The Nature of God

[skalenfehl]

You know none of that is Biblical in ANY way right?

It is barely touched upon in 1 Corinthians. But the whole point, is assuming I am right, we have the fullness of the gospel beyond what the Jews rejected and what is contained in the Bible. But yes I grant you that...to a degree.

[skalenfehl]

It is touched upon along with the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, but more specifically vs. 40 and 41

Per lds.org and our own scriptural references:

There are three kingdoms of glory: the celestial kingdom, the terrestrial kingdom, and the telestial kingdom. The glory we inherit will depend on the depth of our conversion, expressed by our obedience to the Lord's commandments. It will depend on the manner in which we have "received the testimony of Jesus" (D&C 76:51; see also D&C 76:74, 79, 101).

Celestial Kingdom

The celestial kingdom is the highest of the three kingdoms of glory. Those in this kingdom will dwell forever in the presence of God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ. This should be your goal: to inherit celestial glory and to help others receive that great blessing as well. Such a goal is not achieved in one attempt; it is the result of a lifetime of righteousness and constancy of purpose.

The celestial kingdom is the place prepared for those who have "received the testimony of Jesus" and been "made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, who wrought out this perfect atonement through the shedding of his own blood" (D&C 76:51, 69). To inherit this gift, we must receive the ordinances of salvation, keep the commandments, and repent of our sins. For a detailed explanation of those who will inherit celestial glory, see Doctrine and Covenants 76:50–70; 76:92–96.

In January 1836 the Prophet Joseph Smith received a revelation that expanded his understanding of the requirements to inherit celestial glory. The heavens were opened to him, and he saw the celestial kingdom. He marveled when he saw his older brother Alvin there, even though Alvin had died before receiving the ordinance of baptism. (See D&C 137:1–6.) Then the voice of the Lord came to the Prophet Joseph:

"All who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God; "Also all that shall die henceforth without a knowledge of it, who would have received it with all their hearts, shall be heirs of that kingdom;

"For I, the Lord, will judge all men according to their works, according to the desire of their hearts" (D&C 137:7–9).

Commenting on this revelation, the Prophet Joseph said, "I also beheld that all children who die before they arrive at the years of accountability are saved in the celestial kingdom of heaven" (D&C 137:10).

From another revelation to the Prophet Joseph, we learn that there are three degrees within the celestial kingdom. To be exalted in the highest degree and continue eternally in family relationships, we must enter into "the new and everlasting covenant of marriage" and be true to that covenant. In other words, temple marriage is a requirement for obtaining the highest degree of celestial glory. (See D&C 131:1–4.) All who are worthy to enter into the new and everlasting covenant of marriage will have that opportunity, whether in this life or the next.

Terrestrial Kingdom

Those who inherit terrestrial glory will "receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fulness of the Father. Wherefore, they are bodies terrestrial, and not bodies celestial, and differ in glory as the moon differs from the sun" (D&C 76:77–78). Generally speaking, individuals in the terrestrial kingdom will be honorable people "who were blinded by the craftiness of men" (D&C 76:75). This group will include members of the Church who were "not valiant in the testimony of Jesus" (D&C 76:79). It will also include those who rejected the opportunity to receive the gospel in mortality but who later received it in the postmortal spirit world (see D&C 76:73–74). To learn more about those who will inherit terrestrial glory, see Doctrine and Covenants D&C 76:71–80, 91, 97.

Telestial Kingdom

Telestial glory will be reserved for individuals who "received not the gospel of Christ, neither the testimony of Jesus" (D&C 76:82). These individuals will receive their glory after being redeemed from spirit prison, which is sometimes called hell (see D&C 76:84, D&C 76:106). A detailed explanation of those who will inherit telestial glory is found in Doctrine and Covenants 76:81–90, 98–106, 109–112.

Perdition

Some people will not be worthy to dwell in any kingdom of glory. They will be called "the sons of perdition" and will have to "abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory" (D&C 76:32; 88:24). This will be the state of "those who know [God's] power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy [God's] power" (D&C 76:31; see also D&C 76:30, 32–49).

[a-train]

If the FATHER is spirit that is omnipresent, why would a spirit need to exist physically seperate?

.

If the FATHER is indeed an omnipresent Spirit without any physical body, and the Son alone possesses a body of flesh and bone, then They are by definition physically seperate.

If They are NOT physically seperate and One has a body, then Both have a body because they are physically One.

-a-train

[a-train]

This quote From Joseph Smith is what i am trying to investigate, show me from the Bible

...."for I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. These are incomprehensible ideas to some, but they are simple. It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did; and I will show it from the Bible. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345; Journal of Discourses, 6:3)."

He said it can be shown from the Bible, that's all I'm trying to see...

