pam Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 (edited) Aj4u you may believe what you want. We have additional scriptures which we also use. Scriptures that came about after the Bible. But we as LDS believe that God is a body of flesh and blood just as we are. Accept that that is what we believe and move on. From the Pearl of Great Price which we also consider to be scripture. Moses 2:27 27 And I, God, created man in mine own image, in the image of mine Only Begotten created I him; male and female created I them. Edited June 12, 2009 by pam
Carl62 Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 This is really how I feel about this thread.ROFL!^^ This reminds me of a verse in Job that states "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge." There is somebody on here *cough* who has fulfilled the Lord's words to Job.
aj4u Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Posted June 12, 2009 Obviously.Since God is Spirit the ONLY interpretation is that God does not have a body of flesh and bones. It's amazing that you do not at least acknowledge that God could be a dual being as I suggested, both spirit and physical.If Christ is perfect, and He has a body of flesh and bones, would it at least be worth considering that if the Father is perfect that He, too, would have a body of flesh and bones?.NOWhat about the scripture I asked about in Genesis 3? I haven't seen a reply to that one yet.God is flesh and bone in Christ Jesus the WORD made flesh. This is something we cannot understand even Paul said it is not even clear what we shall be, but we will be like Jesus when He appears, but God is a Spirit. This is a mystery. Foolish people, however, have tried to create a doctrine out of this mystery (like the JWS). God has not shown himself to any man. Moses spoke to God face to face in a burning bush and Jacob wrestled with God trhrough an angel, but humans cannot see a spirit.
aj4u Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Posted June 12, 2009 NOW you are being disrespectful.How:confused:
prisonchaplain Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 (edited) God is Spirit I'll confess to having skimmed over the discussion of the Father's corporeality. But I have a line of thought that I don't believe has been discussed. My reading of the Old Testament, and my discussions with rabbis, leads me to a clear understanding that God having a physical body is foreign to them. In fact, I suspect they would be horrified at the suggestion, what with all the prohibitions against idolatry, image-making, and with God's mockery of those who think they can literally "house" God. With that background, I would find any New Testament interpretation of God as having a physical body to be a radical departure from OT teaching. Jesus was radical in rejection ritual over heart, and in appealing to women and the poor, and in condemning those who relied on position and wealth rather than God. But, he did not reject the Law--He fulfilled it.I suppose Joseph Smith would respond that this is among those precious truths that were lost...but if so, this one has been lost for 3,400 years.NOTE TO AJ: YOU DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED PAM. WHAT WERE YOU THINKING, MAN???!!! Edited June 12, 2009 by prisonchaplain
aj4u Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Posted June 12, 2009 Aj4u you may believe what you want. We have additional scriptures which we also use. Scriptures that came about after the Bible. But we as LDS believe that God is a body of flesh and blood just as we are. Accept that that is what we believe and move on.From the Pearl of Great Price which we also consider to be scripture.Moses 2:2727 And I, God, created man in mine own image, in the image of mine Only Begotten created I him; male and female created I them.Pam,WADR, that is what this thread is about : Does LDS doctrine clash with Scripture? There is no disrespect in pioneering this question. I believe it is dangerous to believe God is not Spirit. I agree with the Holy Bible, but you are telling me that you have another source that tells you something different. That sounds like a clash to me. Lets call a spade a spade!
pam Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 PC thank you...but the point I thought I was clearly trying to make is that aj may believe what he wants and that is fine. But we believe differently. It does no good to continue to argue or debate the point. We believe what we believe. If he doesn't agree that is okay...but agree to disagree and move on.
aj4u Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Posted June 12, 2009 I'll confess to having skimmed over the discussion of the Father's corporeality. But I have a line of thought that I don't believe has been discussed. My reading of the Old Testament, and my discussions with rabbis, leads me to a clear understanding that God having a physical body is foreign to them. In fact, I suspect they would be horrified at the suggestion, what with all the prohibitions against idolatry, image-making, and with God's mockery of those who think they can literally "house" God. With that background, I would find any New Testament interpretation of God as having a physical body to be a radical departure from OT teaching. Jesus was radical in rejection ritual over heart, and in appealing to women and the poor, and in condemning those who relied on position and wealth rather than God. But, he did not reject the Law--He fulfilled it.I suppose Joseph Smith would respond that this is among those precious truths that were lost...but if so, this one has been lost for 3,400 years.NOTE TO AJ: YOU DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED PAM. WHAT WERE YOU THINKING, MAN???!!!I cannot disagree with Pam. Why? By the way, you made a good point above.
pam Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 Genesis 1:26 26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Let's see... God said this (above)...if we are created in God's image...why are we not a Spirit then? To me this says that God had a body of flesh and blood or else we would not be in the same likeness or image as Him.
aj4u Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Posted June 12, 2009 PC thank you...but the point I thought I was clearly trying to make is that aj may believe what he wants and that is fine. But we believe differently. It does no good to continue to argue or debate the point. We believe what we believe. If he doesn't agree that is okay...but agree to disagree and move on.I agree with that, but if someone asks a question, I feel oblidged to respond!:)
aj4u Posted June 12, 2009 Author Report Posted June 12, 2009 Genesis 1:26 26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Let's see... God said this (above)...if we are created in God's image...why are we not a Spirit then? To me this says that God had a body of flesh and blood or else we would not be in the same likeness or image as Him.The Bible says that heavens are God's throne and the earth His foot stool. Why can't I put my foot on the earth as a stool and sit in the heavens for a throne?
prisonchaplain Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 AJ, Pam is kinda like "mom" here. You just don't.Actually, I was attempting to be cute. You can respectfully make all the points you want, so long as they are not repetitive. If you start getting the sense that those you're dialoguing with feel a dead horse is being beaten, or that the points being made are starting to repeat, then, perhaps it's time to back off, and look for something fresh to share? BTW, I would highly recommend you read How Wide the Divide: a Mormon and an Evangelical in Dialogue, by Robinson and Blomberg. I've found that if you can grasp the key issues these professors present, you'll have most of the main issues discussed here pretty well covered. Blomberg is Baptist-like (Denver Seminary), and Robinson is LDS (BYU). Blessings to you.
