LDS LDS folk, a question for you

Ironhold

Member
Feb 14, 2014
7,625
1,463
✟201,967.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Single
@HeartenedHeart -

LDS - LDS folk, a question for you

Long posts, like #132, are unlikely to be read by most people due simply to how long they are; I'm used to reading corporate financial filings and I was still unconsciously glossing over things.

What, specifically, was the gist of what you were trying to say there?
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
The washing of the feet is a sacred ordinance so I will not say much about it, but you can read this: Washing of Feet

It is a very sacred ceremony for us also. Because of that, we have no problems discussing it. We do not film it mostly because people have to take off socks, and though women don't normally need to take hose off--they dry so quickly, they do compression stockings and such so it is a more private matter. We love this ceremony and wish everyone to do it. We do not believe in hiding our ceremonies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: He is the way
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
No it's just a long answer like that is like a filibuster. We're having a simple dialog. If I went off and posted 3 pages (a bit of an exaggeration), it's kind of defensive, yeah.

It's really very simple. Isaiah 43:10 says no gods have or every will be formed and there is one God. It seems this one verse is really all I need to answer any number of your pages. But if you could tell me in simple terms what you think this means that would help.

Yahweh was indeed making this statement about no other gods being formed before or after him. There are 2 ways, I can answer this question:

1) God the Father and God the Son and God the HS can always speak in the first person. They are so in unison and perfect harmony, it is as if they are 1 God. So even though there are 3 Gods, any one of them can speak as if he is God, the only God. It is not a lie.

If you say that is a lie, then your point of view, becomes a lie too. If Yahweh, God the Son is speaking and saying there are not other Gods formed before or after, he is not telling them the whole truth about the separate and distinct Persons that also exist, and are standing to his left and to his right. Because for sure these separate and distinct Persons have also existed for ever. Should God the Son disclose that there are 2 other Persons involved too?

Also from the scriptures we know there are other gods, but as Paul says, "there are gods many and lords many, but for us, there is only one God the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ". (BTW Paul just spoke of 2 Gods, but did not mention the HS?)

2) This is the position of The Church of Jesus Christ. We believe there are other gods, but for us and this world there is only 1 God the Father and one Lord Jesus Christ, and they are one God. And they are the only God with which we have to do and they will be our God for everlasting to everlasting.

One other thought. Since the Jews do not believe in Jesus Christ is there a possibility that they purposefully changed scripture to make sure we knew that
God the Father was the only God/Person that existed? No God the Son, no God the Holy Spirit?
 
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The washing of the feet is a sacred ordinance so I will not say much about it, but you can read this: Washing of Feet
Thank you for the article, but it only speaks of Joseph Smith and some others in the past.

Do you have any information that LDS do this (wash feet) presently today? That is what I am curious to know.
 
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
No, you could not write a book like the Book of Mormon in 85 days.
I have written thousands of pages in 85 days. It is not so hard, nor difficult, especially having access to resources such as the KJB, and other historical materials, as Joseph Smith had, and as I have.

The point being made by myself, as that when I asked for evidence in the mouth of two or three witnesses in regards 1 Cor. 15:29, only that text was given, and afterward an explicit LDS source.

That would be proving your doctrine by your doctrine, not from two or three witnesses from scripture (KJB).

I even gave the example of WTS practices and their point to WTS sources when asked for further evidence. Should I accept their reasoning and WTS sources proving their doctrine?

Joseph Smith dictated the Book of Mormon in 85 days to scribes.
So the story goes.

He had no written materials with him to help him with the work either.
This is not historically accurate, but I am not here to debate the point of how the BoM came to be. My question, was specific to 1 Cor. 15:29 and evidence from scripture (KJB). Where are the two or three witnesses from it, as LDS sources say I need to have?

How can you use the BoM (which by the way you cited Doctrine and Covenants, not the BoM - LDS - LDS folk, a question for you , which is switching things up) to prove your doctrine concerning 1 Cor. 15:29, since the BoM is LDS doctrine?

Should I accept the WTS teachings on blood-transfusions and organ transplants when they quote a single verse of the KJB, and then refer to their WTS material for the remainder?

When the Old Testament was written long before Christ's birth there was only one verse that said love thy neighbor as thyself:
(Old Testament | Leviticus 19:18)

18 ¶ Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
This is simply not so. It is all through the OT:

Exo. 20:16 "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."

Exo. 20:17 "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's."

Lev. 19:34: "But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself;"

Deut. 10:15 "love ye therefore the stranger"

Psa. 15:3 "He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour."

Psa. 109:4 "For my love they are my adversaries: but I give myself unto prayer." (loving enemy)

Psa. 109:5 "And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love." (loving enemy)

Pro. 3:28 "Say not unto thy neighbour, Go, and come again, and to morrow I will give; when thou hast it by thee."

Pro. 3:29 "Devise not evil against thy neighbour, seeing he dwelleth securely by thee."

Pro. 14:21 "He that despiseth his neighbour sinneth: but he that hath mercy on the poor, happy is he."

Zec. 8:17 "And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour; and love no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the LORD."

Etc.

However, even though it was only in the Old Testament one time it was still a valid commandment.
It is all over the OT, not merely one time, and said in differing ways.

What I asked for, was two or three witnesses in regards what LDS teach on 1 Cor. 15:29, from OT or NT. What I received was LDS explicit material.

I do see your point. That is why prayer is so important as is repentance. We can repent and pray for guidance in our lives. God helps those who turn to Him.
Okay, seeing the point, do you have any further witnesses in the OT or NT on the LDS doctrine of 1 Cor. 15:29?

I understand about repentance, which is turning back to God, as per Acts 4:24, 14:15-16, 15:19,21, etc.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
@HeartenedHeart -

LDS - LDS folk, a question for you

Long posts, like #132, are unlikely to be read by most people due simply to how long they are; I'm used to reading corporate financial filings and I was still unconsciously glossing over things.

What, specifically, was the gist of what you were trying to say there?
Read this section:

"This is addressed even specifically on Video 206:


However, if you do not desire to consider it, allow me to share with you something, and ask another question about the LDS theology on this subject (as this is the ask LDS a question thread).

Is John 20:19, referring to the same events as at Luke 24:36?

