...listEN to some ...

WARNING!!!

A man who remains stiff-necked after much reproof, will suddenly be broken beyond remedy.

Proverbs 29:1

Yep, that about fits the the stereotype of the Mormon missionaries I have seen. I have always said, most Mormons that I have met, have been some of the nicest people I have ever met. The LDS religion they push, however, is a false, evil cult, dragging people to Hell. I don’t care how many of them have the burning in the bosom, that they know it’s true, it’s still a false, evil cult. I wish Mormons would come out of that cult and get saved.

... I don’t care how many of them have the burning in the bosom...

Why don't they ever test the D&C and/or the Pearl of Great Price in this manner?

There is no claim that THESE were ever delivered by angels!

There is no claim that THESE were ever delivered by angels!

I think the D&C and P of GP, were both delivered by an angel. A FALLEN angel. 👎🤣😚

MHGinTN

My complements to you, as you have tried to bring reasoning/scriptures into a religious difference, although I could do without your juvenile insults. Whereas Elsie/Mark17/aMPU guys usually just bring trash talk/hypocrisy .... and aMPU pretty much only bring vile insults (I think that’s all he has).

After our discussion, I realized that the two most predominant women in the Bible are Eve and Mary. In an interesting parallel, God and a Messenger from God (Gabriel) told both women they would conceive; which I find reminiscent of St.Paul’s statement “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead” (1Cor 15:21).

I find your view a s-t-r-e-t-c-h that with Eve, God’s use of ‘conceive’ meant DNA, but that Gabriel’s use of the same word meant surrogate. Clearly your trying to fit biblical evidence into the ‘Homoousis’ element of your +4th century Creeds that contain the ‘Doctrine of the Trinity’.

So ... your not going to convince me on that one. But let’s look at your interpretation of John 4:24 (God is Spirit).

Question. Our communication with God is obviously spiritual not physical. When you worship God, does your Spirit leave your Body? Obviously not. If you have both Spirit and Body and communicate from your spirit to God’s spirit .... then Why can’t God also have a body?

In essence, isn’t this scripture (John 4:24) more about communication with God than a statement of God’s being?

Additional biblical evidence:

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness (Gen 1:26)

using the same words, parallel to: And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth (Gen 5:3)

If God created Adam in his image, and Adam Created Seth in his image .... then it appears God had a Body. (Obviously, Jesus Christ at this time only had a spirit/future body).

One additional thought .... based on Satan’s angels (evil sprits) desperation to get into a body .... any body, even that of a pig (Mat 8:31). There must be something very limiting about being only spirit.....

....there must be something that is better to having both a spirit and a physical body.

When Christ was resurrected he had a glorified physical body where somehow he could be in the physical world and yet not be subjected to physical limitations like gravity/death/communication/mobility.

I suspect that is why he took his resurrected physical body with him to heaven ... it was better.

Next Question: Did God exist before the ‘beginning’?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1)

Obviously, Christ was the ‘Word’

Did God exist before the Beginning? ...or was the “Beginning” spoken of only the beginning of his creations?

Biblical Evidence:

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”. (Gen 1:1)

It appears that the “Beginning” was only the beginning of God’s creation phase.

So ... if God existed before the ‘Beginning’ Did the ‘Word’ exist before the ‘Beginning’?

....or was the ‘Word’ the first of God’s creations in the ‘Beginning’?

“ and aMPU pretty much only bring vile insults”

I quoted your prophet and asked if you believe him?

So... is it vile to quote Joseph Smith, or vile to ask you If you agree with Smith??

Smith said people looking like Quakers live on the moon, with lifespans of 1,000 years.

Is Smith right or wrong teppe??

“ Did the ‘Word’ exist before the ‘Beginning’?

Better question teppe...

Joseph Smith said your heavenly father used to be a man before he became your god.

teppe, do you believe your heavenly father used to be a man that became a god?

Mormon, wearing magic underwear, believes god was a regular human who became a god who had sex with Mary...and has a harem of heavenly mothers to breed... but is just one of an unlimited number of mormonic gods...

Wants to tell Christians they don’t understand the nature of The One God of Scripture.

Read all about it!!!!

Leave the Mormons to their own devices. They have been warned. They might need some flame retardant magic underwear, but that’s on them.

👍🏼

You offered, "I find your view a s-t-r-e-t-c-h that with Eve, God’s use of ‘conceive’ meant DNA, but that Gabriel’s use of the same word meant surrogate." Apples and oranges are not the same ... Eve conceived by union of her gamete with the gamete from Adam. The term DNA is not the same as the meaning of conceive.

