“Firstly, you can cut and paste a huge amount of material like so many do to try to drown an opponent in details all you want,”
It was a factual, well referenced article on the single specific topic we were discussing. It establishes a factual basis for our claims.
“will not deter me from addressing the main points which differentiate Mormonism and counterfeit belief systems from true Biblical Christianity.”
Then address the points in the article, or admit by your avoidance that you can’t.
“You replied: And from my POV, it is orthodox Christianity that has a false and confused concept of the Godhead.
I would expect that to be your point of view,”
Of course, but what makes your POV any better than mine? You can’t just declare yourself right because you believe yourself right.
“When Jesus asked the disciples, “Who do YOU say that I AM?”, it was because many had confused and wrong concepts of His Person. Peter’s reply; “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God.”, that means something, and is defined by the Scriptures in the Bible,”
And we Mormons agree that Jesus is ‘the Christ, the Son of the Living God’ and that makes us Christians by definition.
“not the additional works of Joseph Smith and his plagerized BOM, or other works of fiction such as the Pearl of Great Price.”
The BoM quotes from the Bible, so what, it represents a rather small part of the whole. The NT quotes from the OT, do you then call the NT plagiarized too? I hold the BoM, D&C and PoGP to also be the word of God, you opinion of them carries no weight with me.
“The Church from the very beginning, starting with the Apostles, believed and taught that Jesus Christ was and IS eternally Divine, co-eternal, co-equally Divine with the Father and the Holy Spirit, and NOT a created being as the Arians and the modern day Arians such as Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses falsely believe and preach.”
We believe Christ to be the Jehovah of the Old Testament, he was with the Father in the beginning and at his Father’s direction created the material universe we see around us. He is the Great I AM, the God of Israel. You talk of Christ as ‘begotten, not created’ yet when we say that his spirit was begotten by the Father in the beginning, suddenly you jump around saying we teach a created Christ. I find it hard to take such self contradictory posturing as having any serious merit.
Christ was also pretty clear about the Father being greater than he (John 14: 28), and that he learned and grew and progressed, increasing wisdom in favor with God as he did so (Luke 2: 52), that Christ looked to the Father as his God (John 20: 17) that he was exalted after his resurection (Acts 2:32-33).
I feel the Bible is very clear the Christ is subordinate to the Father, and as demonstrated in the article I posted, subordinationalism was orthodox in the early church, not trinity. When you take all the quotes used to claim that the trinity was taught by the early church, and remove all those that are also consistent with subordinationalism you find nothing specifically for the trinity until around 200AD.
“To be a Christian means something. One must believe certain things about God, Christ, Salvation, etc”
Nope, again check the dictionary. Beyond a belief in Christ there is no other requirement to be a Christian, that is also how the term is generally understood and to use it differently is deceptive. Words mean things, and you don’t get to pick the meaning.
“A dictionary does not define what orthodox Christian beliefs are, the Bible does”
First, we don’t claim to be orthodox Christians, we claim to be Christians. Call us unorthodox Christians if you want to distance yourself from us in a truthful way.
Second, what is orthodox and what is not is defined by majority opinion, it has nothing to do with being correct. Whatever interpretations theologians come up with that become accepted by the majority are by definition orthodox. It was once orthodox that the world was flat and the sun went around it. Men interpreted the Bible to justify it, they persecuted someone with proof to the contrary, and they were wrong. They are also wrong about some things that are still part of orthodox Christianity today.
You: It was a factual, well referenced article on the single specific topic we were discussing.
No it wasn't.
You: It establishes a factual basis for our claims.
Wrong again.
Me: “will not deter me from addressing the main points which differentiate Mormonism and counterfeit belief systems from true Biblical Christianity.”
You: Then address the points in the article
I addressed the pertainent points as I said I would.
, or admit by your avoidance that you can’t.
Arrogant insults will get you nowhere.
“You: And from my POV, it is orthodox Christianity that has a false and confused concept of the Godhead.
Me: I would expect that to be your point of view,”
You: Of course, but what makes your POV any better than mine?
The Bible does.
You can’t just declare yourself right because you believe yourself right.
I declare the Bible to be right.
Me: “When Jesus asked the disciples, “Who do YOU say that I AM?”, it was because many had confused and wrong concepts of His Person. Peter’s reply; “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God.”, that means something, and is defined by the Scriptures in the Bible,”
You: And we Mormons agree that Jesus is ‘the Christ, the Son of the Living God’ and that makes us Christians by definition.
Wrong, the jesus you declare to be the Christ is a false jesus, a created being and not the Eternal Divine Second Person of the Triune God.
Me: “not the additional works of Joseph Smith and his plagerized BOM, or other works of fiction such as the Pearl of Great Price.”
You: The BoM quotes from the Bible, so what, it represents a rather small part of the whole.
Joseph Smith plagerized entire chapters of Isaiah and claimed they were given to him, and you know it.
The NT quotes from the OT, do you then call the NT plagiarized too?
