LDS How to Become a God

twin.spin

Trust the LORD and not on your own understanding
May 1, 2010
797
266
✟72,766.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
I am sure dzheremi does not need the Cambridge definition of "creed" or "sidetrack". Nor do I or anyone I know on this forum. If you do, please keep these to yourself. Thank you.
I'm sure that dzheremi understood that the context of the post wasn't concerning dzheremi's lack of understanding of what those two words mean nor most people can read that it wasn't directed his way.

Rather the inclusion to the Cambridge definition of "creed" or "sidetrack" was to leave no doubt for the original respondent benefit (He is the way) as to exactly what I meant when stated.
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Peter...I don't even know what to say anymore, my friend. You're clearly a firm believer in the BOM and in Mormonism, and I am really trying to be the kind of person who does not knock someone down for their belief (probably still failing in that,
Yes, you are failing at that, miserably. But, I realize how sincere you are in your endeavor to bring me out of Mormonism, so I give you a pass and do not report you for "flaming". Your last paragraph is rather disgusting as you refer to my church and its leaders past and present, but again in your zeal I forgive you for your flaming rudeness.

Also for your knowledge of history and of the bible and the fathers, I do not come in contact with many men that have your knowledge of these things and so I enjoy our discussions, even if I or you get a little rude and say things that are hurtful, and I do apologize for that on my behalf. So don't give up and stop responding.

One other thing, I look at you as a brother in Christ and love you for your zeal for Christ. I know I am anathema from you, but I am not from you, and I look forward to meeting you in the future, after it is all over, and comparing notes. God is merciful, and I do not doubt both of us in our zeal for Christ will be in his kingdom.

and that 'big picture' is that Mormonism is not salvific, because Mormonism does not worship the true God.
I believe that while the apostles were alive the Church of Jesus Christ of First-century Saints had the binding and loosing power. This power is the power to bind one to Christ (save) or to loose one from Christ (damn).
I believe that as soon as the apostles were murdered and gone, this binding and loosing power was taken from the earth. And I believe that it was restored to the earth by God and Jesus and angels so that men, once again hold that binding and loosing power to save.

I believe without this power, no body is saved, no matter how much they believe in Jesus Christ. And so if JS would have become a pastor with the Methodists or any other church, he would have been unable to be part of the saving process. That process had to be restored to the earth and it was, so that people could be saved. The process of binding and loosing transcends life on earth and death in the spirit world, so that now spirits, who have been waiting from millennia can now experience the process of being saved also. Remember God is not just the God of the living, but also of the dead (live spirits that exist and waiting for the resurrection).

So to me you are trying to drive me away from the very church that I believe can get a person on the right path of salvation. The right path for Jesus Christ to give his grace and show his mercy to all those that believe on his name, and do what he has charged them to do.

This "Jesus was a really wise guy/good teacher/(generic 'good' attributes that specifically disclaim His divinity)" crap has always been popular among the heretics,
From our discussion, you have to know that we would never believe that a nice guy Jesus has the power to save. Right? Jesus Christ is only Begotten Son of God, with the power and authority to not only create us, but to save us with his infinitely divine atonement.
So stop with the nice guy Jesus, we never believed such a heretical thing. We have never demoted Jesus to a nice guy.
We do not deny God or his Sons divinity and their power to save, never.
What we do not deny that there is a Trinity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, but what we do deny is that this Trinity somehow and in some strange way is 3 Gods or Persons in 1 God. That we deny. This is a long way from denying the true Trinity, which we bear testimony of, and will die before we deny God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

The problem we have is that our theology is not the same as your theology, and from your great fathers, if you do not believe what we believe you are blasphemous, satanic, God-denying, and anathema to us. We accept your anathema, and wish you well with your theology, that has been debated and debated and debated for thousands of years now.

You will find out soon enough what the circle of mostly octogenarian quasi-religious businessmen in Utah who couldn't prophesy that Tuesday is coming on a Monday afternoon, will do for all mankind in conjunction with Jesus Christ and his second coming. Be watchful and don't miss anything, it will be interesting to see.
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
I'm sure that dzheremi understood that the context of the post wasn't concerning dzheremi's lack of understanding of what those two words mean nor most people can read that it wasn't directed his way.