Mary certainly was a surrogate, whether her ovum was used or not, since God chose her to bear The Son, not a blood descendant of Joseph. But even that is in question since God could so easily use chromosomes from any descendant from David and or Solomon, and from Eve to Bathsheba, or Ruth, etc.

You and I do not have a single data point upon which to assume God used an ovum from the virgin Mary. In fact, had God used an ovum from Mary, He, GOD, would have defrauded Joseph according to Jewish marriage vows! That you could not reach that conclusion is yet another example of using as axiomatic that which you seek to prove, namely that The Creator God hasDNA which He used to conceive Jesus. God the Father Almighty is a Spirit and must be worshiped in spirit and truth. We really do not know from any evidence where the DNA for the body of Jesus was sourced, BUT we know it was an act of God the Creator. By what means we know not..

The Bible tells you that the message to Mary was she would conceive in her womb. That phrase means a life would implant in her uterine lining. It tells you and me nothing of where the embryo is from or whom is the chromosome donor. All we know is the man Jesus had God's life in His HUMAN SPIRIT in the fullness of God, making Him in Spirit the same as God. A born again member of God's family has the life of God in his spirit, but not in the fullness that IS GOD.

The body is not the soul (behavior mechanism) and the soul is not the spirit. We can deduce that the chromosome origin of the body Jesus occupied was descended from David who was descended from Adam. For all we can guess, God took chromosomes from David and Bathsheba to form the embryo that was Jesus then.

I am afraid you have made an assumption based on zero statement from me: "Clearly your trying to fit biblical evidence into the ‘Homoousis’ element of your +4th century Creeds that contain the ‘Doctrine of the Trinity’." You want to discredit the concept of Trinity but you also want to pin you negative on me, speciously. I do believe God is The Father Almighty, The Holy Spirit evidenced by the Universe remaining in such an astonishing balance, and God in a man, Christ Jesus. Each aspect of the One God is expressed according to what He, God, is doing.

Before the Universe existed, Jesus was, and all that is was made by Him and for Him, as God would take on flesh and dwell among us. That is what the Bible teaches yet your cult does not want to believe The Almighty as God the Father Almighty was never a man who 'evolved' / 'ascended' to godhood. God has ALWAYS BEEN GOD and Jesus said 'before Abraham I am.' The Y side chromosomes may have come from Abraham and the female chromosomes from Sara. we just do not know from anything God has given us.

Let's move on ...

You surmised: "When you worship God, does your Spirit leave your Body? Obviously not." Who told you that the spirit is in the 4D body? In fact, who told you that the soul is in the 4D body? Perhaps it has not occurred to you that there is at least one more coordinate system of space and time which is not the same as the 4D you and I sense!

If I say to you,'Your spirit is attached to your soul, and your soul is attached to your body, that does not place soul or spirit in the 4D spacetime of the physical body. It might be that your body is IN the same location as your soul, but the time for the body is different than the time for the soul, so your body would be 'in' the soul only so far as it can intersect the coordinate system of the soul and spirit.

That same concept was true for when Jesus walked among the disciples. His 4D body was 'in God the Father Almighty' and God The Father Almighty was IN HIM (see John 14). As oblique proof of this, the 'time' of your soul is eternal yet the 'time' of your body is finite. The Time of your spirit is also eternal, and will exist in some where/when eternally, in torment or in the Presence of God. Your body is destined for returning to the elements.

The life that is in the body is in the blood. If your soul was sequestered to that body, when all the blood is gone from that physical house where is your soul and spirit? In some where/when that exists eternally, and in torment for rejecting the so Great Grace of God via Christ Jesus, or in the Presence of the Almighty God Creator. God gives you and me that choice for the aspects which have eternal existence, albeit different where/whens.

You asked, "Why can’t God also have a body?" He does, teppe, and we name that Body Christ Jesus. That body is no longer like yours or mine, it is changed to an immortal living with very special powers body. And the great news is You can have the same type of body, eventually, when Jesus comes for His own at the Rapture.

You asserted as if axiomatic, "Obviously, Jesus Christ at this time only had a spirit/future body." Sorry, once again you are stating as axiom that which you seek to prove. You don't know this from God's word and Joseph Smith could not know this either. You and he have assumed without Word from God. You have not one iota of evidence that The Word Who was with God and was God was a spirit, albeit to be of God and with God Who is a Spirit and must be worshiped in spirit and truth makes The Word GOD. So The Son proceeds from The GOD dwelling in a physical body that was in the fullness of God. After all, His name was prophesied as God With Us.

