LDS LDS, when did Jesus become God?

Peter1000 said:

OK we are not going to have a discussion that means anything. I can see that you do not know the answer that I asked, therefore you try to shift the discussion another way. So here is the answer to your "all" question.

Matthew 2:2-4 King James Version (KJV)
2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and "all" Jerusalem with him.

"All" Jerusalem was not troubled. Probably, a good 90% did not even know this was happening. So to say that "all" Israel was troubled is a little too much.

Matthew 3:4-6 King James Version (KJV)
4 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

I suggest that not "all" Judaea and "all" the region round about Jordan came to John and were baptized, confessing their sins.

Matthew 10:22 King James Version (KJV)
22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

From the beginning Peter and the apostles were indeed hated by "most" men, but certainly not "all" men. Thousands of men loved and almost worshipped them. So no, not "all".

This 3 examples out of many that "all" in the bible does not always mean "all". Am I right? Or, am I off my rocker?

Click to expand...

When talking about men---yes---when talking about God---nope. When it says ALL things were made by Him--followed by--and without Him was not any thing made that was made. That means every thing--period.

BigDaddy4 said:

If you have a point, please make it. You are playing a game, it's called leading questions. All while avoiding telling us your linguistic credentials for claiming why the word "all" is misused in the Bible. You made that claim and have failed to back it up. I gave you the Greek translation of John 1:3. Deal with that, please.

Click to expand...

OK, since the earth and the water existed before creation day 1 even started, Therefore, Jesus didn't create "all" things that were made.

Besides look at the God that did the creation in chapter 1 of Genesis. It was Elohim, not Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus. When did Yahweh/Jehovan/Jesus start to create. Not until the natural creation in chapter 2 of Genesis. So Jesus did make all the natural things in the universe and the heavens for the earth and the earth. But he did not create them out of nothing. That is a false doctrine, as seen in Genesis chapter 1:2, where the water and the earth were already there before the creation started in Genesis 1:3.

mmksparbud said:

When talking about men---yes---when talking about God---nope. When it says ALL things were made by Him--followed by--and without Him was not any thing made that was made. That means every thing--period.

Click to expand...

So part of the bible is true and part of it is not? I don't think you want to take that position?

mmksparbud said:

When talking about men---yes---when talking about God---nope. When it says ALL things were made by Him--followed by--and without Him was not any thing made that was made. That means every thing--period.

Click to expand...

I know he created light.
I know he divided the water to create the firmament - heaven
I know he moved the lower water into 1 location and called is the seas, and this made the dry land appear.
I know he created the plants
I know he created the animals
I know he created man, both male and female after him image.

But I could not find where he created the global earth or the water.

I only know that Genesis 1:2 tells us that the earth and water already were in existence before the first day of creation. Therefore I am on solid grounds to say that Jesus did not create the earth or water, but he molded a void and unshaped mass covered with water into our earth, not from nothing, but from existing material.

Peter1000 said:

OK, since the earth and the water existed before creation day 1 even started, Therefore, Jesus didn't create "all" things that were made.

Besides look at the God that did the creation in chapter 1 of Genesis. It was Elohim, not Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus. When did Yahweh/Jehovan/Jesus start to create. Not until the natural creation in chapter 2 of Genesis. So Jesus did make all the natural things in the universe and the heavens for the earth and the earth. But he did not create them out of nothing. That is a false doctrine, as seen in Genesis chapter 1:2, where the water and the earth were already there before the creation started in Genesis 1:3.

Click to expand...

What part of Gen 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."---DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? In the beginning, at the start of creation, He created the heavens and the earth--He created it void, without form and empty except for water---where do you get anything else?

Peter1000 said:

So part of the bible is true and part of it is not? I don't think you want to take that position?

Click to expand...

Do you really take everything as literal? When someone says they waited FOREVER at the post office---did they?? When you attributed to God the word forever--it means forever!

Peter1000 said:

I know he created light.
I know he divided the water to create the firmament - heaven
I know he moved the lower water into 1 location and called is the seas, and this made the dry land appear.
I know he created the plants
I know he created the animals
I know he created man, both male and female after him image.

But I could not find where he created the global earth or the water.

I only know that Genesis 1:2 tells us that the earth and water already were in existence before the first day of creation. Therefore I am on solid grounds to say that Jesus did not create the earth or water, but he molded a void and unshaped mass covered with water into our earth, not from nothing, but from existing material.

Click to expand...

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
It says He created the earth---then it goes on to describe the condition He created it---without form and void and with water!!! You need to read the word of God, not the word of JS!!!

Peter1000 said:

Thank you for your concern. But I feel that I have been born of the spirit, and I have been born of the water, and am a new person in Jesus Christ. So where does that leave me?

Click to expand...

I know I'm being a bit hard on you, but I would rather be that way than to give an assurance when it might not be how God sees it for you. If it is going to make the difference between heaven or hell for you, then it is better to be strict about what true conversion to Christ is, than to be too soft about it.

When I thought of you, it seemed to come to me: "Is he worshiping Christ, or his church?" The test for that would be that if the Holy Spirit said to you, "Leave your church permanently and go join a Baptist church", would you go, or would you resist?

