Ray

I’m not sure about what you are asking here. Are you asking what I meant by saying that Man was already in possession of all the information about the gospel that was necessary? By that I meant that Man was already in possession of the knowledge that Jesus is the Christ. The knowledge that Jesus is the Christ is all the information that is necessary for salvation. When you know that, you know that you need to look to Him for guidance, and you know that you must do what He requires of you. You know that You aren’t the one who makes the rules regarding what is necessary for salvation, and nobody else is either. Christ is the only one who can guide you, and Jesus is the Christ. The understanding of that knowledge is both simple and complex at the same time. For instance, must Christ do everything Himself? No, He can send someone as a messenger, to declare His will to us on His behalf. He can appoint prophets, and apostles, and teachers, and other people to help Him with His work. But whether the message comes from Him personally, or through one of His appointed servants, it is the same. It all comes from Him. And how can you know whether or not a message truly comes from Him or the mind of some other person? Through a testimony from the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost will personally witness to you whether or not a message is from Christ, and you can trust a message from the Holy Ghost because Christ and the Holy Ghost are in agreement, and God will never lie to you. Once you acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ, and you try to learn all you can about Him, you will begin to know more and more about what He requires from you, and whatever He requires, you will know that you must follow Him. To think that you can simply acknowledge that He is the Christ but not do anything He requires from you doesn’t make any sense, does it? <!--QuoteBegin--inactivetx@ Feb 27 2004, 11:56 AM During these 1600 the priesthood was gone so all baptisms performed during this period are null and void, there was no gift of the HG, and no temples to perform rites in. How did these people have the gospel? I suggest that you think about the difference between the actual gospel message and actually doing what Christ requires from you. The gospel is simply the message that Jesus is the Christ, but before you can acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ, you must first think about what the word “Christ” signifies. It doesn’t help a whole lot to acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ if you don’t first understand the significance of Christ, or Messiah. Put simply, Christ signifies the person with the power to redeem you from your sins, cleansing your conscience from everything you have ever done “wrong” and helping you become the best type of person you can possibly imagine. We have all done things that we knew were “wrong”, and without being able to put those faults behind us, and receiving the power to overcome our weaknesses, we would always feel bad about the mistakes we have made and never be able to move forward to reach our full potential. The destiny of Man is glorious, if we will simply rely upon the mercy and power of Christ. But without a Christ, Man would be limited to only what He can accomplish by himself, with no assistance from a higher power. You also mentioned some specific things we must do in obedience to Christ, probably because you have heard that Christ requires us to do those things, namely being baptized and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, but if we don’t have the opportunity to do those things, we are not at fault. Understanding that we need to be baptized doesn’t do us any good if we don’t have anyone around who can baptize us. The ordinance of baptism must be fulfilled through someone with the authority to act for Christ, if we are to expect Christ to honor our baptism. Christ will not accept a baptism that was done by someone only “claiming” to have authority to act for God because God must authorize and approve every act done in His name. He will not honor the work of unauthorized servants. Christ is also the one who must give us the opportunity to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, because the gift of the Holy Ghost comes from Him, and not from us. But we can only receive it when it is available to us. In summary, Man has always had the gospel, because the gospel has been taught since the days of Adam. But God doesn’t force Man to listen to Him, or remember what He has taught, or share the gospel with other people. When Man chooses to ignore the gospel or rebel against God after being taught, Man is showing that he doesn’t want the kingdom of God on this Earth. In the past God has allowed this to happen because God wants Man to choose Him, but someday this Earth will be inhabited only by people who want God as their Lord and King. Everyone else will have to live somewhere else. The work of God will not be frustrated, because every Man will have the opportunity to know what God requires and do it. It’s only a matter of time and testing, to see if Man will do everything that God requires of Him.

