Some questions for Mormons

[xanmad33]

None of us dispute the fact that Jesus, Heavenly Father and the Holy Ghost are all divine. We are simply saying, as does the Bible itself, that they are not the same person. They are seperate. If they were niot seperate then why would Jesus pray to himself? You speak of logic and logic itself tells us that a person does not pray to himself and debate with himself about whether his will or his will should be done - not unless they are a psychiatric case.

Jesus is and always has been divine. He is Jehovah the God of the Old Testament. This is LDS doctrine.

Show me in the Bible

[xanmad33]

If the Father claims to be the only God and like wise the Son, and The Holy spirit, who is lying?

If we are commanded to worship God alone but also commanded to worship Jesus , who should we worship?

If the father resureccted Jesus and Jesus resurrected himself, and the Holy spirit also claims to have resurrected Jesus, who really resurrected Jesus?

[Elgama]

Show me in the Bible

there is plenty

1)Paul begins every letter by stating they come from God our Father and From the Lord Jesus Christ

2) Jesus submits to His Father's will, prays for strength and guidance why did he need to do that if they were the same:?

3)Christs Baptism - all 3 members of the Godhead are present but distinct.

-Charley

[Elgama]

If the Father claims to be the only God and like wise the Son, and The Holy spirit, who is lying?

If I say God I mean Father, Son and Holy Ghost - if I mean one of them I will identify which one, if I don't know the term God works for all of them

If we are commanded to worship God alone but also commanded to worship Jesus , who should we worship?

Are we commanded to worship God or the Father? If we are commanded to worship God and Jesus then that does not conflict with my beliefs at all as Jesus is God - however Jesus is not Heavenly Father

If the father resureccted Jesus and Jesus resurrected himself, and the Holy spirit also claims to have resurrected Jesus, who really resurrected Jesus?

God? I don't know tbh and don't remember anything in the Bible that gives a blow by blow account of how the resurrection occurred perhaps you can direct me to it? I really don't think any of us understand the complexities of how it occurred and I do not believe it essential to knowing God. Personally I suspect all were needed to accomplish it

-Charley

[WillowTheWhisp]

Show me in the Bible

I have shown you. I have shown you the most striking example of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane praying to his Heavenly Father.

If you do not believe that is in the Bible then I don't see how I can convince you.

Matthew 26:39 - "O my Father if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not as I will but as thou wilt."

I really don't see how I can make it any plainer. The Bible is referring to two people one pleading with the other for a different way if possible to do this thing, but then submitting to the will of the other.

At Jesus' baptism a voice spoke from Heaven saying "This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3 verse 17) At the risk of sounding facetious was Jesus a ventriloquist?

[xanmad33]

If the term 'literal' is to make a distinction between His being our eternal life giver and the father of our mortal bodies or our spirits, then I understand. But you do recognize that He literally gives eternal life and that in that sense He is our Father in Heaven. Correct?

The term literal means he did not have physical sex with mary.

A better term would be CREATER. He created out of NOTHING all that exists in heaven and on Earth.

Raised or elevated, as in rank or character. (English definition, are there other definitions?) Is there a definition of 'exalted' that we can NOT apply to Jesus?? What definition of 'exalted' are you reluctant to attribute to Him?... ...especially in light of Paul's words: 'Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.' (Hebrews 2:8)???

Some verses for use of the term 'exalted' in context:

'This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.' (Acts 2:32-33)

'The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.' (Acts 5:30-31)

'But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' (Philippians 2:7-11)

Is Jesus NOT exalted? Did He not rise from the grave and ascend to His throne?

My reluctancy with the term is when I have read Mormon dosctrine using the word "exalted" to imply he was not always God but IS now an exalted being.

If we mean, he is exalted wothy of worship then we are on the same page

Not only this, but He healed the sick, raised the dead, was crucified for the sins of the world, and did rise from the grave on the third day. But does this somehow change the fact that He lived a mortal life on this earth? Do you believe that Jesus was born on this earth as an infant and grew to manhood?

I believe God himself poured himself out into the form of a man, and I have clearly shown this, many times already, you seem to miss all the places I have illistrated that for you.

I'll rephrase the question: Do you believe that Jesus of Nazareth died?

So you are saying He DOES have a Father?

He himself as God, became a man by his own doing, to conquer sin for which Adam failed.

He is a just God, and he had to reconcile our sin with his Holy charachter, becasue he loves us so, he put his own position of God on hold for a time, if you will, to become LIKE US in all ways BUT sin. I have shown you this repeadedly in scripture.

You do understand that Mormons do NOT believe they will ever take God's place or be independent of Him correct? So if I said: 'God wants us to become as He is, or like Him.' This would not be an incorrect statement. Right?

You do believe you can become JUST AS powerful as him, only on another planet correct?

