I'm EXLDS now bought by the blood ;-)

[Wrigley]

Are we better off if we allow the false doctrine to stand?

Is relationship more important that truth ?

Yes, it looks like it is.

 

[Alma]

Please tell me what is biblically correct about believing a man can be a god with his own planet. And where in scripture are God and the Holy Ghost referred to as posessing a body of flesh and bone? I would appreciate further light and knowledge on these matters.

Thanks!

So, we ignore the previous discussion and move on to a new strawman approach.

It would seem to me that you would ask me to biblically support concepts from Mormonism that are actually concepts from Mormonism. I’m fairly well versed in LDS theology as well as arguments against Mormonism by its critics; yet, there is no scripture anywhere about anyone being a “god with his own planet” except for Satan. You do recall that Paul said Satan was the “god of this world?” (2 Cor. 4:4) So, I would suggest that if you’re going to criticize LDS concepts, you should make sure they are really LDS concepts before criticizing them as such. That same caution goes for your second request/criticism. Mormons don’t believe that the Holy Ghost has a body of flesh and bone. They do believe that the Father and Son do, but not the Holy Spirit.

I’m guessing here, but you’re probably not really interested in where LDS scripture says that the Father and Son are corporeal (D&C 130:22). I do believe that the corporeal nature of the Father can be extrapolated from the Bible, but even so, there is nothing that contradicts such a concept. (I’m familiar with John 4:24 and fully believe it).

Alma

 

[Wrigley]

I’m guessing here, but you’re probably not really interested in where LDS scripture says that the Father and Son are corporeal (D&C 130:22). I do believe that the corporeal nature of the Father can be extrapolated from the read into the Bible, but even so, there is nothing that contradicts such a concept. (I’m familiar with John 4:24 and fully believe it).

Alma

 

[Alma]

If we're getting to false prophecies Alma, may I interest you inD&C 114 if I remember correctly. Gerge W. Patten was supposed to serve a mission at a certain date in the fall. He died three months before the alleged prophecy fulfillment date.

Right section, wrong name, wrong interpretation. It was David rather than Gerge and it wasn’t a prophecy. A prophecy is an unambiguous statement that something will come to pass. The section has God telling David Patten to settle up his business so that he “may” go on a mission in the spring. Apparently, those who think this is a prophecy are unaware of what the word “may” means. It expresses possibility, purpose or permission; it doesn’t stipulate futurity. If I say that tomorrow “I may work on my taxes,” that’s clearly not a prophecy and neither was Joseph Smith’s revelation telling David Patten to settle up his affairs so that he “may” accomplish something. (Do you think that Gerge Patten might be related to George Patton?)

I also have a question pertaining to the WOW in D&C 89 and eating meat in the winter.

OK, what’s the question?

As Calgal mentioned the "flesh and bone" issue, I would like to add someting: If the heavenly father and mother both possess physical bodies, how do they physically give birth to spirit children? If He possesses a body "just like ours", there is no theological excuse.

Since “physically” is the antithesis of “spiritually” I don’t think your question is coherent. It’s impossible to physically give birth to spirits. It’s like asking how can chickens be dogs. I’m sorry but the rest of your comment is to me equally incoherent. Could you explain how you have come to the conclusion that God’s body is “just like ours” and what that is no theological excuse for?

Oh, and what's the story with Oliver Cowderly? The only witness to many activities that Smith claimed. For some reason, he confessed and "fell away" from the LDS church recanting on everything he said about the church.

It’s Oliver Cowdery. He wasn’t the only witness, there were several other witnesses. Actually, he never recanted on anything. He was excommunicated from the Church in 1838 for “unchristian conduct” but that expulsion doesn’t have anything to do with what he claimed to have seen. In 1847 he was re-baptized into the Church and died shortly thereafter of tuberculosis. His testimony is printed in two places in LDS scripture: the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price.

If he placed no faith in the church, why should we? I respect this man who confessed about lying about obtaining the preiesthood from the apostles, because he had the heart to come back to the faith. He converted to true Chrsitianity from Mormonism, the right hand man of Smith and his co-visionary.

I’m sorry but you’ve got some very bad information. Perhaps you’re relying on a 1904 publication that Jerald and Sandra Tanner have demonstrated is bogus? I would say that if Oliver Cowdery placed no faith in the Church you shouldn’t either; but the fact is, he always believed that it was the restored Church of Jesus Christ and he remained true to his testimony throughout his life. Another of the witnesses, David Whitmer, published a pamphlet responding to false claims that he and others had denied their testimonies. It’s available on the web and called, “An Address to All Believers in Christ.” Oliver Cowdery never ever confessed to lying about his ordination by the apostles or any other item connected to the resoration.

If you ignore all my other questions I do not care, but answer me this. I seriuosly inquire this because I do not know the answer from the LDS perspective. I've heard it only poorly explained and would like a proper explanation of this modern revelation. I asked my LDS friend exactly how he knew whether what he felt was from God or from Satan disguising himself as an angel of light. He went on to talk about how if you meet an angel, you'll know it's an angel because they won't shake because he doesn't want to decieve you. If it's a demon, he'll offer to shake your hand because he wants to decieve you. If it's a resurrected being, he'll try to shake your hand. By this method, according to modern reveltion, we're supposed to distinguish between manifestations of holilness and evil.

The concept is that evil spirits do not have physical bodies but angels from God generally do. The instruction given to Church members in section 129 is as follows:

“THERE are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones-- For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory. When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you. If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.”