As the laws of this Earth agree with the laws of Heaven, and as people obey those laws, the more people on Earth will be in agreement with the people in Heaven.You’ll always be able to find people who are not obedient to law, and some will even go so far as to make laws in total opposition to the laws in Heaven, but what happens to those people in the end? I hope everyone will figure that out before they actually see it happen to them.

bizabra, Do you realize that you’re trying to redefine marriage? Do you realize that you’re trying or at least hoping that you can get a STATE to agree with your ideas, and change the laws to what you think they should be? If you’re successful at convincing a STATE that they should do things differently, will you then try to get other states, and maybe even the rest of the WORLD to change the way they feel about marriage. And if you’re successful there, will you then try to change the laws of GOD? The reason that marriage is defined as it is for a STATE is because that is the way that STATE has defined it. True, there may be room for improvement with some laws in a STATE, but when a STATE is in agreement with the laws of GOD, that’s as perfect a law as you’re ever going to get. And as always, if you don’t like the laws of any particular government, you can live somewhere else.

I think it’s worth mentioning that the Bible does contain the fullness of the gospel, so it isn’t the “gospel” that was restored. The gospel is simply the message that Jesus is the Christ, the only one who can redeem Man from sin and bring Man back into the presence of God with a clear conscience. The Book of Mormon is another witness that the gospel and Bible are true. What was restored was the kingdom of God to the Earth, comprised of people who help Man to know and do the things God requires from citizens in God’s kingdom. Many plain and precious truths were also restored, pertaining to both the gospel and kingdom of God, but Man was already in possession of all the information about the gospel that was necessary. Once someone knows that Jesus is the Christ, and that they must go through Him to enter the kingdom of God, they know that they need to do whatever He requires of them before they can enter God’s kingdom and presence with a clear conscience. That involves doing things. If someone can’t do something during their mortal life on this Earth, because an authorized servant of God isn't available to help them do something, or because someone isn't aware that they need to do something, they will learn about all those things later, after their mortal life here on this Earth. People who are already in the kingdom of God, who already know about those things and do them, help other people know and do those things both during this mortal life and afterwards. Someday, everyone will know that Jesus is the Christ, and they will either do what they know they should be doing or they won't. Advancement in the kingdom of God is dependent on how well people do what they know they should be doing.

Can you imagine how the disciples of Jesus felt as they watched our Lord go through this? Can you imagine how Mary, the mother of Jesus, felt as she watched her son go through this? The people who knew our Lord and watched Him go through this didn’t walk away smiling after seeing this, and the people who watch this movie aren’t supposed to go away smiling after seeing this movie either. This movie may bring us as close as we’re ever going to be in imagining what it was like for our Lord to go through this, and if it does nothing more than give me a better idea of what He went through as I think about Him during sacrament meeting, it is well worth watching. Btw, most of us know that our Lord was resurrected, and can imagine how much joy there was in seeing Him risen. But before that, there was this, and this was necessary.

Yes, I do, and questions usually help other people think for themselves. :)

Q: Why did God allow the truth to be lost? A: How could God have kept the truth from being lost? By constantly providing revelation to people after some other people chose not to acknowledge the truth? Do you understand how someone comes to know the truth in the first place? I believe God reveals the truth to anyone who sincerely wants to know it and apply it in their lives, but He won’t force anyone to accept anything He has to say and He won’t keep assuring people of the truth when people show by their attitude and actions that they really don’t want it. Revealing the truth to people like that just doesn’t do any good. Q: Why did God wait several centuries to restore the truth? A: Who says He did? Who says that He wasn’t always willing to assure someone of the truth? Who says that people can’t know the truth without being citizens of His kingdom? There are lots of people in the world today who know the truth about some things, and they aren’t citizens of His kingdom. Just because God waited a while before restoring His kingdom to the Earth that doesn’t mean that He hasn’t always been willing to assure someone of the truth. Btw, I believe the reason that God chose to reorganize His kingdom from scratch was the same reason that He didn’t try to straighten out the Jews during His mortal ministry. Putting new wine in old wine skins doesn’t seem to be a good idea.

