LDS LDS folk, a question for you

[Peter1000]

Please!! He said it himself and so has every other of your prophets---his writings are more accurate than the bible and if there is a contradiction between the bible and his writings---it is JS you are to follow. So, you may read it, but you only believe the parts that agree with JS.

That may be right, but the vast majority of the bible agrees with JS, so no problem, I love the bible.

 

[mmksparbud]

That may be right, but the vast majority of the bible agrees with JS, so no problem, I love the bible.

Vast majority, if it were true, would still not be sufficient. It is not in agreement with the Holy word, not by a long shot and yes, you have a problem with the REAL God with that. Good luck with the Lord when He asks you why you put His word lower than the word of JS. He isn't gong tp buy---"because he is your prophet," because he isn't and you have place the words of men above the word of God.

 

[Peter1000]

Vast majority, if it were true, would still not be sufficient. It is not in agreement with the Holy word, not by a long shot and yes, you have a problem with the REAL God with that. Good luck with the Lord when He asks you why you put His word lower than the word of JS. He isn't gong tp buy---"because he is your prophet," because he isn't and you have place the words of men above the word of God.

The bible is the words of men. Remember: the book of Peter (he is a man), the book of James (he is a man), etc. I think you get my point. Were they inspired by the Lord to say these things. Yes, of course they were.

So I believe that the words which JS writes also to be inspired by the Lord too, although, yes, he is a man.

God works through men and women.

 

[drstevej]

n.

God works through men and women.

So does Satan (Matthew 16:23)

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

 

[Peter1000]

Vast majority, if it were true, would still not be sufficient. It is not in agreement with the Holy word, not by a long shot and yes, you have a problem with the REAL God with that. Good luck with the Lord when He asks you why you put His word lower than the word of JS. He isn't gong tp buy---"because he is your prophet," because he isn't and you have place the words of men above the word of God.

Why do we debate the value of the bible. We both love the bible. If a person said to me deny the bible or I will kill you on the spot, I would say kill me. Would you do the same? Of course you would.

I have always maintained that the bible is the word of God, with some translation problems that I overlook when I read it. JS was given more information about God and Jesus Christ and to me that made sense. You may think that more information is not necessary and that all of it is false. But I believe that after 2,000 years, some of the truth was lost, and needed to be restored again by another prophet of God. So JS was chosen for that restorative event.

If every word he says cannot be found in the bible, it does not immediately disqualify his words. I want you to think about the time of Christ. Jesus was considered by the existing clergy to be a radical rogue religious nut. You know why? Because what he was saying was not in their bible. In fact it was so different from their bible that he was finally put to death.

So after 2,000 years, and the millennium is coming, you would think there could posssible me more information that the Lord would want people to know that was not in the bible because it did not pertain to the people in the Church of Jesus Christ in the First Century, but does pertain to the people in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

For instance, from the BOM we realize that Jesus, after his resurrection and ascendance, he visited people in the Americas that were of the house of Israel. That was an important piece of information, that confirms that Jesus is the Christ and worshiped by not only the people in the Jerusalem area, but also in the Americas. Wow, thousands of miles from each other, with no communications possible, but they believe in the same Jesus Christ. Think about that. 2 peoples acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ. Does that work, as the bible says, that by the mouth of 2 witnesses, all thing may be established, even that Jesus lived, and died for the salvation of men on earth. The same testimony from peoples thousands of miles apart with not form of communications? That is incredible, believe it or not, at least acknowledge that this would be more powerful than just 1 witness, the bible.

Sop do not be stuck in just the bible, and say to yourself, I have my bible, I need no other bible, I need no other information about Jesus than the bible. The bible is wonderful, but always remember it is a very few words of Jesus given to men.

 

[mmksparbud]

The bible is the words of men. Remember: the book of Peter (he is a man), the book of James (he is a man), etc. I think you get my point. Were they inspired by the Lord to say these things. Yes, of course they were.

So I believe that the words which JS writes also to be inspired by the Lord too, although, yes, he is a man.

God works through men and women.

The bible writers were inspired by the Spirit of God---JS was not.

 

[mmksparbud]

Why do we debate the value of the bible. We both love the bible. If a person said to me deny the bible or I will kill you on the spot, I would say kill me. Would you do the same? Of course you would.

