Mormons, Why Do You Believe Such Junk?

[Apologette]

If you are thinking of becoming a Mormon, being approached by a Mormon neighbor to have a "missionary lesson," or have a kid dating a Mormon - get out of that situation as soon as possible. These are some of the more ludicrous things Mormons believe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJjvpjpfrWs&ebc=ANyPxKrhw_rdorunkKLgc26YYPn5WhhW9x4inzyows634k tNJnCFSEiSVqWWquZUrffQ5b7GPwM4GSEzD-OhTJRmk80Q7kEZmA

[Apologette]

Notice, folks, how the Mormons are unable to address the ludicrous belief system they embrace!

[MickeyS]

Nobody watches these videos lol

[alanmolstad]

If you are thinking of becoming a Mormon, being approached by a Mormon neighbor to have a "missionary lesson," or have a kid dating a Mormon - get out of that situation as soon as possible. These are some of the more ludicrous things Mormons believe:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJjvpjpfrWs&ebc=ANyPxKrhw_rdorunkKLgc26YYPn5WhhW9x4inzyows634k tNJnCFSEiSVqWWquZUrffQ5b7GPwM4GSEzD-OhTJRmk80Q7kEZmA
Thanks for posting the video....lot of good information there.

It is just amazing how many views the linked videos we have been posting additional links to here have gotten over the years...I know one I linked to have over 470,000 views!
But seriously,the numbers don't really mean that much in the plan of God....
For even if only one person found the link to a video and watched it and came away with new and better understanding of the world of the CULTs its worth the time for us to post the link here.

But still, it is nice to know a few people are viewing the information all the time...

[BigJulie]

If you want to know what Mormons believe, the best place to go is to a Mormon. There is no reason to be afraid of Mormons. Actually, there is no reason to be afraid of any church. Once we understand that God does love us and he does hear and answer our prayers, we can always turn to him for any question. He is there for us. He wants us to be happy. He wants us to have joy. There is no reason to belittle another's belief. Pure love casteth out all fear.

[Phoenix]

If you want to know what Mormons believe, the best place to go is to a Mormon. There is no reason to be afraid of Mormons. Actually, there is no reason to be afraid of any church. Once we understand that God does love us and he does hear and answer our prayers, we can always turn to him for any question. He is there for us. He wants us to be happy. He wants us to have joy. There is no reason to belittle another's belief. Pure love casteth out all fear.

and pure hate results in the creation of threads like this one

[Christian]

If you want to know what Mormons believe, the best place to go is to a Mormon. There is no reason to be afraid of Mormons. Actually, there is no reason to be afraid of any church. Once we understand that God does love us and he does hear and answer our prayers, we can always turn to him for any question. He is there for us. He wants us to be happy. He wants us to have joy. There is no reason to belittle another's belief. Pure love casteth out all fear.

But of course a BETTER Place to go is to the official (and supposedly 'authoritative' WRITINGS such as the pgp book of abraham and other junk writings by joe smith.

NOBODY is 'afraid of' mormons. We CHRISTIANS (mormons are cultists, not Christians) go to the BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD, not to joe smith's writings for Truth. Why not go to God's very Own Word?

When the beliefs and teachings of others contradict God and send people to Hell for following false prophets, false christs, and false gods, Jesus attacked those false beliefs, as did Paul and all of the other Apostles.

The REAL God, the God of the BIBLE loves us MUCH MORE than your false gods and their goddess wives do.

[John T]

and pure hate results in the creation of threads like this one
Since when is telling the truth "hate"?
Only when someone fails to warn drivers that there is black ice on the top of the hill ahead, can it be called "hatred". I can say that because I once did a 360 on black ice on a bridge, and THAT was scary.

Some Mormons are blithelu oblivious to the fact of black ice because they are wearing their precious garments. those garments will not prevent the tires from loosing traction, and you are on a 3000 pound toboggan going 30 MPH traveling sideways.

It is the one who gets out of his car and flags others down to slow, who is the most loving.

[John T]

Nobody watches these videos lol

3081 viewers prove your error

[BigJulie]

But of course a BETTER Place to go is to the official (and supposedly 'authoritative' WRITINGS such as the pgp book of abraham and other junk writings by joe smith.

NOBODY is 'afraid of' mormons. We CHRISTIANS (mormons are cultists, not Christians) go to the BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD, not to joe smith's writings for Truth. Why not go to God's very Own Word?

When the beliefs and teachings of others contradict God and send people to Hell for following false prophets, false christs, and false gods, Jesus attacked those false beliefs, as did Paul and all of the other Apostles.

The REAL God, the God of the BIBLE loves us MUCH MORE than your false gods and their goddess wives do.


I go to scriptures (Bible included) and they teach me:

Matthew 7:1-5

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

and:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

John 13:34-35

“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

(Please do not try to tell me that you are trying to show me love. Not when you so callously speak to me.)

[alanmolstad]

Test all things, hold fast to what it true.

and how do we test things?
We test them the same way they put the words of Paul to a test...

We test them by opening our Bible and reading the Scripture to see if what is being said is true?

[alanmolstad]

Test all things, hold fast to what it true.

and how do we test things?
We test them the same way they put the words of Paul to a test...

We test them by opening our Bible and reading the Scripture to see if what is being said is true?

[BigJulie]

Test all things, hold fast to what it true.

and how do we test things?
We test them the same way they put the words of Paul to a test...

We test them by opening our Bible and reading the Scripture to see if what is being said is true?

I do test all things. I do read scriptures. I test them by reading scriptures AND by praying. I listen for the Holy Ghost to bear witness to me of truth. Then I live that truth and experience the fruits.

[alanmolstad]

his promise is that if we search for him, we will find him.

[MickeyS]

Test all things, hold fast to what it true.

and how do we test things?
We test them the same way they put the words of Paul to a test...

We test them by opening our Bible and reading the Scripture to see if what is being said is true?

And as I've already revealed in another thread....how many different interpretations and commentary is available out there to "test" the truth of the Bible? You yourself admit to not agreeing with a lot of what Christian commentators say about precious truths yet they're reading the SAME BIBLE you are.

How do you know who's right?? Are you stating YOU'RE right, and THEY'RE wrong? Actually, you have. But how do you KNOW that you're right? They opened their Bible and read the scripture too, they're non-Mormon Christians....but yet there are many differing views on one little chapter from the very beginning that literally paved the way for the definition of man's nature AND God's very Plan. Kind of important, don't you think?

All because of MEN's interpretation of what's said, and MEN's ***umptions as to what's NOT said.

I read scripture, I read commentary.... THEN, If I have questions about GOD's Word....I go to the source. Why wouldn't I??

[MickeyS]

his promise is that if we search for him, we will find him.

EXACTLY

What better way to seek Him out then by keeping a personal relationship with Him??

How do you not pray??

[alanmolstad]

EXACTLY

What better way to seek Him out then by keeping a personal relationship with Him??

How do you not pray??

oh you and I can pray for stuff all we want...

But in the end, the results of all our searching have to be in full agreement with the Scriptures.

this is why when Paul came to a church and taught his message, the good people would put Paul's teaching to the testof Scripture.

Now I would guess many people had prayer too while they opened their Bibles and read,as Im sue what they were reading in their Bible was a challenge to how things were being taught by people that did not know what they were teaching...

But the final judge of Paul's teaching came when people opened up their bible and read what it said to see if what Paul was saying was in full agreement with god's word?


Had the people seen Paul's teachings were different?..then they would have been very correct to reject pauls teachings.

But because Paul's teachings were in agreement with the Word of god that they already had, it was believed.

[alanmolstad]

is it ever wrong to pray?....

the answer is, that it depends on the situation...the context.

its like....if your 6 year old child is seen out in the backyard with some of his friends,and suddenly you see that they have a box of matches?.....is that a moment you should say to yourself..."Rather than jumping to conclusions, perhaps I should first go into my prayer room and pray about matters?"


in such a situation, spending some quality alone time in prayer with your Lord, is about the LAST THING you should be doing....



Another situation:
You are a married wife of a great husband,but one day you are at work and suddenly see a new man that just hired and he is really looking good to your eyes....but you know it would be wrong to have a relationship with him,,,yet you feel this new man might be your 'soul mate".....should you pray about cheating on your husband and allow your feelings of what God wants you to do be the final judge?


The problem is the feelings come and go....

You can be totally convinced of something in your heart...that your feelings are telling you clearly what god's will is for your life...and be totally off the wall in error.

feelings are....feelings...
They are not based on anything but themselves....or what you had for lunch earlier.


but the thing that is not subject to the ever-changing results we get from our feelings is the word of god.

the word stays constant.

That is why when someone prays for an answer to some question, the answer they feel they get from their Lord, has to agree with the Scriptures, or it should be rejected.


So....if a person wants to join a new religion...and they pray and pray about it, it really dont mean squat if the answers they get after their many prayers are at odds with the Scriptures.

if the religion you are praying about is at odds with the Bible?....then your prayers and the answers you believe you receive dont mean squat.

[Phoenix]

Since when is telling the truth "hate"?
Since when is telling untruths about people you hate, love?

[MickeyS]

3081 viewers prove your error

How do you get 3081 out of 143?? And the 143 only resulted because there are comments being made, it does not at all mean anyone has actually watched the video. Then look at the threads that only have video and no comments, they gross maybe a dozen or so (and again this does not prove anyone's actually watching the video)...so no, I don't believe anyone here is watching these videos, hence nobody is responding to Apologette's baiting.

[MickeyS]

is it ever wrong to pray?....

the answer is, that it depends on the situation...the context.

its like....if your 6 year old child is seen out in the backyard with some of his friends,and suddenly you see that they have a box of matches?.....is that a moment you should say to yourself..."Rather than jumping to conclusions, perhaps I should first go into my prayer room and pray about matters?"


in such a situation, spending some quality alone time in prayer with your Lord, is about the LAST THING you should be doing....



Another situation:
You are a married wife of a great husband,but one day you are at work and suddenly see a new man that just hired and he is really looking good to your eyes....but you know it would be wrong to have a relationship with him,,,yet you feel this new man might be your 'soul mate".....should you pray about cheating on your husband and allow your feelings of what God wants you to do be the final judge?


The problem is the feelings come and go....

You can be totally convinced of something in your heart...that your feelings are telling you clearly what god's will is for your life...and be totally off the wall in error.

feelings are....feelings...
They are not based on anything but themselves....or what you had for lunch earlier.


but the thing that is not subject to the ever-changing results we get from our feelings is the word of god.

the word stays constant.

That is why when someone prays for an answer to some question, the answer they feel they get from their Lord, has to agree with the Scriptures, or it should be rejected.


So....if a person wants to join a new religion...and they pray and pray about it, it really dont mean squat if the answers they get after their many prayers are at odds with the Scriptures.

if the religion you are praying about is at odds with the Bible?....then your prayers and the answers you believe you receive dont mean squat.

First of all - It is never WRONG to pray. Will you have your prayers answered if they are for selfish prideful or lazy reasons....no. But to say it's sometimes WRONG to talk to your Father is a dangerous teaching. Only one being wants you to not talk to Him, and it's NOT God, Christ OR the Holy Ghost.

Second of all - nobody said or even implied you should simply pray for answers to everything. Of course you should use your brain and knowledge to work things out before taking it to Him in prayer.

Third - again - who's translation of Gods Word is the truth? We discussed before in Genesis alone that you don't agree with what most all other Christian commentary says about the events that transpired in The Garden. Including what you yourself learned in Bible school. Are you then the final word on what really happened? How do you know that?? With so many different commentary from other Christians alone, it's quite obvious the Bible is not completely cut and dry or there would never be any question in anything. Why would you even need to go to Bible school to understand anything? What is the point of that if simply reading the words gives you all the information you need?

God wants us to build faith in Him AND He wants us to build a relationship WITH Him. God doesn't want us to just read words on a page to get to know Him and then not talk to Him about it. God also doesn't want us to rely completely on our own understanding of something.

Honestly....why should anyone simply believe the Bible at strictly at face value? It is the Word of God, BUT was written by MAN. You personally did not witness God, Jesus OR even Paul say any of these words, yet you are relying completely upon somebody else's transcription of these words. Why?? Because someone else told you to? It must be, because you don't take it to God in prayer so HE didn't tell you it was right. Yes, feelings are feelings and you believe words on a page from your personal feelings about what another person told you. When you are not believing your OWN personal feelings about it.

So you claim you rely solely on another MAN's transcription of God's Word handed down for thousands of years by other MEN. How do you know there are absolutely NO errors in man's translations of the Bible through all these years? If you did not ask God, you DON'T know. These words were not WRITTEN by God Himself.

You cannot have the things you learn about God confirmed to you BY HIM if you do not talk to Him. Period

You have to talk to Him.

[alanmolstad]

Bible not the word of God eh?...

Suddenly just how far off the rails the Mormons are becomes very clear..

[MickeyS]

Bible not the word of God eh?...

Suddenly just how far off the rails the Mormons are becomes very clear..

When did I say the Bible WASN'T the Word of God??

[BigJulie]

is it ever wrong to pray?....

the answer is, that it depends on the situation...the context.



I can't think of a single reason why one should ever not pray. If the answer is in the scriptures, God will point that out as an answer to prayer.

[alanmolstad]

There comes a time when I have to admit "they are too far gone".
I am not interested in any future conversations with anyone who holds so poor a view of God's Word.


Talk to someone else from now on ok?
I just don't have any desire to deal with such people.

[alanmolstad]

There comes a time when I have to admit "they are too far gone".
I am not interested in any future conversations with anyone who holds so poor a view of God's Word.


Talk to someone else from now on ok?
I just don't have any desire to deal with such people.

[alanmolstad]

Tell you what.


Let's save time here and put you on my IGNORE LIST...
I come here to share views with others who have a 100% trust as I do in the bible.
I'm not at all interested in dealing with people who don't show the text the same respect.
.
When I write something and post it here I write it with the idea that the person reading this actually trusts the bible as much as I do.

I'm not here to have to defend the bible itself.

I m not here clearly to deal with that deep of mess.

If you were always like this? ..then sorry .

I really did not know that until now...

Be that as it may be.
We are done here...

[BigJulie]

Tell you what.


Let's save time here and put you on my IGNORE LIST...
I come here to share views with others who have a 100% trust as I do in the bible.
I'm not at all interested in dealing with people who don't show the text the same respect.
.
When I write something and post it here I write it with the idea that the person reading this actually trusts the bible as much as I do.

I'm not here to have to defend the bible itself.

I m not here clearly to deal with that deep of mess.

If you were always like this? ..then sorry .

I really did not know that until now...

Be that as it may be.
We are done here...

I completely agree. I shouldn't have to defend prayer or my belief in the Bible or Joseph Smith as a prophet and certainly not against violence towards others (in this day or in past ages.)

Thank you for your understanding as to why I am out of these conversations. (The Genesis discussion has been interesting, but I am not sure why you feel you must defend it against science or anything else.)

[MickeyS]

Tell you what.


Let's save time here and put you on my IGNORE LIST...
I come here to share views with others who have a 100% trust as I do in the bible.
I'm not at all interested in dealing with people who don't show the text the same respect.
.
When I write something and post it here I write it with the idea that the person reading this actually trusts the bible as much as I do.

I'm not here to have to defend the bible itself.

I m not here clearly to deal with that deep of mess.

If you were always like this? ..then sorry .

I really did not know that until now...

Be that as it may be.
We are done here...

You still didn't understand a word I said....see I KNOW the Bible is the Word of God. I was just explaining HOW i know.

Am I speaking another language???

[MickeyS]

Tell you what.


Let's save time here and put you on my IGNORE LIST...
I come here to share views with others who have a 100% trust as I do in the bible.
I'm not at all interested in dealing with people who don't show the text the same respect.
.
When I write something and post it here I write it with the idea that the person reading this actually trusts the bible as much as I do.

I'm not here to have to defend the bible itself.

