I find it strange

[theway]

Originally Posted by James Banta

This is not an experiment or a demonstration of anything other than your ability to disbelieve God's word..



I am not going to use the word Ghost or even Spirit to try to explain this to you. I will only use the Bible..

Col 1:13-16
For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him

Are you going to be one that tells be that because God isn't standing right before me that He is invisible? If that were the case I am also invisible to you.. No, invisible doesn't mean that; it means that which can not be seen. Jesus then is the image of the God who can't be seen.. A body of flesh and bone is never invisible..

If I include the word Spirit (NUMA). Which you see fit to call a ghost which is more literally the word wind. Jesus used that word to tell us about the nature of God.. He later told His disciples that such a person has no physical body, no body of flesh and bone like His own.. So in context how is NUMA mistranslated as Spirit? Show me how the word "wind" works in those context where Jesus draws a line between those persons who have no body and those that do.



When a doctrine is taught openly by the Prophet seer and revelator of the LDS church in Conference of that church. is that not confirmation? I don't see that it can be anything else.. It was taught by Young, in 1862 and in 1870, published in the JofD..

He [Jehovah] was the Son of our Heavenly Father, as we are the sons of our earthly fathers. God is the Father of our spirits, which are clothed upon by fleshly bodies, begotten for us by our earthly fathers. Jesus is our elder brother spirit clothed upon with an earthly body begotten by the Father of our spirits. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 2, September 28, 1862)

we actually believe that God the Father is our heavenly Father, that we are His children; and we believe that Jesus Christ is our elder brother—that he is actually the Son of our Father and that he is the Savior of the world, and was appointed to this before the foundations of this earth were laid. (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, pp. 235-256, February 20, 1870)

In more modern times an apostle of the LDS church taught that:

God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holy Man, an immortal Personage. And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any mortal son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says. (Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce McConkie, p. 742)

It would seem that the doctrine we read from the accounts of President Young continues in to the modern era when Elder McConkie was a central figure of the LDS church.



Seems clear enough to me..
"Why do the LDS cling to the teaching that there are three Gods, with whom we have to do, instead agreeing with God through His word that there is ONE GOD; that created ALL things visible and invisible?"

I did add one s and a couple of comas for you.. Hope that helps..

As I said there is one God, that God is the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. By the context of the verse it is clear that the Person of Jesus is the Person that actually preformed the creation. That doesn't mean the Father ans the Holy Spirit were not just as responsible..



You have offered your opinion. When I asked for answers I did says those answers had to be Biblically based.. So what is your Biblical basis for your opinions.. Give me something that shows you are based in God's word not what you have been taught in Sunday school.. Sorry but you haven't even tried to answer my questions.. I will still say that on LDS poster here has ever answered one of my questions with the authority of the scripture..



The truth is truth.. It doesn't change.. Thank you for seeing that my posts agree and follow God's example and they don't change either.. If stating God's word is the use of p l a t i t u d e s I will use p l a t i t u d e s. It using a p***age that teaches that God is invisible has nothing to do with a discussion about the nature of God then you again lack understanding, not just of me but of God's word..

Most of my post don't mention Smith at all other than to quote his teaching and compare them to the Bible.. When I speak about polygamy, the BofM, or the LDS attacks against the Christian Church, it is hard to leave his name out.. Just as what I have to endure from the LDS here as they attack Christianity though attacking the reformers.. IHS jim

Really James???
You do realize that I already just told you that I have no intention of reading anything you write?
My life is not that empty that I need to fill it with the boring diatribe of an Apostate... Sorry you wasted your time.

I only posted to prove my point that nobody here asks questions.

To ask a question means that you seek an answer; nobody here cares one wit about an answer to their question, or about the truth.
Anti-Mormons "question"; there is a big difference.
This means that any question they ask is rhetorical; they believe they already have the correct answer to the question so they pretend to ask questions in order to try and trip you up, or make you "question" what it is you believe.
This is what lawyers do... The number one cardinal rule of any lawyer in court is NEVER ask a question that you don't already know beforehand how the person on stand is going to answer it.

And just like a Lawyer, it is not the real truth you are concerned with, it is merely trying to win by suppressing the other guys truth.

I stopped playing that game with you guys years ago because I saw the futility of it... I am here only for the entertainment value. And believe me.., the silly rantings of Anti-Mormons is very entertaining.
I told you guys from the very beginning.
Don't pretend you are going to school me on the Bible, the gospel, or my religion.
I know every quote and move you are going to make because I am always three steps ahead of you. This is why it is not necessary for me to even read what you wrote.

[nrajeffreturns]

Theway has a point: It seems disingenuous for an anti to ask a fallacious "question" such as "Why do you cling to a religion that teaches nothing but lies?" and then wonder why no one will answer that question.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

Theway has a point: It seems disingenuous for an anti to ask a fallacious "question" such as "Why do you cling to a religion that teaches nothing but lies?" and then wonder why no one will answer that question.