What if the Holy Spirit said to you that the book of Mormon is just a made-up document and was never inspired by Him, that you should abandon it and base your total faith on the Bible? Would you do it?

That would be an interesting test to see who your master really is - your church or Christ.

Peter1000 said:

OK, since the earth and the water existed before creation day 1 even started, Therefore, Jesus didn't create "all" things that were made.

Besides look at the God that did the creation in chapter 1 of Genesis. It was Elohim, not Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus. When did Yahweh/Jehovan/Jesus start to create. Not until the natural creation in chapter 2 of Genesis. So Jesus did make all the natural things in the universe and the heavens for the earth and the earth. But he did not create them out of nothing. That is a false doctrine, as seen in Genesis chapter 1:2, where the water and the earth were already there before the creation started in Genesis 1:3.

Click to expand...

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.


God created from nothing---JS is wrong on all of it!!

Peter1000 said:

OK, since the earth and the water existed before creation day 1 even started, Therefore, Jesus didn't create "all" things that were made.

Besides look at the God that did the creation in chapter 1 of Genesis. It was Elohim, not Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus. When did Yahweh/Jehovan/Jesus start to create. Not until the natural creation in chapter 2 of Genesis. So Jesus did make all the natural things in the universe and the heavens for the earth and the earth. But he did not create them out of nothing. That is a false doctrine, as seen in Genesis chapter 1:2, where the water and the earth were already there before the creation started in Genesis 1:3.

Click to expand...

So John was mistaken when he said that everything was made by Jesus, even when he emphasised the point in saying that without him was not anything made that was made. John was adamant that the pre-incarnate Son of God made everything that exists and there is nothing that was created that was not created by Him.

To say that Jesus did not create everything without exception is to call the Apostle John a liar! If JS and BY taught that Jesus did not create everything in our universe, then the founders of the Mormon church are at odds with the Apostle John who wrote his gospel under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit!

The Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself. So, who was inspired by the Holy Spirit? The Apostle John, who walked with Jesus for 3 years and was baptised with the Holy Spirit at the Day of Pentecost, or JS who formed the foundation doctrines of the Mormon church, and who, at the age of 16 years, may not have known there was a Holy Spirit?

When I was a lot younger, in my early twenties, my small group and I invited a couple of Mormon missionaries to take us through the basic doctrines of the Mormon church. It was basically a seven-step process with the seventh step to attend the church and be baptised into Mormonism. We got to step six and then declined.

Around the fifth visit, we started talking to them about the baptism with the Spirit, speaking in tongues, genuine testimonies of healing miracles, hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit, walking in close fellowship with God, etc, which was the real day-to-day experience we had with Christ. The younger missionary left his "script" and started asking searching questions about our walk with God. This made the older missionary very angry, and tried hard to get back on the set "script", but he became more and more frustrated to the point where he raised his voice and angrily fired one Scripture reference after another at us without actually quoting the actual verses!

We found at at the sixth visit, that the younger missionary had suddenly been transferred to the other end of the country! That had to tell us something, and showed us that when a Mormon starts to ask honest and searching questions about his or her faith, he or she is shut down pretty quickly and transferred right away from any influence that might make him or her doubt that Mormonism might not be as genuine as he or she thinks it is.

Peter1000 said:

Thank you for your concern. But I feel that I have been born of the spirit, and I have been born of the water, and am a new person in Jesus Christ. So where does that leave me?

Click to expand...

To give you some food for thought, I have attached my Ebook on true conversion.

Phoebe Ann said:

Thanks, I might read that sometime but I'm already a true Christian based on what I read in the Bible.

View attachment 252559

Click to expand...

LOL! He said that to Peter!

Peter1000 said:

OK we are not going to have a discussion that means anything. I can see that you do not know the answer that I asked, therefore you try to shift the discussion another way. So here is the answer to your "all" question.

Click to expand...

Whoa, back up the accusation train. You made a claim and have yet to back it up with any evidence. I am not the on who is "shift(ing) the discussion another way". Please Peter, at least be honest here.

Peter1000 said:

Matthew 2:2-4 King James Version (KJV)
2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and "all" Jerusalem with him.

"All" Jerusalem was not troubled. Probably, a good 90% did not even know this was happening. So to say that "all" Israel was troubled is a little too much.

Click to expand...

Your "[p]robably, a good 90%" is not evidence of anything. The original language for "all" in this passage is the same word used in John 1:3 and still means all.

Peter1000 said:

Matthew 3:4-6 King James Version (KJV)
4 And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

I suggest that not "all" Judaea and "all" the region round about Jordan came to John and were baptized, confessing their sins.

Click to expand...

Your suggestion is not evidence of anything. The original language for "all" in this passage is the same word used in John 1:3 and still means all.

Peter1000 said:

Matthew 10:22 King James Version (KJV)
22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

From the beginning Peter and the apostles were indeed hated by "most" men, but certainly not "all" men. Thousands of men loved and almost worshipped them. So no, not "all".

Click to expand...

Again, lack of evidence. The original language for "all" in this passage is the same word used in John 1:3 and still means all.

