You said the B.Y. floated the Adam-God theory but didn't have it canonized. Was it not part of the doctrines and covenants? And if polygamy was no longer necessary and has not been in practice since the 1890's, then why was it not removed from the mormon teachings until 1978?
ugh, gotta get to work, I'll respond later...

I already posted the declaration that was made available in 1890 to the whole church, so I'm not sure what the 1978 thing is about. The Adam-God theory is found no where in the doctrine and covenants.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
[QUOTE]Did you get the book from the source I gave you?

descendents of Israel yes, Ishmael, not so much. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">absolutely i got it from where you directed me ....i dont remember where that is now but...i did then....and i may be mistaken about the ishmael thing....but i will go home and read up....my book of mormon isnt exactly the contemperary version... lol i just got the standard ye yall shou thou version

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by ericm:
The Adam-God theory is found no where in the doctrine and covenants. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">yet it was taught by the almighty prophet brigham young for 20+ years, who got the bits of it from joe smith's teachings.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
“Now hear it, O inhabitants of the earth, Jew and Gentile, Saint and sinner! When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is MICHAEL, the Archangel, the ANCIENT OF DAYS! about whom holy men have written and spoken—HE is our FATHER and our GOD, and the only God with whom WE have to do.”
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I thought mormon prophets, speaking from the pulpit, were giving us the true word of God, and now the mormon church denounces it?
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
In 1976, LDS prophet and president Spencer Kimball told attendees of a Priesthood session of Conference, “We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General authorities of past generations, such, for instance is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine.”</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's not only found in his preachings from the pulpit, but also in his writings, that Adam was Michael, the archangel, and God, the father of all.

All this and yet we are seriously supposed to believe that mormon prophets have the mainline to God.

http://www.irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-ag-jdv1p50.html

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Adam came into the garden of Eden with a celestial body and one of his many wives, he is our Father and God. The Father, not the Holy Spirit, conceived Jesus with the Virgin Mary.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

I gotcha now Allen. If it had been a part of the "Doctrine & Covenants" then it would have been canonized as we consider the "Doctrine & Covenants" to be a part of our scriptural canon, as such it was not ever canonized or a part of the "Doctrine & Covenants." It is found in a book titled the Journal of Discourses, which essentially recorded many speeches given by early leaders of the church. Additionally, there is quite alot of disagreement regarding what it was Brigham actually meant in that speech.

Polygamy is still taught in the LDS church. However, it is not taught as a principle that needs to be practiced any longer - nonetheless, we do need to understand when and why it was there. I think you're getting things mixed up, because 1978 was something altogether different, that was when the Priesthood was extended to all worthy males.

NE20 - sorry, that's the only version.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by ericm:
Polygamy is certainly not practiced by any legitimate Mormon today.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">[/QUOTE]
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
Polygamy is still taught in the LDS church. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">dont know who to believe ...actually Joel i was hoping you could give me the number to a hot line cuz i forgot the one I had and its at home...but NE way what i was trying to get at was ...if some one is a faithful member of the LDS church is it wrong for them to have multiple partners/wives?

and just out of curiosity Joel...did you read who's God thread today?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">descendents of Israel yes, Ishmael, not so much.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">not so much er not at all?

Teaching so that there is an understanding of a doctrine and practicing are two different things. In short, there has never been any rejection of the practice of polygamy while it was sanctioned by the Lord. If they were to reject Brigham Young because he was a polygamist they would have to reject Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob on the same grounds. So we teach when and why the principle of Polygamy is appropriate to be practiced, but it is not practiced.

Back to Allen and the Adam-God theory - I want to point out a couple of mistakes, by all accounts, Brigham spoke directly about this only twice and made veiled statements referring to it about 20 other times. Much as you always tell me that you must understand any verse out of the Bible in the context of the Bible in its entirety, the same can be said of Brigham Young. His statements can only be properly understood if you understand the entirety of other statements he has made. Brigham Young personally believed that "Adam" was one of the names of God and has made public statements to that effect. This stems from the Hebrew meaning of Adam being "man" and Jesus Christ often being referred to as the Son of Man. So in effect, He felt there was an Adam Sr (God) and an Adam Jr (Adam). Obviously, you can see where there may have been some confusion interpreting his statements. Considering that an LDS Prophet at that time will probably be called upon to speak publicly about 5 times a week and that he was the Prophet for almost 20 years, I'm pretty sure that this wasn't the most important issue for him. In fact in over 1500 recorded sermons of Brigham Young this doctrine is only referred to 20 times (less than one percent). The "Doctrine & Covenants" we use today has been added to since the time of Brigham Young, were this to be a true doctrine, I'm certain it would have been added. The fact that it has not been added to the canon of scripture is proof enough of its lack of doctrinal quality.