You believe you can be like him in ALL ways. I have your own doctrines to prove this.

The antis make a big stink about 'becoming like God'. They twist the whole matter and pretend that Mormons believe in something they do not. They act like Mormons believe that there will come a time that they will no longer need the LORD nor be subject to Him. This is flatly FALSE.

This is because that is EXACTLY what the scripture tells us that Satan thought.

I have MANY quotes from LDS leaders and doctrines proving this.

Let me address this subject of 'deification'. Let me try to put this right in your mind. Do you believe those that overcome this world through the blood of Christ will sit with Him in His throne just as He sits with His Father in His throne?

Do kings not sit on thrones in this world? Does that make them deity, a god?

No?

'And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.' (1 John 4:3)

Did Jesus of Nazareth get a body or not? I believe that God can have whatever He wants, but that is not what I am asking. The New Testament is full of the notion that Jesus has a body. What did the Virgin bare? What did our LORD's persecutors torture? What did they hang on the cross? What did Joseph of Arimathaea request from Pilate? What did Pilate deliver? What did Joseph wrap in the linen cloth and place in the tomb? What rose from the tomb? What did the disciples see and feel and give witness of? Was it not the body of flesh and bone, the physical tabernacle of our LORD Jesus?

Jesus denied he was exactly like ordinary men. Jesus told ordinary men, "Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world" (John 8:23). Jesus didn't come into this world the same way as an ordinary human. You trying to radically humanize him, but in the same breath our Lord then claimed to be the great "I AM" (verse 24). Accepting the limitations of a normal human body in no way altered his essential being.

Do you believe that Jesus lost that body some time between the resurrection and today? What scriptural basis do we have for such a notion? Am I mis-reading you? Can a person claim to be a Christian and deny Christ's physical existance? I can thinking of nothing less biblical than the saying that God has no body of flesh and bone. I will allow you to clarify your answer. Does God (Jesus) have a body of flesh and bone?

The son is both God and man. He has two 2 natures

Do you mean he still eats, sleeps, rests and goes through all the same body functions he did in the flesh? Are you saying the humanity of Jesus is not in anyway different than the humanity he accepted while on earth?

1. Jesus was not a man just like ordinary man when he first took to himself the form of a slave and was found in fashion as a man (Phil. 2:7).

2. Paul described his current condition as having a "glorious body" (Phil. 3:21). Is his glorious body the very same body Jesus dwelt in while on earth? Does the glorious body need rest and sleep, food and drink, get weary and exhausted? What do we really know about that glorious body? John says we don't know enough to be as dogmatic as some protagonists of our day. " Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).

3. If we do not know what we shall be, but our bodies will be fashioned like unto his glorious body, how can anyone say they know what the man Christ Jesus is like in heaven?

4. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 15:50). The only physical body we know of has nerves, bones, tissue, blood and other fluids, veins, arteries and organs. This body of flesh and blood will die, rot, and is corruptible. Paul said corruption does not inherit incorruption. The flesh and blood of Jesus never saw corruption. That is not true of any ordinary man. The man Jesus in heaven is in a body quite different than that of an ordinary human being.

[xanmad33]

I have shown you. I have shown you the most striking example of Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane praying to his Heavenly Father.

If you do not believe that is in the Bible then I don't see how I can convince you.

Matthew 26:39 - "O my Father if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not as I will but as thou wilt."

I really don't see how I can make it any plainer. The Bible is referring to two people one pleading with the other for a different way if possible to do this thing, but then submitting to the will of the other.

At Jesus' baptism a voice spoke from Heaven saying "This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased." (Matthew 3 verse 17) At the risk of sounding facetious was Jesus a ventriloquist?

Will you please answer the questions I have outlined for you already ?

I reposted them.

I will answer this Biblically in a little while for you.

[skalenfehl]

Remember, objective, humble and honest responses given in the love. The way to gain truth is to Humble ourselves before our Heavenly Father and our brothers and sisters. I am willing to listen and learn all that I can from whoever has truth how about you?

Love,

Leeann

Leanne, that was a beautiful post. You experienced what I have been trying to say from my very first post and what I have been trying to say in every post since. Only by asking Father in Heaven, who is the source of all truth can you know as you found out. I was there twenty years ago.

Once you can understand from the Lord, then you can take the Bible and read not only what it says, but what it truly means and why it is in perfect harmony with the Book of Mormon and our church.

As I mentioned earlier, Moroni 10:3-5 and James 1:5-6 hold the same litmus test, the same promise. We can all debate the Bible and our own personal interpretation, but only Father in Heaven can tell any of us which interpretation, if any, is correct. What I have laid out in all my posts, if you carefully read them and pray as you have done, you can know for yourself. You can even take xan's quotes (not the conveniently incomplete ones) and all the scriptures that she posted and pray about them as well.

