Christianity vs Mormonism : Bible, BOM & Nature of God

[Grace_Alone4gives]

ATTENTION TO ALL THAT JOIN THIS DISCUSSION

This discussion and debate has been thoughly planned. Myself, HopeTheyDance (supporting Christianity) and jodrey (supporting Mormonism) have put together some rules to help this thread go smoothly, without hostility and bitterness. We recognise that both Christians and LDS are passionate about their beliefs. Having said this, we have laid some groundwork to follow for all who participate in this thread. We only ask you respect our request.

1. To get things rolling, we (HopeTheyDance and jordey) have agrred to begin with discussing the BOM and the Bible. Having said that, I will post my inital question to jordey tomorrow morning, in which, he will respond. Prior to providing feedback, please await his response. (and vice versa when he returns a question in my direction).

Obviously this is an open forum and we can not prevent anyone from posting...however, would like only one question to be asked at a time to lessen the confusion and keep the discussion focused and on track.

2. When providing your feedback to a question or response, please do so as you feel Christ would.  Any critisism (and there will be plenty) should be edifying to Christ. No personal attacks against anyone - disagreement is fine - but we ask you refrain from hostile comments.

3. Should anyone question a belief of Christianity or LDS please support your claims with the church doctrin. Doctrin being the Bible for Christianity, and the Bible, BOM, D&C, Peal of Great Price for LDS. In other words, please do not proclaim ones faith believes in something it does not....check it out first. (Church History will also be accepted for argumanets sake, if being a reliable source of course.)

(For inquiring Christians, you will find LDS beliefs listed at www.lds.org) This site has been approved by jodrey as it is the official website for the Mormon Church

4. We understand the LDS consider themselves 'Christians', however, for argument sake, the term Christian will be used to define those who believe the Bible is the infallible and COMPLETE Word of God. LDS (Latter Day Saints) will be used to describe Mormon doctrin believers (Modern Day prophets, further revelation etc...)

5. We request patience be given to each side.

6. Many topics will be discussed, starting with the comparrison of the Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon. There are many other areas we would like to discuss/debate on...such as the Nature of God, Doctrin, interpretation of the scriptures etc....however, will be taking one topic at a time, and as you/we will find - they all tie into one another.

Tomorrow, April 9, will mark the opening of the discussion. I will pose my first question. (Please keep in mind..I am on PST...I will try and post early)

Please note - we are not professional debaters. I ask all my Christian brothers and sisters to support me and one another throughout this thread - I will ask for advice or your comments if an area is broached that I am unsure of. I would also ask your kind correction if I am in error on any point I make, or not being clear in my expressions. I do not claim to know everything. I also ask the same respect be given to jodrey from His LDS supporters.

 May God Bless this thread.

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches"

 

[Jedi]

All systems standing by, HopeTheyDance. Ready at your command.

 

[Grace_Alone4gives]

Good Morning,

Question 1.

Topic: Comparing the BOM with the scriptures of the Bible.

I believe the Bible to be the God's infallible written Word. All 66 books of the Old and New Testaments were verbally and fully inspired by the Holy Spirit, written without error (inerrant) in the original manuscripts. It is the supreme and final authority in all matters on which it speaks....from Creation, the fall of man and depravity, to Grace, redemption, salvation through Christ Jesus and the revelation of the End times. 

LDS believe the Book of Mormon is additional revelation from God.LDS claim that the BOM verifies and supports the bible. However, many scriptures contradict themselves when comparing the two. Not to overwhelm jodrey or any other LDS, I will only state two inconsistancies at a time.

1. The Bible states there is only ONE God (Isaiah 43:11; 44:6,8; 45:5) Whereas the BOM states the opposite (And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light (Book of Abraham 4:3)


2. The Bible states the gospel was not fully revealed till after Christs death Eph. 3:3-7 (See also Col. 1:26; 1 Peter 1: 1-12; Romans 16:25-26) The book of Mormon preaches this knowledge was held much much earlier (around 545 BC)(2 Nephi 25: 19-23 and 2 Nephi 26:12)

If required, I can list many more if you desire. The questions is...if the BOM verifies the Bible, why so many contradictions..How can an LDS feel comforatable quoting from one book, when the other book holds differing views? 


