LDS Damnation for Refusal to Become Mormon

[Rescued One]

You believe they are false prophets who teach false teachings. Many of the Jews believed that Jesus Christ was a false prophet teaching false doctrine. Jesus Christ's apostles and many of His followers were killed for believing His words. Yet there were people who who believed on his word because they knew they were true. I have read the Book of Mormon and I know it is the word of God.

I know that those who are blind don't see truth. God led me out of Mormonism.

 

[He is the way]

Why do anti-Trinitarians always post these verses as though Jesus Christ did not know His own relationship to the Father? He constantly says things like "This command I received of My Father", and also "Neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand [...], and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand", etc.

In truth, St. John Chrysostom (and not only him; far from it...he is just the easiest to get to online) dealt with the lifeless, senseless implication of our Mormon friend way back in the late 4th century, when he wrote in his twentieth homily on St. Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians the following (bold added):

Nor yet, if you observe, has he distributed the names as if belonging exclusively, assigning to the Son the name Lord, and to the Father, God. For the Scripture uses also often to interchange them; as when it says, (Psalm 110:1) "The Lord says unto My Lord"; and again, (Psalm 65:8) "Wherefore God Your God has appointed You"; and, (Romans 9:5) "Of Whom is Christ according to the flesh, Who is God over all." And in many instances you may see these names changing their places. Besides, if they were allotted to each nature severally, and if the Son were not God, and God as the Father, yet continuing a Son: after saying, "but to us there is but One God", it would have been superfluous, his adding the word "Father," with a view to declare the Unbegotten. For the word of God was sufficient to explain this, if it were such as to denote Him only.

And this is not all, but there is another remark to make: that if you say, "Because it is said 'One God,' therefore the word God does not apply to the Son"; observe that the same holds of the Son also. For the Son also is called One Lord, yet we do not maintain that therefore the term Lord applies to Him alone. So then, the same force which the expression "One" has, applied to the Son, it has also, applied to the Father. And as the Father is not thrust out from being the Lord, in the same sense as the Son is the Lord, because He, the Son, is spoken of as one Lord; so neither does it cast out the Son from being God, in the same sense as the Father is God, because the Father is styled One God.​

Your objections were dealt with ~1,600 years ago, some 1,400 years before JS was even born, let alone before he preached any of his terrible blasphemies. Don't you think if you can't come up with anything that wasn't already answered nearly a millennia and a half before your prophet was even born, it might just be time to look into a different religion?

Christ overturned the religious and social expectations of the leaders of His day and of His own people. Joseph Smith did nothing of the kind, and clearly only recycled old objections that the Church itself had answered 1,400 years before he was even alive. Had it not been for the fact that he was in a religiously confused area (the "burned over district" of NY, which abounded with all kinds of different preachers), he would not have been able to use this 'perfect storm' of ignorance and magical worldviews to his advantage in pulling off a scheme by repackaging old heresies and a fantastical story about the origins of Native Americans into a new religion that he then claimed was a 'restoration' of some type of 'original, uncorrupted' Christianity which, not surprisingly, nobody who knows thing one about any kind of traditional Christianity can take even slightly seriously.

But you don't have to continue in Joseph Smith's, and Martin Harris', and Oliver Cowdery's (et al.) ignorance. Especially today, with all the information available to you via the very machine on which you type your posts, you could yourself prove the foundations of Mormonism to be as hollow and faulty as they in fact are in mere minutes, if you would only free yourself to look beyond the confines placed on your thoughts by the vice grip of the Mormon organization. You're in a cult, my friend. Get out before it is too late and you must stand before the Just Judge (as we all will), and answer for the lies you told against Him in service to Joseph Smith, who cannot save you.

Was it really adequately dealt with?:

(New Testament | John 14:28)

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

(New Testament | John 5:36)

36 ¶ But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

(New Testament | John 20:17)

17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.


The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are NOT of the same substance. These scriptures show that the creeds are wrong.

 

[He is the way]

I know that those who are blind don't see truth. God led me out of Mormonism.

I will follow Jesus Christ, Son of the Father, not the erroneous creeds.

