Is God unable to create in kind?

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by Joshua.Thomas

This process of acquiring a testimony is essential to one’s membership in the Mormon Church. Mormons believe each member has the privilege to know personally what is true. The Spirit of the Lord will testify to individuals, so that they can feel a conviction of the teachings of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Hi Josh.

Thanks for your good input here. What you said is spot on. The Holy Ghost is a second witness--a confirming witness--of what we have come to know is true through study, and pondering the word of God.

This is the essence of a Testimony.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle

Hi Josh.

Thanks for your good input here. What you said is spot on. The Holy Ghost is a second witness--a confirming witness--of what we have come to know is true through study, and pondering the word of God.

This is the essence of a Testimony.

But I have a testimony about truth that conflicts with your testimony. Can both of us have a witness from God about conflicting data?

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

But I have a testimony about truth that conflicts with your testimony. Can both of us have a witness from God about conflicting data?

---Can Moses have a witness from God that it's okay to hit back, yet Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have a witness from God that it's NOT okay to hit back?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Can Moses have a witness from God that it's okay to hit back, yet Matthew, Mark, Luke and John have a witness from God that it's NOT okay to hit back?

Jeff, you are comparing apples to oranges. The old covenant is completely different than the new covenant. LDS say that they are a restoration of the NT church not a revision of the NT church. If you said that the LDS church is a revision of the NT church then yes I could agree with your ****ogy, but that is not what the LDS claims.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Jeff, you are comparing apples to oranges.

---Yes, in a way, probably, but look: You said

"But I have a testimony about truth that conflicts with your testimony. Can both of us have a witness from God about conflicting data?"

To Moses and the other ancient Israelites, if someone had shown up saying "No, God REALLY wants you to turn the other cheek, to go the extra mile, etc." that person would have been executed for being a false prophet. Maybe what YOU think God is telling you, and what the LDS think God is telling them, is a similar situation, where from each side's POV the other is false but it's just because of different perspectives. Or maybe you're just deceived--I guess that's a possibility, too.

The old covenant is completely different than the new covenant.

---You should tell that to your friends who keep prooftexting the Old Covenant's test of a prophet to use against the LDS.

[akaSeerone]

---You should tell that to your friends who keep prooftexting the Old Covenant's test of a prophet to use against the LDS.
That is just another cop out.

You are still comparing apples to oranges and your reply was meaningless or even less than that!

Old Covenant or New Covenant....Smith was no Prophet of God.....prophet of Satan yes, and a self proclaimed profit, but no way a Prophet of God and the Bible bears that out.

You mopologists don't think for yourselves and are stuck in a state of denial.

Andy

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by akaSeerone

---You should tell that to your friends who keep prooftexting the Old Covenant's test of a prophet to use against the LDS.
That is just another cop out.

You are still comparing apples to oranges and your reply was meaningless or even less than that!

Old Covenant or New Covenant....Smith was no Prophet of God.....prophet of Satan yes, and a self proclaimed profit, but no way a Prophet of God and the Bible bears that out.

You mopologists don't think for yourselves and are stuck in a state of denial.

Andy

Hey Andy, remember this thread?

http://www.waltermartin.com/forums/s...near#post49058

Post #40 was a question. Do you have an answer to the question?


Thanks.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by akaSeerone

You are still comparing apples to oranges and your reply was meaningless or even less than that!

---Well, if it was meaningless then it probably made perfect sense to you, right?

[akaSeerone]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Well, if it was meaningless then it probably made perfect sense to you, right?

Your twistology is very telling.

Andy

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

To Moses and the other ancient Israelites, if someone had shown up saying "No, God REALLY wants you to turn the other cheek, to go the extra mile, etc." that person would have been executed for being a false prophet. Maybe what YOU think God is telling you, and what the LDS think God is telling them, is a similar situation, where from each side's POV the other is false but it's just because of different perspectives. Or maybe you're just deceived--I guess that's a possibility, too.

Someone did show up, his name was Christ, who set up his church. What you are saying is that you agree with me that the LDS church teaches a different gospel than was set up just after the death of Christ.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Someone did show up, his name was Christ, who set up his church.

---What I said was that if someone had visited MOSES, and told HIM "No, God REALLY wants you to turn the other cheek, to go the extra mile, etc." then that person would have been executed for being a false prophet. Because Moses believed that God had told HIM the opposite: That God was COOL with His chosen people hating their enemies, retaliating, and only going the first mile.
So anyone suggesting that what Moses had been told from God was WRONG, would have been considered a blasphemer. Which supports my point that two people can get contradictory messages from God.

What you are saying is that you agree with me that the LDS church teaches a different gospel than was set up just after the death of Christ

---I don't see where I agreed with THAT. The LDS teach the same gospel that Jesus and His apostles taught, which includes the idea God wants people to love both friends AND enemies, to go the extra mile, etc.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---What I said was that if someone had visited MOSES, and told HIM "No, God REALLY wants you to turn the other cheek, to go the extra mile, etc." then that person would have been executed for being a false prophet.