It is not for me to prove anything. Like I said, the Bible cannot prove that God lives. God can prove it to us through prayer as James and Moroni have admonished us. You have taken that step into true faith and humility. Trust only the Lord.

I have a brotherly love for everyone I meet, and the posts that I have written are from my heart and from my experience with reading the Bible and the Book of Mormon prayerfully. I know xanmad means well and I have great respect for her. I hope and pray that one day she can see the forest for all the trees.

Best wishes.

[xanmad33]

There is so much evidence in scripture this could take a month!

Ask yourself why would Jesus call himself God, if God claims to be the only God?

JESUS - claimed to be God, equal with the Father, is clear from numerous Scriptures. For example, He said:

“I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty” (Revelation 1:8).

HOLY SPIRIT — the Bible teaches that He is a real person, just as are the Father and the Son. Jesus said:

"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come” (John 16:13).

"Each Person of the Godhead equally and fully and eternally God. Each is necessary, and each is distinct, and yet all are one. The three Persons appear in a logical, causal order. The Father is the unseen, omnipresent Source of all being, revealed in and by the Son, experienced in and by the Holy Spirit. The Son proceeds from the Father, and the Spirit from the Son. With reference to God's creation, the Father is the Thought behind it, the Son is the Word calling it forth, and the Spirit is the Deed making it a reality.

We “see” God and His great salvation in the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, then “experience” their reality by faith, through the indwelling presence of His Holy Spirit.

Though these relationships seem paradoxical, and to some completely impossible, they are profoundly realistic, and their truth is ingrained deep in man's nature. Thus, men have always sensed first the truth that God must be “out there,”

Similarly, men have always felt the need to “see” God in terms of their own experience and understanding, but this knowledge that God must reveal Himself has been distorted into polytheism and idolatry. Men have thus continually erected “models” of God, sometimes in the form of graven images, sometimes even in the form of philosophical systems purporting to represent ultimate reality.

Finally, men have always known that they should be able to have communion with their Creator and to experience His presence “within.” the truth of God's tri-unity is ingrained in man's very nature."

If Jesus is not God, then why did he call himself God?

The Bible says God is the ONLY God, if that's the case wouldn't Jesus be blasphemous to "the father"?

[Misshalfway]

Leeann--

I appreciate your post. But I must say, first of all, that conversations like this rarely turn out warm and fuzzy. In order for two parties to understand one another..... there must be willingness to UNDERSTAND on both sides. It is rare that I have ever witnessed this phenom in such conversations. As long as both sides try to prove their point.... there will always be the inference that someone is wrong. And sometimes, being right becomes more important than coming to an honest understanding. I want to believe that everyone, as flawed and as emotional as humans are, has good intensions. I am just not sure they are the best intensions. I am not sure the OP came here to understand. I think she came here to be understood. You can't take a stick to an beehive and then be offended when one bee stings you. Ok? This conversation feels like a heated debate rather than a conversation. You want warm and fuzzy. I have hoped my whole life to find others who could talk about my faith without bashing it. It is a very rare experience. I don't bash other faiths. I simply don't do it. I ask questions. And I try to understand. And if I disagree, I try to do so respectfully.... not taking anything from the person I am with. But I can't just sit and take the bashing either. Those of us who are engaging in this conversation.....are we doing so out of love? Maybe... Seems to me, we are all good people getting sidetracked by the need to prove we are right. And I think in the end, the Spirit of the Lord is grieved and departs. This isn't how Jesus shared his gosepel. It isn't how He communicates truth.

Bible bashing never works!!! That is the only thing that is being proven definitively by this thread!

[skalenfehl]

There is so much evidence in scripture this could take a month!

My dear, you could quote the entire Bible word for word and take an entire year and still miss it. It is not in the rumbling of scriptures and quotes, it is in seeking the Lord for the answers.

1 Kgs. 19: 10-12

10 And he said, I have been very jealous for the Lord God of hosts: for the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword; and I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away.

11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake:

12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

Personal revelation.

[skalenfehl]

I have to agree, Misshalfway. The spirit of contention is not of the Lord. I can't help but be obligated to address certain things, if not all, especially when quotes are posted out of context or incomplete. But I endeavor to do so with a spirit of love and not contention.

I bear no grudges either. I believe xanmad and everyone here to be sincere. Still, as Nephi did, I seek to testify and to correct where necessary, as Alma and Amulek did, to those who would take out of context the words which have been given us plainly.

Best wishes.

[Elgama]

T

If Jesus is not God, then why did he call himself God?

The Bible says God is the ONLY God, if that's the case wouldn'tha Jesus be blasphemous to "the father"?

Like I have said in Latter Day Saint Theology Jesus is God, but He is not Heavenly Father, as a Latter Day Saint I could write most of your post and say that is what we believe.

