I don’t think I ever made the effort to prove that the LDS Church is false. I researched to prove that it was true and I found that I can not honestly say that it is true.
Most of the things you bring up I have researched. I’ll go thru them one by one.
>> Generally the appellation of Apostate is reserved for those who openly reject the church, not for their children. The Doctrine and Dogma of a church can be apostate without the members themselves being apostate. Just my opinion, you seem to still have an open mind, so I would not even call you an apostate, merely “Troubled”. I hope that does not offend you.
That’s a very fine line to say that the other Christian churches are apostate, but the people who follow their doctrine are not apostates. A very fine line there; respectfully, I would differ with you on that.
I take no offense to being labeled “Troubled”, but I have simply studied the Mormon prophets (Joseph Smith, Brigham Young mainly) through their own words oftentimes (Journal of Discourses) and much of the points on Mormon scriptures (Bruce Mckonkie, etc) and I’ve found their interpretations of scriptures to be logically incorrect. For example, I’ll address the illustration you put forward regarding Revelation below.
>> Now this rebellion happened before the world was, so Satan and all of us must have existed then in some form.
I believe the Book of Revelation is John’s prophetic viewing of times to come after his viewing. They were not events that had already transpired before John had the viewing. Therefore, the war in Heaven could not have happened before Adam and Eve. Is there something that leads you to believe that that “war in heaven” happened before John’s vision? I’ve found nothing to support that. In verse 1 of Revelation: “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must SHORTLY COME TO PASS; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John”
See the “shortly come to pass” part. That tells me that the things which he is being shown are to come to pass after his vision. So, logically, when someone in the Mormon church tells me that Revelation speaks about the war in heaven when Satan was cast out and before Adam and Eve came to the Earth, it just doesn’t make sense.
>> 10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
See, here the scripture says that Satan is the ACCUSER of our brethren. It does not say that he is our brother.
>> Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
Again, this scripture says that the sons of God came and Satan came with them. It does not say here that Satan is a son of God, just that he came with them. When that scripture says refers to the sons of God, I understand it to mean the “adoptive” sons of God that Jesus says we become when we accept him as our Savior. But put that aside for a minute, logically, that scripture does not say that Satan is a son of God. Just because he was among the “sons” of God doesn’t mean he was one.
One point about Satan who was originally an arch-angel. We both agree on that. Hebrews chpt 1 vs 11 speaks about how Angels grow old and perish. So, if Satan is an Angel and will grow old and perish, then if Jesus is his literal brother, then would he not grow old and perish too. I can’t accept that as truth.
>> Having read the King Follet discourse a while ago (and I confess it was some time ago) I am not aware of this passage, Intelligence (which is not Spirit matter) cannot be created, nor destroyed, but that is not the same as giving birth to a spirit, or a Baby.
Ok, I’m too tired to look up the discourse, but it’s a great read and I encourage you to take a look at it again. I believe Joseph Smiths use of the word Intelligence is interchanged in his discourse with the word spirit. It doesn’t really matter though, because if our intelligences (i.e or minds existed) were around back then and as Joseph says, God did not have the power to create those intelligences, then logically, Joseph is saying that God did not have the ability to create us (which he says directly in the discourse). That means that God is not Omnipotent, which you said you believe He is Omnipotent. How can you explain that disconnect? If God is Omnipotent, then he can do anything, correct?
Thanks for the discussion, and be assured, I don’t take offense. I am interested to hear your answers to the questions that I have posed.
>>I don’t think I ever made the effort to prove that the LDS Church is false. I researched to prove that it was true and I found that I can not honestly say that it is true.
“Houston, we have a problem” (Grin)
There is a reason we call religions “faiths”. You cannot “prove” Jesus existed. No one can “Prove” the Bible is the word of God. If you were looking for empirical “Proof” that the church is true, I am not surprised you did not find it. Some things can and often are true that cannot be proven with research. These things must be taken on faith. On the other hand you can prove that something cannot be true. Lets take a few examples. I can tell you that I am a Christian, and in lieu of any other facts and because you do not want to be rude, you will believe me. That’s faith. You can then observe me behaving in a most un-Christian manner toward my wife, friends and strangers, and conclude that I am not really a Christian after all.
