xanmad33

Whats interesting to me about these claims is that the Bible is thousands of years old and no claim of it being corrupted has EVER been proven. All you have posted in regard to "lost books" and corruption is complete speculation. With all of the massive manuscript evidence of the Bible, you would think there would be massive discrepancies -but just the opposite is true. New Testament manuscripts agree in 99.5% (5) of the text. Most of the discrepancies that do occur are in spelling and word order through translation. There are only two passages that are disputed by Biblical scholars but no discrepancy is of *any doctrinal significance* (i.e., none would alter basic Christian doctrine). Most Bibles include the options as footnotes when there are discrepancies. How could there be such accuracy over a period of 1,400 years of copying? Two reasons: The scribes that did the copying had meticulous methods for checking their copies for errors. 2) The Holy Spirit made sure we would have an accurate copy of God's word so we would not be deceived Never has one prophesy or fact or anything in it been proven false. Never. I have read pro/con websites of the Bible, I have watched the History channel account and read much of the history myself, (obviously my evidence isn't only coming from my church) and there is nothing damning, not remotely. There may be places hard to understand, but there has never been a proven contradiction. All the speculation, is just that, speculation. And it's ok to speculate, because it forces a good hard look to be done, but its also important when speculating, that you rememeber, it IS speculation, not a fact. The reason I brought the Bible up was to compare it against the Book of Mormon, in evidences, and it reasons for you not trusting it. My question still remains, What about the Book of Mormon? How many translations have been made of it? Is it less reliable in French or German? Does the church put a disclaimer on the Book of Mormon in other languages for translational errors as they do with the Bible? If not, why not? If professional LDS translators can reliably take the English Book of Mormon into French, why can't professional translators take the Greek New Testament into English? Since most likely the answer will be, "thats why we have a prophet", my question becomes, how do you guard against false teachings? If your prophet gave a revelation that differed from church teachings in the past, how do you determine which to follow? If All books of faith are fallable, How do you really know the prophet it true? How do you difinitively know there is a need for a prophet? The apostle Paul warned believers not to listen to anyone who teaches another gospel (Galatians 1:6-8). There are many false teachers who preach a "gospel" and a "Jesus," and a spirit may accompany them. So we know that there are false gospels, false christs and unholy spirits (2 Corinthians 11:3-4, 13-14). How to you protect form that? How do you "test" the spirits? If all books are corrupted in some way,how do you know what parts to use? Im sure the "spirits" would not look, or feel "bad" kwim? How would you really know since Satan is a liar and a deciever, plus he was beautiful in appearance... These are all just my remaining thoughts that I still feel have not been adequately answered throughout this discussion and really, they are at the heart of what I do not understand about LDS.

I read over his paper and I read some rebuttal papers, honestly,there was nothing damning or even proveable imo, I would def not be calling victory if I were you Personally I am not a historian so that means I would need to use sources to gather my information, which clearly you do not want me to do... However as a side note, when I do gather information I use many different sources, and try to find as independant as I can get (not always possible but I try). This thread will just become a revolving display case of this evidence vs. that evidence if I was to gather a case against it anyway... I'm also a little hesitant to participate in this conv anymore because clearly there are people who feel I am persecuting them and that makes me very cautious because I would never want anyone to feel that way... And really, now I understand you do not believe the Bible or the BOM to be infallable and that clears up a lot of my questions right there.

With a quick search I've just found an extremely in depth rebuttal of this book and also the video, and so it goes on...

Thank you I really appreciate that, and honestly this is exactly why I never wanted to talk to my friend about it, because I didn't want to offend him with all my thousands of questions. I hear a lot of claims of persecution, but that is far from what is happening here, this is an online discussion. I thought this would be the best place to ask such questions because it would be less confrontational, and more focussed on facts and matter of fact like discussion rather than emotion. I try to stay away from emotion in these talks for that very reason.. so I may come across cold, but I am not, i promise.

