Body Of Flesh And Bones

[Spencer]

Genesis 1:26-27

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.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Here God says Adam was created in his image correct?

Genesis 5:3

3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Here the same term is used to describe the likeness of Adam and his son Seth.

Interesting, what say you?

Spencer

[Guest curvette]

I say little Sethy was a chip off the old block!

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Spencer@Sep 24 2003, 04:13 PM

Genesis 1:26-27

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.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Here God says Adam was created in his image correct?

Genesis 5:3

3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Here the same term is used to describe the likeness of Adam and his son Seth.

Interesting, what say you?

Spencer

You are on to a lot more than you think here. Sorry that I do not have the recourses of my library to give you the exact Hebrew words but in ancient Hebrew the words that are translated into modern English as "image" and "likeness" have more significance than you have provided. The Hebrew word used here for "image" specifically indicates a physical model of something physical. Therefore in order for the scripture to be correct the “image” must be a physical thing that is very much like another physical thing.

Though the ancient scriptures are very clear on this matter there are many that claim to believe scripture – except when is runs contrary to their opinion. In that case their opinions are more important than the scriptures. None-the-less – keep up the good research and check out opinions.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

One other thing. Note that man's image is not after something singular. The reference is plural and is translated as “our”. This would imply that something in eternity other than G-d and man have this same image. Other than the LDS view on this matter I have not heard of any other religion that has made an attempt to indicate what other that G-d in the singular sense is enough like the physical ness of G-d to be identified with him to account for the plurality.

The Traveler

[Lindy]

I have always thought of man in the image of God, and God having a body which was of the same image He gave man. Knowing that His body is different than the body that He gave man, yet basically the same, I had to wait a long time to find a church that didn't think I was insane when I expressed my thoughts on the matter.

:)

Lindy

[Will_Drotar]

I don't recall myself being omniscient, omnipotent, or omnipresent...

Oh, you don't take that verse to mean that we were to completely in God's image either? So you place exceptions on this as well.

This verse happens right after God makes animals. This is stressing our dominion, distinctness, authority over Creation. We were made in God's literal image, we were given consciousness (something animals are not since they do not possess the mental capacity for such), we were given a spirit and a soul. We were made in God's image in contrast to Creation. I don't understand how people work this BACKWARDS into saying that God is in OUR image, ie He has a body of flesh and bones.

Question: Why is this so important to y'all? Why does your church stress that God has a physical body of flesh and bones? My question is why does your church remain silent on issues such as evolution (as from what I've seen) but stress that God has bones? I don't mean to sound mean, but I just hear this so often, and yet none ever talk about the important stuff whenever I talk to my friends, or the missionaries.

The fact that God is not bound to finite dimensions is one logical outworking of Trinitarianism. The fact that He does is an outworking of exaltation. By simply demonstrating the presence of the Triune God in the Scriptures, this issue ought to be settled. TTYL Jesus loves you!

[Spencer]

That is your oppinion, while I appreciate it, it does not make any sense to me what so ever.

Spencer

[Spencer]

Reading your explanation to me seems like someone who likes to go around his shoulder to get to his butt. Just cause it was written so long ago doesnt mean it has to be hard to understand.

Spencer

[Lindy]

"3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:"

Hi ya Spencer!

I'm thinking that Seth had the looks and the spiritual nature of his father,(sometimes I just have to think simply. )

Will- I don't like to talk about evolution- cause I think that it is cut and dried...either you believe in it or you don't...I don't, never have, never will. That might be why you don't have a lot of answers from LDS, other than "I don't believe in it". It is a topic that is brought up time and time again to stir things up...I don't believe in stirring the pot on that one.

:)

Lindy

[lash4160]

I think that coming from an ape isnt for me. I agree that it is cut and dry.

For we wre created in the image of God and that is good for me.

Remember the frist vison and that Joesph Smith saw the Father and the Son.

This is something that has to be read and prayed about.

One can say that it happened or just accept it.

As for I know that it happened.

But cominig from monkeys is a little hard to accept.

[Will_Drotar]

Originally posted by Spencer@Oct 24 2003, 12:24 PM

Reading your explanation to me seems like someone who likes to go around his shoulder to get to his butt. Just cause it was written so long ago doesnt mean it has to be hard to understand.

Spencer

How could that have possibly been interpreted as difficult to understand? If it is, I'll be patient in going into greater detail with whatever you'd prefer me to elaborate on.