I found this in the Preach My Gospel Manual - I am curious to see you disprove what we believe concerning Christ using the bible, I will find something else about the Godhead and ask the same question and the Father:

When you have faith in Christ, you believe in Him the Son of God, the Only Begotten of the Father in the Flesh. You accept Him as your Saviour and Redeemer and you trust Him and are confident that He loves you.

Faith leads to action, including repentance, obedience, and dedicated service. When you have faith in Jesus, you trust the Lord enough to follow His Commandments- even when you do not completely understand the reasons for them. You accomplish what the Lord wants you to accomplish. You help bring about good in your own life and the lives of others. You are able to do miracles according to the Lord;s wil. Your faith will be manifest through diligence and work.

faith is a principle of power. God works by power, but His power is usually exercised in response to faith (Moroni 10:7) He works according to the faith of His children. Doubt and fear are opposed to faith

Your faith will increase through diligent study, prayer dedicated service and obedience to the promptings of the Holy Ghost and the commandments.

Your Faith in Jesus Christ grows as you become better aquainted with Him and His Teachings. As you explore the scriptures and search them you learn of His way, His love for all people and His Commandments.

-Charley

[Elgama]

I found this LDS.org - Liahona Article - The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent

As Elder Ballard noted earlier in this session, various cross-currents of our times have brought increasing public attention to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Lord told the ancients this latter-day work would be “a marvellous work and a wonder,”1 and it is. But even as we invite one and all to examine closely the marvel of it, there is one thing we would not like anyone to wonder about—that is whether or not we are “Christians.”

By and large any controversy in this matter has swirled around two doctrinal issues—our view of the Godhead and our belief in the principle of continuing revelation leading to an open scriptural canon. In addressing this we do not need to be apologists for our faith, but we would like not to be misunderstood. So with a desire to increase understanding and unequivocally declare our Christianity, I speak today on the first of those two doctrinal issues just mentioned.

Our first and foremost article of faith in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.”2 We believe these three divine persons constituting a single Godhead are united in purpose, in manner, in testimony, in mission. We believe Them to be filled with the same godly sense of mercy and love, justice and grace, patience, forgiveness, and redemption. I think it is accurate to say we believe They are one in every significant and eternal aspect imaginable except believing Them to be three persons combined in one substance, a Trinitarian notion never set forth in the scriptures because it is not true.

Indeed no less a source than the stalwart Harper’s Bible Dictionary records that “the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the [New Testament].”3

So any criticism that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not hold the contemporary Christian view of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost is not a comment about our commitment to Christ but rather a recognition (accurate, I might add) that our view of the Godhead breaks with post–New Testament Christian history and returns to the doctrine taught by Jesus Himself. Now, a word about that post–New Testament history might be helpful.

In the year a.d. 325 the Roman emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea to address—among other things—the growing issue of God’s alleged “trinity in unity.” What emerged from the heated contentions of churchmen, philosophers, and ecclesiastical dignitaries came to be known (after another 125 years and three more major councils)4 as the Nicene Creed, with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed. These various evolutions and iterations of creeds—and others to come over the centuries—declared the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be abstract, absolute, transcendent, immanent, consubstantial, coeternal, and unknowable, without body, parts, or passions and dwelling outside space and time. In such creeds all three members are separate persons, but they are a single being, the oft-noted “mystery of the trinity.” They are three distinct persons, yet not three Gods but one. All three persons are incomprehensible, yet it is one God who is incomprehensible.

We agree with our critics on at least that point—that such a formulation for divinity is truly incomprehensible. With such a confusing definition of God being imposed upon the church, little wonder that a fourth-century monk cried out, “Woe is me! They have taken my God away from me, … and I know not whom to adore or to address.”5 How are we to trust, love, worship, to say nothing of strive to be like, One who is incomprehensible and unknowable? What of Jesus’s prayer to His Father in Heaven that “this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”?6

It is not our purpose to demean any person’s belief nor the doctrine of any religion. We extend to all the same respect for their doctrine that we are asking for ours. (That, too, is an article of our faith.) But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first Christian Saints, many of whom were eyewitnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?7

We declare it is self-evident from the scriptures that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are separate persons, three divine beings, noting such unequivocal illustrations as the Savior’s great Intercessory Prayer just mentioned, His baptism at the hands of John, the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration, and the martyrdom of Stephen—to name just four.