Well Ray, you have the internet. Do some research. You wonder what differences can be in 1/10 of 1%, but think about the universe. DNA is like a miniature universe. <!--QuoteBegin--curvette@ Feb 26 2004, 10:23 AM Well Ray, you have the internet. Do some research. curvette, Is that as good as you can do? I was hoping somebody might be able to provide a link to the information I was asking for, possibly with images of DNA strands and an explanation of what each component signifies. While you may not be able to show me any links to those sources of information, somebody else might be able to, and knowing where to look can save a lot of time. When someone asks for information showing why we (LDS) believe something, should we simply tell them to go look it up in the scriptures? I don’t think so. Some people are familiar enough with the scriptures to be able to point out where someone can read something pertaining to the question being asked, and I don’t see any reason why some people can’t be familiar enough with DNA to be able to point out their sources of their information too. And I’m not interested in hearing the excuse that this can’t be understood without a lot of prior education. All education begins somewhere and someone who is familiar with this issue should know some good sources of information. And btw, the information doesn’t have to be on the internet, but that would be preferable. Good heavens Ray. How lazy are you? Do you know how to use a search engine? There is no conspiracy theory on DNA. No one expects you to "take their word for it." Use your own intelligence, do a search on it, find some good websites and dive in. curvette, Did you overlook my statement concerning saving time? Of course I could do all the research myself, but it will take far less time with references from other people. If you can't provide any references, don't, but don't criticize me when I ask for help. What do you think this message board for, anyways? Outshined, Thanks again for your help. :) And btw, you're not only helping me, but everyone else who is reading this thread. :)

Well Ray, you have the internet. Do some research. You wonder what differences can be in 1/10 of 1%, but think about the universe. DNA is like a miniature universe. <!--QuoteBegin--curvette@ Feb 26 2004, 10:23 AM Well Ray, you have the internet. Do some research. curvette, Is that as good as you can do? I was hoping somebody might be able to provide a link to the information I was asking for, possibly with images of DNA strands and an explanation of what each component signifies. While you may not be able to show me any links to those sources of information, somebody else might be able to, and knowing where to look can save a lot of time. When someone asks for information showing why we (LDS) believe something, should we simply tell them to go look it up in the scriptures? I don’t think so. Some people are familiar enough with the scriptures to be able to point out where someone can read something pertaining to the question being asked, and I don’t see any reason why some people can’t be familiar enough with DNA to be able to point out their sources of their information too. And I’m not interested in hearing the excuse that this can’t be understood without a lot of prior education. All education begins somewhere and someone who is familiar with this issue should know some good sources of information. And btw, the information doesn’t have to be on the internet, but that would be preferable. p.s. A sincere THANK YOU to you, curvette, and Outshined, and the other people who have helped to clarify this issue for me.

So we’re talking about a 0.1 percent difference between the DNA of all humans? And there is supposed to be some way to determine what that 0.1 percent signifies? I’d like to find some information on how to interpret DNA evidence for myself, and see the actual DNA evidence, rather than rely on someone else’s interpretations of these things. People don’t really expect us to just take their word for these things, do they?

I’d like to learn some more about this DNA evidence, especially about whose DNA is used to determine whether or not people in the Eastern hemisphere are related to people in the Western hemisphere. Any suggestions for places to start? For instance, how does someone use DNA to determine whether or not a person is a “Jew”? Whose DNA do you begin with, and how do you know whether or not that person is a “Jew” and not a Samaritan, Babylonian, Assyrian, Egyptian, etc.?

Any ideas on how I might track down the statements from General Authorities regarding rated R movies? I have a feeling that the person(s) who made those statements were only trying to give general counsel, and not official declarations from our Lord. And as far as “taking it back” goes, I think it would be a bit rude for anyone other than the person(s) who made those statements to say that those persons should have expressed their thoughts in other words. When people express their thoughts with anything less than perfect words, I think we should try to understand the thoughts they are trying to express. And for the record, I’m going to see it with my wife this weekend. If I believed I should avoid anything that could be rated “R”, I would stop reading the Bible and Book of Mormon.

