Who Is Jesus Christ?

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 31 2004, 04:24 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 31 2004, 04:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 03:20 PM

Jesus Christ has no literal parents.

Interesting, so when the Bible says Son of God we should interpret that as Not the Son of God. Good thinking Stephen - disbelieving the Bible. Let us know how that works out for you.

Fact is, not supposition, fact, that people have 46 chromosones. 23 from the father and 23 from the mother. Provided Christ was a person, he had all 46, just like the rest of us. That 20 and 3 from his father and 20 and 3 from his mother. Check the math, add it up.

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.

broadway · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen+Mar 31 2004, 08:25 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Stephen @ Mar 31 2004, 08:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 04:24 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 03:20 PM

Jesus Christ has no literal parents.
Interesting, so when the Bible says Son of God we should interpret that as Not the Son of God. Good thinking Stephen - disbelieving the Bible. Let us know how that works out for you.
Fact is, not supposition, fact, that people have 46 chromosones. 23 from the father and 23 from the mother. Provided Christ was a person, he had all 46, just like the rest of us. That 20 and 3 from his father and 20 and 3 from his mother. Check the math, add it up.

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are igorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elementary information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.

I am not sure what point this proves. In any case, you sound presumptuous to speak of Jesus's birth with such assumed knowledge and understanding.

It is true that Heavenly Father and Mary did not have intercourse, but I do not think that this means that Jesus had only half a set of dna material or chromosomes. In fact, I have no idea what it means to be the child of two people who did not share their bodily fluids in some shape or fashion (and I admit that I too am assuming quite a bit in that last statement).

But like I said before, what point is this supposed to prove? I mean that honestly and not as sarcastic as I am sure it sounds. Is this supposed to prove that Mormons don't believe in the 'real' Jesus?

Of course, I would refute that, but I will wait until there is something to refute.

broadway

Snow · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:25 PM

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.

WARNING, WARNING STEPHEN LIE ALERT.

The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent although it does not know the mechanics of how it happened. Can you even go a single day without lying about the Church? Just one day? One?

Note: Stephen's solution is to 1. interpret the scripture Son of God to mean not Son and God and to believe that Christ had no inherited chromosomes - poof, magic, razzamatazz.

Please stop lying Stephen. Please.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 31 2004, 07:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 31 2004, 07:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:25 PM

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.

WARNING, WARNING STEPHEN LIE ALERT.

The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent although it does not know the mechanics of how it happened. Can you even go a single day without lying about the Church? Just one day? One?

Note: Stephen's solution is to 1. interpret the scripture Son of God to mean not Son and God and to believe that Christ had no inherited chromosomes - poof, magic, razzamatazz.

Please stop lying Stephen. Please.

The Mormon Church says that Mary was a virgin.

How is that lying?

Can you Mr. Snow go a single day without lying about me lying?

If the Mormon Church no longer believes that Mary was a virgin then please show references. If you are right and the Mormon Church has changed their doctrinal position that Mary was a virgin then I will admit I was wrong.

However you have yet to prove your presumptuous speculations.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by broadway+Mar 31 2004, 07:34 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (broadway @ Mar 31 2004, 07:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 04:24 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 03:20 PM

Jesus Christ has no literal parents.
Interesting, so when the Bible says Son of God we should interpret that as Not the Son of God. Good thinking Stephen - disbelieving the Bible. Let us know how that works out for you.
Fact is, not supposition, fact, that people have 46 chromosones. 23 from the father and 23 from the mother. Provided Christ was a person, he had all 46, just like the rest of us. That 20 and 3 from his father and 20 and 3 from his mother. Check the math, add it up.
Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are igorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elementary information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.

I am not sure what point this proves. In any case, you sound presumptuous to speak of Jesus's birth with such assumed knowledge and understanding.

It is true that Heavenly Father and Mary did not have intercourse, but I do not think that this means that Jesus had only half a set of dna material or chromosomes. In fact, I have no idea what it means to be the child of two people who did not share their bodily fluids in some shape or fashion (and I admit that I too am assuming quite a bit in that last statement).

But like I said before, what point is this supposed to prove? I mean that honestly and not as sarcastic as I am sure it sounds. Is this supposed to prove that Mormons don't believe in the 'real' Jesus?