You have yet to define how you came to the most basic assumptions about salvation without the aid of a church. All your most fundamental beliefs have come from the same place you accuse me! Your beliefs all derive from the word of a man. [

Hmmm... I get the feeling you are accusing me of having more of a relationship with the Bible than with God.. well in response to that, the simple answer is no. I have a deep and personal relationship with God, but you must not be so quick to judge the BIble as just a book either. Jesus called it the Living word because God speaks to us through it and he defines our relationship in it. In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the Word WAS God. His word shall not be broken. Why should I not use the Bible after all the evidences are brought forth? My continuous question is why do you believe anything OVER the Bible....If you believe the Bible to be partially true, why not give it a chance that what it says could be all the way true? It claims divine inspiration, and the word used in original language there for inspiration literally translates to a wind overcoming the apostles so they were not in control. If you are trusting in the BOM and all other Mormon doctrines, my question has been why? If you say you believe in the Bible, my question is why do you not believe in all the basic truths found therein. What is the measure for which you have judged? Why have you come to the conclusions you have about both texts? HOW have you come to those conclusions? HAS God himself given you a divine revelation? the reliability of the Bible is verified by believer and non-believer alike. When the Apostle Paul preached the Gospel to the Bereans, how were they to know whether it was true or not? Do the Scriptures teach that they went out and prayed, and asked the Holy Ghost to confirm it? No! in Acts 17:11 WE READ THAT: "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the Word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so." They did not have to rely upon some subjective experience, they had the Scriptures of the Old Testament by which to judge Paul's words. While it is true that James 1:5 tells those who lack wisdom to ask God for it, the context refers to those who are already brethren. It also clearly states they will receive wisdom, NOT knowledge.

I came here looking for answers, but after a few assertations were made about the Bible, I started to do more research and then using common sense, more questions arose out of your un-belief in the BIble as authoratative in all theings. One question has led to another, and people making judgements about me or the Bible has provoked some of my responses here. I am up for a debate/discussion, my feelings arent hurt, but it seems to me any evidence posted to refute any claims made my Mormonism, later comes with accusations of malace. You are not being persecuted as insinuated in the beginning, you are however being asked to clarify hard questions. As Mormon apostle and historian, George A. Smith, has rightly said: "If a faith will not bear to be investigated; if its preachers and professors are afraid to have it examined, their foundation must be very weak." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 14, p.216) The following are similar statements of confidence and challenge: "If this book be of God, it must have sufficient evidence accompanying it to convince the minds of all reasonable persons that it is a Divine revelation...the testimony establishing the truth of the Book of Mormon is far superior to that establishing the Bible in its present form...any person who will carefully examine the subject will be obliged in their hearts to say there is a hundredfold more evidence to prove the Divine authenticity of the Book of Mormon than what we have to prove the Palestine records." (Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, pp. 22, 36, 37) I have been asked MANY questions here over the past couple days and I am trying my best to answer them. I haven't been treated the best here for posing those questions either, and there have been so many questions posed to me that I have even been attacked for not answering everything...and lots of accusations have been made. That's okay and I understand your defensiveness, but please assume benign intent. I get frustrated as you do, but that doesnt mean it's not worth it. I am willing to concede things about your beliefs, but there has yet to be anything I can concede to because it hasent even been argued fairly.. I was under the impression this is a forum for such discussions, if I am not welcome because of such questions, then I will go..

Where do you derive your conclusions about the basic principals of the nature of God? How have you come to the conclusions you have about who he is and what he has said if you have not trusted man along the way? Are you telling me that God himself gave you a divine revelation?

I never said the Bible said the word "trinity" I DID say that the Bible introduced the concept. It is clear, in many places as I have already shown, you are now focussing on a "word" rather than the scriptural description itself. re-read what I already posted about it and you will get an answer to this question. hmm... the rest is un-biblical its all completely un-biblical--my point.

