AnthonyB

Ceeboo, I'm sure you'd be charming and hospitalable. Without hopefully being too confrontational though would they be allowed to be RC baptized and recieve communion without getting divorced? Actually have an OT Q for you? Given I was sprinkled RC but then baptized in a Church of Christ church, would I still (if I could get over the whole "real" presence concept, which sorry no matter how hard I try and understand and appreciate, I still feel somewhat queasy about) be eligible to take communion at an RC church? (Sort of humourously, if I ever did join the LDS, I'd have to get baptized for the remission of sins for a 3rd time! (Which reminds me that I must do a post showing how baptism for remission of sins and justification by faith alone fit together for me))

Mel, Can you give me a BCV for polygamy being a sin? (BCV -Book, Chapter, Verse) I can show that monogamy is the preferred option but I'm interested from where or why you would call it a sin? Are you LDS or Evanglelical Christian? You profile is a little confusing as you list under the LDS section but then list Evanglelical groups, music and books?

My favourite end time theory is "pan-milleniallism", that is it will all pan out as God wants it. I like it for 3 reasons.... 1) From my bible reading the people of God in every era have almost always either missed, misunderstood or failed to appreciate what God was doing. I don't see why we will be any different. (The twelve disciples were with Jesus for several years, yet they kept misreading, misunderstanding until God deemed it right to open their eyes) 2) Too many people have come up with too many scheme's, interpretative keys etc and so far they have all been wrong! Jesus indicated that we might be able to pick the season but as for the actual return it will be like "theif in the night". After the event we might be able to come up with the timing that marked out the 7 years etc but I doubt anyone will really be able to countdown the days till his return. 3) Way too many people spend way to much effort prognosticating and worrying instead of doing something that will really have an effect on the future like praying. As to whether it is straight to a new earth, a 1000 years on this one or straight to heaven. IMHO Living on an earth with Jesus as Lord would be as close to heaven as any new future world/heaven when compared to how things are now.

The problem with deciding Paul's a false prophet is that very little of NT would be left behind.... The letters from Romans to Philemon would need dropping. Then of course whoever right Luke/Acts was clearly in the Pauline party. But if your not trusting Luke then the other two synoptic gospels Mark and Matthew are also doubtful. (Especially since John Mark, the most commonly presumed author of Mark also appears mixed up the Pauline party) That leaves you with John, Hebrews, James 1-2 Peter 1-2-3 John and Revelation. With Hebrews also possibly suspect, it doesn't leave much to go on. Revelation being an apocalypse is very vague due to its genre. 1-2-3 John are so small to be of not a lot of use.

The point is that God cannot be found merely within our 4 dimensional time-space, cause if he needed that to exist then he couldn't exist before he created the universe we live in. It would be sensible that eternity had a separate time dimension. That is if string theory proves to be true there is up to 7 dimension not used currently within our universe. For those interested in the idea about other dimensions I'd recommend, "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene, although if your one of the many who bought Hawkins "A Brief History of Time" and failed to complete it, be warned Greene's book is probably a step up in complexity (IMHO).

PC, I'd agree with your graphs as far as our time dimension goes. Aren't you however making "time" eternal? Did God create all things except "time"? I don't know how much physics you've studied but Einstein's relativity theories insist that time and space are inseperably linked. You cannot have time without having space, we live a four dimensional time-space interwoven universe. If you insist on having time before the creation act then you must have space (and therefore matter). Which leaves you without realising it supporting the LDS eternal matter belief.

I know many may find such speculation fruitless but for me it helped answer some spiritual questions that I think do have a very practical effect on the way one lives life. I don't like several of the tenets of Calvinism but was drawn towards it because it seemed the only way to maintain the sovereignty of God. How can God be sovereign and yet allow free will. IMHO using foreknowledge just seemed to move the question but not answer it. Placing God outside time, and having him therefore experiencing all our time simultaneously seems to be a really great way of maintaining both divine sovereignty and free will. I'm aware that we can get trapped into counting the angels on a pin head. However I have also seen people who want to be so practical in their faith that they banish all theological thinking and live shallow lives without the slightest thought on their beliefs. Any number of people I consider great followers of Jesus managed to do both. I see no harm in pondering on God and attempting to progress in my understanding of Him. I shall never fully understand until I pass through the veil/stand in the presence of God but I rejoice in the little my mind can comprehend.