Of course, I would refute that, but I will wait until there is something to refute.

broadway

It shows that the Book of Hebrews was right asserting that Jesus Christ was without parents.

Snow · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen+Mar 31 2004, 07:41 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Stephen @ Mar 31 2004, 07:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 07:36 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:25 PM

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.
WARNING, WARNING STEPHEN LIE ALERT.
The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent although it does not know the mechanics of how it happened. Can you even go a single day without lying about the Church? Just one day? One?
Note: Stephen's solution is to 1. interpret the scripture Son of God to mean not Son and God and to believe that Christ had no inherited chromosomes - poof, magic, razzamatazz.
Please stop lying Stephen. Please.

The Mormon Church says that Mary was a virgin.

How is that lying?

Can you Mr. Snow go a single day without lying about me lying?

If the Mormon Church no longer believes that Mary was a virgin then please show references. If you are right and the Mormon Church has changed their doctrinal position that Mary was a virgin then I will admit I was wrong.

However you have yet to prove your presumptuous speculations.

What on earth are you babbling about. You said that the Church believes that Jesus had no biological parents. I said you were wrong specifically about that particular point ("The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent(s)") and now you are pretending that I was making a point about whether the Mother of Christ had engaged in sexual activity.

Stop the lies Stephen.

How long do you suppose it might take for me to post proof, again, of your deceitfulness?

srm · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:45 PM

It shows that the Book of Hebrews was right asserting that Jesus Christ was without parents.

It is referring to Melchisedic not Jesus. How do you explain that?

And, please Stephen answer my othe question,

So, I can't just accept Jesus? I have to know a lot about him? What if I am pricked in my heart at a church meeting and I accept Jesus then get hit by a car and die before I can learn all the extra stuff about him...am I doomed to hell?

Oh, one more question. Suppose a person was saved by accepting Jesus and even knew the required extra stuff about him. What if this person later in life becomes a mormon and changes his beliefs about the extra stuff that you say is required. Is that person still saved or will they go to hell?

Tr2 · April 1, 2004

And yes, Trident, there is something that you can do. You can lose your composure and start calling me a coward, safely, from behind your computer screen, behind the border, far away in Toronto. You could do that Trident. I'm impressed by it, I imagine that others are as well.

You called me a rapist for the simple reason that I do not agree with your views. It is exactly that simple. You have a track record of saying whatever is necessary it takes to try and get one up on another person. Are you honestly thiking that calling me a rapist is not a very cowardly thing? You know very well I can't do much about it. You know i can't give you what that action deserves. If you went into a bar, or any other establishment, and called another man a rapist you wouldn't likely leave there under your own power, and you know it. But doing that on the internet is safe for you. I don't know what kind of person can just throw that insult out and think that is ok.

No, I'm not, thank you for asking

ok, I didn't ask you a yes or no question. I asked you what made you such a bitter and angry person. You have still not answered.

So, there you go Trident, you have been dishonest, again

When you are ready to stop playing these stupid games, and actually want to have an intelligent discussion then give me a shout.

Snow · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by srm@Mar 31 2004, 10:18 PM

So, I can't just accept Jesus? I have to know a lot about him? What if I am pricked in my heart at a church meeting and I accept Jesus then get hit by a car and die before I can learn all the extra stuff about him...am I doomed to hell?
Oh, one more question. Suppose a person was saved by accepting Jesus and even knew the required extra stuff about him. What if this person later in life becomes a mormon and changes his beliefs about the extra stuff that you say is required. Is that person still saved or will they go to hell?

I should let Stephen answer for himself but this is the great lie that is foundational to his anti-Mormon stance. Unless you believe the characteristics of Jesus that Stephen tells you to believe, you believe in "another" Jesus and so aren't saved.

Of course it is all just a lie so that bigots can exclude you even though you meet the criteria they set up (accept Christ).

According to Doug, another Mormon that fell off the deep end like Stephen, once saved always saved so instead of sending them to hell, God would just give them heart disease so they would die earlier.

