</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by SenorElMouse:
intelligent conversation instead of you calling me and joel a "pooh mouth", a liar, a "fruitcake", and basically, all around idiots.

Like I said, return to earth and mayhaps we can talk. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">yeah the pooh mouth thing was for comic relief...and your right I appologize about the fruit cake comment...also i never (to my recalection) called you a liar or joel a pooh mouth....and i like that whole mayhaps thing...I might use it in the future

Too much to say and not enough time. I'll check in when I can.

Joel...please understand that my post above this...the one that compares scripture... is not an attack on you, but simply facts that I have dug up...and also realize that I am not saying you are not a christian...I cant judge your relationship with God, but I strongly argue that Mormonism (not Joel) is a cult. However like I have said many times its not about rules its about relationship

Juss...Howdy

All of God's Glory! /

I take what you said constructively embie buti wish every one would realize that I am not trying to come across as Hitler here...honestly....I am simply proving that mormonism is a cult...i think several people here would agree with me and I also think that not all things can be said politely..but I wasnt trying to convert Joel...from whathe says his relationship with Christ is great so there is no need to convert a follower...I was just saying facts about the difference between mormons and us..but i do respect your post towards me...

Juss,

What I don't get is this, did you think you were telling anyone anything new. All of this has been discussed at length in this thread.

Was your post intended to be some sort of expose?

I mean, as I said above, I freely admit that Mormons disagree as to the nature of the Trinity and I freely admit that Mormons have a different viewpoint in many aspects of their Christianity. I've never covered those things up, I've talked about each and every thing you've posted above. It's hardly revelatory that you should post them now.

I guess for me, it is more simple to define whether or not someone is a Christian. In my mind, anyone claiming to be a Christian should simply have to believe that Christ is his Savior and then act like it. The rest is merely details.

Again, still on the road with business so I don't have a lot of time, so I'll just wrap things up.

Oh yeah, as for my "show me the books comment" that was really with respect to your claim that Joseph Smith had been arrested multiple times. Again, I don't disagree, but to imply that he was ever imprisoned justly and with the full due process of law is simply false. He was imprisoned by bigoted men who sought for reasons to discredit him and often lied and trumped up charges to have him imprisoned.

Here's the facts, Joseph Smith was arrested and exhonerated 3 times - I take that back the third time he was exhonerated posthumously because an angry mob organized by Christian ministers killed him before he could be tried.

Anyway, I'll answer everything - especially nabster's post when I get back home.

The angry mob was not orginized by Christian Ministers Joseph Smith Died in Jail...And you know good and well what my post was about you asked for me to show you the books in which I got my information from andI showed you....there is no need for explanation Mormons are not christians...take it how you want it....its a cult...any one who says differently is a liar...and I stand by that firmly....your black and white bible text next to ours proves that...end of discussion....should be end of thread....

It's only the end of the thread for you. As I have stated before, its because of close-minded people like you that there is such dissent within religion. People break away all the time just to get away from this. Juss, can't you see what you're doing? You are basing your judgement on someone on what they religion they are. Not their works, not their ideas or personality, but by their religion. You can continue to do this but you are missing out on a great number of good people in the world.

S'why I respect Allen. He has very different views than mine. However, he can look past that and accept me. He may believe that everything I say is wrong, but he still is a heckuva nice guy to me.

Sometimes its better to say nothing at all.

Mormon Doctrine and Practices:

The Bible: Mormons believe that the old testaments have been corrupted through the ages by humanity and contains several errors. JOSEPH SMITH RE-translated the Bibleand its considered on of the four LDS scriptures, though it is not considered fully authoritative while containing errors (Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price are the last 2 LDS scriptures). "The Book of Mormon is more correct than the Bible" ("We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. . ." 8th Article of Faith of the Mormon Church.)


God: God the father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as mankind. There are many Gods.
..."And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light (Book of Abraham 4:3)

...."God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345

The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's" (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22. Compare with Alma 18:26-27; 22:9-10)
"Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body . . . of flesh and bones." (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 38).


