Kathryn, a local Mormon, wrote to me on November 7:
“We believe that [God] was in our same situations. I don’t want someone judging me, until they have walked in my shoes. I am sure God has sinned. How else would he know and understand that he didn’t want his children to feel that pain. The difference between God and I, is that he took the steps to fix his wrongs. He offers the same to us.”
To people who think this way: Do you believe you can say Jesus was also in your shoes (enough to be your friend, sympathizer, Lord, and Savior), since he never was a sinner? We are taught in Hebrews 4:15, “For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.”
The above Mormon logic also seems to prevent the Mormon Jesus from becoming a Heavenly Father (like ours) someday over his own set of literally begotten spirit children. The same accusation that the Mormon leveled against the sinless God is what spirit children would be able to accuse Jesus of.
Neighbors: Run very, very far away from any Church which so comfortably fosters and tolerates this kind of thinking.
As always, check out GodNeverSinned.com.
Ralph – If I was Mormon I know I would be drinking a lot more beers and wine. I do have an adult beverage every now and then – it is not a sin and legalism has never saved one person. If I were Mormon I would probably be smoking too, and so on. The Mormon faith offers no hope – it turns you inward to reflect on your own condition and striving for your own salvation. Such a religion would drive me to extremes as I am fully aware of my fallen sinful nature and complete inability to save myself. I would utterly despair of "change" and indulge in hopeless reckless abandon.
Thankfully, I know it's not about me or what I do. It's about Jesus from beginning to end. It's about His bearing the cross, His holy wounds which cleanse me of all unrighteousness. It's about His forgiveness through His body and blood. It's zero about me. Now THAT gives me hope, leads me to repentance and faith, and cleanses me of all unrighteousness, just as He has promised. Lord, have mercy on me a sinner.
Sarah,
Since you’re relatively new to MC I will answer this question as best I can, but it has been answered for others many times in past posts better than I can by other LDS.
Just remember, you are asking for an answer and I will respond in my understanding of my faith, not in your understanding as the answer needs to be consistent with and congruent with the LDS doctrine, not traditional Christianity. So I will give a plausible answer, just may be not an answer you would subscribe to.
First, many historians/archaeologists have evidence that the people in the beginning of the OT before Moses (eg Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc) were most likely polytheistic, more so henotheistic – ie worshiping only one God but acknowledging the existence of other Gods. (I have even seen a BBC programme where they presented evidence of the worship of a main God, with acknowledgement of His wife, their Son and a messenger who were also Gods – sound similar to any religion you know of?) Evidence of this is possibly reflected in the Bible in Genesis where the plural of ‘God’ is used – ie Elohim. But many of the people studying into Bible history and archaeology say that strict monotheism started with Moses. Now if this is all true, then the Bible started out as a polytheistic book.
So why the switch from poly to monotheism? The Israelites spent a couple of centuries in Egypt, which was very polytheistic – ie worshiping all of their gods, not one main one, with a powerplay going on between these gods. If the Israelites got their original faith mixed up with the Egyptian faith and started worshiping other gods as well as their original (since they did believe in other Gods just didn’t worship them up until then) then pushing the fact that there is only one God to worship and no other, which would lead to a teaching of strict monotheism, makes sense.
Just remember the first commandment Moses gave to them did not exclude the existence of other Gods, just that they should only worship the one true God.
When it comes to the verses in Isaiah, we LDS teach that God only gives us what we need to know for our salvation so that everything we have pertains only to this world and none other. Since Heavenly Father is the one and only Supreme Being over this whole creation and world, there are no other Gods that we deal with regardless of whether there are others in existence or not. Its like fathers – we all have one biological father and regardless of how many other men out there are fathers to other children, in relation to you they are not your father, so you have one father and none other. So the Isaiah verses are telling us the same thing – there is only one God for us and He knows of no other as He is The Supreme Being and creator of our all.