Jodrey - the floor is yours.
 

 

[ksen]

Added to favorites.

This should get interesting. Thanks for starting this thread.

 

[jodrey]

Let me deal with one at a time. Remember, the question is shorter than the answer.

1. The Bible states there is only ONE God (Isaiah 43:11; 44:6,8; 45:5) Whereas the BOM states the opposite (And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light (Book of Abraham 4:3)

This is kind of abstract; even the Bible speaks of God in a plural sense (Elohim). PoGP, Abraham 4: 27-28 says, "So the Gods went down to organize man in their own image, in the image of the Gods to form they him, male and female to form they them. And the Gods said: We will bless them. And the Gods said: We will cause them to be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and to have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." This is parallel to Genesis 1: 26, which says, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." The LDS certainly do believe in one God, as often stated by Isaiah, but we must realize what the definition of 'God' really is.

A literal translation of the Bible says the following regarding respective definitions.

For example, the God of Isaiah 44: 6 ("and beside me there is no God."):

410
'el {ale}
shortened from 352; TWOT - 93a; n m

AV - God 213, god 16, power 4, mighty 5, goodly 1, great 1, idols 1,
Immanuel + 06005 2, might 1, strong 1; 245

1) god, god-like one, mighty one
1a) mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes
1b) angels
1c) god, false god, (demons, imaginations)
1d) God, the one true God, Jehovah
2) mighty things in nature
3) strength, power

Pertaining to Isaiah 45: 5 ("and there is none else, there is no God"):

430
'elohiym {el-o-heem'}
plural of 433; TWOT - 93c; n m p

AV - God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2,
angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + 04136 1, godly 1; 2606

1) (plural)
1a) rulers, judges
1b) divine ones
1c) angels
1d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
2a) god, goddess
2b) godlike one
2c) works or special possessions of God
2d) the (true) God
2e) God

(The Linked Word Project http://www.bju.edu/bible/index.html)

As you can see, these are not finite definitions. 'God' could mean one of many things, so we should look at the context of each instance. The theme of the verses in Isaiah is that of a Redeemer, and so it could easily be said that God actually means Saviour. If that is the case then it is very true, for Christ is our Savior; there is none else by which we may be saved. Moses 1: 6 says, "And I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the similitude of mine Only Begotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the Savior, for he is full of grace and truth; but there is no God beside me, and all things are present with me, for I know them all." 1 Nephi 13: 14 says, "And they must come according to the words which shall be established by the mouth of the Lamb; and the words of the Lamb shall be made known in the records of thy seed, as well as in the records of the twelve apostles of the Lamb; wherefore they both shall be established in one; for there is one God and one Shepherd over all the earth."

Perhaps another reasonable explanation is this:

This apparent discrepancy is easily resolved by understanding the scriptures in context. The term God is a name-title that can mean different things in different contexts. When the scriptures teach that there is only one God they are emphasizing the unity of the members of the one true Godhead, the governing council of the universe. In other words the phrase, "Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God...." actually means "Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one Godhead...." The scriptures repeatedly emphasize the unity of the members of the Godhead to ensure that all men understand that there is only one Godhead to whom we should look for salvation, which is presided over by our Father in Heaven. There are no competing Gods (i.e., Greek mythology) or other sources of salvation. (See Unity)

(Response to anti-Mormon Critics http://www.lightplanet.com/response/index.shtml)

'Jehova' (seen in the Bible as LORD) is more specific in referring to an actual being than is 'God.' Verses must be viewed in context. There is but one God whom we look to as our Father and Saviour. This is a standard belief of Latter-day Saints, in fact I would say it is the first principle of our belief; indeed it must be. Christ is our Saviour. He has a Father, which is the Eternal Father; our Father; the Father of our spirits. There is the Holy Ghost, who converts and proves truth. These three are separate beings, while at the same time part of a whole, which is commonly known as the Godhead or Trinity; we do not attempt to compound these beings into one individual being, as the Trinity commonly understood does. What I find funny is that many Christians have the same view as Mormons of what the Trinity is. Many Christians claim that the three together make God. This is true, but God can be applied in a broader sense, even so that each individual in the Godhead is God; 'God' is a name-title, not a name. It does not necessarily have to refer to a specific being. Even idols are referred to as gods. We are referred to as Gods as well (see Psalms 82: 6; John 10: 34-35). Obviously the Gods written of in the scriptures just mentioned do not use the same definition of the God referred to many times by Isaiah. The 'gods' of John 10: 34 are defined as thus:

