zlarry123

Good stuff concerning your question on this site https://creation.com/pre-adamic-man-were-there-human-beings-on-earth-before-adam

You may have missed a post I presented at one time Traveler, that the only peace that counts is with God through Christ, Romans 5:1 who inaugurated the covenant we are suppose to live under by grace. And it is through that grace of God which will produce those qualities in the heart, void of regulation, that Apostle Paul speaks of. Regulation that bring about a crises of conscience and division. Isn't this what this post is about. Unless one claims they have a righteousness, which he considered a loss, of their own. Wouldn't you say! Shouldn't we remember it is not how man views us but God. Without a play on words to avoid the simple truths from the bible. "If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James

I'll give it a shot! It seem to me how inconsequential all of this is when compared to the words of Apostle Paul,, "Fix your thoughts on what is true and good and good things in others. Think about all you can praise God for and be glad about. Keep putting into practice all you learned from me and saw me doing, and the God of peace will be with you." Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way. Love is not irritable, and it keeps no record of when it has been wronged. It is never glad about injustice but rejoices whenever the truth wins out. Larry

The rule of Romans 14 is a universal application. In all cases, if a man does a thing which he does not "believe" to be right, it is a sin, and his conscience will condemn him for it. The point of the object should always be to promote peace, and to build him, the weak one, in the holy faith. If a man doesn't have peace in his heart, he cannot be happy inwardly, perhaps he can look outwardly in high spirits, since no man can have peace who sins against his own conscience. And that one's peace should always be peace with God through Christ. Romans 5:1 Larry

I believe the problem may be adding many layer and meaning to the simple truths. Specifically in the New Testament, when we use double meaning and shadows of things as was used in the Old Testament. This has cause scriptural misinterpretation. One sort is what I describe as the News Paper Gospel. Christians read New Paper events and find a scripture to match it. Especially when it comes to the second advent, and the kingdom of God. Now we have the internet, and TV to add to the confusion. It reminds me of the words of Jesus to the Pharisees that these happening do not come with observation. And by using surveillance I think alters the nature of the Kingdom of God. Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: 21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. KJV Just my thoughts Larry

Greetings Before Max King's book mentioned in the attention-grabbing audio in the New Topic by Wenglund, "Creation and Garden Story: Instructional Value?" was another author James Stuart Russell 1878 who penned "THE PAROUSIA" on the same subject matter. These books changed the way many Christian in our day view the New Testament, including myself. The author of "The Parousia" is no relationship to Charles Taze Russell the founder of the Jehovah Witnesses. The books, The books on the subject matter places most if not all prophecy fulfilled in the first century, completely opposite to the popular futuristic theology we hear about today. Many futurist and partial preterist deem the full preterist view as heretic, mainly because it leaves out a future second coming of Christ. Which even the Mormons believe is a futuristic concept of His coming. Because according to the full preterist view the second coming happened in the first century of the destruction of the Jewish temple by the Roman armies Jesus mentioned in the Olivet Discourse. The Parousia is on line to read if anyone cares to do so. http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1878_russell_parousia.html Regards, Larry

Wade Good stuff Thanks for those links, it set me on a ride through the Mormon community. Intelligence and Matter existed before the Genesis creation story. God did not create the universe in that account, but reorganize/rearranged it. First estate! (Abr. 3:26). D&C 93:29 Moses 3:5, 9). (Jer. 1:5 To provide a place for his heavenly children to make choices in a physical environment/body i.e. mortal probation. Moses 1:34) https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/the-three-rs-of-choice?lang=eng The choices made not first-rate, terrestrial and telestial, contained in a biological body reside in a spiritual detention center. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/the-three-rs-of-choice?lang=eng In time subsequently they will be preached to by the faithful who attained the celestial level. Making it possible through a sort of second chance Gospel. A failed test relocates them to the lowest glory. Hell! BTW I don't believe in a literal flaming hell fire doctrine Surely this lead to more question and answers, and is filling my purpose to understand the Mormons believe system. Perhaps you can provide a deeper look into what I have provided here. Or if this is so far on the right track. Thanks Larry

You may like this link, Beyond Creation Science, it will answer those questions I copied and pasted from. http://beyondcreationscience.com/ Larry

Does the biblical "beginning" match the biblical "end"? When did God introduce the old covenant order? Could Genesis creation speak about the beginning of the covenant world of God's relationship to his people rather than the beginning of the physical universe? Why would the Bible open with an account of the creation of the physical universe and then change subjects completely to close with prophecy of a covenant end? Larry

Rhoades As I understand marriage is a very solemn contract to produce a large posterity. It is a blessing in the plan of God, because the angel's residing in heaven will find a place to live in. So the marriage produced millions of Jews to give more angel's a place to dwell. And by the symbolic prediction of the branches crossing water, is in reference to confirm Joseph Smith as true prophet by reading the Book of Mormons. Since before the 18th century when the book was written there were far and few-between Jewish converts like myself. And those branches that were by the water and went over the wall include descendants that went across the ocean to the Americas. Interestingly the Apostle Paul who coined the phrase wall, uses the same terminology, the wall, where he is referring to the Mosaic Law that separated the Jews from Gentiles. Brought about by the crucifixion. Ephesians 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; KJV There was also a wall surrounding the Jewish temple that separated them from the Gentiles. Seem to me the incoming of the Gentile in the first century is what Jesus had in mind when speaking of the other sheep, the two becoming one. And that according to the Gospel what happened by the words of the Son of God. Also following Christ death and resurrection, he visited the Americas to establish a church among the "Nephites." I took a cursory look once again at 3 Nephi 15–17 I want to see if this is clear first before going into the reference you posted on Ezekial 37:16-19 https://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot/ezek/37.16-19#p14 Thanks for your patience Larry