Better evidence has pretty much been my point all the way through, please go back and read it. Read ABOUT the BIble --INDEPENDANT RESEARCH-- with NO hidden agendas. Weigh the facts YOURSELF. Go read secular research and not Mormon propoganda. Explain to me how I am asking you to put my word before God himself? I have continuously proven the validity of the Bible and implored you to read what it says independantly. You are putting Joseph Smiths word above God himself. I have continuously asked why you trust the BOM and all other mormon doctrines, over the Bible when there is FAR more evidence FOR the Bible. you know what the responses have been? "lol" YOU NEED EVIDENCE" BLA BLA BLA... well, I need no EVIDENCE of God, however I do need some evidence to believe in the books written by Joseph Smith. And if we are to take a side by side look at both books the evidence is INSURMOUNTABLE! Are you a free thinker? It just doesnt make sense to me... I too have always know that God is real. That is not the problem.

Your so vile, and have deliberately misrepresented everything I have written...this doesnt even deserve a response. Church has nothing to do with it. The Word of God has everything to do with it. I dont believe Catholics are going to hell, though we have severe doctrinal differences, There is nothing in Catholicism denying God as God and Jesus dying for our sins. They believe very much in the trinity also... The Bible is clear on how to get to heaven. When one carefully examines this verse in its context, one can see that it does not teach a works-based salvation. The context: people claiming to have faith in Christ but not showing this in their everyday lives (1:19-2:13). James's "justification" (v. 24) is in reference to men, not God. His point is that men can only see that your claim to faith is true by how it is expressed in your life. "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works" (v. 18). Your works prove your claim to faith to those who cannot see your heart. Christians are called to live up to their claims. Salvation is a free gift, unearned and given by the grace of God to all who receive His son as their personal Saviour. Thus, it does not come through any Temple ordinances, Temple marriage, Baptism, etc. Eternal life with the Father is gained through simple faith in Christ's finished work upon the cross for me. Of course you believe that because you rely soley on the Mormon church for your guidance. Though we are called to pray always (1 Thessalonians 5:17), the Bible nowhere teaches that prayer is a test for truth. "In context of James 1:5, one finds reference to the testing of one's faith by trials and temptations (see verses 2-3, 12, and 13). We are exhorted, if we lack wisdom, to ask God for wisdom and understanding (not truth) when faced with trials and temptations so we may respond in a godly fashion. The apostle Paul warned the believers in Galatia not to listen to anyone who teaches another gospel (Galatians 1:6-8). There are many false teachers who preach a "gospel" and a "Jesus," and a spirit may accompany them. But we know that there are false gospels, false christs and unholy spirits (2 Corinthians 11:3-4, 13-14). Should we pray to find out which is which? How can we know? The danger with praying to find truth is that spiritual testimonies are a dime a dozen, and those which are valid may be difficult to distinguish from those which are not. We cannot trust the feelings of our hearts (Proverbs 28:26; Jeremiah 17:9), nor can we trust every spiritual witness (1 John 4:1-6). Called to be like the Bereans of Acts 17:11, we need to "search the Scriptures daily" to see if what Mormonism teaches is true. The biblical test focuses on the Word of God as our standard for truth (2 Timothy 3:15-17); for the witness of the Holy Spirit will never contradict the Word he himself inspired—the Bible (2 Peter 1:21)." If "most posts" are being ignored, it's because I am but ONE person trying to answer in your words the "100" responses! How about a little grace?!!!! I have ALREADY answered all these questions in previous responses. ALL OF THEM. Why dont you go back and read what has already been said with regard to all the versus you just posted! You seem to be the one ignoring things...

hmm.... Obviously I disagree secondly, my questions started with HOW do you know? Is it only because the Mormon church tells you so? Becuase I have already posted incredible evidences to the contrary, and pointed out the importance for reading yourself without the guidance of ANY MAN. Even being guided by the spirit, you are called to test the spirit against The Word. I quoted one of your own admitting to the reliability of the Bible, contesting previously held beliefs. and the list goes on... After ALL the incredible evidences FOR the Bible, archeaological, factual, scientifical, historical, and phrophesys, AND after there has never been found one FALSE claim or one provable contradiction, after the AMAZING evidences in it's favor, you STILL choose to believe a Book that has never had even ONE SHRED of evidence EVER! EVER! EVER! WOW... In comparison with the Bible, the closer one comes to the original autographs of the New Testament, the fewer the transmissional errors. However, the closer one comes to the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon, the more numerous the errors.