Of course this only relates to actual appearances of messengers claiming to be angels from God. It doesn’t necessarily relate to all manifestations of holiness or evil. In this and other circumstances you would be advised to still use the standard of judgment given by John in the New Testament: “ Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (1 John 4:1-3)

I hope this is just a straw man construction of the revelation. I REALLY hope this wasn't all that was revealed, because there is such a big problem with that that it's ridiculous. Please tell me there's more to this than I was told.

Hopefully, you have seen that this wasn’t the sum total. BTW, I try not to ignore any questions people ask. Sometimes I miss them, but if you asked a question I didn’t answer, remind me again.

Alma

 

[Alma]

Yes , The Bible gives the test of a prophet.

Deu 18:20 ...(stuff deleted) The Bible makes it clear that there are other spirits besides the Holy Spirit who can be very "seducing" and even teach "doctrines" (1 Timothy 4:1). This is why 1 John 4:1 warns: "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try [Greek dokimazo "test"] the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world."

Yes, and people generally only quote 4:1 without verses 2 and 3. You’re only using the first half and leaving the part out that says how to judge! He says to try the spirits and then he gives the “herewith” for testing them: “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God.” (1 John 4:2). That’s the KJV version. The NIV makes it a little more clear in current English: “This is how you can recognize…” He says the way to recognize whether or not it’s of God is if it acknowledges that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.” Let’s try out that Biblical test and see how Joseph Smith fares: We got the Book of Mormon from Joseph Smith. The central character in the book is Jesus Christ. He enters the record early and remains the center of discussion upon its last page. It’s stated purpose is to convince Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ. When Joseph Smith was asked what “are the fundamental principles of your religion?" He answered, “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.” That, Calgal, is the Biblical test, the way John said we were to determine true or false prophets; and Joseph Smith passes with flying colors—as does the Book of Mormon:

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. (2 Nephi 25:26)

The issue is of course his prophet status. If one hears god one would not make such a foolish observation.

1 Corinthians 2:12-16
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

Are those papers open to non Mormons to read?

I imagine so, I got the quote from an anti-Mormon book quoting the LDS archives.

It makes me think of the "corrections" made in other documents or the removal of or underplaying historic practices.

Which “corrections” does it make you think about? (Or is this just more smoke and mirror assertions like “steel arrowheads?”)

Alma is there ANY physical evidence in archeology studies done by BYU or others that support any of Joe Smiths claims?

I’m not aware of any; but neither am I aware of any physical evidence for the resurrection or any of the miracles of the Bible. Are you aware of any?

I live in the burned over district ( the birth place of Mormonism) that is remarkably like the geography discussed in the BOM . There has never been any evidence found here. The digs have now moved all the way to South America.

It is remarkably like the geography of the Book of Mormon? That is amazing. Could you point out where it is in New York that someone can walk from the east sea westward and in a day and a half arrive at the west sea? (Alma 22:7, 32) Last time I looked, the west sea was more than a day and a half walk westward.

Alma

 

[calgal]

Yes, and people generally only quote 4:1 without verses 2 and 3. You’re only using the first half and leaving the part out that says how to judge! He says to try the spirits and then he gives the “herewith” for testing them: “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God.” (1 John 4:2). That’s the KJV version. The NIV makes it a little more clear in current English: “This is how you can recognize…” He says the way to recognize whether or not it’s of God is if it acknowledges that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.” Let’s try out that Biblical test and see how Joseph Smith fares: We got the Book of Mormon from Joseph Smith. The central character in the book is Jesus Christ. He enters the record early and remains the center of discussion upon its last page. It’s stated purpose is to convince Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ. When Joseph Smith was asked what “are the fundamental principles of your religion?" He answered, “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.” That, Calgal, is the Biblical test, the way John said we were to determine true or false prophets; and Joseph Smith passes with flying colors—as does the Book of Mormon:

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. (2 Nephi 25:26)




1 Corinthians 2:12-16
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.




I imagine so, I got the quote from an anti-Mormon book quoting the LDS archives.



Which “corrections” does it make you think about? (Or is this just more smoke and mirror assertions like “steel arrowheads?”)



I’m not aware of any; but neither am I aware of any physical evidence for the resurrection or any of the miracles of the Bible. Are you aware of any?



It is remarkably like the geography of the Book of Mormon? That is amazing. Could you point out where it is in New York that someone can walk from the east sea westward and in a day and a half arrive at the west sea? (Alma 22:7, 32) Last time I looked, the west sea was more than a day and a half walk westward.

Alma

Again I will ask you this simple question having a life outside the forums and not having the time to look up every little thing: In the endowment live and film ceremony, God (Elohim) and God #2 (Jehovah) went to this earth "like unto the other worlds we have formed" along with Michael (Adam) to create the events discussed in Genesis 1. That is not the single God without a mortal body but two less powerful godlings. I haven't been in an endowment ceremony since 1997 since I don't like sneaking into other people's rituals without a proper invitation but this was a central part of the ceremony. God in the OT and NT is a single being who was the First and the Last. I see a disconnect here that bothers me.

 

[Alma]

Again I will ask you this simple question having a life outside the forums and not having the time to look up every little thing: In the endowment live and film ceremony, God (Elohim) and God #2 (Jehovah) went to this earth "like unto the other worlds we have formed" along with Michael (Adam) to create the events discussed in Genesis 1. That is not the single God without a mortal body but two less powerful godlings. I haven't been in an endowment ceremony since 1997 since I don't like sneaking into other people's rituals without a proper invitation but this was a central part of the ceremony. God in the OT and NT is a single being who was the First and the Last. I see a disconnect here that bothers me.

I seem to have missed the question. (“Again I will ask you this simple question...”) I didn’t even see it the first time. Unless you want to engage in all kinds of grammatical gymnastics, the words “us” and “our” are plural and indicate more than one being. Moses tells us that God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let us give him dominion over all the beasts of the field.”