Jesus: He was the first spirit born in Heaven. Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers and we were all born as siblings in heaven to both of them. Jesus' sacrifice is not able to cleanse us from all of our sins. He was born as a result of a naturalunion between God the father and Mary. (not of the Holy Spirit).
"The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood - was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8: p. 115)

Bizarre Temple Practices and Ceremonies: Highly Based on freemasonry ceremonies.

And here you go ...it will tell you every thing you need to know and more...Mormonism is NOT christianity

CLICK HERE

or Visit http://www.mrm.org/

Oh Joel there is one thing I wanted to ask you because I am curious...Is it true that if a mormon kills some one is their only hope for salvation to have their blood shed?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by SenorElMouse:
It's only the end of the thread for you. As I have stated before, its because of close-minded people like you that there is such dissent within religion. People break away all the time just to get away from this. Juss, can't you see what you're doing? You are basing your judgement on someone on what they religion they are. Not their works, not their ideas or personality, but by their religion. You can continue to do this but you are missing out on a great number of good people in the world.

Sometimes its better to say nothing at all. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Ive said it a hundred times I am not going against Joel as a person...But mormonism as "the" religion....and you said it best yourself....sometimes its better to say nothing at all...any who I will take a break and continue this class on Mormonism...lol...when I return

Next is Polygamy and mormon involvement

please read, folks.
http://www.gnosis.org/ahp.htm

Joel please correct me if I am wrong and please respond to my other post in which i provide scripture from LDS books to proove LDS has nothing to do with christianity.....

but this is my knowledge of the LDS and polygomy

Many early leaders in the LDS church were proponants and practitioners of polygomy. Joseph Smith had 25 wives and Brigham Young had 27 wives. Due to political pressure President Wilford Woodruff signed what has become known as the MANIFESTO...or the declaration... 1.) The Manifesto can be found following section 138 in the Doctrine and covenants. This Document was basically a promise to the USA stating that the LDS church would submit to the laws of the land and desist from solemnizing plural marriages. The document, signed in 1890, also denied any accusations that the church was encouraging or performing any such marriages......

well..................It would appear that the signing of the manifesto was merely a ploy to get the federal government to relax its sanction against the LDS church. Evidence shows that polygomy continued despite the promise to abandon it. In 1899, then Apostle Heber J. Grant (he would become President in 1918) would plead guilty to unlawful cohabition and be fined $100. in 1906 sixth LDS Pres. Joseph F. Smith "pleaded guilty before Judge M.L. Rictchie in the District Court Friday to the charge of Cohabitating with four women in addition to jis lawful wife." He was fined $300 the maximum allowed by law. Almost immediatly splinter groups were formed to carry on the "everlasting covenant" of celestial Marriage...According to The Dec.11 1997 issue of the New York Times it is estimated that over 30,000 mormons still practice polygomy today Many skirt around the letter of the law by legally marrying one wife and performing private services that they say is in accord with "God's Law"

When you call me a liar, I find that to be a personal attack.

No time today.

I can tackle the polygamy issue really quickly here.

The Mormon position is not that Wilford Woodruff gave in to political pressure but rather that he recieved a revelation that it was time to end the practice of polygamy. As I've said before, were he to have merely given in to political pressure the Mormons would have abandoned polygamy in the 1860's when the persecution therefrom was at it's peak.

As for those who were tried for "unlawful cohabitation" after polygamy was declared unlawful by the church, this is an example of the Federal Government renigging on a promise. An agreement was made that current polygamists could continue to support and care for their polygamist wives, but no new wives were to be taken. The govt renigged on this agreement and decided to prosecute.

The splinter groups that practice polygamy are not affiliated with the LDS church and never have been. Most often they have started when a man has declared that the church is in error and he's a new prophet and he needs some new wives. In the church, since 1896, if you entered into a polygamous relationship after 1890, you were immediately excommunicated. That is, as soon as it was discovered by church authorities that you were a polygamist, you were excommunicated.

As for the NY Times article, they were incorrect in characterizing polygamists today as Mormons. As a result of that article the LDS church has requested the AP wire to adopt standards when discussing polygamy, such as referring to polygamists as former Mormons or fundamentalists.