Peter1000 said:

This 3 examples out of many that "all" in the bible does not always mean "all". Am I right? Or, am I off my rocker?

Click to expand...

I would say the latter. And, you still haven't dealt with the "all" in John 1:3. Why is that?

Peter1000 said:

OK, since the earth and the water existed before creation day 1 even started, Therefore, Jesus didn't create "all" things that were made.

Besides look at the God that did the creation in chapter 1 of Genesis. It was Elohim, not Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus. When did Yahweh/Jehovan/Jesus start to create. Not until the natural creation in chapter 2 of Genesis. So Jesus did make all the natural things in the universe and the heavens for the earth and the earth. But he did not create them out of nothing. That is a false doctrine, as seen in Genesis chapter 1:2, where the water and the earth were already there before the creation started in Genesis 1:3.

Click to expand...

Typically, one would read Genesis 1:1 before reading 1:2. It helps put 1:2 into perspective. 1:2 is describing what the earth looked like when God created it in 1:1. Give that a whirl in the theater of your mind. All still means all.

BigDaddy4 said:

Whoa, back up the accusation train. You made a claim and have yet to back it up with any evidence. I am not the on who is "shift(ing) the discussion another way". Please Peter, at least be honest here.

Your "[p]robably, a good 90%" is not evidence of anything. The original language for "all" in this passage is the same word used in John 1:3 and still means all.

Your suggestion is not evidence of anything. The original language for "all" in this passage is the same word used in John 1:3 and still means all.

Again, lack of evidence. The original language for "all" in this passage is the same word used in John 1:3 and still means all.

I would say the latter. And, you still haven't dealt with the "all" in John 1:3. Why is that?

Click to expand...

So you really think that in Matthew 3:4-6 when it says, 'all Judea came out to him' that every man, woman, and child, whether Jew or gentile came out from Judea to John the Baptist and was baptized in the river Jordan?

Doy you really believe that 'all' men, 100% of every man, woman, and child since Jesus hates the apotles of the Lord Jesus Christ?

You keep saying you have a lack of evidence. I would like to ask you if you have evidence that 100% of all men, women, and children since Jesus Christ has hated the apostles of Jesus? You would have a very difficult time proving that.

So if the word 'all' that is used in John 1:3 is the same 'all' that is used in Matthew 3:4-6, you are in trouble, beause the 'all' in Matthew 3:4-6 obviously does not mean 'all'. The evidence is common sense and a mature analysis of the text.

So if you can prove that 'all' people since Jesus have hated the aposltes of Jesus, then I will believe your 'all' in John 1:3. Go for it, and a heartfelt good luck.

Peter1000 said:

So you really think that in Matthew 3:4-6 when it says, 'all Judea came out to him' that every man, woman, and child, whether Jew or gentile came out from Judea to John the Baptist and was baptized in the river Jordan?

Doy you really believe that 'all' men, 100% of every man, woman, and child since Jesus hates the apotles of the Lord Jesus Christ?

You keep saying you have a lack of evidence. I would like to ask you if you have evidence that 100% of all men, women, and children since Jesus Christ has hated the apostles of Jesus? You would have a very difficult time proving that.

So if the word 'all' that is used in John 1:3 is the same 'all' that is used in Matthew 3:4-6, you are in trouble, beause the 'all' in Matthew 3:4-6 obviously does not mean 'all'. The evidence is common sense and a mature analysis of the text.

So if you can prove that 'all' people since Jesus have hated the aposltes of Jesus, then I will believe your 'all' in John 1:3. Go for it, and a heartfelt good luck.

Click to expand...

God doesn't do things half way. When referring to God--all means all. When He says He forgives all sins, except blasphemy of the Holy Ghost---He means all. That includes murder. All. When it says God created all things, it means all. Only JS would come up with--He created out of what was there--no---He created all---out of nothing.

BigDaddy4 said:

Typically, one would read Genesis 1:1 before reading 1:2. It helps put 1:2 into perspective. 1:2 is describing what the earth looked like when God created it in 1:1. Give that a whirl in the theater of your mind. All still means all.

Click to expand...

Would you be more mature than to use phrases like "give that a shirl in the theater of your mind". It is not necessary.

1:1 says that Elohim created, not Yahweh/Jehovah/Jesus to start with.

Again, tell me which day was the earth created after Elohim started creating in 1:3?

We do see that on day 2 he created the heavens, which he also mentions in 1:1. But why do we not see that it says in day 1 or 2, for instance, that he created the earth?

It is because the raw material for the earth, already existed. What God did was organize that raw material into an earth

If God had created the earth from nothing, why would he have created it without form and why was it void? So you think God created a deformed thing?

Why not create a nice round globe from nothing in day 1 or 2 and tell us that it was good?
It is because there was no creation out of nothing, he took material that was without form and void, and made it into an earth before the creation even got started.

Never does it talk about creating water in any day. Why? Wouldn't water be a huge part of 'all'?

We believe that God did hot create things out of nothing. And Jesus, God's son, did not create "all" things out of nothing either.

So if this does not answer your "all" question, let me know.