus did not always have a body of flesh when it says the Word "became flesh".
By telling us the Word became flesh we are also shown that in order for something to "become" another thing it had to once not be it, then later became it.




The Word was God, and God is a spirit.....So no body of flesh.

Then the Word "became" flesh, and that is the moment when the Word starting having a body of flesh.






Except to believe your interpretation, you must ignore that God created man in his image and likeness and ignore after Christ's death and resurrection that we are told he is the express image of the Father.

I get that Christ was spirit first, than man, then resurrected. But I also understand that we are created in God's image and that Christ is currently the express image of God.

You yourself acknowledge that Christ can have a body and still be a spirit. That's my point.

[Phoenix]

Except to believe your interpretation, you must ignore that God created man in his image and likeness and ignore after Christ's death and resurrection that we are told he is the express image of the Father.

I get that Christ was spirit first, than man, then resurrected. But I also understand that we are created in God's image and that Christ is currently the express image of God.

You yourself acknowledge that Christ can have a body and still be a spirit. That's my point.

Why do Trinitarians believe such junk?

[alanmolstad]

Except to believe your interpretation, you must ignore that God created man in his image and likeness


Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,

John 4:24 God is spirit,

Genesis 3:19 until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."



Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.



So while our Spirit is truly made in the image of God, it yet is very true in the Bible that our bodies are not made in the image of God at all,

God is spirit,and a spirit does not have flesh and bone.

[BigJulie]

Genesis 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,

John 4:24 God is spirit,

Genesis 3:19 until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."



Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.



So while our Spirit is truly made in the image of God, it yet is very true in the Bible that our bodies are not made in the image of God at all,

God is spirit,and a spirit does not have flesh and bone.


And if you only believed in the Old Testament, then I can see why you would believe this. But Adam's body will not remain in the ground, but will be resurrected just as Christ is.

In other words, being a spirit does not preclude one from also having a body. This is why we can be made in God's image and why Christ can be the express image of God even in his resurrected state.

[alanmolstad]

And if you only believed in the Old Testament, then I can see why you would believe this. .

lets put a pin in that sentence for now,and get back to it later....

[alanmolstad]

..... But Adam's body will not remain in the ground, but will be resurrected just as Christ is.

In other words, being a spirit does not preclude one from also having a body. ......


I think we have two totally different agendas working here.

My agenda is to just quote the Bible.
And the Bible says the following.

The Bible says that God is spirit and does not change.
The Bible also says that a spirit does not have flesh and bone.
The Bible also tells us that because God is a spirit, he is invisible.

So that is what the Bible tells us about God, that He is a spirit,and is invisible, and that will never change.


The Bible tells us about Christ the following things-

Christ is called"The Word: and the Word is God, and therefore the Word is also spirit and therefore invisible and that will never change.
The Bible also tells us that the Word became man.

So there are two totally different natures going on at the same time in the person of Jesus.
Thus, while Jesus is God, and therefore spirit and invisible and that will never change, yet he also "Became" human, and can so now be seen.



That is my agenda....and your agenda is different because when I say the above facts the Bible teaches, you view them as an attack on the first visions that Mormon founder Smith had.

This is why you go on and on looking for ways around the facts found in the Bible verses I list.
Simply put, you see my Bible verses as an attack against Smith, even though I have not talked about Smith,and I dont think I have much brought up Smith's vision of the father having a body at all.




So while Im not really interested right now in talking about Smith's stories, you are however correct in understanding that Smith's vision is in fact at odds with Bible teachings Im quoting...

[BigJulie]

[B]
I think we have two totally different agendas working here.

My agenda is to just quote the Bible.
And the Bible says the following.

The Bible says that God is spirit and does not change.These are two separate scriptures you are putting together to fit your agenda.

The Bible also says that a spirit does not have flesh and bone. Interpreting a scripture to make it fit your agenda. You have a spirit, do you have flesh and bones?

The Bible also tells us that because God is a spirit, he is invisible.Once again, putting two separate scriptures together to fit your agenda.


So that is what the Bible tells us about God, that He is a spirit,and is invisible, and that will never change.
Once again, putting it together in such a way to fit your own agenda. To me, if your definition of God does not fit Jesus Christ, then you definition is wrong.


The Bible tells us about Christ the following things-

Christ is called"The Word: and the Word is God, and therefore the Word is also spirit and therefore invisible and that will never change.
The Bible also tells us that the Word became man.
And there you just contradicted yourself. You state that God just changed. He BECAME a man. You are the one who is stuck on the becoming part.

So there are two totally different natures going on at the same time in the person of Jesus. Who says that having "flesh" is a nature? If you did not have a spirit, would your flesh have a nature of its own? It can't live without the spirit. It would be dead.

Thus, while Jesus is God, and therefore spirit and invisible and that will never change, yet he also "Became" human, and can so now be seen. Actually, his nature is something that is not either spirit or body. It is who he is--what makes Him God. Oh, that's right--you believe that what God makes who you are, right? He either designs you to be saved or ****ed.

I don't agree. I believe we each have a nature that is who we are. It is not the spirit God made, nor our bodies he made. It is who we are. It is this nature that needs to be saved and perfected-which is done through the atonement of Christ if we follow him.




That is my agenda....and your agenda is different because when I say the above facts the Bible teaches, you view them as an attack on the first visions that Mormon founder Smith had. No, the Bible says no such thing. We don't even need to talk about Joseph Smith as you taking some things taught in the Bible, ignoring others, putting scriptures together to come up with your own agenda. This is why when I read the history of the trinity and other web-sites it is so easy to find that the trinity is not backed in the Bible.




So while Im not really interested right now in talking about Smith's stories, you are however correct in understanding that Smith's vision is in fact at odds with Bible teachings Im quoting...

Actually, the more I study the Bible and the more I study the history of the trinity, I can see why it is so important to attack Joseph Smith--he was the one who dared to say that the emperor had no clothes.

[alanmolstad]

well,,,if there is anything I have written you want me to address,,,just ask,,,,

[alanmolstad]

.....Joseph Smith--he was the one who dared to say that the emperor had no clothes.

I dont know much about the Emperor's clothes, but I do know Smith was always interested in talking young girls out of theirs...

[BigJulie]

I dont know much about the Emperor's clothes, but I do know Smith was always interested in talking young girls out of theirs...

Your response is getting predictable :)

I am beginning to understand that you must attack Joseph Smith because your doctrinal stance is not backed by scriptures.

Your only argument, over and over again, is that Jesus Christ is NOT the same as the Father. You have gone to great lengths and scripture splicing to make this point.

Yet, the end testimony that I have is that the Bible does in fact back that we are created in the image of God, that Jesus Christ the express image of the Father and that to know Christ is to know the Father. Christ's mission was to allow us to see the Father so that we can be one with Him as Christ is with Him. You can argue all you want that Christ in unlike the Father, but the scriptures say otherwise.

[alanmolstad]

Christ is the same nature as the father....

Both are the One God...


and the Bible teaches us that God is spirit,and invisible, and does not change...

So what the Father is in his nature,the Son is,for they are equal in nature.

[BigJulie]

Christ is the same nature as the father....

Both are the One God...


and the Bible teaches us that God is spirit,and invisible, and does not change...

So what the Father is in his nature,the Son is,for they are equal in nature.


Except then you go to ignore the New Testament and Christ, birth, death and resurrection---claiming that his glorified, resurrected and exalted state is different than God the Father even though we learn that Christ tells us that he does nothing he does not see the Father do and are told that Christ is the express image of the Father.

If truly, both are one, you would not spend so much time arguing that God is unlike Christ.

I think the whole reason we began discussing this is because you believe I cannot receive answers to my prayers because I am praying to the wrong God.

Here is my take on it:

#1. God is more powerful and more loving than that. He will answer anyone who seeks truth and lead them to Christ.

#2. There are enough scriptures in the Bible alone for me to contradict your description of God (as unlike anything we have ever seen). Jesus Christ spends his ministry so that we can KNOW His Father.

#3. Taking a look back into history, there is enough understanding of what happened to create the idea of the trinity to know that it is not based on Bible scripture. There is also enough history to understand that it was decided by a minority and anyone who did not agree with it was either executed or exiled.

You cling to your own false beliefs based on tradition and then do your best to attack the messenger who teaches otherwise. This is not unlike during Christ's time. If those religious traditionalists would attack and kill the perfect Christ and his apostles, why should you do anything less with an imperfect prophet? Joseph Smith was told by an angel that his name "should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues." By your attacks, almost 200 years later, you are living proof of this prophecy.

[alanmolstad]

the Son is "fully God almighty"

there.... that ends your issue with any difference between the Son and the father.
For in his nature as God, there is no difference.


WalterMartin used to teach that in the GREEK, the words are at John 1;1...."What God was, the Word was"





But the Son has a body Alan!!!!?

Yes,that is why the bible says the Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was NOT flesh before....then it "BECAME" flesh after.
It was always spirit however as it is God, and as we know from the Scriptures, "God is spirit"


So in his nature as God, the Son is totally equal with the father. What the Father is, so is the Son.

But when the Word "BECAME" man, the Word gained a 2nd nature that the father does not have.
The father does not have a 2nd nature.


So the Son and the Father are totally the same in the nature as God.
and with this the Son also has a 2nd nature as a man.....that he gained when the Word "BECAME" flesh.







To review.
In their nature as God, the Son and the Father are the same nature..they are equally God ...

[BigJulie]

the Son is "fully God almighty"

there.... that ends your issue with any difference between the Son and the father.
For in his nature as God, there is no difference.


WalterMartin used to teach that in the GREEK, the words are at John 1;1...."What God was, the Word was"





But the Son has a body Alan!!!!?

Yes,that is why the bible says the Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was NOT flesh before....then it "BECAME" flesh after.
It was always spirit however as it is God, and as we know from the Scriptures, "God is spirit"


So in his nature as God, the Son is totally equal with the father. What the Father is, so is the Son.

But when the Word "BECAME" man, the Word gained a 2nd nature that the father does not have.
The father does not have a 2nd nature.


So the Son and the Father are totally the same in the nature as God.
and with this the Son also has a 2nd nature as a man.....that he gained when the Word "BECAME" flesh.







To review.
In their nature as God, the Son and the Father are the same nature..they are equally God ...

And there you go again. You just can't speak of the Father and the Son without going on about their differences. You keep saying they are the same....but.

And then you completely ignore that the Son became glorified, resurrected, and exalted and sits on the right hand of the Father. I know you think this is only a metaphor, but there is a way to see both scriptures as true without being only metaphors. (Or so many other scriptures that you write-off as metaphors that don't agree with your interpretation of one scripture.)

Think of it, if you can recognize that your interpretation is completely incorrect and that "God is Spirit" is much like you are your spirit and without your spirit, your flesh is dead--it makes it so all of the other things we learn both in the Old Testament and the New Testament fall into place. And if you go on to just another chapter or two in John, wow--here is the explanation--(so you don't even have to guess what Christ is saying, he explains it more fully.)

John 6 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. (Okay, God is NOT invisible to Christ--you agree with this, right?)

Jhn 6:63 "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." (This is also found in John.)

So, now in John we find both "God is spirit" and "the words I speak unto you are spirit." Now, would you then equate that God must be only words? Of course not. You know he is more than just words because you understand that words alone have no ability to save or give life.

