Do Mormons go to Hell?

[happyinhisgrace]

Actually, if he at some point believed in the things you listed, it would be consistent with the culture in which he lived. So if that where my point I would be mistaken.

The culture in which JS lived at the time was a culture of christianity, not of paganism, peep stones and witchcraft. There were of course some people involved in those things at that time (obviously, since JS himself was) but the "culture" was Christianity. That is infact why so many people did not like or trust him because he followed the practices of divination, glass looking and treasure hunting and it was (and still is) considered very unBiblical and against God by Christians to practice in such things.

God Bless-
Grace

 

[TOmNossor]

Oh, so you planned it that way? RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT

Come on!

Do you really believe that it was coincidence that I used the same words Der Alter used?

Did you really not see that I specifically stated that I did not believe what I was pointing to was the true reason for his statements?

If in your world every time unexplained parallels exist it is merely coincidence, no wonder you question much of the evidence of the truth of the CoJCoLDS.



Charity, TOm

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Come on!

Do you really believe that it was coincidence that I used the same words Der Alter used?

Did you really not see that I specifically stated that I did not believe what I was pointing to was the true reason for his statements?

If in your world every time unexplained parallels exist it is merely coincidence, no wonder you question much of the evidence of the truth of the CoJCoLDS.



Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

And still you fail to realize and acknowlege that catholics did not teach, nor do they now teach that man can becomes Gods. Your cut and paste quotes did not prove the point you were trying to make. Del Arter pointed this out using very self explanitory explanations and yet you apperenlty did not read that post. Also, did you by any chance read the post where I showed the link that explains how the word "god" was translated into the Bible? I guess not or this discussion would be done away with.

God Bless-
Grace

Happyinhisgrace,

In post #511 you make the mistake of assigning a possessive to the term “gods” making it “God’s.”

I pointed this out to you in post #512.



I am well aware of the Hebrew way to make gods=judges. The Greek “theos” is much less susceptible to this view (although not strictly immune). I typically point to “partakers of the divine nature” and “made rich.” For deification.



In any case, I am fairly certain Jerome wrote in Latin. He was clear what he said.



Also, did you ask your Catholic Priest friend about CCC #460 and the CCC in general?

I know many Catholics too, and I have studied Catholicism for over a year. As Pope John Paul II said, “so that, indeed, in a certain sense, he could become God.” As I have told you and Der Alter so many times this deification like LDS deification demands a uniting with God. But it is not blasphemy to say, “become gods.”



And no, you and Der Alter refuse to think that the scriptures do not say what you think they say. It is you who stretch for a contrived meaning.



Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

The problem with this gods=judges is that it is untenable. Jerome did not mean this. His words to not support this. You yourself tried to change his words by making gods=God’s, but that was untenable.

Wrong. Go back and re-read my posts and also read the link I posted on the translation of the word "Elohiem" (God) in the Bible. It clearly states my position.

God Bless,
Grace

Happyinhisgrace,

In post #511 you make the mistake of assigning a possessive to the term “gods” making it “God’s.”

I pointed this out to you in post #512.



I am well aware of the Hebrew way to make gods=judges. The Greek “theos” is much less susceptible to this view (although not strictly immune). I typically point to “partakers of the divine nature” and “made rich.” For deification.



In any case, I am fairly certain Jerome wrote in Latin. He was clear what he said.



Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Am I the only one that has noticed that a few of the LDS on this thread, and on another thread on this forum, rather than deal with the topic have navigated off into "correct the grammer and quotes" land? To bad for those folks that some of us are not easily swayed into distraction.

Now, can we get back to the topic or shall we continue to discuss things that are of no importance? I choose "topic".

God Bless-
Grace

It was Der Alter who said that the more complete quote refuted what I said. It was I that showed that I acknowledged the evidences in the full quote and it did not refute what I said.

Not to mention the fact that I included links so anyone could review the full quote.



Concerning grammar, “gods” does not in any way mean “God’s.” I am sorry if you think this is irrelevant grammar stuff.



Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Is it really the LDS position that this Psalm is speaking of actual gods? I do not see how it could possibly be referring to actual gods, rather than men who are judges. This may have been pointed out already, but how can a man who has progressed to godhood die like a man? Also these "gods" appear to be corrupt beings, not perfected beings.

Psalm 82

1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

​

I think the most clear read of Psalms 82 is gods=judges. I learned this about 3-4 months ago on this board.