When I was wondering why the Church was silent on it, I was simply curious why there are so many non-denom research groups trying with every ounce of strength in their body to research the natural world and preserve the truth of God's creation. I wonder why your church, and JW's, are pretty much the only churches that don't defend theism or Creation, but spend 8 times more time talking about how God has flesh. It's simply I was wondering if those priorities sounded kind of reverses to y'all.

The problem, as I said, or attributing a physical body to God, is that you by necessity can no longer believe in the 3-1 Godhead of the Trinity, and you must believe he is bound to physical dimensions. TTYL Jesus loves you!

[Spencer]

I do not need further explanations of your views as they are obviously contrary to mine. I started this post because i found it interesting. I dont know what you mean about the church being silent on it, but i also do not care to find out what you mean.

I am aware Jesus loves me but thanks for the reminder anyway.

Spencer

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Will_Drotar@Oct 24 2003, 10:20 AM

I don't recall myself being omniscient, omnipotent, or omnipresent...

Oh, you don't take that verse to mean that we were to completely in God's image either?  So you place exceptions on this as well.

This verse happens right after God makes animals.  This is stressing our dominion, distinctness, authority over Creation.  We were made in God's literal image, we were given consciousness (something animals are not since they do not possess the mental capacity for such), we were given a spirit and a soul.  We were made in God's image in contrast to Creation.  I don't understand how people work this BACKWARDS into saying that God is in OUR image, ie He has a body of flesh and bones. 

Question: Why is this so important to y'all?  Why does your church stress that God has a physical body of flesh and bones?  My question is why does your church remain silent on issues such as evolution (as from what I've seen) but stress that God has bones?  I don't mean to sound mean, but I just hear this so often, and yet none ever talk about the important stuff whenever I talk to my friends, or the missionaries. 

The fact that God is not bound to finite dimensions is one logical outworking of Trinitarianism.  The fact that He does is an outworking of exaltation.  By simply demonstrating the presence of the Triune God in the Scriptures, this issue ought to be settled.  TTYL Jesus loves you!

Will D: I am rather astonished with the extreme liberalistic licence you take when you claim certain doctoral notions are in complete accordance with scripture. In the first chapter of Genesis verse 26 the holy word of G-d tells us (KJV) “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” G-d spoke these things to Moses in the tongue of the ancient Hebrew. Two Hebrew terms of paramount interest to all that care of G-d’s sacred utterances are “pesel’ for image and “temuna” for likeness. These terms not only imply a physical modeling but demand it.

If I were to say that I have a 1/60th scale model of the York aircraft carrier used in World War II at the battle of midway. Two thing would be understood. First that I have in my possession a PHYSICAL object. And second that it is a replica of the actual PHYSICAL aircraft carrier called the York. To imply that I make no physical reference could only be a blatant effort to distort my actual words.

Maybe I am ignorant and stupid but I have found no reference in any ancient Hebrew text sacred or otherwise where “pesel” and “temuna” are ever used in any manner remotely similar to the interpretation you insist is the only logical way this passage should be interpreted. The LDS view is that these words be considered to mean exactly what is implied within the context of the language as it was spoken to Moses by G-d. Nothing more and nothing less. I see no justification for men to expand on the wisdom of G-d.

I am most curious why you insist this passage be consider to reference something other than man as a physical model of a physical G-d. Can you give me any example in ancient Hebrew text where “pesel” and “temuna” are used to reference something non physical? Has G-d spoken to you or someone you know in the same manner as he spoke to Moses to explain that he did not really intend to use “pesel” and “temuna” but something else therefore justifying your wildly liberal interpretation of this sacred text?

To all reading my post I would ask you to carefully consider the options of doctrine being presented. Is it possible that man was physically created and modeled after G-d and that beyond the physical model man has little to claim that he be considered a g-d or like G-d? I would also point out that the creation being spoken of in Genesis is in reference to all things of a physical creation.

Most involved in religious thought agree that man is not just a physical being. Are we to imply that excluding the physical that man is in every other way just like G-d? Such a notion is laughable. As far as morals, love, kindness, compassion, mercy and ever other non physical aspect man is just like G-d? History proves this notion that you claim nothing but fantasy. One last consideration to pounder. When G-d manifested his physical body, as was done through Jesus Christ. That physical body was indistinguishable from that physical body of every other man according to all that witnessed and that is exactly what is being said and implied in Genesis 1:26.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Will_Drotar@Oct 27 2003, 02:30 PM

The problem, as I said, or attributing a physical body to God, is that you by necessity can no longer believe in the 3-1 Godhead of the Trinity, and you must believe he is bound to physical dimensions.  TTYL Jesus loves you!