If you feel this was taken grossly out of context please feel free to post the full context and where it changes the meaning of this excerpt...

Joseph Smith went on to say: 'What did Jesus say? (Mark it, Elder Rigdon!) The Scriptures inform us that Jesus said, As the Father hath power in Himself, even so hath the Son power--to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious--in a manner to lay down His body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. Do we believe it? If you do not believe it, you do not believe the Bible. The Scriptures say it, and I defy all the learning and wisdom and all the combined powers of earth and hell together to refute it.'

He is talking about John 5. Verse 19 says: 'The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'

And Verse 20: 'For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.'

Now, what works did the Father show Jesus? What does it say? Read on:

And verse 21: 'For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.'

And verse 26: 'For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.'

What kind of life is He talking about? Look at the context, He is talking about the life of the physical body and the power of resurrection.

Are there scriptures that say the Father has not a physical body? That He did not lay it down and rise again? That He did not do the things that our LORD Jesus did before Him?

-a-train

[xanmad33]

Joseph Smith went on to say: 'What did Jesus say? (Mark it, Elder Rigdon!) The Scriptures inform us that Jesus said, As the Father hath power in Himself, even so hath the Son power--to do what? Why, what the Father did. The answer is obvious--in a manner to lay down His body and take it up again. Jesus, what are you going to do? To lay down my life as my Father did, and take it up again. Do we believe it? If you do not believe it, you do not believe the Bible. The Scriptures say it, and I defy all the learning and wisdom and all the combined powers of earth and hell together to refute it.'

He is talking about John 5. Verse 19 says: 'The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'

And Verse 20: 'For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.'

Now, what works did the Father show Jesus? What does it say? Read on:

And verse 21: 'For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.'

And verse 26: 'For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself.'

What kind of life is He talking about? Look at the context, He is talking about the life of the physical body and the power of resurrection.

Are there scriptures that say the Father has not a physical body? The He did not lay it down and rise again? That He did not do the things that our LORD Jesus did before Him?

-a-train

yes there are scriptures that say that, God does not have a body... He is spirit, omnipresent, and omnipotent.... Several times the Bible describes God as invisible (Colossians 1:15; I Timothy 1:17, Hebrews 11:27). Although man can see God when He appears in various forms, no man can see directly the invisible Spirit of God. Since God is an invisible Spirit and is omnipresent, He does not have a body as we know it. He did assume various forms and temporary manifestations throughout the Old Testament so that man could see Him. (ex:theophanies.) However, the Bible does not record any permanent bodily manifestation of God until Jesus Christ was born. Of course, in Christ, God had a human body and now has a glorified, immortal human body.

He is the only Spirit that is truly omnipresent

lol a-train, all those verses have great meaning to them, when applied to the rest of scripture and read in context.

[xanmad33]

If the FATHER is indeed an omnipresent Spirit without any physical body, and the Son alone possesses a body of flesh and bone, then They are by definition physically seperate.

If They are NOT physically seperate and One has a body, then Both have a body because they are physically One.

-a-train

So you don't believe that "God the father" has a seperate body or personage from Jesus, as Joseph Smith taight?

i need further clarification on what you are ACTUALLY saying here...

[a-train]

yes there are scriptures that say that, God does not have a body...

Where specifically?

He is spirit, omnipresent, and omnipotent.... Several times the Bible describes God as invisible (Colossians 1:15; I Timothy 1:17, Hebrews 11:27).

They didn't have the superfriends back when the scriptures were translated. Invisible doesn't have to mean He has no body or physical existance, there are many invisible things that are physically existant. In fact to you, I am invisible.

Of course, in Christ, God had a human body and now has a glorified, immortal human body.

And if Jesus has a body, but the Father does not, then they are physically seperate. Is the chair I am sitting in physically seperate from happiness? Of course, the chair is physical and happiness is not. Happiness is physically seperate from all things physical because it has no physical existance. If the Father has no physical existance, then He is physically seperate from all things physical including the body of Jesus which hung on the cross and rose from the tomb.

Now, if the Father and Son are physically One, then we have to admit that the Father has a physical body. And if we admit that the Father has a physical body, then statements about Joseph Smith's assertion that God has such a body are not to be ridiculed.

He is the only Spirit that is truly omnipresent.

But, if He has no physical existance, then He is not physically present anywhere.

lol a-train, all those verses have great meaning to them, when applied to the rest of scripture and read in context.

You asked for those verses. Is this why? So you could laugh at the person nice enough to give them to you and pretend you understand them better? You did not even know what verses Joseph was talking about and now you know all of this much better than he to whom you must come for this information?

You heard Joseph's defiance of your refutations. What do you have to refute his interpretation?

