Page 33 of 36 FirstFirst ... 232930313233343536 LastLast
Results 801 to 825 of 896

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

  1. #801
    nrajeff
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    So if God does not conform to how you expect Him to be then he is not worthy of your worship?
    --Well, YOU expect God to be an amorphous, capricious tyrant with a 3-way personality disorder, and if God doesn't conform to that, do YOU consider Him worthy of YOUR worship?


    Isn't that just making up a god in your own mind?
    ---Isn't that what Calvinism's Trinity is?

    The answer is: YES, I DO have high standards for God: He'd better have better wisdom, fairness, and ethics than humans have, or else why should I think He should be worshiped? That would just be illogical, to want to worship a being of a lower character than WE have.

    "But He is more POWERFUL and KNOWS MORE stuff than you do, and He can be in two places at the same time!"

    That has got to be among the WORST reasons why a being should be worshiped.

  2. #802
    James Banta
    Guest

    Default

    [nrajeff;67687]--I am the one who quoted the Bible verse about the devils believing. I stand by IT being more accurate than you are.
    Good because I am NOT inerrant as the Bible is.. It is good news that you are now ready to turn against the teachings of Smith and believe Jesus instead that the Lord our God is ONE LORD.. Not three, not billions on billions of Gods, just one.. You finally are caughting up to devils believe, what they KNOW..

    ---I am sorry, you will need to quote THAT verse--the one says that the devils have faith. If they have faith, shouldn't that alone save them?
    They also have works should that save them? The p***age doesn't say that the devils have faith at all now does it? It says they believe that God is one.. You jumped all over me for using the word know when I showed you that they DO KNOW according to mormon beliefs.. And then you changing that believing that God is one is having faith in Jesus.. There seems to be a LOG in your eye..

    --I don't really believe that they are Trinitarians. I reckon they have an ACCURATE knowledge that God, Jesus, and the HS are each a deity in His own right.
    All I am saying is what is taught in the Bible the Devils were angelic at one time and fell from the presence of God.. That they believe that God is One and they tremble..

    --No, I disagree with TRINITARIANS who believe that the 3 Persons are literelly one being. I don't disagree with St. James, since he never said they were one being.
    James said that even the devils know what you reject.. That is what I am saying, that is what you say you believe in one breath and deny in the next..

    I can't find the post you are talking about, where you said "the devils both believe and have knowledge of God's nature."
    Just be honest.. You don't need to go look it up unless all you want to do here is cause trouble.. That would be TROLLING and against the rules you wouldn't do that.. So being honest tell me that mormonism doesn't teach that even the devils were in the presence of God at one time.. That being established by your honesty they would KNOW of the nature of God.. So saying that they believe God is One or they know that God is one is the same thing according to James 2:19..

    --I am not denying it. I am just quoting the Bible and wondering why you disagreed with it.
    It's right there in Abr. 3:28. Lucifer and the many that followed him became Satan and his angels or the devil, No? That is mormonism the Bible says that Lucifer and his angels were cast out after having Fought against God (Rev 12:7-9).. Because they were in heaven they would KNOW that God is One.. That isn't faith it's knowledge.. No were is it said that we are saved by Knowledge it says we are saved by faith.. Your denial that James taught that faith saves and works manifests that faith is way outside his message.. IHS jim

  3. #803
    Father_JD
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    No if James interprets the meaning of the word justification in Genesis 15:6 to mean a vindication or justification before men he is contradicting Paul.




    No if James interprets the word justification to mean a vindication or justification before men then what he said in James 2:24 would make no sense.




    Faith alone would also have to be non-salvific,and only vindicative.





    The word "justified" in Luke 7:35 is metaphorical. It is not metaphorical in James 2:21-25.



    Tell me WHY you've chosen to IGNORE my line by line exegesis of the latter part of James 1 and ALL of chapter 2 in my two part threads:

    "Can you lead a Mormon to scripture and make him THINK CONTEXTUALLY" ??


    Is it because you know you can't BS anyone with Mormon misinterpretation?