This is the real reason I'm here, to clear up legitimate misunderstandings and inaccurate interpretations of LDS beliefs.

NE20

Not yet and that was a Seinfeld-esque "not so much" meaning not at all.

i use to watch that show....seinfeld....i thought it was Funny

this topic really doesnt interest me a whole lot any way ....Joel tell me about how you guys will run your own planets when you die......

Don't know a whole lot about it (because I'm still alive) and i'm not even sure that's the plan. All I know is that we believe salvation ultimately results in becoming "like God." If that means we'll go out and do the same things he does, then so be it, if it merely means, we'll know everything he knows and be like him in glory, then so be it. Of course, if we know everything he knows and have attained his glory, then what's to stop us from going out and doing what he does?

the same thing that stopped the devil from going out and doing what God does...."God" himself...if it were ok for the devil to go and do the same thing God does then he wouldnt have tried to take over Gods thrown and get kicked out of heaven ...he would have just started his own lil colony of free will believers...

NE20 Satan hadn't recieved the promises we've recieved in the scriptures (primarily in the Bible - might I add). and he had not been granted this power by God - which we Mormons believe is a part of our eternal reward. There's a big difference between Satan trying to work against God and God rewarding us with the privilege of working with him.

I'll provide you with some scripture references that mention it, both Biblical and LDS scriptures. And no, Allen, I'm not trying to prove anything by the LDS Scripture, I'm just posting the information for discussion.

Mankind started the process of becoming like God way back in Genesis 3:22 after Adam and Eve ate the fruit when God said, </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">interesting that God would say "become as one of us" - "Us" meaning that this is a conversation between at least two people, most likely God and the pre-mortal spirit of Jesus Christ.

Psalms 82:6 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Then of course Christ's command that we strive to become like God in Matthew 5:48 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In John 10:34 Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6

Acts 17:29 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Of course this is also telling us that since we are his offspring we can reasonably expect that we resemble God and he resembles us in some way.

Romans 8:16-17 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">heirs of God? and joint-heirs of Christ? Well this is good for a couple of reasons, because it demonstrates that God and Jesus are separate (we are an heir to God and a joint-heir with Jesus - not an heir of both) and it demonstrates that we will gain all that God has in our inheritance if we are fortunate enough to be glorified with Christ.

1 John 3:1-2 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">BEHOLD, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">emphasis mine

Jesus speaking in Revelations 3:21 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">sit in the very throne of God and Jesus - how nice.

Now from the Book of Mormon:

Jesus speaking in 3 Nephi 28:10 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And for this cause ye shall have fulness of joy; and ye shall sit down in the kingdom of my Father; yea, your joy shall be full, even as the Father hath given me fulness of joy; and ye shall be even as I am, and I am even as the Father; and the Father and I are one;</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So we will be one with God and Jesus in the sense that they are one in purpose, yet not one in being.

From the Doctrine & Covenants
Section 88:106-107 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And again, another angel shall sound his trump, which is the seventh angel, saying: It is finished; it is finished! The Lamb of God hath overcome and trodden the wine-press alone, even the wine-press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God.

107 And then shall the angels be crowned with the glory of his might, and the saints (Joel Here: that's followers of Christ - not Catholic saints) shall be filled with his glory, and receive their inheritance and be made equal with him. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Section 132:19-20 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">...Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And here is a link to the discourse by Joseph Smith regarding Man's Eternal Destiny, commonly referred to as the the King Follett Discourse as it was given at the funeral of a man named King Follett.

ok one thing at a time....