 

[dzheremi]

Was it really adequately dealt with

Yes. Only those who hate Christianity consider Jesus to not be God. If you read those verses as saying that Jesus Christ is somehow less than God, then guess what? You're an Arian. And the Arians were thrown out by the entire Church, and have never, ever been recognized by anyone to be in line with what the apostles taught. So if that's what you think Joseph Smith was 'restoring', then you're condemning your own prophet as a liar and a fraud for claiming to restore original, first century Christianity. It doesn't even fit with Mormonism's own idea of the 'Great Apostasy', wherein Christianity was 'corrupted' by AD 200 (or 170, or whenever), because Arius wasn't even born until 256 AD.

(New Testament | John 14:28)

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

Let us look at this not in isolation, but together with the Apostles' expectation and understanding, which gives the context needed to understand what Christ was saying.

We can do so by looking at it from the very beginning of the chapter. Christ is teaching His apostles:

1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father's house are many mansions; 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

4 And where I go you know, and the way you know." 5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?" 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. 7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him." 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.

12 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father. 13 And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask anything in My name, I will do it.

15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever-- 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.

18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. 19 "A little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. 20 At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. 21 He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." 22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" 23 Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. 24 He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.

25 "These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. 26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. 27 Peace I leave with you, My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

28 You have heard Me say to you, 'I am going away and coming back to you.' If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I am going to the Father,' for My Father is greater than I. 29 And now I have told you before it comes, that when it does come to pass, you may believe. 30 I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in Me. 31 But that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father gave Me commandment, so I do. Arise, let us go from here.

+++

So He begins by talking to His disciples on the eve of His crucifixion, telling them that He is going away that He might prepare a place for them where He is going (His Father's house/heaven). He says that they know where He is going, and the way there. They do not understand, so makes it more explicit:

"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." So in response to Philip's protest that they do not even know where He is going, so they can't possibly know the way there, He tells them they know the way through knowing Him. And "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him." Again, they know Him (the Father) by knowing Him (Christ). But they still don't get it:

Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.​

They are not taking Him at His word, not because they don't believe because they do not understand what those words mean (remember: this is all before His crucifixion and resurrection), so Jesus says "I don't speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." These are religious, first century Jews. They do not necessarily understand every word that Jesus says, but they do understand that God the Father is the One God, because that was a common way to talk about God by that point. So, since they don't understand (yet) what Jesus is saying, since His resurrection has not been made manifest to them, He is essentially saying "If you're not going to believe Me based on what I say, because you don't get it, then recognize that I'm not saying so of Myself to begin with, but that I say and do what the Father has given me to say and do, so look at the miracles I have already done -- by your own understanding, these are proof in themselves that the Father works through Me, whether you understand what I'm saying right now or not." (Because His saying "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father" resulted in them asking Him to show them the Father when that wasn't the point.)

This is all the build-up to the verse you have chosen to isolate from its context, wherein Christ says "You have heard Me say to you, 'I am going away and coming back to you.' If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I am going to the Father,' for My Father is greater than I." Not only can this likewise be understood as the above example is -- Christ talking to His disciples in terms they will understand -- but also is necessary to consider in light of the intervening promise that with His going away, He will send them the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, so that they will not be as orphans after He leaves.

The properly literate Christian understands these things as having been spoken in the time they were (before His crucifixion), to the people they were (first century Jews), in the context they were (the Apostles' anxiety over Jesus' message that He would be leaving them soon), and on the topic they were (Why they should be rejoicing that He is going away). To take any of these away by presenting one 'bald' verse makes it seem as though it is appropriate to conclude based on the verse in isolation that Christ must've been talking about His own ontological relationship with the Father. This is not the case. That is dealt with all over the chapter, of course ("If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father"), but is not what is dealt with in that verse. We know that because when we read it in context, we can see from the very beginning of the chapter how Christ tailor's His message to what His disciples can understand in the context in which they are, as in the earlier "I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." Would you conclude from this fragment that Jesus is saying that He does not have authority in Himself? Maybe you would, but I'm going to guess that a Christian would not, because a Christian knows that Jesus also said "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth" (Matthew 28:18), and that this is not attenuated by the fact that it has been given to Him (by the Father, of course), since of course Christ's ontological relationship with the Father is that He is the incarnate Word of God, so the authority (power, might, eternality, etc.) that He is has is the Father's authority, because He and the Father are One. It is a testimony to their homoousion relation to one another, not a denial of it.

