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

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Again...when you don't have a valid defense, call the opponent a liar. Oh well.

But is what I said REALLY 'completely false'? I said there is no verse that specifically states that Jesus created Satan. And the verse you provided ALSO does not specifically state that Jesus created Satan.

I can also look at verses that say Jesus will forgive ALL sins. And yet there is at least one sin he will NOT forgive. So I am quite content in understanding the verse you posted above that states 'ALL' as being 'ALL' but with at least one exception ie. our spirits.

Again, you show that the Bible does not SPECIFICALLY refute LDS doctrine, and I have shown that the Bible SUPPORTS LDS doctrine as we understand it.

I see when you run into a verse you have no answer in mormonism for you pull a Chubby Checkers and really get down doing the twist.. Jesus is credited in the Bible for the creation of ALL things, all principalities, all powers. Are telling me that Satan isn't a power? Yes of course he is and here he is being said to be a creation of Jesus.. COMPLETELY BIBLICAL. Mormon doctrine that calls Satan the spirit brother of Jesus would then be COMPLETELY wrong!

Jesus is said to forgive all sin but one..

Matthew 12:31
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

It is therefore my Biblical contention that all the evil you have ever done or will ever do will not charged against you only that you treated the promoting of the Holy Spirit with contempt as He tried to bring you to Jesus.. That is indeed blasphemy.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

lol...."ex nihilo"...

Yes out of nothing.. Not even a thought that was based in the Bible.. Just Poof.. A new god created out of nothing.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

as I said, LDS can reconcile all our beliefs about Jesus with the Bible. So it becomes a matter of interpretation of the Bible.

Those two statements can't be reconciled just because you say so.. Show how you would do that.. How is it that the Lord our God is One Lord and yet we have three Gods and no one can contradict it.. That I have to see.. It's nothing bit another Pipe dream or pretzel thinking.. That is having to twist the Bible way out of it's real meaning.. Without doing one or the other you can't reconcile these statements.. IHS jim

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by James Banta

Yes out of nothing.. Not even a thought that was based in the Bible.. Just Poof.. A new god created out of nothing.. IHS jim

Whatever you wanna believe I guess.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Vlad III

Whatever you wanna believe I guess.

Ok I'll believe the Bible and you can believe a man.. That's the way it is here all the time.. The Bible (the word of God) vs Joseph Smith.. They conflict! IHS jim

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

So, did Jesus create God the Father?

Is this a serious question Mark? Of course Jesus did not create God the Father. Remember that Christians believe in ONE God not many gods, so this may be the reason for your confusion. Please explain this verse from a LDS point of view.

Colossians 1:16 For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I will paraphrase it clarity and convenience. The Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation except for the doctrines that are vague.

This is completely false. I never said that. Either you can't read or you have misrepresented my post. Here is my post again. Notice the underlined portion is NOT, I repeat NOT speaking about salvation and this should be clear given the preceding sentences.

Originally Posted by Billyray

This is an excellent point on your point because it shows your error. Mainstream Christianity with rare exceptions is in agreement on salvation. So your statement "conflicting and contradictory doctrines are acceptable" is completely a straw man argument and is completely false. The Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation. Within scripture some doctrine are extremely clear and some doctrine are more vague, we may differ somewhat in the vague areas.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

No BillyRay I am not alluding to priesthood authority here. I am making the argument that the Bible teaches us thhat certain ordinances are essential for our salvation.

And what ordinances are absolutely required to live with God again? Please include your explanation of the thief of the cross into your explanation.

[Mesenja]

You said that " if you believe that there is anything you can do that makes you acceptable to God you are in error and will be ****ed." Correct theology therefore is requisite to our salvation.

Originally Posted by James Banta

If a Baptist hold false doctrine about the nature and Person of God they are 100% in error YES. There is no salvation in any thing or any one other that Jesus. For instance if you believe that there is anything you can do that makes you acceptable to God you are in error and will be ****ed. IHS Jim

Father_JD said that "Correct 'theology' ATTENDS THE SAVED,IT IS NOT THE CAUSE OF SALVATION".

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Correct "theology" ATTENDS THE SAVED,IT IS NOT THE CAUSE OF SALVATION."