2316
theos {theh'-os}
of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with 3588) the
supreme Divinity; TDNT - 3:65,322; n m

AV - God 1320, god 13, godly 3, God-ward + 4214 2, misc 5; 1343

1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities
2) the Godhead, trinity
2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity
2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity
2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity
3) spoken of the only and true God
3a) refers to the things of God
3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him
4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in
any way
4a) God's representative or viceregent
4a1) of magistrates and judges

(LWP)

As a note, you can browse the standard works of the LDS Church by going to lds.org. That way you can get the exact quotes of what you need to cite.

 

[jodrey]

2. The Bible states the gospel was not fully revealed till after Christs death Eph. 3:3-7 (See also Col. 1:26; 1 Peter 1: 1-12; Romans 16:25-26) The book of Mormon preaches this knowledge was held much much earlier (around 545 BC)(2 Nephi 25: 19-23 and 2 Nephi 26:12)

Well, Ephesians is talking specifically about the Gentiles, not the gospel. In other words, the gospel is then given to the Gentiles, which it was withheld from before. 1 Peter 1: 1-12 is all about the trial of faith before salvation. Verse 12 is mainly what I think you were referring to. "Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into." What this means is that things were revealed to others beforetimes for those of the current time.

As for the relevant scriptures, it is important to consider two questions: first, what is the mystery? and second, is this statement universal?

Let me start with some appropriate scriptures from the Doctrine & Covenants:

D&C 6: 7, "Seek not for riches but for wisdom, and behold, the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto you, and then shall you be made rich. Behold, he that hath eternal life is rich."

D&C 42: 65, "Behold, thou shalt observe all these things, and great shall be thy areward; for unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom, but unto the world it is not given to know them."

D&C 121: 27, "Which our forefathers have awaited with anxious expectation to be revealed in the last times, which their minds were pointed to by the angels, as held in reserve for the fulness of their glory;"

So we believe in revelation through dispensation by the Spirit as well.

I have to go to class, so I'll continue this thesis when I get back.

[edit]I will not be elaborating this until I do some more research on the subject. I have an answer, but I want to make sure it's the right one before I post it. In the mean time, let's resolve the first issue.[/edit]

 

[Wrigley]

Today at 02:37 AM HopeTheyDance said this in Post #1

ATTENTION TO ALL THAT JOIN THIS DISCUSSION

This discussion and debate has been thoughly planned. Myself, HopeTheyDance (supporting Christianity) and jodrey (supporting Mormonism) have put together some rules to help this thread go smoothly, without hostility and bitterness. We recognise that both Christians and LDS are passionate about their beliefs. Having said this, we have laid some groundwork to follow for all who participate in this thread. We only ask you respect our request.

1. To get things rolling, we (HopeTheyDance and jordey) have agrred to begin with discussing the BOM and the Bible. Having said that, I will post my inital question to jordey tomorrow morning, in which, he will respond. Prior to providing feedback, please await his response. (and vice versa when he returns a question in my direction).

Obviously this is an open forum and we can not prevent anyone from posting...however, would like only one question to be asked at a time to lessen the confusion and keep the discussion focused and on track.

Sounds reasonable.

2. When providing your feedback to a question or response, please do so as you feel Christ would.  Any critisism (and there will be plenty) should be edifying to Christ. No personal attacks against anyone - disagreement is fine - but we ask you refrain from hostile comments.

Fine, but what constitutes a hostile comment. Is bluntness considered hostile? I ask this with all seriousness, not to be flippant.

3. Should anyone question a belief of Christianity or LDS please support your claims with the church doctrin. Doctrin being the Bible for Christianity, and the Bible, BOM, D&C, Peal of Great Price for LDS. In other words, please do not proclaim ones faith believes in something it does not....check it out first. (Church History will also be accepted for argumanets sake, if being a reliable source of course.)