When Jesus quotes Psalms, it is less likely he means “judges.”

When ECF speak of deification it is clear they do not mean “judges.”

2 Peter and 2 Cor are the two scriptures I point to most commonly to show deification. The ECF point to 2 Peter most frequently (I think) then some form of Psalms/John, then least commonly 2 Cor.



Charity, TOm

 

[Toms777]

Am I the only one that has noticed that a few of the LDS on this thread, and on another thread on this forum, rather than deal with the topic have navigated off into "correct the grammer and quotes" land? To bad for those folks that some of us are not easily swayed into distraction.

Now, can we get back to the topic or shall we continue to discuss things that are of no importance? I choose "topic".

God Bless-
Grace

I note a tendency to do most anything to try to distract the discuission off the topic.

I choose topic also.

 

[MormonFriend]

It appears the LDS God is not omnipotent, if He were then it would not be necessary to send all these spirit children to earth to become perfect since their god cannot make His children perfect in heaven.

Do we have the same understanding of omnipotence? Do we have the same understanding of the purpose of free will? You are mixing the pieces of the jig-saw puzzle. They will never fit anywhere except in the big picture of which they came from.

To LDS He is Omnipotent and just. Interesting though, I cannot see these attributes of God in your "big picture," and I have tried to put the pieces together from your source.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

And no, you and Der Alter refuse to think that the scriptures do not say what you think they say. It is you who stretch for a contrived meaning.

I have no time for immature "he said, she said" games, I am ashamed of myself for letting you even suck me into it this far so from this point on, I will not allow this to happen. You have continuely avoided the topics at hand and tried to steer people away from those topics, I can only assume you do this because you yourself don't want to deal with them. So, go ahead....continue to write condesending, puffed up posts to me and some of the others on this forum, makes no difference to me if that is how you want to spend your time but I personally choose to no longer allow you to engage me in this silly behavior.

Grace

 

[Toms777]

I think the most clear read of Psalms 82 is gods=judges. I learned this about 3-4 months ago on this board.

When Jesus quotes Psalms, it is less likely he means “judges.”

Jesus referred to Psalm 82 in John 10:34. This cannot be referring to different things. Regardless, John 10:34 does not speak kindly of those who claimed that they were "gods".

When ECF speak of deification it is clear they do not mean “judges.”

The ECF are words of man, as is the BoM - my doctrine comes from tghe Bible, the word of God.

2 Peter and 2 Cor are the two scriptures I point to most commonly to show deification.

We have discussed these numerous times and neither one even addresses the topic.


Charity, TOm[/QUOTE]

 

[TOmNossor]

[/size][/font]

Jesus referred to Psalm 82 in John 10:34. This cannot be referring to different things. Regardless, John 10:34 does not speak kindly of those who claimed that they were "gods".


The ECF are words of man, as is the BoM - my doctrine comes from tghe Bible, the word of God.

[/size][/font]

We have discussed these numerous times and neither one even addresses the topic.


Charity, TOm

[/QUOTE]
It is the words of men when you tell me that "partaking of the divine nature" does not mean what I know it to mean. How is ok for you to say that the scriptures that I and many ECF see refering to deification do not refer to deification.

Charity, TOm

 

[Der Alte]

If you missed it, this is actually a Catholic-R-Us quote as are virtually all the quotes that I have provided. We have already establish that I have sporadically read the primary sources. If the dark shadows you cast upon my statements really amount to much, then 99.5+% of the quotes posted said by past LDS leaders should have equally dark shadows cast upon them.

Huh?

And as I have said before, with out using pointless words such as “Rubbish,” “Nonsense,” and other non-discussion promoting polemics, it is the opinion of the majority of patristic scholars that the ECF did speak of deification.

The word ”deification” does not in and of itself mean that men can become gods. And so far in your cut and pastes from the ECF, it has always been qualified so that it definitely does not mean that. You have not quoted a single ECF, in the first 3 centuries, who supports the LDS doctrine of men becoming gods. Anything else is irrelevant. "Partaking of the divine natue" does not mean men becoming gods, being gods of their own little worlds, having their own savior go to their worlds, etc., etc., etc.

You are not really serious are you? Are you questioning Jerome’s understanding of scripture? Or are you suggesting that Jerome is saying that we are made unjust judges by grace?

Are you really serious? Did you by any chance happen to read my citation from Gill who, in turn, cited the Talmudic scholars, who gave the correct Jewish interpretation of that passage? But that is not important to you is it? So long as you can find some bits and pieces of something which appears to support you.

