https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4JlJaD2fks
Printable View
mostly what I see true in the actions of Smith and the reason he did the things he did was.....sex.
Thats about it....mostly just the sex was his main concern with his teachings....sex and power and money to be sure..
But when you read of how he would try to jump from bed to bed with different young girls, and how he was sniffing around the wives of the men he sent out of town on a 'mission", when you read that even at the end when he was on the run from the people who were out to kill him, even then as he took shelter in the homes of his most trusted followers, even THEN he would chase after the young daughters who also lived there.
Yes, I can see why you would believe it was about sex. Or as Jesus Christ stated: "And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant" Luk 19:22Quote:
mostly what I see true in the actions of Smith and the reason he did the things he did was.....sex.
Thats about it....mostly just the sex was his main concern with his teachings....sex and power and money to be sure..
But when you read of how he would try to jump from bed to bed with different young girls, and how he was sniffing around the wives of the men he sent out of town on a 'mission", when you read that even at the end when he was on the run from the people who were out to kill him, even then as he took shelter in the homes of his most trusted followers, even THEN he would chase after the young daughters who also lived there.
The one thing I come to understand about men is that they way that they see Joseph Smith tells me a LOT about how they see women. Marriage to them is about sex, not love, not protection, not responsibility. Therefore, if Joseph Smith married more than one woman, it must because he wanted sex. Because in YOUR eyes, this is what women and marriage must be for.
On the other hand, Christ also states "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." Mat 7:18
And here is the proof of the revelations given to Joseph Smith regarding marriage--my husband, my son, my son-in-law--each treat their wife well. Their belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ as restored by Joseph Smith has turned their hearts from lustful beings into men who honor their wives and marriage.
I liked your observation about how men see Joseph Smith and marriage. I think there is truth in that.
BTW your inbox is full.
How does that verse apply to what molstad said? How was he being a wicked servant by making an observation about the proclivities of a man who claimed to be a messenger of God? Since we know Smith's sexual activity and pedophilia traits, Molstad is not the one being wicked and how could Smith lead a church given the verses in both ***us and Timothy which state that overseers are to be the husband of one wife?Quote:
Or as Jesus Christ stated: "And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant" Luk 19:22
There is no biblical instruction for church leaders to live as the patriarchs lived and have multiple wives, including female children.
Your interpretation certainly does not make what you say as true and mislabels men who make the same observation yet do not view women and marriage as you describe.Quote:
The one thing I come to understand about men is that they way that they see Joseph Smith tells me a LOT about how they see women. Marriage to them is about sex, not love, not protection, not responsibility. Therefore, if Joseph Smith married more than one woman, it must because he wanted sex. Because in YOUR eyes, this is what women and marriage must be for.
You keep bringing this verse but do not provide any evidence that Smith was producing good fruit. He was killed because of his sins not because he was holy and producing good fruit.Quote:
On the other hand, Christ also states "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." Mat 7:18
This isn't proof as many mormon men had multiple wives including Brigham Young. The idea of polygamy was dropped even though Smith said it was a command of God to have more than one wife when it was revealed that Utah would not receive statehood if they continued to believe and practice polygamy. It wasn't a holy change of a divine mind but the greed and selfish desire to be part of a secular nation that drove the Mormon church to give up one if its supposed divine commands.Quote:
And here is the proof of the revelations given to Joseph Smith regarding marriage--my husband, my son, my son-in-law--each treat their wife well. Their belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ as restored by Joseph Smith has turned their hearts from lustful beings into men who honor their wives and marriage.
Christ's statement speaks to the truth that those who are wicked jump to believing that others are wicked or motivated by wickedness. In terms of psychology, it is called projection.Quote:
How does that verse apply to what molstad said? How was he being a wicked servant by making an observation about the proclivities of a man who claimed to be a messenger of God? Since we know Smith's sexual activity and pedophilia traits, Molstad is not the one being wicked and how could Smith lead a church given the verses in both ***us and Timothy which state that overseers are to be the husband of one wife?
What Biblical patriarchs are you referring to? Abraham, Jacob? Do you believe that Abraham would have multiple wives if God told him NOT to?Quote:
There is no biblical instruction for church leaders to live as the patriarchs lived and have multiple wives, including female children.
I have yet to experience otherwise. A man who views marriage as honorable which includes the responsibility to wife and children tend to jump more to the responsibility, not the sex side. It speaks to where a man's brain in when he thinks of marriage and women.Quote:
Your interpretation certainly does not make what you say as true and mislabels men who make the same observation yet do not view women and marriage as you describe.
The fruit is my husband, my son, my son-in-law and other men I know who live the gospel as revealed by Joseph Smith. You seem to think that fruit is only produced by a person, rather than the offshoots of what that person taught.Quote:
You keep bringing this verse but do not provide any evidence that Smith was producing good fruit. He was killed because of his sins not because he was holy and producing good fruit.
