Posted on 07/05/2007 3:00:33 AM PDT by Gamecock
kobol... kolob. Neither exists. What is the difference?
Not for you anyways....
LOL
“Press on! It will be clear to any rational human that Mormon doctrine is contrary to the Bible “
To many, it is clear to any rational human that anything other than Roman Catholic doctrine is contrary to the Bible.... are you Roman Catholic or a member of what many consider satanism?
Are you a Catholic? Or what some consider a heretic?
Are you a Catholic? Or what many believe are lamb straying further towards the path of hell?
No, I am not RC. And what do you mean by heretic? Ha.. I don’t think many people would claim they are a heretic.
What made you ask if I was catholic?
You don’t like mormons... I just wonder what else you do not like?
Actually, I don’t have anything against Mormons. I know a few and one in particular is very welcome in my house. It is just that their doctrine is wrong and anti-Christian. They deny the God of the bible. And that is what this thread is about, or at least I thought it was. What are you?
To condemn the spiritual beliefs of individuals is anti objectionist, anti individual, and all too liberal.
Mormons deserve to be treated with high respect. Their doctrine is theirs. Just as Southern Baptist, Methodist, and even Anglican.
You may say this all you want but God knows your reason for saying these ugly things...
God can see into your heart and you mind lupie and why you and others say this kind of stuff
So even if you and others want to continue in your witch hunt on the LDS I know that the Lord is aware of all your behaviors!
I am very well aware that the Lord God knows my heart, as He does yours. On that we agree. We just disagree on whether it is His truth I speak, or what you say is ugly. Each will be held accountable to who we say that He is. And I rest completely in that Truth.
You say you have trouble understanding the Trinity -- "I cannot seem to wrap my mind around the idea that three are not three, but one."
From this I take it you also must not understand the meaning of Christ's words -- "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30).
Yet you say you believe in the Bible.
Christians understand that the doctrine of the Trinity is a revealed truth. If you cannot understand that God the Father is separate but the same as God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, then it hasn't been given to you to know this distinction, and thus you follow some faith other than Christianity.
what does it mean by "dividing the substance"?
What does it mean, "incomprehensible"?
What does it (begotten) mean here?
What does "proceeding" mean?
LOL. Perhaps a dictionary would help.
My impression from speaking to Christians is that the majority imagine God the Father to be a man with long flowing beard and a halo, usually wearing a robe. Jesus they imagine much the way he is depicted in religious art. The Holy Spirit is a spirit, perhaps in the form of a dove.
I don't know any Christians like that. Not to say there aren't some like that, but I haven't met them. If those are the Christians you know, perhaps you might try meeting more people.
Do you believe that some men will rule their own planets when they die? (I can't find the answer to that question in a dictionary, so I thought I'd ask.)
Do you believe there are three levels of heaven (three "degrees of glory")? --
•Telestial - where unbelievers go•Terrestrial - for religious people who aren't Mormons and for Mormons who have not met the requirements of the
•Celestial - for Mormons who have kept ALL of the laws and ordinances of their church.
What will the celestial heaven (kingdom) be like for a good Mormon? Will he be a god; will he rule over a planet with his wives and spirit children?
Do you believe God was once a man?
If you can manage to believe in the above, but have trouble grasping the Trinity, then I guess it just goes to show the world is filled with all kinds of knowledge. Some Scriptural and some not so much.
No you said that the LDS
“They deny the God of the bible.”
That is a lie to say that lupie or even to imply it!
This is not truth this is an opinion and a ugly one at that!
As a convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints I know it is the same God of the Bible I grew up with the Lord, he was with me in all the harsh days of my childhood from a tot on up!
Rameumptom:”Besides that you seek to exclude Mormons from “orthodoxy” (another non-biblical term) for a differing view on so called “total depravity” is ridiculous.”
This was not the intent of my post. Logophile asked me to define a true Christian. I was not implying that my primary gripe with Mormons is their view of the sinfulness of man. In my earlier post (#64) highlighted my oposition to Mormonism (polytheism).
Rameumptom:”There are many Chritian Father’s who reject your view of “orthodoxy” including Justin martyr, Origen, Hipollytus etc. Are they Christian?”
Luk 18:26 Those who heard it said, “Then who can be saved?”
Luk 18:27 But he said, “What is impossible with men is possible with God.”
Let us be thankful that what may appear impossible is possible in Christ Jesus. I am not perfect nor is my understanding complete. Yet I do contend without hesitation that Jesus Christ has died for ALL my sins and hence I am forgiven and therefore redeemed.