With these New Testament sources and more8 ringing in our ears, it may be redundant to ask what Jesus meant when He said, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do.”9 On another occasion He said, “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.”10 Of His antagonists He said, “[They have] … seen and hated both me and my Father.”11 And there is, of course, that always deferential subordination to His Father that had Jesus say, “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.”12 “My father is greater than I.”13

To whom was Jesus pleading so fervently all those years, including in such anguished cries as “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me”14 and “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me”?15 To acknowledge the scriptural evidence that otherwise perfectly united members of the Godhead are nevertheless separate and distinct beings is not to be guilty of polytheism; it is, rather, part of the great revelation Jesus came to deliver concerning the nature of divine beings. Perhaps the Apostle Paul said it best: “Christ Jesus … being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”16

A related reason The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is excluded from the Christian category by some is because we believe, as did the ancient prophets and apostles, in an embodied—but certainly glorified—God.17 To those who criticize this scripturally based belief, I ask at least rhetorically: If the idea of an embodied God is repugnant, why are the central doctrines and singularly most distinguishing characteristics of all Christianity the Incarnation, the Atonement, and the physical Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ? If having a body is not only not needed but not desirable by Deity, why did the Redeemer of mankind redeem His body, redeeming it from the grasp of death and the grave, guaranteeing it would never again be separated from His spirit in time or eternity?18Any who dismiss the concept of an embodied God dismiss both the mortal and the resurrected Christ. No one claiming to be a true Christian will want to do that.

Now, to anyone within the sound of my voice who has wondered regarding our Christianity, I bear this witness. I testify that Jesus Christ is the literal, living Son of our literal, living God. This Jesus is our Savior and Redeemer who, under the guidance of the Father, was the Creator of heaven and earth and all things that in them are. I bear witness that He was born of a virgin mother, that in His lifetime He performed mighty miracles observed by legions of His disciples and by His enemies as well. I testify that He had power over death because He was divine but that He willingly subjected Himself to death for our sake because for a period of time He was also mortal. I declare that in His willing submission to death He took upon Himself the sins of the world, paying an infinite price for every sorrow and sickness, every heartache and unhappiness from Adam to the end of the world. In doing so He conquered both the grave physically and hell spiritually and set the human family free. I bear witness that He was literally resurrected from the tomb and, after ascending to His Father to complete the process of that Resurrection, He appeared, repeatedly, to hundreds of disciples in the Old World and in the New. I know He is the Holy One of Israel, the Messiah who will one day come again in final glory, to reign on earth as Lord of lords and King of kings. I know that there is no other name given under heaven whereby a man can be saved and that only by relying wholly upon His merits, mercy, and everlasting grace19 can we gain eternal life.

My additional testimony regarding this resplendent doctrine is that in preparation for His millennial latter-day reign, Jesus has already come, more than once, in embodied majestic glory. In the spring of 1820, a 14-year-old boy, confused by many of these very doctrines that still confuse much of Christendom, went into a grove of trees to pray. In answer to that earnest prayer offered at such a tender age, the Father and the Son appeared as embodied, glorified beings to the boy prophet Joseph Smith. That day marked the beginning of the return of the true, New Testament gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and the restoration of other prophetic truths offered from Adam down to the present day.

I testify that my witness of these things is true and that the heavens are open to all who seek the same confirmation. Through the Holy Spirit of Truth, may we all know “the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom [He has] sent.”20 Then may we live Their teachings and be true Christians in deed, as well as in word, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

[Elgama]

and I guess thats what I believe concerning the trinity - I felt a strong witness when I read it and its all i can say on the matter. And it brought home to me just why we need apostles, prophets etc in 2008 because other groups are still discussing how the Trinity functions there are about 20 different models -whereas I don't need to really i perceive the Godhead differently from my other Latter Day Saints but all I need to know is in that talk by a special witness of Jesus Christ - a man that Christ has called to serve and preach just like He did Peter, James and John

-Charley

[a-train]

The term literal means he did not have physical sex with mary. A better term would be CREATER. He created out of NOTHING all that exists in heaven and on Earth.

Who said the Father had sex with the Virgin? I have seen the idiotic claims of the antis: full of quotes out of context which only demonstrate either their severe ignorance or blatant dishonesty.

John 14 is but one example of the multitude of places where our LORD told us of His FATHER. Are you now correcting Him? He should have used 'a better term'?

You do believe you can become JUST AS powerful as him, only on another planet correct?

No, this is foolishness. No man will ever attain any power save that which He receives from God. Whatever quotes your antimormon sources have fed you will demonstrate upon further examination that LDS leaders have NEVER claimed that a man can become independent of God.

Do kings not sit on thrones in this world? Does that make them deity, a god?

This is not what I asked you. Do you believe that those that overcome this world through the blood of Christ will sit with Him in His throne just as He sits with His Father in His throne?

Jesus denied he was exactly like ordinary men. Jesus told ordinary men, "Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world" (John 8:23). Jesus didn't come into this world the same way as an ordinary human.

So His mother did not bare Him just as did mine? How did He come into the world? Was He not born of the Virgin Mary?

