Numerical Singularity

[alexm8]

peteolcott, I wanted to throw my two cents in, as I believe the debate is over the wrong issue here.

Isaiah 45:6

I am the Lord and there is none else. (Nothing besides God exists)

First, this scripture is TRUE as it stands. However, your interpretation of it is incorrect on two fronts. First, I exist outside of God. I am not nothing. Satan exists separate and apart from God, he is definitely real. So your interpretation that nothing exists besides God is incorrect.

Second, Lord does not equal God, yet you use them interchangeably. It is true there is no other Lord (or Savior), it is reserved for Jehovah/Jesus alone. He is the only way and there is "NONE ELSE". God, on the other hand, is a plural word. In vs 5. 'elohiym is the plural form of ''elowahh' used elsewhere. It's like using the singular with family (a plural word) in saying ONE family (even though family implies multiple people). So, again, the scripture is correct and the Holy Ghost will testify of it. It is your additional interpretation of it that is wrong.

John 17:21

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. (One and the same as, numerical singularity)

Again, ONE is the singular form of a plural concept. In the first part Jesus is praying that "they" (all believers) will be ONE. How can you interpret that as a numerical singularity? That's just nuts (the interpretation, not you).

Galations 5:14

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (Your neighbor IS yourself)

I have read this entire post and still do not understand your point here. You cannot be your own neighbor, due to the concept of what a neighbor is. I am A neighbor as I can be someone else's neighbor, but I cannot be my own.

The Holy Spirit will confirm the above.

Absolutely, the "job" of the HS is to confirm truth of the Bible and of the quoted scripture, but he cannot confirm your interpretations of them due to the fact that they do not conform to logic or reason. Things become clearer with the Holy Ghost, not more obscure and confusing as when you trying to make plural concepts become singular.

Edited November 4, 2011 by alexm8

[peteolcott]

peteolcott, I wanted to throw my two cents in, as I believe the debate is over the wrong issue here.

First, this scripture is TRUE as it stands. However, your interpretation of it is incorrect on two fronts. First, I exist outside of God. I am not nothing. Satan exists separate and apart from God, he is definitely real. So your interpretation that nothing exists besides God is incorrect.

Second, Lord does not equal God, yet you use them interchangeably. It is true there is no other Lord (or Savior), it is reserved for Jehovah/Jesus alone. He is the only way and there is "NONE ELSE". God, on the other hand, is a plural word. In vs 5. 'elohiym is the plural form of ''elowahh' used elsewhere. It's like using the singular with family (a plural word) in saying ONE family (even though family implies multiple people). So, again, the scripture is correct and the Holy Ghost will testify of it. It is your additional interpretation of it that is wrong.

Again, ONE is the singular form of a plural concept. In the first part Jesus is praying that "they" (all believers) will be ONE. How can you interpret that as a numerical singularity? That's just nuts (the interpretation, not you).

I have read this entire post and still do not understand your point here. You cannot be your own neighbor, due to the concept of what a neighbor is. I am A neighbor as I can be someone else's neighbor, but I cannot be my own.

Absolutely, the "job" of the HS is to confirm truth of the Bible and of the quoted scripture, but he cannot confirm your interpretations of them due to the fact that they do not conform to logic or reason. Things become clearer with the Holy Ghost, not more obscure and confusing as when you trying to make plural concepts become singular.

Apparently it is not yet time for this truth to be widely known. Paul provided milk for babes. What I am saying is more like raw meat, few may be prepared for it.

[alexm8]

Apparently it is not yet time for this truth to be widely known. Paul provided milk for babes. What I am saying is more like raw meat, few may be prepared for it.

Paul provided logical and well reasoned points based on the languages he understood. Unless you care to expound further on why you are interchanging incongruous concepts and semantics for your interpretations, the "meat" you are providing is illogical and unsound based on language limitations alone, and not easy to understand what you are saying...

Edited November 4, 2011 by alexm8

[annewandering]

Peteolkott, the problem here is you are setting yourself up as a prophet. You feel you are the one chosen by God to understand the truth and preach to the rest of us even if we do not 'understand' his message.

Well its your business to think that but please understand that we do not believe as you do. When people disagree with you its not very convincing to tell them that they are only able to understand milk as a baby does. Frankly I am opposed to raw meat on principle. Yuck.

[peteolcott]

Paul provided logical and well reasoned points based on the languages he understood. Unless you care to expound further on why you are interchanging incongruous concepts and semantics for your interpretations, the "meat" you are providing is illogical and unsound based on language limitations alone, and not easy to understand what you are saying...

I know that it would seem that way to most everyone. Things are not always as they seem to be.

[peteolcott]

PeteOlcott, the problem here is you are setting yourself up as a prophet. You feel you are the one chosen by God to understand the truth and preach to the rest of us even if we do not 'understand' his message.

Well its your business to think that but please understand that we do not believe as you do. When people disagree with you its not very convincing to tell them that they are only able to understand milk as a baby does. Frankly I am opposed to raw meat on principle. Yuck.

That is all well and good. One thing that I know for sure is that both belief and disbelief form hindrances rather than paths to truth. A belief (or a disbelief) most often tends to be a mind closing thing. I do know that the Mormon way is very good. I am pretty sure that it is not infallible.