(For inquiring Christians, you will find LDS beliefs listed at www.lds.org) This site has been approved by jodrey as it is the official website for the Mormon Church

Are any other sites ruled out? How about jefflindsey.com? If I were to post a reference from Alpha and Omega Ministries, would that be considered out of bounds? The reason I ask is that a lot of what Mormonism teaches can be amplified from sermons and such. It would be a shame if those weren't usable.

4. We understand the LDS consider themselves 'Christians', however, for argument sake, the term Christian will be used to define those who believe the Bible is the infallible and COMPLETE Word of God. LDS (Latter Day Saints) will be used to describe Mormon doctrin believers (Modern Day prophets, further revelation etc...)

Sounds good to me.

5. We request patience be given to each side.

Cool

6. Many topics will be discussed, starting with the comparrison of the Holy Bible and the Book of Mormon. There are many other areas we would like to discuss/debate on...such as the Nature of God, Doctrin, interpretation of the scriptures etc....however, will be taking one topic at a time, and as you/we will find - they all tie into one another.

If I may make a suggestion, it may be beneficial to limit the thread to talk about one topic and keep it on topic. Ancillary threads could come from this. This is your baby, so it is your decision.

Tomorrow, April 9, will mark the opening of the discussion. I will pose my first question. (Please keep in mind..I am on PST...I will try and post early)

Please note - we are not professional debaters. I ask all my Christian brothers and sisters to support me and one another throughout this thread - I will ask for advice or your comments if an area is broached that I am unsure of. I would also ask your kind correction if I am in error on any point I make, or not being clear in my expressions. I do not claim to know everything. I also ask the same respect be given to jodrey from His LDS supporters.

 May God Bless this thread.

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches"

This should be an interesting exercise. I'll lurk and chime in.

 

[Grace_Alone4gives]

Wringley - ALpha and Omega Ministries is fine.

 

[Grace_Alone4gives]

Many Christians claim that the three together make God. 

I would like to point out jodrey, that this is not the case at all...Trinitarians do not believe in three seperate beings. We believe in ONE being, existing in three co-eaqual, co-eternal persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Jesus is not 1/3 God, the Father is not 1/3 God, nor is the Holy Spirit 1/3 God. Together they are God, yes, but 100% God on their own also.

The common misunderstanding of those who are not familiar with Trinitarian Doctrin, is the thought that we worship 3 seperate Gods. This IS NOT the case at all. I reiterate, they are three seperate persons - not beings.

I fail to like to use of the word person when defining the Trinity as the term person, in our minds, automatically brings with it a ton of baggage, giving the word person an image, a time frame etc... However, God has no being or end...EVER.

In addition, the Father is not a being, has no body.  God is a spirit without flesh and bones (John 4:24; Luke 24:39) - This is another discrepancy comparing now the D&C with the Bible as the LDS faith claims he (the father) does. "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's" (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22. Compare with Alma 18:26-27; 22:9-10)

This is kind of abstract; even the Bible speaks of God in a plural sense (Elohim). PoGP, Abraham 4: 27-28 says, "So the Gods went down to organize man in their own image, in the image of the Gods to form they him, male and female to form they them. And the Gods said: We will bless them. And the Gods said: We will cause them to be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and to have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." This is parallel to Genesis 1: 26, which says, "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

This is peculiar...I ask you to ask yourself the following question...why would God rewrite His work? Was Genisis not complete? Did He forget to include certain data the first time? Did He change?

Yes, the book of Abraham in the LDS scriptures very much resebles the book of Genesis in regards to creation - but implies a completley different doctrin.

The Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament are inspired by God.."thus saith the Lord" appears approx 2,000 times in the Hebrew books. Many Hebrew authors claimed and declared inspiration (2 Sam. 23: 1, 2, Ezek. 1: 3, Jere. 1: 6-9). So, why would God 'add' to his inspired Word. Not only that...but change it.

You may ask where I am going with this...I will get to the point. Your mentioned the pluralty of the Hebrew word Elohim in Genesis. Yes, Elohim is plural. Does that mean that there is more than one God as the book of Abraham suggests? No, of course not...the Bible declares there is only One God. So how do we define the pluralty of 'elohim'?