Now, you have more than ample scriptural evidence that you should not take God is spirit out of context and use it as an excuse to NOT believe Christ is speaking the truth fully (believing he only is speaking in metaphors.) In fact, when Christ says "God is spirit' he is speaking to the woman at the well of living water. Hence, right then--he is using a metaphor to explain who the Father and He is to her (living water.) He then explains to her that soon, worshiping the Father will not occur on the mountain or in Jerusalem, but will be done in spirit. Why? Because Jerusalem is going to be destroyed. Those who follow Christ are going to be destroyed. It is historical fact that this occurred. He also teaches the deeper lesson that even though these places will be destroyed, it is okay because God the Father wants us to worship in personally, via our spirits.

"But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him."

[alanmolstad]

And there you go again. You just can't speak of the Father and the Son without going on about their differences. You keep saying they are the same....but.

And then you completely ignore that the Son became......."



That's right,in my post I never once used the word "became".......how did I miss that?... :)





So to review what the Bible is teaching us:

God is Spirit, God is invisible , and God does not change.

The Word is God.
so the Word is Spirit, the Word is invisible, and the Word does not change.


That what the God is, the word is also.


And for our salvation , the Word became flesh.

The Word never stopped being God.

The Word never stopped being invisible

The Word never stopeing being unchanged.


But with the birth of the Christ child, we see that the Word had now also the 2nd nature of a human as well.


So the Word remained unchanged in his nature as the one eternal God, for God is always God, and therefore always invisible, and unchanged,etc.
But within this 2nd nature of a man, the Word has became flesh....


The word "became" means it was not flesh before, but then later it became this flesh.

The Word became flesh.
The Word became a man
The Word became a child
The Word became a teenager
The Word became a carpenter
The Word became a preacher
The word became the sacrificial lamb and took onto himself the sins of all men
The Word became dead
The Word became dead for 3days
The Word became resurrected.
The Word became resurrected in a body of flesh and bone.

So,,,,,the key words in the beginning of the book of John is this word "became: for it teaches us that the Word was not all these things at first...but that later it became all these things.


and yet, all the time that it was becoming all these things, the nature the word has with the Father as God Almighty, was unchanged.....unaffected....and as always invisible.

[BigJulie]

That's right,in my post I never once used the word "became".......how did I miss that?... :)





So to review what the Bible is teaching us:

God is Spirit, God is invisible , and God does not change.

The Word is God.
so the Word is Spirit, the Word is invisible, and the Word does not change.


That what the God is, the word is also.


And for our salvation , the Word became flesh.

The Word never stopped being God.

The Word never stopped being invisible

The Word never stopeing being unchanged.


But with the birth of the Christ child, we see that the Word had now also the 2nd nature of a human as well.


So the Word remained unchanged in his nature as the one eternal God, for God is always God, and therefore always invisible, and unchanged,etc.
But within this 2nd nature of a man, the Word has became flesh....


The word "became" means it was not flesh before, but then later it became this flesh.

The Word became flesh.
The Word became a man
The Word became a child
The Word became a teenager
The Word became a carpenter
The Word became a preacher
The word became the sacrificial lamb and took onto himself the sins of all men
The Word became dead
The Word became dead for 3days
The Word became resurrected.
The Word became resurrected in a body of flesh and bone.

So,,,,,the key words in the beginning of the book of John is this word "became: for it teaches us that the Word was not all these things at first...but that later it became all these things.


and yet, all the time that it was becoming all these things, the nature the word has with the Father as God Almighty, was unchanged.....unaffected....and as always invisible.


I will acknowledge that Jesus Christ became flesh and now retains that flesh in a glorified, resurrected state and now sits on the right hand of the Father.


Let's see if you can just answer 3 simple questions.

1. Is God the Father invisible to Christ or does Christ see the Father?

2. When Christ says the words that I speak are spirit and give life, how do you interpret that?

3. As the Father wants us to worship him in spirit, what does that mean to you?

(It will be interesting to see if you acknowledge my questions or will ignore it to just take my first sentence to respond to and ignore the rest as this seems to be your pattern with the scriptures.)

Oh, and can you please explain this "the Word never stopped being invisible?"

[alanmolstad]

I will acknowledge that Jesus Christ became flesh .....

The Word became flesh....the Father never did.

[BigJulie]

The Word became flesh....the Father never did.

Amazing you are becoming so predictable. ;)

From my last post:


(It will be interesting to see if you acknowledge my questions or will ignore it to just take my first sentence to respond to and ignore the rest as this seems to be your pattern with the scriptures.)

[alanmolstad]

Amazing you are becoming so predictable. ;)

From my last post:The predictable part of my answers are that they are always based on the Text, and that if the text has no clear verse on a matter I try not to guess....

I dont just fling out personal opinions, rather if the Bible speaks then I do, if the Bible does not address a question then I try not to just guess based only on my personal views..


What does the Bible say or not say?-

The bible tells us that God is spirit, that He is invisible, that he never changes.
The Bible tells us also that the WORD is God as well.

Thus the Word is spirit, the Word is invisible, the Word never changes.

So when we say that the "Word became flesh" we cant mean that the Word stopped being God, (or that the Word was in the slightest way different than the father),for that would go against the idea that we already learned about God, in that He is spirit, invisible, and never changes.

But the Word truly did come in the flesh, that flesh of a man...

This 2nd nature of the Word is truly human...



Now there are tons and tons of questions a person might want top ask the Text about how the Word could be both God almighty, and human at the same time?...and the truth is, the bible does not inform us too much of how that worked out.

We only know that this is what the bible teaches,,,it does not teach us how it worked.
The bible does not teach us how a little baby could be the eternal God?
The Bible does not tell us how the Lord God almighty, could have to learn things from his parents?
The bible does not tell us how the most powerful in the universe, could submit to the authority of his parents?



.

[BigJulie]

The predictable part of my answers are that they are always based on the Text, and that if the text has no clear verse on a matter I try not to guess....

I dont just fling out personal opinions, rather if the Bible speaks then I do, if the Bible does not address a question then I try not to just guess based only on my personal views..


What does the Bible say or not say?-

The bible tells us that God is spirit, that He is invisible, that he never changes.
The Bible tells us also that the WORD is God as well.

Thus the Word is spirit, the Word is invisible, the Word never changes.

So when we say that the "Word became flesh" we cant mean that the Word stopped being God, (or that the Word was in the slightest way different than the father),for that would go against the idea that we already learned about God, in that He is spirit, invisible, and never changes.

But the Word truly did come in the flesh, that flesh of a man...

This 2nd nature of the Word is truly human...



Now there are tons and tons of questions a person might want top ask the Text about how the Word could be both God almighty, and human at the same time?...and the truth is, the bible does not inform us too much of how that worked out.

We only know that this is what the bible teaches,,,it does not teach us how it worked.
The bible does not teach us how a little baby could be the eternal God?
The Bible does not tell us how the Lord God almighty, could have to learn things from his parents?
The bible does not tell us how the most powerful in the universe, could submit to the authority of his parents?



.

But you are ignoring verses in which Christ teaches "God is Spirit" and in order for you to take it out of context, you must make so many other versus strictly metaphorical. And listen to your ramblings now, they are getting more and more nonsensical.

Wow, now I understand what Christ meant when he said "For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." Mat 13:15

[Christian]

Julie posted:

But you are ignoring verses in which Christ teaches "God is Spirit" and in order for you to take it out of context, you must make so many other versus strictly metaphorical. And listen to your ramblings now, they are getting more and more nonsensical.

You mean like the verses that say Jesus is the vine? Jesus is the door?

Do you take THOSE p***ages literally? Or ARE they metaphorical? DO His 'wings' do anything? DOES he have leaves and blossoms?

Wow, now I understand what Christ meant when he said "For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." Mat 13:15

Looking in a mirror, are you? That IS how you look to those of us who read the Bible for what IT says rather than what some relatively new religious sect says it 'musta ment.'

Joey smith has lied to you, kiddo!

[BigJulie]

Julie posted:

But you are ignoring verses in which Christ teaches "God is Spirit" and in order for you to take it out of context, you must make so many other versus strictly metaphorical. And listen to your ramblings now, they are getting more and more nonsensical.

You mean like the verses that say Jesus is the vine? Jesus is the door?

Do you take THOSE p***ages literally? Or ARE they metaphorical? DO His 'wings' do anything? DOES he have leaves and blossoms?

Wow, now I understand what Christ meant when he said "For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." Mat 13:15

Looking in a mirror, are you? That IS how you look to those of us who read the Bible for what IT says rather than what some relatively new religious sect says it 'musta ment.'

Joey smith has lied to you, kiddo!


Yes, exactly--Jesus is the vine or the door--that is definitely a metaphor. So, if you look at God is spirit, you will see that as Christ continues that thought, he does not exclude God having a body. In fact, he is speaking to the woman at the well and explaining to her that if she drinks of this water she will never thirst again. So, he is teaching her in metaphors. Only two chapters later Christ state that his words are spirit and give life.

So, you are making my point for me.

Maybe you are willing to answer the questions that Alan is not:

1. Does Christ see the Father or is He invisible to Christ?

2. When Christ says the words that I speak are spirit and give life, how do you interpret that?

3. As the Father wants us to worship him in spirit, what does that mean to you?

[alanmolstad]

these 3 things are always true.

God is Spirit

God is Invisible

God does not change






Just deal with it people, and forget spending all your life running away from these 3 simple things we know about God...

[BigJulie]

these 3 things are always true.

God is Spirit

God is Invisible

God does not change






Just deal with it people, and forget spending all your life running away from these 3 simple things we know about God...

When did I become "people"? Do you think repeating the same thing over and over makes other scriptures disappear?

If your claims are so simple, just answer me these two questions.

Is God the Father invisible to Christ?

Can people see Christ?

[alanmolstad]

When did I become "people"? .....



Thats a conversation you need to have with your parents.....

[MickeyS]

Yes, exactly--Jesus is the vine or the door--that is definitely a metaphor. So, if you look at God is spirit, you will see that as Christ continues that thought, he does not exclude God having a body. In fact, he is speaking to the woman at the well and explaining to her that if she drinks of this water she will never thirst again. So, he is teaching her in metaphors. Only two chapters later Christ state that his words are spirit and give life.

So, you are making my point for me.

Maybe you are willing to answer the questions that Alan is not:

1. Does Christ see the Father or is He invisible to Christ?

2. When Christ says the words that I speak are spirit and give life, how do you interpret that?

3. As the Father wants us to worship him in spirit, what does that mean to you?

Excellent points...and excellent questions. I wonder why they're not being answered, they are all biblical and refer to specific verses...you think those well versed in the Bible could answer them?? Not being nasty...it's just interesting.

[BigJulie]

Excellent points...and excellent questions. I wonder why they're not being answered, they are all biblical and refer to specific verses...you think those well versed in the Bible could answer them?? Not being nasty...it's just interesting.

Thanks Mickey. I agree. Because I was told I did not believe in the Biblical God, we began a discussion on how God is described. From there, I cannot get a Biblical discussion. All I can get are a few cherry-picked verses and no discussion of the context of those verses or the discussion of any other verses.