You trying to radically humanize him, but in the same breath our Lord then claimed to be the great "I AM" (verse 24).

I have made no assertion that our LORD Jesus of Nazareth is not the Great I Am. Certainly He is.

My questions were these:

Did Jesus of Nazareth get a body or not? I believe that God can have whatever He wants, but that is not what I am asking. The New Testament is full of the notion that Jesus has a body. What did the Virgin bare? What did our LORD's persecutors torture? What did they hang on the cross? What did Joseph of Arimathaea request from Pilate? What did Pilate deliver? What did Joseph wrap in the linen cloth and place in the tomb? What rose from the tomb? What did the disciples see and feel and give witness of? Was it not the body of flesh and bone, the physical tabernacle of our LORD Jesus?

The answers to these questions are biblical. You can color me as someone trying to 'humanize' our LORD, but does that change the facts?

ANSWER ME WITH YES OR NO. It will take but two or three keystrokes to do this. DOES JESUS HAVE A BODY OF FLESH AND BONE?

Do you mean he still eats, sleeps, rests and goes through all the same body functions he did in the flesh? Are you saying the humanity of Jesus is not in anyway different than the humanity he accepted while on earth?

I am not talking about any of this. I am asking a simple and basic question: DOES JESUS HAVE A BODY OF FLESH AND BONE?

1. Jesus was not a man just like ordinary man when he first took to himself the form of a slave and was found in fashion as a man (Phil. 2:7).

What do we really know about that glorious body?

We know that it is flesh and bones. How? He said so: '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.' (Luke 24:39)

Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 15:50).

Nobody is arguing with that.

-a-train

[WillowTheWhisp]

Will you please answer the questions I have outlined for you already ?

I reposted them.

I was under the impression that I had answered them. I have given you scripture references which you choose to ignore. I have referred you to logic, which you asked us to do, but again you have chosen to ignore.

He is a just God, and he had to reconcile our sin with his Holy charachter, becasue he loves us so, he put his own position of God on hold for a time, if you will, to become LIKE US in all ways BUT sin.

This statement simply doesn't make sense if you intend it to mean what I think you meant. If he put his 'Godness' or position in Heaven on hold whilst he placed his spirit into an earthly body then can you please explain to me who the heck he was praying to in Gethsemane and why on the cross he said "Father forgive them for they know not what they do."? And not least of all why he cried out "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"

If he was the same person simply having moved from being a spirit 'up there' to being a physical being 'down here' then he would not have done any of those things would he? Unless he really was a schizophrenic ventryloquist.

[SmilingRedhead]

Xan, I have been following this thread and I really respect you for sticking to what you understand to be true. I have no problem with you asking questions like this either. On-line discussions always seem more heated than what they probably would be in a real life discussion group due to the lack of facial expressions, tone of voice and body language. And I just wanted to mention that I honestly think you seem like a really nice person, unlike some of the things others have accused you of being... :)

Anyway, I'll get on to the main reason for my post...

I don’t claim to be clever or very knowledgeable scripturally but I just wanted to add my honest and very simple understanding of the ‘one God’ issue.

Hopefully it doesn’t sound confusing – at least it makes sense to me... :) Well, here goes:

There is one ‘main’ God – Heavenly Father, who created us all.

Jesus is God’s son, our Saviour and also a god – God/Father of the earth, which he created, but he is not the ‘main’ God.

The Holy Ghost/Spirit – he is also a god in his own way but again not the ‘main’ God i.e. Heavenly Father.

The term God, Lord etc. can all be used in various ways in the Bible to describe the different ‘people’ of the Godhead. Though at any point is only one of the ‘people’ our Heavenly Father, one is our Saviour and one the Holy Spirit. They are 3 different ‘people’ and they are each a god but they are 1 in purpose.

Like a husband and wife is ‘one’ in purpose but is not the same person. Mothers and fathers are each a different person yet they unite in the title of ‘parent’ but the father is the head of the family with the mother at his side with different responsibilities. (Simple and probably not bullet proof analogy... :))

We can become gods and be like God our Heavenly Father but he will always be our ‘main’ God. Another one of my simple analogies: I am a mother just like my mother is a mother but she will forever be my mother and the ‘main’ mother in our little universe amongst me and my siblings who are mothers too. (Apart from my brother who is a father... lol)

I see plenty of verses in the Bible which support this perspective but no matter how many verses you post I still don't see any verses in the Bible which disprove what I've said above. Any of the verses you have added to 'prove' your point of view can still work in support of our point of view. Obviously ‘we’ LDS people have a different understanding and a different perspective than you have of what the various verses and terms stated in the Bible mean. And our perspective is what links the BofM and the Bible for us, without any contradiction. Until someone truly sees it all from ‘our side’ there will always be questions like the ones you’ve posed. And we will forever be ‘arguing’ our differing understandings. For you, it all makes sense from your perspective and for us it all still makes sense from our perspective... :)