...but you go ahead Stephen.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 31 2004, 08:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 31 2004, 08:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 07:36 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:25 PM

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.
WARNING, WARNING STEPHEN LIE ALERT.
The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent although it does not know the mechanics of how it happened. Can you even go a single day without lying about the Church? Just one day? One?
Note: Stephen's solution is to 1. interpret the scripture Son of God to mean not Son and God and to believe that Christ had no inherited chromosomes - poof, magic, razzamatazz.
Please stop lying Stephen. Please.
The Mormon Church says that Mary was a virgin.
How is that lying?
Can you Mr. Snow go a single day without lying about me lying?
If the Mormon Church no longer believes that Mary was a virgin then please show references. If you are right and the Mormon Church has changed their doctrinal position that Mary was a virgin then I will admit I was wrong.
However you have yet to prove your presumptuous speculations.

What on earth are you babbling about. You said that the Church believes that Jesus had no biological parents. I said you were wrong specifically about that particular point ("The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent(s)") and now you are pretending that I was making a point about whether the Mother of Christ had engaged in sexual activity.

Stop the lies Stephen.

How long do you suppose it might take for me to post proof, again, of your deceitfulness?

The points are inter-connected. If the Mormon Church believes that Mary was literally a virgin then they also believe that Jesus Christ had no biological parents. The two points go hand in hand. I did not know that you were so dense that I had to connect the dots for you also. Nowhere in LDS doctrine that I am aware of does the Mormon Church ever state that they believe Jesus Christ had biological parents. If Mary was really a virgin that gave birth to Jesus Christ it means that he had no DNA from Mary or Joseph........hence the reason why it is called a miracle. And a miracle of this nature is an abnormal event that does not fall into the normal biological laws.

Where are the lies?

I guess anybody that disagrees with Snow must be lying! That is an awfully convenient evasive maneuver!

Snow · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen@Apr 1 2004, 09:10 AM

The points are inter-connected. If the Mormon Church believes that Mary was literally a virgin then they also believe that Jesus Christ had no biological parents. The two points go hand in hand.
...hence the reason why it is called a miracle. And a miracle of this nature is an abnormal event that does not fall into the normal biological laws.

Wrong, that's not what Mormons believe and the points do not follow. You pretend to understand the mechanics, something you could not possibly know.

Where did you get the definition that a miracle falls outside biological laws? That's a new one.

Next time I get back to a computer, I post proof that you are completely wrong.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Snow+Apr 1 2004, 09:15 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Apr 1 2004, 09:15 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Apr 1 2004, 09:10 AM

The points are inter-connected. If the Mormon Church believes that Mary was literally a virgin then they also believe that Jesus Christ had no biological parents. The two points go hand in hand.
...hence the reason why it is called a miracle. And a miracle of this nature is an abnormal event that does not fall into the normal biological laws.

Wrong, that's not what Mormons believe and the points do not follow. You pretend to understand the mechanics, something you could not possibly know.

Where did you get the definition that a miracle falls outside biological laws? That's a new one.

Next time I get back to a computer, I post proof that you are completely wrong.

That would be a neat trick. Unless you plan on posting the quote from Brigham Young in the Journal of Discourses that says that Heavenly Father had sexual intercourse with Mary.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by srm@Mar 31 2004, 10:18 PM
So, I can't just accept Jesus? I have to know a lot about him? What if I am pricked in my heart at a church meeting and I accept Jesus then get hit by a car and die before I can learn all the extra stuff about him...am I doomed to hell?
Oh, one more question. Suppose a person was saved by accepting Jesus and even knew the required extra stuff about him. What if this person later in life becomes a mormon and changes his beliefs about the extra stuff that you say is required. Is that person still saved or will they go to hell?

"How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"(Romans 10:11).

Everybody needs to come to know Jesus Christ the same way. You say: I can't just accept Jesus?

I say: which Jesus Christ? Do you really think that it makes no difference what Jesus Christ you believe in? Do you really think that you can believe anything you want about Jesus Christ and your faith is valid? Do you realize how strange and illogical that is?

No...you cannot just believe any Jesus Christ that you choose. You need to believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible who is without beginning of days or end of life. You need to believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible who is God manifest in the flesh. A faith in a false Jesus Christ can bring no salvation. The Bible warns us about false Jesus Christ's and false Prophets in the world. "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many"(Matthew 24: 5). "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves"(Matthew 7:15). "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him"(2Corinthians 11:3-4).