To be clear, no polygamist can be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints today. The penalty for polygamy is excommunication.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The angry mob was not orginized by Christian Ministers Joseph Smith Died in Jail...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Joseph Smith was in jail and awaiting trial, because he, as the Mayor of Nauvoo, had allowed the destruction of a press that was based in Nauvoo and was printing slander and libel. According to the city Charter of Nauvoo, the Mayor and City Council had the right to destroy any press that was a public nuisance and printing libelous statements. They did this and joseph Smith was arrested.

There was a conspiracy of sorts to assure that he was arrested and killed. Among the conspirators were the following.

Governor Ford of Illinois: promised Joseph that if he turned himself in that the state militia would offer him their full protection - unfortunately the majority of the Mob that killed Joseph was made up of members of the state militia and governor Ford conveniently left town the day before.

John C. Bennet - who was a doctor, general, and Methodist preacher - was instrumental in publishing and speaking out against the Mormons and worked behind the scenes to facilitate the conspiracy.

Other conspirators include:

Levi Williams - Colonel in the Illinois Militia

Thomas Sharp - Captain in the State Militia

Mark Aldrich - Captain in the State Militia

Jacob C. Davis - State Senator in Illinois.

Joseph Smith was never afforded due process of law for the crimes he was accused of in Illinois leading to this arrest and leading legal minds today are of the opinion that he would have been acquitted.

nabster,

I've read your link and I found it interesting.

I disagree with it, much of it, but found none of it surprising. The author, however, makes many, many mistakes.

First, His claim that this information only came to light a decade ago is ludicrous, these accusations against Mormons as being occultists and linked with Masonry, and Kabballah have been around for decades not one decade.

His reference to Mark Hoffman was interesting - what he failed to make clear is that Mark Hoffman forgeries are still being discovered today. Hoffman, got a kick out of forging documents and hiding them, waiting for them to come forward and cause trouble. He was not only a forger of Mormon documents but also forged other historical documents that have been giving historians fits for over 20 years. There is some debate as to the other documents he refers to being authentic or some of Hoffman's forgeries. - Hoffman was so brilliant he had managed to create a method that would "trick" carbon dating techniques.

Lastly, when I read through the footnotes and saw that he used Fawn Brodie as a source and said about her "Despite many interpretive limitations, Smith's best over-all biography remains Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History" In the real world, Ms. Brodie's book has been widely denounced by Mormon and non-Mormon critics alike for her biased anti-Mormon approach and incomplete research techniques. She's even been accused of outright fabrication.

At any rate, read the article, but be aware that the author has an agenda - based on his source material and the tone of the article, I would say that it is anti-Mormon in nature. Is there truth in it, yes. Are some truths distorted, yes. Are some truths accurate, yes. Are there lies in it, yes. Is that the authors fault. I don't think so, I think he used faulty source material.

I assume this was posted to undermine the position I took regarding the gnostic gospels and the information they provide on Early Christian practices as being evidence in favor of Mormonism. Am I right?

Here's an interesting article if anyone is interested in reading it, I'd appreciate some comment on it. It is essentially about resolving the Mormon concept of the trinity with the historical christian notion of the trinity.

http://www.fairlds.org/apol/morm201/m20103.html

Juss, I will get to your posts eventually, I am dismayed however that I'll just be repeating myself as I've discussed all of this before.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Juss, show me the books and I'll show you their faults.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">reread the thread for the last few pages. This was solely in response to your claims about Joseph Smith's criminal record and his mother's superstitious nature.

As for the rest

God's nature:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christians...There is only one God (Isaiah 43:11; 44:6,8; 45:5)
Mormons..."And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light (Book of Abraham 4:3)</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Let's read the full text of the scriptures Juss quotes:

Isaiah 43:11
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

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


</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This doesn't actually say there is one God, it only says there is one savior. Even within Christianity there is some lack of clarity on the nature of the trinity, but we'll get to that. At any rate, it does not say, “There is only one God” it simply says there is only one savior.

Isaiah 44:6, 8
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I [am] the first, and I [am] the last; and beside me [there is] no God.


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].

