LDS What is the reward?

[Jane_Doe]

Just because they profess to be Protestant does not mean that they hold the same beliefs as me.

Many Catholics on this site disagree in a major way. Some may say that they hold the view of one type of doctrine but their posts are way out in left field for any doctrine discussed here.

Ok, I just wanted to make sure you realize that. You'd be amazed how many people don't realize the variety of beliefs under the Christian umbrella.

Again, Paul was accepted by the people at the time. He has been accepted by the groups that have debated, argued, discussed and agreed as to what is Canon.
....
The Bible is accepted, world wide, by far greater theologians than myself, to be the word of God.

(Bolding mine)
I thought we both agreed that popular vote was not a determiner of Truth. If so, why do you three times using the popular vote of sinners as your justification for belief?

Again, I'm not trying to change your beliefs, but can you see why I'm skeptical about determining Truth off of such a method?

God is the same today, yesterday and tomorrow.

Then why do you believe an unchanging God is mute today? Why do you believe He stops calling apostles/prophets?

 

[Rescued One]

Returning to the topic of this thread, why did Jesus die, and who will have eternal life?

John 10
10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
11 I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

1 Timothy 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Mark 10
45 For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.


John 6
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 10
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Are some of the sheep denied eternal life?

Matthew 25
31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

 

[JacksBratt]

Ok, I just wanted to make sure you realize that. You'd be amazed how many people don't realize the variety of beliefs under the Christian umbrella.

(Bolding mine)
I thought we both agreed that popular vote was not a determiner of Truth. If so, why do you three times using the popular vote of sinners as your justification for belief?

There is a difference between believing something due to the fact that many others believe it........and.......believing something because it has been put to the test, scrutinized, studied, and reviewed by councils of learned, accredited men on several occasions, in order to be considered valid, ........and.........believing it because one man said so.

Do you see the three different situations here?

Then why do you believe an unchanging God is mute today? Why do you believe He stops calling apostles/prophets?

You alluded to this before. You also asked if I had biblical proof that God has stopped appointing apostles.

You do realize that you cannot prove a negative. Again, the burden of proof is not my responsibility here.

If I come to the public and state that I have been given a new revelation by an angel of God..... I better make certain that I can justify and validate that it is truly from God.

It is not up to the public to prove why the "new revelation" is not from God.

This is why I hold the Bible to be my soul valid source for God's word and study it to learn, teach, and determine God's will for me.

I do not hold the Book of Mormon to be, in any way, shape or form, the words of God... I believe them to be counterfeit and the twisting of the scripture by the enemy.

Unless someone can prove to me that Joseph Smith was, in fact, given these by our creator.......any application of this text being presented as words from God is dangerous and the book becomes more than just at nice story... it becomes a dangerous tool of the deceiver.

 

[toLiJC]

Jesus said he can only do what he sees the Father do. We take that to mean hes following in his Fathers footsteps. The father has prints in his hands too.

yes, the soul of the Lord, Jesus, may be the next Heavenly Father - He is described as a heir of God the Father

Matthew 21:38 (NASB) "when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir;",

Galatians 4:1 (NASB) "as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave although he is owner of everything",

Hebrews 1:2 (NASB) "His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world."

i believe in one God, the Heavenly Father, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ

1 Corinthians 8:4-6 "As concerning therefore the eating of(i.e. as for the act of following/practicing) those things(i.e. those spiritual/religious things) that are offered in sacrifice unto idols(or: that are unrighteous/heretical), we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords(also: and christs) many,) But to us(i.e. but actually the truth applying to all humans of the universe is such that) there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

Blessings

 

[JacksBratt]

yes, the soul of the Lord, Jesus, may be the next Heavenly Father - He is described as a heir of God the Father

Matthew 21:38 (NASB) "when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir;",

Galatians 4:1 (NASB) "as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave although he is owner of everything",

Hebrews 1:2 (NASB) "His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world."

i believe in one God, the Heavenly Father, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ

1 Corinthians 8:4-6 "As concerning therefore the eating of(i.e. as for the act of following/practicing) those things(i.e. those spiritual/religious things) that are offered in sacrifice unto idols(or: that are unrighteous/heretical), we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords(also: and christs) many,) But to us(i.e. but actually the truth applying to all humans of the universe is such that) there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."

Blessings

The Lord Jesus is God. He is the creator. He does not have a soul. He is God. Only humans have a soul. Angels are beings of the other dimension, animals don't have souls. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the God Head and have no need of a soul. They are Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent. As soon as you give something a soul, it can no longer be Omnipresent or Omnipotent.

