JohnOF123

Tell the Jews who wrote it that, lolz. Not at all, much appreciated.

These are probably some of the scriptures that persuade me to believe that many will go to hell, and that it is eternal. I took the liberty of making them clickable, lol. Too many here to paste the whole scripture in the thread. Matthew 7:13-14 Matt. 18:8 Matt. 25:46 John 5:24 2 Thess. 1:9 Jude 7 Jude 12-13 There are more, but I thought these kinda get the point across (to me). I believe Jesus spoke of hell more than he did of heaven. Ultimately, I was wondering why people thought Jesus warned more of hell than anyone else did, and for that matter, spoke more of it than heaven. To me, it sounds like something to avoid, and that most people are headed into. Matthew 7:13-14 By the way, nice camera ya got there Ever seen one of them gigapixel camera shots? HARLEM-13-GIGAPIXELS.COM Zakstudio Une image géante

Here is how Trinitarians come to their position in what they believe. First of all, we know the Bible explicitly states that there is only 1 God. It says it many many times in many ways, so we can't argue this fact with ourselves. But then it also says that the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God. Therefore, we have to believe that 1) there are no other Gods, or groups of God, and 2) God is 3 persons, not one. You probably knew all this, but I thought I'd say it just in case. I agree, if the LDS is true, then they have more light by default, and in that instance, their statement is not arrogance. But if I mirror your example and say that if mainstream Christianity is true, then these "anti" people really are indeed doing deeds in love. Key word here [if]. I'm sure we can probably both agree. I guess it depends where you are standing when you look at all this. From an LDS perspective, people can be anti-Mormon. But from a mainstream Christian perspective, people can be pro-Mormons but anti-Mormonism. It's all kinda hazey, but if we step out of our own shoes, and imagine we are in the others shoes, then it can help us see the alternative perspective. I do appreciate you stating your perspective on all this.

I guess what I'm really trying to ask is this. Do you think that someone could give you "anti-mormon" literature and still love you?

Ok thanks. I was wondering what the LDS think about the passage in Revelations that speaks of the lost in the final days. Revelation 14:11 "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name." What does this apply to in the LDS theology. And thx for the info.

Thanks for that input. Would you say that those "who attempt to break up the church" do that because they do not like the individuals? That's kinda where I was going, only because the term "anti-mormons" or "anti-christians" sounds like they are anti the person.

Just curious, I've always wondered this: When the LDS say the term "anti-mormons", are they referring to people who 1) don't like mormonism and the doctrine, or 2) don't like mormon people and the members? I assume many people could have different answers here, but what would you say the majority means when they say this. Thx- It would be easier if this term were in the dictionary, but it's not. I guess it would be clearer if they said anti-mormons and anti-mormonism.

Modalism is much different. It is a belief that in one instance, God becomes the Father, then in another, God comes as the Holy Spirit. That is to say, there is one God but He can transform (in modes). The trinity view is that there is God, but He is made up of 3 separate person, (not 1 person with the ability to change modes). In the trinitary view, Time is made up of Past Present Future. But past is NOT present and present is NOT future. In the modalism view, Past can be present or future or whatever it wishes. Modalism is indeed a heresy.

Allow me to post a few passages to why I believe many people will be going to hell. I don't like to think about it, but the Bible speaks of it. 1) Jesus warned about hell, A LOT! 2) Lazaraeth and the Rich man: the rich man went there. 3)"Wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it" 4)"And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell." Over and over, we are warned about this, we are asked what it profits a man to gain the whole world than to lose his soul. We are told not to fear man, who can kill the body, but to instead fear God, who after the body is killed can cast body and soul into hell. It says to "workout out salvation with fear and trembling". I gotta tell ya, I don't fear or tremble at the proposition of going to a lower kingdom of heaven, but I DO fear and tremble at the idea of going to hell. Many, few, warn, warn, warn But whether you believe this or not, it still leaves the question.... Why did Jesus warn about this more than anyone else in the Bible??

I see your viewpoint here. But it just begs the question: How do you know what to believe and what not to believe, since I think you're implying somethings said are not true? Or did I misunderstand what you meant with that?

Keep in mind, I don't agree with belittling the person, however I would have to say it's not one-sided. I've heard it said that we are Christians, but Mormons are at a university level where we are at a high school level. I've also heard that the Mormon Church is the one true church which implies that my church is not the true church. I've also heard some people quote Joseph in saying that all other churches are an abomination. I can probably list about 10 more if you really want to listen. But the point is that the accusations are not one-sided, though I agree that it is not healthy, or loving, and choose not to do it. So we definitely agree there. I would say that since God said we are to "conform to the image of His Son" that we are not supposed to go get plastic surgery to physically look like him, similarly I would have to say when God created us in His image, we were created as beings that could love, have emotions, moral character, ability to use logic... not that we have two arms, two legs, etc.. I understand this could probably go back and forth for a long time, but I just wanted to point out how we feel "created in the image" means as well.