-a-train

[a-train]

So you don't believe that "God the father" has a seperate body or personage from Jesus, as Joseph Smith taight?

i need further clarification on what you are ACTUALLY saying here...

I believe exactly as Joseph Smith testified. The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as ours and so does His Son Jesus Christ. They Each possess respective physical bodies of flesh and bone.

-a-train

[WillowTheWhisp]

I think you may have misunderstood what a-train is saying. I hope he will forgive me for butting in with my understanding of the post.

There are two possibilities put forth. The first takes the suggestion that Heavenly Father does not have a physical body - which was your claim, and then follows that with the Biblical teaching that Jesus does have a physical body. If those two statements were true then it would be impossible for Jesus and Heavenly Father to be the same being as you claim them to be because one being cannot both have a body and not have a body. Therefore if one part is true then the other part would be false.

The second sentence states that if they were both the same being and if one manifestation of that being has a physical body then you could not argue that the other manifestation of the same being does not have a physical body because if they are both the same person then they would both have the same body. It would be like saying that I am my mother's daughter and my daughter's mother. So I am both a mother and a daughter and still the same person. So far it makes sense. But if you then went on to say that as a mother I have a living body but as a daughter I don't have a body that would be nonsense because if I am the same person as both daughter of my mother and mother of my daughter I cannot be two different things one with a body and one without.

Therefore you cannot have it both ways. Either one statement is true and the other is false or vice versa. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

But LDS teaching is that both father and son have physical bodies and both are different seperate people and you can have both of those facts at the same time and both making sense.

Could you please explain to me the Trinitarian take on what was happening in the Garden of Gethsemane when Jesus prayed to his Father asking that the cup be taken from him and then submitted to his Father by saying "Nevertheless not my will but thine", and also when on the cross he prayed "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." Why didn't he just say "I forgive you because you don't know what you're doing."?

[ZenWarrior]

I don't see this as concrete proof, certainly not a verse to base a religion on.

Stephen did not see two Gods... He did not say, "I see Jesus standing beside God." The term, "right hand of God" is from Exodus 15:6-- Moses and the Israelites claimed to have "seen the right hand of God." But God is a Spirit with neither right nor left hand; what they saw was a manifestation of God's power and glory. As an Israelite, Stephen knew what "the right hand of God" meant. He saw the Son of Man in power and glory.

I do not see how that verse proves that they are seperate personages?

When there is a confusing verse, you must search the rest of scripture to clear up the confusion. The FULL weight of scripture must be applied. There is nowhere in those verses where it states there are two or more gods. These instances, ilbeit difficult to understand, in no way prove a 2 or more god theory.

Hi xanmad33. I'm new here and have been reading some of the discussions you've been having and I just wanted to put my tupence worth in. I'll say in advance that I'm not the type that spends much time on the internet and my account is set to not notify me of any responses, so pre-emptive apologies if I don't get back to you on any counter points you put to me.

I'm assuming that your purpose here is mutual understanding. In my view this is the most productive approach. I threw away my old view that everyone would agree with my own understanding once they knew my logic and explanation some time ago (yet every so often I still fall into that trap - hey I'm human).

With that in mind I have something to put to you (without any intention to offend); I feel you do not accept other peoples' logic for their interpretation of scripture. As in the quotes above, I felt that the other person in the discussion with you gave logical, reasonable and valid reasons as to why he believes a certain way. However, rather than say words to the effect of, "yes, I understand your point of view, but I personally think otherwise for these reasons: X, Y, Z", you seem to be totally dismissive. I think this is a problem.

Again, I don't want to offend you; this isn't a personal attack on you. I just feel that there is a more productive approach. In a way it seems, at times, that your stand point is one of, "prove to me that what you believe is true by using my interpretation of scripture!" If I misunderstand you, which is entirely possible, then I humbly apologise.

In relation to the above quotes, I can see where you are coming from; I think I understand your opinion on the subject and your logic and reason for believing so. Equally though, there are others who study the scriptures, use the best of their understanding and knowledge to comprehend it terms of context and prayerfully search for understanding (as I'm sure you do too), and yet come to conclusions, which, may in part, differ from your own. Does this mean they are wrong? Does this mean you are wrong? The truth is, it doesn't mean anything; it is merely a difference of opinion.

I personally believe the doctrine taught by the LDS Church concerning the nature of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. I believe so because through all of my experience, study and prayerful consideration I have come to this understanding; it doesn't make any sense at all to me any other way. Could I be mistaken about things? Of course. I believe there are some things that I am not mistaken about, but I try to keep an open mind so that I am prepared for any further understanding God my give me through the inspiration of his Spirit.