Rather the inclusion to the Cambridge definition of "creed" or "sidetrack" was to leave no doubt for the original respondent benefit (He is the way) as to exactly what I meant when stated.
"He is the way" does not need your 3rd grade definition class either.
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
First before anything, Peter, I want to say that I truly appreciate your reply, and I must ask forgiveness from you for my rudeness. I am sorry that I have offended you, and probably routinely do so, and have failed to approach matters in a more irenic fashion, as any witness to the Christian religion not just deserves but in fact demands. "Be as wise as serpents, and as harmless as doves" is the command given by the Lord Jesus Christ, and in that I have very much missed the mark. I have sinned; Lord have mercy.

Thank you also for your encouragement to keep trying anyway. I do need that sometimes, and since you and I interact quite a bit, I am happy to receive it from you. On the other hand, the flattery of my faulty intellect is shameful to my sense of proper spiritual orientation (i.e., we are not to think of ourselves as better than anyone, and I really don't; look at how I just had to apologize for being rude, because I am in fact very rude...it's shameful :oops:), so if you don't mind I'm going to skip over those parts of the your reply.

QUOTE="Peter1000, post: 74348292, member: 382212"]
One other thing, I look at you as a brother in Christ and love you for your zeal for Christ. I know I am anathema from you[/quote]

I would like to clarify something here, just so that it is on the record for any future conversation. Saying that someone or something is "anathema" means that it/they are outside the bounds of the Church. So when this was declared against early heretics like Nestorius or Arius, it was saying that they personally (and their ideas, which the councils had gathered to discuss and decide on) are not to be considered as within the Christian fold anymore. Since a parallel Arian 'church' of sorts existed until the 9th century or so (source: Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick's Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy podcast on Ancient Faith Radio; I can't remember the exact episode or I'd link it), and the Nestorians still exist today (they call themselves the Church of the East, Assyrian Church, Ancient Church of the East, and are sometimes are called in academic or historical sources "The Persian Church"; there is also a very old group of them in India who are confusingly known locally as Chaldeans, though they have no obvious link to the modern Chaldean Catholic Church, which came out of Roman Catholic missionary activities among the Nestorians in what is now Iraq in the 16th century), it obviously is not saying that such people are to be personally damned or destroyed or physically fought or anything like that. It is simply a judgment passed on their doctrines, and in the case of the founders of the heresies which they have formed their Church around, it is a personal condemnation of those individuals. In other words, the modern Nestorian or God forbid the modern Arian (as there are some people on the internet who try to revive that...like a dog returning to its Geocities website) may be a believer in heresy which anathema to the Church, but this says nothing about them personally beyond that. They have a wrong belief, but they are not their organization -- they are an individual. And especially since in the modern day so many people are born into these churches with centuries old schisms and conflicts, it is not considered proper that they be held personally responsible for them. I suppose a very hard-headed person could say "Yes, but they are still observing and affirming the wrong belief, and remaining away from the true Church (Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, whatever), so they are still anathema", but I don't get the sense that this is a popular approach in any tradition. Even reading those who have been used as a cudgel against my communion in particular, like John of Damascus (d. 749; who oddly enough is a saint among the Ethiopians, who are most definitely a part of the OO communion :scratch:), he writes against what he calls "the heresy of the Egyptians", which even though it's not something I recognize as my own faith is still at least pointed at the people as a group, rather than at individuals. Similarly, in my own communion, St. Dionysius Bar Salibi (d. 1171) wrote "Against the Melkites" (a Syriac slur for Chalcedonians) to discuss what he saw as the problems with that belief.

To put it even more simply and to quote HH Pope Shenouda III of thrice-blessed memory, our fight is against ideas, not people.

So in that way, no, you are not anathema to me. I am not a bishop and this is a message board, not a synod. Mormonism, however, will be evaluated differently than Mormons, as the individual is generally not responsible for the beliefs of the entire group (with the caveat that leaders who create and/or propagate the wrong beliefs and strengthen them will be treated more harshly; cf. the above distinction between Nestorius the individual and the average Nestorian believer).

but I am not from you, and I look forward to meeting you in the future, after it is all over, and comparing notes. God is merciful, and I do not doubt both of us in our zeal for Christ will be in his kingdom.

