Dust

I think perhaps we might disagree with when the actual day of atonement was. As we both know, Christ died upon the Passover as it correlates to the deaths of the first born of Egypt for the deliverance of the Israelites from bondage. For us, this bondage is the slavery to sin (as Romans calls it). Passover is the 14th of Nissan. About 6 months later on the 10th of Tishrei is the Day of Atonement or Yom Kippur. The Day of Atonement corresponds to the Day of Judgement as called in the New Testament. Prior to Yom Kippur, Moses went up Mount Sinai to speak with the Lord and to be given the Law to which the Israelites had to obey. When he came back down, he found the Israelites worshipping a golden calf and had many of them killed and destroyed for their idolatry (incidentally, the Father wanted to kill all of them, but Moses gave intercession). Now we see that this is Christ. Christ went up the mountain (ascended) and he shall come back down the mountain when there is a state of wickedness amongst the earth. On this day, he shall destroy the wicked and save the righteous. Take notice that while Moses was on the mountain he gave intercession, just as Christ gives intercession for the believers. When he comes down, we will all have to atone for our sins. Incidentally, major events of Christ's life corresponds to the feast days. He was born on the Feast of Tabernacles. He died on the Feast of Passover. Actually, I just found this website which looks like it talks about the feast days corresponding to the first and second coming of Jesus. It looks like an SDA site which I do not endorse, but at least the info about the feasts is good. Well anyways, the day of Atonement has yet to come.

Certainly. It is from Proverbs 13:24 Obviously, the Father loves His son. And this promise was given to David concerning Christ (also Solomon). 2 Sam 7:12-16 Isaiah thus sums up that Jesus Christ was chastised on our account. In other words, he took our punishment. Isaiah 53:5 But chastisement and reproof is also a test of character (see Job). And Christ showed his character by being obedient even unto death. Phil 2:3-16 Thus, the rod or physical punishment was laid upon Christ for both his good and our good. For the rod revealed in him no falseness and perfect obedience so that he was made greater than angels. As Solomon says, the Lord loves His son and did not spare the rod from him. The Lord even promised to David that he would not spare the rod. Isaiah says that with the stripes from that rod, we shall be healed. And Paul says that Christ suffered the rod even unto his own death... so work out your salvation with fear and trembling. So... Christ was not spared the rod. I hope this helped.

That is a bit harsh, but let me check the Bible to see if the Lord uses gentleness and persuasion to convince His people... Leviticus 26:14-45 Well that's a no to gentleness there. If you wanted to shorten this to a metaphor about father and child, I guess it would be disciplining first with a slapping, then a spanking, then taking away possessions, then beating to a bloody pulp, and then throwing out of the house. Take notice that there is a chance at repentence and turning toward God throughout this. These punishments were to chastise and "convince" Israel to turn to the Lord. But they certainly were not gentle. I could list about a thousand examples of chastisement and the fulfilling of this prophecy in Leviticus in the Old Testament, but I am sure some one will say that that only applies to Old Testament. So let us use New Testament examples about how the Father does not convince with gentle persuasion but with chastisement. A quick definition of chastise: it comes from the word chaste meaning pure. Thus, to chastise means to purify from iniquity. This word is often used with disciplining a child and relates to corporeal punishment as to get them in line. Hebrews 12:5-11 Verse 6 in the RSV uses discipline instead of chastise as in the KJV and uses chastise instead of scourge. This makes the sentence a little less intense, but the word mastigoo is used when Christ was scourged by the Romans before his crucifixion. We know that this was to discipline him as well (2 Sam 7:14). It seems like one quote will not do. 1 Cor 11:32 Rev 3:19 The two above relate to being physically chastised. Paul below talks about spiritually chastised. Again, this is not gentle persuasion but fervent combatting with words (not being angry, but being zealous). 2 Cor 10:3-6 Why is this chastisement necessary? Obedience. Rom 6:16 2 Cor 2:9 Phil 2:8 (of Christ) 1 Pet 1:1, 2, 14-17 Thus, the Lord does not use gentle persuasion, but discipline, reprovement, punishment, and chastisement to garner faithful, respectful, and loving obedience from His children so that He may be manifest in them. If Christ was not spared the rod, what makes people think that the believers will not? Now I tend to write is if I am speaking without being open, but I am indeed open. If I err in anything, please tell me and show me how I err so that I may gain something from it.

I am sorry if you feel that I am not open. I am all for having an open and honest debate. If you believe I have any error or misconceptions, then prove these statements false. If they are false, then I will be more inclined to believe you. If I believe what you believe, then I will join with you. As James says, "whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins (Jam 5:20)." Now will you also be open to the ideas that I bring forth? Perhaps we can learn from each other. As it is written, "iron sharpens iron (Prov 27:17)."