Let us discuss what it is not, as opposed to the BOM. According to the LDS faith, one of the Beings of the Godhead is the Holy Ghost, correct? So, if Genesis 1:26 is referring to  three seperate beings or gods when the word 'elohim' is spoken, the Holy Ghost is one of those beings, or gods, correct?

If elohim means three seperate beings, or gods, as the book of Abraham would suggest, then how would the LDS justify Geneis 1:2b where is states: 

Gen 1:2b And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

If I was to translate elohim in the above verse the way you would have me to, I would say "The Spirit of the The gods..." Meaning that the Spirit of three seperate beings, gods, in the Godhead share one Spirit - which would no longer justify them as seperate.

Even idols are referred to as gods. We are referred to as Gods as well (see Psalms 82: 6; John 10: 34-35).

I understand that the hebrew word elohim is also used to describe 'gods'  (you noted psalm 82:6) - However, one must note the traslation of the text. Its meaning in Psalm 82:6 does not imply that men are gods. It rather refers specifically to the fact that God has appointed judges to act in a dignified, God-like manner in the discharge of their God-appointed responsibilities. In addition,G and g are different, and translated that way for a reason. Men are referred to as gods, not Gods. The context here, and that of Elohim used in Genisis is different. I assume you agree with me here.

We must note we can not render the heart of the writer when his pen hit the paper with this God breathed revelation, but the translators of the original text did - and the words themselves were inspired from God Himself.

Now, to not turn this into a Godhead Trinity debate (that will come later) I will sum the above up with reiterating that the Book of Abraham with it's 'The gods" translation does not verify Genisis 1:1-2, 26 - infact it does contradict it. If it did not contradict it, it would read differently.

 

In Christ,

HTD

 

 sites used to gain knowledge of subjects: www.lds.org, www.carm.org, Apologetics site for Christianity (recommended)

 

[jodrey]

Question: What is Alpha and Omega Ministries?

Allow me to clarify something. You may post quotes from anti-Mormon sites to clarify your point as long as you give the citation. Also, please post the quotes directly into the thread if you can, and cut out the most pertinent parts, for everyone's time and ease. The reason I said not to do this at first was because many of those sites claim the LDS have doctrines we do not have, say we believe things we do not, etc. So, if you have a problem with an LDS doctrine, you first need to cite that from an authoritative LDS web site such as www.lds.org or www.mormon.org so that we all know that the LDS Church really teaches that. As said in the preceding thread, The Journal of Discourses is not authoritative for Church doctrine, so please keep that in mind in your inquiries and rebuttals, as many LDS-antagonistic sites enjoy calling the JoD authoritative and base their critiques around it. (See previous thread for further discussion of the JoD.) Is this agreeable, Hope?

 

[Grace_Alone4gives]

jodrey - I will be quoting some from "Articles of faith"

 

[jodrey]

The book by James E. Talmage or the statements by Joseph Smith? I don't have a copy of the book by Talmage, so you'll have to give me the full context. I am enjoying Jesus the Christ by the same author; it's a marvelous book.

 

[Wrigley]

Today at 05:24 PM jodrey said this in Post #10

Question: What is Alpha and Omega Ministries?

Allow me to clarify something. You may post quotes from anti-Mormon sites to clarify your point as long as you give the citation. Also, please post the quotes directly into the thread if you can, and cut out the most pertinent parts, for everyone's time and ease. The reason I said not to do this at first was because many of those sites claim the LDS have doctrines we do not have, say we believe things we do not, etc. So, if you have a problem with an LDS doctrine, you first need to cite that from an authoritative LDS web site such as www.lds.org or www.mormon.org so that we all know that the LDS Church really teaches that. As said in the preceding thread, The Journal of Discourses is not authoritative for Church doctrine, so please keep that in mind in your inquiries and rebuttals, as many LDS-antagonistic sites enjoy calling the JoD authoritative and base their critiques around it. (See previous thread for further discussion of the JoD.) Is this agreeable, Hope?

Allow me to clarify something. You may post quotes from anti-Mormon sites to clarify your point as long as you give the citation.

If you make the claim that alpha and omega ministries is a "anti-Mormon" site, can I make the claim that lds.org is an "anti-Christian" site?

I don't want to muddy things up too much, but to keep with the desired tone of this thread, maybe "non-Mormon" site would be a better term.

Wouldn't you agree jodrey?

