No A-Z; either 100% T or 100% F

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Vlad, that is the problem, there is no Biblical support for your position. You simply make it up and label it theology and you believe it.

You seem to be missing the point. But we'll use YOURlogic in a second and see if it helps or hurts your accusation.

Christians don't believe in a Heavenly Mother because there is no Biblical verses that say there is a Heavenly Mother.

There is no biblical verse that says thare is a "Trinity", yet you believe it exists.

Atomic handgrenade diffused.

Christians don't believe that God the Father and his wife had spiritual children in heaven because the Bible does not teach this. The problem is that Mormons make up these concepts that simply are not there.

Again, we take the Bible as a whole, and along with other scriptures/ modern revelation, understand a bigger picture than the one you non-LDS see in regards to our existence and purpose. Yet these do not CONFLICT with the biblical accounts.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

There is no biblical verse that says thare is a "Trinity", yet you believe it exists.

Atomic handgrenade diffused.

Vlad, the word "Trinity" is not is the Bible but the teaching about the "Trinity" is clearly present. That is the difference between LDS and Christians. LDS simply add theology that clearly is not there. For example it does not say "Heavenly Mother" but if it said God was married then that would cons***ute that God had a wife. But you and I both know that there is not any evidence in the Bible that God has a wife.

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Vlad, the word "Trinity" is not is the Bible but the teaching about the "Trinity" is clearly present. That is the difference between LDS and Christians. LDS simply add theology that clearly is not there. For example it does not say "Heavenly Mother" but if it said God was married then that would cons***ute that God had a wife. But you and I both know that there is not any evidence in the Bible that God has a wife.

You seem agree with me now!

One can 'see' a teaching 'clearly' to justify their beliefs.

Now, can you tell us which church/ religion is 100% perfect in doctrine?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

You seem agree with me now!

One can 'see' a teaching 'clearly' to justify their beliefs.

Now, can you tell us which church/ religion is 100% perfect in doctrine?

I don't agree with you at all. The word Trinity is not in the Bible but the teaching about the Trinity is. For the unique concepts of Mormonism there is not these teachings to support your theology.

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I don't agree with you at all. The word Trinity is not in the Bible but the teaching about the Trinity is. For the unique concepts of Mormonism there is not these teachings to support your theology.

LOL...you DO agree with me, since that is what I've been saying all along. Nothing in the Bible REFUTES LDS doctrine.

For example, baptism for the dead is mentioned in the Bible, but only the LDS understand it in its true context. The verse in the Bible about it SUPPORTS the LDS concept, not REFUTES it.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Nothing in the Bible REFUTES LDS doctrine.

Vlad, are you kidding me?

Here are just two examples.

The Bible teaches that God has been God from everlasting to everlasting. LDS teach that God was not always God but was a man.

The Bible teaches that the Aaronic priesthood is restricted exclusively to the tribe of Levi. If you check your Patriarchal blessing you are likely from the line of Joseph via one of his two sons.

[nrajeff]

The Old Testament teaches that a child would be born of a virgin, and that the child would be called the mighty God, among other things.

The New Testament teaches that the Great I am became a mortal baby who became a man when He grew into manhood, and that He even referred to Himself as the son of man whose father was the only true God.

What Bible are YOU using, that has those parts deleted?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

The Old Testament teaches that a child would be born of a virgin, and that the child would be called the mighty God, among other things.

The New Testament teaches that the Great I am became a mortal baby who became a man when He grew into manhood.

What Bible are YOU using, that has those parts deleted?

Jesus never ceased to be God when he came down to this earth. Jesus has been God from everlasting to everlasting. This conflicts with the LDS concept that both God the Father and Jesus were not always God. The verses that you provided do not support your claim.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Jesus never ceased to be God when he came down to this earth.

---According to the Bible, Jesus was not a candidate for inheriting His Father's kingdom until AFTER He had become a man and had the experiences He experienced on this planet. That probably contradicts what your preacher told you, so you need to decide whether you're gonna believe your preacher, or the Bible.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---According to the Bible, Jesus was not a candidate for inheriting His Father's kingdom until AFTER He had become a man and had the experiences He experienced on this planet. That probably contradicts what your preacher told you, so you need to decide whether you're gonna believe your preacher, or the Bible.

That is strange because He is said to be the God that created it all (Col 1:16). That would mean that He owns it by right of creation.. If There is only one God as Moses taught and Jesus confirmed, and Jesus is God then He is the owner of ALL things.. He is not a creation but the one and only creator.. You are the one who needs to decide whether to believe the teaching of Joseph Smith or the WORD OF GOD.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

The Old Testament teaches that a child would be born of a virgin, and that the child would be called the mighty God, among other things.