I truly believe that anything is possible in Christ, and that there are Mormons (and Muslims, and probably others of other religions that I have not personally encountered) who may indeed worship God as He seeks true worshipers to do. It's just not my place to say categorically when or with whom this is the case, as God's ways are far above my or any other person's ways. We can only hope and pray for the salvation of everyone, as this is Christ's own desire. And so we pray in the concluding prayer of every hour of the Agpeya (the Coptic book of daily prayers):

Have mercy on us, O God, and have mercy on us, who, at all times and in every hour, in heaven and on earth, is worshiped and glorified; Christ our God, the good, the long suffering, the abundant in mercy, and the great in compassion, who loves the righteous and has mercy on the sinners of whom I am chief; who does not wish the death of the sinner but rather that he returns and lives, who calls all to salvation for the promise of the blessings to come...

+++

I believe that while the apostles were alive the Church of Jesus Christ of First-century Saints had the binding and loosing power. This power is the power to bind one to Christ (save) or to loose one from Christ (damn).
I believe that as soon as the apostles were murdered and gone, this binding and loosing power was taken from the earth.

But why was it taken from the earth? If God could restore His Church some 1,700-1,800 years after this happened, then surely He could prevent it from happening in the first place, if it had been His will. So I'm left to wonder: is the 'great apostasy' something that God wanted or willed to happen, and if so for what purpose? And if not, then why did He wait until JS went to pray in the grove as a teenager to restore things to how He apparently always wanted them to be? Does Mormonism teach that between the death of the last apostle and Joseph Smith, no one ever offered any sincere prayers to God for guidance of the Church, or no one ever rightly guided the Church towards keeping the commandments? I know you participated in my thread a while ago on Mor Philoxenos of Mabbug, the 5th-6th century monk and bishop who wrote extensively on the importance of keeping the commandments of Christ as entry into the Christian life, and you have also had what I would characterize as cautiously positive things to say about other early bishops like St. John Chrysostom.

Is it not at least possible that in the same way that I have just written that some Mormons may worship God essentially despite their religious affiliation (as only God knows the heart of every person), some bishops and hence some measure of the early Church (bishops, priests, deacons, laity, etc.) may have kept the true faith despite the apostasy that Mormonism claims would've been going on by the time of these saints who you have been exposed to and had mostly positive things to say about? I understand if you cannot categorically say that this was the case with regard to these specific examples or any specific example, as this is again the dynamic at play in leaving judgment of the individual (but not the organization or its leadership, necessarily) up to God, which is the general pattern you see in early Christian history (keeping in mind that I tune out of what's going on in the Greek and Roman churches very early on, on account of my own ecclesiastical affiliation; so I don't doubt that you can find many examples which would contradict my statement), but it would good to know for our future interactions whether or not you are willing to grant the possibility that this may have been the case somewhere during the long centuries before JS, even if you can't say where.

And I believe that it was restored to the earth by God and Jesus and angels so that men, once again hold that binding and loosing power to save.

I believe without this power, no body is saved, no matter how much they believe in Jesus Christ.

A question: Does Mormonism teach that men lacking that power thereby means God somehow lacks that power?

And so if JS would have become a pastor with the Methodists or any other church, he would have been unable to be part of the saving process.

How would you or anyone have know that the apostasy or this particular answer to it (restoration) had even happened, in that case? Isn't it from Joseph Smith's own writings and other writings within the Mormon religion that this idea comes? So no JS (because he's a Methodist pastor instead of the restorer of the Church from its apostasy) means no apostasy, right? Or at least no knowledge of it. And so no restoration/no Mormonism, since nobody's any the wiser as to the need for it.

Or is it posited that in that case God would have raised up another person to have had the same experience, i.e., found the golden plates, translated them, published those translations as the BOM, etc.?

So to me you are trying to drive me away from the very church that I believe can get a person on the right path of salvation. The right path for Jesus Christ to give his grace and show his mercy to all those that believe on his name, and do what he has charged them to do.

Well, yes, because I don't believe that it is that. I recognize that you do, but this is the very basic difference between us on this level. So I say my peace, and you say yours, and hopefully we both think about it a bit, and the world keeps spinning.

The 'great apostasy' which forms the foundation of the restorationist narrative upon which Mormonism is built (and indeed all forms of restorationism, be they Christian or non-Christian) is not just fundamentally unproven, it is unproveable, and furthermore historically unsound, given the many counterexamples that can be shown of people and groups within existing Christian churches performing the ordinances that Mormonism says were lost during the great apostasy, and showing forth the powers that Mormonism says were absent during this long period. I have argued such and will continue to do so, though hopefully without stirring up as much consternation.