In closing, I'd like to say that I respect your opinion and would defend your right to have it, even if it differs from my own.

[Andrew777]

yes there are scriptures that say that, God does not have a body... He is spirit, omnipresent, and omnipotent.... Several times the Bible describes God as invisible (Colossians 1:15; I Timothy 1:17, Hebrews 11:27). Although man can see God when He appears in various forms, no man can see directly the invisible Spirit of God. Since God is an invisible Spirit and is omnipresent, He does not have a body as we know it. He did assume various forms and temporary manifestations throughout the Old Testament so that man could see Him. (ex:theophanies.) However, the Bible does not record any permanent bodily manifestation of God until Jesus Christ was born. Of course, in Christ, God had a human body and now has a glorified, immortal human body.

He is the only Spirit that is truly omnipresent

lol a-train, all those verses have great meaning to them, when applied to the rest of scripture and read in context.

If you look at the full context in the bible it can be clearly seen that God has both a spirit and a body. It's not either/or, that is if you want to look at the entire Bible and not just certain verses. We are made in his image as both physical and spiritual beings.

As for the kingdoms, they're not mentioned in detail in the Bible. There is about as much biblical reference to the different kingdoms as there is for your belief in the trinity, i.e. practically none. Fortunately we have modern day prophets to reveal such information for us, as well as the ability we all have to ask God himself.

[xanmad33]

Where specifically?

They didn't have the superfriends back when the scriptures were translated. Invisible doesn't have to mean He has no body or physical existance, there are many invisible things that are physically existant. In fact to you, I am invisible.

We are not omnipresent, yes we have a spirit but ours is not everywhere at once.

And if Jesus has a body, but the Father does not, then they are physically seperate. Is the chair I am sitting in physically seperate from happiness? Of course, the chair is physical and happiness is not. Happiness is physically seperate from all things physical because it has no physical existance. If the Father has no physical existance, then He is physically seperate from all things physical including the body of Jesus which hung on the cross and rose from the tomb.

Now, if the Father and Son are physically One, then we have to admit that the Father has a physical body. And if we admit that the Father has a physical body, then statements about Joseph Smith's assertion that God has such a body are not to be ridiculed.

But, if He has no physical existance, then He is not physically present anywhere.

You asked for those verses. Is this why? So you could laugh at the person nice enough to give them to you and pretend you understand them better? You did not even know what verses Joseph was talking about and now you know all of this much better than he to whom you must come for this information?

You heard Joseph's defiance of your refutations. What do you have to refute his interpretation?

-a-train

Fist of all I think we need to start by aknowledging that God cannot ever be put into some box of human rationalle. Any intellectual argument could not ever define him. If any argument could put him into complete understanding in that box in our mind, then he wouldn't be God.

But for the sake of argument let us consider:

Yes, God in a sense is in everything because he created everything. Scripture tells us he is holding everything together. All things are held together by the power of his word.

We cannot ever fully comprehend that.

God has physically manifested himself or made himself visible to us in a physical way even though he is spirit.

It doesn't negate or cancel his spirit.

Jesus said, If you have seen me, you have seen the father. He is fully God in Jesus as Jesus said "all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in me.

The fullness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily, but since it is omnipresent it could still be everywhere.

This is the mystery...God is singular...It all began with him. He is the only God... But as a singular God he is also a plural God. It's not either or it's both. That goes beyond any human rationalle, we cannot comprehend that.

No amount of intellectualizing will ever make that easier to grasp.

Everything he created is physical, his creation in heaven is a different composition that that of earth, he holds all things together.

What an awesome God!

a-train, there are many things I could say about Joseph Smiths claims being unbiblical, Insinuating God was once a man etc. Will it matter to you?

At the end of it all, you chose to believe Joseph, and that's perfectly Ok. No hard feelings. I am just a person enjoying a religious debate/discussion. Peace

[xanmad33]

Hi xanmad33. I'm new here and have been reading some of the discussions you've been having and I just wanted to put my tupence worth in. I'll say in advance that I'm not the type that spends much time on the internet and my account is set to not notify me of any responses, so pre-emptive apologies if I don't get back to you on any counter points you put to me.

I'm assuming that your purpose here is mutual understanding. In my view this is the most productive approach. I threw away my old view that everyone would agree with my own understanding once they knew my logic and explanation some time ago (yet every so often I still fall into that trap - hey I'm human).

With that in mind I have something to put to you (without any intention to offend); I feel you do not accept other peoples' logic for their interpretation of scripture. As in the quotes above, I felt that the other person in the discussion with you gave logical, reasonable and valid reasons as to why he believes a certain way. However, rather than say words to the effect of, "yes, I understand your point of view, but I personally think otherwise for these reasons: X, Y, Z", you seem to be totally dismissive. I think this is a problem.