The ancient Hebrew word that tells us that there is one G-d is "ehad". There is no way "ehad" can mean a 3-1 Trinity G-dhead. If you can show me any context where 3 different kinds can be discribed by "ehad" in any ancient Hebrew text - sacred or otherwise I would be very interested.

As for love ther is no doube Jesus loves and his followers love their fellow man. But I see little historical evidence that Trinitarians love anybody. Since the declaration of the Trinitarian Creed the Trinitarians killed in the name of their trinitarian G-d anyone that would disagree with their 3-1 concept. The first law passed by any Trinitarian society I am aware of that would allow anyone to live that did not see eye to eye with their doctrine was 1549, but this law demanded that only other Trinitarians be allowed to live. Not until 1826 can I find any law on any Trinitarian societies books that did not attempt to stop killing in the name of their Trinitarian G-d anyone that disagreed with their 3-1 doctrine. And those laws did not stop the extermination of Mormons by Trinitarians in Missouri.

No my misunformed friend Trinitarians have a very bad history of manifesting love that Jesus said was the number one method of identifing his followers or those that gather in his name.

The Traveler

[Will_Drotar]

Originally posted by Traveler@Nov 8 2003, 10:27 AM

Will D: I am rather astonished with the extreme liberalistic licence you take when you claim certain doctoral notions are in complete accordance with scripture. In the first chapter of Genesis verse 26 the holy word of G-d tells us (KJV) “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” G-d spoke these things to Moses in the tongue of the ancient Hebrew. Two Hebrew terms of paramount interest to all that care of G-d’s sacred utterances are “pesel’ for image and “temuna” for likeness. These terms not only imply a physical modeling but demand it.

If I were to say that I have a 1/60th scale model of the York aircraft carrier used in World War II at the battle of midway. Two thing would be understood. First that I have in my possession a PHYSICAL object. And second that it is a replica of the actual PHYSICAL aircraft carrier called the York. To imply that I make no physical reference could only be a blatant effort to distort my actual words.

Maybe I am ignorant and stupid but I have found no reference in any ancient Hebrew text sacred or otherwise where “pesel” and “temuna” are ever used in any manner remotely similar to the interpretation you insist is the only logical way this passage should be interpreted. The LDS view is that these words be considered to mean exactly what is implied within the context of the language as it was spoken to Moses by G-d. Nothing more and nothing less. I see no justification for men to expand on the wisdom of G-d.

I am most curious why you insist this passage be consider to reference something other than man as a physical model of a physical G-d. Can you give me any example in ancient Hebrew text where “pesel” and “temuna” are used to reference something non physical? Has G-d spoken to you or someone you know in the same manner as he spoke to Moses to explain that he did not really intend to use “pesel” and “temuna” but something else therefore justifying your wildly liberal interpretation of this sacred text?

To all reading my post I would ask you to carefully consider the options of doctrine being presented. Is it possible that man was physically created and modeled after G-d and that beyond the physical model man has little to claim that he be considered a g-d or like G-d? I would also point out that the creation being spoken of in Genesis is in reference to all things of a physical creation.

Most involved in religious thought agree that man is not just a physical being. Are we to imply that excluding the physical that man is in every other way just like G-d? Such a notion is laughable. As far as morals, love, kindness, compassion, mercy and ever other non physical aspect man is just like G-d? History proves this notion that you claim nothing but fantasy. One last consideration to pounder. When G-d manifested his physical body, as was done through Jesus Christ. That physical body was indistinguishable from that physical body of every other man according to all that witnessed and that is exactly what is being said and implied in Genesis 1:26.

The Traveler

Ok.

We were modeled physically after God. ? ? What's the problem?

My you are rather aggressive in your post. I did not call you stupid or anything like that.

As I said, we must discuss the Trinity first, then move on to this. Which is more important?

Man was modeled physically after God's image. We were given dominion over Creation, a degree of His attributes- those communicable- and a physical body SHAPED AFTER His spirit body.