Me thinks you place to much emphasis on this interpretation of Psalms 82. Every time you see the term “gods” you view this as an easy way to “correct” our understanding. Did you personally come up with this or is if from “Protestants R Us?”

The only time I make reference to Ps 82 is when one of your blind, cut and pastes, quotes the passage. Did Jerome quote it or not? Another blatant falsehood, I do not refer to Ps 82 every time I see the word gods, only when one of your sources quotes or refers to it. If your position was solid and correct there would exist no need for this type of dishonesty. Too bad you lack originality.

I will also of course say that I read the above statement to mean that Der Alter has found some ECF quotes that he cannot dismiss by making gods=judges, pointing to other passages by the same author that Der Alter feels are inconsistent with deification, or some other dismissing tactic. I state this as my opinion however. I believe that quite a number of ECF speak of deification and it is Der Alter that does not see it.

You can read the above statement to mean that I have not read every word, of every ECF, and it is possible that you may find one or two that write of men becoming gods, but I doubt it. Still not being truthful, if you were honest you would not be misrepresenting how and why I refer to Ps 82. But that is totally expected. Keep it up, your dishonesty does not make me look bad.

”pointing to other passages by the same author that Der Alter feels are inconsistent with deification, or some other dismissing tactic.” This is what is known as scholarship, something you evidently know nothing about. A writer’s views are not determined by reading one or two sentences of one of his works, and ignoring everything else, but by reading all of his works in context. Again this is totally expected, it is the common tactic of all heterodox groups.

The word “deification” in and of itself does not mean men becoming gods. And this is particularly true when the same writer clearly indicates elsewhere what his meaning was. Heterodoxy breeds this kind of tactic. Instead of legitimate study and research, people sifting through various writings, searching for little bits and pieces which can be cut and pasted to give the impression that a particular writing or scholar supports a heterodox view.

I believe in the Bible too, but the Bible speaks of deification.

No it does not! Repeating a false statement over and over again does not make it true.

 

[Toms777]

It is the words of men when you tell me that "partaking of the divine nature" does not mean what I know it to mean. How is ok for you to say that the scriptures that I and many ECF see refering to deification do not refer to deification.

Charity, TOm

Because I go to scripture. The ECF and you may have opinions, but those are opinions of men. the Bible is the word of God. Opinions of men lose everytime.
I partook of a good meal last night, but oddly, I did not become that meal.

The Bible says that there are no other gods, therefore it cannot mean that which the Bible says cannot exist.

1 Cor 8:4-7
5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.
NKJV

Isa 45:5
5 I am the LORD, and there is no other;
There is no God besides Me.
NKJV

Isa 45:21
And there is no other God besides Me,
NKJV

Isa 46:9
For I am God, and there is no other;
NKJV

Joel 2:27
I am the LORD your God
And there is no other.
NKJV

Here is what God said to one man who tried to declare himself a god:

Ezek 28:2
"Because your heart is lifted up,
And you say, 'I am a god,
I sit in the seat of gods,
In the midst of the seas,'
Yet you are a man, and not a god,
NKJV

Ezek 28:10
10 You shall die the death of the uncircumcised
By the hand of aliens;
For I have spoken," says the Lord GOD.' "
NKJV

Let us heed the word of God and not be as the prince of Tyre who tried to deify himself only to suffer the judgement of God.

 

[TOmNossor]

Toms777,



I have said, that Catholic and EO deification absolutely and unequivocally are associated with becoming gods through the uniting with God. I have also said that since LDS accept the same Bible Catholics, EOs, and you accept we must embrace this uniting with God as an aspect of our deification. Since unlike Catholics and EOs we already have a social Trinitarian structure, this is even easier for LDS.

So there is one God, there are no other gods besides God, and Abraham is a man who has become a god through uniting with God the Father.



Charity, TOm

 

[TOmNossor]

Der Alter,

I hope to say a few things here.



I think that neither you nor I have said a lot of new things in the last few posts here concerning deification. I think that neither you nor I have said a lot of new things concerning eternal matter on our other thread (this is an area of continued research for me so it seems likely I will have more to say on this one day). With these opinions of mine in mind and with your willingness to question my honesty I think it best that I do not attempt to continue to say the same thing over and over again more.