PC, Just curious... Did God create time? (the time we experience) Did God therefore exist before time? If God currently exits in eternity, does he as postulated by Augustine, exist outside time? If we enter eternity, will we exist outside time? If something exists outside of time, how can you say that it only occurs after a specific time, when it is no longer bound/"related to" by that time? What I am trying to get to say is that if we enter eternity, time as we know it ceases to have any effect on us. Eternity is not IMHO a continuation of this current time but stepping outside and beyond it.

chriscb, [Lec 5:2j] And he being the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, and having overcome, received a fullness of the glory of the Father - possessing the same mind with the Father; [Lec 5:2k] which Mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son; [Lec 5:2L] and these three are one, or in other words, these three constitute the great, matchless, governing, and supreme power over all things; by whom all things were created and made, that were created and made: [Lec 5:2m] and these three constitute the Godhead and are one: the Father and the Son possessing the same mind, the same wisdom, glory, power, and fullness; [Lec 5:2n] filling all in all -the Son being filled with the fullness of the Mind, glory, and power; or in other words the Spirit, glory, and power of the Father - possessing all knowledge and glory, and the same kingdom; [Lec 5:2o] sitting at the right hand of power, in the express image and likeness of the Father - a Mediator for man - being filled with the fullness of the Mind of the Father, or in other words, the Spirit of the Father; [Lec 5:2p] which Spirit is shed forth upon all who believe on his name and keep his commandments; [Lec 5:2q] and all those who keep his commandments shall grow up from grace to grace, and become heirs of the heavenly kingdom, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ; [Lec 5:2r] possessing the same mind, being transformed into the same image or likeness, even the express image of him who fills all in all; [Lec 5:2s] being filled with the fullness of his glory, and become one in him, even as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one. Although the language seems strange to me and is clearly LDS in tone, it all seems much more a type of trinitarianism than binatarianism. The spirit bears record and the three are one (not just one in purpose but in words much closure to traditional Christians thinking.) As for the personages, it comes back to the question I asked on another thread. Does person and personages mean the same. (Outside Mormons people very rarely use personage any more) Personages (as I've seen LDS use it) seems to convey embodiement in a way persons (especailly by non-LDS) do not. I realize that the Holy Spirit is said to be a personage of spirit but the way personage in the first vision is used by LDs always makes me think that personage by itself conveys embodiement to LDS. However for an entity to "bear record" it must have a seperate something to it and this would best be described as "person" (ie an entity capable of separate observation and expression which IMHO are both required by the concept of "bearing record) Yet alone the repeated number of three instead of two, if it was merely a shared mind why give the number of three continually.

73.1% believe that you can prove anything with statistics. 83.3% of people believe that statistics are mostly meaningless. I would want to know the questions. Then the questions leading up to the question. As famously (well maybe not in the US) showed by Sir Humphery Appleby in "Yes, Minister", it is quite possible to get the same person to answer the same question with the opposite answers depending on the questions leading up to the question. Although personally committed to a physical ressurection, as it is quite clearly IMHO the starting and central doctrine of Christianity, my guess as to those who deny the ressurection yet still claim to be Christians are that probably fall into 2 camps, with a certain amount of overlap. Firstly the "spiritualizers", who have drunk so deeply from Platonic thought (the fact of which they are generally unaware) that they minimize the physical and place the emphasis on the spiritual. So Christ is alive but spiritually not anything anything as grose as involving physical bodies. Secondly liberals who see Christinaity as mostly myth from which springs a philosophical beliefs systems which they adhere to. No need to attempt to pretend that any of the mythic stories are actually true but rather rejoice in the stories and ideas the myths are trying to convey.

This question is aimed at NON-LDS Christians who frequent this board..... If a polygamous family turned up at your church, and the "marriages" were all between consenting adults and no laws had been broken would you.... 1) Expect the man to seperate all but on wife. 2) Allow them to continue as they were for some time but counsel for separation 3) Accept them fully as a single blended family This doesn't have to be a fundamentalist type "Mormon" could be Muslim or someone from certain parts of Africa. If option 1 or 2, would the presence of kids make a difference?

PC, I think "Surprised by Joy" CS Lewis's story of his own conversion, shows that even intelligent, committed athiest can came to a faith in God in real life. gapebla, As a non-LDS Christians I don't know if I should be helping to answer your questions but my response if placed in that situation would be to.... Ask them which version of the book of Acts they read, the Western version or the Alexanderian version. Although for most of the books of Bible the textual differences are not that significant, the two versions of Acts differ by about 10%. Both are very early in the textual tradition and although the Alexandrian is more likely the original text there is no absolute way of knowing. (I have even read some people argue that the same author might have written two version of Acts, an early plain version (Alexandrian) then a more colourful one (Western).)

Yeah no, I'm glad for the "edit" function its a ripper. This threads "going straight to the pool room"! Favourite Aussie language misunderstanding.... Famous Australian TV actor Bert Newton (about 50 at the time) is presenting an award with Mohammed Ali. Bert says "I like the boy!" to Ali which to an Australian comes across just as a respectful comment to a younger person. However Ali heard the word "boy" and you could see his eyes just exploding with rage at the insult.