 

[jodrey]

I would like to point out jodrey, that this is not the case at all...Trinitarians do not believe in three seperate beings. We believe in ONE being, existing in three co-eaqual, co-eternal persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Jesus is not 1/3 God, the Father is not 1/3 God, nor is the Holy Spirit 1/3 God. Together they are God, yes, but 100% God on their own also.

Perhaps you believe this, but the Trinity is commonly misunderstood. I have spoken with many Christians who do not understand what they are supposed to believe, and so end giving the answer that God is basically a group of three individuals. This is almost what you have said, but not quite. We must understand one thing about the Trinity right now -- it is logically wrong. Those who are familiar with the concept of Trinity will openly admit this, and the real test is whether the Bible testifies of it and whether the early Christians believed in it. So, I advise you not to spend time on defining the Trinity with numbers and that when we come to it we will delve straight into its legitimacy in a Biblical and historical sense.

In addition, the Father is not a being, has no body. God is a spirit without flesh and bones (John 4:24; Luke 24:39) - This is another discrepancy comparing now the D&C with the Bible as the LDS faith claims he (the father) does. "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's" (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22. Compare with Alma 18:26-27; 22:9-10)

We'll get to that eventually. For now let's just concentrate, shall we?

This is peculiar...I ask you to ask yourself the following question...why would God rewrite His work? Was Genisis not complete? Did He forget to include certain data the first time? Did He change?

As you know, prophetic writings were copied from the time they were written. The book of Abraham was translated by Joseph Smith from some papyri he obtained. The book of Abraham is another record. That doesn't make Genesis wrong. Abraham contains more information, expounding the account of Genesis, but it does not contradict it.

Yes, the book of Abraham in the LDS scriptures very much resebles the book of Genesis in regards to creation - but implies a completley different doctrin.

How?

The Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament are inspired by God.."thus saith the Lord" appears approx 2,000 times in the Hebrew books. Many Hebrew authors claimed and declared inspiration (2 Sam. 23: 1, 2, Ezek. 1: 3, Jere. 1: 6-9). So, why would God 'add' to his inspired Word. Not only that...but change it.

Well, one of the issues we will slowly be getting to the bottom of is whether the gospel of the Bible was really changed by the Book of Mormon and other works, or if it was clarified, explained, and added to. As for why He'd add to it, that's fairly obvious: it didn't contain all that was necessary to know. We know this by Paul's words to the Corinthians -- 1 Corinthians 13: 9-12 says, "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." Even after Jesus was born, killed, and resurrected, the apostles still did not hold the entirety of truth. This implies that the Bible is not complete in doctrine, for how could God's messengers have related what they did not know? I wrote a little about this in the previous thread. Maybe it would be expedient for us to discuss the nature of prophets and their relationship to God.

You may ask where I am going with this...I will get to the point. Your mentioned the pluralty of the Hebrew word Elohim in Genesis. Yes, Elohim is plural. Does that mean that there is more than one God as the book of Abraham suggests? No, of course not...the Bible declares there is only One God. So how do we define the pluralty of 'elohim'?

I was actually hoping you would notice the "us" in Genesis 1: 26. This implies that there were multiples involved in the creation; who these beings are is difficult to know from the biblical account. Many people think it was God and His angels, others think God and all of us before being born. The Book of Abraham shows us that the "us" was actually God the Eternal Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. The Bible declares there is one God, and I agree. Of course, this particular subject I have already explained. The Trinity exists because of the apparent contradiction; there is a Heavenly Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost (and they are One), yet there is only one God. So, the Trinity pleases both sides. It must be expressed that Mormons also have this contradiction settled in our doctrine, as I have explained; we just do it in a different way: what I feel to be correct.

Let us discuss what it is not, as opposed to the BOM. According to the LDS faith, one of the Beings of the Godhead is the Holy Ghost, correct? So, if Genesis 1:26 is referring to three seperate beings or gods when the word 'elohim' is spoken, the Holy Ghost is one of those beings, or gods, correct?

If elohim means three seperate beings, or gods, as the book of Abraham would suggest, then how would the LDS justify Geneis 1:2b where is states:

Gen 1:2b And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

If I was to translate elohim in the above verse the way you would have me to, I would say "The Spirit of the The gods..." Meaning that the Spirit of three seperate beings, gods, in the Godhead share one Spirit - which would no longer justify them as seperate.