Thanks for the information, but I was trying to make a point of showing how every government has procedures for granting authority to others.Even when someone was allowed to become a lawyer by simply hanging up a shingle, a lawyer’s authority had to be recognized as legitimate by the higher authorities in government, such as the court who would acknowledge that the lawyer was allowed to act as a lawyer. And even if everyone was allowed to be a lawyer, with no qualifications whatsoever, it would only be allowed because the higher authorities had allowed everyone to be a lawyer. Can you imagine the confusion in that situation? Would you want to be represented by just anybody who was able to call himself a lawyer? Would you trust him with your life? How would you know whether or not he knew the law? Would the number of clients he has have any influence on your decision to choose him? What if all of his clients had their cases pending trial, or the number of cases he has won in the past can't determine how good a lawyer he really is? Let’s get back to the point a little bit. Even if everyone were able to call himself or herself a priest, or an authorized representative of God with the priesthood, would you listen to someone just because he had lots and lots of people who went to him for guidance? Would you trust that person with your life? How would you know whether or not he spoke the truth? Would the number of people following his guidance have any influence on your decision to follow him? Would you be willing to wait until the Day of Judgment before finding out that you should have been listening to somebody else? I thank God that His kingdom is a kingdom of order, and not of confusion. When God gives someone the priesthood, I can know whether or not that someone has authority by receiving a testimony from God, through the power of the Holy Ghost. I wouldn’t put my life in the hands of someone “claiming” to hold the priesthood any more than I will put my life in the hands of someone “claiming” to be a good lawyer, and there is no good reason I should. Getting back to the point a little more…the point of having authorized servants of God on this Earth is to enable Man to establish the kingdom of God on this Earth. If Man isn’t authorized to act as God, he is only acting as Man, because Man can’t righteously assume to act as God unless God has given that authority to Man. I hope I have now illustrated how silly it is to assume that Man can act as God simply because Man thinks he knows what God would do or how God would do it. Without the authority or power of God, Man is nothing more than Man.

Tao, I can explain how those prophecies of our Lord were fulfilled, just as I can explain how many prophecies that have been attributed to Joseph Smith have been fulfilled, but rather than explain those things to you, I would rather have you be open to the possibility that it can all be explained. You need one of those “Ahh-haa” moments, as your mind is illuminated and your soul is filled by the power of the Holy Ghost, and only God can give you that. Have you seen the movie called “God’s Army”? I just saw that last weekend, while my wife and I were celebrating our wedding anniversary at the beach. I had heard about it before, but I didn’t feel motivated to get it until now. Anyway, it’s a really good movie that shows what many missionaries are up against as they try to share the gospel with others. It portrays many different personality types, and my favorite guy was Pappy. Next time I need to come up with an internet identity, I think I’ll use that one. :)