Certainly, you would not require this same "proof" from Christ. Although the Pharisees called him wicked and murdered him for it, would you deny the "good fruit" of the lives today by those who believe in and follow Jesus Christ?
It is proof because my husband and I believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet. I also have many ancestors who did practice polygamy. I know what type of people they were and what type of children they had. You think this not fruit? This is exactly the fruit of the revelations given to Joseph Smith which include the sanc***y of marriage, the eternal nature of marriage, the eternal nature of family and of children. While Alan only sees sex, what the fruit of this teaching is a man who loves and honors his wife. No other church that I know of teaches the sanc***y of family and its special place to God like Mormonism does. This makes us unique. This is one of the most beautiful understandings of who we are and who we are to God. Alan sees sex. We see family, unity, eternity, creation.Quote:
This isn't proof as many mormon men had multiple wives including Brigham Young. The idea of polygamy was dropped even though Smith said it was a command of God to have more than one wife when it was revealed that Utah would not receive statehood if they continued to believe and practice polygamy. It wasn't a holy change of a divine mind but the greed and selfish desire to be part of a secular nation that drove the Mormon church to give up one if its supposed divine commands.
So yes, what Alan states specifically speaks to his mindset and how he views women.
I have read julie's post but will only respond to select points as most of her words are just pure foolishness.
The bible records many different biblical figures as having multiple wives at the same time but there is no verse providing God's approval or permission for this behavior.
Belief is not proof that something is true and of God. It is evidence that someone has accepted the words of another person.
The question that needs to be answered is-- who died and left julie in charge of the meanings and intent of other people's words? Going to the sex issue does not provide any evidence that the person providing the critique has a bad view of marriage.
1Co 2:14Quote:
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
And yet these are the "patriarchs" that he identifies Himself with. He calls himself "Quote:
The bible records many different biblical figures as having multiple wives at the same time but there is no verse providing God's approval or permission for this behavior.
I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." Mat 22:32
If He is their God and their ruler, if he did not condone polygamy, they would NOT have lived it.
[/QUOTE]Quote:
The question that needs to be answered is-- who died and left julie in charge of the meanings and intent of other people's words? Going to the sex issue does not provide any evidence that the person providing the critique has a bad view of marriage.
Yes, I completely agree--who died and put you or Alan or anyone else in charge of the "intent".
Jumping right to sex when a person is a polygamist speaks to the persons mindset. If polygamy equates to only being a pervert for sex, then the same thing should be said about the patriarchs who clearly had multiple wives.
1Co 2:14Quote:
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
And yet these are the "patriarchs" that he identifies Himself with. He calls himself "Quote:
The bible records many different biblical figures as having multiple wives at the same time but there is no verse providing God's approval or permission for this behavior.
I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living." Mat 22:32
If He is their God and their ruler, if he did not condone polygamy, they would NOT have lived it.
Yes, I completely agree--who died and put you or Alan or anyone else in charge of the "intent".Quote:
The question that needs to be answered is-- who died and left julie in charge of the meanings and intent of other people's words? Going to the sex issue does not provide any evidence that the person providing the critique has a bad view of marriage.
Jumping right to sex when a person is a polygamist speaks to the persons mindset. If polygamy equates to only being a pervert for sex, then the same thing should be said about the patriarchs who clearly had multiple wives.
but you and the mormon cult do not have the things of the spirit of God. There is no biblical foundation to have more 'scripture' along with the Bible. The Bible doe snot speak of another prophet coming to restore the original faith and why would God wait 1800 years to do that? Seems unfair that he would allow so many people die without knowing 'the truth' and being able to do something about it.Quote:
1Co 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned
postmordem (sp) baptism is not biblically based nor taught by Jesus or the disciples, nor is salvation after death.
Really, so Abraham did not lie to the Pharaoh? David did not commit adultery and murder?Quote:
If He is their God and their ruler, if he did not condone polygamy, they would NOT have lived it.
Who said we jumped right to the sex? That is your idea placed upon our words and research which you know nothing about. Your dismissal of ****ysis by others is one of your flaws.Quote:
Jumping right to sex when a person is a polygamist speaks to the persons mindset
Can't speak for molstad but I examine the evidence and the evidence shows that Smith had no regard for real marriage, no sanc***y of it or whatever you want to label it. you live in a dream world thinking that your prophet can do no wrong yet was killed for doing wrong not for being a light to a dark world.Quote:
Yes, I completely agree--who died and put you or Alan or anyone else in charge of the "intent".