That being said, I do believe God is not a God of confusion - instead, he is a God of truth, logic and consistency. Therefore, we cannot say two contradictory statements are both true. There is a correct (and absolute) thinking on these theological issues and Paul exhorts us to continually search the Holy Scriptures to discern these truths.
Also consider what Jesus taught:
Luk 12:48 But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.
I don’t contend that we will ever truly know God fully - not ever. But there is a minimum requirment called out in scripture and those who are disqualified will suffer the eternal wrath of God. Perhaps as Jesus implies in Luke, some may even have more responsibility than “the minimum” to qualify. It may be that some of these “Christian Fathers” fall into this category???
Thanks. I already followed the first link, and was not disappointed. The beginning paragraph is very interesting:
The term "Trinity" is not a Biblical term, and we are not using Biblical language when we define what is expressed by it as the doctrine that there is one only and true God, but in the unity of the Godhead there are three coeternal and coequal Persons, the same in substance but distinct in subsistence. A doctrine so defined can be spoken of as a Biblical doctrine only on the principle that the sense of Scripture is Scripture. And the definition of a Biblical doctrine in such unbiblical language can be justified only on the principle that it is better to preserve the truth of Scripture than the words of Scripture. The doctrine of the Trinity lies in Scripture in solution; when it is crystallized from its solvent it does not cease to be Scriptural, but only comes into clearer view. Or, to speak without figure, the doctrine of the Trinity is given to us in Scripture, not in formulated definition, but in fragmentary allusions; when we assembled the disjecta membra into their organic unity, we are not passing from Scripture, but entering more thoroughly into the meaning of Scripture. We may state the doctrine in technical terms, supplied by philosophical reflection; but the doctrine stated is a genuinely Scriptural doctrine.
This confirms what I have suspected: the doctrine of the Trinity is not Biblical, but philosophy mixed with Scripture. Forgive me if I prefer scripture without the philosophy.
From this I take it you also must not understand the meaning of Christ's words -- "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). Yet you say you believe in the Bible.
Indeed I do believe the Bible. And I know that Jesus also prayed to the Father that the disciples "may be one, even as we are one" (John 17:22; see also 17:20-23). I do not see how our Savior's prayer can be reconciled with the doctrine of the Trinity expressed in the Athanasian Creed.
Christians understand that the doctrine of the Trinity is a revealed truth. If you cannot understand that God the Father is separate but the same as God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, then it hasn't been given to you to know this distinction, and thus you follow some faith other than Christianity.
Perhaps Christians understand that the doctrine is revealed (although not in the Bible). However, I doubt that many of them actually understand the doctrine itself. Whenever I have asked for a simple explanation, most Christians either evade the question or offer up some form of Modalism.
LOL. Perhaps a dictionary would help.
You are being evasive.
For something that is held to be so essential, it is surprising that the doctrine of the Trinity is present in the Bible only as "fragmentary allusions" that must be assembled from "the disjecta membra" of scripture. It is hard to see how such a doctrine can be held as essential to defining who is and who is not a Christian.
Well, I have to get the children to bed. The answers to your questions about my beliefs will have to wait until a later post.
I didn’t see an answer to a question posed by someone else:
“Do you believe God was once a man?”
HUH?
Since you beleive in the Trinity all in one do you believe that Jesus was once like man?
When it comes to Jews and Gentiles I think its safe to say that the Mormon church and their apologists definitely have a double standard in their brand of modern day mysticism beliefs. First, we have Joseph Smith declaring through revelation that Zion (location of the New Jerusalem where Jesus will reign for 1000 years) is to be built in Jackson County, Missouri; and he declares a specific border between the lands of US white settlers and American Indians to be the line separating Jew and Gentile with the Indians (called Lamanites) being referred to as Jews. See http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/57/4b in Latter-day scriptures for more on this. Next, we have sophisticated scientific research in the 20th century and the present plugging holes into the Mormon scriptural claims about the American Indians' ancestry. Finally, the apologists and defenders of Mormonism give more weight to the teachings of anti-Mormon and other non-Mormon scientists on the origins of the American Indians than they do the words of Mormon prophets Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Spencer W. Kimball, Ezra Taft Benson and even Gordon B. Hinckley and other present-day Mormon apostles. Go read what the so-called apologists/scholars have to say at FARMS (now called the Maxwell Institute). Its amazing how none of them think that the Book of Mormon is a record of the principal ancestors of the American Indians. And their scriptures introduction says, "they [Book of Mormon people] are the principal ancestors of the American Indians"(see http://scriptures.lds.org/en/bm/introduction). I stand all amazed at the double standards I see so often from Mormon apologists.
But alas I shouldn't be too harsh because I myself used to be a Mormon apologist. But I'm trying to repent now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.