To say that you can’t prove a church is true in my interpretation just means you don’t have faith in it (which is ok, I am not denigrating your position, just defining it in my terms so you will understand my perspective) that however is vastly different from proving the church is “wrong” Which some of your statements here would have seemed to indicate, like there is no support for Jesus and Satan being brothers in the bible. I have shown you some scriptures and explained that from my perspective they support that View. You respond that they do not. Give ma a break here, these scriptures can be interpreted, and reasonably so , to mean what I say I think they mean which means it could be that I am right. I could also be wrong, but you have yet to give me your interpretation of what they mean.
I believe I said earlier that being a Christian is a personal thing because “Christianity” per se is a stretch for some people. We accept it because we live in a culture based on that faith. I met a Hindu in Taiwan who‘s explanation of Jesus was a bit embarrassing, I will try to capture the essence of his words and you should read this with a British accent in your mind since that was where he studied English. “You mean to tell me that you believe that this bloke who lived 2,000 years ago, was a convicted criminal, and died nailed to a bit of wood is going to hear your prayers and let you into heaven after absolving you of sin? That’s a bit dodgy isn’t it?” The most glorious truths can be phrased in such a way to make them sound silly, but yes, even phrased that way, I will state that I believe in Christ.
To sum up, the only way you can “Believe” a religion is through personal revelation.
>> Most of the things you bring up I have researched. I’ll go thru them one by one.
You can research a religion all you want to and you will never “prove” any religion true.
>> That’s a very fine line to say that the other Christian churches are apostate, but the
>>people who follow their doctrine are not apostates. A very fine line there; respectfully,
>>I would differ with you on that.
Well, it’s my opinion, I would not expect for us to agree on very opinion I hold or this would be a very short, very boring conversation wouldn’t it? (grin)
>> I believe the Book of Revelation is John’s prophetic viewing of times to come after his viewing.
IMHO some of Revelations is back ground information for his revelations about the future.
>> Is there something that leads you to believe that that “war in heaven” happened before John’s vision?
Well, John did not say in the year… (grin) however, either Satan was cast out of heaven to the earth before the Vision, or no one before Christ had to deal with Satan here. Hmm, there was this story about a Garden and a snake… (grin) lets just day it fits the timeline I have constructed in my head to have this war happen before the world was created. When do you think this war in heaven is going to happen?
>> See the “shortly come to pass” part. That tells me that the things which he is being shown are to come to pass after his vision. So, logically, when someone in the Mormon church tells me that Revelation speaks about the war in heaven when Satan was cast out and before Adam and Eve came to the Earth, it just doesn’t make sense.
English is a low context language. The words that we use typically have a specific meaning that does not change with the sentence they are placed in. Many other anguages however are High context languages, the only way you can see the correct meaning is “in context” where you have all the back ground material. I have found the Bible to be a high context environment; the parables for example take on more meaning as I stuffy the culture in which they were given. If you don’t mind I’d like to give an example:
I had the opportunity to go to Israel in April of 2000. I arrived at about 2:00 AM via a rental car from the airport Jerusalem. As my wife and I came over a pass and could see Jerusalem, it glowed in the moonlight, the old city is carved from a unique Golden limestone that is plentiful there. This glowing city caught the light from stars, moon and some electric light, and positively glowed in the night. My wife and I observing that it was set on a hill in the middle of the valley looked at each other and said “A city that is set upon a hill cannot be hid.” For the true meaning and impact of Jesus’ statement had never hit home to us before. He knew that everyone within the sound of his voice had seen Jerusalem at night, and would know what he was talking about. Jerusalem, the city of David, the City on a hill could not be “hid”.
This part that I quoted about the war in heaven is Background information that is glossed quickly over to set the stage for the revelations about the future, in my opinion anyway. I do not ask that you agree with my interpretation, I do however ask if you accept it as a plausible interpretation (I have seen some interpretations of the bible where I could not see how people “got there” and I hope I am not presenting you with such a case here)
>> See, here the scripture says that Satan is the ACCUSER of our brethren. It does not say that he is our brother.