If you say 'yes' (and rightly so, see the TSK cross references), it means that it was actually the second day of the week, since the day begins as "evening". John 20:19 refers to this very "evening", at the end of the first day of the week, which means it was actually the second day of the week in the evening portion as per Luke 24:13-35. Notice, Jesus rose from the dead on the first day of the week before sunrise (Luk. 24:1, as per His pattern of getting up early to pray unto His father; Mar. 1:35, see also type in Joshua), and yet spent some time with various disciples at various places, but had not yet met with all the Apostles yet. Jesus meets with the two on the road to Emmaus, and walks with them from Jerusalem down to this city (approx./ 7 miles), and as it grew toward evening (sundown) the two invite Jesus into their home for a supper. Jesus breaks bread and vanishes from their sight (He was still there, and walked back with them unnoticed, and enters with them as the door opened). The two run/walk all the way back to Jerusalem as it was "evening" (nighttime), and then Jesus appears to them all, which means it was actually the second day of the week, according to Biblical time (Gen.), not the "first day" any longer which ended with sundown long before they got to Jerusalem.

Most people do not read their Gospels carefully to catch this nuance.

Also, from that day, (first) evening of the second day, they were to meet again 8 days later, which no matter how you calculate that, inclusive or exclusive time, is also not a first day of the week either.

Jesus met with the disciples on numerous occasions, such as ten days before Pentecost, which if we take Pentecost as the first day of the week, ten days before when Jesus was with them and ascended, was also not a first day of the week.

The Jews and Christians met daily before Jesus and after Jesus ascension. None of that 'changes' God's Law, and there is no such commandment in NT either for so doing. it's a myth, and even the LDS sources say that it was not Jesus that changed it, but it was in the "meridian" time by the "church", by unknown persons long after Jesus ascended. (Do you want that LDS quote?)

Acts 20:7 is another instance, of a night meeting, not during the day. It also says nothing about a weekly re-currance, but is recorded for the farewell to Paul (who was going to Rome to die eventually), preaching unto Midnight and beyond, and for the miracle of Eutychus. Also before one says, "LORD's supper' here, notice that no such terms are used, and the 'cup' is not present, neither footwashing, but only the simple words of 'break bread' (Acts 2:42,46) and 'eating', at least twice, at night, even well into midnight and beyond, while Paul at sunrise walked many miles to catch the boat.

The disciples met "daily" (Acts 2:46-47, 5:42, 6:1, 16:5, etc), but wherein any of that is a commandment to alter the Ten Commandments, which LDS doctrine also says is unchangeable (Do you want that quote too)?

Jews who kept sabbath before Jesus was even born also met daily in the Temple and synagogue, even as Jesus did when He came (Mat. 26:55; Mar. 14:49; Luk. 19:47, 22:53, etc), and yet wherein was the alteration from the 7th day sabbath to another? There is none, not from Gen. to Rev.

Peter and Paul both cite Exo. 20:11, in Acts 4:24 & Acts 14:15-16 in asking person to repent unto the Creator (Redeemer/Re-Creator) God, and is found in Rev. 10:6, 14:7, etc and all throughout Acts (Acts 13, 15,16,17,18) and a whole 2 chapters in Hebrews 4.

Daniel warned us of the power that would think to change times and laws of the Most High God, Dan. 7:25, and is found mentioned again in Rev. 14:6-12, and a few other places.

If you carefully read Acts, they continually met upon the sabbath (the 7th day), in the Temple, synagogue, nature, etc, and Paul in one city for a whole year and half, but you will never find any such scripture that says they did so for the first day of the week.

In fact, every single 'first [day] of the week' text in the NT proves the continuance of the 7th day sabbath as the culmination of the week of God's created order, and His rest, while the 'first' [day] was just a common work day, a number towards that day ..."
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Not so (bara), also I never cited philosophers. I cited scripture, which speaks plainly in Hebrew or English.

You may not have but I said that the idea of "matter from nothing" had to have come from 2nd, and 3rd century philosophers, because the definition of "bara" does not suggest "matter from nothing", and your 1 scripture from Hebrews even uses the word "framed", which does not mean "from nothing".

The idea of "things which are seen were not made of things which do appear", sounds exactly like, for instance; the mountains which appear, are made up of the dirt and rock which do appear, but the atoms and molecules which really make them up, do not appear.

God spake that which came from His mind, (which is not nothing).
atom
Which 2nd or 3rd century philosopher or church father said this? You would be hard pressed to find a scripture that would tell us what makes up God's mind.

I do believe that when God said, Let there be light, existing atoms and molecules heard his voice and obeyed, and light was created. Have you ever heard that atoms and molecules can hear the word of God and obey? Interesting concept. How do you think Jesus walked on water. How do you think that Jesus calmed the weather? etc. etc., etc., etc., etc.

Again, why do you have to doubt what scripture plainly states and re-work it to suit your ideology? You do not see that you do this, neither the danger of it?

I did not rework anything, I explained how God hung the earth in space. Besides, who said God hung the earth on nothing? Did he know all the tools that God had at his disposal to hang the earth exactly where he wanted it to be?

Gravity, is a word used to describe a phenomena, not that that is an actual thing (matter).

You are right, it is at least one of the phenomena that God uses to hang the earth where he wishes

The 'habital zone', or 'goldielocks' expressions, is the ID movements terms and is really non-sequitur to the matter of 'creation'. God's word says:

goldielocks is a term that expesses the idea that a superior being (God) knew exactly what he was doing when he hung the earth where he did. A few degrees further away or toward the sun, and you would not have the earth with people on it. His plan was not to just have an earth, it was to people that earth, hence an earth in the goldielocks position.

What is "Earth' made of? It is made of 'earth' ...

How could I possibly argue with this statement. Except, I am sure you know about atoms and molecules etc., etc., etc.

Again, LDS have an infinite regress here, as elsewhere, for where did the 'atoms', 'molecules' come from?

The only thing from scripture that we know has existed from everlasting is God. Tell me what the scriptures say He is made of.

We believe, and I am sure you do not, and that is OK too, that matter is not created and has existed forever too. The reason we believe that, is because you cannot destroy it. You can only change it's form. If you cannot destroy it, then you can never create it in the first place.

Belief must be validated by scripture, for belief to be true, in harmony with what God stated. Let God be true and every man a ...