"The first Article of Faith of the Mormon church reads: "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." While this may sound Christian at first glance, upon further examination it is found to be radically different. The Mormon church explicitly rejects the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Said Joseph Smith, "I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 370; emphasis added)." " According to Mormon doctrine, all humans preexisted as spirit children of God before coming to earth. Even before we became spirits, we existed eternally as individual intelligences. Now that we have come to earth and have mortal bodies, we have the opportunity to become worthy to return to our Father in heaven and become gods. This is the core teaching of Mormonism and is called "the Law of Eternal Progression." (See, McConkie, pp. 589-590.) Despite the teachings of Mormonism, men cannot become gods (Isaiah 43:10). Man was created, unlike God, and therefore has not existed from eternity (1 Corinthians 15:46). Mormons cannot compare themselves to Jesus and his preexistence, for they are not deity by nature, as is Jesus. He preexisted because he is God (Isaiah 9:6; John 1:1; 17:5; Philippians 2:6-7)." Mormons deny the power of the cross, and that Jesus is the way by placing the requirement for salvation on "good works" But..If we could attain salvation by obeying the law, and doing good works, then Christ died in vain (Galatians 2:21). We can be righteous before God only on the basis of the righteousness of Christ. Though Christ was without sin, he paid the penalty due our sin so that we would be declared righteous before God (2 Corinthians 5:21; see also, Ephesians 2:1-5). ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory. LDS: Believe Christ's death brought release from grave and universal resurrection. Salvation by grace is universal resurrection. Beyond this, man must earn his place in heaven. Saved by grace after all we can do. (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 25:23; Mormon Doctrine pp. 669-671) The BIBLE says: Salvation is not limited to universal resurrection but gift of God to those who believe. (Rom. 1:16; Heb. 9:28; Eph. 2:8-9)" We dont believe God is married in heaven, we dont believe jesus and satan are brothers, all these details may seem insignificant to you but when you dig for the deeper implications for what such beliefs mean, is is a matter of grave importance.

That was my point earlier, you really arent reading them in context, in my other post I CLEARLY demonstrated that. You must heed to the full weight of scripture taking into account context and using the Bible itself to clear up questions. Non christian theologans and biblical scholars and Christian theologans and Biblical scholars alike all agree on the scriptural messages. It is only when you introduce NEW books of faith that you can come to any of these conclusions. I have demonstrated the reliability of the Bible vs. that of the BOM or any other book of faith, and I think the evidence speaks for itself. *****"LDS assume from this passage that we will inherit "whatever" God has, and since God has Godhood, then we must be able to inherit godhood as well. LDS also assume from this passage that Christ inherited godhood. "Technically, "all" doesn't always have to mean literally "all". For example, after the flood, God said that He would never again destroy "all" creatures (Genesis 8:21). But if this is taken too literally, then how did those on the ark not fall under this category? Even LDS need to qualify what we actually inherit, since of course we don't have the opportunity on their view to rule over this world and receive worship in place of God. We don't get His wife or wives, for example. But if qualifications come into play, why not let God's Word determine what exactly we will or will not inherit? Revelation 3:21 says that those who overcome will sit with Christ in His throne, which is also the throne of the Father. So it is clear that we will rule, but nowhere does it say that we will become "gods," and especially as God is God. As a matter of fact, God says that there was no God formed before Him or after Him (Isaiah 43:10). Further, even though we will rule with God, that does not entail that we will be worshipped, since only God is to receive this (Matthew 4:10). And notice that this ruling is in God's throne; it is not ruling over some other planet in some other throne where we receive exclusive worship from our spirit children (granting the unbiblical [cf. Mt. 22:24-30] LDS assumption that we can produce spirit children with our spouses in the afterlife). Given God's exclusive role as the creator of everything outside Himself (Gen. 1:1, Isa. 40:12-15, 44:24, John 1:1-3, and Colossians 1:15-18), it is impossible for even God to create something to inherit this role. If it is impossible for an all holy God to lie (Hebrews 6:18), then it is certainly impossible for God to do something as nonsensical as creating the uncreated originator of all things outside of Himself. Consequently, at best the inheritance that we receive is similar to the inheritances given to pets. (Yes, people actually do this!) Some pets are quite lucky in receiving a fortune. Similarly, believers are quite "lucky" to be receiving the inheritance of God. Finally, the inheritance that Christ received was only in His human nature, and not even Christ in His human nature could inherit the kind of Godhood that God uniquely has. As the first glorified man, He received the inheritance that all adopted children of God will receive. But since Christ is the unique begotten Son of God, He also eternally has the divine nature as well... just not as the man of Nazareth (for more on the divine and human natures of Christ, see my comments on John 10:34). " -------------------- Why can we not grasp such concepts? The Bible is clear, and it's there because God wants us to know it. Have you read any of my posts on the matter of the trinity? Nothing comes before God or after, he has always existed never being created. You may believe that about Jesus eternally being God, but that is not what The Mormon church teaches. I already adressed this all Biblically, and it is in direct conflict with Mormon doctrine.