As to the rest of your Gordian 'Not' I leave you with this fact: God created space and time and the word of God says 'God made, etc., so the word was God even before space and time existed ... and He was made flesh and dwelt among us! He is returning soon to gather His unto Himself and return to The Father's House. Do you know enough of the Bible to know where that House is?

Whereas Elsie/Mark17/aMPU guys usually just bring trash talk/hypocrisy

Folks; we've just been called ugly by a toad!

I can't answer for you; but I'll spend the rest of the evening in a corner; whimpering softly.

After our discussion, I realized that the two most predominant women in the Bible are Eve and Mary.

In an interesting parallel, God and a Messenger from God (Gabriel) told both women they would conceive...

Really?

I guess I slept thru the lesson about Gab talkin' to Eve.

You seem to have a lot of unanswered questions.

Hasn't Mormonism filled in these empty spots by now?

Is Smith right or wrong teppe??

This is a TRICK question; teppe!!

Don't answer; just bare your testimony!

Ah...

While this is true; there may be folks with a curiosity about LDS stuff; and actually READ these threads without commenting.

Let those with ears listen to what the Spirit says to the churches.

Revelation 3:22

LOL ... as if

We've all read; here on the pages of FreeRepublic; the discourse from Joseph Smith about him being the next Mohammed.

Perhaps we've overlooked how he was more likely channeling Nostradamus; from the 1530's; three hundred years later; in the 1830's.

Skeptics of Nostradamus state that his reputation as a prophet is largely manufactured by modern-day supporters who shoehorn his words into events that have either already occurred or are so imminent as to be inevitable, a process known as as "retroactive clairvoyance". No Nostradamus quatrain has been interpreted before a specific event occurs, beyond a very general level (e.g., a fire will occur, a war will start).

Preparation and methods of prophecy

While Nostradamus was clearly familiar with recent Latin printed editions of a range of esoteric writings, as well as having a passing acquaintance with astrology, recent research has shown that most of his prophetic work was based on paraphrasing collections of ancient end-of-the-world prophecies (mainly Bible-based) and supplementing their insights by projecting known historical events and identifiable anthologies of omen-reports into the future. It is thanks to this that his work contains so many predictions involving ancient figures such as Sulla, Marius, Nero, Hannibal and so on, as well as descriptions of "battles in the clouds" and "frogs falling from the sky". The end of the world, after all, was confidently expected at the time to occur in either 1800 or 1887, or possibly in 2242, depending on the system adopted.

His historical sources include easily identifiable passages from Livy, Suetonius, Plutarch and a range of other classical historians, as well as from the chronicles of medieval authors such as Villehardouin and Froissart. Many of his astrological references, by contrast, are taken almost word-for-word from the Livre de l'estat et mutations des temps of 1549/50 by Richard Roussat. Even the planetary tables on which he based such birthcarts as he was unable to avoid preparing himself are easily identifiable by their detailed figures, even where (as is usually the case) he gets some of them wrong.

His major prophetic source was evidently the Mirabilis liber of 1522, which contained a range of prophecies by Pseudo-Methodius, the Tiburtine Sibyl, Joachim of Fiore, Savonarola and others (his Preface contains no less than 24 biblical quotations, all but two of them in exactly the same order as Savonarola). Further material was gleaned from Petrus Crinitus's De honesta disciplina of 1504, which included extracts from Psellus's De daemonibus and the De Mysteriis Aegyptiorum..." (Concerning the mysteries of Egypt...), a book on Chaldean and Assyrian magic by Iamblichus, a 4th?century neo-Platonist. Latin versions of both had recently been published in Lyon.

http://nostradamus.org/

We've all read; here on the pages of FreeRepublic; the discourse from Joseph Smith about him being the next Mohammed.

But perhaps we all need a refresher...

"I Will Be a Second Mohammed"

In the heat of the Missouri 'Mormon War' of 1838, Joseph Smith made the following claim,

"I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was "the Alcoran [Koran] or the Sword". So shall it eventually be with us: "Joseph Smith or the Sword!" [1]

It is most interesting that a self-proclaimed Christian prophet would liken himself to Mohammed, the founder of Islam. His own comparison invites us to take a closer look as well. And when we do, we find some striking and troubling parallels. Consider the following.