I have always maintained that the bible is the word of God, with some translation problems that I overlook when I read it. JS was given more information about God and Jesus Christ and to me that made sense. You may think that more information is not necessary and that all of it is false. But I believe that after 2,000 years, some of the truth was lost, and needed to be restored again by another prophet of God. So JS was chosen for that restorative event.

If every word he says cannot be found in the bible, it does not immediately disqualify his words. I want you to think about the time of Christ. Jesus was considered by the existing clergy to be a radical rogue religious nut. You know why? Because what he was saying was not in their bible. In fact it was so different from their bible that he was finally put to death.

So after 2,000 years, and the millennium is coming, you would think there could posssible me more information that the Lord would want people to know that was not in the bible because it did not pertain to the people in the Church of Jesus Christ in the First Century, but does pertain to the people in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

For instance, from the BOM we realize that Jesus, after his resurrection and ascendance, he visited people in the Americas that were of the house of Israel. That was an important piece of information, that confirms that Jesus is the Christ and worshiped by not only the people in the Jerusalem area, but also in the Americas. Wow, thousands of miles from each other, with no communications possible, but they believe in the same Jesus Christ. Think about that. 2 peoples acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ. Does that work, as the bible says, that by the mouth of 2 witnesses, all thing may be established, even that Jesus lived, and died for the salvation of men on earth. The same testimony from peoples thousands of miles apart with not form of communications? That is incredible, believe it or not, at least acknowledge that this would be more powerful than just 1 witness, the bible.

Sop do not be stuck in just the bible, and say to yourself, I have my bible, I need no other bible, I need no other information about Jesus than the bible. The bible is wonderful, but always remember it is a very few words of Jesus given to men.

Our God does not withhold information from His people that will save them!! Your God might. I don't need to know that David, or any other king, had 25 or more battles that they won and lost. It's not needed for my salvation! That the word of God was withheld from the general population by the early church is very well known---but the word itself was not lost. God has always maintained a remnant that kept it safe. There is no end of books out there that help in the translation of the word. We have much help from other than the bible. And within the Christian community everyone and their mother writes an endless stream of books about their Christian experiences and understanding and are great for in depth studying for the Holy Spirit does talk to everyone that asks Him---but if they do not agree with what is already in the bible, they are not of the Holy Spirit---JS writings are not of the Holy Spirit, they add foolish theories and are contradictory. Sorry, but I can't say it any other way.

 

[Peter1000]

Our God does not withhold information from His people that will save them!! Your God might. I don't need to know that David, or any other king, had 25 or more battles that they won and lost. It's not needed for my salvation! That the word of God was withheld from the general population by the early church is very well known---but the word itself was not lost. God has always maintained a remnant that kept it safe. There is no end of books out there that help in the translation of the word. We have much help from other than the bible. And within the Christian community everyone and their mother writes an endless stream of books about their Christian experiences and understanding and are great for in depth studying for the Holy Spirit does talk to everyone that asks Him---but if they do not agree with what is already in the bible, they are not of the Holy Spirit---JS writings are not of the Holy Spirit, they add foolish theories and are contradictory. Sorry, but I can't say it any other way.

That's OK, you have just not had the opportunity to sit down and study the doctrine with someone that can show you what we mean. This forum is not really a good place to get to know what The Church of Jesus Christ really has to offer, so don't feel bad that you don't have good feelings about the church. In many ways it is unfair to burden your mind with some of the things that I have given you for fear it would taint you with a certain disgust. Some doctrines you have to learn a little here and a little there until you can receive the fullness of the doctrine.
I believe that is why Paul did not give the Corinthian saints the "meat" of the gospel, because he said they would not receive it. So to a certain extent, I am sorry for giving you such deep doctrine about the nature of God the Father and God the Son.

 

[Peter1000]

So does Satan (Matthew 16:23)

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

So does God.

 

[mmksparbud]

That's OK, you have just not had the opportunity to sit down and study the doctrine with someone that can show you what we mean. This forum is not really a good place to get to know what The Church of Jesus Christ really has to offer, so don't feel bad that you don't have good feelings about the church. In many ways it is unfair to burden your mind with some of the things that I have given you for fear it would taint you with a certain disgust. Some doctrines you have to learn a little here and a little there until you can receive the fullness of the doctrine.
I believe that is why Paul did not give the Corinthian saints the "meat" of the gospel, because he said they would not receive it. So to a certain extent, I am sorry for giving you such deep doctrine about the nature of God the Father and God the Son.

