Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
He isnt bearing flase witness by starting this thread. He is a Christian, as am I, you and just about everyone on this site. The only bearing of false witness here is people claiming they know what others belive.Breetai said:You are bearing false witness with starting this thread.
If you don't believe it, then why are you a mormon, who believes in a "living" prophet? Why do you sustain these men as prophets twice a year, but doubt their words?fatboys said:FB: What part of the scriptures is this found in? Oh I forgot you take every bit uttered from the prophets as scriptures.
"Apex", did you not notice that he deliberatly changed his icon from lds to a christian icon and then turned around and still supported lds beliefs. I agree with Breetia, it appears that "ED" is being deceptive. I am really hoping that ED is just confused rather than deliberatly dishonest in this situation but the evidence is against him.Apex said:He isnt bearing flase witness by starting this thread. He is a Christian, as am I, you and just about everyone on this site. The only bearing of false witness here is people claiming they know what others belive.
Jason the Evangelist said:If you don't believe it, then why are you a mormon, who believes in a "living" prophet? Why do you sustain these men as prophets twice a year, but doubt their words?
Who's the hypocrite?
I'm interested in knowing how your leaders are set apart. Are they?And your leaders are not set apart from anyone else.
Then we'd call you a wiccan.I haven't been on these threads in a long time. Now I know why. It's just a clash of swords. (spiritually speaking)
Maybe we should all go out into the woods, leave our varied holy books and church doctrines at home, and seek to worship God in Spirit and in Truth. then maybe the Holy Spirit will be able to break down all the walls of "my way is right-ism" and the light of Christ will shine......
The idea of believing someone speaks face to face with God (which according to the Bible cannot be done while alive) and then not accepting such a persons teachings which would obviously be straight from the mouth of God as doctrine just does not compute to me. Could you help me understand how you can do this? thanks.fatboys said:FB: I never said I was not a hypocrite. I am one. So are you Jason. I bet you don't believe you are, do you? I would say that most people who call others hypocrites are the biggest. I have never called you a hypocrite because I am one. Judge not Jason.
Now as for the reasons I sustain the leaders of the church. I believe them to be called of God as it was done in ancient times. I believe they speak to God face to face as a man speaketh to another. That sets them apart from those of us who pray to God and receive inspiration and guidence from God through the Holy Ghost. And I don't doubt their words. They just are not scripture to me, and they have no affect on me if they are true or false. None. They do not help me in pushing me futher to knowing Christ. They are their words which may or may not be great information. But to know Christ is a personal journey. We are given tools in which help us to easier make this journey. We are not left to flounder if we ask.
emerald Dragon said:To let you all know, I am a Christian. I have accepted Christ as my personal Lord and Savior. Without Him, I cannot be saved. He accepted my sins in the Garden of Getsemene, and died on the cross, and has paid the price. I know that if I repent of my sins, and pray to Him for forgiveness, He will wash away my sins, and I will be saved. I believe in God, Christ and the Holy Ghost. I am ever grateful for the guidance they have given to me, and for the many blessings that they have bestowed on me. Words cannot begin to express my gratitude.
God Bless,
Emerald Dragon
emerald Dragon said:To let you all know, I am a Christian. I have accepted Christ as my personal Lord and Savior. Without Him, I cannot be saved. He accepted my sins in the Garden of Getsemene, and died on the cross, and has paid the price. I know that if I repent of my sins, and pray to Him for forgiveness, He will wash away my sins, and I will be saved. I believe in God, Christ and the Holy Ghost. I am ever grateful for the guidance they have given to me, and for the many blessings that they have bestowed on me. Words cannot begin to express my gratitude.
emerald Dragon said:
God Bless,
Emerald Dragon
How does the Watchtower reconcile Matthew 10:22 NWT?
"And you will be objects of hatred by all people on account of my name; but he that has endured to the end is the one that will be saved."(NWT)
Every time I read this all I can think is "then why don't they call themselves Jesus' Witnesses?" Has anyone else wondered this or know how the Watchtower's response to this? I'm sure they have one.
The Watchtower 10/1/1999, p. 17-21, study article "You Can Endure to the End". Matthew 24:13 occurs in 4 times.
Pretty funny, isn't it?
CrownCaster said:The idea of believing someone speaks face to face with God (which according to the Bible cannot be done while alive) and then not accepting such a persons teachings which would obviously be straight from the mouth of God as doctrine just does not compute to me. Could you help me understand how you can do this? thanks.