Different situation, the writers of the NT cite the OT, not insert whole chapters claiming they came from them as Joey Smith did.
You: I hold the BoM, D&C and PoGP to also be the word of God, you opinion of them carries no weight with me.
Anyone is free to live in deception by following those false books of Mormonism.
Me: “The Church from the very beginning, starting with the Apostles, believed and taught that Jesus Christ was and IS eternally Divine, co-eternal, co-equally Divine with the Father and the Holy Spirit, and NOT a created being as the Arians and the modern day Arians such as Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses falsely believe and preach.”
We believe Christ to be the Jehovah of the Old Testament, he was with the Father in the beginning and at his Father’s direction created the material universe we see around us. He is the Great I AM, the God of Israel.
As a created spirit being who was created by the Mormon father god having celestial sex with one of his many celestial wives. Wrong jesus, wrong god.
You: You talk of Christ as ‘begotten, not created’ yet when we say that his spirit was begotten by the Father in the beginning, suddenly you jump around saying we teach a created Christ.
Because the Mormon jesus was "begotten" as Mormonism has taught from it's inception, that the Mormon jesus was "begotten" as Bringem Young said, "In the same manner as any man begets any child", by the Mormon god having sex with his celestial wives, and even taught that the Mormon god had sex with Mary too to produce the baby jesus.
In Christianity, "begotten" does not mean, "created" as Mormonism teaches, it refers to the Father sending the Son.
You: Christ was also pretty clear about the Father being greater than he (John 14: 28), and that he learned and grew and progressed, increasing wisdom in favor with God as he did so (Luke 2: 52),
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT, is the key. Those passages refer to the humanity of Christ, not His Deity. You see, in the One Person of Christ is a unique Person having two distinct Natures, Divine, and human, and the two are not confused. In His humanity God the Father was greater, and Jesus did grow in His humanity, which is what those passages are referring to in context.
that Christ looked to the Father as his God (John 20: 17)
The Father also refers to the Son as God.
Matthew 22:
41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose Son is He?”
They said to Him, “ The Son of David.”
43 He said to them, “How then does David in the Spirit call Him ‘Lord,’ saying:
44 ‘ The LORD said to my Lord,
“ Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool”’?[f](Psalm 110:1)
45 If David then calls Him ‘Lord,’ how is He his Son?” 46 And no one was able to answer Him a word, nor from that day on did anyone dare question Him anymore.
God the Father(Adonai) calls God the Son, Lord(Yahweh--God)
You: I feel the Bible is very clear the Christ is subordinate to the Father
Christ the man submitted His Will to the Will of the Father, which is exactly what those passages refer to.
, and as demonstrated in the article I posted, subordinationalism was orthodox in the early church, not trinity.
Not in the Mormon sense at all. Mormonism takes them out of context as it does the Scriptures and twists them to their own destruction just as Jesus and the Apostles said false teachers and false prophets would do.
When you take all the quotes used to claim that the trinity was taught by the early church, and remove all those that are also consistent with subordinationalism you find nothing specifically for the trinity until around 200AD.
Wrong again. The Apostles taught the Eternal nature of Christ as the Eternal Second Person of the Triune God, as did the early church, specifically, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Athenagorus and many others who were contemporaries and disciples of John the Beloved and of Saint Paul.
Me: “To be a Christian means something. One must believe certain things about God, Christ, Salvation, etc”
You: Nope, again check the dictionary. Beyond a belief in Christ there is no other requirement to be a Christian, that is also how the term is generally understood and to use it differently is deceptive. Words mean things, and you don’t get to pick the meaning.
Once again, the dictionary does not define who is a Christian, God's Word the Bible does.
Me: “A dictionary does not define what orthodox Christian beliefs are, the Bible does”
You: First, we don’t claim to be orthodox Christians, we claim to be Christians. Call us unorthodox Christians if you want to distance yourself from us in a truthful way.
Mormons are no more Christian than the Docetists, Gnostics or Arians were.
Just call yourselves what you are, Mormons, period, the followers of a false prophet named Joseph Smith.
Many heretical groups of whom Mormonism is in alignment with tried to call themselves "Christian" too, but found out upon death, just as Mormons will, that they placed their faith in a false god and a false jesus who can neither save nor ever existed.
But for them it was too late, but it is not for you, if you renounce Joseph Smith and the false religion of Mormonism and trust in the True Christ of the Bible and historic Christian faith.
Yeah, right. And we Christians agree that God restores all things (well, at least one day He will), so that makes us "restorationists" as well...therefore, by your logic, I guess you might as well call us true and pure restorationists "Mormons."
(There, you no longer have a monopoly of the word "restoration." And since Mormonism is 100% linked like a trailer to that word, that also means you no longer can so narrowly define "Mormonism." ... You know...kind of like those who redeem the word "Catholic" for its true meaning of "universal" rather than the popular, parochial understanding of "Roman Catholic")