When the serpent tempted Adam and Eve, he told them they would become “as gods” knowing good and evil. Well, they did partake and notice that as a result God said “Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.” See that pesky little plural pronoun?

It is also written in your law, “God stands in the congregation of gods and among them will judge gods.” (Psalm82:1) Jesus cited the same psalm in his own defense - - noting that it could not be broken. I don’t know where you come up with the concept of “godlings” because it is entirely foreign to LDS theology - - especially in reference to Jesus Christ/Jehovah. Nothing in our theology says that Jesus is “less powerful” than the Father, it affirms that He has “all power in heaven and in earth.” (Matt. 28:18) Where do you come up with such distorted perceptions?

BTW, I too have a life outside the forums, but today is a holiday in Utah but it's too hot to work outside.

Alma

 

[Drotar]

Right section, wrong name, wrong interpretation. It was David rather than Gerge and it wasn’t a prophecy. A prophecy is an unambiguous statement that something will come to pass. The section has God telling David Patten to settle up his business so that he “may” go on a mission in the spring. Apparently, those who think this is a prophecy are unaware of what the word “may” means. It expresses possibility, purpose or permission; it doesn’t stipulate futurity. If I say that tomorrow “I may work on my taxes,” that’s clearly not a prophecy and neither was Joseph Smith’s revelation telling David Patten to settle up his affairs so that he “may” accomplish something. (Do you think that Gerge Patten might be related to George Patton?)

You will haveto forgive me for my mispellings. I don't have a copy in front of me. yes I meant "David "Patten, not George Patton. I got their names confused.

Does God give prophecies saying that something "might" happen? Did God reveal a "maybe" prophecy? Why? That's ridiculous.

OK, what’s the question?

Why do you eat meat all year long when there's a specific time instructed for it?

Since “physically” is the antithesis of “spiritually” I don’t think your question is coherent. It’s impossible to physically give birth to spirits. It’s like asking how can chickens be dogs. I’m sorry but the rest of your comment is to me equally incoherent. Could you explain how you have come to the conclusion that God’s body is “just like ours” and what that is no theological excuse for?

You misunderstand my questions. If God is a physical being, and the heavenly mther is to, how do they give birth to spirit children in the First Estate? Shouldn't we be born with physical bodies in our pre-existence, if God has a body "just like ours"? Why does a God with a body like ours, give birth to spirit children? More or less, how?

It’s Oliver Cowdery. He wasn’t the only witness, there were several other witnesses. Actually, he never recanted on anything. He was excommunicated from the Church in 1838 for “unchristian conduct” but that expulsion doesn’t have anything to do with what he claimed to have seen. In 1847 he was re-baptized into the Church and died shortly thereafter of tuberculosis. His testimony is printed in two places in LDS scripture: the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price.

I'm specifically referring to witnessing the transmission of the priesthood from the apostles, so they claimed.

Not what I heard. As for being rebaptized, you're the only LDS I've ever heard say that. I've been told and taught that he is a son of perdition. He actually contested against them in court, as to the plans for the New Jerusalem and their polygamy, etc. You're leaving information out. What was this "unchristian conduct"?

I’m sorry but you’ve got some very bad information. Perhaps you’re relying on a 1904 publication that Jerald and Sandra Tanner have demonstrated is bogus? I would say that if Oliver Cowdery placed no faith in the Church you shouldn’t either; but the fact is, he always believed that it was the restored Church of Jesus Christ and he remained true to his testimony throughout his life. Another of the witnesses, David Whitmer, published a pamphlet responding to false claims that he and others had denied their testimonies. It’s available on the web and called, “An Address to All Believers in Christ.” Oliver Cowdery never ever confessed to lying about his ordination by the apostles or any other item connected to the resoration.

We have sources from historical men and women in encyclopedia that are religiously non-partisan. Unbiased. Why on earth would I believe info on history from someone that's a member of your church?

The concept is that evil spirits do not have physical bodies but angels from God generally do. The instruction given to Church members in section 129 is as follows:

“THERE are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones-- For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory. When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you. If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.”

Of course this only relates to actual appearances of messengers claiming to be angels from God. It doesn’t necessarily relate to all manifestations of holiness or evil. In this and other circumstances you would be advised to still use the standard of judgment given by John in the New Testament: “ Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. (1 John 4:1-3)

Thank you. I have discrepancies, but to remain true to what I said, I won't contest them because that answer is consitent.

Alright then I have a question: Why would God allow the Great Apostasy to reign from 100 to 1830. All LDS agree that the world is nearly over before the coming millennium. Why would God let error reign from 100 to 1830, and have the gospel restored from 1830 to X (understanding that X is VERY soon)? Why wouldn't God make appearances to someone WAY sooner than JS jr. in 1830? My question is that the Great Apostasy doesn't make sense in why God would have allowed it to go on so long, ESPECIALLY since the LATTER-DAY saint church has been around for only 175 five years roughly. TTYL Jesus loves you!

 

[Drotar]

You rely too much on the literal English translation for Psam 82.

In Hebrew, the word Elohim is used, also meaning powerful judges, or kings.

Gen. 3 says you will become like unto God, not gods. Maybe you have the Inspired version.


As for Gen. 1:26-27, you misunderstand the Trinity doctrine. We do NOT say that the Father is the Son, and that the Holy SPirit is the Father. They are three persons in one God, thus they can communicate with each other. What is so difficult about that? Remember that this is possible because God is a spirit, not fleshly like us. TTYL Jesus loves you!

How do you acount for Isaiah 44-46 on monotheism?

 

[Drotar]

So, we ignore the previous discussion and move on to a new strawman approach.