I m not here clearly to deal with that deep of mess.

If you were always like this? ..then sorry .

I really did not know that until now...

Be that as it may be.
We are done here...

You still didn't understand a word I said....see I KNOW the Bible is the Word of God. I was just explaining HOW i know.

Am I speaking another language???

I think it's far more offensive to not trust God Himself....

[alanmolstad]

(The Genesis discussion has been interesting, but I am not sure why you feel you must defend it against science or anything else.)

This is why...

Within the Christian church there is this thing called mostly the Young Earth Creation teachings.
They spread via few books, into the church,and at times they seem to take over the thinking of many in leadership positions.

This had lead to all kinds of trouble for the christian church, Including putting people to death for believing in the roll of science in helping us understand God's universe.

Thus, it is an important issue with me as I do also see that at the local level the YEC teachings have the effect of driving out of the church the best and brightest of bible students.
They get pushed out of conversations, they get pushed out of church positions, they get pushed out of the church they go to...all because they in addition to the Bible, also have an understanding of science.


thus....I stand up for truth.
I stand up for people that have been attacked because they stand up for truth.

I have a great interest in showing people that there is nothing at all to be afraid of...that evolution is not a bad thing...that science is not a bad thing.

so that is why I spend alot of time here dealing with the Evolution/genesis topic.




as for dumping another guest on my permanent IGNORE LIST ?
I simply did not know of the depth of some people's personal problems......and I simply dont want to have to deal with them in the future....

I dont come here for that.
When I post to a topic,I write with a type of reader in my mind.
the person that I write to, has a deep respect for God's word.

The person I write to trusts the Bible....that is why I write many times that while we might not agree with what the Bible "teaches"we can agree with what the text "says"in black and white.


it is via this common trust we both have of the Bible's text that I have with the person who reads my words that I try to engage the other person in interesting conversations.

I truly believe my conversations are worth being in.

When I attack some teaching or defend a teaching,its over what the Text we read is saying.
When I attack or defend some type of historical person, its an attack that I can base on the bible...

and I will refer to the Bible in what ever I support or whatever I attack.


but if the person Im writing to suddenly is shown is one of them nut***s that does not trust the Bible 100%?......
Well...all I can say is that I got no time for that type of messed-up crazy......

[Christian]

julie posted:


Originally Posted by Christian http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=167472#post167472)
But of course a BETTER Place to go is to the official (and supposedly 'authoritative' WRITINGS such as the pgp book of abraham and other junk writings by joe smith.

NOBODY is 'afraid of' mormons. We CHRISTIANS (mormons are cultists, not Christians) go to the BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD, not to joe smith's writings for Truth. Why not go to God's very Own Word?

When the beliefs and teachings of others contradict God and send people to Hell for following false prophets, false christs, and false gods, Jesus attacked those false beliefs, as did Paul and all of the other Apostles.

The REAL God, the God of the BIBLE loves us MUCH MORE than your false gods and their goddess wives do.


I go to scriptures (Bible included) and they teach me:

I don't go to the BIBLE to see what YOUR CULT teaches. . .I go to the writings of YOUR CULT. Those writings do NOT come from the Bible.

Matthew 7:1-5

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

And that is EXACTLY how I judge, with the judgment I will be judged by. . .THE WORD OF GOD. I judge the falseness or 'truth' of the mormon religion, my own faith, and my own life by what GOD HAS SAID IN HIS WORD, THE BIBLE.

and:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Do you consider yourself MY enemy? Do you curse me? Do you hate me? I pray for you. Do you pray for me?

John 13:34-35

“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

I'm not here for 'sport.' There is little of that to be had here if you are honest. I am here to demonstrate to the 'lurkers' who may be thinking about coming to Jesus Christ exactly why the REAL Jesus Christ is NOT to be found in joe smith's made-up mormon cult.

The p***age you quoted was addressed TO followers of the REAL Jesus Christ, not to joey smith's, bill butler's, or muhammads mad-up christs. Perhaps a better p***age to quote would have been:

Mark 12:30-31
30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. 31 And the second, like it, is this: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these."
NKJV

IF you are a 'true-blue mormon,' then you follow a FALSE prophet and a FALSE christ, but verse 31 of the Mark p***age applies.

(Please do not try to tell me that you are trying to show me love. Not when you so callously speak to me.)


If I saw a small child run out into the street where there was a lot of traffic I might 'callously' spank him too. NOT because I don't love him, but because I do. Love can be tough.

Apparently your 'callousness' towards ME is 'different' for you, huh?

Yes Julie, we CAN disagree with each other and not be unloving because we do so. And with the things of God, that is the way it is.

[BigJulie]

You still didn't understand a word I said....see I KNOW the Bible is the Word of God. I was just explaining HOW i know.

Am I speaking another language???

I think it's far more offensive to not trust God Himself....

Mickey, you will find that you can go in circles in this place and it isn't much worth our time.

In academic circles, scholars use the term "garbage in, garbage out", meaning that if you don't use good resources, any work you do will just be garbage.

Good scholarly work consists of looking at all sides of an issue and presenting with as much integrity as possible. But there are others who are just trying to make their own point and so they look for information that they believe will back their point. They can make a lot of money doing this--Michael Moore comes to mind in today's world, with his promotion of Marxist thinking.

Walter Martin does this as well. And sadly, there are those who do not do their own research (or if they do, it is of the "garbage in" type) and believe it. This is the hope of those on this site--that they can provide only part of the story or sensationalized tidbits and have others believe them.

This site has never been and will never be about integrity. Don't be surprised then, if even your words or thoughts are misrepresented.

[Phoenix]

Mickey, you will find that you can go in circles in this place and it isn't much worth our time.

In academic circles, scholars use the term "garbage in, garbage out", meaning that if you don't use good resources, any work you do will just be garbage.

Good scholarly work consists of looking at all sides of an issue and presenting with as much integrity as possible. But there are others who are just trying to make their own point and so they look for information that they believe will back their point. They can make a lot of money doing this--Michael Moore comes to mind in today's world, with his promotion of Marxist thinking.

Walter Martin does this as well. And sadly, there are those who do not do their own research (or if they do, it is of the "garbage in" type) and believe it. This is the hope of those on this site--that they can provide only part of the story or sensationalized tidbits and have others believe them.

This site has never been and will never be about integrity. Don't be surprised then, if even your words or thoughts are misrepresented.

Amen......

[John T]

Mickey, <SNIP>
This site has never been and will never be about integrity. Don't be surprised then, if even your words or thoughts are misrepresented.

I take strong exception to your blanket condemnation of so many others. Can you not face the FACTS of the matter and admit that there are "Yahoos" on both sides of the fence?

Then, since YOU are the only one responsible for what YOU post take the responsibility for YOUR posts, and elevate the reply to the levels which you wish to have others respond? Civil discourse will never happen on its own accord, nor will it happen if anyone wants to legitimize the "See what you made me do?" type of response. It is not always the easiest thing to do, but it is the most important.

As you can see in my post, I strongly disagree with your conclusion, and in doing so I made a clear unequivocal statement, and did not (call you ugly or fat or [a joke, OK?} insult you

[BigJulie]

I take strong exception to your blanket condemnation of so many others. Can you not face the FACTS of the matter and admit that there are "Yahoos" on both sides of the fence?

Then, since YOU are the only one responsible for what YOU post take the responsibility for YOUR posts, and elevate the reply to the levels which you wish to have others respond? Civil discourse will never happen on its own accord, nor will it happen if anyone wants to legitimize the "See what you made me do?" type of response. It is not always the easiest thing to do, but it is the most important.

As you can see in my post, I strongly disagree with your conclusion, and in doing so I made a clear unequivocal statement, and did not (call you ugly or fat or [a joke, OK?} insult you

The problem JohnT, is this whole site is founded on the beliefs shared by Walter Martin. And he was a bad researcher. You make the claim that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is founded on lies. Is it hard to hear that I believe this whole site and the arguments against Joseph Smith is founded on half-truths and sensationalism and not on good research? And that as a result of this, those who follow Walter Martin, likewise, do not show integrity in their own research?

When you look into our beliefs, how often do you look to see the other side of the argument and fully understand it before you post? (I mean really research it out and try to understand it fully before you make any comment about our history or beliefs. Because personally, I do not see any evidence of that. As I noted, I compare this to Michael Moore with his promotion of socialistic thinking. There are many who believe his research is accurate--but there are a lot who understand it is one-sided and junk.)

[John T]

The problem JohnT, is this whole site is founded on the beliefs shared by Walter Martin. That is a "DOH! satatement, BJ. Everyone who posts here knows that, so if you do not like the things he did, then why patronize a site that bears his name?



And that as a result of this, those who follow Walter Martin, likewise, do not show integrity in their own research?
I am not concerned about the research of others; personally, I attempt to use primary LDS materials If for example you believe that 2 Nephi 25:23 is actually refering to the exalted life on Kolob, then it is up to you to demonstrate the error by posting stuff in its context. It is really that simple.


When you look into our beliefs, how often do you look to see the other side of the argument and fully understand it before you post? (I mean really research it out and try to understand it fully before you make any comment about our history or beliefs. Because personally, I do not see any evidence of that.
Michael More is irrelevant in many ways.

Not if I know something to be true from other research I have done. For example, Mormoninfographics makes a very good case about the life of smith and his many wived, all based upon LDS source material. The problem with that is that it has been recently demonstrated in papers from BYU that he had as many as 39 wives (Can't find the source now) so I have to take that into consideration when I post about his many wives.

You see, what you are doing is making a very generalized complaint, and offering no specific resolutions. And as the old adage goes, "If you are not trying to be a part of the solution, then you are part of the problem,"

[BigJulie]

That is a "DOH! satatement, BJ. Everyone who posts here knows that, so if you do not like the things he did, then why patronize a site that bears his name? I think the bigger question is why set up a whole site based on faulty research?


I am not concerned about the research of others; personally, I attempt to use primary LDS materials If for example you believe that 2 Nephi 25:23 is actually refering to the exalted life on Kolob, then it is up to you to demonstrate the error by posting stuff in its context. It is really that simple. It is not up to me to demonstrate anything. You are the one making the claim, not me. And as you are, you should be able to articulate both sides of every point you make. A good scholar can and does do this as part of his argument.



Michael More is irrelevant in many ways.

Not if I know something to be true from other research I have done. For example, Mormoninfographics makes a very good case about the life of smith and his many wived, all based upon LDS source material. The problem with that is that it has been recently demonstrated in papers from BYU that he had as many as 39 wives (Can't find the source now) so I have to take that into consideration when I post about his many wives.

You see, what you are doing is making a very generalized complaint, and offering no specific resolutions. And as the old adage goes, "If you are not trying to be a part of the solution, then you are part of the problem," I will wait for you to give both sides of the research here.

I am making a very generalized complaint, but you have given me a perfect example to begin with. I will wait until you share the scholarly resourced sites that explain about Joseph Smith, polygamy, and what is believed from the LDS view as well as your others.

For example, siting Michael Moore about economics would be faulty as he is a secondary resource. In order to discuss the issues he thinks are important, I would need to site both primary scholarly writings for and against his stance.

[John T]

I think the bigger question is why set up a whole site based on faulty research?

This is just one part of their ministries, Here I am responsible for what I post. There in what you are complaining about is the ultimate responsibility of Jill. If you believe that her Father's research is inaccurate (remember how old it is, and that the internet was not available when he wrote it.

I actually read his actual bachelor's dissertation in a grad school north of Philadelphia which I attended back in 1977, and I found some things needing clarification. However to judge his ministries by that dissertation is really not proper. Each stand on their own merits.



http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by BigJulie http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=167617#post167617)

And that as a result of this, those who follow Walter Martin, likewise, do not show integrity in their own research?



John[/B] http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=167635#post167635)
I am not concerned about the research of others; personally, I attempt to use primary LDS materials If for example you believe that 2 Nephi 25:23 is actually refering to the exalted life on Kolob, then it is up to you to demonstrate the error by posting stuff in its context. It is really that simple.

It is not up to me to demonstrate anything. You are the one making the claim, not me. And as you are, you should be able to articulate both sides of every point you make. A good scholar can and does do this as part of his argument.
You are missing several points here; each are crucial.
Primary is your logical error of "guilt by ***ociation.
Because people rely of Dr. Martin's research does not therefore make them similarly guilty of (purported) misinformed research, but that does not absolve them of sloven scholarship skills.

That is the reason why I replied as I did. I am not responsible for the accuracy of anything from anyone. Nor are you

Your second error is to require that be able to "articulate both sides of an argument" That is absurd! I will articulate my point as accurately as possible, and it is really not up to me to reason out an alternate explanation for anything, except perhaps you are on the committee for my oral exam for my Ph.D.


I will wait for you to give both sides of the research here.
Then you will wait a long time to get your wish


I am making a very generalized complaint, but you have given me a perfect example to begin with. I will wait until you share the scholarly resourced sites that explain about Joseph Smith, polygamy, and what is believed from the LDS view as well as your others.
Like most generalized things, your "generalized complaint" is generally wrong. If you have a beef, articulate it, and be specific


For example, siting Michael Moore about economics would be faulty as he is a secondary resource. In order to discuss the issues he thinks are important, I would need to site both primary scholarly writings for and against his stance.

As far as it goes, I agree. However your original complaint was about the research of Dr. Martin. Now we are back to Michael Moore. What is the connection between Moore and Martin? If you are unable to articulate a connection, I suggest that you drop it.

BTW if you REALLY wanted to get back on CARM, I suggest that you write Diane S a letter, and that you create a new username, asking her permission to return. She can be reached via yahoo.com, and send a letter to carmdiane@ . FYI Among the "old timers" such as I am, there is an open secret that most of the Mormons are "recycled once-banned Mormon posters. For example, "Ralph" as at least 10 different usernames, and I have been there for over 10 years

[BigJulie]

You are missing several points here; each are crucial.
Primary is your logical error of "guilt by ***ociation. And you are making an error yourself. A poster claimed she is being misrepresented on this site. I merely observed that she cannot expect more on this site. You are the one who lumped yourself into this.


Because people rely of Dr. Martin's research does not therefore make them similarly guilty of (purported) misinformed research, but that does not absolve them of sloven scholarship skills.Good researchers would NOT see Walter Martin as a credible source. It is would be similar to using Wikipedia as a source.


Your second error is to require that be able to "articulate both sides of an argument" That is absurd! I will articulate my point as accurately as possible, and it is really not up to me to reason out an alternate explanation for anything, except perhaps you are on the committee for my oral exam for my Ph.D. Yes, a Ph.D. would know that good research has to show both sides.



Like most generalized things, your "generalized complaint" is generally wrong. If you have a beef, articulate it, and be specific I was talking to a single poster about her experience. You are the one who jumped in and took exception to it.




As far as it goes, I agree. However your original complaint was about the research of Dr. Martin. Now we are back to Michael Moore. What is the connection between Moore and Martin? If you are unable to articulate a connection, I suggest that you drop it. Both Michael Moore and Walter Martin use one-sided, sensationalized tidbits that they "research" to stir up people in hopes that they can propagandize them into seeing the world the way they hope they will. (And is a great way to make a lot of money if they can get others to buy in.)


BTW if you REALLY wanted to get back on CARM, I suggest that you write Diane S a letter, and that you create a new username, asking her permission to return. She can be reached via yahoo.com, and send a letter to carmdiane@ . FYI Among the "old timers" such as I am, there is an open secret that most of the Mormons are "recycled once-banned Mormon posters. For example, "Ralph" as at least 10 different usernames, and I have been there for over 10 years I have posted maybe 3 posts on CARM about 15 years ago. It became quickly apparent the place is a cess pool and I have never returned. I have only used this one username on this site (even after moving). I can't even remember the name I used on Bob's site..and about CARM, there is nothing really to remember. The fact that you ***ume this about me makes me wonder about your own integrity. This seemed to have come out of the blue. zf you are wondering where I came up with knowing about Walter Martin's research methods, it is because it was posted on this site and the flaws in his research (including actually siting pages that do not exist) were posted here as well. My guess is that Jill has removed them.