That and the fact that no ancient m****cript attests to the existence of this supposed true religious belief or that anyone followed it if it did exist. Since the book of Mormon has zero archaeological evidence to support one iota of its words, Smith's marriage antics fall into the same category as all his other deeds--sinful desire which means he wanted lots of sex.
but you and the mormon cult do not have the things of the spirit of God. There is no biblical foundation to have more 'scripture' along with the Bible. The Bible doe snot speak of another prophet coming to restore the original faith and why would God wait 1800 years to do that? Seems unfair that he would allow so many people die without knowing 'the truth' and being able to do something about it.Quote:
1Co 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned
postmordem (sp) baptism is not biblically based nor taught by Jesus or the disciples, nor is salvation after death.
Really, so Abraham did not lie to the Pharaoh? David did not commit adultery and murder?Quote:
If He is their God and their ruler, if he did not condone polygamy, they would NOT have lived it.
Who said we jumped right to the sex? That is your idea placed upon our words and research which you know nothing about. Your dismissal of ****ysis by others is one of your flaws.Quote:
Jumping right to sex when a person is a polygamist speaks to the persons mindset
Can't speak for molstad but I examine the evidence and the evidence shows that Smith had no regard for real marriage, no sanc***y of it or whatever you want to label it. you live in a dream world thinking that your prophet can do no wrong yet was killed for doing wrong not for being a light to a dark world.Quote:
Yes, I completely agree--who died and put you or Alan or anyone else in charge of the "intent".
That and the fact that no ancient m****cript attests to the existence of this supposed true religious belief or that anyone followed it if it did exist. Since the book of Mormon has zero archaeological evidence to support one iota of its words, Smith's marriage antics fall into the same category as all his other deeds--sinful desire which means he wanted lots of sex.
Thank you. If one wants to declare something to be good or bad fruit, they need to look at more than what they want to see. In Julie's case she stops at a limited view of marriage and condemns everyone else for their views even though she has not provided a credible standard that defines her idea of what is good or bad fruit. She quotes the Bible using those terms but she is NOT using God's definitions. She uses her own which is not accepted by anyone but herself.
That is not establishing anything credible, legitimate or even evidence for defining Smith as good fruit. She also ignores all his sins and not once do we see Smith repenting of those sins. Where are the accounts of his being born again and a new creature in Christ. There are none. All we have is that the angel moroni appeared to him as he was in his sinful state. Why would God appear or send an angel to an unrepentant person to do his holy work?
double post
Or we do have the things of the Spirit of God and you just do not recognize it just as you do not recognize the prophecies in the Bible concerning the restoration. This is not unlike the Pharisees dismissing Christ and not recognizing what they had learned.Quote:
but you and the mormon cult do not have the things of the spirit of God. There is no biblical foundation to have more 'scripture' along with the Bible. The Bible doe snot speak of another prophet coming to restore the original faith and why would God wait 1800 years to do that? Seems unfair that he would allow so many people die without knowing 'the truth' and being able to do something about it.
What? Yes is does.Quote:
postmordem (sp) baptism is not biblically based nor taught by Jesus or the disciples, nor is salvation after death.
Well, I did not bring up David, but he did sin and he recognized it. Show me that Abraham recognized polygamy as a sin. I don't see it.Quote:
Really, so Abraham did not lie to the Pharaoh? David did not commit adultery and murder?
Alan does. Read the beginning of this thread. You were the one who jumped in to defend him. I know about the research. I know Joseph Smith's history--both sides. And any researcher worth their salt can give both sides. Your dismissal of the other side is one of your major flaws.Quote:
Who said we jumped right to the sex? That is your idea placed upon our words and research which you know nothing about. Your dismissal of ****ysis by others is one of your flaws.
No true. I don't live in a dream world believing that Joseph Smith was perfect--in fact, one of the first commandments Joseph Smith received was to repent---and it is in our scriptures. But you don't know that because all you have is one-sided propagandized "research"--if you want to call it that.Quote:
Can't speak for molstad but I examine the evidence and the evidence shows that Smith had no regard for real marriage, no sanc***y of it or whatever you want to label it. you live in a dream world thinking that your prophet can do no wrong yet was killed for doing wrong not for being a light to a dark world.
And anyone who wants to see what Joseph Smith taught about marriage can look at our church today.
Oh my--is your faith based on archaeological evidence? I am surprised you believe the Bible then as there is "archaeological" evidence that man is much older than the Bible states. I didn't know your beliefs are based on science--and here I thought you said the Bible is your authority and that God is somehow dead in this equation and no longer teaches his people nor has prophets. Now you tell me not even the Bible is your authority. Sheesh--can't keep up with your changing of the goal posts.Quote:
That and the fact that no ancient m****cript attests to the existence of this supposed true religious belief or that anyone followed it if it did exist. Since the book of Mormon has zero archaeological evidence to support one iota of its words, Smith's marriage antics fall into the same category as all his other deeds--sinful desire which means he wanted lots of sex.
talking to julie is a waste of time. she doesn't understand anything.