It would seem to me that you would ask me to biblically support concepts from Mormonism that are actually concepts from Mormonism. I’m fairly well versed in LDS theology as well as arguments against Mormonism by its critics; yet, there is no scripture anywhere about anyone being a “god with his own planet” except for Satan. You do recall that Paul said Satan was the “god of this world?” (2 Cor. 4:4) So, I would suggest that if you’re going to criticize LDS concepts, you should make sure they are really LDS concepts before criticizing them as such. That same caution goes for your second request/criticism. Mormons don’t believe that the Holy Ghost has a body of flesh and bone. They do believe that the Father and Son do, but not the Holy Spirit.

I’m guessing here, but you’re probably not really interested in where LDS scripture says that the Father and Son are corporeal (D&C 130:22). I do believe that the corporeal nature of the Father can be extrapolated from the Bible, but even so, there is nothing that contradicts such a concept. (I’m familiar with John 4:24 and fully believe it).

Alma

By saying that Satan was the god of this world, does not mean that he is literally a God.

Wait hold that thought. I'd like to run with it. So you're saying that Satan is an exalted being? That HE created this world because he is the god of it, rather than Elohim? Giving that verse to supprt that concept of exaltation and henotheism just cost you.

May I ask your interpretation of John 20:28 and Acts 20:28? One supporting the deity of the Son, the other of the Holy Spirit. For the sake of brevity, we'll skip the verses supporitng the deity of the Father. TTYL Jesus loves you!

 

[jsfrk2]

877647

History disproves the claim that the Mormon church is the "restored" church. By tracing the history of the Christian church, it becomes clear that the Mormon claim of "restoration" is pure fiction. Because church history is well preserved, an accurate picture not only regarding the teachings of the early churches but also of the deviations from the orthodoxy that took place including; Gnosticism, Arianism, and Sebellianism. If it were true that Mormonism is the "restored" church, we would certainly expect to find evidence in the first century for doctrines such as; the plurality of Gods’, men becoming Gods, and God the father once being man.
But no evidence as to such exists anywhere in church history.


you are totally right by grace that there is no support for the "restored" church theory,your brother in Christ Jesus,jsfrk2

 

[jsfrk2]

Thank you. I have discrepancies, but to remain true to what I said, I won't contest them because that answer is consitent.Alright then I have a question: Why would God allow the Great Apostasy to reign from 100 to 1830. All LDS agree that the world is nearly over before the coming millennium. Why would God let error reign from 100 to 1830, and have the gospel restored from 1830 to X (understanding that X is VERY soon)? Why wouldn't God make appearances to someone WAY sooner than JS jr. in 1830? My question is that the Great Apostasy doesn't make sense in why God would have allowed it to go on so long, ESPECIALLY since the LATTER-DAY saint church has been around for only 175 five years roughly. TTYL Jesus loves you!

History disproves the claim that the Mormon church is the "restored" church. By tracing the history of the Christian church, it becomes clear that the Mormon claim of "restoration" is pure fiction. Because church history is well preserved, an accurate picture not only regarding the teachings of the early churches but also of the deviations from the orthodoxy that took place including; Gnosticism, Arianism, and Sebellianism. If it were true that Mormonism is the "restored" church, we would certainly expect to find evidence in the first century for doctrines such as; the plurality of Gods’, men becoming Gods, and God the father once being man.
But no evidence as to such exists anywhere in church history.

Thats what I was trying to dooo.......lol,hehe!!!,jsfrk2

 

[rnmomof7]

eph Smith passes with flying colors—as does the Book of Mormon:

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins. (2 Nephi 25:26)

In the first edition of the BOM we read as follows:

"... These last records ... shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father and the Savior ... " (Book of Mormon, 1830 edition, page 32)

In the 1964 edition it reads as follows:

"... These last records ... shall make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the [Son of] the Eternal Father, and the Savior ..." (Book of Mormon, 1964 edition, 1 Nephi 13:40)

This correction is a doctrinal change...Smith's first edition which claims it was inspired by God and was correct...says that Jesus Christ is God the eternal Father.... The later editions say he is the Son of the eternal father. The reason for the first statement is clear...the Bible says that Jesus is God the Eternal Father....and Smith correctly stated this doctrine...but later he changed his doctrine and denied what the Bible clearly teaches.

I imagine so, I got the quote from an anti-Mormon book quoting the LDS archives.



Which “corrections” does it make you think about? (Or is this just more smoke and mirror assertions like “steel arrowheads?”)

The Book of Mormon says the people of the Americas possessed and used, such things as iron, steel, brass, gold and silver coins, swords, cimeters, breast plates, arm shields, armor, horses, and chariots, wheat, barley, olives, and silk. Also they are said to have had domesticated animals of cattle, oxen, cows, sheep, swine, horses, asses, elephants, cureloms and cumoms.

******* The BOM dates up to the 5th Century AD and on investigation you find that not one of these items or animals has been found in America before the arrival of Europeans over a thousand years later. The only exception is that there were elephants in the New World and there is evidence that they were killed and eaten. The problem is, that the dates that modern archaeologist use, they became extinct at least 10,000 years ago. That would be at least 6000 years before the Nephites and the Lamanites of the Book of Mormon were suppose to arrive in the New World from the Middle East

I’m not aware of any; but neither am I aware of any physical evidence for the resurrection or any of the miracles of the Bible. Are you aware of any?



It is remarkably like the geography of the Book of Mormon? That is amazing. Could you point out where it is in New York that someone can walk from the east sea westward and in a day and a half arrive at the west sea? (Alma 22:7, 32) Last time I looked, the west sea was more than a day and a half walk westward.