[jude1:3]

Good researchers would NOT see Walter Martin as a credible source.




http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-d3hAGLm3gmA/Tzk6y0RFLeI/AAAAAAAAB_4/_TrYyhM79r8/s1600/88.gif






*Not only is that not true, it's also mean.

[John T]

So many ***umptions, and so many of them wrong


And you are making an error yourself. A poster claimed she is being misrepresented on this site. I merely observed that she cannot expect more on this site. You are the one who lumped yourself into this.
This is a RED HERRING as well as an expansion of your gripe about this place.
Your discussion of MickeyS is irrelevant to the topic at hand, or the topic of the OP. Therefore, I will discuss it no more except to notice that you are now going on an irrelevant personal rant.


Good researchers would NOT see Walter Martin as a credible source. It is would be similar to using Wikipedia as a source.
Yes, a Ph.D. would know that good research has to show both sides.
B ut this is NOT a place for Ph.D-level dissertations


I was talking to a single poster about her experience. You are the one who jumped in and took exception to it.
I was addressing your error, and because this is NOT a closed discussion, then I did nothing wrong by jumping in. That is the nature of discussion forums.



Both Michael Moore and Walter Martin use one-sided, sensationalized tidbits that they "research" to stir up people in hopes that they can propagandize them into seeing the world the way they hope they will. (And is a great way to make a lot of money if they can get others to buy in.)
This is the logical error called "poisoning the well"

That is because you make SEVERAL UNSUBSTANTIATED ACCUSATIONS about Walter Martin and you are attempting to make the silly conclusion that "My (UNPROVED) accusations prove that the entire ministry of Walter Martin is bad. That is the definition of a baseless rant.


I have posted maybe 3 posts on CARM about 15 years ago.
That is not correct. I have been on CARM for about 12 years or so, and I can remember posting several times to you about 2-4 years ago.

[BigJulie]

So many ***umptions, and so many of them wrong


This is a RED HERRING as well as an expansion of your gripe about this place.
Your discussion of MickeyS is irrelevant to the topic at hand, or the topic of the OP. Therefore, I will discuss it no more except to notice that you are now going on an irrelevant personal rant. Please, do tell my wrong ***umption about Walter Martin



B ut this is NOT a place for Ph.D-level dissertations That is exactly my point--hence, you cannot expect fair, integrity based research here.



I was addressing your error, and because this is NOT a closed discussion, then I did nothing wrong by jumping in. That is the nature of discussion forums. It is not an error. You yourself back that this is not a place where you can expect dissertation style commentaries which demand higher standards when making claims.




This is the logical error called "poisoning the well" Yes, this whole site bases its arguments on "poisoning the well" which is why you see so much propaganda against Joseph Smith and other church leaders--as well as bad research about Mormon beliefs. I am amused that you take such offense at it.


That is because you make SEVERAL UNSUBSTANTIATED ACCUSATIONS about Walter Martin and you are attempting to make the silly conclusion that "My (UNPROVED) accusations prove that the entire ministry of Walter Martin is bad. That is the definition of a baseless rant. Wait, but this is just a discussion board, we do not need to substantiate are arguments. People can go and check out Walter Martin's credentials and the accusations against him easily enough. And yes, you cannot understand a whole "ministry" or religion based on a few "unproved" accusations. I agree.



That is not correct. I have been on CARM for about 12 years or so, and I can remember posting several times to you about 2-4 years ago.Really? Because after the first few times I posted, which was long before my last move (so I know about the time frame), I have never posted there again. What name do you think I am using? I believe the one who posted about Walter Martin's past was Libby and she also posted a video from a man who had a Ph.D. who made the arguments against Walter Martin. I believe this was removed as well. But I find it fascinating that you are so sure you know who I am. It leads me to believe there is someone posting on CARM about Walter Martin's credentials or lack thereof.

[Christian]

If you want to know what Mormons believe, the best place to go is to a Mormon. There is no reason to be afraid of Mormons. Actually, there is no reason to be afraid of any church. Once we understand that God does love us and he does hear and answer our prayers, we can always turn to him for any question. He is there for us. He wants us to be happy. He wants us to have joy. There is no reason to belittle another's belief. Pure love casteth out all fear.

Personally, I find it better to go directly to the source, the "authoritative writings" of the religious ins***ution. For Christianity, I go to the BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD. For the mormons, I go to the bom, d&c, and/or pgp, the writings of joe smith, or other mormon 'authorities.'

NOBODY is afraid of the mormons except perhaps a few mormons themselves.

The god(s) the mormons believe in don't love anyone and don't save anyone from the penalty of their sins. . .thus they are candidates for hell. :(

[BigJulie]

Personally, I find it better to go directly to the source, the "authoritative writings" of the religious ins***ution. For Christianity, I go to the BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD. For the mormons, I go to the bom, d&c, and/or pgp, the writings of joe smith, or other mormon 'authorities.'

NOBODY is afraid of the mormons except perhaps a few mormons themselves.

The god(s) the mormons believe in don't love anyone and don't save anyone from the penalty of their sins. . .thus they are candidates for hell. :(


I see no reason to take God out of the equation. I did not see you mention going directly to him. As my signature promotes, it is the Spirit that opens are eyes to be able to understand what we read. It is the Spirit that testifies of truth.

[Christian]

I see no reason to take God out of the equation. I did not see you mention going directly to him. As my signature promotes, it is the Spirit that opens are eyes to be able to understand what we read. It is the Spirit that testifies of truth.

Jesus is the center of my life, so God is NEVER out of the equation. I understand what comes from God, but the junk your cult and other cults write. . .no the Spirit of God has NOTHING to do with them.

The Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus Christ. HE is True. Your mormon false christ has nothing to do with the REAL Jesus. Your false christ is nothing more than a demon 'spirit-brother' of satan, according to current mormon doctrine.

As I said, I prefer to go to the SOURCE of teachings (doctrines) when researching. I go to the BIBLE (the WORD OF GOD) when studying CHRISTIANITY. I go to mormon books when studying what the mormons teach. I go to branch davidian writings when studying what branch davidians teach.

You ought to try that.

[Phoenix]

Jesus is the center of my life, so God is NEVER out of the equation.
some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism the center of their lives. They might even spend more minutes per day on antimormon sites, demonizing Mormons, then they spend reading their bibles.

That seems pretty sad.

one way to ascertain your priorities is to see how many weeks you can go without attacking the Mormons.
You ought to try that.


5 weeks maybe?
Only 2 weeks?
Less than one week?

[BigJulie]

Jesus is the center of my life, so God is NEVER out of the equation. I understand what comes from God, but the junk your cult and other cults write. . .no the Spirit of God has NOTHING to do with them.

The Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus Christ. HE is True. Your mormon false christ has nothing to do with the REAL Jesus. Your false christ is nothing more than a demon 'spirit-brother' of satan, according to current mormon doctrine.

As I said, I prefer to go to the SOURCE of teachings (doctrines) when researching. I go to the BIBLE (the WORD OF GOD) when studying CHRISTIANITY. I go to mormon books when studying what the mormons teach. I go to branch davidian writings when studying what branch davidians teach.

You ought to try that.

The Spirit testifies to me of Christ, his birth, his atonement, his resurrection and his eternal love for us. I don't need to put down other's beliefs to make this claim. It stands freely and without insult.

[alanmolstad]

some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism ....

"anti-Mormon"is against the rules...please drop its use...

[teenapenny]

some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism the center of their lives. They might even spend more minutes per day on antimormon sites, demonizing Mormons, then they spend reading their bibles.

That seems pretty sad.

one way to ascertain your priorities is to see how many weeks you can go without attacking the Mormons.
You ought to try that.


5 weeks maybe?
Only 2 weeks?
Less than one week?
I do not see anyone attacking Mormons, they are only trying to show them that what they believe is not the truth.

[teenapenny]

some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism the center of their lives. They might even spend more minutes per day on antimormon sites, demonizing Mormons, then they spend reading their bibles.

That seems pretty sad.

one way to ascertain your priorities is to see how many weeks you can go without attacking the Mormons.
You ought to try that.


5 weeks maybe?
Only 2 weeks?
Less than one week?
I do not see anyone attacking Mormons. I only see them trying to show that what the Mormons believe is not the truth.

[BigJulie]

I do not see anyone attacking Mormons, they are only trying to show them that what they believe is not the truth.

Yes, I once had a person tell me that they don't believe in poverty. It was so much easier to just not believe in the suffering of others. Prejudice can do that to people.

[alanmolstad]

I do not see anyone attacking Mormons, they are only trying to show them that what they believe is not the truth.


well said....

[John T]

I see no reason to take God out of the equation. I did not see you mention going directly to him. As my signature promotes, it is the Spirit that opens are eyes to be able to understand what we read. It is the Spirit that testifies of truth.


There is one very good reason for taking god out of the picture, Julie:
Mormo-god is not the God of the Bible, and PLEASE do not play me for a fool. We both know that the god as made clear in D&C is not the same God as revealed in Scriptures alone. the gods of Mormonism are a polytheistic pantheon, and there is only God of the Bible.

Therefore, going to Mormo-god will not get the same results as the God of the Bible.

[Christian]

some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism the center of their lives. They might even spend more minutes per day on antimormon sites, demonizing Mormons, then they spend reading their bibles.

That seems pretty sad.

one way to ascertain your priorities is to see how many weeks you can go without attacking the Mormons.
You ought to try that.


5 weeks maybe?
Only 2 weeks?
Less than one week?

Do YOU THINK Paul would have gone 2 weeks without attacking the false doctrines of the pharisees and sadducees?

Sorry, but your request is off-base and anti-Biblical, just like the rest of mormonism.

1 Peter 3:13-17
13 And who is he who will harm you if you become followers of what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you are blessed. "And do not be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled." 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear; 16 having a good conscience, that when they defame you as evildoers, those who revile your good conduct in Christ may be ashamed. 17 For it is better, if it is the will of God, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.
NKJV

I cannot stop mormons who do evil, but I CAN give a defense for the TRUE Gospel of Christ to those (like you) who follow FALSE christs and FALSE prophets as you do.

I will obey SCRIPTURE rather than to play YOUR little 'go without attacking the mormons' nonsense. Besides, it is not the mormons I attack; it is the FALSE DOCTRINES THEIR FALSE RELIGION TEACHES that I attack. Exposing FALSE RELIGION is part of what we CHRISTIANS do, just as Jesus, Paul, and the rest did.

[Christian]

julie posted:


Originally Posted by Christian http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=167472#post167472)
But of course a BETTER Place to go is to the official (and supposedly 'authoritative' WRITINGS such as the pgp book of abraham and other junk writings by joe smith.

NOBODY is 'afraid of' mormons. We CHRISTIANS (mormons are cultists, not Christians) go to the BIBLE, the WORD OF GOD, not to joe smith's writings for Truth. Why not go to God's very Own Word?

When the beliefs and teachings of others contradict God and send people to Hell for following false prophets, false christs, and false gods, Jesus attacked those false beliefs, as did Paul and all of the other Apostles.

The REAL God, the God of the BIBLE

I go to scriptures (Bible included) and they teach me:

Matthew 7:1-5

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Mormons should practice what they preach. I judge by the WORD OF GOD, the BIBLE, knowing that I WILL BE JUDGED BY THE SAME MEASURE, and I am happy with that.

IF you can find anything I believe that is NOT SCRIPTURAL (according to the BIBLE, not according to joe smith's made-up junk), SHOW ME. If I am out of step with the Bible, I will change. WOULD YOU AGREE TO DO THAT?

and:

Matthew 5:44

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

I have MANY dear mormon friends whom I love. They are not my enemies (do you consider YOURSELF to be my enemy? I don't), their FALSE BELIEFS are my enemies.

John 13:34-35

“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

I love you as my NEIGHBOR, not as a sister in your fake 'spirit-brother-of-satan' 'christ.' I follow the BIBLICAL Jesus Christ instead.

(Please do not try to tell me that you are trying to show me love. Not when you so callously speak to me.)

​Pot, kettle. No need for any response.

[BigJulie]

There is one very good reason for taking god out of the picture, Julie:
Mormo-god is not the God of the Bible, and PLEASE do not play me for a fool. We both know that the god as made clear in D&C is not the same God as revealed in Scriptures alone. the gods of Mormonism are a polytheistic pantheon, and there is only God of the Bible.

Therefore, going to Mormo-god will not get the same results as the God of the Bible.

So, what are you saying? That when I pray, God does not hear my prayers? Do you believe that this "Mormon-god", as you call it, is so powerful that you believe it can shut the mouth of God? Do you believe that when I pray, God will not hear and answer me? Are you saying that you think this "Mormon-god" is more powerful than the God of the Bible? (Which I believe is the God I pray to, but as you don't--how exactly do you reconcile your comments?)

[BigJulie]

I love you as my NEIGHBOR, not as a sister in your fake 'spirit-brother-of-satan' 'christ.' I follow the BIBLICAL Jesus Christ instead.
.[/COLOR]

Hmmm, this reminds me of the Pharisees asking Christ "who is my neighbor." Surprised that you would bring up something so similar.

[alanmolstad]

So, what are you saying? That when I pray, God does not hear my prayers? ....I cant speak for John, but in my own opinion, you are correct here, in that your god does not hear any of your prayers.

It does not matter how religious you are...
It does not matter how deeply you pray.
It does not matter you use all the right words in your prayers.

It does not matter because the god you pray to is just a false idea that a guy named Smith came up with on his own as a means to get in the beds of younger girls as well as into the coin purse of the girl's fathers or husbands..

[BigJulie]

I cant speak for John, but in my own opinion, you are correct here, in that your god does not hear any of your prayers.

It does not matter how religious you are...
It does not matter how deeply you pray.
It does not matter you use all the right words in your prayers.

It does not matter because the god you pray to is just a false idea that a guy named Smith came up with on his own as a means to get in the beds of younger girls as well as into the coin purse of the girl's fathers or husbands..

Okay, so what you believe is that when I pray to my Heavenly Father and do so in the name of Jesus Christ having faith that the Holy Spirit will answer, that God does not hear any of my prayers because I prayed and received confirmation that Joseph Smith is a prophet, that the Book of Mormon is true, and that He expects me to follow Jesus Christ?

So, basically---you believe God will ignore me even if I am religious, pray deeply and "use all the right words" because of something you believe about Joseph Smith?

This reminds me of the Christ saying, "If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!" Matthew 7:11.

[alanmolstad]

Okay, so what you believe is.....

I often wonder why people do this...

"Do what?" you may ask,

It seems that no matter how clear I make my posted comments-
that regardless of how I carefully pick each of the words that I use to totally sum up my views-
so that when anyone reads my words that can get a very clear understanding of what Im saying-
that regardless of all this effort to make sure nothing I say on this forum leaves anyone in doubt as to what Im talking about-

YET....yet for some reason the very first thing the other person will ALWAYS seem to do is to start their next posted comment with the words- "so what you believe is....."

[alanmolstad]

that God does not hear any of my prayers because I prayed and received confirmation that Joseph Smith is a .......

Oh I dont care if you heard Peter,Paul and Marry singing "Jeremiah was a bullfrog".....your personal confirmations are a moot point.

The Mormon god is an invention of a man that was just making up all kinds of stuff to seduce women and young girls,as well as talk their husbands or fathers into slipping him cash.

So you can pray all you want, your prayers are a moot ,

You can receive all the confirmations you want, your gut feelings are moot.

And it really does not matter that you believe and trust your god and try to do your best to worship him according to your traditions, for Im sure that was also very true for the guys talked about at 1 Kings 18:28

The prayers are unheard.
No matter how hard to believe in your god and no matter how hard your trust your confirmations, its yet just pointless and sad.