[disciple]

Just a few thoughts. Occasionally in the Scriptures we get a glimpse into Heaven of the Father and the Son. We do know that there was a fellowship between the Father and the Son before the foundation of the world. John 17:5, "And now, O Father, glorify Thou Me and Thine own self with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was."
We get the same teaching from John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Note especially the words, "and the Word was with God." This simply implies a fellowship enjoyed by the Father and the Son in the beginning and from the beginning.
When Stephen died, he looked up into Heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. This implies that the Father is visible in Heaven and that the Son, likewise, is visible in Heaven. Acts 7:55, "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into Heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God." If the Father were not visible Stephen would not have known Jesus was at His right hand. Also I Corinthians 15:44 says, "It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body."
I would say that heavenly or spiritual things are visible in heaven. Just think about all the descriptive pictures in Revelation.

[alanmolstad]

"He will cover you with his feathers,
and under his wings you will find refuge"


There you have it,,,,proof that God is a chicken!

[BigJulie]

Just a few thoughts. Occasionally in the Scriptures we get a glimpse into Heaven of the Father and the Son. We do know that there was a fellowship between the Father and the Son before the foundation of the world. John 17:5, "And now, O Father, glorify Thou Me and Thine own self with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was."
We get the same teaching from John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Note especially the words, "and the Word was with God." This simply implies a fellowship enjoyed by the Father and the Son in the beginning and from the beginning.
When Stephen died, he looked up into Heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. This implies that the Father is visible in Heaven and that the Son, likewise, is visible in Heaven. Acts 7:55, "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into Heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God." If the Father were not visible Stephen would not have known Jesus was at His right hand. Also I Corinthians 15:44 says, "It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body."
I would say that heavenly or spiritual things are visible in heaven. Just think about all the descriptive pictures in Revelation.

Thank you. I completely agree with everything you said. Therefore, would you agree that when we speak of the "invisible" God, we do so because he is invisible to us?

[disciple]

Thank you. I completely agree with everything you said. Therefore, would you agree that when we speak of the "invisible" God, we do so because he is invisible to us?

Hi Julie,
I believe that as humans we are not able to see things in the spirit realm. God is spirit and we are not equipped to see Him.

[BigJulie]

Hi Julie,
I believe that as humans we are not able to see things in the spirit realm. God is spirit and we are not equipped to see Him.

When talking with Alan, he refers to some scriptures as being literal and concrete and others as being metaphorical. How do you determine which ones are literal, which ones are metaphorical, and which ones are both?

[disciple]

When talking with Alan, he refers to some scriptures as being literal and concrete and others as being metaphorical. How do you determine which ones are literal, which ones are metaphorical, and which ones are both?

Since I can't pretend to be a bible scholar or a theologian, I can't give you an all encomp***ing answer. My understanding is that scripture must be taken in context and we must use the reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit to understand God's intended meaning. Some things are easily understood, when Jesus said He is the door in John 10, we know He is not made of wood, we get the meaning but other things are not so easily understood. I guess each instance of scripture that falls into this category must be studied in regard to it's context and to whom it was written. All scripture was not written to us but it was all written for us.

[BigJulie]

Since I can't pretend to be a bible scholar or a theologian, I can't give you an all encomp***ing answer. My understanding is that scripture must be taken in context and we must use the reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit to understand God's intended meaning. Some things are easily understood, when Jesus said He is the door in John 10, we know He is not made of wood, we get the meaning but other things are not so easily understood. I guess each instance of scripture that falls into this category must be studied in regard to it's context and to whom it was written. All scripture was not written to us but it was all written for us.

I completely agree--especially in regards to reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Okay, so let me give you a few verses and see how you interpret them and why?

John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

Acts 7:55-56 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

Hebrews 1:3-4 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they"

Isa 44:8 "Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

[Christian]

Julie posted:


Originally Posted by disciple http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168242#post168242)
Since I can't pretend to be a bible scholar or a theologian, I can't give you an all encomp***ing answer. My understanding is that scripture must be taken in context and we must use the reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit to understand God's intended meaning. Some things are easily understood, when Jesus said He is the door in John 10, we know He is not made of wood, we get the meaning but other things are not so easily understood. I guess each instance of scripture that falls into this category must be studied in regard to it's context and to whom it was written. All scripture was not written to us but it was all written for us.


I completely agree--especially in regards to reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Okay, so let me give you a few verses and see how you interpret them and why?

John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

In the Greek there is no article 'a.' It says God is Spirit. . .period. It does NOT say He is flesh or bones, and Jesus said:

Luke 24:39
Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."
NKJV


Letting Scripture define Scripture, God is Spirit, and God does not have flesh and bones. (speaking of the FATHER of course)

Acts 7:55-56 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

With a little more to show the CONTEXT:

Acts 7:54-60
54 When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 56 and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, stopped their ears, and ran at him with one accord; 58 and they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." 60 Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
NKJV

Do you think that we will NOT see the separate PERSONS of God when we get to heaven? Or that we won't recognize the Father?

Do you think that God the Father lied when He said HE is the only God (Isaiah 43:10)???


Hebrews 1:3-4 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Is Jesus a liar, or is Jesus speaking of a SPIRITUAL 'sitting down' with God. REMEMBER, Paul said that to be absent from his body was to be present with the Lord. Do you think they were speaking of PHYSICAL bodies, or SPIRITUAL bodies?

Isa 44:8 "Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

Isa 43:10-11
10 "You are My witnesses," says the Lord,
"And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
Nor shall there be after Me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord,
And besides Me there is no savior.
NKJV



UNLESS you would care to call God a liar (claiming He contradicts Himself), THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD EXTANT AND HE DOES NOT KNOW OF ANY OTHERS.

Yet joe smith in pgp abraham 3 claimed he met with other gods, sent three of them to earth to 'organize' the earth, etc.

So smith had to have LIED. The God of the Bible stated JUST THE OPPOSITE of your theories that you could become a god of your own little world, etc etc etc

[Christian]

Julie posted:


Originally Posted by disciple http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168242#post168242)
Since I can't pretend to be a bible scholar or a theologian, I can't give you an all encomp***ing answer. My understanding is that scripture must be taken in context and we must use the reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit to understand God's intended meaning. Some things are easily understood, when Jesus said He is the door in John 10, we know He is not made of wood, we get the meaning but other things are not so easily understood. I guess each instance of scripture that falls into this category must be studied in regard to it's context and to whom it was written. All scripture was not written to us but it was all written for us.


I completely agree--especially in regards to reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Okay, so let me give you a few verses and see how you interpret them and why?

(May I join you? Perhaps I could shed a little light for you.)

John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

In the Greek there is no article 'a.' It says God is Spirit. . .period. It does NOT say He is flesh or bones, and Jesus said:

Luke 24:39
Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."
NKJV


Letting Scripture define Scripture, God is Spirit, and God does not have flesh and bones. (speaking of the FATHER of course)

Acts 7:55-56 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

With a little more to show the CONTEXT:

Acts 7:54-60
54 When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 56 and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, stopped their ears, and ran at him with one accord; 58 and they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." 60 Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
NKJV

Do you think that we will NOT see the separate PERSONS of God when we get to heaven? Or that we won't recognize the Father? Do you think we WON'T 'see more clearly' when we see heaven?

Do you think that God the Father lied when He said HE is the only God (Isaiah 43:10)???


Hebrews 1:3-4 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Is Jesus a liar, or is Jesus speaking of a SPIRITUAL 'sitting down' with God. REMEMBER, Paul said that to be absent from his body was to be present with the Lord. Do you think they were speaking of PHYSICAL bodies, or SPIRITUAL bodies?

Isa 44:8 "Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

Isa 43:10-11
10 "You are My witnesses," says the Lord,
"And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
Nor shall there be after Me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord,
And besides Me there is no savior.
NKJV



UNLESS you would care to call God a liar (claiming He contradicts Himself), THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD EXTANT AND HE DOES NOT KNOW OF ANY OTHERS.

Yet joe smith in pgp abraham 3 claimed he met with other gods, sent three of them to earth to 'organize' the earth, etc.

So smith had to have LIED. The God of the Bible stated JUST THE OPPOSITE of your theories that you could become a god of your own little world, etc etc etc

[BigJulie]

Julie posted:



I completely agree--especially in regards to reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Okay, so let me give you a few verses and see how you interpret them and why?

(May I join you? Perhaps I could shed a little light for you.)

John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

In the Greek there is no article 'a.' It says God is Spirit. . .period. It does NOT say He is flesh or bones, and Jesus said:

Luke 24:39
Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have."
NKJV


Letting Scripture define Scripture, God is Spirit, and God does not have flesh and bones. (speaking of the FATHER of course)

Acts 7:55-56 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

With a little more to show the CONTEXT:

Acts 7:54-60
54 When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. 55 But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, 56 and said, "Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!"
57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, stopped their ears, and ran at him with one accord; 58 and they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their clothes at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." 60 Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not charge them with this sin." And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
NKJV

Do you think that we will NOT see the separate PERSONS of God when we get to heaven? Or that we won't recognize the Father? Do you think we WON'T 'see more clearly' when we see heaven?

Do you think that God the Father lied when He said HE is the only God (Isaiah 43:10)???


Hebrews 1:3-4 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Is Jesus a liar, or is Jesus speaking of a SPIRITUAL 'sitting down' with God. REMEMBER, Paul said that to be absent from his body was to be present with the Lord. Do you think they were speaking of PHYSICAL bodies, or SPIRITUAL bodies?

Isa 44:8 "Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

Isa 43:10-11
10 "You are My witnesses," says the Lord,
"And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
Nor shall there be after Me.
11 I, even I, am the Lord,
And besides Me there is no savior.
NKJV



UNLESS you would care to call God a liar (claiming He contradicts Himself), THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD EXTANT AND HE DOES NOT KNOW OF ANY OTHERS.

Yet joe smith in pgp abraham 3 claimed he met with other gods, sent three of them to earth to 'organize' the earth, etc.

So smith had to have LIED. The God of the Bible stated JUST THE OPPOSITE of your theories that you could become a god of your own little world, etc etc etc


Christian, it would be so much easier if you learned how to use the quote icon on the top of the textbox. It looks like a little cartoon bubble.

For your John 4:24, it does not say God is flesh and bones, but it also does not exclude this possibility. The disciples obviously knew two things:

1. God is a spirit.
2. Christ is God.

It would make sense, understanding that they understood what a spirit is and what they understood about who Christ is that they would expect Christ to be a spirit as well. Clearly, Christ was teaching them something new when he let them see he had a body of flesh and bones. Hence, not unlike the disciples learning that the gospel would spread to the Gentiles, the disciples were being taught line upon line and precept on precept.

Hence, just using reason alone, your conclusions do not stand.

For Acts 7:55-56, it appears that your reasoning agrees with me. That there are two persons, and that we will be able to see both.

For Isaiah 44:8--How do you determine if this is metaphor or literal as Isaiah speaks in metaphor? Especially in light of the words " besides Me there is no savior"?? (Surely the Jews at the time used their understanding of Isaiah to stone Stephen. Clearly, he was speaking blasphemy. Or was he? Did the disciples of Christ understand something about God that the Jews did not?)

[alanmolstad]

When talking with Alan, he refers to some scriptures as being literal and concrete and others as being metaphorical. How do you determine which ones are literal, which ones are metaphorical, and which ones are both?
The answer is that you do what they did with the teachings of Paul.