Were these warnings given in vain or in other words were they given for no reason? People that come saying: I am Christ and deceive many is only one warning and is a serious warning because people could not obtain salvation because they were deceived by such a counterfeit. The warning more applicable to the discussion at hand is Paul's warning in the book of 2Corinthians.........Paul worried for those whose minds may be corrupted from the simplicity which is in Jesus Christ by those who come teaching another Jesus Christ(who was the first born spirit child of a Heavenly Father and Mother would qualify as another/different Jesus Christ). This is a serious issue because we are discussing a counterfeit Jesus Christ......a different Jesus Christ then the one we read about in the Bible. So, yes it is very important which Jesus Christ you place your faith and trust in.......your eternal salvation is at stake.

If you were pricked in your heart at a Church meaning in which the Jesus Christ of the Bible is described and you trust in the only true and living Jesus Christ, confess your sins and accept him as your Savior then you will be Saved/Born Again. If you were pricked in your and ignored that convistion of the Holy Spirit that was telling you that yoiu need to be Saved because you realize your a Sinner, but you reject that witness from God and you got hit by a car and died then you would be doomed to Hell.

If a person is Saved by accepting Jesus Christ then that person is Born Again for the first time and that means that person has a living faith in the Lord jesus Christ......so good works will follow. This does not mean that you are perfect.......after all we all have human weaknesses and make mistakes........but good fruits/works should be a natuaral by-product of that genuine faith in Jesus Christ and there will be signs that such a person is a believer.

I don't really like to go into "what ifs" because some "what if" questions are rare circumstances. Suppose a person who is really a Born Again Christian joins the Mormon Church and has been swayed by false doctrines.......that person really knows the truth, but is in a bacslidden condition.....He deep down knows that the Mormon Church teaches a counterfeit Jesus Christ because the Holy Spirit dwells in that person and teaches him the truth even though he may be in denial.... if that person dies in that condition he will still go to Heaven because he is saved by the grace of Jesus Christ, but he will be among the least in the kingdom of Heaven.

srm · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen+Apr 1 2004, 09:10 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Stephen @ Apr 1 2004, 09:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by -Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 07:36 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:25 PM

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.
WARNING, WARNING STEPHEN LIE ALERT.
The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent although it does not know the mechanics of how it happened. Can you even go a single day without lying about the Church? Just one day? One?
Note: Stephen's solution is to 1. interpret the scripture Son of God to mean not Son and God and to believe that Christ had no inherited chromosomes - poof, magic, razzamatazz.
Please stop lying Stephen. Please.
The Mormon Church says that Mary was a virgin.
How is that lying?
Can you Mr. Snow go a single day without lying about me lying?
If the Mormon Church no longer believes that Mary was a virgin then please show references. If you are right and the Mormon Church has changed their doctrinal position that Mary was a virgin then I will admit I was wrong.
However you have yet to prove your presumptuous speculations.
What on earth are you babbling about. You said that the Church believes that Jesus had no biological parents. I said you were wrong specifically about that particular point ("The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent(s)") and now you are pretending that I was making a point about whether the Mother of Christ had engaged in sexual activity.
Stop the lies Stephen.
How long do you suppose it might take for me to post proof, again, of your deceitfulness?

The points are inter-connected. If the Mormon Church believes that Mary was literally a virgin then they also believe that Jesus Christ had no biological parents. The two points go hand in hand. I did not know that you were so dense that I had to connect the dots for you also. Nowhere in LDS doctrine that I am aware of does the Mormon Church ever state that they believe Jesus Christ had biological parents. If Mary was really a virgin that gave birth to Jesus Christ it means that he had no DNA from Mary or Joseph........hence the reason why it is called a miracle. And a miracle of this nature is an abnormal event that does not fall into the normal biological laws.

Where are the lies?

I guess anybody that disagrees with Snow must be lying! That is an awfully convenient evasive maneuver!

There are people walking the earth now that were conceivec without sexual intercourse. Are you saying that they have no biological parents. I choose to believe the Bible. It says that Jesus is God's son, that mary is his mother AND that Mary was a virgin. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus didn't have biological parents.