This might sound blasphemous to you, but the bible does not contain the totality of knowledge that exists in the world. I am not bound to by the bible. In the scope of all that has been done and said since the beginning of the world, the bible contains about 1/100000000000000 of what happened, and even the word of God. So no, I do not have to run things past the bible to have a belief in something. It is nice when what I believe is spoken of in the bible. You actually run into the same problem, you just won't admit it.

Re-citing Gen. 1:1-8 is not furthering this line of discussion, for the important verses are vs 1 and 2.

The reason I went to 8 was because that ended day 2. Why was that important. Because you seem to think because God said in 1 that he created the heavens and the earth, that that was enough said about the earth. However, you must remember it says in 1 he created the "heavens" and the "earth". Then in 2 he says the earth was void and dark, but does not say that he created it or said for it to be like he does with the "heavens". For in 7-8 he describes how he created the "heavens" in day 2. What day did he describe the creation of "earth". He doesn't, because it already existed, and he just called forth the existing material by his word. Then on day 1 created light for the earth. Day 2, Day 3 and so forth.
Remember create does not mean "make something out of nothing".

Other (corrupt) English translations are a distortion to what the Hebrew says, as the word used means to be 'set up', in that context, not created, made into existence, etc:

So you believe that all other versions of the bible are corrupt except the KJV? Well, at least in this instant, it serves your purpose.

His glorious form, His glorious body, as we see throughout the scripture (Jhn. 17:5; Phil. 2:6, 3:21, etc).

What glorious body did he have before the incarnation? Was it a body of spirit, or did it have flesh and bone?

I deny this with all my heart. I have not always existed. I am finite, having beginning. I am not "I AM" (always existing). I came to be. I do not inherently have eternal/everlasting life. I am not Life, I was given life by JEHOVAH Elohiym who is Life.

You speak the same words as the serpent, yet in another form, and are unaware of what you do or say, nor of what it means to the Everlasting Gospel itself.

Sorry, you are made up of indestructible atoms and molecules, you have always existed. Your intelligence (your mind and will) can not be created or destroyed. Spirit cannot be created or destroyed. You are made of the same infinite material that God and Jesus are made of, that is why you are god in embryo. Now, through your experience as the ages roll by, you will have the opportunity to be like God. Not so for a tree. Their intelligence is to weak to be like God. But your intelligence is strong and your spirit is forever and ever. You were made in the image of God, a tree was made in the image of a tree. It all has to do with the intelligence of both. You do believe that a tree has intelligence? A tree is a tree because of its level of intelligence. A dog is a dog, because of their level of intelligence. You are a human being because of your superior level of intelligence. The most intelligent of all the children of God is Jesus Christ. That is why he has been sinless from the beginning, and was receive Godhood before this world was even created.

Spirit deals with 'heart/mind' and the 'breath' also, as many examples could be cited. It doesn't mean that we always existed.

We have very little information from the bible about intelligence and spirit and whether it has existed forever or not, you could not tell me from the scriptures.

God always existed. God is I AM. Not we, for we 'came to be' by the will of I AM.

When?

Christians are brothers of Jesus through adoption.

Adoption is another thing altogether. Here on earth we are adopted into the household of faith. Jesus Christ is the head of that household.

But he himself says that he and you and I were his brothers when he told Mary this important information at the time of he saw her right after his resurrection.
See John 20:17. He says "he ascends to his Father and our Father". How is God the Father our Father. He is the Father of our spirits, like I have been talking about.
(See Hebrews 12:9)
Lots of other scriptures for that, but running out of time.

Lucifer was once the fellow minister(ing angel) of 'Jesus' (who was His superior (infinitely so), being Michael). The Son of God eternally existed (Jhn 1:1, etc), but not so with Lucifer (though he would like to posit the idea otherwise, Eze. 28:13,15).

I believe he was a ministering angel for God the Father, being very close to him. But between lucifer and God was Jesus, his brother, his perfect and sinless brother, whom he began to hate because of his sinlessness and because the Father loved him. lucifer could not overtake him in righteousness, so he tried to take over heaven with a war. He lost and was banned to the earth. His first recorded appearance on earth was in the garden of Eden. He lost there too.
But as you can see, at one time lucifer was perfect like Jesus and God love him too. But that changed and now satan is not loved any more and will be out of the presence of God for eternity, like 1/3 of our spirit brothers and sisters who followed him.

The Nature of Divinity is uncreated and uncreatable.

Lucifers nature is created, and therefore, destructible.

Lucifer also has his own intelligence and spirit (uncreated). He will always be outside the presence of God for eternity, but he is immortal and cannot not be destroyed, ever.

Are angels called the 'sons of God' in certain places in scripture, 'Yes', but this is not equating them with the same standing as the original eternal Son of God.

We equate them with exactly the same nature as Jesus. Jesus was the only begotten Son of God in the flesh. But there were billions of sons and daughters of God in the spirit.
Jesus was the first spirit child of God (Colossians 1:15, and Revelations 3:14). We and lucifer came later.
Jesus was also the only spirit child that was begotten by God the Father in the flesh. Mary was his mortal mother, and God the Father was his mortal Father. You and I had mortal fathers and mothers. Big difference.
 
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You may not have but I said that the idea of "matter from nothing"
"May not" have? I definitely did not and stated so. This is given to be doubly clear.

had to have come from 2nd, and 3rd century philosophers, because the definition of "bara" does not suggest "matter from nothing"
Which lexicons do you have in evidence of your claim that it cannot ever mean 'from nothing'? I acknowledge the multiple definitions and uses, which includes also 'from nothing', and 'from something'.