    This is the last post on this thread because I'm working on an old computer (I'm in North Africa for cryingoutloud!) and with over 800 posts, it takes this old jalopy of a computer several MINUTES to download each reply, painfully one by one.

    So...GO to my two threads and argue with me there, ok?

  4. #804
    nrajeff
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James Banta View Post
    Good because I am NOT inerrant as the Bible is..
    --Bad News for Jim Time: Neither you NOR the Bible is error-free. I admit that the Bible possibly has less errors than you do, though.

    They also have works should that save them?
    ---I dunno--does the Bible really say the devils do GOOD works? Or is that more of your errant Bible-quoting?

    The p***age doesn't say that the devils have faith at all now does it?
    ---That's what I always thought, until YOU started claiming that it DOES say they have faith. Here, let me quote you:
    James said that they have faith that God is one..
    It says they believe that God is one..
    --Yeah, and the LDS ALSO believe that God is (metaphorically) one, but mere belief isn't enough to bring grace into effect on a person. The person ALSO needs to OBEY GOD. Which is something that the LDS think is pretty important, but apparently the devils (and maybe Calvinists) don't think is a big deal.

    You jumped all over me for using the word know when I showed you that they DO KNOW according to mormon beliefs.. And then you changing that believing that God is one is having faith in Jesus.. There seems to be a LOG in your eye..
    ---Whatever is in my eye, it's seeing you misquote the Bible.

    James said that even the devils know what you reject..
    -----Good, because what THEY "know" got them in trouble with God. Maybe if I reject everything THEY stand for, I will be in good shape.

    Just be honest.. You don't need to go look it up unless all you want to do here is cause trouble..
    ---But the HONEST thing to do IS to look it up so that you can't claim that I misquoted you when I show that your claims are false.

    That would be TROLLING and against the rules you wouldn't do that..
    --So you're claiming that if you make an ***ertion about what the Bible claims, and I look it up to prove that the Bible doesn't say what you ***erted that it claims, that I am breaking a rule? Hello, James: This isn't Carm. WM doesn't HAVE that rule you're thinking of.

  5. #805
    James Banta
    Guest

    Default

    [nrajeff;67782]--Bad News for Jim Time: Neither you NOR the Bible is error-free. I admit that the Bible possibly has less errors than you do, though.
    You made the unsupported claim that both of us are in error so let me help you take this to it's ultimate conclusion:

    "IS SO, IS NOT, IS SO, IS NOT..." Now is you want to still make the claim this time us some evidence to prove your point. Let me warn you however I am looking at the message of the Bible not the wording of that message. you will have to show where, with evidence, that that message is corrupt.. As for me you are going to have to show where I disagree with that biblical message.. Good luck..

    ---I dunno--does the Bible really say the devils do GOOD works? Or is that more of your errant Bible-quoting?

    Yes is a way it does.. But maybe you won't see it..
    2 Cor 11:13-15
    For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
    And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
    Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

    If they are transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness, then their works would also mimic works of righteousness.. But it would seem that those would be evil still there to make themselves look to be something they are not.. The ends of such works are the Lake of Fire.. So any work that tends to exalt a man instead of lifting up Jesus are such works.. Look good but are not the works of righteousness.

    --Yeah, and the LDS ALSO believe that God is (metaphorically) one, but mere belief isn't enough to bring grace into effect on a person. The person ALSO needs to OBEY GOD. Which is something that the LDS think is pretty important, but apparently the devils (and maybe Calvinists) don't think is a big deal.
    As James says.. Saving faith works, and as Paul says, works do not bring saving faith. God has no need to see your temple recommend or ***hing receipts. He doesn't need to see the neighborhood widow's sidewalks, cleared after each winters snow storm, or her lawn freshly cut and trimmed each week to see your faith.. I do and for those I see doing that with a oral testimony of Jesus also proclaimed to the world I see a Christian indeed. But what of the old man or woman who can barely move? What if the give me just that testimony of Jesus. I trust that God is in them and they give His love to all they meet.. Both meet the qualifications to become children of God.. But if the hold the Garden Gnome to be their Jesus that are as lost as the worst serial murderer that has ever walked the earth..