Wait....did I need a prophet right now after Jesus died? I don't think so.Visage of Glory said:I think Moses was alive here.
Exodus 33:11
11. And the LORD spake utno Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, departed not out of the tabernacle.
Now, lets talk about rejecting the teachings of the Prophet. If what he says as been recieved this by revelation or by communication from God, then I think his word is binding. If, however, he is teaching what he has learned, but has not been revealed, then that is his opinion, and it is up to the member to accept or disagree. It would be like your preacher saying something on the pulpit. Do you have to accept it as revelation? We do believe in modern revelation, but the Prophet is also capably of teaching by his own understanding as well.
Hi there!Visage of Glory said:I think Moses was alive here.
Exodus 33:11
11. And the LORD spake utno Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, departed not out of the tabernacle.
Now, lets talk about rejecting the teachings of the Prophet. If what he says as been recieved this by revelation or by communication from God, then I think his word is binding. If, however, he is teaching what he has learned, but has not been revealed, then that is his opinion, and it is up to the member to accept or disagree. It would be like your preacher saying something on the pulpit. Do you have to accept it as revelation? We do believe in modern revelation, but the Prophet is also capably of teaching by his own understanding as well.
This is where the differences come into play... You are comparing "new revelation" from the "prophet" to the interpretation of "old revelation" from the known Word of God, and saying that we, the listeners, have a choice to accept or reject the "old revelation"Do you have to accept it as revelation?
Moses NEVER had direct dealings with YHWH let alone talk to him face to face. Angels acted as Ambassadors of YHWH in this regard. The following are the scriptures that explains the interaction between Moses, the Israelites and YHWH. As you can see from scripture it was all done by the Angels.Visage of Glory said:I think Moses was alive here.
Exodus 33:11
11. And the LORD spake utno Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, departed not out of the tabernacle.
Now, lets talk about rejecting the teachings of the Prophet. If what he says as been recieved this by revelation or by communication from God, then I think his word is binding. If, however, he is teaching what he has learned, but has not been revealed, then that is his opinion, and it is up to the member to accept or disagree. It would be like your preacher saying something on the pulpit. Do you have to accept it as revelation? We do believe in modern revelation, but the Prophet is also capably of teaching by his own understanding as well.
mawuvi said:Moses NEVER had direct dealings with YHWH let alone talk to him face to face. Angels acted as Ambassadors of YHWH in this regard. The following are the scriptures that explains the interaction between Moses, the Israelites and YHWH. As you can see from scripture it was all done by the Angels.
Where does it say that Moses NEVER had direct dealings with God? He may of had interactions with angles, but this verse clearly says that Moses sopke directly to God. He may not of seen His face but he saw his hand and back, to me this suggests that God has a body.Exodus 33:11
11. And the LORD spake utno Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, departed not out of the tabernacle.
Breetai,
Then we'd call you a wiccan.
Whatever you say. It seems fairly clear to me. How about Genesis 32:30?Serapha said:Hi there!
The passage in Exodus 33:11 states that Moses and God talked face-to-face, but this certainly could not be absolute, for no one can "see" God, who is spirit, and one must know that the "face" is anthropomorphic. The passage in Exodus 33:18-23 identifies that the Lord was willing to give Moses His name and to reveal the ever-present glory of His backside, but not the true face of God. For God is spirit (John 4:24), and only the Son has seen God and lived.
Actually that is not what I was doing. I was comparing your preacher explaining something to one of our leaders doing the same thing. I don't think neither of us are obligated to accept their teachings as revelation. If however, Gordon B. Hinckley recieved a revelation, and said as much, I would obey. I think it is our obligation to accept revelation whether new or old. But someone's explanation or teaching on an old revelation is not essentially binding.
This is where the differences come into play... You are comparing "new revelation" from the "prophet" to the interpretation of "old revelation" from the known Word of God, and saying that we, the listeners, have a choice to accept or reject the "old revelation"
You are comparing apples to oranges.
~serapha~
If my pastor claimed to be a prophet and then spoke in the name of God something that contradicted the Bible, I would personally lead the committee to remove him from his position. Heck, I would confront him as a mere pastor if he chose to teach un-Biblically and depending on his reaction and whether he chose to repent and make it right, he may still need to be removed. The Word of God is not something to be trifled with and a leader has no business leading if they are not firmly grounded in Gods Word, the Bible.Visage of Glory said:It would be like your preacher saying something on the pulpit. Do you have to accept it as revelation? We do believe in modern revelation, but the Prophet is also capably of teaching by his own understanding as well.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?