If you want to discuss more outside of these posts, as we can’t hijack threads, feel free to email me [email protected]. Just be warned, I don’t know everything so I may not be able to answer all your questions.
fmelo,
I was not using the great intercessory prayer to ‘prove’ that we can become Gods, I was showing you how we understand what is meant by the scriptures saying that the Godhead is one instead of going to the extremes that the Trinity doctrine does. But then I asked that if we are to believe that when it says in the Bible that Heavenly Father and Jesus are one means a ‘trinity’ then what about John 17, does that mean that the believers are going to become a ‘trinity’ of sorts? Especially when Jesus said things like – 21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one
You asked ”Also why would Jesus say in John 8:23 "And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.”
In John 8:23 Jesus is talking to people that did not believe in Him if you reference the verses before He started talking with the Pharisees (vv 13-20), and remaining in the same place He then said in verses 24 and 25 He says – I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. These people did not know or understand who Jesus was and did not believe in Him. So when we cross reference this with John 17:16 Jesus talks of His true believers we see that He says ”They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world”. He also says tha sam thing about His true believers in John 15:19 – If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. So what was this you said earlier about context?
Jesus came into this world for the express purpose of negating the Fall of Adam which brought 2 deaths into this world – physical and spiritual death. John 17:4 is referencing this, the Atonement. Jesus fulfilled all that was required for the atoning of the sins of this world and for the resurrection of all mankind. So yes, His work was finished.
" each has the fullness of truth, knowledge, charity, power, justice, judgment, mercy, and faith"
Oh, man, that´s precious – God has a fulness of faith? Faith in WHAT? Do you care to enlighten us about that?
Can I reference Hebrews 11:1 and 3 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen…Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
So God used faith to create the worlds. Faith in what? That what He wants done will be done.
You´re right – Brigham Young taught all that you just mentioned!
Yet, the laws of the land don´t allow the church to practice it the way it should be. That will only happen when the church has also political power(i think it was Joseph Fielding Smith who said that… i might be wrong).
Still remains what Ralph said – will the person be forgiven but not go to the Celestial Kingdom? What does that even mean?
"He also says tha sam thing about His true believers in John 15:19 – If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. So what was this you said earlier about context?"
Well, apparently you still didn´t get what i said about context. Now, you can´t compare those passages like that, they don´t mean the same thing at all.
In the two passages i cited Jesus was making a clear distinction between His nature and theirs, that´s why the Pharisees got offended.
In John 17:16 Jesus says they´re not of the world just means they didn´t partake of the same things the world does, their hearts did not belong to the world because, as you quoted "but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world,"
They were not of the world because Christ had chosen them.
Now, how does that imply that Christ was saying they share the same nature?
" So yes, His work was finished."
No it wasn´t because how could mankind receive the blessings of the atonement without the priesthood which could bestow them?? Your theology disables Jesus´sacrifice for what, 1500 years more or less?
Then He had to restore it all otherwise nobody else would be able to be saved, so how was His work finished at all?
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God,"
Through faith "WE" – Hebrews says "WE" understand it by faith that God framed the worlds BY HIS WORD! geez…
"So God used faith to create the worlds. Faith in what? That what He wants done will be done."
Amazing!!!!! God can´t be all-knowing and yet have faith… it´s the simple law of non-contradiction.
"Just remember the first commandment Moses gave to them did not exclude the existence of other Gods, just that they should only worship the one true God."
Ralph, once again you´re showing your complete disregard for the Bible as the Word of God. Let me help you.
1 Corinthians 8:
4 "As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. 5 "For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 6 "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."
There´s only one God. Other may call other things "gods" or "lords", but in reality they are nothing.
So, if you think Israel should acknowledge other gods but only worship one you´re sorely mistaken, and you´re intentionally ignoring the meaning of the scriptures.
you´re intentionally ignoring the meaning of the scriptures.
That's actually what makes my head hurt the most in all of these conversations I've had with Mormons — blatant disregard for scripture and context.