Mudcat, Thx for the response, you and I have much in common. I would be happy to stick to the things that are a priority to God, to a large decree what we are discussing is IMHO not essential or God would have made it clearer. But in trying to understand LDS I have had to dig into these things because that is where much of the difference between us lie. (I enjoy dicussing them even though it may not in all honesty be the most productive use of my time, I trust God can forgive me that human failing!) LDS posters, That is in 5/5 for socail trinitartians. Everyone, I think the pertinent questions are what is "spirit"? How is God's omnipresence worked out? Both immensely difficult questions. What is "spirit"? We have it but it is bound to our bodies whilst we live. On death our spirit is de-embodied, only to be reembodied at the resurection. However the resurrected body is spoken about by Paul as a "spiritual body", as if almost in the Eastern Orthodox way of thinking it is a new hybrid or intermingleling of the two realms. Angles are spirits but definitely "appear" in "human-like" bodily form. Except for Cherubim and Seraphim and the whole six wing thing. Demons and Satan are fallen angels but unlike angels generally indwell other creatures not take a seperate perceivable form. God's omnipresence This is one of the things where I really struggle to grasp an LDS idea. If God has a body and is stuck on a planet, a long way from earth, how then does he hear our prayers or innermost thoughts. How does He interact with people from such a long distance. What do you do with "in Him we live and move and have our being"? It appears for me to turn Father God from always capable of being with me (no matter where, no matter when) to a long gone absent Dad, whose left His children and moved on. For me I don't understand how he can manifest in the myriad way he appears to in scripture unless he is a spirit. I do not doubt that if He chose to He could be perceived by us as being in human form (as angels do) but that is our perception not His reality. (I could conceive that Joseph Smith may have percieved God and Jesus as he reported he did but that is His perception from this side of the veil not necessarily the reality of the situation.)

The issues is that a Lib-Green-Bloc coalition was not put before the people at the election (infact from what I've read it was spefically ruled out). However if you can form a majority (if even by coalition) then under normal parliamentary rules you should get to govern. My suggestion is that Harper the Tory PM, should have let the no confindence vote occur. Then go to the GG and inform him that you have lost confidence and need to resign as PM. Then make the case that the opposition do not have a madate for their coalition and that the only appropriate action is for the GG to use the reserve powers to enforce another election where they can run as coalition or at least not rule it out and appoint him (Harper) as care taker PM as he is the only leader who will request another election occur. It then falls to the Canadian people to sort out the mess and if they are not capable then they deserve the goverment they then get. (In 75 in Australia, a GG used reserve powers to appoint a caretaker PM so as to call a full dual house election (double dissolution) and the caretaker PM romped it in)

Hemi, Is your question serious, you surely know what is G'day...."Strine" for Good day....Try saying Good day but imagine that it is 40C(110F) plus and a host of flies are trying to enter your mouth! Here's a Slim Dusty song ► Slim Dusty - G'day g'day Lyrics RickJ, Welcome mate, I hope you enjoy your time here.

Hemi, I'm just trying to understand, this is an area of LDS belief that seems confusing to me. I thought that LDS believed that all non-LDS went to Spirit Prison until the resurrection and only the LDS got to go to paradise. Then everyone gets moved on from there at some time into the level of kingdom you inherit. Maybe you can give me a run down from an LDS perspective the path(s) someone like would follow from death onwards? (Presuming on your part that I have a genuine faith in Jesus)

But once that is done, do I get out immediately or do I have to wait until the Ressurection? I must admit I don't get the whole authorized priesthood thing, to me it seems very "priestcraftish". The idea that God only allows the gospel to be dispensed by authorized salespersons who have an absolute monopoly seems not much like God to me.

OK as a non-LDS christian in LDS eyes I go to spirit prison to have the gospel preached to me by LDS missionaries.... But I've already... Repented, believed, been baptised for the remission of my sins, received the Holy Spirit through laying on of hands and obeyed Jesus commands to the best of my ability with the help of the Holy Spirit. I just haven't done any of that in the LDS church, nor with someone in LDS eyes with priesthood authority. (I view that all believers are priests, so I was baptised with priesthood authority. Furthermore that Jesus promise that where two or three gathered in His name, he would be there means that the ultimate high priest was present at those times as well, that they were conducted with His priesthood authority) So is all I have to do to get out of spirit prison is to accept the need for priesthood authority as LDS understand it in Christian ordinances and wait for someone to get dunked for me in the LDS way? Or do I have to wait for the resurrection to get out?