From our discussion, you have to know that we would never believe that a nice guy Jesus has the power to save. Right? Jesus Christ is only Begotten Son of God, with the power and authority to not only create us, but to save us with his infinitely divine atonement.

This is not so much a matter of whether or not you would agree with that characterization of theology, but of what Mormonism theology says and very importantly does not say about Jesus. Your Jesus figure may be more than a 'nice guy', but he is also not God from God, True Light From True Light, of one essence with the Father. (Because from our discussion I have found that Mormonism takes expressions like this in a carnal fashion that is quite simply outside of the bounds of Christianity.)

So stop with the nice guy Jesus, we never believed such a heretical thing. We have never demoted Jesus to a nice guy.

Again, in Mormonism, Jesus is something less than fully God.

We do not deny God or his Sons divinity and their power to save, never.

They are not of the same divinity. This much I have learned from you, and Jane_Doe, and other Mormon posters.

What we do not deny that there is a Trinity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, but what we do deny is that this Trinity somehow and in some strange way is 3 Gods or Persons in 1 God. That we deny.

Aye, there's the rub. This is anathema (again, please read this as "outside of the bounds of the Christian faith", not a personal condemnation). There is no other theology that is acceptable in Christianity. Our fathers fought against the Sabellians, the Arians, and all the other heretics who denied the consubstantiality and/or distinct personhood of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. That Mormonism repackages these ideas is reason enough to reject it, but even outside of considering that, it is reason to say that Mormonism simply does not preach the God of Christianity, but a different God. Sometimes a different theology does indeed amount to a different God (not all the time, but sometimes; this is why we have things like the Nicene Creed to help us see when that line has been crossed on a basic level).

This is a long way from denying the true Trinity, which we bear testimony of, and will die before we deny God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.

But your 'true trinity' is not the Holy Trinity as testified to in ~2,000 years of Christianity, from the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost in 33 AD until now. So again, it is a different God entirely (or perhaps better said a different set of gods? I don't know what would be most accurate).

The problem we have is that our theology is not the same as your theology

This is indeed the problem.

and from your great fathers, if you do not believe what we believe you are blasphemous, satanic, God-denying, and anathema to us. We accept your anathema, and wish you well with your theology, that has been debated and debated and debated for thousands of years now.

Ehhh...for us in the Oriental Orthodox Church, from about the 50s (if we are to count things like Judaizing, which was dealt with at the Apostolic Council in Jerusalem mentioned in the book of Acts, as a kind of heresy) until 431. Or it could be argued from 325 (the start of the conciliar era) to 431. Everything after that is someone else's theological development which did sometimes include us (e.g., the Henotikon of Zeno, 482), but did not change our theology. Others have their own significant dates. The point is that the fact that it is debated or the time in which it has been debated is not an issue, as such debates are necessary to see where everyone stands.

You will find out soon enough what the circle of mostly octogenarian quasi-religious businessmen in Utah who couldn't prophesy that Tuesday is coming on a Monday afternoon, will do for all mankind in conjunction with Jesus Christ and his second coming. Be watchful and don't miss anything, it will be interesting to see.

Unsurprisingly, I simply do not believe this is a thing that will happen.

...

Hmm. See...this is what happens when I try to be 'nice'. We don't have anything to talk about anymore. "I believe X.", "I believe not-X." "...Okay." "Yeah." "..." :|
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
dzheremi
In order to understand the apostasy you have to see the whole plan of salvation from the beginning to the end and everything in between.

In this plan, Jesus Christ is trying to influence all people to come unto him. He is the Savior, he is the one that will save, but in order to be saved you have to know of him and believe in him.

From the beginning, men have been born and died and so it did not take long for there to be as many dead people as there was live people, and eventually that ratio quickly favored the dead.

A quick discussion with every dead person, (their spirits are still alive and well) after the flood took place, you would have found that only about 5% of them ever heard of Jesus Christ. Therefore the missionary work by Adam, and Seth, and Enoch, and Methusalah, etc., etc., etc. would have been just as lively in the afterlife as it was on the earth.

It is this missionary work that is important to our discussion of the apostasy. I believe that missionary work has taken millions of the dead, and taught them the gospel and allowed them now to enter into heaven and be saved too. So they did not have the chance on the earth to hear the gospel, but they got that chance in the spirit after life on earth.

IOW you are not lost if you are not set in a family on earth that knows not Jesus Christ.