Again, I don't want to offend you; this isn't a personal attack on you. I just feel that there is a more productive approach. In a way it seems, at times, that your stand point is one of, "prove to me that what you believe is true by using my interpretation of scripture!" If I misunderstand you, which is entirely possible, then I humbly apologise.

In relation to the above quotes, I can see where you are coming from; I think I understand your opinion on the subject and your logic and reason for believing so. Equally though, there are others who study the scriptures, use the best of their understanding and knowledge to comprehend it terms of context and prayerfully search for understanding (as I'm sure you do too), and yet come to conclusions, which, may in part, differ from your own. Does this mean they are wrong? Does this mean you are wrong? The truth is, it doesn't mean anything; it is merely a difference of opinion.

I personally believe the doctrine taught by the LDS Church concerning the nature of Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. I believe so because through all of my experience, study and prayerful consideration I have come to this understanding; it doesn't make any sense at all to me any other way. Could I be mistaken about things? Of course. I believe there are some things that I am not mistaken about, but I try to keep an open mind so that I am prepared for any further understanding God my give me through the inspiration of his Spirit.

In closing, I'd like to say that I respect your opinion and would defend your right to have it, even if it differs from my own.

I appreciate the advice given to me in such a loving manner, thank you.

I tend to err on the debate non-emotion side of things and only focus on what is at hand. Perhaps I could say "i understand you points" more, thank you

Everyone should know this from my original post on this thread, I am trying to stay away from emotion so as not to cloud my points...

Sometimes I get overwhelmed with all the questions and me being only one person, so I get even more focused on the point and not the person, please forgive me for that

My questions have been regarding the Bible because that's what I believe in fully and since you believe in it too, I wanted to see why we both come away with such differences.

I am having a great discussion, right Skalen

I consider every point made but then I may have more questions about it.

If anyone feels hurt, please know that is not my intention, at all.

Sometimes I feel anger behind a post and I may respond back in anger, but I am trying hard not to, and please forgive me if I have.

Religion is personal, that's why I chose the internet to get my questions answered, and to further discuss Mormon beliefs and the Bible. I don't want to upset anyone esp in real life :)

So, peace, love and blessings everyone!

[xanmad33]

I think you may have misunderstood what a-train is saying. I hope he will forgive me for butting in with my understanding of the post.

There are two possibilities put forth. The first takes the suggestion that Heavenly Father does not have a physical body - which was your claim,

My claim was he did not have a physical body until he manifested himself for us physically in Jesus. That does not negate his power and omnipresence though.

and then follows that with the Biblical teaching that Jesus does have a physical body. If those two statements were true then it would be impossible for Jesus and Heavenly Father to be the same being as you claim them to be because one being cannot both have a body and not have a body. Therefore if one part is true then the other part would be false.

Why? If we consider what all the scriputes tell us, then is's perfectly true, our minds just cannot grasp the full imact of that statement.

The second sentence states that if they were both the same being and if one manifestation of that being has a physical body then you could not argue that the other manifestation of the same being does not have a physical body because if they are both the same person then they would both have the same body. It would be like saying that I am my mother's daughter and my daughter's mother. So I am both a mother and a daughter and still the same person. So far it makes sense. But if you then went on to say that as a mother I have a living body but as a daughter I don't have a body that would be nonsense because if I am the same person as both daughter of my mother and mother of my daughter I cannot be two different things one with a body and one without.

I can see what your trying to say (see im getting better huh?)

But as my previous post pointed out...one does not negate the other.

God is not held to our human comprehention, it may not make sense to our minds, but nevertheless, it is what scripture says

Jesus said all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him, but that does not negate Gods power and ominpresence.

Therefore you cannot have it both ways. Either one statement is true and the other is false or vice versa. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

Why can't God have it both ways? I agree, it will never fully make sense to us your right about that. But we are provided all this information through scripture about God's nature because it matters. It matters a lot.

But LDS teaching is that both father and son have physical bodies and both are different seperate people and you can have both of those facts at the same time and both making sense.

Could you please explain to me the Trinitarian take on what was happening in the Garden of Gethsemane when Jesus prayed to his Father asking that the cup be taken from him and then submitted to his Father by saying "Nevertheless not my will but thine", and also when on the cross he prayed "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." Why didn't he just say "I forgive you because you don't know what you're doing."?

Prayer is defined in the Bible as flesh praying to deity

If you are born again, you speak to the Holy Spirit Who dwells "in" you. But in Jesus dwelt the fullness of the Godhead bodily," He was the manifestation of God in the physical Form of a man. Yet God is not a man but a Spirit.

as a man Jesus prayed, but as God, He heard and responded to those prayers.