As I stated, those questions make no sense and are incoherent. Rewrite them and fix those problems and you will get an answer
Here they are again---straight from the scriptures:Quote:
You can just refer to the scriptures then and explain what they mean.
Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. (Now, I have heard a lot of discussion why they are called "gods", but no one has explained why they are called "children of the Most High."
And
Mat 25:21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. In this parable, what "many things" will this person be ruler over when he enters in the joy of the Lord?
Here they are again---straight from the scriptures:Quote:
You can just refer to the scriptures then and explain what they mean.
Psalms 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. (Now, I have heard a lot of discussion why they are called "gods", but no one has explained why they are called "children of the Most High."
And
Mat 25:21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. In this parable, what "many things" will this person be ruler over when he enters in the joy of the Lord?
bump for DrDavidT
i won't cast pearls before swine but one thing is for sure, you do not know the context of the p***age and apply your own definition to the word 'gods'. Your misunderstanding of 'children of the most high' is understandable because you do not realize how those words are applied and that they may not reference those who are saved but are part of God's creation.
as for 'many things' that is up to Jesus to determine not me. it does not mean people will be made gods of their own planets. There is NO biblical teaching to support that idea and Smith included it in his heresy because he knew men loved power and control over others thus it was a tool of enticement not a word of truth.
Quote:
but you and the mormon cult do not have the things of the spirit of God. There is no biblical foundation to have more 'scripture' along with the Bible. The Bible doe snot speak of another prophet coming to restore the original faith and why would God wait 1800 years to do that? Seems unfair that he would allow so many people die without knowing 'the truth' and being able to do something about it.
postmordem (sp) baptism is not biblically based nor taught by Jesus or the disciples, nor is salvation after death.
Really, so Abraham did not lie to the Pharaoh? David did not commit adultery and murder?
Who said we jumped right to the sex? That is your idea placed upon our words and research which you know nothing about. Your dismissal of ****ysis by others is one of your flaws.
Can't speak for molstad but I examine the evidence and the evidence shows that Smith had no regard for real marriage, no sanc***y of it or whatever you want to label it. you live in a dream world thinking that your prophet can do no wrong yet was killed for doing wrong not for being a light to a dark world.
That and the fact that no ancient m****cript attests to the existence of this supposed true religious belief or that anyone followed it if it did exist. Since the book of Mormon has zero archaeological evidence to support one iota of its words, Smith's marriage antics fall into the same category as all his other deeds--sinful desire which means he wanted lots of sex.
She has no answers about any of this because SCRIPTURAL ignorance and selective readings are the signature trademark of the mormon religion.
She is the 'natural man' referred to in 1 Corinthians 2:14 as are all 'true blue mormons.' :(
'big' posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDavidT
but you and the mormon cult do not have the things of the spirit of God. There is no biblical foundation to have more 'scripture' along with the Bible. The Bible doe snot speak of another prophet coming to restore the original faith and why would God wait 1800 years to do that? Seems unfair that he would allow so many people die without knowing 'the truth' and being able to do something about it.
Or we do have the things of the Spirit of God and you just do not recognize it just as you do not recognize the prophecies in the Bible concerning the restoration. This is not unlike the Pharisees dismissing Christ and not recognizing what they had learned
Since there ARE NO SUCH 'prophecies in the Bible concerning any 'restoration of Christ's church, or its being 'lost,' or 'destroyed,' your fantasy is simply based on the lying words of the liar joe smith.
What? Yes is does.Quote:
postmordem (sp) baptism is not biblically based nor taught by Jesus or the disciples, nor is salvation after death.
IF THE BIBLE SAID ANY SUCH THING, you would be able to PRODUCE THE P***AGES THAT SAY SO. You cannot find ONE SINGLE P***AGE IN THE WHOLE BIBLE where EVEN ONE CHRISTIAN EVER 'baptized' EVEN ONE PERSON WHO HAD DIED. Your fantasy is simply based on the lying words of the liar joe smith.
Well, I did not bring up David, but he did sin and he recognized it. Show me that Abraham recognized polygamy as a sin. I don't see it.Quote:
Really, so Abraham did not lie to the Pharaoh? David did not commit adultery and murder?
YOUR CLAIM WAS that people who sinned couldn't be 'God's People.' DrDavid just showed you to be WRONG.
Alan does. Read the beginning of this thread. You were the one who jumped in to defend him. I know about the research. I know Joseph Smith's history--both sides. And any researcher worth their salt can give both sides. Your dismissal of the other side is one of your major flaws.Quote:
Who said we jumped right to the sex? That is your idea placed upon our words and research which you know nothing about. Your dismissal of ****ysis by others is one of your flaws.