Hemi, I'd probably agree that Stephen quite likely saw Jesus in a position of power at the right hand side of God. (It is even possible that Stephen perceived God in human form as well). But the point of seeing him on the right hand side IMHO was to ascribe His position in the universe not to describe the seating arrangements in heaven. As I have said a number of times I don't have a problem with the persons of God talking to each other. I actually view that they would have had a discussion about the creation. In that respects there was a council in heaven before creation occurred. At which the plan of redemption was shared amongst the persons of God. In whose image was man created in? My personal answer is Jesus Christ but that takes an understanding of eternity and time. When the ressurected Jesus entered eternity he became outside/beyond our time dimension. At that moment in eternity (if one can use a time oriented word like moment about eternity) He existed throughout our time continuum as the ressurected Jesus.

Hemi, I'm not aware of anywhere the Bible uses "being" to describe God but it and the BoM does use "one God" but never "three Gods" to describe the Godhead. What do you think it means to call Jesus "the eternal God"? (Obviously you know the "the" is a definite article and the straight forward reading would be that He alone is the eternal God, which is not a problem for a trinitarian but I see as problematic for LDS) I have no problems with Stephen seeing a Jesus standing at the right hand of God. However "right hand of God" could be an idiom meaning that Jesus was in a position of authority. If a leader calls someone their "right hand man", we don't think that that person is literally the right hand of the leader.

Hemi, I don't have a problem with the persons existing in differing spatial locations. The idea that the Father was crucified when the Son was, was declared heretical very early on. I expext to see Jesus as a resurrected man in heaven. I really don't know how to describe the Father, John's descriptions clearly show he was blown away by the sight, although I might concede that if He so chose we could perceive Him in human-like form. Why do LDS always use the seperation of the persons to deny the oneness of God? I suppose for me, a perfect person would be unified whilst still be themselves. That is the goal that God has set for all of us to become ever more perfect so that we may become ever more one with Him.

In an exasperated tone he moans...."Ye gods and little fishes"! Quoting Moksha quote from another forum.... "Christianity has struggled to reaffirm the basic monotheism of Judaism while deifying a human being: Jesus of Nazareth. For most Christians, the culmination of this effort has been the doctrine of the Trinity, whereby God becomes one god, but in three forms. When he's in Heaven, he's God; when on earth, he's Jesus; when he dwells in your heart, he's the Holy Ghost. Mormons have upset the applecart by insisting that Jesus was not God, the Father, that his conversations with God were not cunning acts of ventriloquism, that when (at Jesus' baptism), God said, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased," Jesus wasn't resorting to blue smoke and mirrors. Jesus was not a flesh puppet, nor was he throwing his voice. Nor was Jesus an illusion, as some once contended, in their effort to work out the math." Firstly a man wasn't deified, TC's see it the other way round. A person of God became flesh and dwelt amongst us, a man did not become God. Secondly TC's do not see Jesus as being a ventriloquist, pretending to talk to the Father, they are seperate persons. Capable of communicating and expressing emotions to each other. It is not "three forms" but three persons. "When he's in Heaven, he's God; when on earth, he's Jesus; when he dwells in your heart, he's the Holy Ghost." The above line is what we would "modalism". TC's believe Jesus was a person of God before his incarnation, remains to this day our high priest in the true temple in heaven and will return in his ressurected form to earth. The Holy Ghosts role in the trinity is to be God that can be within all believers, but he still remains a person within the trinity, even if there were no believers for him to indwell He would still be a person of God. Still think the BoM gives a better defence of trinitarianism then the Bible. BoM 3 testimonies "And the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God." BoM Title Page "And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God" Simple IMHO the BoM declares there is "One God" and "Jesus is the Eternal God." The LDS scriptures clearly declares one God and that it there are other Gods, then they cannot be eternal ones. BoM -Introduction "Concerning this record the Prophet Joseph Smith said: “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” " Can any of the LDS posters from the BoM (and not from any other work) show me a text that clearly states that there is 3 Gods (or more) and that are only one in purpose? (I understand you see that doctrine as coming mostly from latter revelations but I'm just curious as to if and where you would see support for that belief in the BoM.)

PC, Why pick out that one particular group? (There has been plenty said on the other thread.) "Fidelity within, abstinence without" (marriage that is). Sums up my view. I think we need to make it clear that our stand is not just at a particular group but is based on a positive view of what we think is the God given place for appropriate expressions of certain gifts He has blessed us with. That any use of such a special God given gift outside His ordained design will be outside the makers plan and lead to people living outside what they have been designed to live. If you don't follow the design/plan you end up in a mess. (As any one who has put together swedish flat pack furniture will atest.)

Obviously your supermarket caters well for the "elder"ly.