(New Testament | John 5:36)

36 ¶ But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

Duh. See everything above. Had the Father not sent Him, He wouldn't have been telling the truth concerning anything He said and did. Christ's earthly life only makes even the slightest bit of sense in the context of His having been sent from the Father.

(New Testament | John 20:17)

17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Again, duh. Also again, Christ's earthly life only makes even the slightest bit of sense in the context of His having been sent from the Father. Christ was incarnate as a first century Jew. Who was the God of the first century Jews? God the Father, the Father of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ. In light of that, what else should He have said?

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are NOT of the same substance.

They absolutely are. Stop your blasphemy.

These scriptures show that the creeds are wrong.

These scriptures show that you don't understand them. Maybe if you and all Mormons stopped bathing yourselves in the pond scum of the Arians (a.k.a. Joseph Smith's theology) for five seconds, you'd be able to.

 

[He is the way]

Yes. Only those who hate Christianity consider Jesus to not be God. If you read those verses as saying that Jesus Christ is somehow less than God, then guess what? You're an Arian. And the Arians were thrown out by the entire Church, and have never, ever been recognized by anyone to be in line with what the apostles taught. So if that's what you think Joseph Smith was 'restoring', then you're condemning your own prophet as a liar and a fraud for claiming to restore original, first century Christianity. It doesn't even fit with Mormonism's own idea of the 'Great Apostasy', wherein Christianity was 'corrupted' by AD 200 (or 170, or whenever), because Arius wasn't even born until 256 AD.



Let us look at this not in isolation, but together with the Apostles' expectation and understanding, which gives the context needed to understand what Christ was saying.

We can do so by looking at it from the very beginning of the chapter. Christ is teaching His apostles:


So He begins by talking to His disciples on the eve of His crucifixion, telling them that He is going away that He might prepare a place for them where He is going (His Father's house/heaven). He says that they know where He is going, and the way there. They do not understand, so makes it more explicit:

"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." So in response to Philip's protest that they do not even know where He is going, so they can't possibly know the way there, He tells them they know the way through knowing Him. And "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him." Again, they know Him (the Father) by knowing Him (Christ). But they still don't get it:

Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.​

They are not taking Him at His word, not because they don't believe because they do not understand what those words mean (remember: this is all before His crucifixion and resurrection), so Jesus says "I don't speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." These are religious, first century Jews. They do not necessarily understand every word that Jesus says, but they do understand that God the Father is the One God, because that was a common way to talk about God by that point. So, since they don't understand (yet) what Jesus is saying, since His resurrection has not been made manifest to them, He is essentially saying "If you're not going to believe Me based on what I say, because you don't get it, then recognize that I'm not saying so of Myself to begin with, but that I say and do what the Father has given me to say and do, so look at the miracles I have already done -- by your own understanding, these are proof in themselves that the Father works through Me, whether you understand what I'm saying right now or not." (Because His saying "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father" resulted in them asking Him to show them the Father when that wasn't the point.)

This is all the build-up to the verse you have chosen to isolate from its context, wherein Christ says "You have heard Me say to you, 'I am going away and coming back to you.' If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, 'I am going to the Father,' for My Father is greater than I." Not only can this likewise be understood as the above example is -- Christ talking to His disciples in terms they will understand -- but also is necessary to consider in light of the intervening promise that with His going away, He will send them the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, so that they will not be as orphans after He leaves.

The properly literate Christian understands these things as having been spoken in the time they were (before His crucifixion), to the people they were (first century Jews), in the context they were (the Apostles' anxiety over Jesus' message that He would be leaving them soon), and on the topic they were (Why they should be rejoicing that He is going away). To take any of these away by presenting one 'bald' verse makes it seem as though it is appropriate to conclude based on the verse in isolation that Christ must've been talking about His own ontological relationship with the Father. This is not the case. That is dealt with all over the chapter, of course ("If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father"), but is not what is dealt with in that verse. We know that because when we read it in context, we can see from the very beginning of the chapter how Christ tailor's His message to what His disciples can understand in the context in which they are, as in the earlier "I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works." Would you conclude from this fragment that Jesus is saying that He does not have authority in Himself? Maybe you would, but I'm going to guess that a Christian would not, because a Christian knows that Jesus also said "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth" (Matthew 28:18), and that this is not attenuated by the fact that it has been given to Him (by the Father, of course), since of course Christ's ontological relationship with the Father is that He is the incarnate Word of God, so the authority (power, might, eternality, etc.) that He is has is the Father's authority, because He and the Father are One. It is a testimony to their homoousion relation to one another, not a denial of it.