 

[fatboys]

The Lord Jesus is God. He is the creator. He does not have a soul. He is God. Only humans have a soul. Angels are beings of the other dimension, animals don't have souls. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the God Head and have no need of a soul. They are Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent. As soon as you give something a soul, it can no longer be Omnipresent or Omnipotent.

What is you definition of soul

 

[Rescued One]

What is you definition of soul

The Mormon definition is spirit and physical body combined.

Genesis 35
18 And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Benoni: but his father called him Benjamin. 19 And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem.

I believe that the soul is the non-physical part of humans that is immortal.

 

[JacksBratt]

What is you definition of soul

The soul is the eternal being that, in essence, is you. It lives in the earthly tent that we call a body. It contains your personality, conscience and is your consciousness. When you die, it is this part of you that leaves the body and goes to be judged. It is the part of you that will be eternally in paradise or eternal separation from God.

God, the Father, Jesus, the Son and the Holy Spirit never had a soul as they are eternal all powerful, ever-present and all knowing entities which, together, make up the God head.

Soul's are what was given humans in order to be "in Gods image". Adam "became a living soul". We all "became a living soul" at the moment we were conceived.

 

[fatboys]

The soul is the eternal being that, in essence, is you. It lives in the earthly tent that we call a body. It contains your personality, conscience and is your consciousness. When you die, it is this part of you that leaves the body and goes to be judged. It is the part of you that will be eternally in paradise or eternal separation from God.

God, the Father, Jesus, the Son and the Holy Spirit never had a soul as they are eternal all powerful, ever-present and all knowing entities which, together, make up the God head.

Soul's are what was given humans in order to be "in Gods image". Adam "became a living soul". We all "became a living soul" at the moment we were conceived.

How can it be an eternal being if it had a beginning

 

[JacksBratt]

How can it be an eternal being if it had a beginning

It was created by our awesome God and it will live forever. For eternity.

Do I have to say "once it has been created, at our conception, it will live for eternity"?

We are, now, eternal beings. Yes, we have a beginning, but we have no end.

 

[fatboys]

It was created by our awesome God and it will live forever. For eternity.

Do I have to say "once it has been created, at our conception, it will live for eternity"?

We are, now, eternal beings. Yes, we have a beginning, but we have no end.

God has eternal life. He has no beginning and no end you believe we had a beginning do how can we gain eternal life?

 

[Rescued One]

God has eternal life. He has no beginning and no end you believe we had a beginning do how can we gain eternal life?

God had no beginning and no end. He did not need to gain eternal life. Eternal life is a gift God gives to all the sheep. The goats on Christ's left don't have eternal life.

John 10
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

John 17
6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. 7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. 8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

1 John 5
11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

 

[JacksBratt]

God has eternal life. He has no beginning and no end you believe we had a beginning do how can we gain eternal life?

He, our creator, created us to be eternal.

If we believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we will be saved. We will have eternal life. We will be eternally in paradise.

John 3:16King James Version (KJV)

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


We are given eternal life through the blood of our savior.

Romans 6:23
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Or..eternal punishment in Hell:

Matthew 25:46King James Version (KJV)

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

[Jane_Doe]

There is a difference between believing something due to the fact that many others believe it........and.......believing something because it has been put to the test, scrutinized, studied, and reviewed by councils of learned, accredited men on several occasions, in order to be considered valid, ........and.........believing it because one man said so.

Yes, I see the difference between:
A) Believing something because one man said it
B) Believing something because many men said it (aka popular vote)
C) Believing something because God said it.

As a disciple of Christ, I go with C. A & B have no sway on me. How about yourself?

You alluded to this before. You also asked if I had biblical proof that God has stopped appointing apostles.

Yes, you didn't answer.

You do realize that you cannot prove a negative. Again, the burden of proof is not my responsibility here.

Heb. 13:8 "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever"
He appointed spokesmen of the church before His birth, trained them during His mortal life, and appointed spokesmen after His ascension. Therefore, He should still be appointing spokesmen today.

Why do you believe God changes and doesn't have spokesmen today?

I do not hold the Book of Mormon to be, in any way, shape or form, the words of God... I believe them to be counterfeit and the twisting of the scripture by the enemy.