Let's see now. . .the HISTORICAL 'side' says that joe smith was a letch.
The WHITEWASHED MORMON 'side' (with it's VESTED INTEREST in making joe smith socially acceptable) says not.
Hmmmm. . .WHICH SIDE should we REASONABLY BELIEVE?
Lunch with wifey calls; I will head to her place of business to have lunch with her.
In other words, you have no understanding--but only can continue to criticize my beliefs. Okay.Quote:
i won't cast pearls before swine but one thing is for sure, you do not know the context of the p***age and apply your own definition to the word 'gods'. Your misunderstanding of 'children of the most high' is understandable because you do not realize how those words are applied and that they may not reference those who are saved but are part of God's creation.
as for 'many things' that is up to Jesus to determine not me. it does not mean people will be made gods of their own planets. There is NO biblical teaching to support that idea and Smith included it in his heresy because he knew men loved power and control over others thus it was a tool of enticement not a word of truth.
wrong. it means that you only use those scripture p***ages that are supposedly general enough to read your own Mormon ideas into then you feel justified in believing the deceptive words of the Mormon cult
Could you explain God's testimony of Abraham--who was polygamous?Quote:
Genesis 26:4-5---King James Version (KJV)
4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.
Just a note here, David--most all the Early Church Fathers taught men may become gods:Quote:
i won't cast pearls before swine but one thing is for sure, you do not know the context of the p***age and apply your own definition to the word 'gods'. Your misunderstanding of 'children of the most high' is understandable because you do not realize how those words are applied and that they may not reference those who are saved but are part of God's creation.
as for 'many things' that is up to Jesus to determine not me. it does not mean people will be made gods of their own planets. There is NO biblical teaching to support that idea and Smith included it in his heresy because he knew men loved power and control over others thus it was a tool of enticement not a word of truth.
Justin - Dial. 124 ...thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming "gods", and of having power to become sons of the Highest. (ANF 1.262).
Justin - Discourse To The Greeks 5 The Word exercises an influence which does not make poets: it does not equip philosophers nor skilled orators, but by its instruction it makes mortals immortal, mortals god. (ANF 1.272)
Irenaeus - Adv. Her. 5.Pref ...the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself. (ANF 1.526).
Tertullian - Adv. Hermogenes 5 Well, then, you say, we ourselves possess nothing of God. But indeed we do, and shall continue to do—only it is from Him that we receive it, and not from ourselves. For we shall be even gods, if we shall deserve to be among those of whom He declared, "I have said, Ye are gods," and "God standeth in the congregation of the gods." But this comes of His own grace, not from any property in us, because it is He alone who can make gods. (ANF 3.480).
Clement of Alexandria - Exhortation 1 ...the Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God. (ANF 2.174).
Clement of Alexandria - Strom. 7.10 ...they are called by the appellation of gods, being destined to sit on thrones with the other gods that have been first put in their places by the Saviour. (ANF 2.539).
Origen - Comm. on John 2.2,3 ...the Savior says in His prayer to the Father, "That they may know Thee the only true God;" but that all beyond the Very God is made God by participation in His divinity...And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with God, and to attract to Himself divinity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other gods beside Him, of whom God is the God, as it is written, "The God of gods, the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth." It was by the offices of the first-born that they became gods, for He drew from God in generous measure that they should be made gods, and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true God, then, is "The God", and those who are formed after Him are gods, images, as it were of Him the prototype. ...Now it is possible that some may dislike what we have said representing the Father as the one true God, but admitting other beings besides the true God, who have become gods by having a share of God. They may fear that the glory of Him who surp***es all creation may be lowered to the level of those other beings called gods. We drew this distinction between Him and them that we showed God the Word to be to all the other gods the minister of their divinity. (ANF 10.323).
Athanasius - De Incarnation 54 For He was made man that we might be made God. (NPNF, second series, 4.65).
Augustine - Sermon 81 But in order to lift them out of these iniquities, to redeem, to cure, to heal, to change the sons of men, he gave them the power and right to become sons of God. So what’s so surprising about this text? You were men, if you were sons of men; you were all liars, because every man is a liar. The grace of God came to you, it gave you the power and right to become sons of God. Listen to the voice of my Father saying, I said you are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High (Ps. 82:6). Because you are sons of men, you are liars, if you are not sons of the Most High, because every man is a liar. If you are sons of God, if redeemed by the grace of the Savior, if bought by his precious blood, if born again by water and the Spirit, if predestined to the heavenly inheritance, then of you are sons of God. Son you are already gods. (The Works of Saint Augustine - Part III - Sermons, vol. 3, p. 363.)