That is correct if someone had visited Moses and told him ""No, God REALLY wants you to turn the other cheek. . ." that person would of been a false prophet and that person likely would of been stoned because they were under the old covenant and God did not reveal that new covenant during the time of Moses.

Likewise the new covenant was given to us by Christ and written down for us by his apostles and if someone comes along and gives us a "new gospel" than that which was given we should be consider that person as a false prophet.

Originally Posted by nrajeff

The LDS teach the same gospel that Jesus and His apostles taught, which includes the idea God wants people to love both friends AND enemies, to go the extra mile, etc.

LDS can take two positions

1. That the LDS gospel is a restoration of the original NT church.

2. That the LDS gospel is a revision or new gospel because of the direction of modern day apostles and prophets.

From your statement above I presume that you take position number 1, which means that the LDS is an exact replica or restoration of the original. I could not disagree with you more because the LDS church and its gospel is NOT a replica of the original NT church as described in the Bible. However if you say that the LDS church is a revision or changed gospel because of changes that your prophets have made, then I can agree with this position.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

... the LDS church and its gospel is NOT a replica of the original NT church as described in the Bible.

-----I have yet to see ANY church today that IS an exact REPLICA of the original. Can YOU name one? Also, I have yet to see a churcht currently in existence that comes CLOSER to that original church than the LDS church does. If you know of one that DOES, please name it for me.

However if you say that the LDS church is a revision or changed gospel because of changes that your prophets have made, then I can agree with this position.

---The LDS church IS different from the original in many ways, such as: the original one didn't use computerized databases for membership records. Etc. Is that bad of us to be different in areas like that?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

----- I have yet to see a churcht currently in existence that comes CLOSER to that original church than the LDS church does

Jeff, do you really believe this?

The LDS church and its doctrine are completely different than that in the NT church set up by Christ and his followers. Biblical Christianity and Mormonism are almost 180 degrees apart, I am not sure how you came to your ***essment above. Maybe you could further expound on your ideas for us.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Jeff, do you really believe this?

---Yes, because I try to think logically, therefore if I knew of some OTHER church that came closer to the original, I would be looking to join IT. The fact that I remain happily LDS is a sign that I don't see anything closer out there in the world of "traditional" Christianity.

The LDS church and its doctrine are completely different than that in the NT church set up by Christ and his followers. Biblical Christianity and Mormonism are almost 180 degrees apart, I am not sure how you came to your ***essment above. Maybe you could further expound on your ideas for us.

---Sure, no prob. Item #1: The original church was set up to have, as its human leadership, 12 apostles running it, setting policy and deciding matters of doctrine for the ENTIRE body of disciples. Find me a church out there in "traditional land" that has that setup today. You can't, because all of you abandoned that pattern long ago and now preach that Jesus doesn't WANT His church run that way anymore.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

------Yes, because I try to think logically, therefore if I knew of some OTHER church that came closer to the original, I would be looking to join IT. The fact that I remain happily LDS is a sign that I don't see anything closer out there in the world of "traditional" Christianity..

Every mainstream Christian church is closer in doctrine to the original NT church than the LDS church, so it would not be hard to find a church to join, just look in your phonebook.

Originally Posted by nrajeff

The original church was set up to have, as its human leadership, 12 apostles running it,

There is no question that Christ called 12 apostles to be his witness, to set up his church, and several who went on to write down scripture about His life, miracles, death, and resurrection. But what makes you think that there was suppose to be a continuos succession of 12 apostles eternally?

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Every mainstream Christian church is closer in doctrine to the original NT church than the LDS church

---Then list the doctrines that the original church (apostolic era) taught and practiced. Then rank the Catholic, Orthodox, and the myriad of Reformationist churches in order, with number 1 being the church that does things closest to the original. That would be helpful to people who want to join the church that's closest to the original.

There is no question that Christ called 12 apostles to be his witness, to set up his church, and several who went on to write down scripture about His life, miracles, death, and resurrection.

--You forgot "....and to oversee the bishops, make rulings when disputes arose, decide true and false doctrine, and ordain leaders including their own successors."

But what makes you think that there was suppose to be a continuos succession of 12 apostles eternally?

---Not eternally: Paul said that Jesus ins***uted the office of apostle, et al, to be in the church "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." (Eph. 4) Once all of Christianity arrives at that utopian state of spiritual maturity and unity, the need for apostles will probably fade away. Answer me this: Since you guys did away with apostolic-level leadership, has Christendom become MORE united? Or LESS united and more fragmented?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Then list the doctrines that the original church (apostolic era) taught and practiced. Then rank the Catholic, Orthodox, and the myriad of Reformationist churches in order, with number 1 being the church that does things closest to the original. That would be helpful to people who want to join the church that's closest to the original.