[xanmad33]

for some reason my words turned pink in some places there, sorry!

[skalenfehl]

Dropping in for a minute before work. Xanmad, as you can see where we left off, our resurrection will include which bodies we resurrect with depending on the lives we lived. We will resurrect with either a celestial, terrestrial or telestial body, which is the glory of the sun, moon and stars, by comparison. This is further expanded upon by modern day revelation as we have it and shown in my quote from lds.org, which is a wonderful source if you have more questions. I won't claim to know every iota of gospel knowledge.

For those that never had a chance to hear the gospel and Christ's testimony they will in the post mortal life (spirit world where Christ went to teach the inhabitants from the flood) have that opportunity to receive and accept or reject Christ's testimony. The quote that I provided explains far more effectively than I could.

Therefore, we can resurrect with a body Celestial, and inherit the Celestial Kingdom as exalted children of our Father in Heaven with the same glorified bodies of flesh and bone. This is our doctrine.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Your the only one who has shown complete love in all you posts...

That is a little hurtful to other people who have patiently answered your questions when you have attacked their beliefs

.

How do you know your praying to the true God when you pray the prayer in Moroni?

If you are NOT praying to the one true God, then who are you praying to?

I could just as easily ask how do you know you are praying to the true God when you pray? If we address our prayers to 'God', 'Father in Heaven' (as Jesus taught us we should pray 'our Father who art in Heaven') then why should we doubt that the true God is the one who hears and answers us? Are you saying that the true God would not answer our prayers about the Book of Mormon if the Book of Mormon was not true but he would allow some false God to tell us that it is true? Surely that would be unbelievably cruel of him.

Jesus said "all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in me.

The fullness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily, but since it is omnipresent it could still be everywhere.

Can you please tell me where Jesus actually said this because I'm not familiar with it.

I am familiar with people saying that God is a mystery beyond our comprehension and that if he wasn't then he wouldn't be God. That always used to confuse me because Jesus tells us we need to know God. How can we know him if he is impossible to comprehend? In one way it was easy for me to accept Mormon doctrine because it was the only Church which specifically taught the Godhead that I had come to recognise from reading the Bible. It puzzles me too how people can read the same thing I read and to them it seems to say something completely different.

[Elgama]

I could just as easily ask how do you know you are praying to the true God when you pray? If we address our prayers to 'God', 'Father in Heaven' (as Jesus taught us we should pray 'our Father who art in Heaven') then why should we doubt that the true God is the one who hears and answers us? Are you saying that the true God would not answer our prayers about the Book of Mormon if the Book of Mormon was not true but he would allow some false God to tell us that it is true? Surely that would be unbelievably cruel of him.

I think this is a good question Xan my God answers your prayers but why does yours not answer mine? In fact its a huge one? One of the biggest things that drew me to being LDS was my questions surrounding what happened to people who died unbaptised- for much of its history Christianity taught people who were not christened went straight to hell - your faith offered parents of babies who died early no comfort they wouldn't even buried an unchristened baby in consecrated ground, I have excavated a burial ground near a church for those that could not be buried in consecrated graves it was heart wrenching to realise in amongst the murderers and witches were tiny babies. What do you think happened to people who did not hear the gospel? I just don't understand how you can claim Christianity as it stands offers one baptism?

Knowledge of these things is essential for knowing the nature of God because I need to know if I want the salvation He offers? and if I can truly trust and love Him

-Charley

[xanmad33]

That is a little hurtful to other people who have patiently answered your questions when you have attacked their beliefs.

I am sorry if that hurt you, I was up late last night and I was trying to show Skalen that I appreciated the way he treats me in posts , that's all.

In the other thread, I felt very judged by you, Perhaps it was my own interpretation of your words, but I did not feel very good reading your accusations.

I thank you for your continued participation in threads, and I think you have been more and more loving, you are probably a very kind person, and I never meant to insinuate otherwise, but truthfully my post was to thank Skalen for trying to see the best in me through everything I write.

Even now you accuse me of attacking your beliefs, but am I?

I thought I was engaged in a discussion? Perhaps there have been a few posts where I have responded in more anger than love, but I have never told anyone here they are going to hell have I?

I could just as easily ask how do you know you are praying to the true God when you pray? If we address our prayers to 'God', 'Father in Heaven' (as Jesus taught us we should pray 'our Father who art in Heaven') then why should we doubt that the true God is the one who hears and answers us? Are you saying that the true God would not answer our prayers about the Book of Mormon if the Book of Mormon was not true but he would allow some false God to tell us that it isn't true? Surely that would be unbelievably cruel of him.

Well since we both believe the Bible to be true, then we both know He is the true God correct?