Which prophecies are you referring to, and how can you prove that Joseph Smith is the one who made those prophecies? While I can’t claim to know every prophecy made by Joseph Smith, I do know about a lot of them, and there isn’t one that I know of that hasn’t come true or is yet to be fulfilled in the future. And regarding no “archaeological evidence”…how do you know that the archeological evidence that remains on the American continents isn’t what remains of the civilizations spoken of in the Book of Mormon? What are you waiting for, the discovery of some other plates to describe the civilizations that once existed here? My knowledge that the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be comes from God, and I know of no other “proof” that can convince me otherwise. Sure, Men have come up with other explanations for the evidence that might be true, but how am I to know which of those explanations is true? What else do I need to know before I should rely on a testimony from God, rather than what some Men have to say? My final advice to you is to read and examine the Book of Mormon, to discover for yourself what these writings declare. I recommend that you start reading it from the beginning, from the title page to the very end. When questions come to your mind, make a note for further study later. If you first concentrate on trying to understand what the book declares, by the people who wrote this book, you will then be better prepared to concentrate on questions concerning whether or not their declarations are true. I had questions concerning this book too, when I first discovered it, and while those questions have now been answered, I still come up with questions and answers each time I read it. I can help to explain anything you want to know about this book, and how the teachings within this book harmonize with all other scripture, including the Bible, but your goal should be to discover for yourself whether or not this book is truly what it claims to be, and for that you will need God's help. Forget everything that Man has ever told you, and rely only on God to assure you of the truth. I can promise that if you will carefully consider what this book declares, with a sincere desire to know the truth, and a sincere intent to abide by the truth no matter what the costs, you will come to know that this book is truly what it claims to be. This is essentially a promise that was made by a person who helped to write this book, and if he made it through the inspiration of God, God will certainly honor it. I personally witness that God has honored this promise, and that I have come to know through the power of the Holy Ghost that this book is what it claims to be. I also testify that I have spoken the truth regarding everything I am telling you, and that I am prepared to stand before God to witness that I gave you this message. Until we meet again. Farewell.

Why do some people insist upon calling Faith "blind" ??? Do the same people also consider Love to be blind ??? Just because emotions can't be seen with the physical senses, doesn't mean they are blind. Only the people who can't determine that those things exist are blind.

I agree, it would be very nice if the Book of Mormon included more details about how Alma received the priesthood, and it would also be very nice if the Bible included more details about how the priesthood passes from one person to another, but you do agree that the Book of Mormon contains more details about that issue than the Bible does, don’t you? And you do agree that we aren’t limited to the information we have in only the Bible or Book of Mormon, don’t you? I thank God for providing continuing revelation, especially the revelation I have personally received, and I hope you do too. Btw, the religion I once accepted believes the authority is passed along in what is called "The Great Commission", which refers to the record in Matthew where Jesus told His apostles to go into all the world to preach the gospel, baptizing all who repent, and teaching them to do what He taught them. Those aren’t the exact words, but close enough. My Dad, who is a preacher of that religion, says that everything our Lord taught His apostles that Man needs to know is contained in the Bible, and that someone who teaches from the Bible knows everything that Man needs to know and is thus empowered with the same authority that our Lord gave to His apostles. He compared it to someone finding a rulebook explaining how to play baseball, with that rulebook containing everything a person needs to know to play baseball. Following the same logic, I could say the same thing about someone finding a set of law books, explaining everything a person needs to know about the law. But a person who knows everything about the law isn’t automatically authorized to be a policeman, or a lawyer, or a judge. And a person who knows how to play baseball isn’t automatically accepted into the Major Leagues either. And even if the scriptures did contain everything we needed to know, what makes someone think they are authorized to do something just because they know how?

If you would think more about what I was actually trying to say instead of trying to counter argue against what you think I was saying, you might realize how silly you appear to be right now.Do you really believe that everybody bases their acceptance of religious teachings on an assurance from God? Why would you think that, when it appears that your acceptance isn't based on receiving an assurance from God? Your acceptance of religious teachings seem to be based on your own reasoning and understanding, not on anything God has told you. And don’t use the argument that your views are in agreement with your understanding of the Bible. Lots of people think their views are in agreement with the Bible, and look at how many different views we have in this world. If I could show you how the teachings in the Book of Mormon harmonize with the teachings in the Bible, would you accept the Book of Mormon teachings then? I don’t think so. I think you would come up with more excuses and “rational thinking” to support your own views. If you ever really want to know the truth about religous teachings, especially about things you can't see for yourself, you will need God's assurance before you can know whether or not it's true. If you never receive God's assurance, your reasoning will always be based only on your own thoughts or the thoughts of somebody else other than God. Btw, I won't be talking to you anymore about this because I have said everything that I can say, other than to quote scripture. I hope you find all the happiness you desire. Take care.