By the same token, you are not lost if you are set in a family that knows all about Jesus Christ, but the family lives in a time that the power to bind and loose is not on the earth. So your teaching will be minimal because you already believe, but you still must partake of the ordinances that Jesus required you have on earth. Hence proxy services in a temple designated to do this great work.

With that background, we know that there was very few of Adams posterity that listened to him and followed him in the gospel of Jesus Christ. And from his posterity, millions upon millions went astray on this earth. They will have the opportunity to hear the gospel in the next life, no problem, problem solved.

Move forward to the first century ad. Paul tells us that the Corinthians were not willing to hear the meat of the gospel and so he did not give it to them. The Corinthians were not really able to live the milk of the gospel, the Galatians moved away from their first love, Jesus, and Paul gave them heck, did they move closer then to Christ? Paul told Timothy that all Asia had abandoned him. Jesus talks about the 7 churches in Revelations. They all do had problems.
IOW, the apostasy was a real thing, at least to me. It was not anything that Jesus had not encountered from the beginning, people rejecting his gospel.

His solution was to get them out of this world and separate the evil from the good and begin to teach the good his gospel and give them the chance to not only live the milk of the gospel, but live the meat. So from about 150ad on, as the apostles died, all that died in Christ were transferred to the spirit world and there they began their real learning of Jesus Christ and the meat of his gospel, and recieve the ordinances necessary to salvation.

And here is to your point: The good Christians on the earth that knew the Lord and his gospel and were able to teach it and do missionary work on the earth, and convert millions of Africans and Persians, and Gauls, etc., etc., etc., made it all the easier on the other side to bring them the meat of the gospel, since they were already aware of the milk. So Jesus was very interested in keeping his gospel alivehere on earth, even if it was not the full gospel, so that people would be much more prepared for the next life and their living the gospel in that life.
So there was a great deal of good missionary work among all people, bishops did their jobs, (sometimes), other church officers directing the churches since 150ad have been blessed to raise up children unto Christ on this side, and on the other side to be further blessed with the meat and necessary ordinances.

What the restoration does is helps in that work, for both the living and the dead, in preparation for the second coming. The things that will happen in the next 20 years will be exciting, I hope I am here to see it all happen, but I know I will see it in the spirit world. I believe the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will be up to their eyeballs in helping Jesus get all things ready. That is why I tell you to buckle up, the ride is going to be interesting.

I look forward to the first resurrection and you and I can go side by side up to meet our Savior and escort him to the earth. Would that be incredible?
 
Upvote 0

Rescued One

...yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me
Dec 12, 2002
35,508
6,395
Midwest
✟78,539.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
...One other thing, I look at you as a brother in Christ and love you for your zeal for Christ. I know I am anathema from you, but I am not from you, and I look forward to meeting you in the future, after it is all over, and comparing notes. God is merciful, and I do not doubt both of us in our zeal for Christ will be in his kingdom.


The kingdom of God on earth is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (D&C 65). The purpose of the Church is to prepare its members to live forever in the celestial kingdom or kingdom of heaven. However, the scriptures sometimes call the Church the kingdom of heaven, meaning that the Church is the kingdom of heaven on earth.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the kingdom of God on the earth, but it is at present limited to an ecclesiastical kingdom. During the Millennium, the kingdom of God will be both political and ecclesiastical.
Kingdom of God or Kingdom of Heaven

LDS Key Cannot be Found on Street

“The ordinances of the temple, the endowment and sealings, pertain to exaltation in the celestial kingdom, where the sons and daughters are. The sons and daughters are not outside in some other kingdom. The sons and daughters go into the house, belong to the household, have access to the home. ‘In my Father’s house are many mansions’ [John 14:2]. Sons and daughters have access to the home where he dwells, and you cannot receive that access until you go to the temple. Why? Because you must receive certain key words as well as make covenants by which you are able to enter. If you try to get into the house, and the door is locked, how are you going to enter, if you haven’t your key? You get your key in the temple, which will admit you.“. . . You cannot find a key on the street, for that key is never lost that will open the door that enters into our Father’s mansions. You have got to go where the key is given. And each can obtain the key, if you will; but after receiving it, you may lose it, by having it taken away from you again unless you abide by the agreement which you entered into when you went into the house of the Lord.” -
Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 2:40–41