Duh. See everything above. Had the Father not sent Him, He wouldn't have been telling the truth concerning anything He said and did. Christ's earthly life only makes even the slightest bit of sense in the context of His having been sent from the Father.



Again, duh. Also again, Christ's earthly life only makes even the slightest bit of sense in the context of His having been sent from the Father. Christ was incarnate as a first century Jew. Who was the God of the first century Jews? God the Father, the Father of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ. In light of that, what else should He have said?



They absolutely are. Stop your blasphemy.



These scriptures show that you don't understand them. Maybe if you and all Mormons stopped bathing yourselves in the pond scum of the Arians (a.k.a. Joseph Smith's theology) for five seconds, you'd be able to.

You say homoousion, but the Bible states:

(New Testament | Hebrews 1:3)

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Not the same thing. However, since Jesus is in the express image of the Father. That does explain why seeing Him would be like seeing the Father. We do believe that Jesus Christ is a God and our Savior, but He is our brother. We are to worship the Father, He is our God.

 

[dzheremi]

Yes, the Father is God. ("We/I believe in One God, God the Father...", as we pray in the Creed.) Where you and all anti-Trinitarian heretics fall is in not understanding the relationship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to one another, which is a revealed truth of God as surely as any other fundamental fact of the Christian religion likewise is, and so cannot be denied without denying the religion wholesale. Any form of anti-Trinitarianism is inherently therefore anti-Christian and anti-Christ, and in deep error. Mormonism says they are "united in purpose" and similar things that can be said of any three beings who are in no way divine, not apprehending our Lord's words when He tells His disciples that if they have known Him, they have known the Father, and many similar words which have always been understood by the Christian Church in the Trinitarian fashion. The anti-Trinitarians of the past such as your true fathers the Arians were cast out for exactly the same insubordination toward the Word of God and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, Who is God and has brought to us the perfect faith which is authored and completed by Christ Himself, Who promised that the Holy Spirit would lead His apostles and disciples into all truth -- which He has ever since His descending upon the gathered believers on the day of Pentecost, which is the baptism of the Church into the world.

This is why all creedal statements (whether the Orthodox Creed of Nicene-Constantinople or any other) affirm both the oneness of God and the Trinitarian understanding of God -- orthodox Christian Trinitarianism being a kind of monotheism (not polytheism, as in Mormonism and other religions). That you and others who are beset with the disease of carnality in their thinking cannot understand that is frankly not our problem. No one can liberate you from the shackles of soul-damning Mormon heresy but God, and your lack of cooperation with Him in this will be your own undoing. Lord have mercy.

From the Prime hour of the Agpeya (Coptic Horologion/Book of the Hours), we recite the faith of the Church, including the affirmation of its origin outside of our own intellectual understanding (lest we fall into the trap of the Mormons and others who, oppressed by their own theology and its need to supersede Christianity, feel that this was all decided by man; No! That is not the case!):

One is God the Father of everyone.

One is His Son, Jesus Christ the Word, Who took flesh and died; and rose from the dead on the third day, and raised us with Him.

One is the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, one in His Hypostasis, proceeding from the Father, purifying the whole creation, and teaching us to worship the Holy Trinity, one in divinity and one in essence. We praise Him and bless Him forever. Amen. +

+++

So we are taught this by God and will not give it up for anything. Send one or a million modern day prophets to tell us otherwise, and we will watch as we have for 2,000 years as their prophecies and powers (given to them by the delusion of their followers, not God) wither and die with them, as they are not planted in the firm foundation of having been taught by God Himself.