Mohammed and Joseph Smith both had humble beginnings. Neither had formal religious connections or upbringing, and both were relatively uneducated. Both founded new religions by creating their own scriptures. In fact, followers of both prophets claim these scriptures are miracles since their authors were the most simple and uneducated of men.[2]
Both prophets claim of having angel visitations, and of receiving divine revelation to restore pure religion to the earth again. Mohammed was told that both Jews and Christians had long since corrupted their scriptures and religion. In like manner, Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. In both cases, this corruption required a complete restoration of both scripture and religion. Nothing which preceded either prophet could be relied upon any longer. Both prophets claim they were used of God to restore eternal truths which once existed on earth, but had been lost due to human corruption.
Both prophets created new scripture which borrowed heavily from the Bible, but with a substantially new spin. In his Koran, Mohammed appropriates a number of Biblical themes and characters, but he changes the complete sense of many passages, claiming to 'correct' the Bible. In so doing he changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place. In like manner, Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon, much of which is plagiarized directly from the King James Bible. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon claims that this same Bible has been substantially corrupted and is therefore unreliable. In addition, Joseph Smith went so far as to actually create his own version of the Bible itself, the 'Inspired Version' in which he both adds and deletes significant portions of text, claiming he is 'correcting' it. In so doing he also changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place.
As a part of their new scriptural 'spin', both prophets saw themselves as prophesied in scripture, and both saw themselves as a continuation of a long line of Biblical prophets. Mohammed saw himself as a continuation of the ministry of Moses and Jesus. Joseph Smith saw himself as a successor to Enoch, Melchizedek, Joseph and Moses. Joseph Smith actually wrote himself into his own version of the Bible by name.
Both prophets held up their own scripture as superior to the Bible. Mohammed claimed that the Koran was a perfect copy of the original which was in heaven. The Koran is therefore held to be absolutely perfect, far superior to the Bible and superceding it. In like manner, Joseph Smith also made the following claim. "I told the Brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding its precepts, than by any other book." [3]
Despite their claim that the Bible was corrupt, both prophets admonished their followers to adhere to its teachings. An obvious contradiction, this led to selective acceptance of some portions and wholesale rejection of others. As a result, the Bible is accepted by both groups of followers only to the extent that it agrees with their prophet's own superior revelation.
Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith taught that true salvation was to be found only in their respective religions. Those who would not accept their message were considered 'infidels', pagans or Gentiles. In so doing, both prophets became the enemy of genuine Christianity, and have led many people away from the Christ of the Bible.
Both prophets encountered fierce opposition to their new religions and had to flee from town to town because of threats on their lives. Both retaliated to this opposition by forming their own militias. Both ultimately set up their own towns as model societies.
Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith left unclear instructions about their successors. The majority of Mohammed's followers, Sunni Muslims, believe they were to elect their new leader, whereas the minority, Shiite Muslims, look to Ali ibn Abi lib, whom they consider Divinely appointed, as the rightful successor to Muhammad, and the first imam. (Ali was the cousin and son-in-law of the Islamic prophet Muhammad). Similarly, the majority of Joseph Smith's followers, Mormons, believed their next prophet should have been the existing leader of their quorum of twelve apostles, whereas the minority, RLDS, believed Joseph Smith's own son should have been their next prophet. Differences on this issue, and many others, have created substantial tension between these rival groups of each prophet.
Mohammed taught that Jesus was just another of a long line of human prophets, of which he was the last. He taught that he was superior to Christ and superceded Him. In comparison, Joseph Smith also made the following claim.

"I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him, but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet." [4] In light of these parallels, perhaps Joseph Smith's claim to be a second Mohammed unwittingly became his most genuine prophecy of all.

[1] Joseph Smith made this statement at the conclusion of a speech in the public square at Far West, Missouri on October 14, 1838. This particular quote is documented in Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, second edition, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), p. 230-231. Fawn Brodie's footnote regarding this speech contains valuable information, and follows. â€œExcept where noted, all the details of this chapter [16] are taken from the History of the [Mormon] Church. This speech, however, was not recorded there, and the report given here is based upon the accounts of seven men. See the affidavits of T.B. Marsh, Orson Hyde, George M. Hinkle, John Corrill, W.W. Phelps, Samson Avard, and Reed Peck in Correspondence, Orders, etc., pp. 57-59, 97-129. The Marsh and Hyde account, which was made on October 24, is particularly important. Part of it was reproduced in History of the [Mormon] Church, Vol. III, p. 167. See also the Peck manuscript, p. 80. Joseph himself barely mentioned the speech in his history; see Vol. III, p. 162.

[2] John Ankerberg & John Weldon, The Facts on Islam, (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1998), pp.8-9. Eric Johnson, Joseph Smith & Muhammed, (El Cajon, CA: Mormonism Research Ministry, 1998), pp. 6-7.

[3] Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.4, pp.461.

[4] Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.6, pp.408-409.