When even the milk is sour---the meat will not be any better. Your doctrines contradict the bible and I can not digest them--pure and simple.

 

[Peter1000]

When even the milk is sour---the meat will not be any better. Your doctrines contradict the bible and I can not digest them--pure and simple.

Because some of our doctrine is not captured word for word in the bible, it does not mean they are not true.

You have the same problem. Try to capture all aspects of the Trinity in the bible, you can't. You have to piece it together, and when you get to the consubstantiation part, the bible is silent. So don't think all your doctrines are laden with biblical authority, they aren't.

 

[Rescued One]

The bible is the words of men. Remember: the book of Peter (he is a man), the book of James (he is a man), etc. I think you get my point. Were they inspired by the Lord to say these things. Yes, of course they were.

So I believe that the words which JS writes also to be inspired by the Lord too, although, yes, he is a man.

God works through men and women.

The BIBLE is GOD"S WORD.

 

[Rescued One]

That's OK, you have just not had the opportunity to sit down and study the doctrine with someone that can show you what we mean. This forum is not really a good place to get to know what The Church of Jesus Christ really has to offer, so don't feel bad that you don't have good feelings about the church.

This forum gives LDS the opportunity to answer questions, but most LDS responses to our questions are diversions instead of accurate information.

In many ways it is unfair to burden your mind with some of the things that I have given you for fear it would taint you with a certain disgust.

We're still here. We have the armor of God.

Some doctrines you have to learn a little here and a little there until you can receive the fullness of the doctrine.

This is word for word the same old LDS cliche.

I believe that is why Paul did not give the Corinthian saints the "meat" of the gospel, because he said they would not receive it. So to a certain extent, I am sorry for giving you such deep doctrine about the nature of God the Father and God the Son.

LDS don't know what meat is.

 

[mmksparbud]

Because some of our doctrine is not captured word for word in the bible, it does not mean they are not true.

You have the same problem. Try to capture all aspects of the Trinity in the bible, you can't. You have to piece it together, and when you get to the consubstantiation part, the bible is silent. So don't think all your doctrines are laden with biblical authority, they aren't.

You go right ahead and list them all---and compare that list with yours.
Rotten meat, nor sour milk is edible.

 

[Peter1000]

Please!! He said it himself and so has every other of your prophets---his writings are more accurate than the bible and if there is a contradiction between the bible and his writings---it is JS you are to follow. So, you may read it, but you only believe the parts that agree with JS.

Actually, you are right about that.

But here is the catch. JS was the prophet from 1820-1844. Then came BY, then came Taylor, and Woodruff. It was during Woodruff's times that the Lord told the existing prophet that it was time to not do plural marriage. Now this conflicts with what JS said, so who do we rely on? We rely on the current prophet, and the Church of Jesus Christ stopped practicing plural marriage. There was vestiges of it for a short time after, but for all intense and purposes it stopped with Woodruff.

That is how we listen to our prophets. Another event happened in 1978, Spencer W. Kimball, the current prophet announced that the priesthood would now be given to all worthy male members of the church. This conflicted with earlier prophets including the strong minded BY, but the church members all knew that Kimball was speaking from revelation and accepted his words as coming from the Lord.

So you are right, if our current prophet says a particular bible verse is not in harmony with what the Lord wanted and he gives us the correct understanding, we will follow him in that understanding.

That goes not only for the words of the apostles and prophets in the bible, but the apostles and prophets including JS forward in our time. Hope that helps.

 

[Peter1000]

You go right ahead and list them all---and compare that list with yours.
Rotten meat, nor sour milk is edible.

No need to list anything or say any more, just know it.

 

[Peter1000]

This forum gives LDS the opportunity to answer questions, but most LDS responses to our questions are diversions instead of accurate information.

We're still here. We have the armor of God.

This is word for word the same old LDS cliche.

LDS don't know what meat is.

View attachment 255656[/QUOTE]

This forum gives LDS the opportunity to answer questions, but most LDS responses to our questions are diversions instead of accurate information.