OK, lets break this down:
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
1. Jesus had Brothers (Bretheren)
2. Satan is accusing these Brethren of something
3. This accusation is being done before God (The father)
So, if Jesus had brothers, and was accused before God by Satan, that does not Prove that Satan was Jesus’ brother, but it does prove that Satan thought he could accuse Jesus of something before God. If Jesus and God were indeed the same personage, accusing Jesus of something before God would be as absurd as accusing a judge of a crime while on trial in his court room. Thus God and Christ are separate beings here, and John has just taught us that. Now if God the father and Jesus Christ are Separate beings, and Jesus and Michael are Bothers as this scripture says, and yes, it says that they are our bothers as well, then is it a stretch to believe that Satan (who fell from heaven and was once an angel like Michael http://scriptures.lds.org/en/isa/14/12#12) is also our brother?
>> Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
>>Again, this scripture says that the sons of God came and Satan came with them. It does not say here that Satan is a son of God, just that he came with them.
The Sons of God would look like Jesus who is the preeminent son of God. Jesus looked mortal while upon the earth, indeed, he told his disciples he was in the express image of the father (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/john/14/9) so now we know that God has the form of a man. IF Satan was able to “Sneak in” with the Sons of God we can reasonably assume he has the form of a man also (no horns, no tail, and probably not bright red) If Satan had the form of God, how then would he have that form unless he was created after the manner of God’s Children, and If he was created after the manner of God’s children, is he not our borther?
I do not expect that you will go “Wow, it must be true!” and have a sudden epiphany that the church is true, only that the logic is supportable. If the logic is supportable, then you might be able to find the faith to believe in the “Truth that can never be proven”.
>>When that scripture says refers to the sons of God, I understand it to mean the “adoptive” sons of God that Jesus says we become when we accept him as our Savior.
I can see the logic of what you are saying; can you see the possible interpretation of what I am saying?
>>One point about Satan who was originally an arch-angel. We both agree on that.
>>Hebrews chpt 1 vs 11 speaks about how Angels grow old and perish. So, if Satan is an
>>Angel and will grow old and perish, then if Jesus is his literal brother, then would he
>>not grow old and perish too. I can’t accept that as truth.
OK, lets go to the Scriptures:
Hebrews 1:10&11
10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
I see nothing about angels perishing, the earth and the heavens passing away, yes.
>>Ok, I’m too tired to look up the discourse, but it’s a great read and I encourage you to take a look at it again.
Encouragement accepted, Grin.
>>I believe Joseph Smiths use of the word Intelligence is interchanged in his discourse with the word spirit.
Yes, as all men are human, but not all humans are men (my wife not be happy to be told she was a man…)
>> It doesn’t really matter though, because if our intelligences (i.e or minds existed) were
>>around back then and as Joseph says, God did not have the power to create those
>>intelligences, then logically, Joseph is saying that God did not have the ability to
>>create us (which he says directly in the discourse). That means that God is not
>>Omnipotent, which you said you believe He is Omnipotent. How can you explain that
>>disconnect?
I once ran into an atheist who claimed he could prove God was not omnipotent. I told him to “lay it on me” His “logic” was that ”God can’t create a Rock so big that he can’t lift it”. I responded that God was Omniscient. He said So, what does that mean? I said God is not stupid. This just goes to show that we can run our selves into logical corners that the same level of logic that got us into the corner cannot get us out of. God uses intelligence which cannot be created, nor destroyed, and he has an infinite supply of it, so what’s the problem again? Oh, the definition of omnipotence. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/omnipotent) I checked just to be sure and there is no conflict with Joseph Smith’s testimony of God and omnipotence.
>> If God is Omnipotent, then he can do anything, correct?
There are some things God just can’t do, like break his word.
>> Thanks for the discussion, and be assured, I don’t take offense. I am interested to hear your answers to the questions that I have posed.
I hope you will think about my answers, and I hope you understand I have limited myself to the Bible in answering your questions. The reason I did this is that the truth is in the Bible, but it is difficult to find because the Bible is self contradictory. I could have been more specific if I had used the D&C and the Book of Mormon, but since those are scriptures only if Joseph Smith was a prophet, arguing that he was prophet by his statements is kind of like picking yourself up by your belt to get over a fence you can’t get over any other way.
That said, the only way you will ever know the truth is to have it revealed to you, and not by me. (I have a high opinion of myself grin, but not that high)
Note to self, Write smaller posts, or failing that use a smaller font so they look smaller. (grin)