You open your Bible up ,read it for yourself, and see if what Im saying is true....

[Apologette]

When talking with Alan, he refers to some scriptures as being literal and concrete and others as being metaphorical. How do you determine which ones are literal, which ones are metaphorical, and which ones are both?

If you were indwelt by God's Holy Spirit you would know.

[BigJulie]

If you were indwelt by God's Holy Spirit you would know.

So, the Holy Spirit lets you know the difference between what is metaphor and what is literal? That sounds just like a Mormon--we believe we receive answers via the Holy Ghost. Sounds the same to me.

[BigJulie]

The answer is that you do what they did with the teachings of Paul.

You open your Bible up ,read it for yourself, and see if what Im saying is true....

I did just that, and everything I read, you explain away as a metaphor. I disagree.

[disciple]

I completely agree--especially in regards to reasoning and guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Okay, so let me give you a few verses and see how you interpret them and why?

John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

Acts 7:55-56 "But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God."

Hebrews 1:3-4 "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they"

Isa 44:8 "Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any."

Hi Julie,
I would like to discuss this and I will take one verse at a time, first John 4:24.

God is Spirit. First of all this is necessary, if God were not a Spirit He could not be perfect, or infinite, or independent, or eternal, or omnipotent, or
omnipresent and He is all those things and more.
As all creatures, we were made by him, so we owe him obedience and reverence; but, to be acceptable to this infinite Spirit, the worship must be of a spiritual nature and that can only be possible if we are born again, only those who have the indwelling Holy Spirit and obey the truth can worship God acceptably.

[BigJulie]

[QUOTE=disciple;168284]Hi Julie,
I would like to discuss this and I will take one verse at a time, first John 4:24.

God is Spirit. First of all this is necessary, if God were not a Spirit He could not be perfect, or infinite, or independent, or eternal, or omnipotent, or
omnipresent and He is all those things and more.

First question: Why not? Why can't he be perfect, infinite, independent, eternal and so forth if he has a body? Wouldn't you also use these terms to describe Jesus Christ?

Second question: If being a spirit is supreme to having a body, why did God--
a. Create a body for Adam and Eve and then place their spirit in them (why not just give them a spirit alone?)
b. Why create a body for Christ?
c. Why resurrect and save this body if it is better to be spirit alone?



As all creatures, we were made by him, so we owe him obedience and reverence; but, to be acceptable to this infinite Spirit, the worship must be of a spiritual nature and that can only be possible if we are born again, only those who have the indwelling Holy Spirit and obey the truth can worship God acceptably.

I agree he owes our respect and reverence. I agree our worship must be spiritual in nature and we must be born again. I agree that we must be purified and sanctified by the Holy Ghost to not just worship God, but also be an acceptable sacrifice to him.

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness." Malachi 3

[disciple]

[QUOTE]

First question: Why not? Why can't he be perfect, infinite, independent, eternal and so forth if he has a body? Wouldn't you also use these terms to describe Jesus Christ?

Second question: If being a spirit is supreme to having a body, why did God--
a. Create a body for Adam and Eve and then place their spirit in them (why not just give them a spirit alone?)
b. Why create a body for Christ?
c. Why resurrect and save this body if it is better to be spirit alone?




I agree he owes our respect and reverence. I agree our worship must be spiritual in nature and we must be born again. I agree that we must be purified and sanctified by the Holy Ghost to not just worship God, but also be an acceptable sacrifice to him.

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness." Malachi 3

God is the Creator of all things, the first cause and therefore must be infinite and uncreated. All that is created is necessarily finite and limited. That which is beyond the finite must, by definition, be infinite, and the Bible states that God is beyond creation.
1 Kings 8:27 says, "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you." That which is physical cannot be infinite you cannot add finite parts together until they reach infinity, that is why men can’t become God. God is not composed of matter or any other imaginable substance. He also cannot be measured, He is omnipresent. A physical body can only be in one location.

I don’t know why God decided Adam and Eve should have physical bodies.

Jesus revealed God in human form as part of God's divine plan to offer salvation to all people. He was the one way God has provided to most clearly reveal God to humanity, coming to this world in a human body with its limitations. Yet His supernatural power was also made known, calling people to believe in Him as the Messiah and ultimately proving His claims through His resurrection from the dead.

[BigJulie]

God is the Creator of all things, the first cause and therefore must be infinite and uncreated. All that is created is necessarily finite and limited. That which is beyond the finite must, by definition, be infinite, and the Bible states that God is beyond creation. I've never agreed with the idea of "first cause" because it puts God on a timeline. IE--what was God doing before he "first caused" anything?



1 Kings 8:27 says, "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you." That which is physical cannot be infinite you cannot add finite parts together until they reach infinity, that is why men can’t become God. God is not composed of matter or any other imaginable substance. He also cannot be measured, He is omnipresent. A physical body can only be in one location. This is a prayer being offered regarding the promise the God has made to Israel and asking God to dwell in the temple that Solomon created--but it is acknowledged that a temple can't contain him. It doesn't speak to the "size" of God, but that God is free to be anywhere he wants--but then goes on to ask the favor that he dwell there with them.


I don’t know why God decided Adam and Eve should have physical bodies. I understand that--especially in light that you believe the spirit is supreme. Certainly, God had the capability to form only spirits as he formed both spirits and bodies. I think this is one question most evangelicals never ask themselves--whey go to the effort to build the earth, create bodies for us and then save it all?


Jesus revealed God in human form as part of God's divine plan to offer salvation to all people. He was the one way God has provided to most clearly reveal God to humanity, coming to this world in a human body with its limitations. Yet His supernatural power was also made known, calling people to believe in Him as the Messiah and ultimately proving His claims through His resurrection from the dead. Yes, but provide salvation with their bodies? The whole of the OT and NT is based on this formula--God created the earth and man and then SAVED them in this form. You seem to understand HOW we are saved, but not WHY we are saved. Yet, it is there in the Bible and when it is pointed out it is denied.

When you teach your children to brush their teeth--do you eventually share with them WHY?
When you ask your children to sit for hours on end in school, do you tell them WHY?
When you tell your children to eat their vegetables, do you tell them WHY?

Why then do you think God ignores the big WHY, if you being a flawed parent will tell your children why?

[disciple]

I've never agreed with the idea of "first cause" because it puts God on a timeline. IE--what was God doing before he "first caused" anything?
. This is a prayer being offered regarding the promise the God has made to Israel and asking God to dwell in the temple that Solomon created--but it is acknowledged that a temple can't contain him. It doesn't speak to the "size" of God, but that God is free to be anywhere he wants--but then goes on to ask the favor that he dwell there with them.

I understand that--especially in light that you believe the spirit is supreme. Certainly, God had the capability to form only spirits as he formed both spirits and bodies. I think this is one question most evangelicals never ask themselves--whey go to the effort to build the earth, create bodies for us and then save it all?

Yes, but provide salvation with their bodies? The whole of the OT and NT is based on this formula--God created the earth and man and then SAVED them in this form. You seem to understand HOW we are saved, but not WHY we are saved. Yet, it is there in the Bible and when it is pointed out it is denied.

When you teach your children to brush their teeth--do you eventually share with them WHY?
When you ask your children to sit for hours on end in school, do you tell them WHY?
When you tell your children to eat their vegetables, do you tell them WHY?

Why then do you think God ignores the big WHY, if you being a flawed parent will tell your children why?

Hi Julie,

Thanks for your reply. What was God doing before creation as we know it? I realize that I don't have to know everything in order to
believe those things that God has revealed.

God is omnipresent and a physical body cannot be.

We are saved because God so loved the world.

[MickeyS]

God is omnipresent and a physical body cannot be.


That is why the third member of the Godhead exists...He is pure spirit and can be everywhere

[MickeyS]

God is omnipresent and a physical body cannot be.


That is why the third member of the Godhead exists...He is pure spirit and can be everywhere

[MickeyS]

[QUOTE=BigJulie;168285]

God is the Creator of all things, the first cause and therefore must be infinite and uncreated. All that is created is necessarily finite and limited. That which is beyond the finite must, by definition, be infinite, and the Bible states that God is beyond creation.
1 Kings 8:27 says, "But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you." That which is physical cannot be infinite you cannot add finite parts together until they reach infinity, that is why men can’t become God. God is not composed of matter or any other imaginable substance. He also cannot be measured, He is omnipresent. A physical body can only be in one location.

Is it your belief that Jesus Christ is "uncreated" and "infinite" as well? If He has a body....by what you believe, He cannot be?

[disciple]

[QUOTE=disciple;168355]

Is it your belief that Jesus Christ is "uncreated" and "infinite" as well? If He has a body....by what you believe, He cannot be?

Well hi MickeyS, how are you?

Yes Jesus is infinite He always was, the Bible tells us that the "Word" (Jesus) became flesh and dwelt among us.

[BigJulie]

Hi Julie,

Thanks for your reply. What was God doing before creation as we know it? I realize that I don't have to know everything in order to
believe those things that God has revealed.

God is omnipresent and a physical body cannot be.

We are saved because God so loved the world.

When it think of God as eternal--I take away the timeline--all things are present before God--meaning, that if we have ever been, then we have always been. In other words, the basis of who we are has always existed and God has always known us in this form. As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we call this "intelligences."

Okay--I agree that God saved us because he loves us, but take it one step deeper. Why would loving us equate to savings us WITH our bodies, if being only spirit is the greater way to be?

[MickeyS]

[QUOTE=MickeyS;168368]

Well hi MickeyS, how are you?

Yes Jesus is infinite He always was, the Bible tells us that the "Word" (Jesus) became flesh and dwelt among us.

I'm good thanks :)

But that's the problem. If finite is defined by that which is physical...then Jesus Christ would have to be finite as well.

[disciple]

[QUOTE=disciple;168369]

I'm good thanks :)

But that's the problem. If finite is defined by that which is physical...then Jesus Christ would have to be finite as well.

Hi MickeyS,

Jesus being God is infinite and while He became flesh for a purpose He was still God and still infinite and
now has a glorified spiritual body.

Some verses from 1Cor. 15 explains it clearly.

“So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” 1 Cor 15:42-44

“For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to p*** the saying that is
written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”1 Cor 15:53-54

[disciple]

[QUOTE=disciple;168369]

I'm good thanks :)

But that's the problem. If finite is defined by that which is physical...then Jesus Christ would have to be finite as well.
Hi MickeyS,

Jesus being God is infinite and while He became flesh for a purpose He was still God and still infinite and
now has a glorified spiritual body.

Some verses from 1Cor. 15 explains it clearly.

“So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” 1 Cor 15:42-44

“For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to p*** the saying that is
written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”1 Cor 15:53-54

[Apologette]

Mickey says the Mormon Holy Ghost can be everywhere, however the Mormon cult teaches that their "holy ghost" can only in one place at a time:

"The Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead (see 1 John 5:7; D&C 20:28). He is a “personage of Spirit” (D&C 130:22). He can be in only one place at a time, but His influence can be everywhere at the same time."

Gospel Principles Manual

So, Mickey is either being intentionally deceptive or doesn't know what she's talking about.

[Apologette]

Mickey says the Mormon Holy Ghost can be everywhere, however the Mormon cult teaches that their "holy ghost" can only in one place at a time:

"The Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead (see 1 John 5:7; D&C 20:28). He is a “personage of Spirit” (D&C 130:22). He can be in only one place at a time, but His influence can be everywhere at the same time."