As I have in the past, I would recommend to all (Mormon, non-Mormon, whatever) the beautiful book by author (and I think now priest?) Daniel Fanous called "Taught by God: Making Sense of the Difficult Sayings of Jesus". It goes into all of these difficult passages ("My Father is Greater than I", etc.) from a very traditional, solidly Trinitarian/Nicene-conforming perspective (the author is Coptic Orthodox), very often drawing upon Jewish sources to place Christ's sayings in their proper Jewish context. It's really, really helpful to avoid the types of errors that Mormons and others make in reading into the scriptures their own biases (something which everyone can do, of course; this is why we need books like these to remind of us the historical reality of Christ's incarnation, which reaches beyond our modern confines).

 

[BigDaddy4]

What?!? Context matters???

 

[dzheremi]

Shocking, I know.

I mean, I love taking random passages out for a walk sometimes, too (say, if I just want to meditate on a particular passage that I come across for what I feel it means for me in the context of my own personal struggles, rather than its original context), but even then you've got to put them back where you originally found them. There's a reason why the Bible is not like the Qur'an (which is not arranged chronologically, but by length of individual 'revelation') or some other book that doesn't form a coherent narrative.

Think about it this way, my Mormon friends: when the BOM is quoted out of context to make points that you know are against your religion, you attempt to correct the person who does so, right? "Sorry, that's not right -- it actually means XYZ." And you should feel supremely confident in doing so, since after all, it is uniquely your book.

Well for Christians, the Holy Bible is uniquely our book. That the Jews and the Mormons and in some sense the Muslims may lay claim to it in this or that regard is of very little concern to us, as we follow what was passed down to us from a very early time by the fathers of the Christian Church in particular, and the Christian Church is the only legitimate author, inheritor, and establisher of it (the Jewish Biblical canons, like Rabbinic Judaism itself, are an "AD" invention, so while it may seem paradoxical, we can in fact rightly claim that our religion predates Judaism as anyone post-70 AD would have known it, since if you'll recall the nascent Christians were thrown out of the Temple circa AD 50, some twenty years before its destruction).

You do not simply cede your Book of Mormon to anyone seeking to undo your religion, and likewise neither will we simply say "Oh, that's okay, you have your own way of interpreting the Bible that is in line with your unique theology", because that theology is, as I've already discussed, inherently anti-Christian and anti-Christ. Maybe we cannot stop you from claiming whatever it is you do about it (and really, I'm personally inclined to say that's fine; better that the heresies be openly around and identified and fought against than suppressed, because this gives us a chance to articulate and defend the correct positions; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:19), but you really shouldn't expect to just be able to say whatever seems to be the case to you without backing outside of your uniquely Mormon sources. You will note that with very few exceptions (which I always note as exceptions, so that nobody will be confused), I will only quote from "pan-Christian" (i.e., not specifically Orthodox, Catholic, or Protestant, but recognized by all) writers of the first five centuries of Christianity on matters of Biblical interpretation.

You don't have any interpreters from any time within the first five centuries of Christianity, do you? Strange, that.

 

[Peter1000]

Only God has the ability to give sight to the blind.

Isaiah 42:15-17

Do you mean Jesus, remember when Jesus healed the blind man, God the Father was in heaven.

 

[Peter1000]

That wasn't God changing His mind. He never indented for Abraham to kill His son. It was a test of love and faith. And also there are conditional trials, Nineveh repented, so He did not wipe them out.

There is no 2nd chance to change ones mind after death.

When Jesus is through in the heavenly sanctuary as our High Priest and the names of the saved have been written in the Book of Life, Jesus says:
Rev_22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
The wicked will have their own resurrection for their judgement after the 1000 years.

There are millions and billions of people that have never heard the name of Jesus Christ. They to must have a chance to hear the gospel and repent and believe in Jesus. It will be a busy place in the spirit world. What an ingenious plan for all the men and women who have come to earth as a mortal to hear the word of God and believe it.

 

[Peter1000]

5 For though there be that are called gods---The Jews were surrounded by pagan gods---they were not real gods--they were called gods

The emphasis on this passage is (as there be gods many, and lords many). Paul is not talking about wooden or man made gods this way. He is acknowledging that there are gods and lords whether in heaven or on earth.