[Blueskies]

Mes: Then I can take that you believe there's gray areas and that there's no absolute truths or absolute lies? That is very interesting. So, what do you do when a criminal who is caught in the act of stealing says, it wasn't me, you've got the wrong man? Or, how about this one, for I'm sure you're guilty of this, the phone rings, you're busy or just not in the mood to talk so you tell your kids or spouse to tell whomever is on the phone that you're not at home. Now, is this not a lie?? Maybe a white lie, but a lie none the less. You see, in God's eyes. even a white lie is still a lie and a sin. He doesn't see gray areas. "For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Billyray

This is completely false. I never said that. Either you can't read or you have misrepresented my post. Here is my post again. Notice the underlined portion is NOT,I repeat NOT speaking about salvation and this should be clear given the preceding sentences.

You started out by saying that the Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation. Then in the next sentence you are not speaking about the doctrine of salvation.

Originally Posted by Billyray

The Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation. Within scripture some doctrine are extremely clear and some doctrine are more vague,we may differ somewhat in the vague areas.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

You started out by saying that the Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation. Then in the next sentence you are not speaking about the doctrine of salvation.

OK lets break this down for you into 3 separate statements.

1. Mainstream Christianity with rare exceptions is in agreement on salvation.
2. The Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation.

3. Within scripture some doctrine are extremely clear and some doctrine are more vague, we may differ somewhat in the vague areas.

(I think that these statements are pretty clear, and by the first two statements you would know my position.)
Now put all three statements together. Is the doctrine of salvation clear OR is the doctrine of salvation more vague by using statements 1 and 2?

[Mark Beesley]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Is this a serious question Mark? Of course Jesus did not create God the Father. Remember that Christians believe in ONE God not many gods, so this may be the reason for your confusion. Please explain this verse from a LDS point of view.

Colossians 1:16 For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

It's only a serious question if you insist on using Colossians 1:16 as proof-text for your argument that Jesus created Lucifer, because it is just as easy to read Lucifer out of the set of all things created as it is to read the Father out of that set.

[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?

[Jill]

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

I find Joseph Smith jr is a cheap-con-man skirt chasing lying wantabe prophet with a trail of fraud, boasting, dodging, Zig-Zagging, vicious, with a xanthic personality.
I think this just about covers it from A2Z.

If you're going to approach this issue in this way, (which is a very poor way to do it), than cite your sources or I will delete this.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mark Beesley

It's only a serious question if you insist on using Colossians 1:16 as proof-text for your argument that Jesus created Lucifer, because it is just as easy to read Lucifer out of the set of all things created as it is to read the Father out of that set.

Because of your view of the Godhead which consists of separate and distinct gods that create (or organize) other gods. But if your view of the Trinity was of ONE God you would not have that misunderstanding.

Can you give us your take of that verse? Here it is again.
Colossians 1:16 For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Billyray

OK lets break this down for you into 3 separate statements.

1. Mainstream Christianity with rare exceptions is in agreement on salvation.
2. The Bible is clear on the doctrine of salvation.
3. Within scripture some doctrine are extremely clear and some doctrine are more vague, we may differ somewhat in the vague areas.

(I think that these statements are pretty clear,and by the first two statements you would know my position.)

Now put all three statements together. Is the doctrine of salvation clear OR is the doctrine of salvation more vague by using statements 1 and 2?

Apparently those disputed doctrines on which there is disagreement are not important enough to affect your salvation. And we know this to be a 100% fact. Give me a break.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

What are those rare exceptions?

I used the term "rare exceptions" simply as a stipulation because after the many years of dialogue with LDS if I did not include this stipulation you would search out crazy churches for the exception and thus conclude that my statement was false.

Originally Posted by Mesenja

Apparently those disputed doctrines on which there is disagreement are not important enough to affect your salvation. And we know this to be a 100% fact. Give me a break.

The disputed doctrine that I was speaking about was not about salvation but other doctrine. The definition of doctrine is "something that is taught". Thus there are many things that are taught that are not very clear and there are many things that are taught that are very clear from the Bible. Let me give you some examples of doctrine (something that is taught) and see if you can guess which ones are clear and which ones are not so clear.

1. Jesus died for our sins
2. Role of dinosaurs in creation and age of the earth.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

You said that " if you believe that there is anything you can do that makes you acceptable to God you are in error and will be ****ed." Correct theology therefore is requisite to our salvation.