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Psalms 82:6
6"I, the Most High God, say
that all of you are gods [3] and also my own children. Footnote[3] this refers to God's servants (angels) in heaven or even to human rulers.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In John 10:34 Jesus quotes Psalms 82:6
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">once again The Isrealite judges were refered to as gods with a lil "g" if you noticed but like i say they were just refering to the earthly leaders.

it says so in my footnotes...so i wouldnt have said it if it wasnt in the bible

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Acts 17
29Since we are God's children, we must not think that he is like an idol made out of gold or silver or stone. He isn't like anything that humans have thought up and made. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">just better said than what you have but it kinda clears it up in saying that we are Gods children, not sure what that had to do with Being a God but any way


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Romans 8
16God's Spirit makes us sure that we are his children. 17His Spirit lets us know that together with Christ we will be given what God has promised. We will also share in the glory of Christ, because we have suffered with him. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">in my opinion kinda goes back to the whole God is the same today yesterday and tomorrow...and we can do all things through christ who strengthens us...this is kinda fun

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">1 John 3
1Think how much the Father loves us. He loves us so much that he lets us be called his children, as we truly are. But since the people of this world did not know who Christ [1] is, they don't know who we are. 2My dear friends, we are already God's children, though what we will be hasn't yet been seen. But we do know that when Christ returns, we will be like him, because we will see him as he truly is.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">the scripture says when christ returns we will be like him....not when God returns


as for the mormon stuff i dont know how that comes into play since i dont follow that belief

but any way...get back to me on your views of this post

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">it says so in my footnotes...so i wouldnt have said it if it wasnt in the bible</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm sure you are aware that the footnotes didn't come from the original text of the Bible - they were added by men much, much, much later. I would use a small "g" when describing what man may become as well. Also, I disagree with the footnote considering that Jesus quoted that verse in the NT in John 10:34. He quotes it in defense of himself, when the Jews say to him he's blaspheming by making himself God. Essentially the same thing you disagree with Mormonism about - man cannot be God. Jesus answers by not only defending himself but by quoting that scripture - evidencing that all men are in some form gods - not just the rulers or judges. In fact the way Jesus uses that verse completely negates what is found in your footnotes.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">just better said than what you have but it kinda clears it up in saying that we are Gods children, not sure what that had to do with Being a God but any way
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This is what I don't get about other Christians, puppies are the children of dogs, and they grow up to be dogs; kittens are the children of cats and they grow up to be cats; calves are the children of cows and they grow up to be cows; we are the children of God and we will grow up to be angels? No, that doesn't make sense! We will grow up to be gods.

Your version of the Bible makes Romans 8:16-17 even more vague </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">we will be given what God has promised. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well what has he promised? Salvation? Well what does that entail? I prefer the translation I used because it's more clear - we will inherit God's kingdom. Who or what will be worthy to inherit God's Kingdom? a god.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But we do know that when Christ returns, we will be like him, because we will see him as he truly is.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Well, now who exactly do you think Christ, God's son, will be like? could he perhaps be like his Father?

The Mormon stuff is merely background.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Jesus answers by not only defending himself but by quoting that scripture - evidencing that all men are in some form gods </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">i dunno about all that

allen or TH er sumbody can jump in when ever you feel like...lol....i dunno im kinda at a loss of words
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:
we will be given what God has promised.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">not exactly sure what he has promised ..but i do know all his promises are yes and amen...lol

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:

The main Mormon church has 12Million members who all recognize Gordon B. Hinckley as God's prophet on the earth. the Splinter groups are miniscule in comparison and usually form when someone decides they are the prophet and convinces a small number to follow him. They are then excommunicated from the church for apostacy and have no affiliation with the Mormon church. In order to achieve unity, one needs a correct interpretation of the holy writ and a Prophet and Apostles, as explained in Ephesians 4.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Your explanation is probably extremely close to how the 'abominable' Catholics would describe protestant churches behind closed doors When someone doesn't follow the official church line they are excommunicated for apostacy - I can literally see the love the mormon church is so popular for in that paragraph Yet when mormon prophets preach something that doesn't follow the party line you guys do your best to explain it away... I can feel the unity in that as well.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What about the nicean council findings do you not agree with?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't agree with the Nicean Creed, which robs God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit of their separate identities and established the principle of the trinity (God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost being one and the same being). </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Oh, well I follow that creed then.. tho I don't think it's central to whether someone attains salvation. I can see where it would throw a monkey wrench into mormon beliefs

When we expand the scripture you use for the 'everyone can become a god' doctrine, you'll see something that tends to trip up the 'God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit of their separate identities' :

John 10

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade. The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly."
Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one."
Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"
"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'? If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came--and the Scripture cannot be broken-- what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'? Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Interesting...