Our beliefs about who Jesus is, are at the core of that question. Mormon beliefs about him are irreconcilable with the Bible. We may both call him by the same name, but we worship two very different people. My answer to that question is obvious, and you would probably say the same thing, but upon further inspection of WHO Jesus is according to Mormon doctrine, it stands in direct conflict with who the Bible teaches he is. Because of the Large doctrinal differences, even with a simple question with regard to WHO God even is, we do not agree. Ones "salvation" biblically is dependant on those basic beliefs.

I really don't see what your argument is here? Are you saying that God lied?

You simply cannot ever in good concience say that The Bible recognizes that other gods are real>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Bible presents a thoroughgoing monotheistic view of reality. It repeatedly conveys the fact that “gods” are merely the figment of human imagination, invented by humans to provide themselves with exemption from following the one true God by living up to the higher standard of deity. Humans throughout history have conjured up their own imaginary gods to justify freedom from restriction and to excuse relaxed moral behavior. "all verses in the Bible that use the term “gods” to refer to deity (with the exception of the one God) are referring to nonexistent deities that humans have invented. When God gave the Ten Commandments to the Israelites, the very first one said: “You shall have no other gods before Me” (Exodus 20:3). Liberal higher critics of the Bible (like Wellhausen) have alleged that this dictum advocated only monolatry (exclusive worship of Yahweh) rather than actually denying the existence of other gods. Distinguished professor of Old Testament languages, Gleason Archer, has maintained, however, that “this construction of the words is quite unwarranted” (1974, p. 235). Many additional passages clarify the point. For example, the psalmist declared: “For the Lord is great and greatly to be praised; He is to be feared above all gods” (Psalm 96:4, emp. added). One might get the impression from this verse by itself that the psalmist thought that “gods” actually existed. However, the next verse sets the record straight: “For all the gods of the peoples are idols, but the Lord made the heavens” (vs. 5, emp. added). The Hebrew word for “idols” (elilim) means “of nothing, of nought, empty, vain” (Gesenius, p. 51). Notice carefully the contrast the psalmist was making. The people made their gods; but the one true God made the heavens (i.e., the Universe). The genuineness, reality, and greatness of God are placed in contrast to the people’s fake, nonexistent gods who could not make anything. Archer concluded: “This passage alone…demonstrates conclusively that the mention of ‘gods’ in the plural implied no admission of the actual existence of heathen gods in the first commandment” (1974, p. 236). As God Himself announced: “They have provoked Me to jealousy by what is not God” (Deuteronomy 32:21, emp. added" "The denunciation of the Israelites for conjuring up false gods—pretending that such actually existed, rather than devoting themselves exclusively to the one and only God—reached its zenith in the eloquent preaching pronouncements of the Old Testament prophets. Elijah treated the notion of the existence of gods in addition to the one God with sarcasm and forthright ridicule (1 Kings 18:27-29). The idea of multiple gods would have been laughable, if it were not so spiritually serious (cf. Psalm 115:2-8). The people on that occasion finally got the point, for they shouted: “The Lord, He is God! The Lord, He is God!” (vs. 39). Likewise, the reality of monotheism was pure, well defined, and single minded for Jeremiah. He frequently chastised the people by accusing