I want to be clear. I do not feel you have proven that the Bible does not speak of deification. I do not feel you have proven that Jerome or Irenaeus or a number of other ECF do not speak of deification. I do not feel you have proven that EO and Catholics do not believe in a form of deification. A believe in deification being defined as the orthodoxy (within a certain religious tradition) of the statement that “men my become gods.”



I want to be clear. I do not feel you have proven that St. Justin Marytr did not believe in eternal matter. I do not feel that you have proven the early Christian who added or discovered additional verses in 1st Clement did not believe in eternal matter. I do not feel you have proven that Moses does not speak of preexistent matter. I do feel that I have proven the Hermogenes who walked with Paul the apostle did believe in eternal matter. I do not feel you have proven that the reason Hermogenes ceased to walk with Paul was the heresy of eternal matter.



The only thing that I never said on this board, but I would have said before corrected by you or some other person on this board is that Psalms 82 speaks most clearly of deification. I believe it was you, and you have proven to me that the text we have of Psalms 82 does not point in any reasonable way to deification. You may expect that you will not see me post Psalms 82 and not acknowledge the gods=judges aspect of the text (note, I reserve the right to question this more, especially in light of what Jesus said about it, but I will not neglect to acknowledge what has been proven to me by you).



To my knowledge all of the other assertions that I have made in the past, I am likely to make in the future. It is either my thickheaded stupidity that has blinded me to the truths you have shared or your lack of thoroughness in “proving” things, that will result in me continuing to say these things. I encourage you not impugn my honesty and integrity as I try to interact on this board. You are welcome to say that you have shown me much and then continue to show me more, but by my accounting, for whatever reason, you have not proven TO ME your case.



Now I do believe that your posts on this thread are inappropriate and against the rules. I still invite you to edit or withdraw them.



Also, edit, apologize, or withdraw not withstanding if somehow you feel I can serve you by continuing to engage you in either of these discussions all you must do is ask. I ask you to specifically say,

“TOm please engage me further with respect too …”

If you post further evidence, call this post “nonsense,” or other things; I will likely (but not definitely) just move one.

If you do post,

“TOm please engage me further with respect too …”

and I miss it, please send me a note. I will check in for this phrase over the next little while, but I may miss it.



You are an intelligent man and you possess an impressive knowledge of scripture and the ECF. I would very much like to have the grasp of Greek and Hebrew that you do (Latin would be cool too). May God bless you.



Charity, TOm

 

[Toms777]

Toms777,
I have said, that Catholic and EO deification absolutely and unequivocally are associated with becoming gods through the uniting with God. I have also said that since LDS accept the same Bible Catholics, EOs, and you accept we must embrace this uniting with God as an aspect of our deification. Since unlike Catholics and EOs we already have a social Trinitarian structure, this is even easier for LDS.

So there is one God, there are no other gods besides God, and Abraham is a man who has become a god through uniting with God the Father.

Charity, TOm

Again, TOm, you never seem to realize what I keep telling you. Give me all the opinions of men that you wish and it will have no sway on my views. I will bend my views to the Bible alone. If you direct something to me which is based upon manmade theologies and no on the Bible, then you might as well not waste your energy or time, because I will not have any use for it.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

I decided to go ahead and post this to this thread. The LDS believe that the KJV of the Bible is the most correct so here is a little tid bit (actually a 3 post) tidbit on how the KJV teaches that there is only one God and that Elohiem (who the LDS believe is the name of the father) and Jehovah (who they believe is Jesus) are actually the same God. This goes right along with the topic that man can not become Gods for there is only one God EVER and this Biblical explanation shows that from the very Bible the lds believe to be the most correct.

Enjoy,
Grace

Did you know that the translators of the King James Bible designed a simple code system into their translation to designate the various Hebrew names for God in the Old Testament? Understanding this system unlocks profound new insights into the Scriptural teaching about the nature and character of God.

This article begins by looking at how the code system works. It then examines some specific Old Testament passages to see how knowing which Hebrew name for God is used contributes to an accurate interpretation of what the Bible teaches.

The KJV Code System For Divine Names

If you look at the KJV text carefully, you will notice that there are various names for Deity in the Old Testament, including "God," "GOD," "Lord," "LORD," or some combination of these terms. These different words and spelling variations were used by the King James translators to designate the various Hebrew words for God. The three primary Hebrew words for God are Elohim, Jehovah (Yahweh), and Adonai.