The God(s) in the LDS faith is described as being significantly different than the God we both have already aknowkledged is true in the Bible, so my questions have focused on that. And seeking to understand that better.

If you can grasp this for a second...IF your BOM, is in fact not of God, but perhaps a lie (remember I am saying IF, for arguments sake) then could it also be concludud that praying to the spirit in the book would also be praying to a decietful spirit not of God?

That was the point I was making earlier...IF.

I am familiar with people saying that God is a mystery beyond our comprehension and that if he wasn't then he wouldn't be God. That always used to confuse me because Jesus tells us we need to know God. How can we know him if he is impossible to comprehend? In one way it was easy for me to accept Mormon doctrine because it was the only Church which specifically taught the Godhead that I had come to recognise from reading the Bible. It puzzles me too how people can read the same thing I read and to them it seems to say something completely different.

In order to fully know God, we would have to know every particle and speck of his being.... We dont have the capacity in our brains to know the FULL knowledge of his glory.

The term "know" in the Bible is often used in an intimate way...RELATIONSHIP.

That's what it's ALLLLLLL about. He want to know us intimately and for us to know him intimately. He want a relationship with us.

If your still confused you can provide me with the verse in question and I will look it up more and try to help

[xanmad33]

Can you please tell me where Jesus actually said this because I'm not familiar with it.

Its actually paul speaking sorry for the mix up, Colossians 2:9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

[xanmad33]

I think this is a good question Xan my God answers your prayers but why does yours not answer mine? In fact its a huge one? One of the biggest things that drew me to being LDS was my questions surrounding what happened to people who died unbaptised- for much of its history Christianity taught people who were not christened went straight to hell - your faith offered parents of babies who died early no comfort they wouldn't even buried an unchristened baby in consecrated ground, I have excavated a burial ground near a church for those that could not be buried in consecrated graves it was heart wrenching to realise in amongst the murderers and witches were tiny babies. What do you think happened to people who did not hear the gospel? I just don't understand how you can claim Christianity as it stands offers one baptism?

Knowledge of these things is essential for knowing the nature of God because I need to know if I want the salvation He offers? and if I can truly trust and love Him

-Charley

God is not responsible for what people do in his name. A look at your own church's history should show you that.

Regarding eternal fate, I don't know, nobody does. All I can say is that I serve a loving, Just, merciful, righteous God and all his judgements are pure.

[skalenfehl]

Regarding eternal fate, I don't know, nobody does.

1 Corinthians 15 touches upon it as I previously mentioned and expounded upon. When we die we dwell in paradise (thief on the cross) or prison (where inhabitants from the flood also went) until we all resurrect to be judged and rewarded with a glory of salvation. This is our doctrine.

By the way, those who do accept the gospel in the postmortal world still need to be baptized, so we perform baptism on their behalf. "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?" 1 Cor 15:29. This is also our doctrine.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Even now you accuse me of attacking your beliefs, but am I?

I'm sorry if you feel that I am accusing you of attacking us. Where have I actually said that? You do disagree with the LDS point of view and I am sure that you would be the first to agree that you do. However, I have said that although I do not agree with what you believe I would defend your right to those beliefs.

I thought I was engaged in a discussion? Perhaps there have been a few posts where I have responded in more anger than love, but I have never told anyone here they are going to hell have I?

No-one has told you that you are going to Hell either. It just isn't in the LDS doctrine.

Well since we both believe the Bible to be true, then we both know He is the true God correct?

Yes, we share that common ground.

The God(s) in the LDS faith is described as being significantly different than the God we both have already aknowkledged is true in the Bible, so my questions have focused on that. And seeking to understand that better.

If you can grasp this for a second...IF your BOM, is in fact not of God, but perhaps a lie (remember I am saying IF, for arguments sake) then could it also be concludud that praying to the spirit in the book would also be praying to a decietful spirit not of God?

That was the point I was making earlier...IF.

The problem here is that we do not believe that God as described in The Book of Mormon, or Jesus as described in the Book of Mormon are any different to God and Jesus as described in the Bible. However, they are very different to the God and Jesus or God/Jesus/Holy Ghost Trinity as put forward by other churches and which we do not see as Biblical.

This is actually where we differ - you believe we preach a different Jesus to the one in the Bible. We believe trinitarians preach a different Jesus to the one in the Bible.

In order to fully know God, we would have to know every particle and speck of his being.... We dont have the capacity in our brains to know the FULL knowledge of his glory.

The term "know" in the Bible is often used in an intimate way...RELATIONSHIP.

That's what it's ALLLLLLL about. He want to know us intimately and for us to know him intimately. He want a relationship with us.

