Replies

I Said: We do not believe what you are saying we believe, and if you have any honor you will apologize for spreading misinformation about us.

U Said: What about the cases where you DO believe what we are saying you believe despite your protestations to the contrary?

I Said: Will YOU show any honor by apologizing for spreading misinformation?

Your link to Post# 162 tells me you want me to apologize for misleading you on our belief in Jesus Christ.

If I have inferred your questions incorrectly, please ask it directly next time.

I have on Free Republic in the past stated things that turned out not to be true. Such statements were not intentional, however, when I am proven wrong, I have apologized for my inaccuracy. I have never lied here, for that takes intent.

Now, the Different Jesus thing:

The point of discussion is whether or not Mormons believe in the Same Jesus that Orthodox Christianity does. We do and we don't (clear as mud huh?) We believe in the Biblical Jesus, Only begotten of the Father, born of a virgin named Mary, Worked miracles ordained the Twelve apostles, taught, suffered for our sins, was crucified, rose form the dead and sent his apostles out into the world.

That all sounds pretty standard to most orthodox Christians.

That is why I can say we Believe in the same Jesus. But...

We also believe that Jesus is a spirit child of heavenly father (Making him brother to all other spirits including us and Lucifer.), We believe that Jesus was chosen to be part of the Godhead before time was created, that he organized all God's spirits (that includes you and me) to form this universe, we believe that when he came to earth and gained a body that he will have that body for the rest of the eternities. We believe that he and God the father have separate physical bodies, and are one in heart might mind and strength. We believe the purpose of all creation is to allow us to become like our father in heaven and Jesus Christ whom he has sent. This will be decidedly unfamiliar to "Orthodox Christians" so it is possible to say that we believe in a different Jesus, for we have more knowledge about him than is "common".

There have been attempts to say that this makes us unchristian, this extends back all the way to the Nicene creed and even further. The Arian Controversy was a fight over precisely this point of doctrine and was happening in AD 325 when the Emperor Constantine was trying to reunite his newly united Roman Empire and convened the council at Nicea. The Catholic churches Own records record that he was only interested in the consolidation of his power and wanted to use the church (yes you read right) use the church to pacify his empire.

Here is a quote from these records:

Finally Constantine, having conquered Licinius and become sole emperor, concerned himself with the re-establishment of religious peace as well as of civil order. He addressed letters to St. Alexander and to Arius depreciating these heated controversies regarding questions of no practical importance, and advising the adversaries to agree without delay.

Constantine thought the actual nature of God was "of no practical importance", He just wanted the church to agree, truth was irrelevant to him.

The Council was opened by Constantine with the greatest solemnity. The emperor waited until all the bishops had taken their seats before making his entry. He was clad in gold and covered with precious stones in the fashion of an Oriental sovereign. A chair of gold had been made ready for him, and when he had taken his place the bishops seated themselves. After he had been addressed in a hurried allocution, the emperor made an address in Latin, expressing his will that religious peace should be re-established.

So, you have a pagan sun worshiper opening a religious conference for the Catholic Church, being lauded, then setting the Tone for the meeting by telling everyone that he wanted them to just agree and stop arguing over the nature of God.

The emperor began by making the bishops understand that they had a greater and better business in hand than personal quarrels and interminable recriminations.

Yeah, he offered to make them the State church of Rome if they would just agree on the nature of God and be done with actually caring if they were correct. I have more on my page Here But I will include my Synopsis

Now let's put all this in the context of the day. Constantine had just finally put down the other military leaders of a fractured empire. In spite of Christianity being illegal, it had grown in popularity (or maybe even because it was illegal) Constantine sends letters to these bishops (who are under a death sentence just for being Christians) and invites them to a conference, moreover, he puts "Public transportation" at their disposal to get to the conference with. (Public transportation means military horses and Chariots, there was no bus) Now on top of all this he tells them that one of the topics of the conference will be making the Catholic church the sate church of Rome. Carrot and Stick are now clearly (I hope) visible to all who read this. The bishops meet and Constantine tells them to come to a consensus on the nature of God (the Arian Controversy) and when they do, he makes them the state church. However, there are a few conditions, he wants a definition of God that everyone can accept, and thus we have the Greek religions influence in to the Nicene Creed. Mormons believe that this is the single biggest step into apostasy that can be documented as happening at an exact point in time.

What has all this to do with the question of Mormons believing in the same Jesus as Orthodox Christians? We believe in the Jesus of the Bible, the Jesus the apostles came to know and love, the son of God the creator, the savior, the Jesus the early church believed in. The orthodox Christianity believes in the abominable doctrine that God and Christ are one in substance, in the trinity, the doctrine created by a pagan who co-opted the church and didn't even join until his deathbed. You can go with Constantine as the standard, I will go with the Bible. IF I have to chose between a Jesus as defined by the Bible and one defined by Constantine, i choose the Bible, and Orthodox Christians can chose Constantine, and they can say I don't believe in their Jesus and I will be fine with that. I have a problem if they want to say I don't believe in the Jesus of the Bible and the catch is they think they do, even when their definition didn't come until 325 and because of Constantine.

Are we clear?