I and other members have never given anyone, deeper answers to questions than you on any forum. Since you say you were once a member of the Church of Jesus Christ, we have given you answers to questions that others do not get. Some of the answers may seem like diversions,, but that is because sometimes it is difficult to express our beliefs. Sometimes they are not found word for word in the bible, and so we piece it together. How ever we do, I am not sure there is one time that I have answered your question, and for you to acknowledge that I did. 99% of the time, I get from you a sour response and a rebuke for believing these things.

We're still here. We have the armor of God.

You have a Strongs concordance that is wrong at least 40% of the time with its interpretation of scripture.

This is word for word the same old LDS cliche.

,

This is a true doctrine, if you do not have a strong belief in Christ, how can I tell you, you have to eat of his body and drink of his blood and have you accept that doctrine?

Paul ran into this dilemma, when he know the Corinthian saints were having a problem believing and living the 'milk' of the gospel. He could not even give them the 'meat' because he knew they would not accept it. (1 Corinthians 3:2)

LDS don't know what meat is.

Do you? In any event the Corinthian saints did not get it. Was that just a problem with the Corinthians or was that a problem all over the Church of Jesus Christ of the First Century? Paul later say to his son Timothy, "all Asia have turned away from me". (2 Timothy 1:15)

 

[mmksparbud]

Actually, you are right about that.

But here is the catch. JS was the prophet from 1820-1844. Then came BY, then came Taylor, and Woodruff. It was during Woodruff's times that the Lord told the existing prophet that it was time to not do plural marriage. Now this conflicts with what JS said, so who do we rely on? We rely on the current prophet, and the Church of Jesus Christ stopped practicing plural marriage. There was vestiges of it for a short time after, but for all intense and purposes it stopped with Woodruff.

That is how we listen to our prophets. Another event happened in 1978, Spencer W. Kimball, the current prophet announced that the priesthood would now be given to all worthy male members of the church. This conflicted with earlier prophets including the strong minded BY, but the church members all knew that Kimball was speaking from revelation and accepted his words as coming from the Lord.

So you are right, if our current prophet says a particular bible verse is not in harmony with what the Lord wanted and he gives us the correct understanding, we will follow him in that understanding.

That goes not only for the words of the apostles and prophets in the bible, but the apostles and prophets including JS forward in our time. Hope that helps.

IF WHAT A FORMER PROPHET SPOKE WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOD---THEY WERE NO PROPHET OF GOD!!!!! There are conditional prophecies, there are no conditional scriptures! God doesn't change His mind and then change it again and then change it again!!!

Mal 3:6 "I the LORD do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.

James 1 :17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

There have been times where He repented of a judgement--such as Nineveh--because the people repented. He doesn't state something is a command--under penalty of "destruction"---then rescinds it, then reinstates it, then rescinds it then reinstates it! What He calls an abomination in the OT , remains an abomination to Him in the NT.

 

[Peter1000]

IF WHAT A FORMER PROPHET SPOKE WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOD---THEY WERE NO PROPHET OF GOD!!!!! There are conditional prophecies, there are no conditional scriptures! God doesn't change His mind and then change it again and then change it again!!!

Mal 3:6 "I the LORD do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.

James 1 :17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

There have been times where He repented of a judgement--such as Nineveh--because the people repented. He doesn't state something is a command--under penalty of "destruction"---then rescinds it, then reinstates it, then rescinds it then reinstates it! What He calls an abomination in the OT , remains an abomination to Him in the NT.

Have you ever read the OT and the law of Moses, and then read the NT and the law of Christ?

Just a casual comparison tells me that God changes things up as they need to be changed.

The OT and the NT are so different it has been proposed by doctors and scholars of the church that there were 2 gods involved with the people of the OT and the people of the NT.

If you are so stuck on doing what the word of God says to do, you would still be circumcising your boy children, you would be stoning anyone taken in adultery, you would be having your church on Saturday, you would have a High Priest and lower priests that sacrifice animals in your Sabbath services etc., etc., etc.

So who was the God of the OT? Oh, thats right, he is the same God of the NT! Way different though, as you say it, the OT under the law, the NT under grace. Are they compatible? Are they exactly the same? Are they quite different?