them of following gods that were, in fact, “not gods” (2:11; 5:7; 16:20). Isaiah was equally adamant and explicit: You are My witnesses, says the Lord, and My servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no savior. I have declared and saved, I have proclaimed, and there was no foreign god among you; therefore you are My witnesses, says the Lord, that I am God. Indeed, before the day was, I am He; and there is no one who can deliver out of My hand; I work, and who will reverse it? (43:10-13, emp. added; cf. 37: 19; 40:18-20; 41; 44:8-24). Over and over, Isaiah recorded the exclusivity of the one true God: “I am the Lord, and there is no other; there is no God besides Me” (45:5, emp. added); “There is no other God” (45:14, emp. added); “I am the Lord, and there is no other” (45:18, emp. added). The New Testament continues the same recognition of the nonexistence of deities beyond the one God Who exists in three persons. Paul reminded the Galatian Christians of their pre-Christian foolish belief in other deities: “But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods” (4:8, emp. added). By definition, the “gods” that people claim actually exist are not gods! In his lengthy discussion of whether Christians were permitted to eat foods that had been sacrificed to pagan deities, Paul clarified succinctly the Bible position on the existence of so-called gods: Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is only one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live (1 Corinthians 8:4-6, emp. added). In this passage, Paul declared very forthrightly that idols, and the gods they represent, are, in fact, nonentities. The RSV renders the meaning even more clearly: “We know that an idol has no real existence, and that there is no God but one” (emp. added). Of course, Paul recognized and acknowledged that humans have worshipped imaginary, nonexistent gods in heaven (like Greek mythology advocated) and on Earth (in the form of idols). He used the figure of speech known as “metonymy of the adjunct,” where “things are spoken of according to appearance, opinions formed respecting them, or the claims made for them” (Bullinger, 1898, p. 597; Dungan, 1888, p. 295; cf. 2 Corinthians 4:4). He spoke of “gods” as if they existed, simply because many people of his day had that opinion. But Paul knew “there is no God but one.” As Allen observed: “The gods (i.e., the so-called divine beings contemplated by the pagans) represented by the images did not exist. …[T]hey were nothing as far as representing the deities envisioned by the heathen” (1975, p. 98, emp. added; cf. Kelcy, 1967, p. 38; Thomas, 1984, p. 30). Paul continued his discussion of idols two chapters later, and again affirmed the nonexistence of any deities besides God: “What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything?” (1 Corinthians 10:19). For Paul, it was technically permissible for a Christian to eat food that had previously been used in a pagan ceremony as an offering to a “god.” Why? Because such “gods” did not, and do not, actually exist—except in the mind of the worshipper (cf. 8:7-8)! Thus, the food used in such ceremonies was unaffected. However, the person who really thinks there are “gods,” and who then worships these imaginary “gods,” is, in actuality, worshipping demons (10:20)! Paul said there are only two possibilities: “But I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons” (10:20-21). Paul envisioned no class of beings known as “gods.” There is only the one true God, and then there are the demons and forces of Satan (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:15-16). This bifurcation of the spiritual realm (i.e., God versus Satan and his forces) is the consistent portrait presented throughout the Bible. The Bible simply admits no knowledge or possibility of “gods.”