I think the wine was soooo tasty that the ruler of the feast called the groom forward and proclaimed to the entire crowd (as a grand compliment) "They did so, 9and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside 10and said, Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now." (crowd cheers, everyone's happy, clinks their glasses together and drinks) Lol, how you like my emphasis? The ruler apparently thought that he was just keeping the wine until last. And then he complimented him (I think). He never investigated where it had come from. I cannot see it any other way. I tried reading it again and cannot. (Sorry about the NIV, feel free to read the KJV too)

So, LDS believe it is temporary, but do they believe people are tortured there? What is the hell like in LDS beliefs?

Ohh, let me find that again. 1 sec. Ok, found it. Second Post And you were right, you never said a 1000 years, I must have gotten that from somewhere else. I could have sworn that was taught, but I could be wrong.

I understand, many here believe in a temporary 1000 year Hell, right? I just found your post to some Texas guy about that. Kinda what made me think about this thread. But either way, even if it is temporary, I'd still like to find out why Jesus spoke of this so much. Honestly, I don't like thinking about hell or anything, I don't even like saying it, but I'd like to figure this out.

You have a very interesting way of reading the Bible. But if you want to believe he knew where the wine came from, that is okay by me. I just don't see it. For some reason, I can only find that he didn't know where the wine came from. In fact, if this were a question on a test, and you put "he knew" even though it says "he did not" know, I could see you trying to talk your way out of it to the instructor as well. Or maybe everyone would get it wrong and you would get it right because you see the hidden meaning. I just can't comprehend why the Bible would ever not be clear about something spoken so clearly. Everything has always seemed clear to me, and I gotta say it still is. We should start a poll Justice, lol. That would be funny. No reasoning, absolutely no addition info. No bold letters what we want them to see. Just make the thread poll question "QUIZ: Who knew where the wine came from?". Only list the scripture from v1 to v11, just plain, with nothing bolded or sticking out. And the multiple choice questions could be Jesus Jesus and His Disciples Jesus, His Disciples, and the servants Jesus, His Disciples, the servants, and the Ruler of the Feast And only complete strangers can vote. If a majority picks the last one, I will never question your wise ways again. I will listen to what you have to say.

Hehe, you're a goofball Justice. I'm pretty sure they say the same thing, at least here. Remember, your original claim was that the ruler of the feast knew. John 2:9 KJV When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) John 2:9 NIV And the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. I'd say this is pretty good evidence that you like to debate me just to disagree. If I let you hit me with that gavel a few times, can we start getting along, hehe.

I would probably shout God's word in the streets. I would want to tell as many people about the gospel as possible before I died. I would probably say to someone who proposed "why not just repent right before we die" that they are probably not really saved, since someone in God could not feel this way. But that's just my opinion.

I was just wondering this today. I'd like to hear some more ideas. Why is it that Jesus spoke more about Hell than anyone else in the Bible did? This is where my mind goes when I think about it. Have you ever heard of Apocalyptic literature? It is symbols and signs and dragons and 10-headed beasts and such things as that. You know what it's all about? It's when the human mind is confronted with the divine reality that is so great, that there is no way the mind can understand it or human language can communicate it. Now what does that have to do with Hell? The reason why I believe that Jesus spoke on Hell more than anyone else is... in His divinity, His Godhood, He was the only one who could truly grasp the terror of it. This view might not match others, but I would really be interested in hearing other view points on why Jesus Christ spoke and warned of Hell more than anyone else in the Bible. Post your ideas.. thx! (I know this is not everyones favorite topic, but I'd like to figure it out)

I know we have different viewpoints on things, but I thought this video might help display God's love in His choice of dying for your sins. I hope that relates to your question and seems to apply to both of us.

I would probably just tell them that Mary was a virgin and she supernaturally conceived Christ by power of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was miraculously conceived inside Mary, who was a virgin at the time. It's a tough question to be asked really.

Hey leave some hard drive space for us Justice, hehe. J/K

I don't think we can really debate any of this. It would probably be a longer thread than the Questions Only thread and would probably go nowhere. Ok, so what's the original topic again... I think that Tarnished left of by saying the following, let's take it from there.

Shmita, also called the Sabbatical Year, is the seventh year of the seven-year. "And God rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And GOD blessed the seventh day [not the first day], and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which GOD created and made.” Genesis 2:2 Seventh Day, Day of Rest, don't work, done. I don't understand why we are even debating when the Sabbath is?

It could be argued that other masterpieces such as A Tale of Two Cities, War and Peace or any the works of William Shakespeare could also never be completed by one man. They are very in depth, long, complex and touching. In Tolkien's (Lord of the Rings), not only are many interacting civilizations created but their own languages as well. My point is not that Joseph was wrong, but that this is not a good reason to accredit someone with the inability to achieve. Other religions may have similar arguments to their defense.