Did God change things up a bit? Yes. In fact he brought up the people of Israel as his people, then because of their wickedness, he cast them aside, and in the future he will exonerate them and they will be his people again. Is that what you said the Lord doesn't do? Did you say this:
"He doesn't state something is a command--under penalty of "destruction"---then rescinds it, then reinstates it, then rescinds it then reinstates it! What He calls an abomination in the OT , remains an abomination to Him in the NT."
Well apparently He does if He wishes to. One good example: The Lord allowed the people of Israel to have more than 1 wife between 1400bc up to the time of Jesus. But at the time of Jesus, he changed his mind and decided not to allow plural marriage. Just like God told JS and the church to practice plural marriage from 1840 - 1896. But then changed his mind and did not allow plural marriage from 1896 to present. How does that work with your unchangeable God?

God's general doctrines do not change, but the policies that must be implemented to lead and guide people must have some flexibility as times change and circumstances change. You cannot put God in a cage and demand that he act the same through all generations of time. He doesn't work that way. But for instance: murder in 4500bc is still an abomination in 2019ad. Adultery in 4500bc is still an abomination in 2019ad. However, plural marriage was not an abomination in 800bc, but was an abomination in 33ad. God does as he will, you cannot get in his way as he governs people over millennia of time.

 

[mmksparbud]

Have you ever read the OT and the law of Moses, and then read the NT and the law of Christ?

Just a casual comparison tells me that God changes things up as they need to be changed.

The OT and the NT are so different it has been proposed by doctors and scholars of the church that there were 2 gods involved with the people of the OT and the people of the NT.

If you are so stuck on doing what the word of God says to do, you would still be circumcising your boy children, you would be stoning anyone taken in adultery, you would be having your church on Saturday, you would have a High Priest and lower priests that sacrifice animals in your Sabbath services etc., etc., etc.

So who was the God of the OT? Oh, thats right, he is the same God of the NT! Way different though, as you say it, the OT under the law, the NT under grace. Are they compatible? Are they exactly the same? Are they quite different?

Did God change things up a bit? Yes. In fact he brought up the people of Israel as his people, then because of their wickedness, he cast them aside, and in the future he will exonerate them and they will be his people again. Is that what you said the Lord doesn't do? Did you say this:
"He doesn't state something is a command--under penalty of "destruction"---then rescinds it, then reinstates it, then rescinds it then reinstates it! What He calls an abomination in the OT , remains an abomination to Him in the NT."
Well apparently He does if He wishes to. One good example: The Lord allowed the people of Israel to have more than 1 wife between 1400bc up to the time of Jesus. But at the time of Jesus, he changed his mind and decided not to allow plural marriage. Just like God told JS and the church to practice plural marriage from 1840 - 1896. But then changed his mind and did not allow plural marriage from 1896 to present. How does that work with your unchangeable God?

God's general doctrines do not change, but the policies that must be implemented to lead and guide people must have some flexibility as times change and circumstances change. You cannot put God in a cage and demand that he act the same through all generations of time. He doesn't work that way. But for instance: murder in 4500bc is still an abomination in 2019ad. Adultery in 4500bc is still an abomination in 2019ad. However, plural marriage was not an abomination in 800bc, but was an abomination in 33ad. God does as he will, you cannot get in his way as he governs people over millennia of time.

Same God. Same commandments. Same saved by grace and faith. I don't demand He stays the same---God says He never changes--
Mal 3:6 "I the LORD do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed.
James 1 :17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.

His character never changes. Her does not flip back and forth--"who does not change like shifting shadows."

The new covenant was foretold in the OT. God never demanded plural marriage. It wasn't until Lamech that it started. God never once told anyone to have more than one wife, He allowed it, and set up guidelines for the protection of the wives. JS is the only one that has said God told him to have more than one wife and if his wife didn't agree to it---she would be destroyed. So, she said yes---like she had a choice? Then He says not to, then, He could still say yes---sorry---God simply does not work that way.
Act_17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

At one time brothers and sisters married---God said no more. And that is it--no more. It became bad for severe genetic flaws set in. He isn't now going to demand for this to get reinststed under penalty of death! Every instance of plural marriage in the bible caused problems. Abraham's and Sarah's lack of faith in getting a 2nd wife has caused wars since then and still does.
​