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Isaiah 45:5
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else, [there is] no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">These verses are open to interpretation when God says “beside me there is no other God” that could simply mean none that are as great as him – with which I certainly do agree.

Let's read some other verses in the Bible that seem to contradict Isaiah


Deuteronomy 10:17
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

For the LORD your God [is] God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God,

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What do you suppose God of gods indicates – to me it indicates that there are other beings that are near deity, but not for us, God is the god of all, even other gods that we may not know or be aware of – at any rate this is the bible telling us that God is the God of gods – plural.

Joshua 22:22 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

The LORD God of gods, the LORD God of gods, he knoweth, and Israel he shall know; if [it be] in rebellion, or if in transgression against the LORD,

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">same thing god of gods – plural

Psalms 136:2 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy [endureth] for ever.


</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Same thing again

So either the Bible is contradicting itself – in other words: containing and error – or my interpretation seems to be the most accurate.

At any rate, Mormons are not Polytheistic – to be polytheistic means to believe in multiple Gods and worship them all – like the ancient Romans and Greeks. Mormons do believe that there may well be other beings that are like God in power, wisdom and knowledge, but we do not worship them.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christians...God has always been God (Psalm 90:2; Isaiah 57:15)

Mormons...."God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!!! . . . We have imagined that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345 </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Again the whole verse would be nice, not just a summation and reference

Psalm 90:2
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou [art] God.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This does not say that God has always been God. Rather, it implies only that he was God before the world was made and before everlasting, whatever that is.

Isaiah 57:15
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">

For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name [is] Holy; I dwell in the high and holy [place], with him also [that is] of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">This doesn't say anything about God always having been God, so I don't know why you cited it. It does say he inhabits eternity, that is not the same as stating he has been God for eternity.

As for the Mormon position – Origen's
"Commentary on the Gospel of John, Book II, Chapter I," The Anti-Nicene Church Fathers.
Says the following </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
God on the one hand is Very God (Autotheos, God of Himself); and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, "That they may know Thee the only true God; "but that all beyond the Very God is made God by participation in His divinity, and is not to be called simply God (with the article), but rather God (without article). And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with God, and to attract to Himself divinity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other gods beside Him, of whom God is the God, as it is written, "The God of gods, the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth." It was by the offices of the first-born that they became gods, for He drew from God in generous measure that they should be made gods, and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true God, then, is "The God," and those who are formed after Him are gods, images, as it were, of Him the prototype. But the archetypal image, again, of all these images is the Word of God, who was in the beginning, and who by being with God is at all times God, not possessing that of Himself, but by His being with the Father, and not continuing to be God, if we should think of this, except by remaining always in uninterrupted contemplation of the depths of the Father.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I daresay that Origen was a little more informed on this topic than I. His point is that God is in the process of giving to us the divine through the sacrifice of his son. I'm getting a head of myself so let me back up.
As for whether or not God became God feel free to disagree with me, as it was really a doctrine that was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith and does not have a Biblical footing that I am aware of, if I find one I'll let you know. The only one I can think of if Jesus affirmation that he is only doing what he has seen God do. If Jesus is solely following his father's example, then God must at one time have physically done what Jesus was doing. I know it's confusing, but it does indicate that at one point God was not what he is today, but walked among mortals and did works similar to Jesus' works. Not on this earth and not in this time, but somewhere sometime. Here read the verse for yourself John 5:19 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">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">So Jesus only does what he sees the father doing. To me that means that God once did what Jesus is now doing and Jesus is following his example.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christians...God is a spirit without flesh and bones (John 4:24; Luke 24:39)

Mormons..."The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's" (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22. Compare with Alma 18:26-27; 22:9-10)
"Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body . . . of flesh and bones." (Articles of Faith, by ames Talmage, p. 38).</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The whole verse
John 4:24
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Luke 24:39
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">To me this is kind of funny, because most Christians believe that Jesus and God are one and the same person – am I right nabster – So here you have one verse where John writes that God is a Spirit and then another where Jesus (who is also God incarnate) saying to behold his body, touch it and feel it, because I have flesh and bones. So which is it, are God and Jesus the same, meaning God has a body or are they separate and Jesus has a body and God doesn't?
You know my feelings on this, I've quoted Exodus 33:11 As many times as possible </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ten commandments were written by the finger of God (Exodus 31:18)
Phillipians 3:21 may be referring to Christ or God, but the point is the same, especially if you think they are the same being
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So again, is the Bible in contradiction or in error.