Here is a lexicon, which clearly states that 'bara' can indeed carry that definition:

"... bârâ’ specifically means 'to create something new' and this is how the majority of the early Jewish writers took it. ... bârâ’ is never followed by the material out of which something is made and thus implies creatio ex-nihilo, 'creation out of nothing', or at the very least 'innovation'. ... A good example of the 'newness' with which is associated is in the phrase in Numbers 16:30, "But if the LORD creates a new thing..." or in the strange verse, Jeremiah 31:22, "For the LORD has created a new thing in the earth - A woman shall encompass a man". ..." - Bârâ'' - Hebrew Thoughts- Language Studies - StudyLight.org

Another:

"... (a) First of all, and before any creature was, God made heaven and earth out of nothing. ..." - Geneva Bible Translation Notes

Another:

"... These are said to be "created", that is, to be made out of nothing; for what pre-existent matter to this chaos could there be out of which they could be formed? And the apostle says, "through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear", Heb_11:3. And though this word is sometimes used, and even in this chapter, of the production of creatures out of pre-existent matter, as in Gen_1:21 yet, as Nachmanides observes, there is not in the holy language any word but this here used, by which is signified the bringing anything into being out of nothing; and many of the Jewish interpreters, as Aben Ezra, understand by creation here, a production of something into being out of nothing; and Kimchi says (e) that creation is a making some new thing, and a bringing something out of nothing: and it deserves notice, that this word is only used of God; and creation must be the work of God, for none but an almighty power could produce something out of nothing. ..." - John Gill's Exposition of the Bible and Notations on Genesis 1:1, Bara.

Another:


"... Created - Caused existence where previously to this moment there was no being. The rabbins, who are legitimate judges in a case of verbal criticism on their own language, are unanimous in asserting that the word ברא bara expresses the commencement of the existence of a thing, or egression from nonentity to entity. It does not in its primary meaning denote the preserving or new forming things that had previously existed, as some imagine, but creation in the proper sense of the term, though it has some other acceptations in other places. The supposition that God formed all things out of a pre-existing, eternal nature, is certainly absurd, for if there had been an eternal nature besides an eternal God, there must have been two self-existing, independent, and eternal beings, which is a most palpable contradiction. ..." - Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible and Notation on Genesis 1:1, Bara.

Another:

"... "... bārā', “create, give being to something new.” ... Its object may be anything: matter Gen_1:1; ... Whenever anything absolutely new - that is, not involved in anything previously extant - is called into existence, there is creation Num_16:30. ..." ..." - Albert Barnes Notes on the Bible on Genesis 1:1, Bara.

Another:

"... created — not formed from any pre-existing materials, but made out of nothing. ..." - Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary on Genesis 1:1, Bara.

Another:

"... “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” - Heaven and earth have not existed from all eternity, but had a beginning; nor did they arise by emanation from an absolute substance, but were created by God. This sentence, which stands at the head of the records of revelation, is not a mere heading, nor a summary of the history of the creation, but a declaration of the primeval act of God, by which the universe was called into being. That this verse is not a heading merely, is evident from the fact that the following account of the course of the creation commences with w (and), which connects the different acts of creation with the fact expressed in Gen_1:1, as the primary foundation upon which they rest. בְּרשִׁיח (in the beginning) is used absolutely, like ἐν ἀρχῇ in Joh_1:1, and מֵרֵאשִׁיח in Isa_46:10. The following clause cannot be treated as subordinate, either by rendering it, “in the beginning when God created ..., the earth was,” etc., or “in the beginning when God created...(but the earth was then a chaos, etc.), God said, Let there be light” (Ewald and Bunsen). The first is opposed to the grammar of the language, which would require Gen_1:2 to commence with הָאָרֶץ וַתְּהִי; the second to the simplicity of style which pervades the whole chapter, and to which so involved a sentence would be intolerable, apart altogether from the fact that this construction is invented for the simple purpose of getting rid of the doctrine of a creatio ex nihilo, which is so repulsive to modern Pantheism. רֵאשִׁיח in itself is a relative notion, indicating the commencement of a series of things or events; but here the context gives it the meaning of the very first beginning, the commencement of the world, when time itself began. The statement, that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, not only precludes the idea of the eternity of the world a parte ante, but shows that the creation of the heaven and the earth was the actual beginning of all things. The verb בָּרָא, indeed, to judge from its use in Jos_17:15, Jos_17:18, where it occurs in the Piel (to hew out), means literally “to cut, or new,” but in Kal it always means to create, and is only applied to a divine creation, the production of that which had no existence before. It is never joined with an accusative of the material, although it does not exclude a pre-existent material unconditionally, but is used for the creation of man (Gen_1:27; Gen_5:1-2), and of everything new that God creates, whether in the kingdom of nature (Num_16:30) or of that of grace (Exo_34:10; Psa_51:10, etc.). In this verse, however, the existence of any primeval material is precluded by the object created: “the heaven and the earth.” ..." - Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the OT, Genesis 1:1, Bara.

Again:

"... the verb ברא (bara') denotes creation ex nihilo. ..." - באר | Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary (Old Testament Hebrew)

Another (written long before 2-3rd century AD):

"... 2Ma 7:28 peto nate aspicias in caelum et terram et ad omnia quae in eis sunt et intellegas quia ex nihilo fecit illa Deus et hominum genus ..." - 2 Maccabees 7:28 (translation into English: "Son, look upon heaven and earth, and all that is in them: and consider that God made them out of nothing")

Who has the Greek Philosophy?

"... Philo, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras from Athens, Hermogenes, Clement of Alexandria made statements that seem to indicate that they did not hold to the concept of creation ex nihilo. Philo, for instance, postulated pre-existent matter alongside God. It is fascinating how this thinking is inline with Greek philosophy (when speaking on the subject of pre-existence) ..." - The Creator (Heb: bara)

and your 1 scripture from Hebrews even uses the word "framed", which does not mean "from nothing".
I did not merely cite "1 scripture". I cited numerous:

Gen. 1:1; Exo. 20:8-11; Job 26:7, 38:4-6; Psa. 33:6,9, 90:2; Pro. 8:23-26; Isa. 43:7, 45:18; John 1:1-3; Eph. 3:9; Col. 1:16-17; Heb 2:10, 3:4, 11:3; 1 John 1:1-3; Rev. 4:11.

Thus my question:

"What is "Earth' made of? It is made of 'earth' ...

Again, LDS have an infinite regress here, as elsewhere, for where did the 'atoms', 'molecules' come from?"

Look at Hebrews 11:3, again:

Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

The word "framed" means brought to perfect, as Gen. 2:1-3 show. That word is in the context of "not made of things which do appear".

Molecules may be seen upon specialized microscopes and thus indeed do "appear" - molecules under the microscope - Google Search

Thus God also creates a new heart, not from the old material, but by His creative word, bringing into existence that which had not existence before, except as God's word comes from the mind/heart of God.

"... for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh."