Gospel Principles Manual

So, Mickey is either being intentionally deceptive or doesn't know what she's talking about.

[Apologette]

Mickey says the Mormon Holy Ghost can be everywhere, however the Mormon cult teaches that their "holy ghost" can only in one place at a time:

"The Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead (see 1 John 5:7; D&C 20:28). He is a “personage of Spirit” (D&C 130:22). He can be in only one place at a time, but His influence can be everywhere at the same time."

Gospel Principles Manual

So, Mickey is either being intentionally deceptive or doesn't know what she's talking about.

[Apologette]

Mickey says the Mormon Holy Ghost can be everywhere, however the Mormon cult teaches that their "holy ghost" can only in one place at a time:

"The Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead (see 1 John 5:7; D&C 20:28). He is a “personage of Spirit” (D&C 130:22). He can be in only one place at a time, but His influence can be everywhere at the same time."

Gospel Principles Manual

So, Mickey is either being intentionally deceptive or doesn't know what she's talking about.[/B]

[MickeyS]

Mickey says the Mormon Holy Ghost can be everywhere, however the Mormon cult teaches that their "holy ghost" can only in one place at a time:

"The Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead (see 1 John 5:7; D&C 20:28). He is a “personage of Spirit” (D&C 130:22). He can be in only one place at a time, but His influence can be everywhere at the same time."

Gospel Principles Manual

So, Mickey is either being intentionally deceptive or doesn't know what she's talking about.[/B]

That's fine, my apologies for wording that "incorrectly". As a personage, yes, the Holy Ghost is only in one place...but BECAUSE He is pure spirit, His influence can be in all places at once. Through His influence, we can know the will of the Father. This is why The Holy Ghost is necessary. Him being spirit enables Him to "be everywhere" (of course, meaning His influence). I would hope those reading that definition would know what I meant, but maybe I should have been more specific. Lol

I certainly wasn't lying, and I know what I meant

Let me ask you a question
Is God pure spirit without a body?

[MickeyS]

Hi MickeyS,

Jesus being God is infinite and while He became flesh for a purpose He was still God and still infinite and
now has a glorified spiritual body.

Some verses from 1Cor. 15 explains it clearly.

“So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” 1 Cor 15:42-44

“For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to p*** the saying that is
written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”1 Cor 15:53-54

Yes, this explains the change that occurs when we are resurrected. It's not that we are just reunited with a physical body like we were before...we are resurrected with a "spiritual body" the "spiritual body" which is raised, is the glorified physical body after being resurrected. "Death is swallowed up in victory" since after being resurrected with our bodies, we become immortal, so its different from the physical body we had in mortality, (because it cannot die) but it's still a body and not pure spirit.

It's basically comparing the difference between a mortal body and a resurrected immortal body, sure.

Jesus Christ now has a glorified physical body. So in His glorified spiritual BODY (not pure spirit), is He still infinite?

[disciple]

Yes, this explains the change that occurs when we are resurrected. It's not that we are just reunited with a physical body like we were before...we are resurrected with a "spiritual body" the "spiritual body" which is raised, is the glorified physical body after being resurrected. "Death is swallowed up in victory" since after being resurrected with our bodies, we become immortal, so its different from the physical body we had in mortality, (because it cannot die) but it's still a body and not pure spirit.

It's basically comparing the difference between a mortal body and a resurrected immortal body, sure.

Jesus Christ now has a glorified physical body. So in His glorified spiritual BODY (not pure spirit), is He still infinite?

Hey Mickey,

I don't pretend to fully understand what a glorified body is, but Jesus is infinite. Consider the following verses.

"But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom." Heb 1:8

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." Heb 13:8

[BigJulie]

Hey Mickey,

I don't pretend to fully understand what a glorified body is, but Jesus is infinite. Consider the following verses.

"But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom." Heb 1:8

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." Heb 13:8

We agree. But based on this, your argument for why you believe God the Father is spirit only just vanished. You just made the argument that having a glorified body does not diminish Christ in any way. We believe Christ came to teach us about His Father and our Father. While you argue for a difference between the two--distinguishing characteristics, we do not.

[BigJulie]

Hey Mickey,

I don't pretend to fully understand what a glorified body is, but Jesus is infinite. Consider the following verses.

"But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom." Heb 1:8

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." Heb 13:8

We agree. But based on this, your argument for why you believe God the Father is spirit only just vanished. You just made the argument that having a glorified body does not diminish Christ in any way. We believe Christ came to teach us about His Father and our Father. While you argue for a difference between the two--distinguishing characteristics, we do not.

[alanmolstad]

the Word "became" flesh....


The Word was not always flesh.....this is why the Bible tells us that the Word "became" flesh.



The father never was flesh...nor did the father ever become flesh.

[alanmolstad]

so the nature of God is spirit...and thus invisible....for this is why the bible tells us that Jesus is the image of the INVISIBLE GOD !

For the Word "became"flesh.....thus Jesus has to totally different natures.
the 1st nature is God...thus spirit...thus invisible.
The 2nd nature that Jesus has is man....thus flesh...thus you can feel and see him.



and this is why the Bible tells us that Jesus is the image ( visible) of the INVISIBLE GOD ( spirit)

[disciple]

We agree. But based on this, your argument for why you believe God the Father is spirit only just vanished. You just made the argument that having a glorified body does not diminish Christ in any way. We believe Christ came to teach us about His Father and our Father. While you argue for a difference between the two--distinguishing characteristics, we do not.

Hi Julie,

The bible tells us that Jesus, who was always with God, became flesh and was resurrected in a glorified body. The bible also tells us that God is Spirit and does not tell us that He ever had or will have a body. Where does that idea come from?

[MickeyS]

Hey Mickey,

I don't pretend to fully understand what a glorified body is, but Jesus is infinite. Consider the following verses.

"But to the Son He says:
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom." Heb 1:8

"Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." Heb 13:8

Yes, but by the standards you have given, Jesus Christ cannot be infinite because He has a body

"That which is physical cannot be infinite"

[disciple]

Yes, but by the standards you have given, Jesus Christ cannot be infinite because He has a body

"That which is physical cannot be infinite"

But a glorified, resurrected body is not the physical body we know. If you remember Luke 24 Jesus vanished
from the sight of the disciples He met on the road to Emmaus and He also appeared to the Apostles in a
locked room. So we obviously cannot put the limitations of our finite physical bodies on the risen, glorified
Lord Jesus.

[MickeyS]

But a glorified, resurrected body is not the physical body we know. If you remember Luke 24 Jesus vanished
from the sight of the disciples He met on the road to Emmaus and He also appeared to the Apostles in a
locked room. So we obviously cannot put the limitations of our finite physical bodies on the risen, glorified
Lord Jesus.

So that which is physical can be infinite then.

Ok, so why can't God have a glorified body as well? We are told several times in the Bible that if you've seen the Son, you've seen the Father, that The Son is the express image of The Father, The Son does what He has seen The Father do...etc

Plus we were made in Gods image, and one day we will have glorified resurrected bodies as well.

[MickeyS]

so the nature of God is spirit...and thus invisible....for this is why the bible tells us that Jesus is the image of the INVISIBLE GOD !

For the Word "became"flesh.....thus Jesus has to totally different natures.
the 1st nature is God...thus spirit...thus invisible.
The 2nd nature that Jesus has is man....thus flesh...thus you can feel and see him.



and this is why the Bible tells us that Jesus is the image ( visible) of the INVISIBLE GOD ( spirit)


Invisible....what is the definition of invisible?

1- not visible, not perceptible by the eye
2- out of sight, hidden

oh, look at that. Invisible can mean it's hidden or out of sight, not that it can't be seen AT ALL.

That is how Jesus is the image of the INVISIBLE (hidden) God.

[BigJulie]

Hi Julie,

The bible tells us that Jesus, who was always with God, became flesh and was resurrected in a glorified body. The bible also tells us that God is Spirit and does not tell us that He ever had or will have a body. Where does that idea come from?

Where does the idea come from? From Jesus Christ--once he was resurrected and glorified. Once we learn this about Christ and understanding that Christ's whole mission is to glorify (show us) his Father; then that which was not understood prior to his resurrection is now clear. Hence, in the beginning we learn we are made after the image of God and then Christ shows us how and why.

[disciple]

Hi Julie and MickeyS,

Thanks for the discussion. How do you reconcile what Jesus said in the following verses from Luke and John
with what is said by some of your prophets? Serious question, no malice intended.

“God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
John 4:24

“Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.” Luke 24:39

“He is our Father-the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and is now an exalted Being. How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds, and when men were not p***ing through the same ordeals that we are now p***ing through.”
Brigham Young - Mormon prophet. Journal of Discourses 7:333


“For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.”
— Moroni 8:18

“For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and in him there is no variableness neither shadow of changing?”
— Mormon 9:9

“For he is the same yesterday, today, and forever...”
— 1 Nephi 10:18

[BigJulie]

Hi Julie and MickeyS,

Thanks for the discussion. How do you reconcile what Jesus said in the following verses from Luke and John
with what is said by some of your prophets? Serious question, no malice intended.

“God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
John 4:24

“Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.” Luke 24:39

“He is our Father-the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and is now an exalted Being. How many Gods there are, I do not know. But there never was a time when there were not Gods and worlds, and when men were not p***ing through the same ordeals that we are now p***ing through.”
Brigham Young - Mormon prophet. Journal of Discourses 7:333


“For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.”
— Moroni 8:18

“For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and in him there is no variableness neither shadow of changing?”
— Mormon 9:9

“For he is the same yesterday, today, and forever...”
— 1 Nephi 10:18

First off, let's be clear that the Journal of Discourses is not scripture. In fact, it doesn't take much research to learn that they were not written by Brigham Young. Instead, they were written by another and not edited by Brigham Young. So, we have them as a part of history and we use them to help us learn, but we also don't view them as scripture (revelation from God.)

So, if Brigham Young made that statement, why would he make that statement? Well, the very first word of the Old Testament is "elohim" created the heavens and earth. Literally, this means "gods". As Mormons, we use the term "Elohim" as a ***le to differentiate God the Father from Jesus Christ, but literally, elohim just means "gods." Second, Jesus Christ tells us that He does nothing save He has seen the Father do. We can get into all kinds of discussions about what this really means--but it would all be speculation if it is not revealed to us and given as scripture. What we do know for sure is Christ has a glorified, resurrected body. What we also know (in my scripture) is God the Father has the same. Once this becomes clear, then so many other verses become clear. For example, Genesis 1 in which we learn we are created in the image of our Father. Christ telling us that this is life eternal, to know the Father and himself. Christ telling us that he comes to glorify the Father--so we can be one with Him. Learning that when we see God, we shall be like him. In other words, while in the Old Testament, who God the Father is still vaguely understood--in the New Testament Christ allows us to know him. He asks to be perfect, even as His Father is perfect. He not only shows us the way, He IS the way. (I really believe this is the excuse the Jews made for crucifying Christ. While their motives were power, their excuse was that God can't possibly have a son and we can't really know the Father. It is not surprising to me then, that 300 years after Christ this same argument is made for political reasons. If one can't really know God, then the government can act in his place, right?)