I just finished reading an historical fiction about the early days of polygamy in the Mormon church. While obviously it was a work of fiction, the author did a lot of research and even directly quoted from the D&C 132. I hadn't read it in its entirety before, so I headed over to lds.org to do so. The complete misinterpretation of Biblical scripture made me sick!
I feel like this is the exact same thing here — while I appreciate Ralph's answers to my questions, and his patience with me, the contradictions and the lack of logic followed in any answer is incredible. It's the same thing with my best friend — she can use one piece of scripture to support her beliefs but the interpretation is so convoluted.
I actually wonder what Mormons say when it's brought to their attention that their plan for salvation, their desire to achieve godhood, is actually something from Satan himself in the book of Genesis and nothing that ever came from God.
"I actually wonder what Mormons say when it's brought to their attention that their plan for salvation, their desire to achieve godhood, is actually something from Satan himself in the book of Genesis and nothing that ever came from God."
No mormon has pushed to the point of actually saying that – but i suppose those people would stop talking to me for at least a long, long time.
f_melo,
Paul probably was not the author of Hebrews. The main reason is that Hebrews is obviously written to a Jewish audience and Paul self-identifies as an apostle to the Gentiles (Romans 11:23, Galatians 2:8, 1 Tim 2:7). If Paul focused his mission on the Gentiles, then he would probably not argue it out with the Hebrews.
There is the possibility that Paul wrote it between his conversion and calling to evangelize the Gentiles, but that doesn't sit well with the timelines. Hebrews, to me, looks like it's preaching a post-Temple Gospel, and the Temple was destroyed in AD70, well after Paul's death.
Also, Hebrews uses different language – it focuses on Christ as the fulfilment of the Temple system, yet Paul talks about justification and the formation of the people of God.
However, the authorship of Hebrews does not undermine your argument. The (anonymous) author of Hebrews belonged to the same Christian community as Paul and the other NT authors and they all viewed Christ as the central focus of that community. I believe it's axiomatic that they did talk to each other before committing their beliefs to writing, and I am constantly astounded by people who believed they didn't (thus resulting in the various "different Gospels in the NT" theories).
They all preached the same Gospel, as Paul writes in 1 Cor 1:22-24
f_melo,
PS. I should have also mentioned that in all his (other?) letters, Paul identifies himself by name, but there's no such introduction in Hebrews. So, if Paul was the author to the Hebrews, he's breaking out of his modus operandii in more than one respect.
Ralph,
You can peddle the thesis that the "original" religion of the Israelites was polytheistic all you like, but…
1 The LDS movement should be more honest and repent of falsely representing itself in monotheistic terms. AoF 1 – "We believe in God…" should be "We believe in gods…", shouldn't it? All this talk about "fundamental" beliefs is thoroughly misleading
2 You'd have to revise your great apostasy by back-dating it before the Council of Nicea. A more redolent date (according to your theory, which is bunk, BTW) would be around the time of the Exile in the 7th Century BC. Please, help yourself to any date that would suit. Of course, that would make Jesus the Chief of the Apostates, but that would be OK, because he doesn't fit into your theology either.
Sarah,
If this is the same Ralph who posted here a while back, then he is also advancing a form of local henotheism.
As a bit of light relief, I invite you to take a look at my venting here… http://martinofbrisbane.blogspot.com/2010/08/dear…
Thanks, Martin 😀
Thank you for that clarification!
Amen. I have not had a drink or cigarette and have led a life on the 'straight and narrow' for seventeen years. I really even take no pleasure in 'r' movies, violence. Pretty much choosing to 'go toward the light.' My mormon friend almost suffocates when she sees my coffee maker and once I had an empty coffee cup in my hand while we were talking, and I felt as though I had committed a horrendous act. Feeling defensive is not what spreading any gospel of Jesus should be about. The 'law' seriously has done a number on their version of sin.