Justice Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 God gives those who receive Him power to become the sons of God. For one to say they are a son of God and Jesus is there brother seems presumptious to say the least from where I am standing. First Christ must be received to be given power to become a son of God (Children of God), but in order to receive Him you must know who He is.How so?Don't you believe you are saved?Isn't that the EXACT same presumption?
prisonchaplain Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 Genesis 1:2626 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Let's see... God said this (above)...if we are created in God's image...why are we not a Spirit then? To me this says that God had a body of flesh and blood or else we would not be in the same likeness or image as Him. Like so many doctrinal controversies, it's a question of whether God is speaking literally and tangibly here, or about his character. Theologians and poets have waxed eloquent for millenia about the imagio deo (image of God) within humanity. Very few have found it necessary or useful to take the above literally. Then again, at the Last Supper, Catholics take Jesus literally and tangibly (this is my body, this is my blood), and we (including LDS) don't. We feel very justified in our reasonings for how we take these passages, and are amazed that others disagree. And yet . . .
pam Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 The Bible says that heavens are God's throne and the earth His foot stool. Why can't I put my foot on the earth as a stool and sit in the heavens for a throne? I thought the point we were discussing is whether God is Spirit or flesh and blood. Why change the subject here?
Justice Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 God is SpiritWe believe God is Spirit.This verse does not say "God is only a Spirit." It simply says "God is Spirit." We believe that just as completely as you do.You are interpreting it as saying "God is only a Spirit."We are telling you that we have modern revalation that says it should be interpreted otherwise. It's your choice not to listen.
pam Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 Like so many doctrinal controversies, it's a question of whether God is speaking literally and tangibly here, or about his character. Theologians and poets have waxed eloquent for millenia about the imagio deo (image of God) within humanity. Very few have found it necessary or useful to take the above literally. Then again, at the Last Supper, Catholics take Jesus literally and tangibly (this is my body, this is my blood), and we (including LDS) don't. We feel very justified in our reasonings for how we take these passages, and are amazed that others disagree. And yet . . . That's true...but the question was does LDS doctrine clash with the Bible. Since we as LDS believe that God has a body of flesh and blood I take this literally.
Justice Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 ...God is a Spirit....You add the "a" because it makes it look more like your interprettion.
prisonchaplain Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 Well, the simple reply to the whole string is: LDS doctrine clashes with Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist understandings of the Bible, but it completely in unison with it's own understanding of the Bible.
Justice Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 Pam,WADR, that is what this thread is about : Does LDS doctrine clash with Scripture? There is no disrespect in pioneering this question. I believe it is dangerous to believe God is not Spirit. I agree with the Holy Bible, but you are telling me that you have another source that tells you something different. That sounds like a clash to me. Lets call a spade a spade!aj4u, until you open your heart and WANT to have a dialog with us, you'll just be frustated.Show me where anyone said EVER that God is not Spirit.You add the words "a" and "only" to the text to arrive at your interpretation.I leave it as it is written. God is Spirit. It is not an attempt at a complete treatise of the doctrine. It is simply making a point that God is perfect and glorified, and will always do good... He will always be holy and spiritual.To take this to mean He does not have a body of flesh and bones is reading into the text... or interpreting it.
Carl62 Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 I know it's been said many times on many different threads, but I'm going to repeat it again because it's so true. This all boils down to the acceptance of 2 things and these 2 things ONLY, and that is 1) accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet and 2) believing in latter day scripture/revelation. Until the person we're debating with comes to some kind of understanding of this, then we'll just be arguing apples and oranges 'til kingdom come. I would MUCH rather have a discussion with my CofC brother and try to resolve our doctrinal differences because there I know we are at least starting on somewhat of the same page. But to try to debate someone where we can't even agree on the rules of the game before we even start playing doesn't make any sense. I don't condemn anybody to hell for their beliefs, and I would hope that they do the same for me in return. I'll just continue to worship God and Jesus Christ the way I choose to and try to follow the scriptures according to my own understanding and respectfully allow everybody else to do the same without making them feel like they are worshipping a "lesser Jesus". Please give me the same Christ-like consideration. Thanks.:)
pam Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 In AJ's defense (mark this time and date down) I may have said God is NOT Spirit. But I was meaning in the context that he is not JUST Spirit. That he does have a body of flesh and blood which is what we believe. At the time I said that the conversation dealt with that issue.
Justice Posted June 12, 2009 Report Posted June 12, 2009 Well, the simple reply to the whole string is: LDS doctrine clashes with Catholic, Protestant, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist understandings of the Bible, but it completely in unison with it's own understanding of the Bible.We interpret the Bible with the aid of modern scripture and prophets. So, yes, our interpretation will be different than other Christian religions who do not use these sources.What aj4u is doing is showing where our beliefs clash with what modern Christianity teaches, as PC stated. That's a given. But, he has not shown where the Bible and Book of Mormon clash, unless he uses his interpretation.
Recommended Posts