Edited November 4, 2011 by peteolcott

[peteolcott]

The reason I cited these verses is because they mention the means for judging. YOu have yet to cogently address my look at Isaiah 45:5-7.

I knew that no one here had any chance of getting it from the human point of view. I had hoped that a few would have the humility to dillegently test it with the Holy Spirit.

[volgadon]

I knew that no one here had any chance of getting it from the human point of view. I had hoped that a few would have the humility to dillegently test it with the Holy Spirit.

I've stated more than oncethat I have. I recieved an answer that is is false.

Your increased arrogance is noxious.

[alexm8]

I knew that no one here had any chance of getting it from the human point of view. I had hoped that a few would have the humility to dillegently test it with the Holy Spirit.

It sounds like you are mistaking humility for unquestioning devotion. You have, in my honest opinion, given me nothing to test and that is not the way the Holy Spirit works. I already believe the scriptures you posted through the Holy Spirit. Your unreasoned interpretations of them are what is lacking.

[peteolcott]

I've stated more than once that I have. I recieved an answer that is is false.

Your increased arrogance is noxious.

Not everyone else here has said that they have already tested it.

My lack of humility is my greatest fault. I am learning more humility from the excellent examples provided by my Mormon friends.

Words are slipperly and most often unable to fully express subtle nuances.

What I am trying to express is most often otherwise known as Chrisitian Mysticism.

[peteolcott]

It sounds like you are mistaking humility for unquestioning devotion. You have, in my honest opinion, given me nothing to test and that is not the way the Holy Spirit works. I already believe the scriptures you posted through the Holy Spirit. Your unreasoned interpretations of them are what is lacking.

Test this: Are human beings in any way manifestations of God?

When I tested whether or not the Book of Mormon is true the answer that I got was the Book of Mormon is good.

[Justice]

Apparently it is not yet time for this truth to be widely known. Paul provided milk for babes. What I am saying is more like raw meat, few may be prepared for it.

People have believed your view of God for 1500 years. It's not new. It's not yours.

What's new is the knowledge that came from Joseph Smith's first vision. That's what the majority of the world seems not ready to receive yet.

[peteolcott]

People have believed your view of God for 1500 years. It's not new. It's not yours.

What's new is the knowledge that came from Joseph Smith's first vision. That's what the majority of the world seems not ready to receive yet.

It does seem like the Mormons do have a good head start ahead of the rest.

[Seminarysnoozer]

That is all well and good. One thing that I know for sure is that both belief and disbelief form hindrances rather than paths to truth. A belief (or a disbelief) most often tends to be a mind closing thing. I do know that the Mormon way is very good. I am pretty sure that it is not infallible.

How do you know what the "Mormon way" is other than looking at Jesus Christ. As "Mormons" follow Jesus Christ than your description of being "not infallible" would have to apply to Christ. Of course, no "Mormon" is perfect but you weren't talking about any individual, you were talking about the "way". The "way" is perfect but none of us are. There was only one that was perfect. However, it is true that by their fruits you can know of it's truth.

You have yet to explain the "fruits" of the idea of Singularity. Are there any?

[peteolcott]

How do you know what the "Mormon way" is other than looking at Jesus Christ. As "Mormons" follow Jesus Christ than your description of being "not infallible" would have to apply to Christ. Of course, no "Mormon" is perfect but you weren't talking about any individual, you were talking about the "way". The "way" is perfect but none of us are. There was only one that was perfect. However, it is true that by their fruits you can know of it's truth.

You have yet to explain the "fruits" of the idea of Singularity. Are there any?

"it is true that by their fruits you can know of it's truth." The humility that I have seen and the lack of judging others, and certain key doctrine is what has given me the impression that the Mormons are closer to righteousness than any other denomination of Christianity.

For me the truth of the subject of this thread enables all of what is said in the bible to fit together into a much more coherent whole and thus make much more sense.

Edited November 5, 2011 by peteolcott

[peteolcott]

I've stated more than once that I have. I recieved an answer that is is false.

Your increased arrogance is noxious.

I humbly apologize for my arrogance. It may be the case that what you verified with the Holy Spirit might not have been what I am saying. I do not think that individuality will ever cease to be.

[peteolcott]

You have yet to explain the "fruits" of the idea of Singularity. Are there any?

That is an excellent point. If it bears no fruit then it is useless. If it bears bad fruit then it is worse than useless. This is possibly the best way to keep one's focus on what truly matters. This is the way that I have determined that Mormons are a good example for me to follow. I continue to see the good fruit of the spirit from them.

The subject of this thread lets me see things from God's own point of view, and thus get closer to the truth than is otherwise humanly possible. This lets me better divide what is truly right from what is mere human misunderstanding.

[annewandering]

It would certainly be interesting to see things from Gods point of view. I am not sure that our mortal minds could even comprehend His point of view.

[peteolcott]

It would certainly be interesting to see things from Gods point of view. I am not sure that our mortal minds could even comprehend His point of view.

One thing seems self-evident and that is the actual truth about righteousness could only be attained from this point of view, every other perspective could at best be only a shadow of this.

I have known the Pinnacle of the Master Plan for a long time now, the key aspect of the plan that everything else is based is simply: Maximize Joy.

Edited November 8, 2011 by peteolcott