In reference to the fact that Creation was physical, *again* I'm not claiming that Genesis 1:26-27 is not a reference to man's physical creation. I am saying that it doesn't mean that God therefore has a physical body. We shouldn't make God into the image of man. Just cause we were created with a physical body, doesn't mean He does.

FACT: We live in a physical realm- He lives in a spiritual realm. We have a physical body- He has a spirit body. We were created with a physical body, to dwell inside the physical realm. Who were we modeled after? God. It makes no sense to say that God has a physical body and dwells in a spiritual realm. It makes even LESS sense to say that God and the heavenly mother have physical bodies, and that they give birth to 'spirit children.'

Of course we weren't made exactly in the image of God. My point exactly. My first premise was that man wasn't created exactly like God. I am kind of confused here.

But here I'm blown away: "When G-d manifested his physical body, as was done through Jesus Christ." Now it seems as if you're saying Jesus was God. That follows the Bible straightaway, but I'm not sure if that's LDS doctrine. Christ has a body. Christ is a person within the Godhead. The Father does not have a body. The Spirit does not have a body.

TTYL Jesus loves you!

I'm copying the words 'pesel' and 'temuna'. I'll check to see all the OT references in which the word was used.

[Will_Drotar]

Traveler, the last post of yours was horribly insulting. I am appalled at your personal insults.

I thought you to be an example to many on these forums. In comparison with the number of Trinitarians in history, the number that have been violent as you say, have been few. Very few.

The issue is not about being Trinitarian or antiTrinitarian. It's about being Christian- how many Christians committed violent acts? No no, not how many that claimed to be Christian, but how many that actually WERE Christians committed violent acts.

The LDS church has not been around enough. However, there's evidence from the Mountain Meadows massacre and a quote from Joseph Smith about shedding the blood of a fellow member who might apostasize that proves that if the LDS church had been around longer, it would probably be much worse a situation than that of the Catholic. Plus I'm not Catholic. I'm Evangelical. And we've been around for a shorter amount of time than y'all have. We've collectively commited no such acts of violence.

If you want to play the "You hang out with more sinners than I do" game I'm outta here. You're the last person I would have expected this from.

[HalleysComet]

If were all made from apes we need to buy stock in razors cause we'd all have more hair,lol. j/k

Halleys Comet

[Traveler]

Originally posted by Will_Drotar@Nov 12 2003, 12:21 PM

We were modeled physically after God. ? ? What's the problem?

My you are rather aggressive in your post. I did not call you stupid or anything like that.

As I said, we must discuss the Trinity first, then move on to this. Which is more important?

Man was modeled physically after God's image. We were given dominion over Creation, a degree of His attributes- those communicable- and a physical body SHAPED AFTER His spirit body.

In reference to the fact that Creation was physical, *again* I'm not claiming that Genesis 1:26-27 is not a reference to man's physical creation. I am saying that it doesn't mean that God therefore has a physical body. We shouldn't make God into the image of man. Just cause we were created with a physical body, doesn't mean He does.

FACT: We live in a physical realm- He lives in a spiritual realm. We have a physical body- He has a spirit body. We were created with a physical body, to dwell inside the physical realm. Who were we modeled after? God. It makes no sense to say that God has a physical body and dwells in a spiritual realm. It makes even LESS sense to say that God and the heavenly mother have physical bodies, and that they give birth to 'spirit children.'

Of course we weren't made exactly in the image of God. My point exactly. My first premise was that man wasn't created exactly like God. I am kind of confused here.

But here I'm blown away: "When G-d manifested his physical body, as was done through Jesus Christ." Now it seems as if you're saying Jesus was God. That follows the Bible straightaway, but I'm not sure if that's LDS doctrine. Christ has a body. Christ is a person within the Godhead. The Father does not have a body. The Spirit does not have a body.

We were modeled physically after God. ? ? What's the problem?

The problem is that pesel and temuna require that something "Physical" exist inorder that a physical model be made. If man is pesel and temuna of G-d then G-d must be physical and that is the point of this thread and the holy scripture.

In reference to the fact that Creation was physical, *again* I'm not claiming that Genesis 1:26-27 is not a reference to man's physical creation. I am saying that it doesn't mean that God therefore has a physical body.

Why do you look right at this scripture and say there is no physical relationship. If you believe man is the spiritual example of G-d (not physical) then you have a lot of explaning to do about the history of man. The words "pesel" and "temuna" do not mean kind-a sort-a it means exact to every possible detail - and remember this is G-d doing the creating. Are we to believe man's spirit is what is like G-d? Are you serious or just attempting to avoid admitting the physical connection?