So, why did Christ tell the Samaritan women that God is spirit? Because he is and it is through his spirit that we get to know him. If you keep reading in John, you will see Christ tell his disciples that the flesh is nothing, but it is the spirit that gives life. (It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63.) But we also see another pattern with Christ, meaning that when he is speaking to non-believers, he does not give them the meat of the gospel, but the milk. The Samaritan was not a disciple and was not even a Jew. He was giving her the basics. You can see this as well when Christ speaks to the Pharisees or to the Saducees. He does not explain the full-gospel, but the milk. Hence, when he said, "Give unto Caesar what is Caesars" he doesn't fully explain about ***hing, but he doesn't say that one doesn't need to give to God. He merely gives a broad statement to make them think. With learning of the difference of the spirit and of the flesh, can you see why his disciples would be surprised he has a body of flesh--especially in light of his teachings? But, here in his resurrection, he is glorifying His Father and our Father. They are learning something new. They are learning that the body is resurrected and when it is exalted and glorified, it is not limiting. He is also teaching them what is possible if they follow him. (As all will be resurrected, but not all will be glorified and exalted. See Corinthians.)

So, let's get to the unchanging--non-varying part of God.

It helps to understand this point of doctrine: "Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal. And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all."

First off, as we believe God is eternal,we also understand we are eternal. Why? Because God knows all and knowing all, knows us. This is why we can be "foreordained" or predestined. He knows who we are or the basis for who we are. This is our natures--the part that chooses away from God. God did not make something flawed, but rather our natures have always existed. This is why He can know who will choose to follow him and who will not. Our life then is one of self-discovery. He calls all to come unto him and follow Him, but he already knows us.

Once we understand God's eternal nature, then we know that He has and always will be perfect. He has always been and will always be greater than we are. He is unchanging, unwavering in his perfection-his completeness, his holiness, his grace, his truth, etc. But God does subdue and submit all things to him.

"1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him."

Having a body means that even the flesh is subject to Him. Now, you can believe that Jesus Christ is just a part of God the Father who is spirit, but we do not see this difference. We see Christ as teaching us who God the Father is. God already having power over the flesh.

Which brings us to the last question---why does God subdue and save this world and our physical bodies? Why was that important to him?

It is because God is a God of creation. We learn from this world how God works and why. He created us and the grand promise that he made to Abraham and kept the covenant through the atonement of Jesus Christ is that we can continue to create; just as we do here--if and only if we follow him. This is how the OT fits with the NT. God did not create us, marry us, command us to create (multiply) only to save us so he could sterilize us and divorce us. We believe it is through Jesus Christ "worlds without end" are created. Why? Because it is through him we are saved and perfected.

This is the cause of so much criticism of my beliefs. This is what is ridiculed and put down. Heaven forbid that God, the great creator, would use us to create in this life and the next.

And heaven forbid we can learn this through the spirit, through prayer--and can really know God and be perfected by him! That is why we are criticized.

[disciple]

First off, let's be clear that the Journal of Discourses is not scripture. In fact, it doesn't take much research to learn that they were not written by Brigham Young. Instead, they were written by another and not edited by Brigham Young. So, we have them as a part of history and we use them to help us learn, but we also don't view them as scripture (revelation from God.)

So, if Brigham Young made that statement, why would he make that statement? Well, the very first word of the Old Testament is "elohim" created the heavens and earth. Literally, this means "gods". As Mormons, we use the term "Elohim" as a ***le to differentiate God the Father from Jesus Christ, but literally, elohim just means "gods." Second, Jesus Christ tells us that He does nothing save He has seen the Father do. We can get into all kinds of discussions about what this really means--but it would all be speculation if it is not revealed to us and given as scripture. What we do know for sure is Christ has a glorified, resurrected body. What we also know (in my scripture) is God the Father has the same. Once this becomes clear, then so many other verses become clear. For example, Genesis 1 in which we learn we are created in the image of our Father. Christ telling us that this is life eternal, to know the Father and himself. Christ telling us that he comes to glorify the Father--so we can be one with Him. Learning that when we see God, we shall be like him. In other words, while in the Old Testament, who God the Father is still vaguely understood--in the New Testament Christ allows us to know him. He asks to be perfect, even as His Father is perfect. He not only shows us the way, He IS the way. (I really believe this is the excuse the Jews made for crucifying Christ. While their motives were power, their excuse was that God can't possibly have a son and we can't really know the Father. It is not surprising to me then, that 300 years after Christ this same argument is made for political reasons. If one can't really know God, then the government can act in his place, right?)

So, why did Christ tell the Samaritan women that God is spirit? Because he is and it is through his spirit that we get to know him. If you keep reading in John, you will see Christ tell his disciples that the flesh is nothing, but it is the spirit that gives life. (It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63.) But we also see another pattern with Christ, meaning that when he is speaking to non-believers, he does not give them the meat of the gospel, but the milk. The Samaritan was not a disciple and was not even a Jew. He was giving her the basics. You can see this as well when Christ speaks to the Pharisees or to the Saducees. He does not explain the full-gospel, but the milk. Hence, when he said, "Give unto Caesar what is Caesars" he doesn't fully explain about ***hing, but he doesn't say that one doesn't need to give to God. He merely gives a broad statement to make them think. With learning of the difference of the spirit and of the flesh, can you see why his disciples would be surprised he has a body of flesh--especially in light of his teachings? But, here in his resurrection, he is glorifying His Father and our Father. They are learning something new. They are learning that the body is resurrected and when it is exalted and glorified, it is not limiting. He is also teaching them what is possible if they follow him. (As all will be resurrected, but not all will be glorified and exalted. See Corinthians.)

So, let's get to the unchanging--non-varying part of God.

It helps to understand this point of doctrine: "Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal. And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all."

First off, we believe God is eternal, we are eternal. Why? Because God knows all and knowing all, knows us. This is why we can be "foreordained" or predestined. He knows who we are or the basis for who we are. This is our natures--the part that chooses away from God. God did not make something flawed, but rather our natures have always existed. This is why He can know who will choose to follow him and who will not. Our life then is one of self-discovery. He calls all to come unto him and follow Him, but he already knows us.

Once we understand God's eternal nature, then we know that He has and always will be perfect. He has always been and will always be greater than we are. He is unchanging, unwavering in his perfection-his completeness, his holiness, his grace, his truth, etc. But God does subdue and submit all things to him.

"1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him."

Having a body means that even the flesh is subject to Him. Now, you can believe that Jesus Christ is just a part of God the Father who is spirit, but we do not see this difference. We see Christ as teaching us who God the Father is. God already having power over the flesh.

Which brings us to the last question---why does God subdue and save this world and or physical bodies? Why was that important to him?

It is because God is a God of creation. We learn from this world how God works and why. He created us and the grand promise that he made to Abraham and kept the covenant through the atonement of Jesus Christ is that we can continue to create; just as we do here--if and only if we follow him. This is how the OT fits with the NT. God did not create us, marry us, command us to create (multiply) only to save us so he could sterilize us and divorce us. We believe it is through Jesus Christ "worlds without end" are created. Why? Because it is through him we are saved and perfected.

This is the cause of so much criticism of my beliefs. This is what is ridiculed and put down. Heaven forbid that God, the great creator, would use us to create in this life and the next.

Hi Julie, thanks for your reply.

I don't believe as you believe but I see no reason why we should ridicule or put each other down while we discuss things.
After all it is God's Holy Spirit who convicts and leads to all truth, not you or I.

[BigJulie]

Hi Julie, thanks for your reply.

I don't believe as you believe but I see no reason why we should ridicule or put each other down while we discuss things.
After all it is God's Holy Spirit who convicts and leads to all truth, not you or I.

On this we agree--it is the Holy Ghost who testifies of truth. We can bear testimony, but ultimately, it is up to the person to ask and seek after truth--at which we receive this promise:

Mat 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

[MickeyS]

Hi Julie and MickeyS,

Thanks for the discussion. How do you reconcile what Jesus said in the following verses from Luke and John
with what is said by some of your prophets? Serious question, no malice intended.

“God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
John 4:24

You're welcome :)

The verse about worshipping Him in spirit is a lesson in how we should worship Him, it is not telling us God is Spirit ONLY. Hebrews 12:29 say that God is a consuming fire, 1 Jn 1:5 says God is light, and 1 Jn 4:4,16 says that God is love. Is He just those things? Clearly not. So in this case, as with the others, it is a part of what He is, not the whole.


“Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.” Luke 24:39

And this verse is the Savior comforting His disciples who, upon seeing Him, thought Him to be a ghost (spirit). Again, this is not teaching about the nature of God, but confirming the flesh & bones resurrection of Jesus Christ. This confirms what I've been saying about Jesus having a FLESH & BONES body in His glorified state.

With these Book of Mormon verses, you need to understand the context and what they are teaching. They are teaching that God's Will, His Plan, His TRUTH is unchanging. These verses deal with those who teach contrary doctrine.


"For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity.”
— Moroni 8:18

This verse backs up what is being taught about the false teaching that unbaptized children would go to hell. God is unchanging....His doctrine is unchanging. In other words, He wouldn't teach that all children are precious to Him and then decide that unbaptized children go to hell. Unchanging....

"16 Wo be unto them that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner, for they shall perish except they repent. Behold, I speak with boldness, having authority from God; and I fear not what man can do; for perfect love casteth out all fear.
17 And I am filled with charity, which is everlasting love; wherefore, all children are alike unto me; wherefore, I love little children with a perfect love; and they are all alike and partakers of salvation."
Moroni 8:16-17


"For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and in him there is no variableness neither shadow of changing?”
— Mormon 9:9

Moroni is addressing those who teach and claim that Biblical miracles, gifts of the Spirit, revelation....etc.. have been done away with. Those things and more are not done away with because men decide they are. Unchanging


For he is the same yesterday, today, and forever...”
— 1 Nephi 10:18
This speaks of the plan of salvation which never changes. God can add to what we know...but His Plan....never changes

That all being said, you yourself believe in an "unchanging God", yet Jesus Christ (who you believe to be God) changed quite a bit. How do you reconcile that?

[MickeyS]

Hi Julie,

The bible also tells us that God is Spirit and does not tell us that He ever had or will have a body. Where does that idea come from?

Hi Disciple :) I believe The Bible teaches it quite clearly

"John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"

Jesus does not say, "he that seen me hath seen God" (which would conform more with a trinitarian view, I suppose) He was quite specific that SEEING Him was like seeing The Father.

And these others
I think it was a strong teaching from the beginning..I see nowhere in these verses that state we are made in the "image" of His spirit
-God created man in his own image: Gen. 1:27 .
-God created man, in the likeness of God made he him: Gen. 5:1 .
-in the image of God made he man: Gen. 9:6 .

He has a voice...this is also very clear teachings that God is separate from Jesus
-a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son: Matt. 3:17
-a voice out of the cloud: Matt. 17:5

Stephen saw God
-the Son of man standing on the right hand of God: Acts 7:56

And more teachings about Jesus Christ being the EXPRESS image of God. One of the reasons Jesus came to earth was to teach us more about God, and that includes what He looks like.