I misunderstand nothing, you must heed to the full weight of scripure, and not take something grossly out of context... ****BIBLE: God is not a man. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? God has always been God. He has never been less than He is today. Psalms 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not;... Habakkuk 1:12 Art thou not from everlasting, O LORD my God, mine Holy One?... Romans 1:22-25 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man,...who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. There is only one God. He has eternally existed as God and does not have a father-god above him. Isaiah 43:10-11 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. Isaiah 45:21-22 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. 1 Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen. --------------------------------------------------------------- *****ABOUT JESUS BIBLE: Jesus is fully God, not a subordinate deity. He eternally exists as God and is our creator. Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. John 1:1-4, 14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. ... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. Colossians 1:16-17 For by him [Christ] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

clarify please?

These books existed before New Testament times, yet there is not one single quotation from the Apocrypha in the New Testament. Jesus quoted from twenty four of the Old Testament books, and the New Testament quotes from thirty four books of the Old Testament. Introductory phrases like "it is written" or "thus says the Lord" are totally absent from the books and therefore the books themselves do not claim to be inspired of God. Christians do not claim that the humans who penned the books of the Bible were always accurate in everything they said or did. We simply believe that the Bible is right when it claims that God guided these men in their task of writing Scripture, in such a way that the result is an infallible book. The apostle Peter undoubtedly said some foolish things during his lifetime, but God did not allow him to clutter up the Bible with any of those blunders. 2 Timothy 3:16 contains the classic claim that the Bible was produced by God, not just men: All Scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.

Some of the teachings in Apocrypha are colored and some are immoral. In Judith 9:10,13, it says that God, assisted Judith in the telling of lies. Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom teach that morality is based expedience. In other words it is right to sin in some situations. Wisdom 11:17 teaches that God made the universe out of pre-existing matter instead of "ex nihilo" (out of nothing) as Genesis 1:1-2, John 1:1-3 and Hebrews 11:3 plainly state. There are also historical errors Tobit claimed that he was alive when the Assyrians conquered Israel in 722 B. C. and when Jeroboam revolted against Judah in 931 B. C. However it records his total life span as 158 years. These two events were actually 859 years apart. Judith also mistakenly states that Nebuchadnezzar reigned in Nineveh instead of Babylon. There are many other gross historical errors as well. No true Bible believers have ever accepted the books as canonical for these reasons. In order for a book to be considered inspired of God and included in the canon it must satisfy the follow requirements. 1. It must have been written by a prophet of God. None of the Apocryphal books claim they were. 2. It must come with the authority of God. These spurious books are strikingly absence of the ring of authority. None of them come up to or compare in any way to the character and quality of the sixty six Books of the Bible. 3. It must demonstrate that the power of God rests on the book. There is nothing transforming about these books. 4. It must tell the truth about God, man, history, science, etc. The books are full of contradictions, errors and even heresies. The Apocryphal books are full of untruth.

These are the reasons the Apocrypha was left out: *Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament. *All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin. *None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration. *The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. *The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church *The Apocrypha contains fabulous statements which not only contradict the "canonical" scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places. *The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.

What about this?... The Mormon church explicitly rejects the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Said Joseph Smith, "I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 370; emphasis added). Mormons believe that our Father in heaven has not always been God, but was once a mortal man who progressed to godhood. Joseph Smith declared: "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man. . . . I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. . . . [H]e was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did. . ." (Ibid., pp. 345, 346; italics in original).

The Gnostic gospels are not truly gospels....as in, they are not biographies of Jesus. And they are not reliable. They are not included in the canon for a reason. Quote: "The Gnostic gospels are not historical ac*counts of Jesus’ life but instead are largely esoteric sayings, shrouded in mystery, leaving out historical details such as names, places, and events. This is in strik*ing contrast to the New Testament Gospels, which contain innumerable historical facts about Jesus’ life, ministry, and words. Here's an article: Who is the real Jesus?

The differences are we do not believe Jesus was FIRST A MAN, we believe he was always God. We worship God alone. We also don't believe the trinity is three distinct gods. There are soo mnay questions that have been asked here of me , FORGIVE me if yours was overlooked...