Topic: Trinity
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christians... The Trinity is the doctrine that there is only one God in all the universe and that He exists in three, eternal, simultaneous person: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Mormons...The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. "That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man." (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35.)</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yup, I agree and I won't hide it. I think God is God and Jesus is Jesus and the Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit. They all have a purpose and that purpose is the same and it is the salvation of mankind. To that end they are one as they work toward the same Goal.
If you believe God and Jesus are the same, then you have to believe that God has a body. If you believe they are the same, then you have to believe that God was once a man – when he was Jesus. If you believe they are the same, then whenever Jesus is praying to God, he is merely talking to himself. And When he is baptised in Matthew 3, and God speaks from Heaven that he is simultaneously being baptised, speaking from heaven and descending from heaven in the form of a dove. Why did Jesus ask himself to forgive his tormentors while he suffered on the cross. How did he meet with himself on the mount of transfiguration. The list goes on and on.
Let me use the Bible a bit here
John 20:17
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">He hadn't yet ascended to his father, but he is the father so, what the crap is the bible talking about?

Acts 2:33
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If Jesus and God are the same then who's right hand is he on?

Matthew 27:46
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So I guess Jesus had forsaken himself, even though he was still there?

What's most disturbing is that I think NE20 or NE21 at one time agreed with me, that Jesus and God were separate personages that were one in purpose.

Most revealing is John 17 when Jesus is praying about his disciples in verse 11
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. 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">Did Jesus want these disciples to lose their individuality and become some cosmic entity or did he merely want them to become one in purpose. I think he meant one in purpose. What do you think?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Topic Jesus
Christians...Jesus was born of the virgin Mary (Isaiah 7:14; Matt. 1:23)

Mormons...
"The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood - was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8: p. 115)
"Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers" (Mormon Doctrine," by Bruce McConkie, p. 547)
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">As I said, I believe God made Mary pregnant with Jesus through natural processes. Feel free to disagree – that doesn't mean he had sex with her, it simply means sperm fertilizes egg. I'm sure that if our scientists and doctors today can figure out how to do that that God could do the same. Brigham Young and Bruce R. McKonkie's statements were made in ignorance of modern day science. And they were not made as prophetic statements but as plausible statements.

If I believe that Jesus came into being through a normal pregnancy (apart from the process of conception being somewhat shrouded in the mysteries of what it means to be overshadowed by the spirit) does that make me non-Christian? You might find it to be an odd interpretation of an only loosely recorded biblical event, but it certainly shouldn't disqualify me as Christian.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Christians...
Jesus is the eternal Son. He is second person of the Trinity. He has two natures. He is God in flesh and man (John 1:1, 14; Col. 2;9) and the creator of all things (Col. 1:15-17)

Mormons...Jesus is the literal spirit-brother of Lucifer, a creation. (Gospel Through the Ages, p. 15)
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I've already talked about this. How does it make me non-Christian to believe that Jesus and Lucifer and me and you by the way are all spiritual brothers and sisters? Does that in any way detract from who Christ is? No.
This is a typical anti-Mormon sensationalism tactic. “Mormons are evil because they believe Jesus and Satan were brothers” Seriously, if I believe that and I also believe that Jesus is my personal savior, what's the big deal?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Topic Holy Spirit

Christians... The Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity. He is not a force. He is a person. (Acts 5:3-4; 13:2)

Mormons... Mormonism distinguishes between the Holy Spirit (God's presence via an essence) and the Holy Ghost (the third god in the Mormon doctrine of the trinity).
"He [the Holy Ghost] is a being endowed with the attributes and powers of Deity, and not a mere force, or essence (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 144)
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I disagree with this assertion. LDS doctrine is pretty clear that the Holy Ghost is God's messenger, so to speak. When the Bible speaks of the Holy Spirit, I believe that to be referring to the Holy Ghost. Aside from that misrepresentation. It sounds like Talmage was saying the same thing as you Juss.