Truly it is not good for man to be alone. The Lord in his wisdom has provided a way for man to be happy on this earth, and to continue that joy on through all eternity; the greatest joy and happiness comes through the family unit. It has been so through all mortality. Then why will it not be so in the next life? This family unit is so important that the Lord has made it known to us that all the families of the earth must be sealed together. By the time of the end of the millennium, all of Adam’s posterity who accept the gospel must be sealed together as one family by the power of the priesthood, which is the power to seal on earth, and it shall be sealed in heaven, and to bind on earth, and it shall be bound in heaven.
Eldred G. Smith, Family Research
Family Research

When our Heavenly Father placed Adam and Eve on this earth, He did so with the purpose in mind of teaching them how to regain His presence. Our Father promised a Savior to redeem them from their fallen condition. He gave to them the plan of salvation and told them to teach their children faith in Jesus Christ and repentance. Further, Adam and his posterity were commanded by God to be baptized, to receive the Holy Ghost, and to enter into the order of the Son of God.

To enter into the order of the Son of God is the equivalent today of entering into the fullness of the Melchizedek Priesthood, which is only received in the [LDS temple]house of the Lord.

Because Adam and Eve had complied with these requirements, God said to them, “Thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity.” (Moses 6:67.)
What I Hope You Will Teach Your Children about the Temple
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Wait a minute...hold on here...let's back up and define our terms, please: What is the definition of 'apostasy' that you are operating under when you're talking about these (dead?) people preached to by Adam and Enoch and all of these in post #1325, Peter? Because such figures were all before the incarnation of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ, and before the establishment of His Church, so from where I'm sitting the people of that time cannot have been apostates, as there was no Church nor for that matter any preexisting belief in Jesus Christ, Who was born of St. Mary in time, from which to apostasize. There was obviously a preexisting belief in the coming of a Messiah, as is foretold in the prophets, but His identification with Jesus is something that the Church reads into the Old Testament precisely because we live in the light of Christ's coming; if Jesus hadn't come yet, then it seems rather obvious that there could be neither belief nor disbelief in Him as a particular figure, though of course He was foretold in just that way at the annunciation, which not coincidentally forms part of the New Testament, which did not exist yet in the time of Adam, Enoch, etc.

This is rather strange, and I think something that Mormonism shares with the much more successful restorationist religion Islam, wherein every previous prophet that it recognizes from before its official founding is transformed into a preacher/prophet of itself, no matter if that does not actually line up with the historical timeline. Hmm. That's a bit different than the "seeds of the Word" of St. Justin Martyr, I'd say.
 
Upvote 0

Rescued One

...yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me
Dec 12, 2002
35,508
6,395
Midwest
✟78,539.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
dzheremi...
I look forward to the first resurrection and you and I can go side by side up to meet our Savior and escort him to the earth. Would that be incredible?

Unfortunately you believe lies. Christians are not going to follow your false gods, false leaders, false gospel, and claptrap.

We will follow the true God and invite you to do the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Huh. I had missed the bit highlighted by the quotation in Phoebe Ann's post just now, because I was preoccupied with how the apostasy is supposed to work with the established timeline of salvation.

But now that I've seen it, I have to ask: Why are we escorting Jesus anywhere? Didn't He come to the earth the first time without our help?
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
But in place of an avatar you've got a little outline of a person in a dress above your name and info, mmksparbud! Okay, so that might not settle things with some people these days, but come on...! :confused:

LOL! I just figure a dress indicates a female, no matter what is underneath it!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Wait a minute...hold on here...let's back up and define our terms, please: What is the definition of 'apostasy' that you are operating under when you're talking about these (dead?) people preached to by Adam and Enoch and all of these in post #1325, Peter? Because such figures were all before the incarnation of our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ, and before the establishment of His Church, so from where I'm sitting the people of that time cannot have been apostates, as there was no Church nor for that matter any preexisting belief in Jesus Christ, Who was born of St. Mary in time, from which to apostasize. There was obviously a preexisting belief in the coming of a Messiah, as is foretold in the prophets, but His identification with Jesus is something that the Church reads into the Old Testament precisely because we live in the light of Christ's coming; if Jesus hadn't come yet, then it seems rather obvious that there could be neither belief nor disbelief in Him as a particular figure, though of course He was foretold in just that way at the annunciation, which not coincidentally forms part of the New Testament, which did not exist yet in the time of Adam, Enoch, etc.