That’s an interesting idea, but I see things differently. I think the truth is in the details, it’s just that all the details aren’t fully understood.For instance, I believe Adam and Eve are the parents of all “humans” who have ever been born on the Earth. The only exception is Jesus, because His father was our heavenly Father. But then again, He wasn’t exactly “human” like the rest of us, so I can truthfully say that all “humans” who were ever born on this Earth descended from Adam and Eve. Jesus was both “human” and “divine”, because His mother was a “human” and His father was “divine”. I could get a little more specific about what it means to be “human” or “divine”, but I think I’ll stop there for now. Some people say that Adam and Eve didn’t really exist, or if they did exist, that those names are only a reference to non-specific persons. Like I said, I believe the truth is in the details, and that you must understand every little detail about everything before you can understand all of the truth.

We were originally talking about priesthood, right? Priesthood is a concept that many people don’t think too much about, partly because they don’t understand what that word means. It must first be explained before it can be understood. Priesthood is like the power of attorney, or any other power enabling a person to act in behalf of another power. We use the word ‘priesthood’ to refer to the power that God can give to Man, so that Man can act as God. Q: How would it be if Man didn’t have power or authority from God? A: If Man didn’t have God’s authority, Man would be limited to what only Man can do. The priesthood is necessary if Man desires to do anything that only God can do. Q: If Man didn’t have God’s authority, how could Man get it? A: Man can only get God’s authority if God gives it to Him. Man can’t possess the power or authority of God simply by wanting to do what only God can do, no matter how much Man may desire to do what only God can do. Q: Once Man has power and authority from God, what can Man do with it? A: Everything God can do, and only what God would do, in a particular set of circumstances. God’s power and authority is given to Man a little at a time, and only to the extent that God Himself would act in that particular set of circumstances. If Man tries to do something that God would not do, Man is only acting in His capacity as Man, and not as God. The priesthood is one of the greatest gifts that God can give to Man, wouldn’t you say?

The idea that people can’t know the truth about something without first being able to see it through the physical senses is just one more argument promoted by Lucifer and his disciples. I say you can know whether or not something is true through a means other than your physical senses, and if you would just think about that for a little while, I’m sure you could come to know that truth for yourself. Think some more about how it would be to listen to one of those prophets I mentioned. Think some more about what would convince you whether or not you needed to repent. How would you know whether or not you were doing something that you should not do? Would it only be because someone else was saying or had said that you shouldn’t do something? If the ten commandments hadn’t been written yet, and even if they had been, how would you know whether or not those commandments had truly come from God, and not just from some person who made that claim? Think some more in present terms, and consider how it would be to listen to Joseph Smith. Would you not believe that he was a prophet simply because some other people said so? Don’t you realize that there have always been people who have ignored what prophets have taught, supposing they are nothing more than men speaking for themselves? Don’t you realize that people have killed prophets in the past, by stoning them, or burning them, or crucifying them, etc., simply because what those prophets said did not agree with what they thought was true? Think some more about how Jesus was received by His hometown in Nazareth. Do you remember what He said? Of all the people who knew Him, you might think the people in His hometown would be among those who knew Him best as the person He truly was, but that’s not how it was, was it. If you really believe that you can’t come to know the truth through Faith alone, that simply shows that you have yet to experience the power of Faith. Faith is an assurance from God, and if you know that God knows the truth, His assurance to you is all you need to know something. If He assures you that something is true, then it’s true, and it doesn’t matter that you don’t have any physical evidence to support His claim. Btw, an assurance from God doesn’t always give someone a knowledge of the truth, just as an assurance from someone else doesn’t automatically give a person a knowledge of what someone else knows, but once you experience what happens to you as you follow God’s counsel, which He assures you to be true through the power of the Holy Ghost, you can someday come to the point where you know the truth for yourself. But without Faith, or that assurance from God, there truly will be some things you will never know.