[alanmolstad]

Let me know if you still have any doubt as to what Im saying.....



(Im not sure how more clear I can make my words, but I can try I guess)

[BigJulie]

Let me know if you still have any doubt as to what Im saying.....



(Im not sure how more clear I can make my words, but I can try I guess)

Okay, since you seem to get offended by my saying "what you believe is", let me be clear on how I hear your words.

You believe you know my heart, my communications with God AND what he has answered or whether or not he did answer. You know what is right and what is wrong. You know exactly what God means when His prophets writes His words in the scriptures and for that reason, my prayers mean nothing. They are moot.

In short, I should listen to you and not turn to prayer for understanding. You know more. God's ability to teach me is less than you ability to teach me.

In other words, you are the god I should listen to.

Thank you, but no thank you. I let you work out Genesis first. :)

[alanmolstad]

You believe you know my heart,

my communications with God

AND what he has answered or whether or not he did answer.

You know what is right and what is wrong.

You know exactly what God means when His prophets writes His words in the scriptures and for that reason,

my prayers mean nothing. They are moot.

)

Correct.

All..ALL ALL...and I mean all, your prayers to this false god that a known sexual predator dreamed up in order for him to have access to younger girls, are a moot point.

any "feelings" that you interpreted as a "confirmation" are a moot point.

Any of the reasons you can come up with for remaining within the Mormon church are a moot point.

[BigJulie]

Correct.

All..ALL ALL...and I mean all, your prayers to this false god that a known sexual predator dreamed up in order for him to have access to younger girls, are a moot point.

any "feelings" that you interpreted as a "confirmation" are a moot point.

Any of the reasons you can come up with for remaining within the Mormon church are a moot point.

Yes, and ban all Muslims. Anything else you want to add to the conversation? Maybe Hispanics are rapists (another Trumpism)?

While you may see yourself as being the "god" I should listen to--as I said, no thank you.

[John T]

So, what are you saying? That when I pray, God does not hear my prayers?

Maybe god, or Mormo god will hear your prayers, but the God of the Bible will not


Do you believe that this "Mormon-god", as you call it, is so powerful that you believe it can shut the mouth of God?
There is no other god other than the God of the Bible, and there are so many verses to prove that, I will only quote one verse

Deuteronomy 5: 6 “‘I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

7 “‘You shall have no other gods before me.

8 “‘You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 9 You shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 10 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.




Do you believe that when I pray, God will not hear and answer me? Are you saying that you think this "Mormon-god" is more powerful than the God of the Bible? (Which I believe is the God I pray to, but as you don't--how exactly do you reconcile your comments?)

Whatever you believe is really irrelevant if it fails to conform to what God in the Bible has revealed. THAT is the litmus test of truth, and it has nothing to do with a belly ache.

[John T]

Yes, and ban all Muslims. Anything else you want to add to the conversation? Maybe Hispanics are rapists (another Trumpism)?

While you may see yourself as being the "god" I should listen to--as I said, no thank you.

Your sputtering anger is noted. However please do not direct it at Alan; for he is merely the messenger, who is repeating what the God of the Bible wrote in the Bible, His Word.

[BigJulie]

Your sputtering anger is noted. However please do not direct it at Alan; for he is merely the messenger, who is repeating what the God of the Bible wrote in the Bible, His Word.

There is no anger here--only a deep sigh because Alan has judgement for so many. And Alan is not repeating the God of the Bible because God tells us to pray and have faith in Him.

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

or another version:

James 1: 5-6 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind.

[BigJulie]

Maybe god, or Mormo god will hear your prayers, but the God of the Bible will not Who do you believe this "Mormo god" is? And why do you believe God will not hear my prayers?


T
here is no other god other than the God of the Bible, and there are so many verses to prove that, I will only quote one verse

Deuteronomy 5: 6 “‘I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

7 “‘You shall have no other gods before me.

8 “‘You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 9 You shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 10 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

I believe in the God you speak of whom said "You shall have no other gods before me." Who also said shortly thereafter:

"For the LORD your God God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, [I]which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward"


I do not put any other god before him. (Not even Alan ;) )


Whatever you believe is really irrelevant if it fails to conform to what God in the Bible has revealed. THAT is the litmus test of truth, and it has nothing to do with a belly ache. But I do believe in what the God of the Bible reveals--and he opens my eyes to it through the spirit, through prayer.

No belly-ache, but a burning, a still small voice--that when I live by, I see the truth of it. This is why my signature reads:

Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

Because this is the one truth that seems to be denied on this site over and over again. That when the God opens the scriptures to us, we recognize it in our hearts or as these disciples described, their hearts "burn[ed] within [them].

[Phoenix]

Who do you believe this "Mormo god" is? And why do you believe God will not hear my prayers?


cause John didn't give God permission to hear anyone's prayers except those who John personally approves

and John doesn't like Mormons.

[Phoenix]

Oh I dont care if you heard Peter,Paul and Marry singing "Jeremiah was a bullfrog".....

It would more likely be Three Dog Night who you'd hear singing that song

[alanmolstad]

Yes, and ban all Muslims. .???

Ban?...Ban from where?...here?...
We dont ban people from being lost,

and Im not sure how Trump got dragged into this, as I have not said anything about politics..?



But as for Mormons,they are without hope for they worship a god that Smith just invented so that he could have better results chase tail.
Therefor the prayers of a Mormon are a moot point.
The god that Smith invented so he could get into the beds of young girls that trusted him, is not a real god at all, rather its a false god that cant save, nor hear prayers...

[alanmolstad]

It would more likely be Three Dog Night who you'd hear singing that song

still would not matter....

[BigJulie]

???

Ban?...Ban from where?...here?...
We dont ban people from being lost,

and Im not sure how Trump got dragged into this, as I have not said anything about politics..?



But as for Mormons,they are without hope for they worship a god that Smith just invented so that he could have better results chase tail.
Therefor the prayers of a Mormon are a moot point.
The god that Smith invented so he could get into the beds of young girls that trusted him, is not a real god at all, rather its a false god that cant save, nor hear prayers...

I am just looking at your view of Mormons in light of your political view.

And you are so hung up on your perceived view of Joseph Smith, I can only conclude some projection.

Interesting to me that you do not believe God hears or answers the prayers of Mormons. *sigh*

[alanmolstad]

I am just looking at your view of Mormons in light of your political view.

And you are so hung up on your perceived view of Joseph Smith, I can only conclude some projection.

*sigh*Smith was a sexual predator...if you doubt I can fill-up the next few pages of this topic with information that goes over his vast history in the records of Smith's sniffing around after the young daughters of his followers, or that he would send husbands out of town, then later come "a calling"?.....you just let me know.


I never say anything on this forum unless I can back it up.....



So just let me know.....

[alanmolstad]

Interesting to me that you do not believe God hears or answers the prayers of Mormons. *sigh*

There was another Mormon girl that used to pull the "sigh" stuff too.......


But as to the idea that the prayers of the Mormons to their false god, go no where, do nothing, and are a moot point?....that is based on the fact that the same types of people as the Mormons have had the same types of prayers that were also a moot point as shown at 1 Kings 18:28.


It did not matter squat that the people sure had 100% faith intheir god.

It did not matter squat that they offered prayers, ("But does not god always hear prayers?") to their god.

It did not matter squat how hard they prayed, nor how loudly, nor how for how long.


It the end.....all their prayers were a moot point.....The true God does not listen.

[John T]

cause John didn't give God permission to hear anyone's prayers except those who John personally approves

and John doesn't like Mormons.

Your contemptuous lie about me is noted. I am not the issue

[alanmolstad]

...
and John doesn't like Mormons.why take this type of personal shot at another guest here?

[alanmolstad]

Your contemptuous lie about me is noted. I am not the issue


far as I can see it always goes like this for me...

If Im on a topic I care about and know a bunch of stuff about, and have been around the block a few times on, then the other person will soon find that none of their standard debate points will work on me.

This will cause a person to do one of two things mostly.
eithor they will dig deeper into the topic and try to learn more information about it....or....
They will start to attack me as a person.
They will do this because they have come to see that they dont have any ammo against my views, so they will stop attacking my views and just attack me as a person.

Basicly they come to see that my views and the support for my views are not going to fail, so they then must come to the conclusion that there is something wrong with me as a person to have thought of these views in the first place.


I see this all the time of topics where I have a p***ion.

The other guest that was oh so ready to debate me at the start when they thought they had a chance, will soon decide that not only what Im saying is wrong, that also I must have something wrong with me to have these views in the first place.

So that is why you run into people on this forum that will all of the sudden try to make "you" the topic.....and not the ideas and things you were defending so strongly.

[John T]

Who do you believe this "Mormo God" is? And why do you believe God will not hear my prayers?

I believe in the God you speak of whom said "You shall have no other gods before me." Who also said shortly thereafter:

Let Scripture speak for itself before I reply:


Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments

Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God

Daniel 3:29 Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort

Genesis 35: 11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; 12 And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land

Psalm 46:10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth

Psalm 50:7 Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God

Isaiah 43:12 I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God

Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else

Isaiah 46:99 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Twice in one verse


.
The problem with Mormon theology (and presumably your beliefs) is that you ALSO interpolate the doctrine of exaltation into these verses and therefore embrace a contradiction never intended, and not permitted in Scripture alone in any of those 9 verses for the Christian or the Jew, such a thing as Mormon exaltation could never be considered because it is blasphemy.






Here are two verse in Scripture, that seems to be directed particularly against Mormon theology:



Ezekiel 28:9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.
10 Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD

Hosea 11: 9 I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city




These verses are also included because they describe the penalties that ate given to men who claim to be god. In summary, the doctrine of Mormon exaltation is directed directly AGAINST God, and it is provoking His righteous and jealous wrath upon those who proclaim themselves to be gods

At the top of the page, you asked, "Who do you believe this "Mormo God" is? "

My answer, based upon Scripture is that it is Someone, who has provoked the righteous and jealous wrath of God, and the person is clearly named in Ezekiel 28 as Satan, Himself.

Only when one takes verses ripped from their context can one fond anything that supports Mormon exaltation in Scripture, and that out of context statement would have a 11 or more verses standing in opposition



I do not put any other god before him. (Not even Alan ;) )
Not funny in the slightest


But I do believe in what the God of the Bible reveals--and he opens my eyes to it through the spirit, through prayer.
Indeed, He does that to His children, but He does NOT do that when you are praying to Satan. That is the gorilla in the room. As long as you believe in exaltation, you can NEVER pray to the God of the Bible.


No belly-ache, but a burning, a still small voice--that when I live by, I see the truth of it. This is why my signature reads:

Luk 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

OUT OF CONTEXT


Because this is the one truth that seems to be denied on this site over and over again. That when the God opens the scriptures to us, we recognize it in our hearts or as these disciples described, their hearts "burn[ed] within [them].

Therefore this conclusion is incorrect

[BigJulie]

Smith was a sexual predator...if you doubt I can fill-up the next few pages of this topic with information that goes over his vast history in the records of Smith's sniffing around after the young daughters of his followers, or that he would send husbands out of town, then later come "a calling"?.....you just let me know.


I never say anything on this forum unless I can back it up.....



So just let me know.....

Regardless of what you think about Joseph Smith or write about Joseph Smith, this is what I know for sure.

The revelations given to Joseph Smith when lived produce the most righteous, principled, and faithful husbands. My husband was a virgin when we married. My daughter's husband was as well. My son was too.

The gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed to Joseph Smith, teaches such deep sanc***y of marriage that is so important to God that it lasts eternally, coupled with learning how to listen and respond to the Holy Ghost teach men and women how to be faith to their spouses even before marriage.

Can you say this about yourself?

[alanmolstad]

Regardless of what you think about Joseph Smith or write about Joseph Smith, this is what I know for sure.

The revelations given to Joseph Smith when lived produce the most righteous, principled, and faithful husbands. My husband was a virgin when we married. My daughter's husband was as well. My son was too.

The gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed to Joseph Smith, teaches such deep sanc***y of marriage that is so important to God that it lasts eternally, coupled with learning how to listen and respond to the Holy Ghost teach men and women how to be faith to their spouses even before marriage.

Can you say this about yourself?

I read this one story about Smith and his skirt chasing.

he was on the run at that time, I think he had sneaked into a new place to live, staying with some friends of his.

Well......it was getting late, and it was getting about time to turn in for the evening.

Thats when Smith made his play, and told one of the younger girls who lived there his standard pick-up line , of the "God has given you to me as wife" type.

I read that and was just was amazed as the gall of the guy!

Even then???????, even when on the run, he was still thinking with his zipper.??????

and it was his thinking with his zipper that got him in trouble in the first place.

We tend to forget that the reason Smith was in so much hot water, and the reason that was pushing events that were about to overtake him was the simple fact that Smith could not keep it in his pants.

[BigJulie]

Let Scripture speak for itself before I reply:


Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; 6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments

Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God

Daniel 3:29 Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort

Genesis 35: 11 And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings shall come out of thy loins; 12 And the land which I gave Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give the land

Psalm 46:10 Be still, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth

Psalm 50:7 Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God

Isaiah 43:12 I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God

Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else

Isaiah 46:99 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Twice in one verse

Okay, you've got some great OT verses here. (Although, why ignore concrete Genesis for metaphoric Isaiah when we speak of God?, so let's through that one in: "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness," Gen. 1:26)

NT:

And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." Matthew 3:17

"Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done." Luke 22:42

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.'" John 20:17

"I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God." Acts 7:56



.
The problem with Mormon theology (and presumably your beliefs) is that you ALSO interpolate the doctrine of exaltation into these verses and therefore embrace a contradiction never intended, and not permitted in Scripture alone in any of those 9 verses for the Christian or the Jew, such a thing as Mormon exaltation could never be considered because it is blasphemy.






Here are two verse in Scripture, that seems to be directed particularly against Mormon theology:


[INDENT]Ezekiel 28:9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.
10 Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD

Hosea 11: 9 I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst of thee: and I will not enter into the city Once again, you have to go to the Old Testament. We do not commit blasphemy, but rather recognize Jesus Christ and believe what he states.


These verses are also included because they describe the penalties that ate given to men who claim to be god. In summary, the doctrine of Mormon exaltation is directed directly AGAINST God, and it is provoking His righteous and jealous wrath upon those who proclaim themselves to be gods

At the top of the page, you asked, "Who do you believe this "Mormo God" is? "

My answer, based upon Scripture is that it is Someone, who has provoked the righteous and jealous wrath of God, and the person is clearly named in Ezekiel 28 as Satan, Himself.

Only when one takes verses ripped from their context can one fond anything that supports Mormon exaltation in Scripture, and that out of context statement would have a 11 or more verses standing in opposition


Not funny in the slightest


Indeed, He does that to His children, but He does NOT do that when you are praying to Satan. That is the gorilla in the room. As long as you believe in exaltation, you can NEVER pray to the God of the Bible.



OUT OF CONTEXT



Therefore this conclusion is incorrect Okay, so there it is--you believe I am praying to Satan.

But here is what I see--in order to believe what you do, you must stick to the OT. You must not believe the words of Christ as he states them, but rather rely on the OT, much like the Jews did-- and you even use the same beliefs they did to in order to justify themselves when deciding to crucify him to justify yourself.

That you believe that I pray to Satan when I so strongly believe in Jesus Christ and his words and that God will not answer me tells me that you fall to the same "spirit" that the Jews did when they said " Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?" Then Christ said I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me."

[alanmolstad]

When we confess as Thomas to Jesus, "My Lord and my God" we mean that Jesus is the one true Lord God of the Old testament.
The God that spoke out of the burning bush,,,the God that walked in the cool of the garden, etc.

This is why it says of our Lord Jesus, "The Word was with God, the Word was God"

and that is the heart also of the Christ faith, that the God of the Old test,the God of Moses, came to us as a man, born fully human.


So this means that Jesus is always both Fully God, and fully human.