Alma

Before the 1840s, Joseph Smith made a few references to sites which he identified as scenes of ancient activity. He had, of course, claimed that a hill near Manchester, New York, where he uncovered the gold plates, was the hill where Moroni had buried the plates after the final battle between the Nephites and Lamanites. While Zion's Camp was traveling through Ohio in May 1834, Joseph, along with a number of other men, came to some thick woods, and he stated that he felt that a great battle had taken place there. A short distance further, they came upon "a mound sixty feet high, containing human bones" (Joseph Smith 1976, 2:66). Joseph also described what occurred about a month later, after they had crossed the Illinois River:

You are acquainted with the mail road from Palmyra, Wayne Co. to Canandaigua, Ontario Co. N. Y. and also, as you pass from the former to the latter place, before arriving at the little village of Manchester, say from three to four, or about four miles from Palmyra, you pass a large hill on the east side of the road. . . .

At about one mile west rises another ridge of less height, running parallel with the former, leaving a beautiful vale between. . . . here, between these hills, the entire power and national strength of both the Jaredites and Nephites were destroyed.

By turning to the 529th and 530th pages of the book of Mormon you will read Mormon's account of the last great struggle of his people, as they were encamped round this hill Cumorah. . . .

This hill, by the Jaredites, was called Ramah: by it, or around it, pitched the famous army of Coriantumr their tents. Coriantumr was the last king of the Jaredites. . . . In this same spot, in full view from the top of this same hill, one may gaze with astonishment upon the ground which was twice covered with the dead and dying of our fellowmen. (Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate, July 1835)

The story about Zelph presents a problem, because it has been published both with and without the words "Hill Cumorah." The handwritten copy, in fact, contains these words, but a line was drawn through them, leaving the text to read, "who was known from the eastern sea to the Rocky mountains." To complicate matters further, Joseph's history says both that his group had crossed to the west side of the Illinois River, and that Zelph was killed "during the last great struggle of the Lamanites and Nephites," which, according to the Book of Mormon, occurred at the hill Cumorah. Was Joseph identifying the high mound near the Illinois River as the hill Cumorah? If not, how could Zelph's remains have been discovered there, if the hill Cumorah was located in the state of New York, hundreds of miles to the east? In any case, it appears that we can at least state positively that Joseph placed the Nephites and the hill Cumorah somewhere in North America.

 

[Drotar]

I don't know if you were there, rnmomo7, but I posted a thread about the origins of nations and races. I supposed that Asians and Native Americans came from Shem. However, there is no genetic evidence of that, as I was disclaimed. There are no genetic similarities between Native Americans and Jews. This disclaims 1 Nephi. Alma, I have a question regarding the testimony of the three witnesses. They claim the Father Son and HOly Spirit, not to be one in heart or mind or purpose, but to be "one God." Please elaborate.This is the closing sentence of their testinomny. TTYL Jesus loves you!

 

[jsfrk2]

the John connection:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the lifewas the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Who is this word you say? The word of God who is God?

Jesus, according to the Bible as it is stated in vs 14,
John 1:14
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Its states that Jesus is God and came down to Earth and we beheld his glory that was the fathers glory.

John 1:18

18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Jesus who is IN the bosom of the father has declared him.
IN no even a prophet claimed this in the OT,because they could'nt being a prohet of God they could only claim What God has given them,not being in the bosom of God . This verse could be vauge to some,but the rest of them arent and the ones before the arent either.

John 1:29

29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
Now in the old testament only God himself could forgive sins!

And I belive that also is true in the new testament.THE LAMB OF GOD is the holy sacrifice that would take away the sins of the world. As stated in revelation:

Revelation 17:14

14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Now understand that Lord is translated in hebrew as:
YHWH or Yahwih: meaning the one true God, and some ways to say God in the OT are translated the same,YHWH who is God!
Jesus is God!It's not so hard to understand when you study the real Greek and hebrew meanings to words.

John 4:42

42 And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.

The saviour of the world, in Isaiah it states that God is the only saviour


Isaiah 43:11

11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isaiah 43:3

3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.
No other saviour other than God himself!!!!!

John 5:18

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

well if Jesus was without sin(which he was) then it is not blasphemy to be considered equal

John 10:33

33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

For these statements to be true and not false Jesus has to be God, If they are false, then Jesus is not free from sin because he would be doing the same thing that satan did and wanting to make himself equal to God.

The jews understood correctly what Jesus was saying, That he is equal to God as part of the trinity.

John 10:30

30 I and my Father are one.

Truth spoken by Jesus himself, thank you all for listening,GBU,your brother in Christ Jesus,jsfrk2

 

[Drotar]

May I add to his post:

Deuteronomy 6:4 (check the Hebrew)
Mark 2:4-6
Luke 4:12 (see Jesus's response to Satan tempting him)
John 8:58
John 20:28
Acts 20:28
Colossians 2:9
Titus 2:13

When you're done with those I'll present more.

 

[Alma]

Does God give prophecies saying that something "might" happen? Did God reveal a "maybe" prophecy? Why? That's ridiculous.

First, Dro, it isn’t a prophecy, it’s a command. God tells David Patten to settle up all of his affairs so that he would be able to leave soon. Secondly, “might” isn’t the same connotation as “may” and yes, God does use both grammatical constructions. In the New Testament, Jesus explained that John the Baptist came so that the people “might believe him.” (Matt. 21:32) You see, there is often an element agency involved where people may or may not choose to accept what God offers them. “That ye may be the children of your father in heaven...and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.” It isn’t necessarily “ridiculous.”

Why do you eat meat all year long when there's a specific time instructed for it?