Let's take a look at that passage from John 10. Specifically, the end of verse 36:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
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? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let's find where He said that. Oh, wait, He didn't, at least not in chapter 10. What He did say was that He and His Father are one. And a few verses later He says that what He was saying was that He was the Son of God. Hmmm... It looks like when Christ says He is "one" with the Father it does not mean what you think it means. I suggest you look around that verse to find the real context of the scripture you just quoted, and not just flaunt "I and my Father are one" without really knowing what it means.

So, Joel already gave a lengthy treatment of that subject and our view on it, but it looks like we need to go over it again. So we go to John 17. Christ is giving His last intercessory prayer in behalf of His disciples, and He prays to the Father for them to be one as He and His Father are. Nowhere else in the Bible does Christ give any explanation of what He means when He says that He and His Father are one (except maybe the inference referred to above, but that was inferred, not stated). He nevers says that He and His Father are the same person, the same substance, the same entity. He just says they are one. So left to those verses, there are any number of interpretations that can be drawn from it - you cannot come up with a definitive interpretation from those verses alone. The only place in the Bible when there is any qualification of how Christ and His Father are one is in John 17. So we look in verse 11 of that chapter:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
...Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And again in verses 20-22:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christ certainly didn't mean for His followers to all somehow become one substance, did He? That's ridiculous to believe, so Christ was not saying that He and His Father are the same substance, because this prayer wouldn't make any sense at all. So, let's look around the verse, see what we can find to help us understand what Christ is talking about when He says "one." In verses 20 and 21 Christ prays that those who believe the disciples will be one, as Christ is one with the Father. It seems here Christ is saying that they will be one in faith, one in purpose of following Christ, as Christ is one in purpose with the Father and only did what His Father commanded Him to do (John 5:19, John 8:28 - both of which are pretty hard to make sense out of if you think Christ and God are one and the same). Verse 22 talks about Christ giving His disciples glory (the same glory that Christ received from His Father), that they may be one as He and His Father are one. What glory had the Father given to His Son at that point? Perhaps all of the miracles that Christ performed, all of the people He brought the truth to, something along those lines (something to do with sharing God's power, or His purpose in sharing the gospel), but certainly not a oneness of substance.

So clearly when Christ says that He and His Father are one He is saying not that they are one and the same substance, or being, or person, or whatever you want to call it (which doesn't line up with the rest of the Bible, by the way, only those very few instances in which Christ says He is one with the Father without any clarification, and only then if you choose to have a flawed interpretation and take the quotes out of context, which Allen is so adamant against doing). Christ is saying that He is one in purpose, power, obedience (perhaps family, if you're going by the verse in John 10). Could it possibly mean more than one of those things? I think it could, but certainly not a oneness of person.

In order to add a little bit of weight to the fact that interpreting those verses in the manner that Allen (and others here) chooses to doesn't make any sense at all, let's looks at a few other verses in the Bible. John 5:19, for instance:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Were we to say that Jesus and God are one and the same, we would have to read the verse something like this:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I can do nothing of myself but what I see myself do: for what things soever I do, these also do I likewise. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">John 8:28 would have similar absurdities if interpreted the same way. The entire Bible makes it very clear that Jesus and God are two separate people; Jesus is sent by His Father - did He send Himself? Why doesn't He say so? You are to pray unto the Father in the name of Christ. In the garden of Gethsemane, Christ prays to His Father asking to not have to go through with the atonement; but not His will, but His Father's will be done. In Acts 7:55-56 Steven the martyr sees Jesus standing on the right hand of God, after they were both back in heaven. At the baptism of Christ, the Father's voice was heard from heaven.

Seriously, to look at 3 or 4 verses (how many are there? I could really only find three - the one in John 10 and the two in John 17, all of which I've shown to mean something else entirely) that say that Christ and His Father are one and to gather from those verses that they are the same entity is to ignore the rest of the Bible. You are basing your belief off of a flawed interpretation of a couple of verses taken totally out of context - which interpretation stemmed from the Nicean Creed which you hold so dear. That view of God was no where to be found in the early Christian church, it started with the Nicean Creed. And the reason that the early Christian church didn't believe it is pretty obvious - it's nowhere to be found.