Not at this time! From the way I see it...... who we are in the eyes of God lives on in a resurrected spiritual body form only after death. However in the case of Jesus who was not an angel, lived in the form/nature of God but was not the only true God/Father. Philippians 2:5-6 John 17:3 Hebrews 1:5 From the Mormon perspective the inward man is a separate entity, person, living inside us. Or we are just angel's living in a fleshly body?That personage at one time, before time began, was an angel sent to live according to God's purpose in a physically created body one earth. Adam and Eve and their offspring. From what I understand to make choices, and by the options they would find themselves in different abodes/mansions after death. Some in the presents of God, other in between, and others far off. i.e a hellish prison. Does this suggest for the remote on living on earth forever. Can you fill in some details .... post following, together with D&C references. Thanks Larry

ghost ekpneo NT:1606 ekpneo (ek-pneh'-o); from NT:1537 and NT:4154; to expire: Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Literally to die The correct translation Mark 15:37 And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last. NKJV Mark 15:37" Jesus breathed his last". NIV Mark 15:37 "breathed His last" NASU Is this true or a mock on the Mormon church "Mormons also teach that both the Father and the Son are men with bodies of flesh and bone (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20; Articles of Faith, p 38); as two separate people, the Father and the Son cannot be considered “one" "Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them." This is a new one on me, can you fill me in. It seem like the mainstream Christianity trinity taking on a different form. The doctrine of the trinity came about much earlier then the 18th century, and Christian ran with it. "Mormons today believe that God the Father, Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost are three separate persons who together constitute “the Godhead”. This concept of God cannot be found in the first edition of the Book of Mormon, however. The idea of God in the Book of Mormon closely resembles the traditional Christian doctrine of the Trinity." This concept of God cannot be found in the first edition of the Book of Mormon, Why is that?

Traveler Let's do it! There is no question every bible has it flaws, produced by bias authors. However I see the Gospel intact prior to the 18th century to learn about the Nature of Christ and our Heavenly Father. The bible has brought millions to the hope of salvation through Christ. Where in the scripture are those incompatibilities. And are those believers before the 18th century dead ducks in the eye of God with the extended knowledge. Did Joseph Smith have that knowledge and hope prior to His finding from the KJV. And why was he looking for the right church if he had it. Luke 17:20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, THE KINGDOM OF GOD COMETH NOT WITH OBSERVATION

Matthew 16:27,28 Matthew 26:63 I understand The coming of Christ in power, with authority, and the kingdom of God established in AD 70. Furthermore it was verification to the Jewish community that Jesus was in truth and deed the Son of God. As you mentioned over a million Jews gathered for the occasion in AD 70 from all over, sadly they were entombed by the surrounding Roman troops. Leading the people to starvation and disease. Those poor souls who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Luke 21:22,23 Why is this stuff so important, it's imperative to listen with awareness to our Lord's words. The bible gives reason why! Luke 23:27,28

About the Abomination of desolation By George A. Horton, Jr. “Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.” (Matt. 24:15–18.) Of the abomination of desolation to which Jesus referred, Daniel wrote, “They shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.” (Dan. 11:31.) The abomination had happened in 170 B.C. when the Syrian king Antiochus IV ordered a massacre in Jerusalem, profaned the altar of the temple, and carried away the temple treasures.2 The horrifying events under Antiochus were familiar to every Jew, and those who heard Jesus’ reference to Daniel vividly understood the Savior’s prophecies. Thanks for posting those linked editorial, the authors did an excellent job of putting it together. Conversely, not dogmatically, I'm not certain if Jesus had in mind Syrian King Antioch the massacre in Jerusalem in 170 BC years later. I think that Part of the state of affairs should stay put in the AD 70 episode. Adam Clarke's (1760 or 1762 - 1832) https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc.html [The abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel] This abomination of desolation, Luke (Luke 21:20-21), refers to the Roman army; and this abomination standing in the holy place is the Roman army besieging Jerusalem; this, our Lord says, is what was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in Daniel 9 and 11; and so let everyone who reads these prophecies understand them; and in reference to this very event they are understood by the rabbis. The Roman army is called an abomination, for its ensigns and images, which were so to the Jews. Josephus says (War, b. 6 chap. 6), the Romans brought their ensigns into the temple, and placed them over against the eastern gate, and sacrificed to them there. The Roman army is therefore fitly called the abomination, and the abomination which maketh desolate, as it was to desolate and lay waste Jerusalem; and this army besieging Jerusalem is called by Mark, Mark 13:14, standing where it ought not, that is, as in the text here, the holy place; as not only the city, but a considerable compass of ground about it, was deemed holy, and consequently no profane persons should stand on it. I found it interesting but not bizarre that George A. Horton, Jr. quoted Adam Clark in the article, a long time ago. I learned how commentator feed off each other in their understanding of scripture. I consider no denomination or congregation has a handle on all truth, and we should as students of the bible make sure of all things. There is a book out called The Parousia by James Stuart Russell 1878, not sure if you read it, but it has set in motion for me and many others to understand historical prophecy fulfilled. BTW I'm not abandoning a future coming of Christ as you mentioned. http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/1878_russell_parousia.html I will respond to your most interesting post subsequently, it was primarily what I was looking for. Thanks for reading Larry