The Father does not have a body. The Spirit does not have a body.

Do you not see a contridiction here? If the Father does not have a body how can man's body be in the image and likeness (pesel and temuna) of it.

Let me help you with some doctrine. Jesus was born and had a physical body. Prior to his birth he was spirit without a body. Jesus said to his apostles that saw his physical body, that to see him (his physical body) was like seeing the Father. Think about that. The reason he said that is because man at that time could not see the Father. Why? Because of the Fall of man, man was (and still is) cut off from the Father. After the Fall man could not be with the Father and was cast out from the Father. Jesus was apointed as the mediator (the one and only mediator) between the Father and man and was the only G-d that man could deal with. As mediator Jesus represented the Father by:

1. Taking upon him the name of the Father - The taking upon one self the name of someone greater to represent them is not uncommon in scripture. It is an indication that they are "one with them". Jesus said clearly that he does all in the name of the Father. This use of someone else's name is very common not only in scripture but all of ancient society.

2. Speaking in first person as the Father. It is common for one sent in the name of someone else in scripture (and ancient culture) to speak in the first person.

This is why the Trinitarians are so confused - they will not accept scripture in its context.

As mediator Jesus is the G-d of the Old Testament following the fall of man - note that Moses did not need a mediator at the burning bush. And Jesus said "No man cometh unto the Father but by me". If this is not true Jesus did not tell the truth.

Next point

When a spirit is removed from a physical body it is known as death. The same death that Jesus suffered on the cross. But Jesus took his phisical body following the resurrection and went to heaven where Stephen saw Jesus sitting on the right hand of the Father. This demonstrates that physical beings are in heaven. Also note that Jesus will return with the same "resurrected" physical body. And remember that scripture tells us a resurrected body is immortal and will not die - ever. G-d is not dead or a spirit of a dead person.

One last point. Jesus said that when two or more are gathered in his name there is love. Prior to 1826 can you provide documentation where any Christian church that believed in the Trinity announced by public declaration that people that did not believe in the trinity should be loved and not put to death for their beliefs. The reason I bring this up is that the LDS publically declared that all people should be allowed to "worship how, where, or what they may". Has Christianity changed over the last 200 years? Are Christian churches today following the teachings of Jesus or were the previous Christian chruches of hundreds of years of traditions that gave us the Trinity Creed following the teachings of Jesus?

The Traveler

[Ray]

Originally posted by Traveler@ Nov 13 2003, 12:33 AM

When a spirit is removed from a physical body it is known as death. The same death that Jesus suffered on the cross. But Jesus took his phisical body following the resurrection and went to heaven where Stephen saw Jesus sitting on the right hand of the Father. This demonstrates that physical beings are in heaven. Also note that Jesus will return with the same "resurrected" physical body. And remember that scripture tells us a resurrected body is immortal and will not die - ever. G-d is not dead or a spirit of a dead person.

I’d like to expound upon the subject of resurrection.

Our resurrection will be the reuniting of our spirit with our body, and we are told that we will all be resurrected, the just and the unjust.

Our Lord is an example of a resurrected being. After His resurrection, He ate and drank with His disciples, His disciples were able to touch His body, walk with Him, and embrace Him. His resurrected body was the same body that He had during His ministry, which was somehow glorified. We don’t know exactly what our bodies will be like after we are resurrected, but we can be assured that they will be something like His.

To deny that we will be reunited with our physical bodies is to deny a physical resurrection, but that is the only kind of resurrection the scriptures speak about. Why believe something that is contrary to teachings in the scriptures?

[Mark]

Hi Ray,

You said "Why believe something that is contrary to teachings in the scriptures? "

Think about it, Mormonism is contrary to what the bible teaches?

Mark

John 1:12

[Spencer]

In your interpertation maybe.

[Ray]

I agree with Spencer. Some people only "believe" the Book of Mormon teaches things that are contrary to teachings in the Bible, but I have found just as much harmony between teachings within the Bible and Book of Mormon as I have found between teachings within the Bible alone. I have tried several times to show people the harmony, but for some reason some people simply can't see what I see.

Anyway, let's avoid another red herring, shall we?