Kind regards and much respect,

SmilingRedhead

:)

PS I don't expect a reply or any comments - I just wanted to add my 2 pence :)

[Dr T]

WtW,

I think you are both talking about the same subject matter, God, but have a completely different understanding. You guys are talking to each other but have a different vocabulary and are not really addressing the same topic. It's like apples and oranges. It seem that some in this thread are getting frustrated. There are a lot of great posts that deserve to me worked out with better understanding for all of us. Talking about religious topics can be very frustrating and offensive. I really don't think that is the intention. Maybe it would be better to go point by point instead of a million questions all at once.

[Misshalfway]

I have to agree, Misshalfway. The spirit of contention is not of the Lord. I can't help but be obligated to address certain things, if not all, especially when quotes are posted out of context or incomplete. But I endeavor to do so with a spirit of love and not contention.

I bear no grudges either. I believe xanmad and everyone here to be sincere. Still, as Nephi did, I seek to testify and to correct where necessary, as Alma and Amulek did, to those who would take out of context the words which have been given us plainly.

Best wishes.

Yes. I hear that. And I appreciate that. Conversations like this are difficult and always will be. Not that we shouldn't have the conversation....

Perhaps it will evolve into something better. The tone seems to be taking a turn. That is encouraging.

[Elgama]

WtW,

I think you are both talking about the same subject matter, God, but have a completely different understanding. You guys are talking to each other but have a different vocabulary and are not really addressing the same topic. It's like apples and oranges. It seem that some in this thread are getting frustrated. There are a lot of great posts that deserve to me worked out with better understanding for all of us. Talking about religious topics can be very frustrating and offensive. I really don't think that is the intention. Maybe it would be better to go point by point instead of a million questions all at once.

this why Isaid he was wonderful earlier in the threadlol

-Charley

[Dale]

Answer my questions I have laid out in my last post.

All I have asked you to do is consider what The Bible says, not Mormon doctrine. I have out lined again for you all the places that The father claims to be God, and like wise the son and the Holy Ghost, when the father says He is the ONLY God, who is lying???

Please show me where it says there are 3 gods in the Bible

I will not answer your past questions to me. The condition for our continuing to dialogue on this topic is solely limited to the latin word persona. I am asking the questions now. I only want to see if you really know the creedal idea of them being non-persons persons is Biblical based on anything you have clearly found in the Bible.

If the meaning of persona is really in the Bible you should not have a difficulty in proving the three as not being defineable as modern persons? Let us just examine passages where the three are aware of each other like three modern persons. Then show me what definitions of persons, Paul, Jesus, or any New Testament writer was operating under to avoid being accused of mixing the idea of three Gods with ideas of one God.

I did not write the creeds. the creeds superimpose persona every time on passages dealing with the threeness of God. So i really want you to take out your Bible only on those passages that clearly teach the distinctly aware persons. Then i want you to show me from them where those texts where they mean mean persona, or have any meaning similar to persona. The word Trinity is not in the Bible. But the meaning is supposed to be all Biblical So i challenge you to show me that they felt the persons were like three dumb persons an actor plays. Or show me exactly where they used the word persons in reference to the three where they clearly meant non-persons. Otherwise the Godhead is split into three modern persons even if treated misleadingly as one God.

Can you prove the creedal idea of persons Biblical? That is what your church teaches.

[Guest tomk]

Show me all your proofs IN THE BIBLE , as I have clearly laid out post after post with Biblical proofs.

Instead of telling me Im wrong, why dont you do as I have done and SHOW me I'm wrong.

Please everyone go back and read all the verses I provided that refer to God the father as God as Jesus as The Holy Spirit, there were a lot!

If there were 3 seperate gods, then 2 of them have been lying in the Bible.

This is our take on it:

LDS.org - Liahona Article - The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent

An excerpt from that talk:

n the year a.d. 325 the Roman emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea to address—among other things—the growing issue of God’s alleged “trinity in unity.” What emerged from the heated contentions of churchmen, philosophers, and ecclesiastical dignitaries came to be known (after another 125 years and three more major councils)4 as the Nicene Creed, with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed. These various evolutions and iterations of creeds—and others to come over the centuries—declared the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be abstract, absolute, transcendent, immanent, consubstantial, coeternal, and unknowable, without body, parts, or passions and dwelling outside space and time. In such creeds all three members are separate persons, but they are a single being, the oft-noted “mystery of the trinity.” They are three distinct persons, yet not three Gods but one. All three persons are incomprehensible, yet it is one God who is incomprehensible.