We interpret it this way, you interpret it another way. Who knows what Paul was really trying to say, we do not have the originals, nor his notes on his writings. So our interpretation is as good as yours.

 

[Peter1000]

I know that those who are blind don't see truth. God led me out of Mormonism.

View attachment 259452

I will follow Jesus too, but I will stay in the Church of Jesus Christ.

 

[Rescued One]

I will follow Jesus too, but I will stay in the Church of Jesus Christ.

Your Jesus calls ours a monster.

“Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God anyhow—three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization anyhow. All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God—he would be a giant or a monster.”
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 372; History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 476

 

[Peter1000]

Your Jesus calls ours a monster.

“Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God anyhow—three in one, and one in three! It is a curious organization anyhow. All are to be crammed into one God, according to sectarianism. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God—he would be a giant or a monster.”
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 372; History of the Church, vol. 6, p. 476

Yours would be a monster according to John 17:
John 17:20-22 King James Version (KJV)
20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

In verse 20, Jesus is praying for all those that believe the apostles.

I verse 21, Jesus wants all those that believe to be "one in us". That would be a very large, unusual god, unless "one in us" meant something different. Otherwise you have billions in the Godhead.
Trinitarians cannot reconcile this verse with their beliefs. In fact the whole chapter of John 17 impossible for a Trinitarian to reconcile.

Please try to reconcile it for me.

 

[mmksparbud]

There are millions and billions of people that have never heard the name of Jesus Christ. They to must have a chance to hear the gospel and repent and believe in Jesus. It will be a busy place in the spirit world. What an ingenious plan for all the men and women who have come to earth as a mortal to hear the word of God and believe it.

Not lone man will ever be able to say God is unjust. Everyone has that voice which tells him---go this way, not that way. It is the voice of the Holy Spirit and those who obey will be saved for they have lived up to the light they were given. Jesus will teach everyone what they have not fully understood. The lost are those who did not follow the leading of the Holy Spirit and for those---there is no 2nd chance. God alone knows the heart and only He will judge it. He knows if you are ignoring the Holy Spirit or not.

 

[mmksparbud]

The emphasis on this passage is (as there be gods many, and lords many). Paul is not talking about wooden or man made gods this way. He is acknowledging that there are gods and lords whether in heaven or on earth.

We interpret it this way, you interpret it another way. Who knows what Paul was really trying to say, we do not have the originals, nor his notes on his writings. So our interpretation is as good as yours.

It is clear that no Jew---certainly not Jesus--taught that there is any other God. To teach otherwise is to reject the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD OF THE UNIVERSE!

 

[Rescued One]

You say homoousion, but the Bible states:

(New Testament | Hebrews 1:3)

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Not the same thing. However, since Jesus is in the express image of the Father. That does explain why seeing Him would be like seeing the Father. We do believe that Jesus Christ is a God and our Savior, but He is our brother. We are to worship the Father, He is our God.

Why wasn't the LDS father-god God of the Old Testament per Mormonism?

Jesus is greater than the Holy Spirit, which is subject unto him, but his Father is greater than he!
Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 1, p. 18

The Church's first article of faith states, "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." These three beings make up the Godhead. They preside over this world and all other creations of our Father in Heaven.
Godhead

 

[Rescued One]

1 John 2
23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.

Gill's Exposition
John 17:16
They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. These words are repeated from John 17:14, where they are given as a reason of the world's hatred to them; and here, as showing that they are exposed to the evil of it; and in both are used as an argument with his Father, that he would take notice of them, and preserve them.

In John 6:56 and John 15:4-5 Christ’s followers are said to abide in Him: this is to abide in His Father also.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I don't think even Mormons can spend an eternity with their heavenly Father. He only has one body and is thus limited in how people he is able to entertain or be with.

 

[Peter1000]

It is clear that no Jew---certainly not Jesus--taught that there is any other God. To teach otherwise is to reject the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD OF THE UNIVERSE!

Jesus did not teach the apostles to pray to him, he taught them to pray to God the Father who was in heaven. Do you think that confused the apostles? No. Jesus was not God to them, he was the Son of God and would eventually ascend into heaven and sit with God after he died and was resurrected.

2 different people in 2 different places. No Triune God to the apostles.