This is rather strange, and I think something that Mormonism shares with the much more successful restorationist religion Islam, wherein every previous prophet that it recognizes from before its official founding is transformed into a preacher/prophet of itself, no matter if that does not actually line up with the historical timeline. Hmm. That's a bit different than the "seeds of the Word" of St. Justin Martyr, I'd say.
You have to understand that the apostasy that we talk about did not happen just between 150ad and the present, but it also happened to Adam and all the patriarchs down to Noah, to Abraham, to Moses and the house of Israel, and then the final apostasy after the time of Christ.

The prophets from the beginning knew Jesus Christ. They were speaking to him, he was the God of the OT. They looked forward to his day. See what Jesus says about Abraham:
John 8:56-58 King James Version (KJV)
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

All the prophets rejoiced when they saw the day that Jesus was on the earth to atone for their sins and the sins of all mankind. This atoning sacrifice was known from the beginning and they all knew about it and they taught the people about it. Many believed, but more did not, being convinced by satan not to believe.

In fact it was the atoning sacrifice and the blood that would be shed by Jesus that convinced 2/3 of the stars in heaven to battle on Michael's side (who was on God and Jesus's side) against lucifer in the war in heaven before the earth was finished. The battle was won because 2/3 of the stars of heaven believed the testimony of the Lamb of God (Jesus).
lucifer and his followers were cast out of heaven onto the earth and the war continues here. 2/3 of those stars that followed Michael and Jesus, now are under tremendous pressure to desert the Savior and go over to satan. Satan is working hard to convert as many of them as possible.

So throughout our history there have been high times when the people have listened to their prophets, such as Enoch and his people, Moses and his people, Peter etal and his people, but in each case, apostasy followed until the Lord tried again to bring up a people unto him.

One thing different about the restoration produced by Jesus using JS is that Jesus promised JS that the his restored church would not be taken from the earth again until the second coming took place. This is the dispensation of the fullness of times and the Lord would take away any man or woman that would bring the church down, even an apostle or prophet that got out of the way.
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
Again, how are you actually defining the term 'apostasy'?

Because I am wondering what those ministered to by Adam or these other pre-incarnation figures had to apostasize from.
Do you really believe that the first time the name Jesus Christ ever was heard was when he was born?

Do you not think that Adam knew Jesus Christ and saw his day in vision and rejoiced?

Do you not think that Seth knew Jesus, that Enoch knew Jesus, that Noah knew Jesus, that Abraham knew Jesus and saw his day in vision and rejoiced?
 
Upvote 0

Rescued One

...yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me
Dec 12, 2002
35,508
6,395
Midwest
✟78,539.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Again, how are you actually defining the term 'apostasy'?
Because I am wondering what those ministered to by Adam or these other pre-incarnation figures had to apostasize from.

Mormonism:

Adam had the Mormon gospel and the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Truths restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith bring Adam and Eve out of obscurity and into marvelous light, revealing they were noble and great forebears who “fell that men might be” (2 Ne. 2:25).

Reading about Adam’s life from the Bible alone leaves many unanswered questions. How should we feel about our first parents? Should we bewail Adam and Eve for partaking of the forbidden fruit? What did they really know about the teachings and commandments of God?

Fortunately, the Lord has revealed information that helps answer such questions. These truths are found in the Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, and Book of Mormon, and in the Prophet Joseph Smith’s statements in History of the Church and other writings. Indeed, these sacred writings teach that Adam and Eve were majestic and glorious forebears and that they were taught the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ “from the beginning” (Moses 5:58). These sources instruct us about Adam’s life before Eden, in Eden, in mortality, and in his postmortal state. We are fortunate to have this additional material, for when it is understood properly it renews hope and faith in God and instills confidence in the Bible text and in the prophets.

Pre-Eden

The Bible itself attests that life existed before the physical Creation of the earth (see Gen. 2:4–5). However, the Prophet Joseph Smith learned from the book of Moses that God did not just create some forms of life but that he “created all things … spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. … And I … had created all the children of men, … for in heaven created I them” (Moses 3:5). The Prophet taught that during this period of the spirit existence Adam received the priesthood: “He obtained the First Presidency, and held the keys of it from generation to generation. He obtained it in the Creation, before the world was formed” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith [1979], 157). He was chosen to be the head of the mortal family and was instructed in his role as our earthly progenitor (see Teachings, 158). These sources reveal that Adam and Eve were taught the gospel long before they were in Eden. Indeed, life before Eden was obviously a time of preparation for their important ministry. In the premortal realm, Adam was known as Michael1 and led the faithful angels of heaven against Lucifer. As a result, Lucifer was cast out of heaven to the earth (see Rev. 12:7–9).
What Modern Revelation Teaches about Adam



Now you know! Read more at that link.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Informative
Reactions: dzheremi
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
That is absolutely fascinating, and 'weird' (with due respect to our Mormon friends; this is all very, very different than anything you'll find in any kind of Christianity, so it's like looking at an alien version of the creation story and so on). I most certainly will read more after lunch. Thank you, Phoebe Ann!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Do you really believe that the first time the name Jesus Christ ever was heard was when he was born?

