parsnips

Does the Book of Mormon contain plural Gods? Does the Book of Mormon contain the Doctrine of Eternal Progression? Does the Book of Mormon contain the Doctrine of Celestial Marriage? Does the Book of Mormon contain the Doctrine of Plural Marriage? Does the Book of Mormon contain anything on the Baptism of the Dead? Does the Book of Mormon contain anything on the priesthood? Does the Book of Mormon contain anything on Works+Ordinances+Grace, after all we can do? (Hint: The answer to all of these questions is no) The Book of Mormon does nothing to answer these questions at hand. So now we must go to the Prophet, and the doctrines, because that is the only place where these questions are attempted to be answered. So it all comes down to a test of a prophet, and of a spirit. 1 John 4:1 says we should test every spirit, because there are many false prophets. How do we test a spirit? By consulting the word of God, and seeing if their messages are congruent. How do we test a prophet? By the veracity of his prophecies, they all must be true. There are several prophecies of Joseph Smith that simply were false. (Location of Zion, the Building of the Temple in Missouri being the key ones). Until you can answer those challenges, you cannot be glad for the Book of Mormon, or a Prophet, because they don't address the fundamental issues.

Do you know what the purpose of nearly all of Paul's letters to the churches were? Peter's and James, Jude and John also wrote on the topics in their circular letters. Early gnosticism was very prevalent in the Apostle's time, and they took the time in their letters to address the Gnostics, the Jewish attacks on Christianity, and early Mysticism which began to synthesize pagan rituals, jewish belief, and Christianity. Which teachings in particular? As far as I could tell in history, Origen only had problems with Demetrius, and it was a personal issue. His theology was different as far as Christ's relationship to the Father (he believed he was an image of the father), but then again Origen wasn't the only theologian, nor was he the only one that based his work in scripture. For example, you'll find that his view of the Oneness of God very similar to the Nicean view of God, that he's uncreated, incomprehensible, omnipotent etc etc. Also, Origen was tortured and killed during the persecution of the church, by non-Christians. The purpose of Jesus (Immanuel, God with Us) was to expose himself to temptation, to expose himself to physical pain, and to endure those things without sin (without denying the word). It is clear that it is Jesus the man, expressing the pain and temptation to not follow through his Godly will, yet going through with it anyways. It is yet more proof that Jesus is the Messiah! Stephen did not see two people. Stephen saw the "Glory of God" and Jesus on it's right hand, which is an expression to indicate position, not an expression to indicate that the Glory had a hand. Any elementary study of Greek colloquialism will show that. How can you be denied the rights that being the "true church" allows you to claim? You claim to be able to go on, but first let's stick with the simple subjects that you haven't been able to defend thusfar. The Catholic Church is simply wrong on their form of salvation. For example, look to the Eastern Orthodoxy, which is the most similar to the ancient church, and they believe in Total Grace. Source? Actually, no, there is not a historically proven to be untrue. Because we have the sources (the Bible, and specifically the Apolistic letters) which tell us what the early church believed. Everything from the oneness of God (compare creation account in Moses vs Abraham) shifting to a plural council of God's, to whether God resides in the heart (compare the view in Alma and the Bible, as opposed to the D&C where it is said to be a false Sectarian view), to celestial marriage (A key doctrine found no where in the Book of Mormon, and outright refuted in Luke). Community of Christ figured out that these doctrines were doctrines of men, I wish you could as well. Sources? Again, the account in Acts never once says Stephen saw God. The Aramaic and Hebrew use of "Son of God" is a lot different than our common use of the word "Son". In our language, "Son" indicates a birth relationship to a father. In the use of the term by Jesus and others, "Son of God" refers to a title. It is used to describe the role of human judges or rulers (see Psalm 82:6, where it refers to "children of the Most High"), and specifically to the proper King of Israel (II Samuel 7:14). Perhaps this has lead to your confusion on the issue. Your standards of belief are amazing. You refuse to believe a statement of faith based on scripture, but you believe in a prophet's claims that has zero confirming sources outside of his own works. Because one of us isn't speaking with the Holy Spirit. Do you follow the advice in I John 4:1? Your assertion that Stephen saw two beings is not contained in any translation (excluding possibly the the "Inspired" Joseph Smith "translation") of Acts anywhere. You're setting up a false dichotomy. Which is why the Nicean Creed (or any statement of faith) not taken as the exhaustive word of God. Thanks man. I hope we can disagree, agreeably.