Anyone who has been to the capital building in Washington DC would realize this as well. The painting --"The Apotheosis of Washington depicts George Washington sitting amongst the heavens in an exalted manner, or in literal terms, ascending and becoming a god (apotheosis)." I remember seeing it when I was there and enjoying the fact that it is in the very core of our history.Quote:
Just a note here, David--most all the Early Church Fathers taught men may become gods:
Justin - Dial. 124 ...thereby it is demonstrated that all men are deemed worthy of becoming "gods", and of having power to become sons of the Highest. (ANF 1.262).
Justin - Discourse To The Greeks 5 The Word exercises an influence which does not make poets: it does not equip philosophers nor skilled orators, but by its instruction it makes mortals immortal, mortals god. (ANF 1.272)
Irenaeus - Adv. Her. 5.Pref ...the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, who did, through His transcendent love, become what we are, that He might bring us to be even what He is Himself. (ANF 1.526).
Tertullian - Adv. Hermogenes 5 Well, then, you say, we ourselves possess nothing of God. But indeed we do, and shall continue to do—only it is from Him that we receive it, and not from ourselves. For we shall be even gods, if we shall deserve to be among those of whom He declared, "I have said, Ye are gods," and "God standeth in the congregation of the gods." But this comes of His own grace, not from any property in us, because it is He alone who can make gods. (ANF 3.480).
Clement of Alexandria - Exhortation 1 ...the Word of God became man, that thou mayest learn from man how man may become God. (ANF 2.174).
Clement of Alexandria - Strom. 7.10 ...they are called by the appellation of gods, being destined to sit on thrones with the other gods that have been first put in their places by the Saviour. (ANF 2.539).
Origen - Comm. on John 2.2,3 ...the Savior says in His prayer to the Father, "That they may know Thee the only true God;" but that all beyond the Very God is made God by participation in His divinity...And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with God, and to attract to Himself divinity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other gods beside Him, of whom God is the God, as it is written, "The God of gods, the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth." It was by the offices of the first-born that they became gods, for He drew from God in generous measure that they should be made gods, and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true God, then, is "The God", and those who are formed after Him are gods, images, as it were of Him the prototype. ...Now it is possible that some may dislike what we have said representing the Father as the one true God, but admitting other beings besides the true God, who have become gods by having a share of God. They may fear that the glory of Him who surp***es all creation may be lowered to the level of those other beings called gods. We drew this distinction between Him and them that we showed God the Word to be to all the other gods the minister of their divinity. (ANF 10.323).
Athanasius - De Incarnation 54 For He was made man that we might be made God. (NPNF, second series, 4.65).
Augustine - Sermon 81 But in order to lift them out of these iniquities, to redeem, to cure, to heal, to change the sons of men, he gave them the power and right to become sons of God. So what’s so surprising about this text? You were men, if you were sons of men; you were all liars, because every man is a liar. The grace of God came to you, it gave you the power and right to become sons of God. Listen to the voice of my Father saying, I said you are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High (Ps. 82:6). Because you are sons of men, you are liars, if you are not sons of the Most High, because every man is a liar. If you are sons of God, if redeemed by the grace of the Savior, if bought by his precious blood, if born again by water and the Spirit, if predestined to the heavenly inheritance, then of you are sons of God. Son you are already gods. (The Works of Saint Augustine - Part III - Sermons, vol. 3, p. 363.)
Really? Chapter and verse please that states he married more than one woman at one time. I know that he married AFTER Sarah died, (Gen. 25) something that is okay. He never married Hagar So you need to prove he was polygamous.Quote:
Could you explain God's testimony of Abraham--who was polygamous?
Where is it written that the church fathers always taught the truth, were inspired by God and wrote scriptures? Sorry but an ancient writer's opinion is just the same as that of a modern writer's. Their being 'church fathers' does not bestow upon them any divine status and they can be in error.Quote:
ust a note here, David--most all the Early Church Fathers taught men may become gods:
Also some of your quotes do not teach what you claim.
"Abraham Was NOT a Polygamist
Many people recall at once a few Old Testament instances of plural wives, and ***ume that God sanctioned polygamy. That ***umption is absolutely false! God has never approved, nor made lawful, more than one living wife for any man. Quite the contrary, He FORBADE IT, even to the kings of Israel, and that by written STATUTE!
Abraham was not a polygamist. While Sarah, his wife, lived, he never married any other woman.
Abraham had an illegitimate son by Hagar. But that was an adulterous SIN. Although it renders it nonetheless a SIN, I think we can recognize extenuating circumstances.
Sarah was barren. For a wife in ancient times to go childless was felt to be a disgrace. It was Sarah, Abraham's own wife, who brought to Abraham her servant handmaid, asking him to produce a child for Sarah by this servant woman. We can imagine Hagar to have been attractive, and not necessarily lacking in voluptuous charms simply because she was a servant. That temptation, under these circumstances, at Sarah's instigation, might have been great. Certainly the very invitation coming from Sarah would have made it harder to resist.