I try to share my beliefs with other people. I don't expect people to accept what I am trying to share, and if they don't accept my what I offer, I "leave them alone" as long as their beliefs do no harm or injustice to other people. Are you familiar with the passages in Alma that talk about leaving people alone with their beliefs, only bringing them into judgement when they commit crimes? I totally agree with that. America is a free country, where people should not be coerced into accepting the beliefs of anybody else. And as I have said before, I would die to uphold every persons right to form their own beliefs and worhip however or whatever they want. Btw, my truth will be in agreement with anyone else's truth, if any of us have any "real" truth. There is no such thing as "personal" truth, since all truth is in harmony with all other truth regarding the same issue. Jesus is the Christ, and that is either true for everybody or it isn't true at all. And just so you know, I testify that Jesus is the Christ, and that I am speaking the truth.

I”ve never seen Missouri, but what you’re describing sounds a lot like Oregon. Do you also have lots of forested hills with tall Douglas fir trees there? That’s what made me want to move here from Arizona. Lots of people complain about all the rain we get in Oregon too, but it seems like paradise to me. I certainly can’t see how Africa could be described as anybody’s idea of paradise, but to each their own, I guess. There’s still the possibility that things in the past were different than they are now, and who knows how far Adam and Eve walked from the garden of Eden before they settled somewhere else.

Heh, am I getting credit for something I didn’t say again? Oh well, since I’m posting, I might as well share my opinion on the matter, huh. I agree with antishock on this one, if I’m correct in stating that he also believes that Adam dwelt in the land we now know as Missouri. My reasoning is supported by all the scriptures that have already been cited along with Joseph F. Smith’s answer in the book, “Answer’s to Gospel Questions”. I also have the idea that America is the most choice land on all the Earth, for several different reasons, and that this land has been reserved for God’s chosen people since the beginning of time. I’m still waiting for Faith to support my belief, though.

USN, Try to imagine yourself as someone who is living during the life of a prophet. If Noah talked to you, would you accept his testimony? Before or after you saw all the rain? Is the rain the only thing that would convince you? If you heard Isaiah or Jeremiah preaching in your city, would you accept their testimony? Before or after you were carried away into Babylon? Is that the only thing that would convince you that you and other people needed to repent of your sins and have Faith in God? Is that the only thing that would convince you that those people were really prophets of God? If you heard our Lord, or one of His apostles, would you really believe what He or they said? Before or after you saw with your own eyes that He was truly resurrected, in possession of a glorified physical body? Can you imagine what other people would have said if you had told them that? In other words, how do you know whether or not the teachings within the Bible are true? Do you believe those teachings only because there is “enough” physical evidence to support the existence of the people who wrote the Bible? How do you really know whether or not it’s true? I believe that any faith not based on the truth and reality of an assurance from God is in fact no faith at all. I call that supposition, based only on reasoning and physical evidence. You can't have Faith without God. curvette, I believe we should consider all the possibilities until we know the truth about something. Do you really believe you should keep an open mind after you know something is true, to the point where you should doubt that what you know isn’t true? I hope not. I do think we should be careful about what we claim to know, though. For instance, once we know that 1 + 1 = 2, should we be open to the possibility that “that” isn’t true? What good would that do? 1 + 1 will always equal two, and there is nothing anyone will ever be able to do to change that. It is true that one and one can be something other than two, but one plus one will always equal two. Now let’s try a more “spiritual” perspective: Once we know that Jesus is the Christ, should we be open to the possibility that He isn’t? To be open to the possibility that Jesus is not the Christ implies that you don’t have that knowledge. But once you know, you know, and there is nothing you will ever be able to do to change that. Btw, someone who will say that Jesus is not the Christ is not open to the truth. If someone makes that statement, they are stating their position and a level of knowledge just as much as someone who states that the opposite is true. But Jesus is either the Christ or He isn’t, and to state that you have knowledge one way or the other is to make a claim upon which you will either stand or fall. I think it’s perfectly fine to say that I don’t know something, but a person of integrity will never say that they know something when they truly don’t know. And a person of integrity will also never state that they know something is not true, unless they know that it isn’t.