We agree with our critics on at least that point—that such a formulation for divinity is truly incomprehensible. With such a confusing definition of God being imposed upon the church, little wonder that a fourth-century monk cried out, “Woe is me! They have taken my God away from me, … and I know not whom to adore or to address.”5 How are we to trust, love, worship, to say nothing of strive to be like, One who is incomprehensible and unknowable? What of Jesus’s prayer to His Father in Heaven that “this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent”?6

...

...

It is not our purpose to demean any person’s belief nor the doctrine of any religion. We extend to all the same respect for their doctrine that we are asking for ours. (That, too, is an article of our faith.) But if one says we are not Christians because we do not hold a fourth- or fifth-century view of the Godhead, then what of those first Christian Saints, many of whom were eyewitnesses of the living Christ, who did not hold such a view either?7

Also in this talk, notice the proofs cited in the New Testament that Christ is speaking to His Father.

Good luck.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Maybe it would be better to go point by point instead of a million questions all at once.

Yes, I have to admit I am a bit overwhelmed by so many questions at once, but most of them seem to be variations on the same question.

Perhaps I could go back and take each Biblical verse independently but it may take me a long time..

[xanmad33]

I will not answer your past questions to me. The condition for our continuing to dialogue on this topic is solely limited to the latin word persona. I am asking the questions now. I only want to see if you really know the creedal idea of them being non-persons persons is Biblical based on anything you have clearly found in the Bible.

If the meaning of persona is really in the Bible you should not have a difficulty in proving the three as not being defineable as modern persons? Let us just examine passages where the three are aware of each other like three modern persons. Then show me what definitions of persons, Paul, Jesus, or any New Testament writer was operating under to avoid being accused of mixing the idea of three Gods with ideas of one God.

I did not write the creeds. the creeds superimpose persona every time on passages dealing with the threeness of God. So i really want you to take out your Bible only on those passages that clearly teach the distinctly aware persons. Then i want you to show me from them where those texts where they mean mean persona, or have any meaning similar to persona. The word Trinity is not in the Bible. But the meaning is supposed to be all Biblical So i challenge you to show me that they felt the persons were like three dumb persons an actor plays. Or show me exactly where they used the word persons in reference to the three where they clearly meant non-persons. Otherwise the Godhead is split into three modern persons even if treated misleadingly as one God.

Can you prove the creedal idea of persons Biblical? That is what your church teaches.

I found this article and I think it may answer your question:

" Although God is one being, he is not one person and although he is three persons, he is one being. Our English word "person" is derived from the Latin word persona and this was in fact the word used by Trinitarian Latin theologians to describe the three hypostases of the one God. The word persona was not a word that is equivalent to our modern English word "person." It was a word originally used for a role that an actor portrayed in a play. It was also the word for "mask," because actors wore different masks for each character they portrayed... The idea here is that one being reveals himself in three different ways.

The word "being" can be used as a synonym for "substance" since the word "substance" is intended to mean the essence of being. However, they could also mean God is "one identity" although he is three distinct identities. This definition is usually brought into play when it is understood that God is normally portrayed in Scripture with the personal pronouns, "He," "Him," "I," and "Me." so, God is three persons, yet God is one Being, God is three identities, yet God is one identity.

To describe the essence of divinity or deity (and also humanity as pertaining to Jesus' human nature). The word comes from the Latin word substantia which has its own Latin roots similar to the Greek roots of the Greek word "hypostasis," since both are etymologically derived in their own respective languages from words meaning "under" and "standing." The English theological term "substance" is intended to translate the Greek word ousia. It essentially means stuff that makes something what it is, essence of being. In this sense, it is similar to the philosophical use of the term hypostasis. But in Trinitarian terms, the word "substance" is not the same as hypostasis. Each is a distinct and different hypostasis but they are all the same substance or essence. The Greek word ousia connotates a sense of being. Thus, God is one being because God is one ousia substance consisting of three hypostasis."

Here is a very in depth article on what I have been trying to explain perhaps not so well, and I even agree with the objection the writer has with the trinity please take the time to read it and understand my position better, although I am not pentecostal, I do agree with these articles thanks you! Follow the links to answer you specific questions

The Oneness of God

Again, there are so many great questions but you all must remember, I am only one person and I am trying my best to keep up.

Thank you to the folks who can see my heart, I really appreciate you!

I love to discuss religion, it's a passion, if we can get past the insults, and have a good discusiion all the while remembering that I do have a life on occasion then I think things will go better:)

My personal frustration has been the accusations, and really that's it!

I am enjoying this, but I pray we can all take a deep breath and be kinder to one another.

Thank you to leeanne, DR T, smiling red head, and the mod (i forgot your name at the moment) , but you all have been extremely kind to me.

And p.s. mod- I did not read the entire quote about Jesus that upset you, my fault and please accept my apology. I still think it is relevant though :)