In Genesis, "God said ...", and thus, "... he spake, and it was ..." (Psa. 33:9)., see also Pro. 8.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: mmksparbud
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The idea of "things which are seen were not made of things which do appear", sounds exactly like, for instance; the mountains which appear, are made up of the dirt and rock which do appear, but the atoms and molecules which really make them up, do not appear.
I just demonstrated that they (molecules) do appear. See above.

Which 2nd or 3rd century philosopher or church father said this?
I am not quoting from any such source. Why do you insist upon straw-manning what I said, and ad-libbing to it?

I was directly referencing the Bible.

Things were created from out of the eternal mind of God, as per texts cited above.

"... for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh."

In Genesis, "God said ...", and thus, "... he spake, and it was ..." (Psa. 33:9)., see also Pro. 8.

You would be hard pressed to find a scripture that would tell us what makes up God's mind.
Not really, see Phil. 2:6 about the "mind" (for we have the mind of Christ), and we are given instruction about what was on/in that mind. In Jer. 19:5, 32:35, we also see what was not in God's mind. We can know the expressed will of God.

Lev. 24:12 And they put him in ward, that the mind of the LORD might be shewed them.

1 Sam. 2:35 And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do according to that which is in mine heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed for ever.

Jer. 44:21 The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, ye, and your fathers, your kings, and your princes, and the people of the land, did not the LORD remember them, and came it not into his mind?

Jer. 15:1 Then said the LORD unto me, Though Moses and Samuel stood before me, yet my mind could not be toward this people: cast them out of my sight, and let them go forth.

I do believe that when God said, Let there be light, existing atoms and molecules heard his voice and obeyed, and light was created.
From where did the 'atoms and molecules' come from? The LDS theology makes those things eternal, while 'gods' must come into existence. You have matter (created) and God (Creator) inverted.

Have you ever heard that atoms and molecules can hear the word of God and obey?
Oh yes, and I also heard that such things come into existence by God, and are not of themselves eternally existing, for only God is eternally existing, the, "I AM".

Interesting concept. How do you think Jesus walked on water. How do you think that Jesus calmed the weather? etc. etc., etc., etc., etc.
Jesus walked on water, by Faith. Jesus calmed the weather by His creative Word, for all elements are under His control, having made those elements.

I did not rework anything, I explained how God hung the earth in space.

Besides, who said God hung the earth on nothing? Did he know all the tools that God had at his disposal to hang the earth exactly where he wanted it to be?
Pro. 8.

You are right, it is at least one of the phenomena that God uses to hang the earth where he wishes
We are not discussing 'gravity', but the definition of creation.

goldielocks is a term that expesses the idea that a superior being (God) knew exactly what he was doing when he hung the earth where he did. A few degrees further away or toward the sun, and you would not have the earth with people on it. His plan was not to just have an earth, it was to people that earth, hence an earth in the goldielocks position.
This is still non-sequitur to the matter at hand.

How could I possibly argue with this statement. Except, I am sure you know about atoms and molecules etc., etc., etc.
I am interested in the 'etc., etc., etc.' that you refer to. How far regressive does that go? Is it an infinite regress as I stated, and am asking you?

The only thing from scripture that we know has existed from everlasting is God.
I have been saying this the whole time, and since God (and His word) is uncreated, and molecules are created, they are not God, neither everlasting, but perishable:

Psa. 102:26 They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed:

Isa. 50:9 Behold, the Lord GOD will help me; who is he that shall condemn me? lo, they all shall wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them up.

Isa. 51:6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.

Heb. 1:11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
 
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Tell me what the scriptures say He is made of.
The Bible says, "divine nature".

To go beyond that is beyond my ken, and beyond what scripture says.

This is entirely different that the nature of created things, such as angels or idols:

Heb. 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

Gal. 4:8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.

For angels are made, and brought into existence, and not eternal:

Heb. 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

Eze_28:13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

Eze_28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

Lucifer, had a beginning in time, even upon a specific "day" so long ago, and soon he will come to an end, and be no more:

Eze_28:19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

To "never ... be any more" is to cease from existence completely.

Lucifer is not eternal. Never has been, never will be.

We believe, and I am sure you do not, and that is OK too, that matter is not created and has existed forever too.
I know you believe that, and yet you stated above:

"The only thing from scripture that we know has existed from everlasting is God."

This must mean that you believe that God is made up of the elements of creation, yes or no? please clarify that point for me.

The reason we believe that, is because you cannot destroy it.
You are correct, "I (you)" cannot create, neither destroy it, and that is because you and I are not God, we are created, God is uncreated Creator. God can and did bring things into existence, and can wipe them from existence, as though they had not been. Case in point, sin, itself.

When Christ Jesus blots out sin, soon, those who have remained in Him, will be as though they had never sinned, and sin shall not arise a second time (Nah. 1:9).

You can only change it's form. If you cannot destroy it, then you can never create it in the first place.
You and I cannot. God can. We are not God (in spite of the contrary claims being made). The two things are not equal, in that though we cannot, does not negate God from so doing as God has and will do.

This might sound blasphemous to you, but the bible does not contain the totality of knowledge that exists in the world.
It contains the necessary knowledge for salvation (2 Tim. 3:16-17), and I never said anything else. Creation is also a second book to the Bible, and must be subject to it however.

I am not bound to by the bible.
I am bound to test all things by it (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11, etc), including those claiming the gift of prophecy/prohethood (1 Cor. 14:32; 1 Thes. 5:21; etc.).

In the scope of all that has been done and said since the beginning of the world, the bible contains about 1/100000000000000 of what happened, and even the word of God.
Did you know that God told us the end, from the beginning? Isa. 46:9-10:

AWHN-Bible-7000-Years.jpg


See for yourself - TinyUpload.com - best file hosting solution, with no limits, totaly free
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So no, I do not have to run things past the bible to have a belief in something.
Only if you want to know if the belief is true:

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

1Co 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

1Th 5:20 Despise not prophesyings.
1Th 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

It is nice when what I believe is spoken of in the bible. You actually run into the same problem, you just won't admit it.
I have no such problem, as I test all things by the scriptures, as commanded to. My beliefs are always tested by what God's word (in English, KJB) says. I also have the lesser light which God sent, and that which is in creation, but even both of these are to be tested by scripture (KJB).