This may sound strange, I personally don't care if you cling to a religion of Joseph Smith jr. lies, I wished you didn't, but that's life. As to clinging to a religious bag over your head, and not admitting to facts such as Joseph Smith jr. being a sexual predator, and Brigham Young, teaching your mormon god having sex with Mary. That is a pet peeve of my own.
There is nothing of my faith I wish to hide or try and excuse away. I might differ from yours, but it is out in the open for every one to judge.
PS it does hurt my feelins if anyone doesn't read my writings.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

Theway has a point: It seems disingenuous for an anti to ask a fallacious "question" such as "Why do you cling to a religion that teaches nothing but lies?" and then wonder why no one will answer that question.

Why do you say that it is a "fallacious" question?

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Why do you say that it is a "fallacious" question?

Because the claim that the LDS church teaches NOTHING but lies is a demonstrably false claim. That's why.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

Because the claim that the LDS church teaches NOTHING but lies is a demonstrably false claim. That's why.

Is it false to say that they teach SOME lies?

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Is it false to say that they teach SOME lies?

When the whole reason for the LDS church to exist is false, the foundation of the church is a lie.. Tell me what part of the LDS church teaches truth? They do teach good moral principles but so does Islam. They teach honest, abstinence from alcohol. Good principles but what about Islam is the truth? They deny that Jesus is God.. Mormonism denies that He is the one true and living God. I don't see anything true in mormonism other than they believe in good moral character.. As I have shown that doesn't make their message the truth.. I liked what you said before. There is NO TRUTH IN MORMONISM.. That is a statement much closer to the truth than saying there is some truth in mormonism.. They can say all day that there is some truth in other religions but all the time we know they deny that.. IHS jim

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by James Banta

When the whole reason for the LDS church to exist is false,

That whole reason is to bring people to Christ. Why are you calling that a false thing? What better thing could a church do, in your opinion?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

That whole reason is to bring people to Christ.

The problem Jeff is that it doesn't bring people to the true Christ but rather to a false one.

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by Billyray

The problem Jeff is that it doesn't bring people to the true Christ but rather to a false one.

That would be a bad thing if it was true. Or, it would be a bad thing if the Christ we bring people to was more false than the one you are trying to bring people to. Fortunately, that is not the case.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

That would be a bad thing if it was true. Or, it would be a bad thing if the Christ we bring people to was more false than the one you are trying to bring people to. Fortunately, that is not the case.

Strange we can biblically support the teaching that Jesus has always been God.. We can biblically support the teaching that Jesus created all things. Hey that would include the spirits of men that He created within us! We can biblically support the teaching that Jesus and the Father are one.. We have no need to add the extrabiblical phrase "In Purpose" to the end of that teaching.. Instead mormonism teaches that Jesus was a spirit child born of the Father and His "Mother in heaven" just as it teaches we all were.. That makes Jesus our spirit brother and not our Mighty God, not our everlasting Father. That Jeff makes the LDS Jesus a false Jesus, not the one that is taught to us in the Bible.. Not the Word that was made flesh and DWELT AMONG US.. IHS jim

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by James Banta

Strange we can biblically support ...

It's not strange that you can, through eisegesis, find verses that seem to support your beliefs. It's pretty un-surprising, actually, especially when we see how ambiguous some verses are.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

It's not strange that you can, through eisegesis, find verses that seem to support your beliefs. It's pretty un-surprising, actually, especially when we see how ambiguous some verses are.

I don't find any that are ambiguous.. But then the Holy Spirit teaches them to me.. Seem you must depend on the reason of men (LDS Prophets and Apostles) for the what they believe the truth to be.. Strange that all the people I have spoken to here and on many others site that look to Jesus as their God, their Lord, and savior all have the same message from the scripture. Only the LDS seem to have the strange interpretations that come to them by way of mere men.. IHS jim

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

That would be a bad thing if it was true. Or, it would be a bad thing if the Christ we bring people to was more false than the one you are trying to bring people to. Fortunately, that is not the case.

The LDS jesus is not the Jesus of the Bible in many ways Jeff that is why I say that he is a false one. Do you want to discuss some of the LDS beliefs as they pertain to Christ and see if you can show support from the Bible?

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by Billyray

The LDS jesus is not the Jesus of the Bible in many ways Jeff that is why I say that he is a false one. Do you want to discuss some of the LDS beliefs as they pertain to Christ and see if you can show support from the Bible?

I bet that for any official LDS doctrine you can name, I can find something in the Bible that could support it. But that game is just a time-waster. I already concede that for any official doctrine of apostate Evangelicalism that I can name, you could find a Bible verse that could seem to support it.