Oh, steven, could you please answer my other questions?

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by srm+Apr 1 2004, 10:24 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ Apr 1 2004, 10:24 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by -Stephen@Apr 1 2004, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by -Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by -Snow@Mar 31 2004, 07:36 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:25 PM

Jesus Christ is the only person that walked the earth that had no biological parents. This is biblical. Even the Mormon Church acknowledges this even if you are ignorant of it. Mary was a virgin. Jesus Christ was not conceived as a result of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. That means that he literally had no biological parents. Why this elemenatry information that almost all Christians believe and accept as truth is so difficult for you to understand is beyond me.
WARNING, WARNING STEPHEN LIE ALERT.
The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent although it does not know the mechanics of how it happened. Can you even go a single day without lying about the Church? Just one day? One?
Note: Stephen's solution is to 1. interpret the scripture Son of God to mean not Son and God and to believe that Christ had no inherited chromosomes - poof, magic, razzamatazz.
Please stop lying Stephen. Please.
The Mormon Church says that Mary was a virgin.
How is that lying?
Can you Mr. Snow go a single day without lying about me lying?
If the Mormon Church no longer believes that Mary was a virgin then please show references. If you are right and the Mormon Church has changed their doctrinal position that Mary was a virgin then I will admit I was wrong.
However you have yet to prove your presumptuous speculations.
What on earth are you babbling about. You said that the Church believes that Jesus had no biological parents. I said you were wrong specifically about that particular point ("The Church does indeed believe that Christ has biological parent(s)") and now you are pretending that I was making a point about whether the Mother of Christ had engaged in sexual activity.
Stop the lies Stephen.
How long do you suppose it might take for me to post proof, again, of your deceitfulness?
The points are inter-connected. If the Mormon Church believes that Mary was literally a virgin then they also believe that Jesus Christ had no biological parents. The two points go hand in hand. I did not know that you were so dense that I had to connect the dots for you also. Nowhere in LDS doctrine that I am aware of does the Mormon Church ever state that they believe Jesus Christ had biological parents. If Mary was really a virgin that gave birth to Jesus Christ it means that he had no DNA from Mary or Joseph........hence the reason why it is called a miracle. And a miracle of this nature is an abnormal event that does not fall into the normal biological laws.
Where are the lies?
I guess anybody that disagrees with Snow must be lying! That is an awfully convenient evasive maneuver!

There are people walking the earth now that were conceivec without sexual intercourse. Are you saying that they have no biological parents. I choose to believe the Bible. It says that Jesus is God's son, that mary is his mother AND that Mary was a virgin. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus didn't have biological parents.

Oh, steven, could you please answer my other questions?

I choose to believe the Bible. Jesus Christ was conceived inside the womb of Mary because the Holy Ghost came upon her and the power of the Highest over-shadowed her(Luke1:35).

Yes. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ just as a woman who adopts a son and raises him and takes care of him and loves him in his growing up years is his mother.

This still does not change the fact that Jesus Christ has no biological parents.

srm · April 1, 2004

My (srm) questionsthey have no biological parents. I choose to believe the Bible. It says that Jesus is God's son, that mary is his mother AND that Mary was a virgin. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus didn't have biological parents.
Oh, steven, could you please answer my other questions?

I choose to believe the Bible. Jesus Christ was conceived inside the womb of Mary because the Holy Ghost came upon her and the power of the Highest over-shadowed her(Luke1:35).

Now, this really is getting interesting. So you believe that Jesus wasn't connected to his Mary in the womb? You believe that there was no umbilical cord? What in the Bible leads you to believe this? because all through the Bible it speaks of his mother, not adopted mother.

Yes. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ just as a woman who adopts a son and raises him and takes care of him and loves him in his growing up years is his mother.

But the Bible doesn;t say that he was adopted. how do you explain that?

This still does not change the fact that Jesus Christ has no biological parents.

What in the Bible leads you to believe that? The verses in Hebrews re: Melchisedic? anything else? Because all through the Bible it says that God is his father and that Mary is his mother it says nothing about adoption.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by srm+Mar 31 2004, 10:18 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (srm @ Mar 31 2004, 10:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Stephen@Mar 31 2004, 07:45 PM

It shows that the Book of Hebrews was right asserting that Jesus Christ was without parents.