I believe that the revelations given to the apostles or prophets were given unto them to relay in writing to the true believers (1 John 5:13; Rev 1:11). Once Jesus fulfilled his promise to John (John 21:23) through showing him the final revelation which incorporates the times of the gentiles (Luke 21:24) until they are fulfilled. There is no need for any more prophets or apostles as we have the Bible which has all the writings we need in order to attain eternal life and oneness with Yahweh. It is obvious that there are no more prophets or apostles. First, there is no need for them. Second, no one has the power of the Holy Spirit like the apostles or prophets like Elijah or Elisha did. Paul even alludes to this happening in 1 Cor 13:8 saying that prophecies, tongues, and divine knowledge shall all pass away. All we have is the Bible. Looking outside of it to men is strictly warned against time and again. The doctrines of Christ must be held fast with pure faith and love of the truth(Tit 2:10; Rev 3:3). We cannot believe false gospels (Gal 1:6-8) or fellowship err (2 Pet 3:17). There is no record of the Father "speaking" to any nation besides Israel. The Israelites were so afraid that they begged the Lord to never let His voice be heard (Exo 20:19). Thus, the Lord spoke through prophets to the people. The first prophet was Moses, then Yahshua, and so on. Prophets received messages from the Lord in dreams and visions (Num 12:6). Others saw angels, but no man has ever seen God (John 1:18)... which stands to reason again, that Christ is not God, because John says clearly that no man has ever seen Him. The reason why no one has seen Him is because they will die (Exo 33:20). Of the prophets, we have record of only Israelite prophets. Even the apostles were of Israel. Now this does not mean that people could not prophecy, which means to teach, but the prophets as persons were placed above men as leaders or shepherds bringing the sinners to repentance and back to the Lord. Thus, before Christ, since the gentiles did not know God, they have no hope. Paul makes it pretty clear that the dead and the dead in spirit who do not and did not know the gospel have no hope (Eph 2:12; 1 Thess 4:13). Thus, we should be wary of false teachers leading us astray from the teachings of Christ, the prophets, and the apostles. If there are any contradictions, then we should not and cannot follow them. As to your last question, the Bible is the infallible word of God and the Father cannot be proved false. The only errors are from translation mistakes which are easilly remedied. Now I shall ask you a question. What is the purpose of God? Is it to save us? I am adamently sure that the purpose of God is not to save us, but to be manifest in us. All things are and are done to the glory of Yahweh (Rom 5:2; 1 Cor 10:31; 1 Thess 2:12; Heb 1:3). We are to reflect Christ who reflects the glory of God. Thus, the saints must prepare themselves to become cherubim, which means 'to ride' as in the spirit of Yahweh rides in them like a chariot. Where we fall short, there is grace, but we must ever strive to manifest the glory of the Most High in all things. Salvation is but a motivation to that end. All men want to be saved, but many are called and few are chosen. Narrow is the gate. The Lord would not dwell in the wicked and those who do not love Him. I hope I answered your questions.