Do you not think that Adam knew Jesus Christ and saw his day in vision and rejoiced?

Do you not think that Seth knew Jesus, that Enoch knew Jesus, that Noah knew Jesus, that Abraham knew Jesus and saw his day in vision and rejoiced?

And what makes you think they did? The bible does not mention Him by the Name Jesus ever. You also have to understand that the Hebrew name Jesus was Joshua--Yeshua--the name was not uncommon.
· “Christ” comes from the Greek word Christos, meaning “ anointed one” or “chosen one.” This is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Mashiach, or “Messiah.” “Jesus” is the Lord’s human name given to Mary by the angel Gabriel (Luke 1:31).

The Messiah was known in scripture. Jesus was not recognized as such until His incarnation. A&E knew there would be someone coming, every male child, esp. the firstborn male, was hoped to be the sought after Messiah. No, they did not know who the sacrificial Lamb actually was. It was called faith.
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
 
Upvote 0

dzheremi

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian
Aug 27, 2014
13,500
13,648
✟426,176.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Do you really believe that the first time the name Jesus Christ ever was heard was when he was born?

This is a strange argument considering that Jesus is a proper name and Christ is a title, not a name. So theoretically anyone could be named Jesus or called the Christ, but it wouldn't make them Jesus Christ, the Only-Begotten Son of God and our Lord, God, and Savior.

This is like asking if anyone was named Joseph before Joseph Smith. It's an odd question and answering it either way doesn't tell us anything.

Do you not think that Adam knew Jesus Christ and saw his day in vision and rejoiced?

Again, you are confusing the pre-incarnational world with the post-incarnational one. I don't think it necessarily matters what Adam knew or didn't know, because this is before the incarnation, wherein God was/is revealed to us.

Do you not think that Seth knew Jesus, that Enoch knew Jesus, that Noah knew Jesus, that Abraham knew Jesus and saw his day in vision and rejoiced?

See above. I'm sure these questions have great import to you, but they're not very sensible to me.
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
This is a strange argument considering that Jesus is a proper name and Christ is a title, not a name. So theoretically anyone could be named Jesus or called the Christ, but it wouldn't make them Jesus Christ, the Only-Begotten Son of God and our Lord, God, and Savior.

This is like asking if anyone was named Joseph before Joseph Smith. It's an odd question and answering it either way doesn't tell us anything.



Again, you are confusing the pre-incarnational world with the post-incarnational one. I don't think it necessarily matters what Adam knew or didn't know, because this is before the incarnation, wherein God was/is revealed to us.



See above. I'm sure these questions have great import to you, but they're not very sensible to me.
When we say that the incarnate Jesus was the God of the OT does that seem very sensible to you?

And if that seems sensible, then all the prophets and patriarchs of the OT knew Jesus well and were taught his gospel in one form or another.

Remember it was the incarnate Jesus that gave Moses the Law of Moses. This is a lower law than the higher Law of Christ, which is full of love and charity (Galatians 6:2). Jesus had to do that because of the hardness of the Israelites hearts. The Law of Moses was a schoolmaster to get them ready for the Law of Christ taught in the NT by Jesus Christ, in his earthly ministry.

Nonetheless Jesus is the author of the Law of Adam through Jacob, the Law of Moses, and the Law of Christ. All of these religious systems were to help us know the mission of Jesus the Christ, as our Savior, this message was not preserved for his time on earth, it was given to all of his prophets and patriarchs long before his time, and they all looked forward to his time when all the promises would be fulfilled, and all people of the world since the beginning could be saved.

A lot of that saving was and is taking place in the spirit world, where all the spirits of men go to await the glorious resurrection and learn about the gospel of Jesus the Christ, some for the very first time. The work goes on in the earth and in the spirit world to get all people ready for the second coming and the resurrection of the just.
 
Upvote 0