It is referring to Melchisedic not Jesus. How do you explain that?

Hebrews 7:

1 For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;

2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace;

3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

Here Melchizedek is being compared to the Son of God.

The writer of Hebrews sees in Melchizedek a type or figure of Christ and draws parallels between the two. Without father, without mother: What is true about Melchizedek typically only because of lack of knowledge or silence is intrinsically true of Jesus Christ. Melchizedek is without parents only in that they are unknown. He is without descent in that his genealogy was not preserved. Genealogy was essential to a priest, for under the Levitical system one could not serve if he could not prove his pedigree(Exra 2:62). Melchizedek had no papers. Further he is without beginning and ending due to the fact that the Old Testament never mentioned his birth and death....the Son of God literally is without beginning of days and end of life, which is who the author of the Book of Hebrews compares to Melchizedek.

Many understand these verses in Hebrews to suggest that Melchizedek was a theophany, an appearance of Christ Himself, rather than a historical king at Salem.

There is no Bible scholars or Bible commentaries of any sort that deny the fact that Melchizedek is being compared to the Son of God. What interpretation you choose to take on these verses regarding Melchizedek is up to you.

April 1, 2004

Stephen do you know what a halcyon is?

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by srm@Apr 1 2004, 10:58 AM

My (srm) questionsthey have no biological parents. I choose to believe the Bible. It says that Jesus is God's son, that mary is his mother AND that Mary was a virgin. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus didn't have biological parents.
Oh, steven, could you please answer my other questions?
I choose to believe the Bible. Jesus Christ was conceived inside the womb of Mary because the Holy Ghost came upon her and the power of the Highest over-shadowed her(Luke1:35).
Now, this really is getting interesting. So you believe that Jesus wasn't connected to his Mary in the womb? You believe that there was no umbilical cord? What in the Bible leads you to believe this? because all through the Bible it speaks of his mother, not adopted mother.
Yes. Mary is the mother of Jesus Christ just as a woman who adopts a son and raises him and takes care of him and loves him in his growing up years is his mother.
But the Bible doesn;t say that he was adopted. how do you explain that?
This still does not change the fact that Jesus Christ has no biological parents.
What in the Bible leads you to believe that? The verses in Hebrews re: Melchisedic? anything else? Because all through the Bible it says that God is his father and that Mary is his mother it says nothing about adoption.

I compared Mary to an adopted Mother.......I did not say she was an adopted Mother. That was simply the best comparison that I could make. Mary was the care taker of Jesus Christ and she loved him and raised him during his growing up years.

What does the umbilical cord have to do with anything? I don't know if there was an umbilical cord or not. This does not change the fact that Jesus Christ would not have had DNA from Mary or Joseph because Mary was conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost.

No doubt Mary was a loving parent and took good care of him. This is not disputed. I don't doubt what the Bible says. Mary was indeed a mother to Jesus Christ. This does not negate the fact that Jesus Christ was conceived by miraculous means and that his genetic make-up was different than anybody else that has walked the earth. Don't ask me to explain a miracle. I just accept by faith that it was the miracle described.

Stephen · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Starsky@Apr 1 2004, 11:14 AM
Stephen do you know what a halcyon is?

I don't know. What is a halcyon?

Stephen · April 1, 2004

If God can take on the form of a burning bush, a pillar of fire, ect., then forming a human body for himself should not be difficult for God to do.

srm · April 1, 2004

Originally posted by Stephen+Apr 1 2004, 10:16 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Stephen @ Apr 1 2004, 10:16 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--srm@Mar 31 2004, 10:18 PM
So, I can't just accept Jesus? I have to know a lot about him? What if I am pricked in my heart at a church meeting and I accept Jesus then get hit by a car and die before I can learn all the extra stuff about him...am I doomed to hell?
Oh, one more question. Suppose a person was saved by accepting Jesus and even knew the required extra stuff about him. What if this person later in life becomes a mormon and changes his beliefs about the extra stuff that you say is required. Is that person still saved or will they go to hell?