Abraham was a strong man. But this temptation appears to have been stronger. All humans have sinned. Abraham was human. Abraham lied when he twice claimed Sarah was his sister, fearing for his own life.
Abraham was not without sin. But neither this adultery, nor the two lies, were sins of the nature that springs from a wrong at***ude of mind or heart. Abraham, in his heart, was always OBEDIENT to GOD. There was no spirit of hostility or rebellion. These sins were of the FLESH, under temptation -- not malicious or rebellious sins of the heart. But they were SINS! God forgave Abraham's sins of spiritual weakness, committed under heavy temptation.
Nevertheless, we all must REAP what we sow -- even though God forgives our sins upon repentance. God refused to approve this adulterous act of Abraham. He rejected the illegitimate son, Ishmael, from the birthright. This transgression produced jealousy between the women. It resulted in trouble, controversy, suffering.
How many realize that even the Arab-Jewish strife over Palestine, today, was brought on by this very THREE-CORNERED TRIANGLE, and the ensuing jealousy of the two women, Sarah and Hagar, over the one man, Abraham? The Jews are the children of Sarah, through Isaac, born later by a miracle. The Arabs are the children of Ishmael.
In Genesis 21:8-21 is the record of Hagar's departure from Sarah and Abraham. God ordered Abraham to send away the concubine Hagar and her son, and Abraham obeyed. This was at the time Isaac was weaned. Abraham had, after this, no more relations with Hagar, or his other concubine, Susanna, who is mentioned in the ancient Austrian Chronicle -- see Genesis 25:6 where you will read that Abraham's concubines' sons were sent away.
Sarah's death is recorded in Genesis 23:1-2. It was after that (Gen. 25), that Abraham married Keturah. This, of course, was a perfectly legal marriage. There was no polygamy -- no divorce.
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are termed, in both Old and New Testaments, "the Fathers." Jesus Christ came to confirm the PROMISES made to "the Fathers." The unconditional promises God made to Abraham were repeated to both Isaac and Jacob."
http://giveshare.org/family/polygamy.html
Please provide proof that God ever called Abraham's relationship with Hagar a sin? Do you ever see him reprimanded for it? Are you aware that Abraham continued his relationship with the sons of Ishmael?Quote:
"Abraham Was NOT a Polygamist
Many people recall at once a few Old Testament instances of plural wives, and ***ume that God sanctioned polygamy. That ***umption is absolutely false! God has never approved, nor made lawful, more than one living wife for any man. Quite the contrary, He FORBADE IT, even to the kings of Israel, and that by written STATUTE!
Abraham was not a polygamist. While Sarah, his wife, lived, he never married any other woman.
Abraham had an illegitimate son by Hagar. But that was an adulterous SIN. Although it renders it nonetheless a SIN, I think we can recognize extenuating circumstances.
Sarah was barren. For a wife in ancient times to go childless was felt to be a disgrace. It was Sarah, Abraham's own wife, who brought to Abraham her servant handmaid, asking him to produce a child for Sarah by this servant woman. We can imagine Hagar to have been attractive, and not necessarily lacking in voluptuous charms simply because she was a servant. That temptation, under these circumstances, at Sarah's instigation, might have been great. Certainly the very invitation coming from Sarah would have made it harder to resist.
Abraham was a strong man. But this temptation appears to have been stronger. All humans have sinned. Abraham was human. Abraham lied when he twice claimed Sarah was his sister, fearing for his own life.
Abraham was not without sin. But neither this adultery, nor the two lies, were sins of the nature that springs from a wrong at***ude of mind or heart. Abraham, in his heart, was always OBEDIENT to GOD. There was no spirit of hostility or rebellion. These sins were of the FLESH, under temptation -- not malicious or rebellious sins of the heart. But they were SINS! God forgave Abraham's sins of spiritual weakness, committed under heavy temptation.
Nevertheless, we all must REAP what we sow -- even though God forgives our sins upon repentance. God refused to approve this adulterous act of Abraham. He rejected the illegitimate son, Ishmael, from the birthright. This transgression produced jealousy between the women. It resulted in trouble, controversy, suffering.
How many realize that even the Arab-Jewish strife over Palestine, today, was brought on by this very THREE-CORNERED TRIANGLE, and the ensuing jealousy of the two women, Sarah and Hagar, over the one man, Abraham? The Jews are the children of Sarah, through Isaac, born later by a miracle. The Arabs are the children of Ishmael.
In Genesis 21:8-21 is the record of Hagar's departure from Sarah and Abraham. God ordered Abraham to send away the concubine Hagar and her son, and Abraham obeyed. This was at the time Isaac was weaned. Abraham had, after this, no more relations with Hagar, or his other concubine, Susanna, who is mentioned in the ancient Austrian Chronicle -- see Genesis 25:6 where you will read that Abraham's concubines' sons were sent away.