Fully God as being equal to the Father
Fully human as being equal to me.

This is why I can trust the resurrection , for the resurrection of Jesus was that of a fully human that was truly resurrected.
So just as Christ was returned to life, so too will I be one day too,



This is why Jesus could teach us to pray as he also prayed,,,teach us as our brother.
Teach us as a human, and showing how all humans are to pray to their God in heaven.
because Jesus has to natures,,,fully God and fully man.

and as a man, he prayed as I do to the father.

[BigJulie]

When we confess as Thomas to Jesus, "My Lord and my God" we mean that Jesus is the one true Lord God of the Old testament.
The God that spoke out of the burning bush,,,the God that walked in the cool of the garden, etc.

This is why it says of our Lord Jesus, "The Word was with God, the Word was God"

and that is the heart also of the Christ faith, that the God of the Old test,the God of Moses, came to us as a man, born fully human.


So this means that Jesus is always both Fully God, and fully human.

Fully God as being equal to the Father
Fully human as being equal to me.

This is why I can trust the resurrection , for the resurrection of Jesus was that of a fully human that was truly resurrected.
So just as Christ was returned to life, so too will I be one day too,



This is why Jesus could teach us to pray as he also prayed,,,teach us as our brother.
Teach us as a human, and showing how all humans are to pray to their God in heaven.
because Jesus has to natures,,,fully God and fully man.

and as a man, he prayed as I do to the father.

Do you believe that Jesus Christ still has his glorified resurrected body?

[BigJulie]

When we confess as Thomas to Jesus, "My Lord and my God" we mean that Jesus is the one true Lord God of the Old testament.
The God that spoke out of the burning bush,,,the God that walked in the cool of the garden, etc.

This is why it says of our Lord Jesus, "The Word was with God, the Word was God"

and that is the heart also of the Christ faith, that the God of the Old test,the God of Moses, came to us as a man, born fully human.


So this means that Jesus is always both Fully God, and fully human.

Fully God as being equal to the Father
Fully human as being equal to me.

This is why I can trust the resurrection , for the resurrection of Jesus was that of a fully human that was truly resurrected.
So just as Christ was returned to life, so too will I be one day too,



This is why Jesus could teach us to pray as he also prayed,,,teach us as our brother.
Teach us as a human, and showing how all humans are to pray to their God in heaven.
because Jesus has to natures,,,fully God and fully man.

and as a man, he prayed as I do to the father.

Do you believe that Jesus Christ still has his glorified and resurrected body?

[alanmolstad]

He did not stop being fully human.

This is how we trust what our resurrection will be like..
For Jesus is our example.

[alanmolstad]

He did not stop being fully human.

This is how we trust what our resurrection will be like..
For Jesus is our example.

[alanmolstad]

On phone in forge...don't expect great posts

[BigJulie]

He did not stop being fully human.

This is how we trust what our resurrection will be like..
For Jesus is our example.

So, you are saying he still has his resurrected body, correct?

Do you believe he is on the right hand of God as is explained in the New Testament?

"So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God." Mark 16:19

"Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." Romans 8:34

[alanmolstad]

In other words....when I say Im the "right hand man" of my boss......what is that talking about?

where Im standing?.....

no

What is it talking abut?

Its speaks of my relationship with my boss...the reliance he has placed in me.




Its the same whenever I or another Christians view the Lord Jesus being at the right side of the father...its about his relationship...

[alanmolstad]

why do we always say the "right hand" man?

Because the left hand was used to clean your ****...


so when Steven said he saw the Lord standing at the right hand side, he was making a reference that was very connected to cleaning your **** after you ****?....

yes,

[BigJulie]

In other words....when I say Im the "right hand man" of my boss......what is that talking about?

where Im standing?.....

no

What is it talking abut?

Its speaks of my relationship with my boss...the reliance he has placed in me.




Its the same whenever I or another Christians view the Lord Jesus being at the right side of the father...its about his relationship...

Okay, so you believe that this "right hand of God" is a metaphor that Jesus Christ has with God the Father (being his right-hand man, so to speak with God the Father being the boss).

When you speak of God the Father (the one that Christ refers to) do you think of him as the Holy Ghost? Or would you describe Him as you would describe Jesus Christ? (The one that Christ has a metaphorical relationship with.)

[alanmolstad]

Okay, so you believe that this "right hand of God" is a metaphor

I think most all the use of the term, "The right hand of God" are in reference to Psalm 110:1 and even that use is still very connected to the whole "right hand clean, left hand for ****" context...


Thus being at the "right hand" of God, or being my boss's "right hand man" is a use of the term that talks about a relationship...a closeness....

..in a modern Bible translation that seeks to help the modern reader to understand the context of what even the first Christian killed in the Bible is talking about, they will likely make use of the term, "position of honor" to help us understand what being the right hand guy means today...

[alanmolstad]

When you speak of God the Father (the one that Christ refers to) do you think of him as the Holy Ghost? Or would you describe Him as you would describe Jesus Christ? (The one that Christ has a metaphorical relationship with.)



This is God = within the nature of the One true God, there are three persons.





Each is fully God Almighty, each is equally God....None is "more" god than the others.

But also within the relationship of these 3 persons there is a way they relate to each other.....the father being greater....the son being submissive.



and yes, there is no known thing or idea I can point to in creation that is "just like God".....so while I might try to make a comparison to what is God like by pointing to this or that thing,,,the truth is, that God being as He is, is totally unlike anything or anyone....




we just have to deal with that fact....

[BigJulie]

This is God = within the nature of the One true God, there are three persons.





Each is fully God Almighty, each is equally God....None is "more" god than the others.

But also within the relationship of these 3 persons there is a way they relate to each other.....the father being greater....the son being submissive.



and yes, there is no known thing or idea I can point to in creation that is "just like God".....so while I might try to make a comparison to what is God like by pointing to this or that thing,,,the truth is, that God being as He is, is totally unlike anything or anyone....




we just have to deal with that fact....

Okay, so to you, there is a "person" who is God the Father that Christ has a submissive relationship to, but he is NOT like Jesus Christ, correct? He is unlike anything we have experienced, even the resurrected Christ. This is how you understand God the Father, right?

[alanmolstad]

Okay, so to you, there is a "person" who is God the Father that Christ has a submissive relationship to, but he is NOT like Jesus Christ, correct? He is unlike anything we have experienced, even the resurrected Christ. This is how you understand God the Father, right?

Within the nature of the one True God., there three Divine persons.

There is the Father, who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.

There is the Holy Spirit , who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.

There is the Son, who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.



But so that man might be saved, the Son came to us as a man.
The Son never stopped being God Almighty...never stopped being pure spirit.
Yet with this Divine nature the Son took on to himself the nature of man.


So the Son is yet God...and yet man.

The Son has two natures.


Thus the Son is equal to the Father in His nature as God.
and is equal to me in His nature as man.

The Son is not Less that God the father in his nature as God.
The son is not less than me in his nature as man.






Ok?

[alanmolstad]

Within the nature of the one True God., there three Divine persons.

There is the Father, who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.

There is the Holy Spirit , who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.

There is the Son, who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.



But so that man might be saved, the Son came to us as a man.
The Son never stopped being God Almighty...never stopped being pure spirit.
Yet with this Divine nature the Son took on to himself the nature of man.


So the Son is yet God...and yet man.

The Son has two natures.


Thus the Son is equal to the Father in His nature as God.
and is equal to me in His nature as man.

The Son is not Less that God the father in his nature as God.
The son is not less than me in his nature as man.






Ok?






and this is why the Bible says "For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus"

[BigJulie]

Within the nature of the one True God., there three Divine persons.

There is the Father, who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.

There is the Holy Spirit , who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.

There is the Son, who is pure spirit, eternal God, from everlasting to everlasting.



But so that man might be saved, the Son came to us as a man.
The Son never stopped being God Almighty...never stopped being pure spirit.
Yet with this Divine nature the Son took on to himself the nature of man.


So the Son is yet God...and yet man.

The Son has two natures.


Thus the Son is equal to the Father in His nature as God.
and is equal to me in His nature as man.

The Son is not Less that God the father in his nature as God.
The son is not less than me in his nature as man.






Ok?

So, you believe that Jesus Christ is equal to the Father as far as his nature, but NOT like his father in having a body. In this way, you believe that they are different.

So, do you believe that Jesus Christ has less power, less ability, less capacity because he has a resurrected body?
Or do you believe that God the Father has more power than Jesus Christ because he does not?

[alanmolstad]

So, you believe .....

see post 61

[alanmolstad]

All that the father does he does with the son
All that the son does is only because he sees the father doing it.

The father does all things though the son.

[BigJulie]

All that the father does he does with the son
All that the son does is only because he sees the father doing it.

The father does all things though the son.

So, basically, you see the Father and son as different in that God the Father does not have a body and does everything through the Son--and does nothing for himself? And yet you then claim that the son only does what he has seen his Father do? Isn't that nothing, according to your definition?

[Phoenix]

why take this type of personal shot at another guest here?
Just stating a fact. He really doesn't like Mormons. Prove it to yourself. Go ahead and list as many as you can of the good, positive things he has said about them.

Then, when you're done counting to zero, list as many of the negative, insulting things he has said about them as you can.

Compare the two numbers.

One number will be a lot bigger than the other number.

Then you will hopefully realize that "he doesn't like Mormons" isn't even in the same ball park, as far as personal shots go, with the truly nauseating personal shots YOU have said about Mormons such as Joseph Smith...**** you are oh so proud of.

[Phoenix]

Your contemptuous lie about me is noted. I am not the issue
wow, accusing Mormons of contemptuous lies? maybe you don't like Mormons, if that's your at***ude toward them....

[alanmolstad]

It's none of anyone's business who I like...just worry about yourself

[alanmolstad]

And as far as Smith's sex life goes and the history we can read...if you want me support anything I have said just ask.

[alanmolstad]

So, basically, ...

What is it about my posts that keep making you seem to need to put everything I say into your own words?

[alanmolstad]

when we see the Son do things, and the Son does many things, ( creation of the universe, the salvation of man, etc)we are seeing the Father do it though the Son.

This is why the Son said he could do nothing on his own, for the father and the Son are always in union and do all things as one.

So the Son is not less powerful than the Father, rather the Son is totally equal in nature as with the father.

Within the relationship the Father is greater in that the Son is always subservient and submits to the Father in all things....that is how their relationship is.




so the Father is not a more powerful "being" than the Son.
rather the Father and the Son do all things in union,
and that is why the Father in in the Son and the Son is in the father,
for they are in union at all times with the Father doing all things though the Son.


So, Equal in nature
Father greater in position with the Son submitting out of Love to the father.




And because God wanted to be reconciling himself to man, and he sent the Son to die.

The nature of the Son as God Almighty did not change....The Son is always equal in nature with the father, the Son is never less powerful than the Father.yet for our salvation the Son came to us as a Man.....a fully 100% man.


As a man, a real man, the Son had to pray to the father as we do too.....thus he is the mediator between God and man...this man Christ Jesus.

For the Son has to full natures,
Christ is both fully God almighty and fully man.





That is as clear as I can make things.

[alanmolstad]

so we dont really think that the father is less powerful just because he does all things though the Son.

Nor do we think the Son is less powerful because he only does what he sees the Father is doing though him.


but this is how their relationship is.

[BigJulie]

What is it about my posts that keep making you seem to need to put everything I say into your own words?

Honestly, they read like you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth. I am trying to verify that I am understanding you correctly.

[BigJulie]

when we see the Son do things, and the Son does many things, ( creation of the universe, the salvation of man, etc)we are seeing the Father do it though the Son.

This is why the Son said he could do nothing on his own, for the father and the Son are always in union and do all things as one.

So the Son is not less powerful than the Father, rather the Son is totally equal in nature as with the father.

Within the relationship the Father is greater in that the Son is always subservient and submits to the Father in all things....that is how their relationship is.




so the Father is not a more powerful "being" than the Son.
rather the Father and the Son do all things in union,
and that is why the Father in in the Son and the Son is in the father,
for they are in union at all times with the Father doing all things though the Son.


So, Equal in nature
Father greater in position with the Son submitting out of Love to the father.




And because God wanted to be reconciling himself to man, and he sent the Son to die.

The nature of the Son as God Almighty did not change....The Son is always equal in nature with the father, the Son is never less powerful than the Father.yet for our salvation the Son came to us as a Man.....a fully 100% man.


As a man, a real man, the Son had to pray to the father as we do too.....thus he is the mediator between God and man...this man Christ Jesus.

For the Son has to full natures,
Christ is both fully God almighty and fully man.





That is as clear as I can make things.

So, Christ is fully God and fully man, but the Father is not, correct?

How do you reconcile this verse?: 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; Hebrew 1:3 (I understand you believe that "sat down on the right hand" is a metaphor. Do you believe "express image of his person" is also a metaphor?

[Phoenix]

It's none of anyone's business who I like...just worry about yourself

Who a person likes--and hates--is pretty apparent to everyone by what that person says, if the person talks enough.

[John T]

wow, accusing Mormons of contemptuous lies? maybe you don't like Mormons, if that's your at***ude toward them....

YOU are the one who created a LIE about me. Why are you blaming me for correctly identifying YOUR LIE?

That is plain silliness.

[Phoenix]

YOU are the one who created a LIE about me.
where is your proof that it was a lie?

produce your evidence

[BigJulie]

JohnT and Phoenix--can we just ***ume, in this place, that others do not mean to misrepresent and are merely coming from improper paradigms of understanding?

[alanmolstad]

The word "image" is like a whole book...lol

[alanmolstad]

Honestly, they read like you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth. I am trying to verify that I am understanding you correctly.


Im picking out my words carefully...as i never say anything on this forum unless I can back it with a verse...

But Im also attempting to be very,very clear with what Im saying so as to make it very easy to grasp.

What is the both sides part?...I will write that over if its not getting across...

[alanmolstad]

Hebrews 1:3....


Lets read > http://biblehub.com/hebrews/1-3.htm

expresses the very character of God

the exact imprint of his nature

exact representation of His nature,

the exact expression of His substance

the exact representation of His nature

the express image of his person,

the exact expression of His nature

exact likeness of his being

the representation of his essence

The Image of his Being

etc,etc,etc...


Whats it all mean?
It means the same as this other verse, Colossians 1:15 "The Son is the image of the invisible God"




Let me tell you a story.

The concept of an "image" is a whole book in my Bible School days.
What I remember best when I had to study this verse is the following lesson.

Our teacher talked about how to understand the idea of there being an "image" of something that is always going to be invisible and unseen.

How can you have a visible image of something that is always invisible?

This is how its taught to my cl***.

You have a paper bag and you put something inside it, (it does not matter what is placed inside)
Then you tell a person to close their eyes and reach into the paper bag and try to learn what object you have placed in there.

What happens is that as the other person reaches into the bag and begins to handle the object, an "image" forms in their mind as to what you have in the bag.

The image represents all you will ever know of the "invisible" object.
The object in the bag is never able to be seen, yet you have in your mind an "image' of what is there...


In the same way, God is Spirit, and a spirit is always invisible.
There is never a time when you can see god, as God is spirit and humans cant see that ....So God is always going to be invisible.

But The Son is not just spirit, he is also flesh.

So while the Son is pure spirit as is the father and the Holy Spirit, the Son is also flesh and we can "see" the Son.


This is why we say the Son is the visible "image" of the "invisible" god.


For all we will ever know about the father is shown to us already in the Son.....




This is why when the 12 asked Jesus "Show us the father" that we see Jesus answer the way he did,....for all we will ever see of the father is seen in the Son...for the father is spirit and the son is spirit, and no man can see a spirit but the Son is also human, and can be seen....so the So is the visible image of something totally invisible.

[BigJulie]

Im picking out my words carefully...as i never say anything on this forum unless I can back it with a verse...

But Im also attempting to be very,very clear with what Im saying so as to make it very easy to grasp.