I don't understand the "how" its done part. I can only read the words of the Lord, and trust what they're saying, through confirmation with the holy spirit and the examination of other scripture to ensure that they agree.

And not surprisingly, the apostles had to gently correct the gnostics in the same manner that I have to correct you. Or how about this: That Jesus's fleshly desire not to be in pain, could not override his Godly desire to save mankind from sin? This is called appeal to authority. It is a form of logical fallacy. Not only that, your appeal to authority is wrong, as I've demonstrated by quoting the creeds themselves, and scripture. Please stop using logical fallacies. You're arguing semantics again. To share the same substance is really saying they are of the same substance. The Mormons are "excluded" from Christianity more because of their non-Christian beliefs in about what salvation is, how salvation is earned (Total Grace vs Works+Ordinances+Grace to make up for whatever is left), plural Gods, Eternal Progression, Celestial Marriage, Baptism for the Dead, and a whole host of other doctrines that are either refuted outright in the Bible and the Book of Mormon(!), or simply not mentioned in either book. Your doctrines is getting in the way of simple scripture, in John 17, he's asking his disciples to be of one spirit, like his (Jesus the man's) relationship to God is. God is knowable, you can have a personal relationship with him, be taught directly by him, all with the simple requirement of loving him and keeping his commandments. God is incomprehensible in terms of this: You cannot understand that which God does not reveal to you. There is a proverb that says something like "Mysteries are the Glory of God, and Discovering their answers is the Glory of Kings"... You cannot possibly know all of God's motivations, his thoughts, because he's too big to understand in entirety. These two principles are not in conflict, they describe different things. How does the idea that God is One (as Jesus, the Prophets of Old, and Christians today believe and teach) make Christ's actions on Earth false? Do you even know why Christ was crucified? Jesus asked the Pharisee's if his actions merited death. They replied no, that it was his claim to be God that did. You sincerely believe these things because your questions and doubts come from doctrines which color the issues. The Bible is trusted, and I've shown you throughout the NT, in Jesus's own words his claims to Godhood, and his verification that there is only one God. I've shown how Old Testament Prophecy, confirms this relationship between Begotten Son and the Father. The anthropomorphic characteristics of God, that you refer to, are not physical characteristics, but come non-physical attributes (Logos, Pathos, Ethos), and is perfectly congruent with Trinitarian beliefs. This is because Trinitarian beliefs are revealed and confirmed (by the Holy Spirit, at the Council of Nicea, and through scripture) Because the creed isn't talking about not being able to know God period. It is talking about the nature of God's bigness, that you cannot possibly comprehend all of God. It's an essential truth, you can only understand what God reveals through his word. And I will stick the scriptures, and the word of God, as this is the only way to know him. They teach that Jesus claimed to be God, that he is our savior, that he is knowable, that only he has seen God the father, that he is our only representative before God, that he is the only one with authority to forgive sin (since only God has that authority), that his judgment is perfect and in no need of council, and that in spite of you being wrong that his grace covers you for trying :-) Love you Brother!

I moved here about a year ago. The scenery is wonderful, the people are awesome (if a bit confused, but who isn't in this crazy world?), the climate is perfect, the people are awesome, and the standard of living is great. Did mention the people? They're awesome :-)

No. Christ showing his body to the disciples proved that he rose from the dead, and was not a ghost visiting them. Read the passages. Well first of all, Stephen didn't say he saw God the father, He specifically said that he saw the Glory of God, and Jesus at the right hand of the Glory. But this is semantics. What you are attempting to do, is infuse your own belief about the Trinity into the discussion, and pretend as if it were the standard opinion. This called building a straw man, and I don't play that game. Actually no, that is not what Trinitarian thought is. Once again you're building up straw men. Read John 14, Jesus describes the relationship himself. The Father is in him, and he is in the Father. And if we actually read both the first council of Nicea Or the council that Constantinople put together We can see it is not I who misunderstands Trinitarian thought, but rather someone else ;-) I really encourage you, rather than take the same mocking attitude of Elder Holland towards the scripture, that you study it. Pray about it, and understand that the Nicene Creed is simply a statement of faith that is a summation of the scriptures. Peace brother!