Sarah's death is recorded in Genesis 23:1-2. It was after that (Gen. 25), that Abraham married Keturah. This, of course, was a perfectly legal marriage. There was no polygamy -- no divorce.
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are termed, in both Old and New Testaments, "the Fathers." Jesus Christ came to confirm the PROMISES made to "the Fathers." The unconditional promises God made to Abraham were repeated to both Isaac and Jacob."
http://giveshare.org/family/polygamy.html
We then have Jacob (or Israel) which you never addressed in which the 12 tribes of Israel (some of which are from the concubines) are part of the 12 tribes--all now considered "Israelites." Looking just a few chapters ahead, you would find the conclusions you have made here must be wrong based on what happened only two generations later and how God dealt with the children of both the wives and the concubines.
you do not understand anything as you try to use the bible to justify following your own sinful lusts.
you are also arguing from silence which means you have no argument. You do not have any verse where God says it is okay for them to marry multiple wives. you are also missing part of the story where God tells them to follow his commandments, which apply to all people, and where God sets up a sacrifice to receive forgiveness for their sins. how do you know that they did not ask forgiveness for their sins? Why should forgiveness mean that someone makes one of their wives an adulteress or des***ute?
you really have no clue on what scripture teaches.
Are you talking to Alan? He seems to see the Bible from the "sinful lust" perspective.Quote:
you do not understand anything as you try to use the bible to justify following your own sinful lusts.
you are also arguing from silence which means you have no argument. You do not have any verse where God says it is okay for them to marry multiple wives. you are also missing part of the story where God tells them to follow his commandments, which apply to all people, and where God sets up a sacrifice to receive forgiveness for their sins. how do you know that they did not ask forgiveness for their sins? Why should forgiveness mean that someone makes one of their wives an adulteress or des***ute?
you really have no clue on what scripture teaches.
So, let's take a look at what you believe:
1. If the Bible does not have on record of God making a commandment, it must not be commanded.
2. Abraham was commanded to sacrifice to receive a forgiveness of sins.
3. Silence does not make a valid point.
But let's step back a few verses in the Bible:
1. Proof against your belief that "Silence means you have no argument.
Gen 4 And in process of time it came to p***, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
So---based on your conclusion--please show me WHERE in the proceeding versus was Cain and Able told to make offerings to the Lord?
Hence, if they were not commanded, they must have been sinning--but clearly, they were not.
2. Next, why do you believe it was the sacrifice that they offered that allowed them to receive a forgiveness of their sins?
3. How can you ***ert that you cannot make an argument of silence and then go on to argue (from silence) that MAYBE they asked for forgiveness? Clearly, the silence on their lack of asking for forgiveness is more damaging to your belief than the lack of a written word directing them to what they did DO. If this act was so hideous that they needed to make a sacrifice for it, why was it repeated by Jacob? And not only repeated, but the sons of his multiple wives and concubines were recognized by the Lord as HIS people. My argument looks at actions but no words, your argument relies on both silence in words AND in actions.
It is clear why you must end your post with a direct insult to me because your argument of silence alone does more to destroy your own beliefs than mine.
it must be easy to be a mormon. they do not have to tell the truth, they dodge any difficult point they do not want to answer, they make claims without presenting evidence to support those claims, distract from the point and so on.
they also think they know what you believe, that is arrogance
I will just let my sigline do the talkingQuote:
it must be easy to be a mormon. they do not have to tell the truth, they dodge any difficult point they do not want to answer, they make claims without presenting evidence to support those claims, distract from the point and so on.
they also think they know what you believe, that is arrogance
Oh, I suppose that my presenting Genesis 4 is not evidence?Quote:
it must be easy to be a mormon. they do not have to tell the truth, they dodge any difficult point they do not want to answer, they make claims without presenting evidence to support those claims, distract from the point and so on.
they also think they know what you believe, that is arrogance
I suppose that presenting your own argument as proof the fallacy of your argument against my argument is not evidence?
I suppose that you think that only the portion the Bible you want to discuss is evidence and the portion of the Bible I use to refute it is not?
And once again--you must begin and end with a put down, once again showing the weakness of your own argument. *sigh*
From the forum rules: "The definition of a derogatory term is one that insults, belittles or treats a group or individual with contempt. "
"If you have to resort to making fun of people and their ideas, you have nothing valuable to contribute here."
I completely agree.
Proof that you have "insulted, belittled or treats a group of individual with contempt"
Quote:
Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT View Post
it must be easy to be a mormon. they do not have to tell the truth
And these are just on this page. Don't sweat it though. What it tells me is that you really have no argument--just as the sigline indicates.Quote:
Quote Originally Posted by DrDavidT you really have no clue on what scripture teaches.