So why not just save time and call it a stalemate and discuss something else?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

I bet that for any official LDS doctrine you can name, I can find something in the Bible that could support it.

Fair enough. Can you show me where it says that Jesus and Satan are brothers from a heavenly father and heavenly mother?

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Fair enough. Can you show me where it says that Jesus and Satan are brothers from a heavenly father and heavenly mother?

John 16:12
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
-
John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Acts 1:3
To these also He showed Himself alive after His p***ion by many infallible proofs, being seen by them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

John 16:12
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
-
John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Acts 1:3
To these also He showed Himself alive after His p***ion by many infallible proofs, being seen by them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

Next question, do you think these verses were translated correctly?

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

John 16:12
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
-
John 21:25
And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Acts 1:3
To these also He showed Himself alive after His p***ion by many infallible proofs, being seen by them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.

Jeff the absence of a statement against your antibiblical doctrines is NOT proof to substantiate them as God's truth.. Why would Jesus suddenly deny His word (He is God), and tell us that He DIDN'T create all things, when His word teaches that He DID? That He really hasn't been eternally God when His word says that He has.. No, not every word Jesus ever spoke was recorded. But that which has been recorded is the standard by which we can know something about that which was left out.. Jesus didn't change His teaching that God is One Lord. He didn't suddenly start teaching that God is a tangible physical Being. What God has told us is His word. He doesn't lie, He doesn't change (Mal 3:6). Back in the early days of the LDS church (November 1, 1831) even Joseph Smith agreed with that:

D&C 1:38
What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth p*** away, my word shall not p*** away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.

In the light of that statement do you still believe that a change in God's word, a change that effects it's meaning, ever occurred in the Bible which you also believe is His word? Can you believe that anything Jesus said that wasn't recorded could have changed what was recorded? That Jesus could have been spirit brothers with the angelic being that became Satan rather than His creator? Your text in no was shows that God changed the teaching that are given to us in the Bible.. Jesus is God, and God's word endures forever (1 Peter 1:25).. IHS jim

[nrajeffreturns]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Like I said, thanks to 2 things, it is possible to "find" support in the Bible for lots of things, including God's approval of slavery and genocide, and an earth-centric universe. Those 2 things are:

1. The ambiguity of many Bible verses.

2. The desire or proclivity of some people to misinterpret things.

One could even be led to believe that the 3 persons of the Godhead are literally one being, if one is not careful.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Like I said, thanks to 2 things, it is possible to "find" support in the Bible for lots of things, including God's approval of slavery and genocide, and an earth-centric universe. Those 2 things are:

1. The ambiguity of many Bible verses.

2. The desire or proclivity of some people to misinterpret things.

One could even be led to believe that the 3 persons of the Godhead are literally one being, if one is not careful.

Aint it funny how you can find controverial things in the Holy Bible, but not support for polygamy, eternal marriage, God the Father having a father, LDSinc. Temple whatever goes on in there, and last but not least, your mormon god having sex with his earthly daughter Mary......

[Sir]

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

Aint it funny how you can find controverial things in the Holy Bible, but not support for polygamy, eternal marriage, God the Father having a father, LDSinc. Temple whatever goes on in there, and last but not least, your mormon god having sex with his earthly daughter Mary......

Wrong.

Just off the top of my head I can cite biblical verses to support the notion of polygamy and eternal marriage for example.

And also it is quite telling that you claim ig.norance to what goes on in the temple but think the Bible doesn't support what goes on inside. You should read Temple and Cosmos by Hugh Nibley, for starters. Quite interesting read about it.

As for God having sex, you seem to be the only one fixated on sex around here. You might consider looking into that issue and figuring out a solution to that problem.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by Sir

Wrong.

Just off the top of my head I can cite biblical verses to support the notion of polygamy and eternal marriage for example.

And also it is quite telling that you claim ig.norance to what goes on in the temple but think the Bible doesn't support what goes on inside. You should read Temple and Cosmos by Hugh Nibley, for starters. Quite interesting read about it.

As for God having sex, you seem to be the only one fixated on sex around here. You might consider looking into that issue and figuring out a solution to that problem.

I'll be around all day, if you got those scriptures. Oh, I guess Brigham Young and I must have something in common.

[Sir]

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

I'll be around all day, if you got those scriptures.

Nah. No point. The point is I can use the Bible to support such beliefs. That was what Jeff is saying. Obviously you will disagree with the verses I cite to support it, which was the other part of Jeff's point.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by Sir

Nah. No point. The point is I can use the Bible to support such beliefs. That was what Jeff is saying. Obviously you will disagree with the verses I cite to support it, which was the other part of Jeff's point.

Oh shoot, another LDSinc. cop-out.