Well there is one of two possibilities: 1. God was demonstrating for us (that is for John the Baptist and his disciples) his pleasure at how Jesus was living his life. 2. Jesus was doing a ventriloquist act. I believe it is the former. Throughout the New Testament, Jesus does specific things to fulfill prophecy and to cause people to believe. In fact, this is exactly what Jesus explains to the disciples after his resurrection (Luke 24:25-27), that he had to do things in a certain way, in order fulfill all prophecy and leave no doubt about his nature. What was that nature? Jesus Answers Philips question leaving no doubt: The fact that God the Father communicates with the son, and vice versa, as shown by scripture is for our benefit, to know for certain that Jesus is sent by the God of Israel.

Lol.

Jesus explains it clearly in his prayers Jesus knows that God hears him always, because Jesus shares God's spirit. Jesus, the man, refers to himself separately than God to demonstrate that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel is the same Spirit that created and sent Jesus the man and he is one with God. A good exercise is to ask yourself, "Do I ask myself questions? Do I hold conversations with myself?"... The very fact that you did this exercise, proves that you do. I know in my case, whenever I mess up I say "Oh Mike, why did you do that?" Do people question my sanity? Maybe ;-) But it's more like that is the way human nature demonstrates itself, we're very powerful, intelligent beings, who often search ourselves for answers. This demonstrates a characteristic we inherited from creation. Unfortunately for those who still search themselves for answers, there is none but God who contains those answers. So that is why it is so key to spread the Gospel (Good News) of Christ's resurrection from death, that Total Grace has been given, and access to God is no longer hindered by our own sin.

If you believe the Pearl of Great Price is scripture. The Book of Mormon, nor the Bible, makes this claim. If you are saying that God, being all powerful, can take on physical manifestations and has the ability to create physical things, then yes I agree God can take on many attributes. But what Christ was saying to the Samaritan woman is absolutely true, the essence of God is Spiritual. There isn't a problem with Trinitarian thought here. The disciples thought they were seeing a ghost. Jesus proved to them that he was not a ghost, but living flesh. If anything, this confirms trinitarian thought. The truth that Jesus spoke that God is Spirit to the Samaritan woman, and that Spirits do not have flesh and bone. The idea of "God-man" concept is contained in the scriptures. Read the first chapter of John (In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God.... And the word became flesh)... Read Isaiah 9:6, where the prophet writes about the names and characteristics about the son that was given. Trinitarian thought is contained throughout the scripture, the encapsulation of it as an idea given with specific terminology isn't. Or could it be that Jesus was merely showing obedience to the word given concerning him? Stephen was stoned to death because he was a heretic to the Jews, not because he saw "two Gods"... If you really want to examine the scriptures in terms of God, one needs to look no further than Jesus's interaction with the wise Pharisee who recognized the oneness of God. This oneness is in Spirit, and Jesus's prayer about his disciples was that they would be one, like him and his father are one. All the Nicene Creed did was to encapsulate a concept that is communicated clearly in both the old and new testaments, into a word "Trinity". That Jesus is Immanuel (God With Us), and confirmed John's words that Jesus is God in the Flesh. The Nicene Creed was in response to heretical teachings of plural Gods, similar to Mormon theology today, and it gave common language to a concept that is described over and over in scripture.

A-Train, you need to to read up on your doctrine, because, as far as I can tell, Joseph Smith taught that God wasn't always God. To quote the introduction to his famous King Follet sermon: So as we see, the idea that God was always God, is a notion Joseph sought to refute in the sermon. He goes on in the sermon to state that God was once a man, and he lived on Earth, and Joseph attempted to elucidate his position from biblical sources. So, it is a false statement that the LDS position has always been that God the Father has always been God.

I'm just looking around.. I'm a protestant christian who is dating a "member", and I just want to gain some more perspective on LDS beliefs about God.

Being created in his image, to me, means that characteristics of God can be found in us. Namely the ability to reason, make decisions, and the capability to love.

Can you be excommunicated from the church if you disagree vocally with some doctrines?

Ha, yeah I like parsnips a lot. But in college I got the nickname Parsnips because there is a famous surfer with the same name as me... and his nickname is parsnips :-)