My eyes (and ears) may deceive me, but the word of God cannot be broken (John 10:35) and is no lie (John 17:17) and that which is more accurate than even the eye-witness of Peter is the Prophecy God gave:

2 Pet. 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

The reason I went to 8 was because that ended day 2. Why was that important. Because you seem to think because God said in 1 that he created the heavens and the earth, that that was enough said about the earth. However, you must remember it says in 1 he created the "heavens" and the "earth". Then in 2 he says the earth was void and dark, but does not say that he created it or said for it to be like he does with the "heavens". For in 7-8 he describes how he created the "heavens" in day 2. What day did he describe the creation of "earth". He doesn't, because it already existed, and he just called forth the existing material by his word. Then on day 1 created light for the earth. Day 2, Day 3 and so forth.
Remember create does not mean "make something out of nothing".
I never said vs 1 was "enough". Why do you keep adding to what I say, and making me to say that which I did not? I cited numerous other verses in addition to Gen. 1:1, and yet Gen. 1:1 is perfectly clear.

God created the "heaven" and the "earth", and it is not until vs 2 that we see what likeness it was in when it was brought into existence, "without form and void" (unformed and unfilled, a ball of clay ready for the Master's use).

Rom. 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

Day 2, is not referring back to Day 1's events, but rather is adding more events, by the word of God.

You might as well say Day 4,5,6 were in Day 1. You might as well say, animals were in Day 1 with the same logic.

So you believe that all other versions of the bible are corrupt except the KJV?
There are other languages which are also the Word of God, but in matters of English, it is the KJB. God's word is not bound to English.

The modern English translations are majorly deficient, in passages, words, in both subtractions and additions, doctrines, etc. This is a whole different topic an study, for that I will recommend - Link

Well, at least in this instant, it serves your purpose.
Just consider the evidence provided to you in the link. Then make a judgment based upon the evidence therein.

What glorious body did he have before the incarnation? Was it a body of spirit, or did it have flesh and bone?
Spiritual body. Please take note, that a "spiritual body" is not "spirit body" which is a contradiction in terms according to scripture:

He, the Father, is a "Person", even His person (Job 13:8; Hebrews 1:3), of which Jesus (the Son) is the "express image" of.

As for the rest, see "His person" (Job 13:8); "form of God" (Philippians 2:6), "shape" (John 5:37), "image" (Genesis 1:26,27; Hebrews 1:3), "likeness" (Genesis 1:26,27), "being" (Acts 17:28), has a very real movable "Throne" on which He sits (Daniel 7:9-10; Revelation 4-5, &c), has "the hair of his head like the pure wool" (Daniel 7:9), "whose garment was white as snow" (Daniel 7:9), has a "right hand" (Revelation 5:1; Acts 7:55-56), able to be looked upon, "to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone" (Revelation 4:2), having His own "nature" (Galatians 4:8).

See also "back parts" (Exodus 33:23), and even a "divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4), see also "under his feet" (Exodus 24:20).

The angels are also called 'spirits' and "persons" ("fellows"; Hebrews 1:9), "young man" (Mark 16:5; Daniel 9:21; &c), and yet have real celestial (Heavenly) "bodies" with unfallen angelic "flesh" (1 Corinthians 15:35-58; Jude 1:7, Genesis 17-19, &c) an unfallen heavenly "nature" (Hebrews 2:16), where as we have bodies terrestrial (dust).

The Son is also a "person" (Hebrews 1:3; 2 Corinthians 2:10; Matthew 27:24; Deuteronomy 27:25; &c).

So is the Holy Ghost (John 14:16; &c, though His nature is a mystery and scripture does not explain it, beyond that He is a person.

Mankind are also called 'spirits' (1 Peter 3:19; Hebrews 12:23) and yet are real tangible beings, with bodies (made of dust).

Philippians 2:6; Daniel 3:25; Genesis 18:4, 19:2; Exodus 24:10-11; Psalms 18:9; John 5:37; Exodus 33:23,20,22; Daniel 7:9-10,13; Ezekiel 1:1,8,26-28; Acts 7:55-56; Psalms 24:1-10; John 20:17; 1 Peter 3:22; Matthew 18:10; Revelation 1:13-20, 2:1, 4:1-11, 5:1-14; Hebrews 1:13; Colossians 1:3-6; Numbers 12:8; Isaiah 45:23, 48:3; Revelation 3:16; Psalms 89:34; Psalms 104:33, 146:2; Acts 17:28; Genesis 1:26-27; Colossians 1:15; &c.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Sorry, you are made up of indestructible atoms and molecules, you have always existed.
I just cited verses previous which shows that I am not made up of indestructible atoms, and yet I will cite more:

Corruptible, perishable: Psa. 146:4; Rom. 1:23; 1 Cor. 9:25, 15:53-54; Col. 2:22; 1 Pet. 1:18,23, 3:4, and etc.

Psa. 102:26 They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed:

Notice the contrast of "perish" and "endure".

The wicked will forever cease to be:

Oba. 1:16 For as ye have drunk upon my holy mountain, so shall all the heathen drink continually, yea, they shall drink, and they shall swallow down, and they shall be as though they had not been.

Psa. 37:10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.

Your intelligence (your mind and will) can not be created or destroyed.
That is not what scripture states:

Psa. 146:4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.

Ecc. 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun.

Ecc. 9:10 Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.

Spirit cannot be created or destroyed.
The Spirit of God cannot be. But our 'breath' is a gift from God breathed into us (Gen. 2:7), and can be taken back unto Himself:

Ecc. 8:8 There is no man that hath power over the spirit to retain the spirit; neither hath he power in the day of death: and there is no discharge in that war; neither shall wickedness deliver those that are given to it.

Notice, by God's breath, breathed into dust, which we are, we "became" (that is come into being):

Gen. 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

You are made of the same infinite material that God and Jesus are made of
I deny this with all my heart. No. I am created, a finite being. The Son of the Father, existed eternally with the Father, John 1:1, etc. I was not "in the beginning" "with" God.

that is why you are god in embryo.
Again, the Bible (KJB) says that I am a creature (2 Cor. 5:17, etc), not the Creator.

Now, through your experience as the ages roll by, you will have the opportunity to be like God.
To be like God in character, yes, not in nature of eternality, Deity.