As I have already stated, the Book of Mormon also proclaims One God, as does the Doctrine and Covenants and all the prophets. The controversy lies in the meaning of "God."

As for the verse: "The Spirit of God" is another name for the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost could have very well been traversing the waters of the world while our spiritual Father said to His Son, "Let us go down and make man in our image."

I understand that the hebrew word elohim is also used to describe 'gods' (you noted psalm 82:6) - However, one must note the traslation of the text. Its meaning in Psalm 82:6 does not imply that men are gods. It rather refers specifically to the fact that God has appointed judges to act in a dignified, God-like manner in the discharge of their God-appointed responsibilities. In addition,G and g are different, and translated that way for a reason. Men are referred to as gods, not Gods. The context here, and that of Elohim used in Genisis is different. I assume you agree with me here.

That is exactly what I was trying to prove, thank you. The word "God" and "god" in the Old Testament have variances in definition, and therefore are quite dynamic in linguistic usage. Saying "There is only one God" and "There are many Gods" could very well both be true, depending on how you define the word through the surrounding context.

Now, to not turn this into a Godhead Trinity debate (that will come later) I will sum the above up with reiterating that the Book of Abraham with it's 'The gods" translation does not verify Genisis 1:1-2, 26 - infact it does contradict it. If it did not contradict it, it would read differently.

The ONLY way the two are different (besides semantics) lies in the explicit style of the Book of Abraham, which states that there are Gods. Genesis refers to multiplicity; it just is not specific in saying that there are actual Gods. So, God could have been referencing Himself and others who were not Gods. How do you come up with a contradiction? I can't prove that the "us" is the Father and the Son, but to say there is a contradiction is ridiculous.

 

[jodrey]

Today at 05:41 PM Wrigley said this in Post #13




Allow me to clarify something. You may post quotes from anti-Mormon sites to clarify your point as long as you give the citation.

If you make the claim that alpha and omega ministries is a "anti-Mormon" site, can I make the claim that lds.org is an "anti-Christian" site?

I don't want to muddy things up too much, but to keep with the desired tone of this thread, maybe "non-Mormon" site would be a better term.

Wouldn't you agree jodrey?

Maybe you confused something here. My paragraphs were meant to be viewed separately. I really don't know what Alpha and Omega Ministries is. If you'd like to tell me then I'd appreciate it.

No, there is a difference between Christian sites which promote the Christian faith and anti-Mormon sites which demote the Mormon faith. They have different objectives. It does not really matter in this case I guess anyway. If you're stating an LDS doctrine you need an authoritative citation, and that even discludes LDS apologetics sites. If you are arguing a point then you can quote what you like; just make sure you have the facts straight first. That's all I ask on this point.

(edited for typo)

 

[Wrigley]

Today at 06:17 PM jodrey said this in Post #15




Maybe you confused something here. My paragraphs were meant to be viewed separately. I really don't know what Alpha and Omega Ministries is. If you'd like to tell me then I'd appreciate it.

No, there is a difference between Christian sites which promote the Christian faith and anti-Mormon sites which demote the Mormon faith. They have different objectives. It does not really matter in this case I guess anyway. If you're stating an LDS doctrine you need an authoritative citation, and that even discludes LDS apologetics sites. If you are arguing a point then you can quote what you like; just make sure you have the facts straight first. That's all I ask on this point.

(edited for typo)

No confusion here jodrey. I just wanted to point out what your initial reaction was to a site you didn't know about. Which was to label it "anti-Mormon". We all take pre-conceived notions into this thread, one that I believe you need to be careful with is assuming the worst.

Here's the link to Alpha & Omega Ministries.

http://aomin.org/

 

[Grace_Alone4gives]

We must understand one thing about the Trinity right now -- it is logically wrong. Those who are familiar with the concept of Trinity will openly admit this, and the real test is whether the Bible testifies of it and whether the early Christians believed in it. So, I advise you not to spend time on defining the Trinity with numbers and that when we come to it we will delve straight into its legitimacy in a Biblical and historical sense.