The “word of wisdom” said that meat should be used sparingly, it “should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold or famine.” See the words “of cold?” This revelation was given before refrigeration had been invented. Meat spoils quickly in summer months and hence the counsel to preserve people from food poisoning. We now have the ability to store meat in conditions “of cold” thus preserving its value as food. Additionally, Joseph Smith explained that this should be interpreted as “red” meat rather than all meat.

You misunderstand my questions. If God is a physical being, and the heavenly mother is too, how do they give birth to spirit children in the First Estate? Shouldn't we be born with physical bodies in our pre-existence, if God has a body "just like ours"? Why does a God with a body like ours, give birth to spirit children? More or less, how?

It hasn’t been revealed how spirit children are produced. All I could offer is speculation, but you still include that comment “just like ours” in your question. I don’t know of any LDS teaching that resurrected bodies are “just like our” mortal bodies - - do you?

I'm specifically referring to witnessing the transmission of the priesthood from the apostles, so they claimed.

And I’m telling you that he never denied such an occurrence. In fact, he only made two public statements about priesthood conferral from heavenly messengers (John the Baptist and the apostles Peter, James and John) and both of those accounts affirmed the circumstance.

Not what I heard. As for being rebaptized, you're the only LDS I've ever heard say that. I've been told and taught that he is a son of perdition.

Where on earth did you ever hear that Oliver Cowdery is a son of perdition? As to him being rebaptized, he traveled to Winter Quarters in Iowa with his brother-in-law Phineas Young (brother of Brigham Young) and asked to be rebaptized. He was examined by several of the apostles who asked him about all his public statements – both oral and written - - issued while he was out of the Church. They conceded to his rebaptism and he was baptized November 12, 1848 by Orson Hyde in Kanesville, Iowa.

He actually contested against them in court, as to the plans for the New Jerusalem and their polygamy, etc. You're leaving information out. What was this "unchristian conduct"?

I think you’re getting information from bogus sources. When was this alleged court contest regarding polygamy?

We have sources from historical men and women in encyclopedia that are religiously non-partisan. Unbiased. Why on earth would I believe info on history from someone that's a member of your church?

Why would you automatically reject it? But, the source I gave you was from David Whitmer. He too was excommunicated in 1838 and never returned to the Church. And he specifically said that the encyclopedia had falsely claimed that he had denied his testimony. Enclyclopedias of the 19th century were about as unbiased as the newspapers.

Alright then I have a question: Why would God allow the Great Apostasy to reign from 100 to 1830. All LDS agree that the world is nearly over before the coming millennium. Why would God let error reign from 100 to 1830, and have the gospel restored from 1830 to X (understanding that X is VERY soon)? Why wouldn't God make appearances to someone WAY sooner than JS jr. in 1830? My question is that the Great Apostasy doesn't make sense in why God would have allowed it to go on so long, ESPECIALLY since the LATTER-DAY saint church has been around for only 175 five years roughly. TTYL Jesus loves you!

I would say that the great apostasy began when the people rejected and murdered the apostles. Many people in history were killed who opposed the established Church. Whether it was people who opposed Catholics or Protestants they were still executed. Joseph Smith only lived 14 years after he established the LDS Church when he was murdered by a mob. I’d say that as fast as God was willing to send true prophets since the days of Jesus, people were as quick to kill them. Even the people who followed Joseph Smith were driven from the United States under the threat of extermination - - and that in a country that promised religious liberty! Try preaching Christ in Iran and see what happens. Unfortunately, people everywhere are reluctant to allow religious freedom. They killed many prophets, they killed Jesus and his apostles. I’m amazed that Joseph Smith was allowed to live for 14 years. Maybe that’s one reason why darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the people. (see Isa. 60:1)

Alma

 

[Alma]

Does God give prophecies saying that something "might" happen? Did God reveal a "maybe" prophecy? Why? That's ridiculous.

First, Dro, it isn’t a prophecy, it’s a command. God tells David Patten to settle up all of his affairs so that he would be able to leave soon. Secondly, “might” isn’t the same connotation as “may” and yes, God does use both grammatical constructions. In the New Testament, Jesus explained that John the Baptist came so that the people “might believe him.” (Matt. 21:32) You see, there is often an element agency involved where people may or may not choose to accept what God offers them. “That ye may be the children of your father in heaven...and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.” It isn’t necessarily “ridiculous.”

Why do you eat meat all year long when there's a specific time instructed for it?

The “word of wisdom” said that meat should be used sparingly, it “should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold or famine.” See the words “of cold?” This revelation was given before refrigeration had been invented. Meat spoils quickly in summer months and hence the counsel to preserve people from food poisoning. We now have the ability to store meat in conditions “of cold” thus preserving its value as food. Additionally, Joseph Smith explained that this should be interpreted as “red” meat rather than all meat.

You misunderstand my questions. If God is a physical being, and the heavenly mother is too, how do they give birth to spirit children in the First Estate? Shouldn't we be born with physical bodies in our pre-existence, if God has a body "just like ours"? Why does a God with a body like ours, give birth to spirit children? More or less, how?

It hasn’t been revealed how spirit children are produced. All I could offer is speculation, but you still include that comment “just like ours” in your question. I don’t know of any LDS teaching that resurrected bodies are “just like our” mortal bodies - - do you?

I'm specifically referring to witnessing the transmission of the priesthood from the apostles, so they claimed.

And I’m telling you that he never denied such an occurrence. In fact, he only made two public statements about priesthood conferral from heavenly messengers (John the Baptist and the apostles Peter, James and John) and both of those accounts affirmed the circumstance.

Not what I heard. As for being rebaptized, you're the only LDS I've ever heard say that. I've been told and taught that he is a son of perdition.