Father_JD said that "Correct 'theology' ATTENDS THE SAVED,IT IS NOT THE CAUSE OF SALVATION".

You can't be saved believing Jesus is a scare crow in your back yard.. IHS jim

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

What you can show me is how you agree with Billy. Billy said that "everyone would like to think that they are right about every issue concerning Jesus but this may not be possible." while you said that this was ****ogous to drinking "a full gl*** of filth."

Billy said that there are "core beliefs about Jesus that distinguish Christians from non Christians" and we agree on the essentials we claim the right to disagree on other issues that are not "clearly laid out by God in his word" while you took the diametrically opposite view and argued that "If you back away from truth you fall immediately into LIES. All truth or all lies. There is no half way. A half truth is still nothing more than a lie."

Yes I believe that many people that believe in a false god believe their faith is based in the true God.. So I agree with Bill on that count.. While doing so I stand by my statement that if you believe that your God is a creation of some other god in total disagreement with God's word you are 100% wrong. Even if some of your doctrines contain truth.. You have mixed purity with filth and the result is filth.. Think about a gl*** half filled with pure water and then the other half is fill with sewer water.. Isn't the whole gl*** now sewer water? So it is with half truths. They are nothing more that 100% lies.. IHS jim

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by James Banta

Yes I believe that many people that believe in a false god believe their faith is based in the true God. So I agree with Bill on that count. While doing so I stand by my statement that if you believe that your God is a creation of some other god in total disagreement with God's word you are 100% wrong. Even if some of your doctrines contain truth. You have mixed purity with filth and the result is filth. Think about a gl*** half filled with pure water and then the other half is fill with sewer water. Isn't the whole gl*** now sewer water? So it is with half truths. They are nothing more that 100% lies. IHS Jim

I asked you do you agree that if Billy believes that "everyone would like to think that they are right about every issue concerning Jesus but this may not be possible" or is believing in half truths still ****ogous to "a gl*** half filled with pure water and then the other half is fill with sewer water. So it is with half truths. They are nothing more that 100% lies." Oh and James are you using the New Math?

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Blueskies

Mes:Then I can take that you believe there's gray areas and that there's no absolute truths or absolute lies? That is very interesting. So, what do you do when a criminal who is caught in the act of stealing says, it wasn't me,you've got the wrong man? Or,how about this one,for I'm sure you're guilty of this,the phone rings,you're busy or just not in the mood to talk so you tell your kids or spouse to tell whomever is on the phone that you're not at home. Now,is this not a lie? Maybe a white lie,but a lie none the less. You see,in God's eyes. even a white lie is still a lie and a sin. He doesn't see gray areas. "For ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

How did you ever come to that conclusion? I never said that everything is ethically ambiguous. What I am asking James is to resolve the conflict between what he said and the position that Billy took.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I asked you do you agree that if Billy believes that "everyone would like to think that they are right about every issue concerning Jesus but this may not be possible". . .

Mesenja, reading your post above it seems like you are misrepresenting my position, but what else is new, so I would like clarification from you.

Here is my quote in your post "everyone would like to think that they are right about every issue concerning Jesus but this may not be possible". You follow my quote with YOUR words "is believing in half truths". Are you equating my quote with half truths?

[Vlad III]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Mesenja, reading your post above it seems like you are misrepresenting my position, but what else is new, so I would like clarification from you.

Here is my quote in your post "everyone would like to think that they are right about every issue concerning Jesus but this may not be possible". You follow my quote with YOUR words "is believing in half truths". Are you equating my quote with half truths?

Billy,

I think the point being made is you agree that it may not even be possible that someone can be right on every issue about Jesus. But people like James Banta have said that if you have one thing wrong then you have tainted the whole picture, basically. That's the OP of this thread.

So it boils down to this question: What % of things can a person have wrong about the Biblical Jesus that would make them no longer worshipping that Jesus?

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Mesenja

I asked you do you agree that if Billy believes that "everyone would like to think that they are right about every issue concerning Jesus but this may not be possible" or is believing in half truths still ****ogous to "a gl*** half filled with pure water and then the other half is fill with sewer water. So it is with half truths. They are nothing more that 100% lies." Oh and James are you using the New Math?

What is so hard about this.. 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 100% of the water in the gl***es become sewer water.. Unless you know of a way to separate the clear from the impure? IHS jim