Find me a trinitarian who stated the concept of the Trinity is wrong...for I have never found one. It is NOT logically wrong - infact it makes the most sense. It is suffice to say that believeing in 'Gods' is logically, if not, morally wrong. The Trinity is a beautiful doctrin and from your idea of it's roots - I see you do not fully comprehend it.

It is true that some Christians do not know what they believe when they say they believe in the Trinity. (Same thing goes for Mormons and their doctrin in my experience) However, I am not one - you are talking with someone who studies theology and in particularly the Trinity. So do not fret - for the most part - I know my stuff. But we will get to the Trinity when we come to it - Let us stay on topic on the legitimacy of the BOM and D&C.

jodrey - let me ask you a few questions on the Mormon Doctrin, true or false. I request you simply answer the questions.

1. The Trinity is three separate gods.

2. Hell is not eternal.

3. Celestial marriage

Please answer these for me.

Victoria

 

[jodrey]

Today at 06:30 PM Wrigley said this in Post #16




No confusion here jodrey. I just wanted to point out what your initial reaction was to a site you didn't know about. Which was to label it "anti-Mormon". We all take pre-conceived notions into this thread, one that I believe you need to be careful with is assuming the worst.

Here's the link to Alpha & Omega Ministries.

http://aomin.org/

You're still mistaking me. Where did I claim that my initial reaction was that it was anti-Mormon? My initial reaction was actually, "What is this organization they are talking about"? There was no prejudice involved. I meant it as a simple inquiry. Sorry if you misunderstood. (Oh, and thanks for the link.) Anywho...

 

[jodrey]

Find me a trinitarian who stated the concept of the Trinity is wrong...for I have never found one. It is NOT logically wrong - infact it makes the most sense. It is suffice to say that believeing in 'Gods' is logically, if not, morally wrong. The Trinity is a beautiful doctrin and from your idea of it's roots - I see you do not fully comprehend it.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/39149.html


Also, you're going to need to give support for your claims that the Mormon concept of the Godhead is wrong. I believe your only offensive angle was that certain scriptures speak of a single God. Since I have explained what they mean to us, you have no other foundation for saying that our conception of God is wrong. However, I do have a base for claiming that the modern Trinity is logically and mathematically wrong:

1 + 1 + 1 = 3
1 + 1 + 1 != 1
1 * 1 * 1 = 1 // This does not apply; this cannot happen with people in the laws of physics, therefore we cannot understand it if it is true; we must evaluate and then compare, according to standard law of mathematics and process execution -- ALWAYS SIMPLIFY
1 = 1 // So, how does this prove the Trinity in any way?

jodrey - let me ask you a few questions on the Mormon Doctrin, true or false. I request you simply answer the questions.

1. The Trinity is three separate gods.

2. Hell is not eternal.

3. Celestial marriage

Please answer these for me.

First of all, why are you suddenly bringing up new topics when we haven't finished the first two? We haven't even finished the first one that I can tell. Or are you giving up that point?

1.) True.

2.) Depends what you mean by "hell"; there are two different "kinds."

3.) What about it?

You know, you could just as easily look up these subjects yourself. You don't need me to answer them for you. Or are you just trying to see if I know the answers?

Please, stay on topic. If you want to give up a point then say it. I will do the same. That way we'll know when a question has been properly addressed.

 

[Jedi]

As I have already stated, the Book of Mormon also proclaims One God, as does the Doctrine and Covenants and all the prophets. The controversy lies in the meaning of "God."

And I don't suppose the whole "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become" idea would have anything to do with the Mormon definition of God (and our relationship to Him). According to this, God is really our equal, except for his only advantage being the amount of time he's had on his hands in order to advance.

Backing this up, in the LDS encyclopedic work Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie, page 321, we read: “God was once as we are now, an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder Heavens. I say if you were to see him today you would see him like a man in form like yourselves and all the person and image of man. I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil. God was once a man like us and dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ did, and you have got to learn to be gods yourselves the same as all gods before you. Namely by going from one small degree to another, from a small capacity to a greater one.”

Seems to me that's saying humans, Jesus Christ, and God Almighty are all in the same boat of progression here, meaning the Mormon doctrine of God differs greatly from the Christian God, who has been God "from everlasting to everlasting" (Psalms 90:2).