There is only one God-Man, Christ Jesus.

John the Baptist was clear that the Son of the Father existed before himself:

Joh. 1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

Joh. 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

Which just eliminated any idea of our existing in any form at the same moments in the past as the Son of the Father.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: mmksparbud
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Not so for a tree.
A tree has no mind/heart. It is food (Gen. 1:26-28).

Their intelligence is to weak to be like God.
A tree has no intelligence whatsoever. A tree is without heart/mind. It is a food source, not a source of intelligence.

But your intelligence is strong and your spirit is forever and ever.
For ever and ever is from the given 'now' unto the future, and does not say anything about the past. Eternality does, and the Bible says nothing of my existing in the eternal past, though as a Christian I have the opportunity to exist from this point and forever by the grace of God.

You were made in the image of God
Made in the likeness and image of God does not grant me to have existed eternally. In fact, the very word, "made" denies eternality, for God cannot be "made", only that which is creation can be.

, a tree was made in the image of a tree. It all has to do with the intelligence of both. You do believe that a tree has intelligence?
No, a tree does not have intelligence. It has no mind. It is a replicating food source as stated.

Look up the word "intelligence" in an etymology dictionary - intelligence | Origin and meaning of intelligence by Online Etymology Dictionary

A tree has no faculty of mind to have intelligence.

A tree is a tree because of its level of intelligence.
No, a tree is a tree, because that is what God created it to be.

A dog is a dog, because of their level of intelligence.
No, a dog is a dog because that is what God created it to be, and is of a differing nature than other creatures, as per 1 Corinthians 15:39-40.

You are a human being because of your superior level of intelligence.
No, I am what God made me to be of the race of mankind, after their kind, and not another kind, for angels are of superior intellect than mankind and of a differing kind:

Eze. 28:3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:

Psa. 8:5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Heb. 2:7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:

The most intelligent of all the children of God is Jesus Christ.
Deity (Jesus) is all-wise:

Col. 2:2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;

Col. 2:3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That is why he has been sinless from the beginning, and was receive Godhood before this world was even created.
The Son of the Father at no point 'received' Godhood in eternity past. He always was in the "form of God" (Phil 2:6), even the "express image" (Heb. 1:3) of His Father's person (Job 13:8), and was eternally with His Father (John 1:1), and "was God" (person of the Son). See again Pro. 8, for He was by the side of the Father, as one brought up with Him.

We have very little information from the bible about intelligence and spirit and whether it has existed forever or not, you could not tell me from the scriptures.
God is intellegence, and thus that intelligence has always existed. From "everlasting to everlasting".

Our intelligence is not so.

What do you mean "When?" (did we come to be?)

Adam came into existence here:

Gen. 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

All mankind came into existence after that, see the Genealogy of Luke, etc, see

Act. 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Col. 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Adoption is another thing altogether. Here on earth we are adopted into the household of faith. Jesus Christ is the head of that household.
Yes, that is what I stated.

But he himself says that he and you and I were his brothers when he told Mary this important information at the time of he saw her right after his resurrection.
I am not arguing that Jesus and the Christian are not 'brethren;', for Scripture states we surely are (by adoption), see Hebrews 2.

See John 20:17. He says "he ascends to his Father and our Father". How is God the Father our Father. He is the Father of our spirits, like I have been talking about.
I am not denying that.

(See Hebrews 12:9)
Lots of other scriptures for that, but running out of time.
I am not denying that.

I believe he was a ministering angel for God the Father, being very close to him. But between lucifer and God was Jesus, his brother, his perfect and sinless brother
All angels were without sin, before Lucifer sinned. Lucifer is the originator of the mystery of iniquity.

Again, I already explained how I would accept the term 'brother' in regards Lucifer, as a created being, one-time 'son of God' (by creation of Jesus), but not in the way LDS doctrine defines 'brother'.

, whom he began to hate because of his sinlessness and because the Father loved him. lucifer could not overtake him in righteousness
That is a misunderstanding of "righteousness". Before the sin of Lucifer, all was in perfect harmony, all was righteousness.

, so he tried to take over heaven with a war.
Yes, that is what Rev. 12 states, as elsewhere.

Yes, that is what Rev. 12 and other places state.
 
Upvote 0

HeartenedHeart

Active Member
Apr 2, 2019
257
79
Pacific
Visit site
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
and was banned to the earth.
That is not quite accurate. He came to earth, not was banished here. The only reason he stayed here, is because he could not convince the other unfallen worlds to follow him, but he convinced Eve and gained this world as his foothold.

His first recorded appearance on earth was in the garden of Eden.
True.

He lost there too.
Yes and no. Ultimately lost, though gained a small and temporary victory.

But as you can see, at one time lucifer was perfect like Jesus and God love him too.
Yes, at one point before Lucifer sinned he was "perfect" (Eze. 28:15). That does not make him (Lucifer) Deity in any way, for his nature was not the nature of Deity, and was never "in the form of God" as The Son of the Father eternally had been.

But that changed and now satan is not loved any more
That is not true. God loves even Lucifer, but Lucifer refuses to repent. Lucifer was a long time, "ages and ages", in the presence of God, and so God has close ties to His creature.

and will be out of the presence of God for eternity
In a sense, yes, but not as you mean it, for Satan will cease to exist, as cited previously:

Eze. 28:19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

like 1/3 of our spirit brothers and sisters who followed him.
Root and branches will perish in the flames, Mal. 4:1; Eze. 28:16,18,19, etc.

Lucifer also has his own intelligence and spirit (uncreated).

He will always be outside the presence of God for eternity, but he is immortal and cannot not be destroyed, ever.
Not so. The Bible explicitly says that Lucifer (along with his intelligence, not merely angelic nature) was "created" (Eze. 28:13,15).

We equate them with exactly the same nature as Jesus.
The Bible (KJB) says otherwise (1 Cor. 15:39-41; Heb. 2:16, etc.

Jesus was the only begotten Son of God in the flesh. But there were billions of sons and daughters of God in the spirit.
Mankind is a new creation, different than from all other creation. For mankind can "be fruitful", and "multiply" and "replenish (fill) the earth", while angelic beings cannot.