Elohim. This is a general Hebrew name for Deity that designates God as our Creator and the object of all true worship. It occurs 2,570 times in the Old Testament.1 In most instances it is rendered "God" in the King James Bible, that is, with a capital "G" and with the letters "od" written in lower case. Elohim is plural in form, however, when it refers to the true God, it designates only one Divine Being. We know this because it is consistently used with singular verbs, and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular, so that by the rules of Hebrew grammar it must be understood and translated as singular.2

Because Elohim is a general term for God, it is also used when describing false gods. For instance, Exodus 20:2-3 declares: "I am the LORD thy God [Elohim] which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt . . . Thou shalt have no other gods [elohim] before me."

Since the same word is used for the one true God and for false gods, the KJV translators simply used a capital "G "and made it singular when the context is speaking of the one true God, to prevent confusion. To reiterate, the KJV translators followed the rules of Hebrew grammar in rendering Elohim singular when it refers to the true God; in the verse above, the pronouns used with God are singular ("I," and "me") and the verb form of the Hebrew word translated as "brought" is also singular. These grammatical cues require that the word Elohim be translated as singular here, and consistently throughout the Old Testament when it refers to the true God.

In a handful of instances Elohim is used with the first person plural pronoun, "us." For instance, we read in Genesis 1:26: "And God [Elohim] said, Let us make man in our image" (see also Genesis 3:22; 11:7; Isaiah 6:8). Thus, Elohim conveys both the unity of the one God, and yet allows for the plurality of Divine Persons as expressed in the historic Christian doctrine of the Trinity. It is unique to monotheistic Israel and is not found in the languages of any of her polytheistic, Semitic neighbors.3

Jehovah/Yahweh. This is the personal name of the God of the Bible and speaks of Him as the holy, self-existent God who hates sin but provides redemption. It is used 5,321 times in the Old Testament.4 The Hebrew word Jehovah is written as "LORD" in the KJV Bible. Notice that all the letters are capitalized. In some instances Jehovah is also written as GOD. Again, with all the letters capitalized. Wherever you see the words LORD or GOD in the Bible written in all uppercase letters, you will know that in every case it is the word Jehovah (or Yahweh, as modern scholars believe it should be pronounced) in the Hebrew text.

Adonai. This word means "Sovereign," or "Master," and emphasizes the Lordship of God. It is used more than 300 times in the Old Testament as a designation for God.5 It appears as "Lord" in the King James Bible. Notice that it is spelled with a capital "L" and lower case "ord." Like Elohim, Adonai is a special plural form. In this plural form it always refers to God.6 The singular form, Adon, is used to designate men who are lords over other people. A rare exception where a singular form for Lord (Adona) is used for God will be discussed later.

Joshua 7:6-7 illustrates how the different names for God in the Hebrew text are coded into the King James Bible:

And Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon his face before the ark of the LORD [Jehovah] until the eventide, he and the elders of Israel, and put dust upon their heads. And Joshua said, Alas, O Lord [Adonai] GOD [Jehovah], wherefore hast thou at all brought this people over Jordan, to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us? would to God [Elohim] we had been content, and dwelt on the other side of Jordan!

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Part 2

Are Elohim And Jehovah Separate Gods?

The Bible uses the names Elohim, Jehovah, and Adonai interchangeably for the one true God, along with combinations of these names and a number of other less frequently occurring terms. In fact, one of the names of God in the Old Testament is Jehovah-Elohim. It is translated in our King James Bible as "The LORD God" and literally means "Jehovah is Elohim," or "The LORD is God." (Jehovah-Elohim is rendered "LORD God" 20 times in Genesis 2-3, and there are scores of other examples in the Old Testament).

Since the name Elohim is a general Hebrew word for "God" and was also used to designate the false gods of Israel's heathen neighbors, we have the proclamation in the biblical Scriptures that Jehovah is our Elohim. It is a proclamation that Jehovah is the true God.

There are over 700 verses in the Old Testament that show Jehovah (LORD) and Elohim (God) are the same God. Many of these verses also state that Jehovah is the only Elohim. Following are a few examples.

Isaiah 43:10,11. Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD [Jehovah] and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God [Elohim] formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD [Jehovah]; and beside me there is no savior.

Note from these verses that there are several things which God wants us to know, believe, and understand: (1) There is only one God (Elohim) and Jehovah is that one true God. (2) There were no Elohims formed before Jehovah. This means that Jehovah does not have a Father. That is, no God (Elohim) preceded him, by whom He was procreated. (3) There will be no Elohims formed after Jehovah. Some say that Isaiah 43:10,11 is talking about idols. But that cannot be true for there certainly have been idols and false gods made and worshiped since this passage was written. Therefore, when God said no gods would be formed after him, it must mean no real, true Gods.