    ---Whatever is in my eye, it's seeing you misquote the Bible.
    It's using terms like this that pot that LOG is your eye.. You seem to see the speck that you call misquotes in mine but then you quote Ezekiel 37 the way you do.. You won't even believe that God's interpretation is even close to the real meaning of the p***age.. This deny of yours could put us right back into that "IS SO, IS NOT" kind of argument.. I have shown where your interpretation is totally different than what God said it was you have only told me that I am wrong, without any authority to back up what you are insisting is the real interpretation.. That sound like you have a log and I have a speck to me..

    --So you're claiming that if you make an ***ertion about what the Bible claims, and I look it up to prove that the Bible doesn't say what you ***erted that it claims, that I am breaking a rule? Hello, James: This isn't Carm. WM doesn't HAVE that rule you're thinking of.
    You showed no interpretation that I have given that you proved wrong.. Mainly because in the case of the Ezekiel p***age I gave no interpretation but used God's instead. In the Isaiah p***age again I didn't interpret the p***age at all just said that neither the learned or the unlearned could read the book.. It is Smith that made an interpretation of that p***age not me..

    I am not saying I never interpret scripture I just haven't done so in these two p***ages.. It is your religion that has done so.. You wish to follow the interpretation given by men, I am using the interpretation given by God.. And you call mine wrong.. Can you spell "Gullible" (The quality of readily believing information, truthful or otherwise, usually to an absurd extent.)? IHS jim

  6. #806
    Mesenja
    Guest

    Default That's fine with me

    Quote Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post

    Tell me WHY you've chosen to IGNORE my line by line exegesis of the latter part of James 1 and ALL of chapter 2 in my two part threads:

    "Can you lead a Mormon to scripture and make him THINK CONTEXTUALLY" ??


    Is it because you know you can't BS anyone with Mormon misinterpretation?

    This is the last post on this thread because I'm working on an old computer (I'm in North Africa for crying ou tloud!) and with over 800 posts, it takes this old jalopy of a computer several MINUTES to download each reply, painfully one by one.

    So...GO to my two threads and argue with me there, OK?
    I am not avoiding posting on your thread. It is just that I am busy refuting your other Calvinist claptrap you post elsewhere. You will do no better defending your position.

  7. #807
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nrajeff View Post
    --Well, YOU expect God to be an amorphous. . .
    I don't make up a false god in my own head to suit my needs or wishes like you do. That is the difference Jeff.

  8. #808
    nrajeff
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    I don't make up a false god in my own head to suit my needs or wishes like you do. That is the difference Jeff.
    ---I can accept that you didn't make up the god of Trinicalvitarianism---you just latched onto it. It was some OTHER misguided soul who made it up.

  9. #809
    Mesenja
    Guest

    Default Jeff didn't do that

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post

    I don't make up a false god in my own head to suit my needs or wishes like you do. That is the difference Jeff.
    He was taught the true nature of God. Therefore it follows that he had no need to make up a false god according to his needs or wishes.

  10. #810
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    He was taught the true nature of God.
    Really? Then it wouldn't be too hard for you to substantiate some of your beliefs about god for us in the Bible. Where can I read about god once being a man, or that god is married, or that god has celestial sex?

  11. #811
    Russianwolfe
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Really? Then it wouldn't be too hard for you to substantiate some of your beliefs about god for us in the Bible. Where can I read about god once being a man,
    Not part of the nature of God. This would be history.

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    or that god is married,
    Not part of the nature of God. This would be his status.

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    or that god has celestial sex?
    Again, not part of the nature of God.

    Three strikes and you're out. Thank you for playing. Sorry, there are no parting gifts.

    Marvin

  12. #812
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Russianwolfe View Post

    Three strikes and you're out. Thank you for playing. Sorry, there are no parting gifts.

    Marvin
    Marvin, does it bother you that you can't defend you position from the Bible?