I agree with you that it's difficult for us with our limited understanding to fully grasp all the things the Bible tries to teach us. I believe this is why Jesus taught in parables to try to make things easier to understand.

If your still confused you can provide me with the verse in question and I will look it up more and try to help

I'm only confused about your beliefs. I'm not at all confused about mine. To me the Gospel appears very plain and simple and easy to understand. It's just all this three in one and one in three and the same person being different people and able to pray to himself and have different opinions to himself which doesn't seem to make sense to me, but I don't actually believe that is what the Bible tells us. What I see in the Bible is three separate people with three different personalities, all united in one purpose as the Godhead (a bit like the President, Vice President and Chairman of a company). It just baffles me that other churches make it so complicated and I don't understand why they do that. It's not actually a Bible verse that I don't understand.

Matthew 26:39 is where Jesus prays to his father and asks that the cup could pass from him - but goes on to say 'not my will but thine'

Luke 23:34 is where he asks his Father to forgive those who abuse him.

I did try in your previous thread to answer all the points of scripture which you quoted from my own LDS viewpoint but it did take me an awful long time to look them all up and read them all in context. I have tried not to be dismissive of what you believe but to look into it and to put forward what I believe and why.

Nothing that anyone else could tell me could change what I believe about the nature of God because I had already come to that understanding before I'd ever even heard of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church doctrine merely confirmed what I had already believed. It really just puzzles me how anyone can read the Bible and not see three separate beings.

Did you come to the belief in the Trinity from reading the Bible or from being taught it by your church?

[xanmad33]

I'm sorry if you feel that I am accusing you of attacking us. Where have I actually said that? You do disagree with the LDS point of view and I am sure that you would be the first to agree that you do. However, I have said that although I do not agree with what you believe I would defend your right to those beliefs.

That is a little hurtful to other people who have patiently answered your questions when you have attacked their beliefs.

YOUR ACCUSATION IS ABOVE>>>>

No-one has told you that you are going to Hell either. It just isn't in the LDS doctrine.

I never said they did did I?

Yes, we share that common ground.The problem here is that we do not believe that God as described in The Book of Mormon, or Jesus as described in the Book of Mormon are any different to God and Jesus as described in the Bible. However, they are very different to the God and Jesus or God/Jesus/Holy Ghost Trinity as put forward by other churches and which we do not see as Biblical.

This is actually where we differ - you believe we preach a different Jesus to the one in the Bible. We believe trinitarians preach a different Jesus to the one in the Bible.

I agree with you that it's difficult for us with our limited understanding to fully grasp all the things the Bible tries to teach us. I believe this is why Jesus taught in parables to try to make things easier to understand.

Hence the REASON for this thread in the FIRST place.

I'm only confused about your beliefs. I'm not at all confused about mine. To me the Gospel appears very plain and simple and easy to understand. It's just all this three in one and one in three and the same person being different people and able to pray to himself and have different opinions to himself which doesn't seem to make sense to me, but I don't actually believe that is what the Bible tells us. What I see in the Bible is three separate people with three different personalities, all united in one purpose as the Godhead (a bit like the President, Vice President and Chairman of a company). It just baffles me that other churches make it so complicated and I don't understand why they do that. It's not actually a Bible verse that I don't understand.

Matthew 26:39 is where Jesus prays to his father and asks that the cup could pass from him - but goes on to say 'not my will but thine'

Luke 23:34 is where he asks his Father to forgive those who abuse him.

I did try in your previous thread to answer all the points of scripture which you quoted from my own LDS viewpoint but it did take me an awful long time to look them all up and read them all in context. I have tried not to be dismissive of what you believe but to look into it and to put forward what I believe and why.

Nothing that anyone else could tell me could change what I believe about the nature of God because I had already come to that understanding before I'd ever even heard of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The church doctrine merely confirmed what I had already believed. It really just puzzles me how anyone can read the Bible and not see three separate beings.

Did you come to the belief in the Trinity from reading the Bible or from being taught it by your church?

Never tried to change your mind, just tried to read all scripture quoted in context with the full weight of the entire scripture.

And as you said you are confused by my beliefs, I also am confused by yours...

Yet another reason for this discussion

[xanmad33]

1 Corinthians 15 touches upon it as I previously mentioned and expounded upon. When we die we dwell in paradise (thief on the cross) or prison (where inhabitants from the flood also went) until we all resurrect to be judged and rewarded with a glory of salvation. This is our doctrine.

By the way, those who do accept the gospel in the postmortal world still need to be baptized, so we perform baptism on their behalf. "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?" 1 Cor 15:29. This is also our doctrine.

The question was regarding infant baptism Skalen, and that it's not specifically addressed in scriputre but thank you!

and regarding that verse...we can start a whole other thread about that too