Unless someone can prove to me that Joseph Smith was, in fact, given these by our creator.......any application of this text being presented as words from God is dangerous and the book becomes more than just at nice story... it becomes a dangerous tool of the deceiver.

I"m not not talking about any of those specific subjects. I haven't been for quite a while.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Yes, I see the difference between:
A) Believing something because one man said it
B) Believing something because many men said it (aka popular vote)
C) Believing something because God said it.

As a disciple of Christ, I go with C. A & B have no sway on me. How about yourself?

Actually, if you believe in the Book of Mormon then you don't believe in C. Also, if you don't believe in the Word of God, The Bible, then you don't believe in C.

Since you believe the Bible is imperfect and wrong then you don't believe in what God says. You deny what He says. The entire Mormon religion rejects the Word of God and what the Bible says and therefore rejects what God says. If you believed what God said then you wouldn't believe there is a need to add to the already perfect Word of God, The Bible.

Heb. 13:8 "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever"
He appointed spokesmen of the church before His birth, trained them during His mortal life, and appointed spokesmen after His ascension. Therefore, He should still be appointing spokesmen today.

Why do you believe God changes and doesn't have spokesmen today?

There was no Church before His birth or during His mortal life, so He didn't "appoint spokesmen". There were prophets before the Church. When He established the Church after His Ascension it was through the Apostles. Apostle was an office of the Church specifically for the purpose of establishing the Church. There would be no need for Apostles after the original Apostles established the Church.

The problem with Mormonism is that they deny the original Apostles' work and they deny what Christ said about how He would preserve their work and the Church. Mormons deny this because Joseph Smith commanded them to. Joseph Smith fabricated his own false gospel and in order to spread it he had to discredit the Truth, so he made up lies about a "complete apostasy" which never, ever happened. The lies of Joseph Smith are right from Satan himself and are directly intended to call God a liar.

When you look at Joseph Smith's life he was a constant liar, right through his sexual deviancy in becoming a polygamist and lying to his wife, Emma, about his many wives. He committed adultery in marrying other men's wives and he married underage girls. He was a liar all his life and what you are believing is Joseph Smith's lies, not what God has said. You are believing the lies that contradict and deny what God has said. That is the basis of Mormonism - it is anti-God and anti-Christ.

 

[toLiJC]

The Lord Jesus is God. He is the creator. He does not have a soul. He is God. Only humans have a soul. Angels are beings of the other dimension, animals don't have souls. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the God Head and have no need of a soul. They are Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent. As soon as you give something a soul, it can no longer be Omnipresent or Omnipotent.

if the Lord Jesus Christ has no soul, then how did He feel pain when He was beaten and crucified on the cross?!

Matthew 17:12 (NASB) "Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.",

Mark 9:12 (NASB) "how is it written of the Son of Man that He will suffer many things and be treated with contempt?",

Luke 9:22 (NASB) "The Son of Man must suffer many things",

Luke 24:46 (NASB) "Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day",

Mark 15:34 (NASB) "At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" which is translated, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"",

Matthew 27:50 (NASB) "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.",

1 Peter 4:1 (NASB) "Christ has suffered in the flesh"

Blessings

 

[JacksBratt]

if the Lord Jesus Christ has no soul, then how did He feel pain when He was beaten and crucified on the cross?!

He felt pain because He was God/man. He was God in human form, He endured all the things that a human would endure.

This has nothing to do with the fact that Jesus, God's Son having or not having a soul.

Think of it this way. Your soul is the created part of you. It is "you". God created our souls as living consciousness in order for us to exist. He also created an earthly body for us to live in while on this earth.

When we are concieved, our created soul, the part of us that is "us" is mated or paired with an earthly vessel or body.

Our soul lives in this earthly vessel and is born, grows and matures. When we die, our soul leaves this earthly vessel and goes to the dimension that is inhabited by God, angels fallen angels and demons.

God, had no need of a soul. He is, Jesus is and the Holy spirit is uncreated beings. They are totally different than any created being. They just "are" and always have "been".

It's like you building a battery operated toy car. It needs batteries to "come alive" and move around, flash its lights, make sounds. Take the batteries out and it "dies"....

Yet.........you, the creator, have no batteries....

 

[JacksBratt]

Yes, I see the difference between:
A) Believing something because one man said it
B) Believing something because many men said it (aka popular vote)

In any validation, one person stating something and calling it a "fact" will have to endure some scrutiny in order to be deemed truthful.

This will mean 1/further observations of the "claimed fact" by others. 2/ investigation of the validity by accredited experts in the field. 3/ agreement by councils of accredited experts in the field with due processes to validate the "claimed fact".