Isaiah 44:6,8. Thus saith the LORD [Jehovah the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God [Elohim] ... Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God [Elohim] beside me? yea, there is no God [Elohim] I know not any.

The emphatic "Thus saith Jehovah" in the above verse commands our attention. The following points are made under authoritative declaration: (1) Jehovah is the first Elohim and the last Elohim. There can be only one first and only one last. Again, this rules out the possibility of any other Gods existing throughout all of eternity past and all of eternity future. It also again shows that Jehovah and Elohim are not different Gods. (2) Jehovah is the only God (Elohim) that exists. This again rules out the possibility of other sovereigns existing. (3) No reasonable person would challenge the intellect of God. When He says that He does not know of something, this certainly does not imply any limitation in the scope or capacity of His knowledge. On the contrary, when He says He does not know of something, we may be assured this means that thing does not exist. So it is plain that when God says He does not know of any other Gods it is because they do not exist. Thus, these verses affirm in the clearest possible terms that no other Gods exist, nor will exist, throughout all of time and space, in this universe or any other.

Deuteronomy 6:4. Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah].

Notice the word "one" in this verse. It must be noted that there are two words for "one" in Hebrew: echad and yachid. Echad, the word that is used here, "stresses unity, while recognizing diversity within that oneness."7 For instance, we have one army, but within it there are many members. The oneness described in this verse does not suggest a "oneness of purpose," but a singleness of Being. The word yachid could have been used to designate one that does not allow for a plurality within the oneness.

The following conclusions are in order: (1) Jehovah and Elohim are the same God. (2) While there is only one God, a plurality of divine Persons within that oneness is suggested in the Old Testament.

Psalm 110:1. The LORD [Jehovah] said unto my Lord [Adona], Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Part 3

A plurality of divine Persons within the one God is exactly what we find in this verse. It has been universally recognized for centuries by both Jews and Christians as a Messianic psalm. Matthew 22:41-46 shows that Jews in Jesus day understood the "Lord" (Adona) in Psalm 110:1 to refer to the Messiah. Read Acts 2:32-36 and Hebrews 1:13 and you will see that the New Testament clearly presents Psalm 110:1 as an invitation by God the Father ("LORD"/Jehovah) to His Son, Jesus Christ ("Lord"/Adona) to sit at His right hand. Two observations are in order:

Notice that Jehovah is speaking to Adona (a singular form of Adonai). As was mentioned earlier, when the word 'Lord' is used for God it is usually written in the plural form (Adonai), which is in harmony with the historic Christian doctrine of God's Tri-une nature (Trinity). In this verse Jehovah is speaking to a specific Person within the Trinity, so he uses the singular word for Lord. God is in fact speaking to God, or to state it from the perspective of the Apostle Peter's sermon in Acts 2:32-36, the Father is speaking to His pre-incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.
However, this points up a major contradiction between Mormon doctrine and the Bible, for according to the LDS Church, Jehovah is Jesus. In the words of President Spencer W. Kimball, "There are three Gods: the Eternal Father, Elohim, to whom we pray; Christ or Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost."8 Thus, in the popular brochure, "What Mormons Think of Christ," the late Mormon apostle Bruce R. McConkie offered this translation of Psalm 110:1: "The Lord (Elohim, the Father) said unto my Lord (Jehovah, the Son), sit at my right hand."9 As we have seen, the KJV system for designating the divine names does not allow for this translation; it is completely impossible. The text clearly states that it is Jehovah (LORD), not Elohim, who is inviting the Messiah to sit at His right hand. In order to support the Mormon doctrine of God, Elder McConkie was forced to manipulate the clear text of Scripture.
The Inescapable Conclusion

As we have seen from the Old Testament Scriptures above, it is surely wrong to say that Elohim, Jehovah, and the Holy Ghost are separate Gods. The Bible states emphatically and repeatedly that there is only one God, it declares that Elohim is Jehovah, and it uses the names Elohim, Jehovah, and Adonai interchangeably. The Bible also teaches that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God (Acts 5:3,4). The awesome but inescapable conclusion is that God is Tri-une in nature. How gracious that He has stooped to reveal Himself to us in His infallible Word. How crucial that we interpret His Word accurately.