What is the both sides part?...I will write that over if its not getting across...


Yes, it is very clear that you choose your word very carefully. The problem is, you choose them in such as way as to not try to just not come out and say it. For example, when I asked if the Father and Son were different, you did not say---yes, so, I had to extrapolate that "yes" you do see them differently. Ultimately, I concluded from your answer that the Father is "unlike" the Son or, in your words, " He is, is totally unlike anything or anyone."

Yet, you then did go on to say that the Son has two natures. And from this I ***ume, you believe the Father only has one nature.

Now we are on to God the Father's image. Once again-you seem to think this is a metaphor which would be consistent with your description of God the Father being "unlike anything or anyone"

[John T]

JohnT and Phoenix--can we just ***ume, in this place, that others do not mean to misrepresent and are merely coming from improper paradigms of understanding?

It would do you well to look at the FACTS first, Julie.


cause John didn't give God permission to hear anyone's prayers except those who John personally approves

and John doesn't like Mormons.

THAT above is a flat-out lie

Alan agrees with my ***essment:



Originally Posted by Phoenix http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168079#post168079) ...
and John doesn't like Mormons.



why take this type of personal shot at another guest here?

He also agrees here:



Originally Posted by John T http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168087#post168087)

Your contemptuous lie about me is noted. I am not the issue



far as I can see it always goes like this for me...

If Im on a topic I care about and know a bunch of stuff about, and have been around the block a few times on, then the other person will soon find that none of their standard debate points will work on me.

This will cause a person to do one of two things mostly.
eithor they will dig deeper into the topic and try to learn more information about it....or....
They will start to attack me as a person.
They will do this because they have come to see that they dont have any ammo against my views, so they will stop attacking my views and just attack me as a person.

Basicly they come to see that my views and the support for my views are not going to fail, so they then must come to the conclusion that there is something wrong with me as a person to have thought of these views in the first place.


I see this all the time of topics where I have a p***ion.

The other guest that was oh so ready to debate me at the start when they thought they had a chance, will soon decide that not only what Im saying is wrong, that also I must have something wrong with me to have these views in the first place.

So that is why you run into people on this forum that will all of the sudden try to make "you" the topic.....and not the ideas and things you were defending so strongly.

Likewise this poster, teenapenny


Originally Posted by Phoenix http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168051#post168051) some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism the center of their lives. They might even spend more minutes per day on antimormon sites, demonizing Mormons, then they spend reading their bibles.

That seems pretty sad.

one way to ascertain your priorities is to see how many weeks you can go without attacking the Mormons.
You ought to try that.
5 weeks maybe?
Only 2 weeks?
Less than one week?




I do not see anyone attacking Mormons. I only see them trying to show that what the Mormons believe is not the truth.

Yet when I called his attention to the FACT that he made up lies about me, he turns around, and wants to blame me for his own lies about me., and then makes up more lies about me



Originally Posted by John T http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168087#post168087) Your contemptuous lie about me is noted. I am not the issue



wow, accusing Mormons of contemptuous lies? maybe you don't like Mormons, if that's your at***ude toward them....


Please pay attention to the facts, BJ

[BigJulie]

Lets read > http://biblehub.com/hebrews/1-3.htm

expresses the very character of God

the exact imprint of his nature

exact representation of His nature,

the exact expression of His substance

the exact representation of His nature

the express image of his person,

the exact expression of His nature

exact likeness of his being

the representation of his essence

The Image of his Being

etc,etc,etc...


Whats it all mean?
It means the same as this other verse, Colossians 1:15 "The Son is the image of the invisible God"




Let me tell you a story.

The concept of an "image" is a whole book in my Bible School days.
What I remember best when I had to study this verse is the following lesson.

Our teacher talked about how to understand the idea of there being an "image" of something that is always going to be invisible and unseen.

How can you have a visible image of something that is always invisible?

This is how its taught to my cl***.

You have a paper bag and you put something inside it, (it does not matter what is placed inside)
Then you tell a person to close their eyes and reach into the paper bag and try to learn what object you have placed in there.

What happens is that as the other person reaches into the bag and begins to handle the object, an "image" forms in their mind as to what you have in the bag.

The image represents all you will ever know of the "invisible" object.
The object in the bag is never able to be seen, yet you have in your mind an "image' of what is there...


In the same way, God is Spirit, and a spirit is always invisible.
There is never a time when you can see god, as God is spirit and humans cant see that ....So God is always going to be invisible.

But The Son is not just spirit, he is also flesh.

So while the Son is pure spirit as is the father and the Holy Spirit, the Son is also flesh and we can "see" the Son.


This is why we say the Son is the visible "image" of the "invisible" god.


For all we will ever know about the father is shown to us already in the Son.....




This is why when the 12 asked Jesus "Show us the father" that we see Jesus answer the way he did,....for all we will ever see of the father is seen in the Son...for the father is spirit and the son is spirit, and no man can see a spirit but the Son is also human, and can be seen....so the So is the visible image of something totally invisible.



Once again, you have gone to great lengths to describe the differences between God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ.

So all of these things together:

Christ sitting on the right hand of God.

Christ doing nothing that he has not seen the Father do.

Christ telling his disciples that if they have seen Him, they have seen the Father.

Christ being in the express image of the Father.

You read all of this and take it all metaphorically. None of these take you back to Genesis in which we learn "God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." or also found in Genesis "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:"

All that Christ did to teach us who the Father is. All of this, you take only as metaphor--a God hidden from you (as in a paper bag) whom you will never really know, that you can never really know because he is invisible, hidden, and unlike anything or anyone, not even Christ.

So, when Jesus says "this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent"--even after ALL Christ did to teach you, show you, and let you see who God the Father is, your response is that this not really possible?

[alanmolstad]

yes....all we will ever know about the Father is shown us in the Son.

For in the son we have the visible image of our invisible God.



Im sorry that you have trouble understanding my words, but I am always able to provide a verse that supports all that I post...

So if you see something I write that you doubt, or you think is wrong, or you just want to see "Where does it say that in the Bible?" just ask me for the verse I use to support whatever you call into question,

and if I truly do only post what I can prove, then I should be able to provide you with a Scripture.

[Phoenix]

JohnT and Phoenix--can we just ***ume, in this place, that others do not mean to misrepresent and are merely coming from improper paradigms of understanding?

i am not sure we should ***ume that the misrepresentations by all antimormons of Mormon beliefs, doctrines, and leaders are accidental.

but I will admit that my statement could be incorrect: it is possible that John DID give God permission to listen to, hear, and answer the prayers of Mormons to Him.

[alanmolstad]

i am not sure we should ***ume that the misrepresentations by all antimormons of ......
Im sure I have told you already of your use of terms not allowed on this forum under the rules correct?

and so I take it that by continuing to use such terms in violation of the rules you are "flaunting"?

and I guess you believe this will not come back to haunt you then?

[BigJulie]

yes....all we will ever know about the Father is shown us in the Son.

For in the son we have the visible image of our invisible God.



Im sorry that you have trouble understanding my words, but I am always able to provide a verse that supports all that I post...

So if you see something I write that you doubt, or you think is wrong, or you just want to see "Where does it say that in the Bible?" just ask me for the verse I use to support whatever you call into question,

and if I truly do only post what I can prove, then I should be able to provide you with a Scripture.

You have made yourself clear. You believe all we know about the Father is from the Son, but to you there are inherent differences between the Father and the Son and therefore, we cannot really truly know the Father--even after what Christ has taught us because you see it as metaphorical and that he did not mean what he said literally. Please tell me if you believe my understanding is incorrect.

[alanmolstad]

" The definition of a derogatory term is one that insults, belittles or treats a group or individual with contempt. This applies to terms like "anti-Mormon" and "Circuit Mormon".

Effective immediately, members who use derogatory terms will be warned once, and the second time they will be banned indefinitely without warning. A third infraction will result in a long term account suspension. "..... http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?793-Derogatory-Terms

[alanmolstad]

You have made yourself clear. ..well...that was my goal.



and yes, all we will ever know, learn, see, feel, smell, handle, and listen to, about God is given to us in the Son.

This is why the bible calls the Son, the "image" of the invisible God......






Why does it call Jesus that?

Because God is Invisible.




Why is God invisible?

Because God is Spirit, and spirit is invisible.



So why is Jesus called the "image" of the invisible God?

Because Jesus can be seen, felt, handled etc, due to the fact that the Son has a 2nd nature.


This 2nd nature is that of a man?

Jesus is pure spirit as is the Father.
The nature of the Father is the very same nature of the son.
When we say that "God is spirit" we are not just talking about the father alone.

so there is nothing about being the one true God that the father is, that the Son lacks,,,,,
So the "fullness" of the Godis in Jesus.....not part god.....not 1/3 god....but all that God is is in Christ.

There is NOTHING that God is, that is not found in Christ.

Yet this 2nd Nature that the Son has that the father does not have is flesh, and it allows us to see God....allows us to known of God,,,




When did the Son get his 2nd nature?

In the womb of his mother Mary.




Does the Father have also a 2nd nature?

No.



Does the Holy Spirit have a 2nd nature ?

no

[alanmolstad]

...... misrepresentations by all antimormons ......

I have warned you before about posting terms on to the forum that are against the stated rules.

Perhaps you may need to speak to other Mormon guests on what you can expect if you continue to break the rules around here...

[BigJulie]

well...that was my goal.



and yes, all we will ever know, learn, see, feel, smell, handle, and listen to, about God is given to us in the Son.

This is why the bible calls the Son, the "image" of the invisible God......






Why does it call Jesus that?

Because God is Invisible.




Why is God invisible?

Because God is Spirit, and spirit is invisible.



So why is Jesus called the "image" of the invisible God?

Because Jesus can be seen, felt, handled etc, due to the fact that the Son has a 2nd nature.


This 2nd nature is that of a man?

Jesus is pure spirit as is the Father.
The nature of the Father is the very same nature of the son.
When we say that "God is spirit" we are not just talking about the father alone.

so there is nothing about being the one true God that the father is, that the Son lacks,,,,,
So the "fullness" of the Godis in Jesus.....not part god.....not 1/3 god....but all that God is is in Christ.

There is NOTHING that God is, that is not found in Christ.

Yet this 2nd Nature that the Son has that the father does not have is flesh, and it allows us to see God....allows us to known of God,,,




When did the Son get his 2nd nature?

In the womb of his mother Mary.




Does the Father have also a 2nd nature?

No.



Does the Holy Spirit have a 2nd nature ?

no










So, since you take everything that we learn, feel, smell, etc including:

Christ sat down on the right hand of God metaphorically

and:

Christ saying, if you have seen me you have seen the Father metaphorically

Why ***ume that Christ has a second nature when God the Father does not?

How do you know this? Why not believe what Christ says? I can understand God the Father being invisible, but that is invisible to us, right? God the Father is not invisible to Christ. (Especially in light that Christ tells us he does nothing save he has SEEN the Father do.) And aren't there many invisible things to us that are clearly seen by the creator?

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.

What to you are these "invisible things of him". And aren't we told that are "clearly seen" being understood by things that are made?

So, why then can't I take what Christ says literally? That I can clearly see who God the Father is from Him? Why take "image" metaphorically" or "right hand" metaphorically? Where did you get this thinking?

[Phoenix]

I am sorry, I forgot about the censorship here, I will try harder to not use that bad word.

but does anyone know a word that we could use instead, as a subs***ute for the bad word?

how about "people who are against every aspect of everything that LDS people are for" ?

i know it is long, but would it be legal to use?

[BigJulie]

I am sorry, I forgot about the censorship here, I will try harder to not use that bad word.

but does anyone know a word that we could use instead, as a subs***ute for the bad word?

how about "people who are against every aspect of everything that LDS people are for" ?

i know it is long, but would it be legal to use?

Contra-Mormons? It seems an adequate description of the vibes they give off when discussing our beliefs. :)

You know what I think is quite sad--when prejudice runs so deep that one doesn't even see it. I wonder if they would feel as we do if we referred to Walter Martin as Wally, dug up every nasty piece of information we could about any reformer (and not worrying about if it is out of context for either their beliefs or for the time period), mocked their beliefs as being ridiculous and told them their prayers moot. as we see on a regular basis here, I wonder if then they would understand what their behavior is like or how it is perceived.

[alanmolstad]

but does anyone know a word that we could use instead, as a subs***ute for the bad word?




As I have explained before, that you may refer to a guest by their screen name, and you may refer to my religion as being "Christian"

[BigJulie]

As I have explained before, that you may refer to a guest by their screen name, and you may refer to my religion as being "Christian"

Then if the rules are that we can only be called what we prefer to be called, please call me a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you want to refer to any slang, please refer to me as a Christian-Mormon. Thank you :)

Please do not refer to Mormons in general in any derogatory way (in which we define for ourselves).--I'm starting to like this rule.

[Phoenix]

Then if the rules are that we can only be called what we prefer to be called, please call me a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you want to refer to any slang, please refer to me as a Christian-Mormon. Thank you :)

Please do not refer to Mormons in general in any derogatory way (in which we define for ourselves).--I'm starting to like this rule.

that seems fair...and one would hope that the pro-Mormon posters arent the only ones here who want fairness.

One poster who is not pro-Mormon used the word "nut cases" to refer specifically to all pro-Mormon people who don't trust that the bible is 100% error-free.

I think most people would consider that term to be derogatory.

[alanmolstad]

Then if the rules are that we can only be called what we prefer to be called.......You are to be called what your screen name is...


You are on the "Mormon" forum, and that s what they are to be called here - "Mormon or Mormons"

As people of the Christ faith are to be called "Christian"



CULTS are to be called "CULTS".....

Pedophiles are to be called Pedophiles

sexual deviants are to be called that.

Guys that cheat on the wife, are to be addressed as such.

That is why whenever I say something about a CULT leader's sexual history, (things like sending the husband out of town, and then when it's safe, come "a calling" ),I always make sure that if people doubt what Im saying is the truth, that I have plenty of links that will support the conclusions I have drawn....plenty of support.....

[BigJulie]

You are to be called what your screen name is...


You are on the "Mormon" forum, and that s what they are to be called here - "Mormon or Mormons"

As people of the Christ faith are to be called "Christian"



CULTS are to be called "CULTS".....

Pedophiles are to be called Pedophiles

sexual deviants are to be called that.

Guys that cheat on the wife, are to be addressed as such.

That is why whenever I say something about a CULT leader's sexual history, (things like sending the husband out of town, and then when it's safe, come "a calling" ),I always make sure that if people doubt what Im saying is the truth, that I have plenty of links that will support the conclusions I have drawn....plenty of support.....


Okay, but if we are to define derogatory terms, your latest comment is completely derogatory, unless of course you are defining yourself in comparison with cults, pedophiles, etc.

Other than that, when in this forum, the non-derogatory term for those who believe as I do is members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If you would like respect, then please kindly do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Thank you!

[alanmolstad]

You are to be called what your screen name is...


You are on the "Mormon" forum, and that s what they are to be called here - "Mormon or Mormons"

As people of the Christ faith are to be called "Christian"



CULTS are to be called "CULTS".....

Pedophiles are to be called Pedophiles

sexual deviants are to be called that.

Guys that cheat on the wife, are to be addressed as such.

That is why whenever I say something about a CULT leader's sexual history, (things like sending the husband out of town, and then when it's safe, come "a calling" ),I always make sure that if people doubt what Im saying is the truth, that I have plenty of links that will support the conclusions I have drawn....plenty of support.....


One of the best posts I have ever created....

[Christian]

Originally Posted by Christian
I love you as my NEIGHBOR, not as a sister in your fake 'spirit-brother-of-satan' 'christ.' I follow the BIBLICAL Jesus Christ instead.


Hmmm, this reminds me of the Pharisees asking Christ "who is my neighbor." Surprised that you would bring up something so similar.


There is no similarity there. I simply STATED (not 'asked' as the pharisee did) that I LOVE YOU AS MY NEIGHBOR. It's a clear STATEMENT, not a question at all.