This is different than a whole town believing that one man is a prophet of God and an outsider being told that they cannot question it due to the simple fact of democracy.

The men that agonized over what should and shouldn't be considered canon have been accepted for hundreds of years as being men of God and their descision has been anything but self serving, but has been to ensure that the Holy Bible contains the true word of God based on the translation of the Holy Scriptures.
They did not make up new words, new books, new information. They translated existing text and discerned on which ones should be accepted and which ones should not.

Joseph Smith, made up stuff and presented it as God's word.

End of story.

C) Believing something because God said it.

As a disciple of Christ, I go with C. A & B have no sway on me. How about yourself?

Give me an example of something "God said" that is not a biblical scripture.

The biblical scripture is all we have that is what "God said".

He may speak to you personally, and does this all the time. However, He does not and has not told someone, something that needs to be written down, printed and distributed to the entire world as "new" information from the mouth of God.

If this were not the case, we would have a massive amount of "new" words of God as men and women claim that they have something to say that God told them He wanted the world to hear..

Yes, you didn't answer.

Ya, I did.

I said that you cannot prove a negative. I said the burden of proof is not on me but on you.

Heb. 13:8 "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever"
He appointed spokesmen of the church before His birth, trained them during His mortal life, and appointed spokesmen after His ascension. Therefore, He should still be appointing spokesmen today.

Your conclusion of " Therefore, He should still be appointing spokesmen today." Is unfounded and flawed. You cannot just quote some random scripture, then say "therefore" paste in some fabricated conclusion and state that it is backed by scripture....

 

[Jane_Doe]

In any validation, one person stating something and calling it a "fact" will have to endure some scrutiny in order to be deemed truthful.

This will mean 1/further observations of the "claimed fact" by others. 2/ investigation of the validity by accredited experts in the field. 3/ agreement by councils of accredited experts in the field with due processes to validate the "claimed fact".

This is different than a whole town believing that one man is a prophet of God and an outsider being told that they cannot question it due to the simple fact of democracy.

The men that agonized over what should and shouldn't be considered canon have been accepted for hundreds of years as being men of God and their descision has been anything but self serving, but has been to ensure that the Holy Bible contains the true word of God based on the translation of the Holy Scriptures.
They did not make up new words, new books, new information. They translated existing text and discerned on which ones should be accepted and which ones should not.

Ok, so you follow men. (This is part of the reason I could never be a Protestant, but I still respect your beliefs and am interested in learning more out of that respect/good-neighbor philosophy).

The biblical scripture is all we have that is what "God said".

He may speak to you personally, and does this all the time. However, He does not and has not told someone, something that needs to be written down, printed and distributed to the entire world as "new" information from the mouth of God.

If this were not the case, we would have a massive amount of "new" words of God as men and women claim that they have something to say that God told them He wanted the world to hear..

All of what you say here is according to men. Scripture makes no such claims.

Your conclusion of " Therefore, He should still be appointing spokesmen today." Is unfounded and flawed. You cannot just quote some random scripture, then say "therefore" paste in some fabricated conclusion and state that it is backed by scripture....

I did not bother to quote more because I assumed you also believe God is unchanging, and hence i didn't need to lob a bunch of scriptures to prove that point. Was I incorrect in that assumption-- in other words, do you believe God DOES change?
If you believe God DOES change, we can talk about that very fundamental difference.
If you believe God does NOT change, how do you explain the sudden lack of His spokesman?

 

[JacksBratt]

All of what you say here is according to men. Scripture makes no such claims.

Everything we have, that is considered to be the word of God, was written down by men. Everything.

The tablet that contains the ten commandments was written by the finger of God, in stone. But, we don't have them.

The rest of the accepted scriptures, are penned by me and solidly believed to be God Breathed, inspired words of God.

The difference between the canon, along with how it has been validated and Joseph Smith and his book is obvious.

Like I said, it was obtained by means that are not scriptural, and it contains truths combined with contradictions of the word of God.

The canon was verification of transcripts that already existed from the time of Christ. Joseph Smith made up his own transcripts.

If every Tom Dick and Harry who decided that they have had a new revelation from God, wrote a book, and we believed that it was true, we would be in a spaghetti bowl of scriptural folly.

You have failed to validate the point you make about " point C" in your previous post, stating something "God Said"

Give me a source for something "God Said" without using accepted scriptures.