The New Testament teaches that the Great I am became a mortal baby who became a man when He grew into manhood, and that He even referred to Himself as the son of man whose father was the only true God.

What Bible are YOU using, that has those parts deleted?

I guess we read one that you don't like because we see that verse calling Jesus the Mighty God, The everlasting FATHER.. But you didn't want to use the whole verse because it contradicted your whole POV.. You real should try to believe all the Bible not just the part you can rip out of context to make them sound like you believe in the Bible message.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

LOL...you DO agree with me, since that is what I've been saying all along. Nothing in the Bible REFUTES LDS doctrine.

For example, baptism for the dead is mentioned in the Bible, but only the LDS understand it in its true context. The verse in the Bible about it SUPPORTS the LDS concept, not REFUTES it.

I will agree that some group in the New Testament era were conducting baptisms for the dead.. Paul used that practice to teach the doctrine of the resurrection.. By He never admitted that such a baptism was a Church doctrine.. Rather he separated the Church from the practice. It is like James in chapter 2 verse 19 that the Devils even believe that God is one. That doesn't mean that those that believe that are devils.. Mormon doctrine such as Baptism for the dead are stu.pidly snatched out of their context and made to mean something they have never taught..

I have already shown you that the Bible REFUTES the most important of all mormon teachings.. That God is a creation of yet an other god who is also a creation of yet another god.. I have shown you that God (Jesus) created ALL things.. Not just a few but ALL, even is those things are invisible.. Humm would that include any other universe or dimensions that some people say are real? YES! The Bible doesn't support these ridiculous false doctrines of mormonism! IHS jim

[nrajeff]

The word Trinity is not in the Bible but the teaching about the Trinity is.

Although the WORD "Arianism" is not in the Bible, Arian Christians claimed that it contains teachings that SUPPORT Arianism. They believed that so strongly, that they got into fights with Trinitarian Christians, and the emperor got so fed up with the fighting between the 2 groups of Christians that he ordered a meeting of its bishops (Christianity had abandoned the apostles as leaders by then) and told them to settle on one offical theology/Christology, so that the fighting in his empire would end.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

Although the WORD "Arianism" is not in the Bible, Arian Christians claimed that it contains teachings that SUPPORT Arianism.

Right, so you take their beliefs and compare them with the Bible and find out which side is correct. For example that is what we are trying to show you. You make a theological claim, the Christians make a claim and then we go to the word of God to sort it out. You believe that God and Jesus have not always been God but became separate gods during their progression. Interesting enough that you brought up "Arianism" because LDS beliefs are similar to the Arian heresy,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism
"Arius taught that God the Father and the Son did not exist together eternally."

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Right, so you take their beliefs and compare them with the Bible and find out which side is correct.

---Many people have done that to Trinitarianism and found out that it's not correct. And found out that neither is Arianism. You BOTH blew it. That's what happens when a group of Christians runs out of apostles and prophets. Remember what Williams and Wesley and Fos**** said about the state of mainstream Christendom.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Many people have done that to Trinitarianism and found out that it's not correct. And found out that neither is Arianism. You BOTH blew it. That's what happens when a group of Christians runs out of apostles and prophets. Remember what Williams and Wesley and Fos**** said about the state of mainstream Christendom.

Here is the basis for the Trinity. What part do you take issue with?

1) The Father is diety;
2) The Son is deity;
3) The Holy Spirit is deity;
4) The Father is distinct from the Son and Holy Spirit;
5) The Son is distinct from the Father and Holy Spirit;
6) The Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father and Son;

7) There exists only one deity/god

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Here is the basis for the Trinity. What part do you take issue with?

1) The Father is diety;
2) The Son is deity;
3) The Holy Spirit is deity;
4) The Father is distinct from the Son and Holy Spirit;
5) The Son is distinct from the Father and Holy Spirit;
6) The Holy Spirit is distinct from the Father and Son;

7) There exists only one deity/god

---Which parts did YOU take issue with when you were a TBM RM?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Which parts did YOU take issue with when you were a TBM RM?

As an LDS member I bought it hook line and sinker.

[Blueskies]

Billy: I agree with you 100%. My question to Vlad would be, if these doctrines were so important to ones salvation, i.e. temple marriage, why isn't it ever mentioned in the Bible? Why wouldn't Jesus have preached this doctrine as he traveled? Why wouldn't he have taught this to his disciples?