I have nothing to do with your 'spirit-brothers-of-satan' at all. Your false gods and goddesses don't interest me. They will end up in the lake of fire according to the God of the Bible, the God I worship.

Your 'strange gods' that are 'exalted men,' are figments of joey smith's lying imagination.

[BigJulie]

There is no similarity there. I simply STATED (not 'asked' as the pharisee did) that I LOVE YOU AS MY NEIGHBOR. It's a clear STATEMENT, not a question at all.

I have nothing to do with your 'spirit-brothers-of-satan' at all. Your false gods and goddesses don't interest me. They will end up in the lake of fire according to the God of the Bible, the God I worship.

Your 'strange gods' that are 'exalted men,' are figments of joey smith's lying imagination.


Christ taught "'Love your neighbor as yourself.'

The Pharisees understood that one must love their neighbor as themselves and so they carefully defined "neighbor" as you are doing. Christ told them the Parable of the Good Samaritan (they believed that the Samaritans would be "outsiders" to their beliefs much like you see me) specifically to teach them that their neighbor did not necessarily mean only those who believed as they did. Christ taught that to "love" is the way we treat others. The Samaritan showed love because he behaved in a loving way. (It had nothing to do with what he believed.)

That is why I was surprised you did not catch the similarity.

[Phoenix]

Christ taught "'Love your neighbor as yourself.'

The Pharisees understood that one must love their neighbor as themselves and so they carefully defined "neighbor" as you are doing. Christ told them the Parable of the Good Samaritan (they believed that the Samaritans would be "outsiders" to their beliefs much like you see me) specifically to teach them that their neighbor did not necessarily mean only those who believed as they did. Christ taught that to "love" is the way we treat others. The Samaritan showed love because he behaved in a loving way. (It had nothing to do with what he believed.)

That is why I was surprised you did not catch the similarity.

another good post. I wish all who are not pro-Mormon would be as grounded in the bible as you are.

[Christian]

The Spirit testifies to me of Christ, his birth, his atonement, his resurrection and his eternal love for us. I don't need to put down other's beliefs to make this claim. It stands freely and without insult.


And yet the 'spirit' that testifies to you is NOT the Holy Spirit of the Bible, since he testifies to you of a 'spirit-brother-of-satan' instead of the REAL JESUS CHRIST WHO is NOT a 'spirit brother' of satan at all.

No insult.

Just the TRUTH.

[BigJulie]

And yet the 'spirit' that testifies to you is NOT the Holy Spirit of the Bible, since he testifies to you of a 'spirit-brother-of-satan' instead of the REAL JESUS CHRIST WHO is NOT a 'spirit brother' of satan at all.

No insult.

Just the TRUTH.


You have absolutely no way of knowing that. I am in a big discussion with Alan right now about who God is. His answer is that God is not like anything we know. So, I have studied up on the trinity more and its history. Do you realize that your definition of God was created 300 years after the death of Christ (more years between the Bible and the trinity creation then where we are and the writing of the Cons***ution.) Clearly, the cons***ution has been defined by judges of today different than some see it. There is so much argument about those words and what they mean.

Yet you cling to this 300-year old definition of God and state that I do NOT know the Holy Spirit. Yeah right.

[Christian]

phoenix posted:

some antimormons seem to have made anti Mormonism the center of their lives. They might even spend more minutes per day on antimormon sites, demonizing Mormons, then they spend reading their bibles.

SOME non-mormons (which you referto as 'antimormons') are NOT Christians and have DIFFERENT reasons for objecting to mormonism. A good example was a little town I once lived in that I was told was 97% lds. I went into a 'mom-pop store' to purchase a soda, the lady who waited on me noted that I was new in town from my licence plate, and asked where I lived. . .I told her, she said, "Oh, then you are in the fourth ward." I answered that I was not a mormon, then she waited on everyone else in line (all 4 of them) before checking me out.

Not an uncommon problem there, I understand.

That seems pretty sad.

Yep, it IS sad.

one way to ascertain your priorities is to see how many weeks you can go without attacking the Mormons.
You ought to try that.

Okay, but I WILL keep on attacking ALL FALSE DOCTRINE I see, INCLUDING the junk joey smith made up. I don't attack the mormon PEOPLE. I attack their false religion.

[Christian]

The Spirit testifies to me of Christ, his birth, his atonement, his resurrection and his eternal love for us. I don't need to put down other's beliefs to make this claim. It stands freely and without insult.

WHICH christ? Oh yes, that demonic 'spirit-brother-of-satan' 'christ' that joey smith invented. Yes, that one. No insult. . .just pointing out the TRUTH.

[BigJulie]

WHICH christ? Oh yes, that demonic 'spirit-brother-of-satan' 'christ' that joey smith invented. Yes, that one. No insult. . .just pointing out the TRUTH.

Interesting you are so caught up on Christ being the spiritual brother of Satan. Christ acknowledges God His Father and our Father.

Jhn 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, 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.

and the fall of a prince:

Psa 82:7 "But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes."

But you are right, we did not understand how this fits together until we received clarifying revelation given to Joseph Smith.

But, do you ever ask yourself why the very first story we learn after the creation of the Garden of Eden is about two brothers? One who makes an acceptable sacrifice and one who doesn't--and the one who doesn't killing the one who does? Why do you think we learn of this family's experience? Do you think God is trying to teach us something, or is just a story that sits alone without any further meaning?

[Phoenix]

SOME non-mormons (which you referto as 'antimormons') are NOT Christians and have DIFFERENT reasons for objecting to mormonism.
Bravo, that is a valid statement. it would be interesting to find out how many of the people who mock, ridicule, attack, vilify, and say derogatory junk about Mormons, are true Christians, and not just pretenders.


A good example was a little town I once lived in that I was told was 97% lds. I went into a 'mom-pop store' to purchase a soda, the lady who waited on me noted that I was new in town from my licence plate, and asked where I lived. . .I told her, she said, "Oh, then you are in the fourth ward." I answered that I was not a mormon, then she waited on everyone else in line (all 4 of them) before checking me out.
So you are saying that person was an example of a non-Mormon who wasn't a Christian? And was a person who had different reasons for objecting to Mormonism, and that is why you provided that story, as an example?

[Apologette]

If you want to know what Mormons believe, the best place to go is to a Mormon. There is no reason to be afraid of Mormons. Actually, there is no reason to be afraid of any church. Once we understand that God does love us and he does hear and answer our prayers, we can always turn to him for any question. He is there for us. He wants us to be happy. He wants us to have joy. There is no reason to belittle another's belief. Pure love casteth out all fear.

Most of the Mormons I know aren't even aware of the history of their organization or the licentious lifestyle of Joseph Smith. The other half don't care.

[Apologette]

I do test all things. I do read scriptures. I test them by reading scriptures AND by praying. I listen for the Holy Ghost to bear witness to me of truth. Then I live that truth and experience the fruits.

If you did that Julie you wouldn't be a polytheist.

[BigJulie]

Most of the Mormons I know aren't even aware of the history of their organization or the licentious lifestyle of Joseph Smith. The other half don't care.

I guess I fit into the "don't care" category because I have read it and realize that most of it is pure gossip and sensationalism at best and hypocrisy at worst. Our history is messy. I've never read a true history of anything that isn't. To think one can remove themselves from history and pretend to be "clean" from it is not realistic. If you are an American, you have a messy history. If you are a Christian, you have a messy history. It is what it is.

But, ultimately, it does not change what I know today. Today, those who follow the revelations given to Joseph Smith are faithful spouses who are committed to following Jesus Christ.

[Christian]

Julie posted:


Originally Posted by Apologette http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168236#post168236)
Most of the Mormons I know aren't even aware of the history of their organization or the licentious lifestyle of Joseph Smith. The other half don't care.

I guess I fit into the "don't care" category because I have read it and realize that most of it is pure gossip and sensationalism at best and hypocrisy at worst.

At least your religion wants you to THINK that. . .

Our history is messy.

It is.

I've never read a true history of anything that isn't. To think one can remove themselves from history and pretend to be "clean" from it is not realistic. If you are an American, you have a messy history.

The last part is true anyway.

If you are a Christian, you have a messy history.

Care to DEFINE what you think is 'messy history) for Christians?

It is what it is.

But, ultimately, it does not change what I know today. Today, those who follow the revelations given to Joseph Smith are faithful spouses who are committed to following Jesus Christ.

UNFORTUNATELY joseph smith was NOT a faithful spouse and followed a FALSE christ of his own making.

Jesus is ALWAYS faithful. Smith was not.

I'll follow Jesus instead of smith.

[BigJulie]

[COLOR=#0000ff]Care to DEFINE what you think is 'messy history) for Christians?



If you believe the revelations given to Joseph Smith, you are a follower of Jesus Christ by definition.

Now to get to your question of why I think Christians have a messy history:

1. First apostles are all killed off (except John).

2. From the murder of Peter, popes were being murdered off at rapid rates.

3. 300 years later (more time between now and when the Cons***ution was written) Christianity was being influenced by politics. The definition of God was defined by a minority rule in which anyone who disagreed was killed off.

4. 1296, Pope Celestine V was murdered by his successor (Pope Boniface VIII)

5. 1546, By Martin Luther, the church had become so corrupt that Luther spoke out against it and was later excommunicated. Wars begin to erupt between Catholic church and those who disagree.

6. In the early 1500's, King Henry VIII, in order to have the wife of his choice, gave up the Catholic church and began the church of England. The people were happy because they were tired of paying money to a corrupt church. Henry VIII, who had his next wives beheaded is now the head of the Church of England.

7. At this point, Catholics and Protestants are in full on war--those in power killing off or exiling those who did not agree with them.

8. People flee to America for religion freedom in the north and to spread the Catholic church in the Southern Hemisphere.

9. 1692, Early on in the establishment of "christianity" in America, we get the Salem witch trials.

10. Christians in the South fight for slave rights. (In fact, the largest slave trade in history was created by Europe's Christians.)

I sure hope you don't think this history is part of your history and has not influenced your traditions or religious thought.

[Apologette]

If you believe the revelations given to Joseph Smith, you are a follower of Jesus Christ by definition.

Now to get to your question of why I think Christians have a messy history:

1. First apostles are all killed off (except John).

2. From the murder of Peter, popes were being murdered off at rapid rates.

3. 300 years later (more time between now and when the Cons***ution was written) Christianity was being influenced by politics. The definition of God was defined by a minority rule in which anyone who disagreed was killed off.

4. 1296, Pope Celestine V was murdered by his successor (Pope Boniface VIII)

5. 1546, By Martin Luther, the church had become so corrupt that Luther spoke out against it and was later excommunicated. Wars begin to erupt between Catholic church and those who disagree.

6. In the early 1500's, King Henry VIII, in order to have the wife of his choice, gave up the Catholic church and began the church of England. The people were happy because they were tired of paying money to a corrupt church. Henry VIII, who had his next wives beheaded is now the head of the Church of England.

7. At this point, Catholics and Protestants are in full on war--those in power killing off or exiling those who did not agree with them.

8. People flee to America for religion freedom in the north and to spread the Catholic church in the Southern Hemisphere.

9. 1692, Early on in the establishment of "christianity" in America, we get the Salem witch trials.

10. Christians in the South fight for slave rights. (In fact, the largest slave trade in history was created by Europe's Christians.)

I sure hope you don't think this history is part of your history and has not influenced your traditions or religious thought.

Joseph Smith believed taught that the Mormon god was raised on another planet and became an exalted god, and was appointed by a council of other gods to rule over earth. Sorry, if you believe that you are a polytheist because it has nothing to do with Christianity. You have to choose between Smith and Jesus - you can't have both.

[BigJulie]

Joseph Smith believed taught that the Mormon god was raised on another planet and became an exalted god, and was appointed by a council of other gods to rule over earth. Sorry, if you believe that you are a polytheist because it has nothing to do with Christianity. You have to choose between Smith and Jesus - you can't have both.

Apologette,your understanding of my beliefs is the equivalent of reading the National Inquirer and thinking you have a handle on where Elvis Presley currently lives. It is humorous, if nothing else.

[Apologette]

Apologette,your understanding of my beliefs is the equivalent of reading the National Inquirer and thinking you have a handle on where Elvis Presley currently lives. It is humorous, if nothing else.

No, I understand Satanic Mormonism quite well. It originated in the mind of Satan, and those who embrace Smith, embrace Satan. If you won't repent, it is because you love the lie.

[BigJulie]

No, I understand Satanic Mormonism quite well. It originated in the mind of Satan, and those who embrace Smith, embrace Satan. If you won't repent, it is because you love the lie.

Actually you don't. You can believe anything you want to--but taking it from someone who has studied it, studied its history, lived it, and received a witness to it--you really don't understand anything at all. You speak in mean, vicious and hateful ways of something you do not understand. It would be the equivalent of a KKK member speaking of blacks in the early 20th century. History is and will continue to prove you wrong.

[Christian]

julie posted:


Originally Posted by Christian http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/images/****ons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/showthread.php?p=168186#post168186)


And yet the 'spirit' that testifies to you is NOT the Holy Spirit of the Bible, since he testifies to you of a 'spirit-brother-of-satan' instead of the REAL JESUS CHRIST WHO is NOT a 'spirit brother' of satan at all.

No insult.

Just the TRUTH.

You have absolutely no way of knowing that.

The TRUTH is that I do. YOU SAY you believe the Jesus and Holy Spirit that Joseph Smith taught, do you not?

I can SHOW YOU WHERE JOE WROTE that Jesus was 'a' god amongst other gods, and that the jesus HE taught was a 'spirit brother' to satan.

I can ALSO SHOW YOU IN THE BIBLE that satan is a fallen angel, and that Jesus CREATED the angels. The 'creation-to-creator relationship' IS NOT 'brother-to-brother.' NEITHER can you show in the BIBLE that satan is a 'spirit child' of God the Father. It simply is NOT THERE.

And the REAL Holy Spirit would NEVER testify that Jesus is an angel, a 'spirit-brother' or anything OTHER THAN a being CREATED BY JESUS. Thus YOUR spirit cannot be the REAL Holy Spirit.

I am in a big discussion with Alan right now about who God is. His answer is that God is not like anything we know. So, I have studied up on the trinity more and its history. Do you realize that your definition of God was created 300 years after the death of Christ (more years between the Bible and the trinity creation then where we are and the writing of the Cons***ution.)

A Totally FALSE CLAIM. The BIBLE (those writings are ALL about 2,000 years old or older (The OT text is older).

The BIBLE says
The Father is God
Jesus is God
The Holy Spirit is God
THERE IS ONLY ONE REAL GOD ANYWHERE EVER (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 etc etc etc) Thus THEY ARE ONE GOD.

AND

'Trinity' is the LABEL we label that concept with.

The TRUTH has existed from the beginning of time.

The LABEL is simply something we use to conveniently make it unnecessary for us to 'explain it' every time we refer to the triune God.

Yet you cling to this 300-year old definition of God and state that I do NOT know the Holy Spirit. Yeah right.

You obviously believe a spirit that LIES about God to follow YOUR definition that was thought up by joe smith less than 200 years ago. His 175 or so year old invention is supposed to define God? Yeah, RIGHT. . .:rolleyes:

[BigJulie]

julie posted:

[/COLOR][/I][/COLOR]

You have absolutely no way of knowing that.

The TRUTH is that I do. YOU SAY you believe the Jesus and Holy Spirit that Joseph Smith taught, do you not?

I can SHOW YOU WHERE JOE WROTE that Jesus was 'a' god amongst other gods, and that the jesus HE taught was a 'spirit brother' to satan.

I can ALSO SHOW YOU IN THE BIBLE that satan is a fallen angel, and that Jesus CREATED the angels. The 'creation-to-creator relationship' IS NOT 'brother-to-brother.' NEITHER can you show in the BIBLE that satan is a 'spirit child' of God the Father. It simply is NOT THERE.