Where on earth did you ever hear that Oliver Cowdery is a son of perdition? As to him being rebaptized, he traveled to Winter Quarters in Iowa with his brother-in-law Phineas Young (brother of Brigham Young) and asked to be rebaptized. He was examined by several of the apostles who asked him about all his public statements – both oral and written - - issued while he was out of the Church. They conceded to his rebaptism and he was baptized November 12, 1848 by Orson Hyde in Kanesville, Iowa.

He actually contested against them in court, as to the plans for the New Jerusalem and their polygamy, etc. You're leaving information out. What was this "unchristian conduct"?

I think you’re getting information from bogus sources. When was this alleged court contest regarding polygamy?

We have sources from historical men and women in encyclopedia that are religiously non-partisan. Unbiased. Why on earth would I believe info on history from someone that's a member of your church?

Why would you automatically reject it? But, the source I gave you was from David Whitmer. He too was excommunicated in 1838 and never returned to the Church. And he specifically said that the encyclopedia had falsely claimed that he had denied his testimony. Enclyclopedias of the 19th century were about as unbiased as the newspapers.

Alright then I have a question: Why would God allow the Great Apostasy to reign from 100 to 1830. All LDS agree that the world is nearly over before the coming millennium. Why would God let error reign from 100 to 1830, and have the gospel restored from 1830 to X (understanding that X is VERY soon)? Why wouldn't God make appearances to someone WAY sooner than JS jr. in 1830? My question is that the Great Apostasy doesn't make sense in why God would have allowed it to go on so long, ESPECIALLY since the LATTER-DAY saint church has been around for only 175 five years roughly. TTYL Jesus loves you!

I would say that the great apostasy began when the people rejected and murdered the apostles. Many people in history were killed who opposed the established Church. Whether it was people who opposed Catholics or Protestants they were still executed. Joseph Smith only lived 14 years after he established the LDS Church when he was murdered by a mob. I’d say that as fast as God was willing to send true prophets since the days of Jesus, people were as quick to kill them. Even the people who followed Joseph Smith were driven from the United States under the threat of extermination - - and that in a country that promised religious liberty! Try preaching Christ in Iran and see what happens. Unfortunately, people everywhere are reluctant to allow religious freedom. They killed many prophets, they killed Jesus and his apostles. I’m amazed that Joseph Smith was allowed to live for 14 years. Maybe that’s one reason why darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the people. (see Isa. 60:1)

Alma

You rely too much on the literal English translation for Psam 82.

Actually, that one was reliance on the Greek translation.

In Hebrew, the word Elohim is used, also meaning powerful judges, or kings.

I realize that’s how recent translations have handled the word, but Jesus said it referred to “Gods.” (See John 10:31-34) It would have been easy for the Jews to reply as you have and said, “That doesn’t mean ‘gods’ it means powerful judges or kings.” They didn’t, though, they picked up stones to kill Jesus instead.

Gen. 3 says you will become like unto God, not gods. Maybe you have the Inspired version.

I do have the Inspired Version, but I don’t quote it unless I point out that I’m using it. I quoted the KJV on that passage. Certainly some translations have “god” instead of “gods” but the majority still have “gods.”

As for Gen. 1:26-27, you misunderstand the Trinity doctrine. We do NOT say that the Father is the Son, and that the Holy SPirit is the Father. They are three persons in one God, thus they can communicate with each other. What is so difficult about that? Remember that this is possible because God is a spirit, not fleshly like us. TTYL Jesus loves you!

I didn’t even mention the Trinity. Calgal claimed that a plurality in the Genesis account was faulty and I pointed out the scriptures that demonstrated it isn’t faulty. It’s there. Now, if you want to interpret that as the Trinity, that’s your prerogative, but that is a very very late interpretation.

How do you account for Isaiah 44-46 on monotheism?

I guess you’re coming from the idea that Isaiah 44:8 and following teaches strict monotheism in the Catholic and Protestant sense. (Moslems think trinitarians are polytheists as well.) I think that a careful examination of scripture indicates that the typical “orthodox” interpretation of this passage is mistaken. It reads, “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 beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

I think that the only legitimate and consistent interpretation of this passage and ones similar to it is that God is speaking in a relative rather than absolute sense. The question isn’t whether or not God “knows” something, but whether or not he acknowledges something. God is omniscient; yet, he says that in the day of judgment, “and then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: Obviously, that doesn’t mean that he didn’t know of these people, it means that he did not acknowledge them for what they professed to be. Similarly, in Isaiah, the Lord challenges the people to bring forth their gods of gold and silver and wood, and he challenges them to demonstrate any truth: “Let all the nations be gathered together, and let the people be assembled: who among them can declare this, and shew us former things? let them bring forth their witnesses, that they may be justified: or let them hear, and say, It is truth.” In the next passage, he points out that the children of Israel are his witnesses and they can know and understand that there is no other God but him. Certainly God knew that the people had made their own gods, but he does not acknowledge them as gods. “I know not any” is the same context as “I never knew you.”

There is a sense in which the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one God; but there is another sense in which there are, scripturally, other gods. I have yet to see a responsible refutation of Jesus’ application of Psalm 82 as he used it in John 10. I’m perfectly comfortable in the concept that in a relative sense there is only one God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit; and that in another, absolute sense, there are more Gods than one. It’s explained by Paul: “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”

Psalm 82 begins with the phrase, “God stands in the congregation of the gods and among them will judge gods.” No matter how one tries to negate the fact of that scripture, he is left with the unimpeachable statement that God stands in the presence of other gods. (Please recognize that even though I’m following the standard convention of capitalizing only references that refer to a singular God, these are entirely arbitrary—there are no capital letters in Hebrew and the earliest Greek manuscripts had no miniscule letters, they were ALL CAPS (as it were.)) Additionally, as you continue into the psalm we have the Word of God declaring, “I have said, ye are gods.” The question might be asked, “Who are the “ye” referred to here?” Fortunately, that phrase has been interpreted by the Lord Jesus Christ. He said, “If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?” So, those to whom the word of God came, are called gods, and Jesus said that scripture cannot be broken. (literally, repealed or annulled from the Greek “luo.”. I can’t stress strongly enough the importance of Jesus having commented on this—or on the fact that orthodox Christianity keeps trying to wriggle out of its plain meaning. His comment was a direct refutation of the claim by the Jews that Jesus was blaspheming by making himself God.

Given the above facts, reconciling Isaiah 44:8 (or any other scripture stipulating monotheism) is pretty straightforward. As I see it, if you interpret that passage from the perspective of strict, absolute monotheism, there is a contradiction between it and Jesus’ interpretation of the 82nd Psalm. If on the other hand, you allow that God is condemning the idea that a god could be formed by smithing or carving, there is no contradiction. In relationship to this earth or even to all eternity, no god has ever been manufactured and none ever will be. They are, however, born.

Alma

 

[Alma]

By saying that Satan was the god of this world, does not mean that he is literally a God.

Wait hold that thought. I'd like to run with it. So you're saying that Satan is an exalted being? That HE created this world because he is the god of it, rather than Elohim? Giving that verse to supprt that concept of exaltation and henotheism just cost you.

May I ask your interpretation of John 20:28 and Acts 20:28? One supporting the deity of the Son, the other of the Holy Spirit. For the sake of brevity, we'll skip the verses supporitng the deity of the Father. TTYL Jesus loves you!

You need to read my post more carefully, Will. I wasn't claiming that Satan is exalted, or even a real God.

John 20:28 is an excellent example of the fact that Jesus is God. I'm not sure I understand what you want me to say about Acts 20:28.

Alma

 

[Drotar]

First, Dro, it isn’t a prophecy, it’s a command. God tells David Patten to settle up all of his affairs so that he would be able to leave soon. Secondly, “might” isn’t the same connotation as “may” and yes, God does use both grammatical constructions. In the New Testament, Jesus explained that John the Baptist came so that the people “might believe him.” (Matt. 21:32) You see, there is often an element agency involved where people may or may not choose to accept what God offers them. “That ye may be the children of your father in heaven...and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.” It isn’t necessarily “ridiculous.”

That makes even less sense. Why ON EARTH would God give a prophecy that He foresaw would not come to pass. You mentioned the agency element. Well, if God foresaw that a person would NOT respond positivly to the prophecy, why would He give it in the first place? In other words, if He foresees or foreknows that it won't happen because they WON'T choose to follow it, why would He give that prophecy? If He knows in His perfect knowledge that it actually WON'T happen, because they won't comply, why would He waste His breath? Is it that He doesn't know the future? Or holds false views of it?

BTW, I'm Calvinist and believe in efficacious grace and total depravity. I'm exempt from that question if you try to pull it on me.

The “word of wisdom” said that meat should be used sparingly, it “should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold or famine.” See the words “of cold?” This revelation was given before refrigeration had been invented. Meat spoils quickly in summer months and hence the counsel to preserve people from food poisoning. We now have the ability to store meat in conditions “of cold” thus preserving its value as food. Additionally, Joseph Smith explained that this should be interpreted as “red” meat rather than all meat.

As for this resonse... it holds consistency. I'll accept this answer.

Where on earth did you ever hear that Oliver Cowdery is a son of perdition? As to him being rebaptized, he traveled to Winter Quarters in Iowa with his brother-in-law Phineas Young (brother of Brigham Young) and asked to be rebaptized. He was examined by several of the apostles who asked him about all his public statements – both oral and written - - issued while he was out of the Church. They conceded to his rebaptism and he was baptized November 12, 1848 by Orson Hyde in Kanesville, Iowa. I think you’re getting information from bogus sources. When was this alleged court contest regarding polygamy? Why would you automatically reject it? But, the source I gave you was from David Whitmer. He too was excommunicated in 1838 and never returned to the Church. And he specifically said that the encyclopedia had falsely claimed that he had denied his testimony. Enclyclopedias of the 19th century were about as unbiased as the newspapers.

Oh OK, don't believe a word of non-religiously affiliated encyclopedias.

But accept what a Mormon wrote about his own church?

Please put this in the backburner. I'll get you your sources.

I would say that the great apostasy began when the people rejected and murdered the apostles. Many people in history were killed who opposed the established Church. Whether it was people who opposed Catholics or Protestants they were still executed. Joseph Smith only lived 14 years after he established the LDS Church when he was murdered by a mob. I’d say that as fast as God was willing to send true prophets since the days of Jesus, people were as quick to kill them. Even the people who followed Joseph Smith were driven from the United States under the threat of extermination - - and that in a country that promised religious liberty! Try preaching Christ in Iran and see what happens. Unfortunately, people everywhere are reluctant to allow religious freedom. They killed many prophets, they killed Jesus and his apostles. I’m amazed that Joseph Smith was allowed to live for 14 years. Maybe that’s one reason why darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the people. (see Isa. 60:1)

That verse is proof of a great apostasy of the nation of Israel. Thus, it's given to Israel by a Jewish prophet to Jews in Hebrew.

You missed my question. Why did God not make an attempt to reform the church until 1830? Was there no man righteous for 1,670 years? But JS jr was of course? Why LET the apostasy happen, and for so long?

God converted Saul against his will. Why couldn't he do it to ANYONE for so long?

Answer: The great apostasy of the Christian church NEVER happened. If it did, God would have had to allow it, by all logical measures even if I WAS Arminian. TTYL Jesus loves you!