Angels and mankind have not existed eternally. God alone has immortality:

1 Tim. 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

God is Life itself (John 1:4, 11:25, 14:6).

We 'borrow' Life from God -

Pro. 22:7 The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.

Act. 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

Jesus was the first spirit child of God (Colossians 1:15, and Revelations 3:14).
That is a distortion of those texts, and is similar to how the WTS incorrectly interpret those verses.

Rev. 3:14 in context states that Jesus is the originator of the Creation, the one through whom, an by whom are all things which are created. Beware of misusing the word 'arch'.

Col. 1:15, is in the context of Col. 1:16-18, which refers to His pre-eminence above all. If you need me to further detail the words 'firstborn' let me know, and I will do so.

We and lucifer came later.
The Son of the Father always existed, John 1:1, Pro. 8, etc. All creation (you and I, and Lucifer, etc) were created by Jesus Christ (Eph, 3:9 ; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2, etc).

Jesus was also the only spirit child that was begotten by God the Father in the flesh.
Read the scriptures, it does not say that the Son of the Father was created, neither begotten through sexual intimacy (the word "begotten' deals with several things, eternal nature, and resurrection). The scripture states "a body (of mankind's flesh)" was "prepared" for the Son of the Father. The Son of the Father also did not give up His previous nature, but instead added the second nature to the first, Phil 2:6-8.

The Son of the Father had eternal existence with the Father, but we never did.

That is why it is called the "mystery of Godliness" what God did.

Mary was his mortal mother, and God the Father was his mortal Father.
That is Pagan mythology being brought into the scriptures, it is Zeus, it is Poseidon, it is Hades, etc.

It was by the Holy Ghost:

Mat_1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

It does not say she was found with child by The Father having taken flesh of mankind. It was by the word of God that this took place, even from the promise from the beginning, Gen. 3:15. Notice it speaks of the "seed of the woman", and faith mingled with the promise (creative word) of God, and no seed of a man.

You and I had mortal fathers and mothers. Big difference.
Yet you tell me that those same 'mortal fathers' had eternal existence, and will always be, and cannot be destroyed, and are thus eternal immortal intelligences. You have a very serious contradiction on your hands there.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Rescued One

...yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me
Dec 12, 2002
35,503
6,393
Midwest
✟78,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Mormonism:

Jesus is referred to as "the only begotten Son is the flesh" because all are sons (& daughters) of the Father & one of his wives spiritually, but Jesus is the only one who is also of the Father's flesh.

John 1:12
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

From an LDS source:
Jesus explained how He is both the Father and the Son to the brother of Jared as follows: “Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son.
In me shall all mankind have life, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters” (Ether 3:14). By virtue of His Atonement the Savior has the power and the authority to redeem mankind, and those who are redeemed are referred to as His sons and daughters. We are adopted into His family and become His. The Apostle Paul understood the doctrine of divine adoption (see Romans 8:15; Ephesians 1:5). Paul taught the Galatian Saints:

“Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
“To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
“And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

“Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ” (Galatians 4:3–7).

Adoption and Atonement: Becoming Sons and Daughters of Christ | Religious Studies Center
 
Upvote 0

tampasteve

Pray for peace in Israel
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Angels Team
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
May 15, 2017
25,203
7,289
Tampa
✟767,790.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
MOD HAT ON

This thread has had a clean of goading/flaming posts and their replies. As replies are also cleaned, some good content is lost, so I apologize for that.

MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Heartened Heart said,

Which lexicons do you have in evidence of your claim that it cannot ever mean 'from nothing'? I acknowledge the multiple definitions and uses, which includes also 'from nothing', and 'from something'.

I have read many, many articles about did God create "out of nothing", or "out of chaos". You and I are never going to convince the other of our doctrine. So I believe the scriptures tell us that God created "out of chaos". You believe the scriptures tell us that God created "out of nothing". You get to believe what you wish, and that is the end. Our interpretation of the scriptures are not going to be reconciled.

The word "framed" means brought to perfect, as Gen. 2:1-3 show. That word is in the context of "not made of things which do appear".

If "framed" really means "brought to perfect", then the "framed" in this context would a perfect reflection of something that was chaotic, being brought to perfect. Just like I said about Genesis 1:2.
vs 2 is before the creation days begin, and the earth was without form and void, and was dark, and covered with water. Sounds like it was in a chaotic stage. Then God "framed" the world, would indicate to me that God took a chaotic lump and brought it to perfection as a perfect living globe and called it earth, and after that, said, let there be light, and there was light.

BTW, where did this light come from, since the sun was not created until the 4th day?

Molecules may be seen upon specialized microscopes and thus indeed do "appear" - molecules under the microscope - Google Search

So when was the last time you saw a gigantic microscope that was focused on the mountains of the earth, so that the atoms and molecules "do appear". Never.

In Genesis, "God said ...", and thus, "... he spake, and it was ..." (Psa. 33:9)., see also Pro. 8.

I said, I believe this. God said...", and thus, "...he spake, and the atoms heard his voice and obeyed, and there was light, etc., etc., etc.
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Mormonism:

Jesus is referred to as "the only begotten Son is the flesh" because all are sons (& daughters) of the Father & one of his wives spiritually, but Jesus is the only one who is also of the Father's flesh.

John 1:12
But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

From an LDS source:
Jesus explained how He is both the Father and the Son to the brother of Jared as follows: “Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son.
In me shall all mankind have life, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters” (Ether 3:14). By virtue of His Atonement the Savior has the power and the authority to redeem mankind, and those who are redeemed are referred to as His sons and daughters. We are adopted into His family and become His. The Apostle Paul understood the doctrine of divine adoption (see Romans 8:15; Ephesians 1:5). Paul taught the Galatian Saints:

“Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
“To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
“And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

“Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ” (Galatians 4:3–7).

Adoption and Atonement: Becoming Sons and Daughters of Christ | Religious Studies Center
Again, we are all spirit offspring of God the Father and this is how we are brothers with Jesus. It is Jesus that teaches us this principle in John 20:17, and the writer of teaches this important principle again in Acts 17:28-29.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Again, we are all spirit offspring of God the Father and this is how we are brothers with Jesus. It is Jesus that teaches us this principle in John 20:17, and the writer of teaches this important principle again in Acts 17:28-29.

We are all spirit offering????? What does that even mean?
 
Upvote 0