Thank you Ram for answering my questions and to all of you who have responded. I have not cut and pasted anything. These were given to me by my brother who was discussing the Mormon beliefs with me. I am not a Jehovah's Witness. I am an fervent pursuer of the Truth. I would like to continue this discussion using Ram's answers. 1. I tend to remember that Bethlehem is always referred to as being in the region of Judah (Judges 19:18; 1 Sam 17:12; . It was the home of Boaz, Obed, Jesse, and David (Ruth 1:22; 1 Sam 16:1). Perhaps this prophecy helps: "But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days (Micah 5:2)." This one also: "And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will govern my people Israel (Matt 2:6)." Refer also to John 7:42. Also, Judea as called in Matt 2:1 is the same as Judah. Now, Jerusalem is the city where David lived on Mount Zion and Bethlehem is the city where David was born, a few miles to the south of Jerusalem. When looking at the Greek word polis (where we get the words policy, politics, and police), it can mean either where a person is originally from or where he lived. Thus, both Bethlehem and Jerusalem can be considered a city of David, but both are not necessarily the City of David. Christ's birth mirrored David's birth, and when he returns, he shall live and reign in Jerusalem in the Lord's Holy Mountain of Zion. Anyways, the Holy Scripture usually cites a specific town in concerning the prophecies of Jesus as to add to his credibility, but I can accept that it perhaps means the regions around Jerusalem. 2 & 4. I will offer this retort: "This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be made worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering- since indeed God deems it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to grant rest with us to you who are afflicted, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance upon those who do not know God and upon those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at in all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed. To this end we always pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his call, and may fulfill every good resolve and work of faith by his power, so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” 2 Thess 1:5-12 It seems clear that the destruction is aionios which means forever or eternal and not age-lasting as some other words may imply. Destruction is the word olethros and as Strong's shows, it relates to death or destruction of the flesh. Thus, these people who did not know God and did not obey the gospel will die and be dead forever. 3. Ram, I do not see a scriptural verse supporting this idea from the Holy Bible. Isaiah 9:7 says that Christ will sit on the "Throne of David," inheriting the Kingdom from his ancestor. Was David's kingdom in heaven or earth? Notice that it says Kingdom OF Heaven and Kingdom OF God and not in Heaven. I cannot find a single place in Scripture that Heaven is ever promised. I did find this quote though: "No one has ascended into heaven but he who descended from heaven, the Son of man (John 3:13)." Now some one might say that this was before Christ, but we must all remember that this account from John was written some fifty years after the death of Christ and is placed as true for not only in or before the time of Christ but also in the time of John and beyond. No man has ever ascended into Heaven. 5. Ram, you make a good point, but lets look at James 1:17: "Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change." There is no variation (ou parallege). This does not say the word eternal but it is implied. There is NO CHANGE. The casted "shadow" is from this light coming from the Father, and this shadow does not turn or change. One person replied that I showed that Jesus never existed, but I think it would show rather that Jesus is not God. 6. Surely you would agree that we should do good and praise God on the Sabbath (unless you want to contradict Christ). But should we not do this every day? Thus, every day is a Sabbath, for we have a spiritual rest in the Lord (Matt 11:28-29), who is Lord of the Sabbath (Matt 12:8). We should not single out any day, but treat every day as the Lord's time to give honor and glory to our Father in Heaven. The apostles did not meet on the Hebrew Sabbath for fear of the Jewish authority. And so they met on the first day of the week when every person went back to work. They did not replace the day, for the Sabbath has not been replaced but rather extended to every day. 7. While gluttony and drunkenness are one thing, the apostles showed that those in Christ are no longer under the restrictions of the Mosaic Law, so why would Mormons who believe themselves to be in Christ then put restrictions back? 8. Ram, I believe you are misunderstanding Peter. 1 Pet 3:19 is speaking about the believers. They were in a spiritual prison of iniquity but were freed in Christ with the power of the Holy Spirit. They and the disciples shall be as Noah and his family, a remnant of people who shall be slaved while the rest are destroyed. If you read it in context with the chapter and epistle, this becomes clear. Now here is a quote of Peter rebuking Simon: "But Peter said to him, "Your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have neither part nor lot in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Repent therefore of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord that, if possible, the intent of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity." The important part of this quote is "bond of iniquity." Bond here is often used with the ligaments of flesh. Peter is saying that Simon is fleshly bound to his iniquity. Thus, Simon is a prisoner of his own flesh, doing unrighteous acts such as 1 Pet 3:20 says. But Simon would repent and follow Christ through Peter so that he may might be like Noah who was saved from the destruction of the flood. There is no inference of people who are already dead. For your second quote, I think you believe that the gospel only pertains to what Christ and the apostles said. But that is not the case, the good news of Christ and the Kingdom was preached from the very beginning. The entire Old Testament is a "shadow of good things to come." The prophets and priests spoke about it as well as the Holy Father. This news is not unique to the people coming after Christ. It was promised to Adam and Eve: "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel (Gen 3:15)." Paul says that the seed (speaking of the seed of Abraham) is Christ. It is not of many, but of one. Christ is the seed promised from the very beginning. Thus the gospel was preached from the very beginning to those who are now dead. I hope this helps explain my case and why I cannot believe Mormonism for the moment. Love to you all.

Hello all! I am really interested in Mormonism, but I really need some questions answered before I can think about joining. 1. Alma 7:10 says that Jesus will be born in Jerusalem, but Matt 2:1 says he was born in Bethlehem. 2. Alma 42:9 says that the soul never dies, but Ezek 18:4,20 says that the soul that sinneth shall surely die. 3. Mosiah 2:41 says that man shall dwell in Heaven, but Psa 115:16, Dan 7:27, and Rev 5:10 says that the saints shall dwell and reign on earth under Heaven. 4. Jacob 6:10 and Mosiah 2:39 say that the wicked shall be in never-ending torment, but Psa 92:7 says that the wicked shall be destroyed forever. 5. The works of Joseph Smith, Lorenzo Snow, and Orson Hyde all state that God was once like men and mortal and elevated to His current position. Jam 1:17 and Mal 3:6 says that God never changes, He has always been. 6. Mormons observe the Sabbath day, but Col 2:16,17, Rom 14:5,6, and Gal 4:10,11 all state that we do not keep the Sabbath and let no one combat you for not keeping it. 7. Mormons have restrictions on meat and drinks, but this goes against 1 Tim 4:4,5, Rom 14:1-4, 17, Col 2:16, 17, 20-22, Mark 7:19. 8. Mormons say that those had not the law will be part of the resurrection, but this goes against Rom 2:12, 1 Thess 4:13, Eph 2:12, and especially Isa 26:14. These contradictions are kinda holding me back in believing Mormonism. If any one can help remedy these, I would much appreciate it.