I think that the two most important issues are: 1. The nature of God; 2. Salvation


1. Nature of God. I rank this number one because we know that we should not worship a false god. What makes a god false? False ideas about god. The LDS god and the Christian God are completely different. Using logic either the LDS god is true, or the Christian God is true, but both gods can be true because of their conflicting constructs (or a third possibility is that neither is true). The true God is God from everlasting to everlasting, this point alone rules out the LDS god as being the only true god. God was never a man and there are not many gods--addition points that affirm the false idea about the LDS god. Look at all mainstream Christian churches and you will find that they all affirm this concept and thus are worshipping the only true God.

2. Salvation--this is the second most important issue behind the nature of God. Again the LDS concept and the Biblical concept are at complete odds with each other. LDS teaches exaltation is by works in addition to grace and faith. The Bible teaches us that we are not saved by our works. These are completely opposing ideas.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

------Not eternally: Paul said that Jesus ins***uted the office of apostle, et al, to be in the church "Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." (Eph. 4) Once all of Christianity arrives at that utopian state of spiritual maturity and unity, the need for apostles will probably fade away. Answer me this: Since you guys did away with apostolic-level leadership, has Christendom become MORE united? Or LESS united and more fragmented?

There is no indication that the 12 apostles were to persist in the church after the death of the original 12 apostles died (recall that Judas was never considered a true believer which is why his position was replaced by Matthias to complete the 12th). The apostles were a foundation along with Christ, and we know that a building has only one foundation not foundation over foundation over foundation. . . Also in Revelation, the wall of the city will have foundation stones with the 12 apostles. If there are apostles throughout history (or even from 1830 to present as you ***ume) which 12 apostles were spoken about because there would of been hundreds to choose from.

Rev 21:14 "The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of THE twelve apostles of the Lamb." NIV

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by Billyray

There is no indication that the 12 apostles were to persist in the church after the death of the original 12 apostles died (recall that Judas was never considered a true believer which is why his position was replaced by Matthias to complete the 12th). The apostles were a foundation along with Christ, and we know that a building has only one foundation not foundation over foundation over foundation. . . Also in Revelation, the wall of the city will have foundation stones with the 12 apostles. If there are apostles throughout history (or even from 1830 to present as you ***ume) which 12 apostles were spoken about because there would of been hundreds to choose from.

Rev 21:14 "The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of THE twelve apostles of the Lamb." NIV

You remove the foundation, and the building collapses.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle

You remove the foundation, and the building collapses.

Fig, the foundation has ALREADY been set and consists of THE apostles with Jesus being the "chief corner stone".

Ephesians 2:20 "And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

Notice in verse 14 below it speaks about the wall of the city will have twelve foundations for THE TWELVE APOSTLES of the Lamb. This clearly is speaking about Christ's original 12 apostles. If there were to be a continuos line of apostles throughout ages this verse would not make sense OR at the minimum be unclear about which 12 it was speaking about.

Revelation 21
10 And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Fig, the foundation has ALREADY been set and consists of THE apostles with Jesus being the "chief corner stone".

---What are those original 12 apostles doing for Christians these days? Have they written any epistle updates to address the problems of OUR century? Seems like those apostles are nowhere to be found outside the LDS church, which continues to have that foundation where the rest of Christendom has abandoned it. Face it, you got no foundation anymore. You haven't had one since the 2nd century. And look at the mess that Christendom is in as a result. Paul is probably sitting up in heaven saying "I TOLD you that Jesus gave apostles to help the work of the ministry and edify the saints until they all come to unity of faith and a degree of perfection comparable to the stature of Christ! You should have listened to me! At the rate you're going, you're NEVER gonna reach that level I mentioned in my epistle to the Ephesians! "



By the way, the topic of this thread is whether or not God is able to create anyone like Himself.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---What are those original 12 apostles doing for Christians these days? Have they written any epistle updates to address the problems of OUR century? Seems like those apostles are nowhere to be found outside the LDS church, which continues to have that foundation . . .

So is this an admission by you that the LDS church has changed the basic teachings of the NT church (i.e. created a new foundation than that which was already laid down)?

BTW what are the 5 most important revelations that YOUR leaders have given us in the last 100 years?

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

So is this an admission by you that the LDS church has changed the basic teachings of the NT church (i.e. created a new foundation than that which was already laid down)?

---Of course not. You guys allowed the foundation to be missing for 1600 years, and Jesus rebuilt it in the 1800s. That's not a change of basic teaching--it's a RE-AFFIRMATION of one. I can't help it that the original church was run by apostles, and today only the LDS church has that same setup that the original one had. If YOUR church has DONE AWAY with that setup, it seems like it's YOUR church that changed it, and has some explaining to do as to why it differs so much from the original.

BTW what are the 5 most important revelations that YOUR leaders have given us in the last 100 years?

---I haven't ranked them in importance before, just like I haven't done that to Jesus' revelations to the original church. I would have to do some thinking before I made a judgment as to what the most important ones were. But ANY important revelation from an apostle of Jesus is better than NOTHING, which is what a church that LACKS apostles is gonna get.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

You guys allowed the foundation to be missing for 1600 years, and Jesus rebuilt it in the 1800s.

A "REBUILT" foundation. OK, you admitted it. The LDS church is built upon a new foundation. Thanks for at least admitting it.