-Christ, who is the image of God: 2*Cor.
-Who is the image of the invisible God: Col. 1:15 (remember, invisible also means that which is hidden from view, just as God's person is hidden from our view)
-the express image of his person: Heb. 1:3

And again, we are made after the image of God
-men, which are made after the similitude of God: James 3:9

And when we are resurrected, we will be like Him as well
-Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body...Philip. 3:21

I believe it has been clearly taught from the beginning. I personally see these as stronger evidence than one verse that states God is spirit, when many other verses describe God as being many different things(fire, love, light), but we know He is not ONLY those things. Why would THAT ONE particular verse (God is spirit) be different from the rest? Especially when so many other verses teach that God does indeed have a body?

I hope the verses made sense...I'm typing quickly

Thank you for the discussion, really...it helps me as well. I'm not being sarcastic when I say this, that discussing this actually helps my testimony.

[Berean]

Hi Disciple :) I believe The Bible teaches it quite clearly

"John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"

Jesus does not say, "he that seen me hath seen God" (which would conform more with a trinitarian view, I suppose) He was quite specific that SEEING Him was like seeing The Father.

And these others
I think it was a strong teaching from the beginning..I see nowhere in these verses that state we are made in the "image" of His spirit
-God created man in his own image: Gen. 1:27 .
-God created man, in the likeness of God made he him: Gen. 5:1 .
-in the image of God made he man: Gen. 9:6 .

He has a voice...this is also very clear teachings that God is separate from Jesus
-a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son: Matt. 3:17
-a voice out of the cloud: Matt. 17:5

Stephen saw God
-the Son of man standing on the right hand of God: Acts 7:56

And more teachings about Jesus Christ being the EXPRESS image of God. One of the reasons Jesus came to earth was to teach us more about God, and that includes what He looks like.

-Christ, who is the image of God: 2*Cor.
-Who is the image of the invisible God: Col. 1:15 (remember, invisible also means that which is hidden from view, just as God's person is hidden from our view)
-the express image of his person: Heb. 1:3

And again, we are made after the image of God
-men, which are made after the similitude of God: James 3:9

And when we are resurrected, we will be like Him as well
-Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body...Philip. 3:21

I believe it has been clearly taught from the beginning. I personally see these as stronger evidence than one verse that states God is spirit, when many other verses describe God as being many different things(fire, love, light), but we know He is not ONLY those things. Why would THAT ONE particular verse (God is spirit) be different from the rest? Especially when so many other verses teach that God does indeed have a body?

I hope the verses made sense...I'm typing quickly

Thank you for the discussion, really...it helps me as well. I'm not being sarcastic when I say this, that discussing this actually helps my testimony.

Because Scripture tells us that God is Spirit and we must worship Him in Spirit and truth. Jn 4:24.

Also, what you describe are anthropomorphisms, and as much as anthropomorphisms help us picture God in human terms we can understand, God is not now nor ever has been a man. (Hos 11:9; Num 23:19.

He reminds us in Isaiah 55:8-9: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

God exists outside of and is not limited by time or space. Infinite simply means “without limits.” When we refer to God as "infinite," we generally refer to Him with terms like omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence.

The LDS god, OTOH, even if he does exist, which he does not, there is only ONE God, the LDS god is not omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He is a very weak god, subject to the laws of physics set down by the God of the Bible. He is not able to create, ex nihilo, as the Christian God can, allegedly he can only rearrange matter that already exists. LDS doctrine claims that as man is now, god once was, and as god is now, man may become.

LDS clearly worship a false god and a false Jesus, by their own admission.

The Restoration of Major Doctrines through Joseph Smith: The Godhead, Mankind, and the Creation - Ensign Jan. 1989 - ensign (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/01/the-restoration-of-major-doctrines-through-joseph-smith-the-godhead-mankind-and-the-creation?lang=eng)

[Berean]

Hi Disciple :) I believe The Bible teaches it quite clearly

"John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"

Jesus does not say, "he that seen me hath seen God" (which would conform more with a trinitarian view, I suppose) He was quite specific that SEEING Him was like seeing The Father.

And these others
I think it was a strong teaching from the beginning..I see nowhere in these verses that state we are made in the "image" of His spirit
-God created man in his own image: Gen. 1:27 .
-God created man, in the likeness of God made he him: Gen. 5:1 .
-in the image of God made he man: Gen. 9:6 .

He has a voice...this is also very clear teachings that God is separate from Jesus
-a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son: Matt. 3:17
-a voice out of the cloud: Matt. 17:5

Stephen saw God
-the Son of man standing on the right hand of God: Acts 7:56

And more teachings about Jesus Christ being the EXPRESS image of God. One of the reasons Jesus came to earth was to teach us more about God, and that includes what He looks like.

-Christ, who is the image of God: 2*Cor.
-Who is the image of the invisible God: Col. 1:15 (remember, invisible also means that which is hidden from view, just as God's person is hidden from our view)
-the express image of his person: Heb. 1:3

And again, we are made after the image of God
-men, which are made after the similitude of God: James 3:9

And when we are resurrected, we will be like Him as well
-Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body...Philip. 3:21

I believe it has been clearly taught from the beginning. I personally see these as stronger evidence than one verse that states God is spirit, when many other verses describe God as being many different things(fire, love, light), but we know He is not ONLY those things. Why would THAT ONE particular verse (God is spirit) be different from the rest? Especially when so many other verses teach that God does indeed have a body?

I hope the verses made sense...I'm typing quickly

Thank you for the discussion, really...it helps me as well. I'm not being sarcastic when I say this, that discussing this actually helps my testimony.

Because Scripture tells us that God is Spirit and we must worship Him in Spirit and truth. Jn 4:24.

Also, what you describe are anthropomorphisms, and as much as anthropomorphisms help us picture God in human terms we can understand, God is not now nor ever has been a man. (Hos 11:9; Num 23:19.

He reminds us in Isaiah 55:8-9: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

God exists outside of and is not limited by time or space. Infinite simply means “without limits.” When we refer to God as "infinite," we generally refer to Him with terms like omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence.

The LDS god, OTOH, even if he does exist, which he does not, there is only ONE God, the LDS god is not omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent. He is a very weak god, subject to the laws of physics set down by the God of the Bible. He is not able to create, ex nihilo, as the Christian God can, allegedly he can only rearrange matter that already exists. LDS doctrine claims that as man is now, god once was, and as god is now, man may become.

LDS clearly worship a false god and a false Jesus, by their own admission.

The Restoration of Major Doctrines through Joseph Smith: The Godhead, Mankind, and the Creation - Ensign Jan. 1989 - ensign (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/01/the-restoration-of-major-doctrines-through-joseph-smith-the-godhead-mankind-and-the-creation?lang=eng)

[Phoenix]

God exists outside of and is not limited by time or space.
the Virgin Mary seemed pretty sure that the god she gave birth to existed in her time and space.
if Jesus never existed in our time and apace, then the phrase "god with us" would be a lie.



LDS clearly worship a false god and a false Jesus, by their own admission.

i am pretty sure that they do not admit to worshiping a false god and a false Jesus.
i will go ask one. Wait for a minute and I will be right back.




okay, I asked one of them "do you admit that you worship a false god and a false Jesus?" and they said "no."

[Berean]

the Virgin Mary seemed pretty sure that the god she gave birth to existed in her time and space.
if Jesus never existed in our time and apace, then the phrase "god with us" would be a lie.

Jesus is fully God, and fully man. It's called a hypostatic union. http://www.gotquestions.org/hypostatic-union.html



i am pretty sure that they do not admit to worshiping a false god and a false Jesus.
i will go ask one. Wait for a minute and I will be right back.




okay, I asked one of them "do you admit that you worship a false god and a false Jesus?" and they said "no."

The link I posted, is an Ensign article which clearly indicates that Joseph Smith taught a "different" Jesus and a "different" god than that of orthodox Christianity. Here it is again.

The Restoration of Major Doctrines through Joseph Smith: The Godhead, Mankind, and the Creation - Ensign Jan. 1989 - ensign (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/01/the-restoration-of-major-doctrines-through-joseph-smith-the-godhead-mankind-and-the-creation?lang=eng)

And the following is the reason why I said Mormonism "admittedly" teaches false doctrines, a false Jesus and a false god:

2 Cor 11:4For if he who comes preaches another Jesus, whom we did not preach, or if you receive a different spirit, which you did not receive, or a different "good news", which you did not accept, you put up with that well enough. 5For I reckon that I am not at all behind the very best apostles. 6But though I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not unskilled in knowledge. No, in every way we have been revealed to you in all things.

Gal 1:6I marvel that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different "good news"; 7and there isn't another "good news." Only there are some who trouble you, and want to pervert the Good News of Christ. 8But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any "good news" other than that which we preached to you, let him be cursed. 9As we have said before, so I now say again: if any man preaches to you any "good news" other than that which you received, let him be cursed.

10For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? For if I were still pleasing men, I wouldn't be a servant of Christ.

1 Tim 6:3If anyone teaches a different doctrine, and doesn't consent to sound words, the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, 4he is conceited, knowing nothing, but obsessed with arguments, disputes, and word battles, from which come envy, strife, insulting, evil suspicions, 5constant friction of people of corrupt minds and des***ute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. Withdraw yourself from such.

[MickeyS]

"The doctrine of the hypostatic union is an attempt to explain how Jesus could be both God and man at the same time. It is ultimately, though, a doctrine we are incapable of fully understanding."

So this doesn't really explain anything. No offense, but it seems to me that this is a way to "explain" away contrary doctrine, and contradictory verses to the concept of the trinity. If you don't understand it....why are defining it? It sounds like it was able to be explained up to a point, and then everything else gets labeled as "mystery" and accepted. Just because somebody's come up with a name for it, doesn't mean it's real. I don't see how this explains anything.

You do realize that there isn't a "Jesus" shelf with all these "different Jesuses" lined up to represent what man believes. There is no "different" Jesus. There are simply different understandings of the SAME Jesus. I know the phrase is thrown around a lot, but it's getting really old.

It's okay though. One day the One and Only Jesus will explain it all. I have comfort in that.

[Berean]

"The doctrine of the hypostatic union is an attempt to explain how Jesus could be both God and man at the same time. It is ultimately, though, a doctrine we are incapable of fully understanding."

That's true for LDS, but Christians have no problem fully understanding.




So this doesn't really explain anything. No offense, but it seems to me that this is a way to "explain" away contrary doctrine, and contradictory verses to the concept of the trinity. If you don't understand it....why are defining it? It sounds like it was able to be explained up to a point, and then everything else gets labeled as "mystery" and accepted. Just because somebody's come up with a name for it, doesn't mean it's real. I don't see how this explains anything.

No offense taken. It most certainly is a way to explain the doctrine, but I don't believe there any contradictions in the Bible, and the Trinity is not a concept, it is evident all throughout the Bible. Even the BoM teaches the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, but Mormons don't follow the teachings of the BoM and vise versa.

For example:

Alma 11:
44 Now, this restoration shall come to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous; and even there shall not so much as a hair of their heads be lost; but everything shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil.



You do realize that there isn't a "Jesus" shelf with all these "different Jesuses" lined up to represent what man believes. There is no "different" Jesus. There are simply different understandings of the SAME Jesus. I know the phrase is thrown around a lot, but it's getting really old.

It's okay though. One day the One and Only Jesus will explain it all. I have comfort in that.