  13. #813
    Russianwolfe
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Marvin, does it bother you that you can't defend you position from the Bible?
    Why would it? You made an obvious error and I pointed it out. Does that require the Bible?

    Marvin

  14. #814
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Russianwolfe View Post
    Why would it? You made an obvious error and I pointed it out. Does that require the Bible?

    Marvin
    Marvin, please point out for me where you can support your belief that God was once a man, is married, or has celestial sex.

  15. #815
    Russianwolfe
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Marvin, please point out for me where you can support your belief that God was once a man, is married, or has celestial sex.
    First you present the scriptures that prove that this is doctrine of the LDS Church. I don't need to defend someone's speculation or a claim by someone who is antagonistic.

    Marvin

  16. #816
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Russianwolfe View Post
    Why?
    Marvin
    Why? Because I am trying to reach out to you Marvin and show you that Mormonism is not Biblical.

  17. #817
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Russianwolfe View Post
    First you present the scriptures that prove that this is doctrine of the LDS Church.
    Marvin
    Are you trying to pretend that you don't believe the facts that I posted? In the old days LDS would defend what they believe, now they use plausible deniability. Oh how things change.

  18. #818
    Mesenja
    Guest

    Default Cite the scriptures Billy

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post

    Are you trying to pretend that you don't believe the facts that I posted? In the old days LDS would defend what they believe,now they use plausible . Oh how things change.
    Are you trying to pretend that you believe the facts that you made up?

  19. #819
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    Are you trying to pretend that you believe the facts that you made up?
    Are you denying that you believe these things as well?

  20. #820
    Mesenja
    Guest

    Default Here we go again

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Are you denying that you believe these things as well?
    When you come up with the scriptural proof let us know.

  21. #821
    akaSeerone
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    When you come up with the scriptural proof let us know.
    You only continue to make yourself look foolish by not answering Billy's question especially considering that Billy was a better Mormon than any Mormon on this board could ever hope to be and he knows exactly what Mormonism teaches.

    Thank God that Billy has put all that Mormon nonsense behind him and is now securely in the Kingdom of God and his Salvation is ***ured, another thing you pagan lost souls can only wish you had and can have if you repent or burn.

    Seems like a no brainier to me, so whatcha waiting for?

    Your pride stopping you?

    Andy

  22. #822
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    When you come up with the scriptural proof let us know.
    Mesenja, maybe you don't really believe those things. If so I applaud you. Are you denying that you hold those positions?

  23. #823
    Mesenja
    Guest

    Default You think it's a no brainer?


    [IMG]http://***lol.kerrolisaa.com/1/5077.jpg[/IMG]

  24. #824
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    Does it sound like a no brainer?
    Deleted lighthearted comment--Didn't want M to take it the wrong way.
    Last edited by Billyray; 09-20-2010 at 10:46 PM.

  25. #825
    Billyray
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Billyray View Post
    Marvin, please point out for me where you can support your belief that God was once a man, is married, or has celestial sex.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    Are you trying to pretend that you believe the facts that you made up?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mesenja View Post
    When you come up with the scriptural proof let us know.
    Lets start with the first one. God was once a man. The first reference is from the LDS Ensign. The second reference is from Lorenzo Snow the 5th President of the LDS Church.

    1. Joseph Smith Jr., “The King Follett Sermon,” Ensign, Apr 1971, 13–14
    God an Exalted Man
    I will go back to the beginning before the world was, to show what kind of a being God is. What sort of a being was God in the beginning? Open your ears and hear, all ye ends of the earth, for I am going to prove it to you by the Bible, and to tell you the designs of God in relation to the human race, and why He interferes with the affairs of man.

    God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by His power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with Him, as one man talks and communes with another.

    In order to understand the subject of the dead, for consolation of those who mourn for the loss of their friends, it is necessary we should understand the character and being of God and how He came to be so; for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see.

    These ideas are incomprehensible to some, but they are simple. It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did; and I will show it from the Bible.
    End of Ensign article


    2. Lorenzo Snow couplet
    "As man is God once was, as God is man may be."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •