Unleash the Fundamentals

[rocknanchor]

Jane_Doe', Somewhere along the line you seem to think I am contesting the mentioning she was not a virgin. But if that virgin was not subject to intercourse w/a "resurrected father" it would be wise to show everyone observing this exchange where this full-retraction has occured.

I take it, you do have that ready don't you? Please?

 

[Jane_Doe]

Jane_Doe', Somewhere along the line you seem to think I am contesting the mentioning she was not a virgin. But if that virgin was not subject to intercourse w/a "resurrected father" it would be wise to show everyone observing this exchange where this full-retraction has occured.

I take it, you do have that ready don't you? Please?

I am confused here. You want me to supply a retraction of a belief that was never LDS doctrine?

 

[Rescued One]

If this belief was never held, why did my devout BIC home teacher not tell me that when I asked the question?

 

[Ironhold]

"exclusives"? You mean freely available to whomever wants it?
The original "Articles of Faith" book was 490 pages, and has been through 12 editions The Articles of Faith by James E. Talmage

In fact:

Books: James Talmage (sorted by popularity)

Talmage's works are so old that the majority of them have entered into the public domain through the sheer passage of time.

Project Gutenberg has found fit to collect a number of them and make them available for free.

 

[rocknanchor]

Well there you have it! The classical deflected response; defend the fort by greasing the area where skid sits till the package, contents, skid, all of it is swept right out of sight. But you forgot something Mr. and Mrs. Mormon. Do you see it?

Right there. No-no, look closer! Closer!! See? Yes, a very tiny thread, a bright, shiny “linen” strand of truth (Rev 19:8), Hallelujah! And don't bother retaliating, there is only one way to clean thyself

For that thread of truth is a vehicle in and of itself already catalyzed by the title initiative; cohesiveness of the fundamentals which is additionally fueled by your refusals, all glory to the King most-high! The material to be catalyzed goes without saying which has emblazoned itself as blasphemous.

Now, Christian, bless God, the unleashing will be effortless. Reword the initiative so God gets all glory and send to two or more you know are in agreement over soundness. Hallelujah!

 

[withwonderingawe]

Talmage's work has no official weight, either.

I'm sorry Iron but both of his books can be found at the on line Church library, that's pretty weighty. Canonized no but weighty yes!

 

[Ironhold]

Well there you have it! The classical deflected response; defend the fort by greasing the area where skid sits till the package, contents, skid, all of it is swept right out of sight. But you forgot something Mr. and Mrs. Mormon. Do you see it?

Right there. No-no, look closer! Closer!! See? Yes, a very tiny thread, a bright, shiny “linen” strand of truth (Rev 19:8), Hallelujah! And don't bother retaliating, there is only one way to clean thyself

For that thread of truth is a vehicle in and of itself already catalyzed by the title initiative; cohesiveness of the fundamentals which is additionally fueled by your refusals, all glory to the King most-high! The material to be catalyzed goes without saying which has emblazoned itself as blasphemous.

Now, Christian, bless God, the unleashing will be effortless. Reword the initiative so God gets all glory and send to two or more you know are in agreement over soundness. Hallelujah!

So...

No comment about the fact that certain works in question are readily available for the general public to read for free?

 

[withwonderingawe]

One day I was listening to Walter Martin on the radio and he said cavemen, Neanderthals, were created by Satan. He thought God let Satan create to prove how he couldn't do it right.

Mmmm should I hold all of Christanity responsible for this and start claiming all Christians believe Satan has the power to create?

 

[Rescued One]

We ought to obey God rather than men.

 

[Peter1000]

Walter Martin is deceased.

I was told that if a mortal virgin is impregnated by an exalted being, she is still considered a virgin. I had already read the Book of Mormon in which she is called a virgin, and that was what prompted me to ask the question. I wanted to know how to respond to critics of Mormonism.

Who told you if a mortal virgin is impregnated by an exalted being, she is still considered a virgin. That sounds like Greek mythology, rather than sound doctrine.

Mormons happen to believe that because Mary was a virgin, and was still pregnant, that the HG, or God did not have sexual intercourse with her, regardless of your mythology above.

But, would you please explain what was going to happen to Mary as explained in verse 35:
Luke 1:34-35
34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

I suspect that if Talmage, or BY, or McConkie had said such a thing and not the bible, you would have taken offense and called them blasphemous. But the bible does say this, interesting verbiage, don't you think?

Also explain: is the 'HG' (who fell upon Mary) the same as the 'power of the Highest' (who overshadowed Mary)?

 

[Peter1000]

We ought to obey God rather than men.

How bout men like Peter and the apostles?

 

[Peter1000]

But isn't the reverse also true? In my past discussions with the Mormons, they react alarmed at surprise positioning and quickly disperse. But, due to their being somewhat exclusives, how could I provide what is needed? Could you also provide the citation/ref that demotes Talmage's Mormon 'Apostle' status?

Talmage's 'Apostle' status is not demoted, but his books are not considered canonical.

So, since they are not canonical, there could be parts of his writing that may be his personal beliefs, that cannot then be taken for the word of God.

The virginity of Mary is a sticky wicket that you seem to have a great interest in.
So would you please explain to me what was going to happen to Mary as portrayed by the bible in verse 35 of Luke 1:34-35? Don't be too short on details.

Two interesting concepts that will help direct your response:
1) what is the difference between the 'HG', and 'the power of the Highest'?
The HG fell upon Mary, the power of the Highest overshadowed Mary.
2) what does the word 'overshadowed' refer to?

Thank you for your response.

 

[anna ~ grace]

Catechism of the Catholic Church - "Conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary"

 

[Jane_Doe]

Catechism of the Catholic Church - "Conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary"

Thank you for sharing!

Looking quickly, this actually seems to be pretty much LDS views in regards to the conception of Christ. LDS don't believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary though (rather it is believe that she and Joseph got married and had normal martial relations).

 

[Rescued One]

Who told you if a mortal virgin is impregnated by an exalted being, she is still considered a virgin. That sounds like Greek mythology, rather than sound doctrine.

My home teacher.

Mormons happen to believe that because Mary was a virgin, and was still pregnant, that the HG, or God did not have sexual intercourse with her, regardless of your mythology above.

But, would you please explain what was going to happen to Mary as explained in verse 35:
Luke 1:34-35
34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

I suspect that if Talmage, or BY, or McConkie had said such a thing and not the bible, you would have taken offense and called them blasphemous. But the bible does say this, interesting verbiage, don't you think?

Also explain: is the 'HG' (who fell upon Mary) the same as the 'power of the Highest' (who overshadowed Mary)?

God is the omnipotent Creator.

 

[Rescued One]

How bout men like Peter and the apostles?

Do you follow your Sunday School teachers? I follow Christ.

Proverbs 3
5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

 

[Rescued One]

It is claimed that Arian arguments that used texts that refer to Christ as God's "onlybegotten Son" are based on a misunderstanding of the Greek word monogenēs and that the Greek word does not mean "begotten" in the sense we beget children but means "having no peer, unique".
Monogenēs - Wikipedia

Answer: The phrase “only begotten Son” occurs in John 3:16, which reads in the King James Version as, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." The phrase "only begotten" translates the Greek word monogenes. This word is variously translated into English as "only," "one and only," and "only begotten."
What does it mean that Jesus is God's only begotten son?

 

[Rescued One]

One day I was listening to Walter Martin on the radio and he said cavemen, Neanderthals, were created by Satan. He thought God let Satan create to prove how he couldn't do it right.

Mmmm should I hold all of Christanity responsible for this and start claiming all Christians believe Satan has the power to create?

Please provide an authentic source for your claim.

 

[withwonderingawe]

Please provide an authentic source for your claim.

My own two ears!

 

[Peter1000]

Jane_Doe', Somewhere along the line you seem to think I am contesting the mentioning she was not a virgin. But if that virgin was not subject to intercourse w/a "resurrected father" it would be wise to show everyone observing this exchange where this full-retraction has occured.

I take it, you do have that ready don't you? Please?

I am still waiting for your reply to my post #32. Take a look and let me know what you think?