Tell that to Joseph Smith. He insists LDS follow a different Jesus, a different god and a different gospel.

The Restoration of Major Doctrines through Joseph Smith: The Godhead, Mankind, and the Creation - Ensign Jan. 1989 - ensign (https://www.lds.org/ensign/1989/01/the-restoration-of-major-doctrines-through-joseph-smith-the-godhead-mankind-and-the-creation?lang=eng)

[Phoenix]

Berean still hasn't proven that the Virgin Mary would be lying if she claimed that the god she gave birth to and raised did in fact exist in her time and space.

[MickeyS]

That's true for LDS, but Christians have no problem fully understanding.

I got that quote from your got questions link....was it not an accurate source?

"The doctrine of the hypostatic union is an attempt to explain how Jesus could be both God and man at the same time. It is ultimately, though, a doctrine we are incapable of fully understanding."

http://www.gotquestions.org/hypostatic-union.html

If not, why did you provide it?

[BigJulie]

i am pretty sure that they do not admit to worshiping a false god and a false Jesus.
i will go ask one. Wait for a minute and I will be right back.




okay, I asked one of them "do you admit that you worship a false god and a false Jesus?" and they said "no."

Thanks for a good laugh.

[dberrie2000]

Greetings,
Paul wrote the following,
“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.” Gal 1:6-9
The Gospel message preached by the Apostles and recorded in the New Testament was and is true and complete, and can be either accepted or rejected. There has never been a need for a "restored" gospel. I do not say this with disdain, as I am sure Joseph Smith was indeed searching for truth and you who are Mormons are sincere in your belief as I am in mine, but only one can be right. And since Joseph Smith seems to have done the exact thing Paul warned against, adding to a Gospel that was already complete and declared finished by Jesus Christ and receiving new information form an angel, wouldn't the New Testament account be more reliable than extra-biblical books added in the 1800's? The Gospel didn't need to be restored just preached.

Then could you explain for us why there a need for a Reformation--where a different theology was introduced--with numerous different denominations?

[disciple]

Then could you explain for us why there a need for a Reformation--where a different theology was introduced--with numerous different denominations?

The reformation was an indictment against the catholic church, which was preaching a false Gospel. Salvation by works, indulgences, attributing the power of God to Mary and saints, etc. The true Gospel was not being reformed, Luther and others realized that the teaching of the church did not line up with the truth of the scriptures.

[dberrie2000]

The reformation was an indictment against the catholic church, which was preaching a false Gospel. Salvation by works, indulgences, attributing the power of God to Mary and saints, etc. The true Gospel was not being reformed, Luther and others realized that the teaching of the church did not line up with the truth of the scriptures.

Hello Disciple!

If the gospel was not being reformed(and since the gospel does not need to be reformed, that is good)--and the teachings did not line up with the truth--then what would you call starting new denominations with a different theology?

[disciple]

Hello Disciple!

If the gospel was not being reformed(and since the gospel does not need to be reformed, that is good)--and the teachings did not line up with the truth--then what would you call starting new denominations with a different theology?

Hi DB,

Hope you are well. The realization that the scriptures were true and what the catholic church was teaching was not true was not someone coming up with a different theology. Nothing needed to be added or changed the bible was always true, men just needed to believe the revelation of God and not of men. I'm
not a big fan of the many denominations in Protestantism but I know satan will never stop driving wedges between believers.

[BigJulie]

Hi DB,

Hope you are well. The realization that the scriptures were true and what the catholic church was teaching was not true was not someone coming up with a different theology. Nothing needed to be added or changed the bible was always true, men just needed to believe the revelation of God and not of men. I'm
not a big fan of the many denominations in Protestantism but I know satan will never stop driving wedges between believers.

If it is possible that Catholicism was teaching not-scriptural views such as indulgences, isn't it possible that a idea that came not from the Bible, but 300 years or so later is also not true? As mentioned, the word trinity, nor the concept is backed by the Bible. The only way to do so is to make the poetic writings of Isaiah literal and the literal writings of Moses poetic or figurative. This does not make sense to me.

[dberrie2000]

Hi DB,

Hope you are well. The realization that the scriptures were true and what the catholic church was teaching was not true was not someone coming up with a different theology. Nothing needed to be added or changed ...

Hi Disciple:

Again--if nothing needed to be changed--then why the need for the Reformation--and the different theology--with numerous new denominations?

In fact--the Reformation gave rise to a major branch in Christianity:


Reformation---https://www.britannica.com/event/Reformation
CHRISTIANITY
WRITTEN BY: The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica
LAST UPDATED: 4-20-2010 See Article History

Reformation, the religious revolution that took place in the Western church in the 16th century. Its greatest leaders undoubtedly were Martin Luther and John Calvin. Having far-reaching political, economic, and social effects, the Reformation became the basis for the founding of Protestantism, one of the three major branches of Christianity.

[disciple]

Hi Disciple:

Again--if nothing needed to be changed--then why the need for the Reformation--and the different theology--with numerous new denominations?

In fact--the Reformation gave rise to a major branch in Christianity:


Reformation---https://www.britannica.com/event/Reformation
CHRISTIANITY
WRITTEN BY: The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica
LAST UPDATED: 4-20-2010 See Article History

Reformation, the religious revolution that took place in the Western church in the 16th century. Its greatest leaders undoubtedly were Martin Luther and John Calvin. Having far-reaching political, economic, and social effects, the Reformation became the basis for the founding of Protestantism, one of the three major branches of Christianity.

Hey DB, thanks for your reply.

Here's the point I'm trying to make, it wasn't God that felt the need for the reformation. It wasn't God who was the author of denominations or multiple religions. God had no need to add to or change the Bible, the complete revelation of His redemptive plan was always there, men just ignored it. Religion is man made, James 1:27 tells us," Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." Christianity is following Jesus Christ and acknowledging who He is. People were getting saved before Luther, Calvin or Smith and the means of their salvation can be found in the Gospel. See what I'm getting at?

[BigJulie]

Hey DB, thanks for your reply.

Here's the point I'm trying to make, it wasn't God that felt the need for the reformation. If God did not need a reformation, then it shouldn't have been as it divided the church.


It wasn't God who was the author of denominations or multiple religions. See point above.


God had no need to add to or change the Bible, the complete revelation of His redemptive plan was always there, men just ignored it. If there was no need for any more revelation, then men would not need a reformation, nor a break off from the original church (see above again).


Religion is man made, James 1:27 tells us," Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." So God has no need for religion, then to you, there is no need for a church?

So, if God has no need for religion, nor a reformation, why do you believe God started both? Or do you feel He was not part of either the early church nor the reformation?


Christianity is following Jesus Christ and acknowledging who He is. People were getting saved before Luther, Calvin or Smith and the means of their salvation can be found in the Gospel. See what I'm getting at? I agree that people have been saved since the beginning of time because of Christ, I am just curious how you suppose people understand what it means to follow Christ? What it means to believe in Christ, etc.---especially in light that there is so much division about what this means. I mean, even Muslims believe Christ was a great prophet, are they "christian" to you? And Mormons believe Christ is God the Son and begotten of the Father, are they Christian to you too? We are all just happily saved then--according to the gospel of Disciple (you)?

[dberrie2000]

Hey DB, thanks for your reply.

Here's the point I'm trying to make, it wasn't God that felt the need for the reformation.

Hi Disciple:

I agree. The gospel does not need to be reformed----but it is restored, as the scriptures bear testimony to:


Acts 3:21---King James Version (KJV)
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of res***ution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

The addendum to that restoration is--it must be accompanied by a heavenly event, not just an earthly one. IMO--the LDS church is the only church that claims the presence of Heavenly messengers--with witnesses.


It wasn't God who was the author of denominations or multiple religions.

Once again--I agree with you. So--what separates out God's true church from the rest?


God had no need to add to or change the Bible, the complete revelation of His redemptive plan was always there, men just ignored it.

God has added to the Bible all through the history of man--it was the product of thousands of years of revelations to man. And although the "Bible" may be complete--His revelations aren't finished, as God has always revealed His will to man, and those revelations have always been recorded in scripture, with witnesses--call it what one might. The LDS call it the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, etc.


Religion is man made, James 1:27 tells us," Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

How is that "man-made"? I believe that is God's way--not man's. We, as Christians, adopt God's way as our own, if we are to be accepted of God, and become His servants.


Christianity is following Jesus Christ and acknowledging who He is. People were getting saved before Luther, Calvin or Smith and the means of their salvation can be found in the Gospel. See what I'm getting at?

If any man is saved--it is on the same principle they have always been saved--and that is--obedience to the gospel. I don't believe the gospel, in it's form to be saved--has always been on the earth.

Disciple--the faith alone preach a gospel of salvation independent of following Christ. They preach a gospel of--first--being saved through faith--without any acts of obedience to Jesus Christ.

The scriptures testify to God's grace unto life conditional upon a "walk in the light":

1 John 1:7---King James Version (KJV)
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Preaching salvation is independent of acts of obedience to Jesus Christ is not the Gospel found in the Biblical NT:

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9---King James Version (KJV)
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

[disciple]

Hi DB,


In light of your comment above, it seems you are saying that acts of obedience must precede salvation.
If that is indeed what you believe than how do you interpret the following scriptures?

“knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justifiedby faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.” Gal 2:16

“This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works ofthe law, or by the hearing of faith?” Gal 3:2

The Christian does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us.” – C.S. Lewis

[BigJulie]

Hi DB,


In light of your comment above, it seems you are saying that acts of obedience must precede salvation.
If that is indeed what you believe than how do you interpret the following scriptures?

“knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justifiedby faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.” Gal 2:16

“This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works ofthe law, or by the hearing of faith?” Gal 3:2

The Christian does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us.” – C.S. Lewis

These scriptures (and comment by C.S. Lewis) do not contradict Dberrie's scriptures at all.

[disciple]

These scriptures (and comment by C.S. Lewis) do not contradict Dberrie's scriptures at all.

So are you saying that acts of obedience must precede salvation?

[dberrie2000]

Hi DB,


In light of your comment above, it seems you are saying that acts of obedience must precede salvation.
If that is indeed what you believe than how do you interpret the following scriptures?

“knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justifiedby faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.” Gal 2:16

Hi Disciple:

I interpret "works of the law" as certain rituals attached to the Mosaic Law--such as circumcision.

Obviously--Paul was not referring to obedience to the Gospel:

2 Thessalonians 1:7-9---King James Version (KJV)
7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

When Paul used the terms "works" "works of the Law", "the Law", "the Mosaic Law", etc--that was a reference to certain rituals under the Mosaic Law.


The Christian does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us.” – C.S. Lewis

If that is true--then why doesn't God make the whole world do good?

John 3:16---King James Version (KJV)
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

[disciple]

Hi DB,

So are we justified by faith in Jesus or by doing works. Paul says its by faith.

[dberrie2000]

Hi DB,

So are we justified by faith in Jesus or by doing works. Paul says its by faith.

Hi Disciple--that begs the question--is that a faith with works--or a faith without works?

Romans 6:16---King James Version (KJV)
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

It is certainly a faith without the works of the Law--agreed. But not independent of obedience to the gospel of Christ:

James 2:24---King James Version (KJV)
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

[disciple]

Hey DB,

Perhaps I can ask the question a different way. Which comes first, faith or works?