The main issue on this thread is whether God has a body of flesh and bones. Have you read the 24th chapter of Luke recently? I recently found verse 39 to be particularly interesting.

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

This statement was made by our Lord when He appeared to His disciples after His resurrection. And what did He say? That He had a body of flesh and bones. Do you doubt this? Do you doubt that we will have a body of flesh and bones after we are resurrected? Do you believe our heavenly Father and the Holy Ghost will be the only persons in heaven without a body of flesh and bones?

We aren't told everything about the Holy Ghost, but I believe that someday He too will have a body of flesh and bones. We've been told that our heavenly Father already has one, and I don't doubt that for a second.

[Guest Jesus Saves]

Joseph Smith could not have seen God and Jesus together. They are not two beings of flesh and blood God is a Spirit. Jesus is God in the flesh. That is what the Bible says. But if you don't believe the Bible here is what the book of Mormon says:

Mosiah 7:27 And because he said unto them that Christ was the God, the Father of all things, and said that he should take upon him the image of man and it should be the image after which man was created in the beginning; or in other words, he said that man was created after the image of God, and that God should come down among the children of men, and take upon him flesh and blood, and go forth upon the face of the earth.

2 Nephi 11:7 For if there be no Christ there be no God; and if there be no God we are not for there could have been no creation. But there is a God and he is Christ.

Mosiah 15:1-4 And now Abinadi said unto them: I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son--the Father because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and the Son--and they are one God, yea the very eternal Father of heaven and earth.

Alma 11:44.....and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one eternal God

Mormon 3:21 And also that ye may believe the gospel of Jesus Christ, which ye shall have among you; and also that the Jews, the covenant people of the Lord, shall have other witness besides him whom they saw and heard that Jesus, whom they slew was the very Christ and the very God.

Read mosiah 3:5-8 here are a few verses from it.

Mosiah 3:5 For behold the time cometh, and is not far distant, that with power, the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, who was and is from all eternity to all eternity, shall come down from heaven among the children of men and shall dwell in a tabernacle of clay......

Mosiah 3:8 and he shall be called Jesus Christ the son of God, the Father of Heaven of earth, the creator of all things from the beginning and his mother shall be called Mary.

The three witnesses:......and the honor be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, which is one God. Amen.

These are just some of the verses in the book of Mormon that claim that Jesus is God in the flesh. There are more that I haven't written down. He who has ears to hear let him hear.....

[Ray]

Keep studying and hopefully someday you will be one with LDS, understanding what the scriptures mean when they state that God is one.

The scriptures are clear about the fact that God is more than one person. How, then, can God be one? Think about what our Lord said in the garden of Gethsemane during His prayer to our Father in heaven, recorded in John 17. He prayed that [His followers] would all become one as He is one with our Father. Do you honestly believe our Lord was speaking to Himself, and praying that we would all become the same being? How can we all become the same being if we are all to be resurrected separately, with our own bodies of flesh and bone?

Our Lord Jesus Christ, our Father in heaven, and the Holy Ghost are all God. They are one in agreement and purpose. Our Lord worships our Father in heaven, and our Lord directs us to do the same. Our Father in heaven glorified our Lord and made Him Lord over all the earth, and every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that our Lord has been placed in that position of prominence over the rest of us. There is only one way that we can return to our Father in heaven, and that way is through a recognition and acceptance of our Lord.

Our Lord is God and He has a body of flesh and bones. The Holy Ghost is also God and He is a Spirit, and those who worship God must worship Him through that Spirit, as He alone can guide us to the truth. Our Lord sends the Holy Ghost to anyone who truly desires to know the truth, so everyone who truly wants to know it is without an excuse.

Don't expect to teach me anything, as I do not expect to teach you anything. I will leave the teaching to God, with hopes that you truly want to know the truth and not merely convince me of something you believe.

[Guest Jesus Saves]

God forbid I shall ever "become one " with the Mormon church! If I believed what the Mormon church teaches then I would have to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet. If I believed that he was a prophet then I would have to believe that the book of Mormon was true. If I believed the book of Mormon was true then I would have to believe the racist nonsense in the following:

2 Nephi 5:21-24 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God; I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities. And cursed shall be their seed of him that mixeth with their seed for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it and it was done. And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischeif and subtletly, and did seek in the wilderness beasts of prey.

I know plenty of Mormons and they are all " white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome." Now I guess I know why. But I'm sure this can all be explained away...