And the REAL Holy Spirit would NEVER testify that Jesus is an angel, a 'spirit-brother' or anything OTHER THAN a being CREATED BY JESUS. Thus YOUR spirit cannot be the REAL Holy Spirit.

I am in a big discussion with Alan right now about who God is. His answer is that God is not like anything we know. So, I have studied up on the trinity more and its history. Do you realize that your definition of God was created 300 years after the death of Christ (more years between the Bible and the trinity creation then where we are and the writing of the Cons***ution.)

A Totally FALSE CLAIM. The BIBLE (those writings are ALL about 2,000 years old or older (The OT text is older).

The BIBLE says
The Father is God
Jesus is God
The Holy Spirit is God
THERE IS ONLY ONE REAL GOD ANYWHERE EVER (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 etc etc etc) Thus THEY ARE ONE GOD.

AND

'Trinity' is the LABEL we label that concept with.

The TRUTH has existed from the beginning of time.

The LABEL is simply something we use to conveniently make it unnecessary for us to 'explain it' every time we refer to the triune God.

Yet you cling to this 300-year old definition of God and state that I do NOT know the Holy Spirit. Yeah right.

You obviously believe a spirit that LIES about God to follow YOUR definition that was thought up by joe smith less than 200 years ago. His 175 or so year old invention is supposed to define God? Yeah, RIGHT. . .:rolleyes:

Wow, Christian--I really wish you would learn to use the quote bubble---seriously, it is not hard.

Please don't pretend to know my heart, understand my beliefs, or accuse me of not knowing the Holy Spirit. You just have no way of knowing me in such a way.

Please, show me where it states that Christ created angels.

You never answered my question about Cain and Abel.

Actually, it is easy to read up on the history of the Trinity and where it came from and how it was decided upon.


The BIBLE says
The Father is God
Jesus is God
The Holy Spirit is God

Will you show me the exact verse that says exactly what you just posted?

The trinity concept is not found in the Bible--anywhere.

My belief about God is consistent with what is taught in the Bible. Your trinity definition is not Bibically based and never has been. As such, you cannot show me it from the Bible.

[BigJulie]

julie posted:

[/COLOR][/I][/COLOR]

You have absolutely no way of knowing that.

The TRUTH is that I do. YOU SAY you believe the Jesus and Holy Spirit that Joseph Smith taught, do you not?

I can SHOW YOU WHERE JOE WROTE that Jesus was 'a' god amongst other gods, and that the jesus HE taught was a 'spirit brother' to satan.

I can ALSO SHOW YOU IN THE BIBLE that satan is a fallen angel, and that Jesus CREATED the angels. The 'creation-to-creator relationship' IS NOT 'brother-to-brother.' NEITHER can you show in the BIBLE that satan is a 'spirit child' of God the Father. It simply is NOT THERE.

And the REAL Holy Spirit would NEVER testify that Jesus is an angel, a 'spirit-brother' or anything OTHER THAN a being CREATED BY JESUS. Thus YOUR spirit cannot be the REAL Holy Spirit.

I am in a big discussion with Alan right now about who God is. His answer is that God is not like anything we know. So, I have studied up on the trinity more and its history. Do you realize that your definition of God was created 300 years after the death of Christ (more years between the Bible and the trinity creation then where we are and the writing of the Cons***ution.)

A Totally FALSE CLAIM. The BIBLE (those writings are ALL about 2,000 years old or older (The OT text is older).

The BIBLE says
The Father is God
Jesus is God
The Holy Spirit is God
THERE IS ONLY ONE REAL GOD ANYWHERE EVER (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 44:8 etc etc etc) Thus THEY ARE ONE GOD.

AND

'Trinity' is the LABEL we label that concept with.

The TRUTH has existed from the beginning of time.

The LABEL is simply something we use to conveniently make it unnecessary for us to 'explain it' every time we refer to the triune God.

Yet you cling to this 300-year old definition of God and state that I do NOT know the Holy Spirit. Yeah right.

You obviously believe a spirit that LIES about God to follow YOUR definition that was thought up by joe smith less than 200 years ago. His 175 or so year old invention is supposed to define God? Yeah, RIGHT. . .:rolleyes:

Wow, Christian--I really wish you would learn to use the quote bubble---seriously, it is not hard.

Please don't pretend to know my heart, understand my beliefs, or accuse me of not knowing the Holy Spirit. You just have no way of knowing me in such a way.

Please, show me where it states that Christ created angels.

You never answered my question about Cain and Abel.

Actually, it is easy to read up on the history of the Trinity and where it came from and how it was decided upon.


The BIBLE says
The Father is God
Jesus is God
The Holy Spirit is God

Will you show me the exact verse that says exactly what you just posted?

The trinity concept is not found in the Bible--anywhere.

My belief about God is consistent with what is taught in the Bible. Your trinity definition is not Bibically based and never has been. As such, you cannot show me it from the Bible.

[Phoenix]

Wow, Christian--I really wish you would learn to use the quote bubble---seriously, it is not hard.

Good to know I am not the only one who has been wishing that.

[Apologette]

Actually you don't. You can believe anything you want to--but taking it from someone who has studied it, studied its history, lived it, and received a witness to it--you really don't understand anything at all. You speak in mean, vicious and hateful ways of something you do not understand. It would be the equivalent of a KKK member speaking of blacks in the early 20th century. History is and will continue to prove you wrong.
Well, lady, actually I do - and my specialty is Mormon history. If you find something that I post which you believe is untrue, prove it is untrue.

[BigJulie]

Well, lady, actually I do - and my specialty is Mormon history. If you find something that I post which you believe is untrue, prove it is untrue. If you make the accusation, then the one who needs to provide the proof is you.

[Christian]

Julie posted:

Wow, Christian--I really wish you would learn to use the quote bubble---seriously, it is not hard.

I have used it with YOU regularly, it's not hard to see. I choose to use a different COLOR when it is not needed.

Please don't pretend to know my heart, understand my beliefs, or accuse me of not knowing the Holy Spirit. You just have no way of knowing me in such a way.

Pointing out that when your 'holy spirit' contradicts what GOD has said in HIS WORD, THE BIBLE, then the 'spirit' you seem to know is NOT the Holy Spirit of GOD at all, but an EVIL spirit instead, masquerading as the Holy Spirit.



Please, show me where it states that Christ created angels.

John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
NKJV

WHAT part of 'ALL' do you not understand?

John 1:14
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

The Word is obviously JESUS Who became flesh and dwelt among us etc.



You never answered my question about Cain and Abel.

I don't remember ever seeing a question about Cain and Abel. Did it have to do with this conversation?

Actually, it is easy to read up on the history of the Trinity and where it came from and how it was decided upon.

It's easy to read upon the history of joe smith and what HE was like from the same sources. Do you wish to accept BOTH 'histories' as being truth?


The Father is God
Jesus is God
the Holy Spirit is God
and
There is only one real God ANYWHERE, EVER
Thus
The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are ONE GOD
and other 'gods' are false gods

Will you show me the exact verse that says exactly what you just posted

That's NOT EXACTLY what I posted, but then the window I am in won't let me cut and paste what I DID post. I KNOW YOU DON"T believe what the Bible says:

The Father is God: Matthew 22:32 (DO YOU CARE TO DENY THAT IS TRUE?)
Jesus is God: Colossians 2:9 (Do you care to DENY THAT IS TRUE EITHER?)
Holy Spirit is God: Acts 5:3-4 (Wanna DENY THAT IS TRUE EITHER?)
There is only ONE real God ANYWHERE EVER: Isaiah 43:10, 44:6 44:8 etc etc
Mark 12:32-33


32 So the scribe said to Him, "Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God, and there is no other but He.
NKJV
(Wanna deny THAT one?)
That they are ONE GOD is a logical conclusion.
It is also SCRIPTURAL: 1 John 5:7


The trinity concept is not found in the Bible--anywhere.

Your claim is proven wrong by the scriptures above.

My belief about God is consistent with what is taught in the Bible. Your trinity definition is not Bibically based and never has been. As such, you cannot show me it from the Bible.

Except I just did. Sorry if you don't understand it.

1 Cor 2:14
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
NKJV

The TRUE nature of God does seem foolish to you. . .:(

[BigJulie]

Julie posted:

Wow, Christian--I really wish you would learn to use the quote bubble---seriously, it is not hard.

I have used it with YOU regularly, it's not hard to see. I choose to use a different COLOR when it is not needed. Well, if you know how to use the quotes and continue to not do so even when asked--well, I am not sure why not? By using color instead of quotes, it makes it really hard to respond to your comments.



Pointing out that when your 'holy spirit' contradicts what GOD has said in HIS WORD, THE BIBLE, then the 'spirit' you seem to know is NOT the Holy Spirit of GOD at all, but an EVIL spirit instead, masquerading as the Holy Spirit. I disagree with your interpretation of the Bible. I believe it is you who are being fooled.




Please, show me where it states that Christ created angels.

John 1:1-5
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
NKJV

WHAT part of 'ALL' do you not understand? I have no problem with the word "all"--I read, "through" him, to be different than by him. To me, this scripture makes it clear that it is because of Christ that we can be or in other words, without the atonement, nothing can be.



I don't remember ever seeing a question about Cain and Abel. Did it have to do with this conversation? If you remember nothing of my question of Cain and Abel, you are not reading my posts thoroughly.


Actually, it is easy to read up on the history of the Trinity and where it came from and how it was decided upon.

It's easy to read upon the history of joe smith and what HE was like from the same sources. Do you wish to accept BOTH 'histories' as being truth? Same sources? Hardly. If you read up on peer-reviewed historical work, you would not be posting as you do. You get your "history" from the National Inquirer of histories.




[
COLOR=#0000ff]That's NOT EXACTLY what I posted, but then the window I am in won't let me cut and paste what I DID post. I KNOW YOU DON"T believe what the Bible says:

The Father is God: Matthew 22:32 (DO YOU CARE TO DENY THAT IS TRUE?)
Jesus is God: Colossians 2:9 (Do you care to DENY THAT IS TRUE EITHER?)
Holy Spirit is God: Acts 5:3-4 (Wanna DENY THAT IS TRUE EITHER?)
There is only ONE real God ANYWHERE EVER: Isaiah 43:10, 44:6 44:8 etc etc
[/COLOR]Mark 12:32-33

Your stretching with Acts 5:3-5. and I agree there is one God---but unlike you who believe this is 3 personages who encomp*** indescribable thing--I see God as three beings, who are one in purpose. Not unlike being one flesh with your spouse. Or our being one with God when we follow Him.





32 So the scribe said to Him, "Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God, and there is no other but He.
NKJV
(Wanna deny THAT one?)
That they are ONE GOD is a logical conclusion.
It is also SCRIPTURAL: 1 John 5:7

See above.



The trinity concept is not found in the Bible--anywhere.

Your claim is proven wrong by the scriptures above. The Bible does not describe the trinity. It says that God is one, but it does not describe it as you describe it.


My belief about God is consistent with what is taught in the Bible. Your trinity definition is not Bibically based and never has been. As such, you cannot show me it from the Bible.

Except I just did. Sorry if you don't understand it. Please show me where you get this "being of one substance with the Father"


1 Cor 2:14
14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
NKJV--you think I am foolish--correct?


The TRUE nature of God does seem foolish to you. . .:([/QUOTE]

1Co 1 ¶
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:


But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;


And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are

[Apologette]

If you believe the revelations given to Joseph Smith, you are a follower of Jesus Christ by definition.

Now to get to your question of why I think Christians have a messy history:

1. First apostles are all killed off (except John).

2. From the murder of Peter, popes were being murdered off at rapid rates.

3. 300 years later (more time between now and when the Cons***ution was written) Christianity was being influenced by politics. The definition of God was defined by a minority rule in which anyone who disagreed was killed off.

4. 1296, Pope Celestine V was murdered by his successor (Pope Boniface VIII)

5. 1546, By Martin Luther, the church had become so corrupt that Luther spoke out against it and was later excommunicated. Wars begin to erupt between Catholic church and those who disagree.

6. In the early 1500's, King Henry VIII, in order to have the wife of his choice, gave up the Catholic church and began the church of England. The people were happy because they were tired of paying money to a corrupt church. Henry VIII, who had his next wives beheaded is now the head of the Church of England.

7. At this point, Catholics and Protestants are in full on war--those in power killing off or exiling those who did not agree with them.

8. People flee to America for religion freedom in the north and to spread the Catholic church in the Southern Hemisphere.

9. 1692, Early on in the establishment of "christianity" in America, we get the Salem witch trials.

10. Christians in the South fight for slave rights. (In fact, the largest slave trade in history was created by Europe's Christians.)

I sure hope you don't think this history is part of your history and has not influenced your traditions or religious thought.

Denominational histories don't reflect the source of Christianity, which is the Incarnation, and God's Word. Mormons reject the Incarnation, and thus, reject Christ. Mormons teach there are many gods and goddesses spread throughout the universe, and the god you worship is just one of billions of gods. Who was the first "god" of Mormonism? Nobody seems to know...and, in fact, Joseph Smith, is more important within the Mormon system than Jesus Christ.

[BigJulie]

Denominational histories don't reflect the source of Christianity, which is the Incarnation, and God's Word.


Denominational histories do reflect the traditions and beliefs of Christianity. If you don't understand that, you are kidding yourself.

[MickeyS]

Denominational histories don't reflect the source of Christianity, which is the Incarnation, and God's Word.

Wait a minute....so what you're saying is if thousands of known "Christians" do anything wrong throughout history, they weren't really "Christian", and it shouldn't reflect upon "Christianity" but any one "Mormon" who does something wrong (or even appears to do anything "wrong") reflects poorly on the LDS church in it's entirety? Ohmygosh C, you are pure entertainment :D

[Phoenix]

Wait a minute....so what you're saying is if thousands of known "Christians" do anything wrong throughout history, they weren't really "Christian", and it shouldn't reflect upon "Christianity" but any one "Mormon" who does something wrong (or even appears to do anything "wrong") reflects poorly on the LDS church in it's entirety? D
You have figured out how their hypocrisy works. It is like how super-liberals won't admit that it was people of their mindset that did some really bad things to many people , in the name of socialism, but they will point to one rare incident caused by one "right winger" and say "see? This is what conservatism does to people."

[Apologette]

Apologette,your understanding of my beliefs is the equivalent of reading the National Inquirer and thinking you have a handle on where Elvis Presley currently lives. It is humorous, if nothing else.

Did or did not Joey Smith teach that "heavenly father" was raised on a planet much like our own? Yes or no will do.

[Apologette]

You have figured out how their hypocrisy works. It is like how super-liberals won't admit that it was people of their mindset that did some really bad things to many people , in the name of socialism, but they will point to one rare incident caused by one "right winger" and say "see? This is what conservatism does to people."

Isn't your suspension over yet?

[Apologette]

Denominational histories do reflect the traditions and beliefs of Christianity. If you don't understand that, you are kidding yourself.

You certainly are no scholarly authority in Church history, that's for sure.

[MickeyS]

You certainly are no scholarly authority in Church history, that's for sure.

How long is your suspension this time Catherine?

[BigJulie]

You certainly are no scholarly authority in Church history, that's for sure.

It is naive to think that your views of doctrine are without their traditional backgrounds. Here is one site which talks about when the Holy Spirit became distinguished from the Holy Ghost and when:

http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/spirit/spirit-to-ghost.html

This page starts with this line: "During the Middle Ages, Christian translators created a way to make the English Bible reflect their belief that the Holy Ghost was not the Holy Spirit."

I think if you spent as much time studying your own history, you would be surprised what you find.

[Phoenix]

http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/spirit/spirit-to-ghost.html

This page starts with this line: "During the Middle Ages, Christian translators created a way to make the English Bible reflect their belief that the Holy Ghost was not the Holy Spirit."

that is quite interesting - thanks for making us aware of it.