The rest will have to wait.

Joel, you are my new hero. I believe that Joel just whipped out the religious nuclear warhead compared to my topic. Joel, there is only one other person I have ever speak so clearly and so intelligently, his name is KTG. If you'd like to talk to him I know he loves a great religious talk. I'm sure that you could both teach him much and mayhap learn a few things. But man, you're an excellent debater.

yes , it is gnosticism, which is not christianity. just kabbalah is not judiasm.

in respect to Joshua 22
it is the PEOPLE saying GOd of gods, not the Lord...the people of Reuben GaD AND mANNASeh,

next in Psalm 136 verse 2 ...if you read the preceding verses of 135 15-21(the last verse before 136) you will notice the emphasis on false gods/idols. this is God of gods(idols) my friend. your interpretation is out of context.

your "what if " about the Isaiah scripture is awful, i think you would concur. there is no other God is pretty simple to interpret....


regarding Luke 24...christians believe Jesus is God inthe flesh as man tempted as man and sinless in order to b e perfect sacrifice.But he was born a man. God, at the throne is a seperate being. The Bible says Jesus is seated at the throne with God , they are distinct beings. Triune. Jesus had flesh and bone the Father does not.He is SPirit.

Jesus is talking to those who see him after resurrection, for cryin out loud. misinterpret some more will ya? he is saying see my hands and my feet and the scars...it is me Jesus. I AM NOT A SPIRIT as you might think i am, it is me JESUS.
C'mon Joel. You are better than this. Clearly you have been taught incorrectly or you are stretching hard to make some scripture plausible to mean what you want it to.

Phillippians....In heaven we will be transformed to a spotless and perfect body As Jesus is(not God) JEsus.

psalm 90...Joel, what does everlasting to everlasting mean to you? it is pretty self explanatory bro.alpha and omega...ya know beginning to end. in the beginning was thhe Word and the Word was God....beginning=word=God = Beginning He was never a man like you and me .thank goodness, no?

The trinity will never be understood in our ophysical natural realm of physics.

Jesus is GOd in flesh, but he is God. The holy spirit is another "entity" of GOd, here from the beginning and the third part of the trinity but also God. triune. it is not an earthly thnig and cannot be compared to our five senses of understanding.

Acts 2:33 figurative right hand...means heir to the throne of the person on the throne. IT is figurative not literal hand.

Matthew 27..
Jesus was a man here on earth. Tempted and lived as men do and did. hurt and suffered and had emotions like us to...he felt betrayed and left alone...he cried to God as we would.
HE was not talking to HIm self...for criyin out loud. While on Earth Jesus was a man who lived a perfect sinless life. A perfect sacrifice. the only one ever. HE ascended to the throne of God in Heaven, and is with the Father.Guess what so is the Holy Spirit. God is ominpotent, do not try to place him in time or space. Jesus , however was subject to earth and time and space while here. If you truly do not understand the trintiy, much can be learned. if you are playing games , i am getting tired of your misinterpreting....

regarding spirit brothers...equating Jesus and satan as heirs to the throne is blasphemous. SAtan is a fallen cast out angel . Jesus is not an angel and not even the same being as satan. He is God and man(while on earth) satan is neither gof nor man. theyt are not brothers and neother are we brothers in the spirit world to either of them. it is not anywhere in scripture and no interpretation can validate it. when we become saved, we become heirs to a throne satan will never have access to . this whole God was a man then a spirit then a god(or whatever) thing is more confusing to me than the trinity is to you...hehehe.

BTW mouse, before you back someone up you should research the validity and interpretation brought forth....Joel, in all seriousness there is such a broad difference in scriptural application, I often wonder how we could get so far apart..unless the end all application is done to validate a viewpoint that is difficult to come up with , without stretching the meaning a bit...and sometiimes more then a bit. to me anyways, and many who believe as I do. Just curious, do you see my interpretation as I see yours? i.e. major messed up?
anytime we get into specific scriptures of the BIble and what they mean , we differ greatly when it comes to issues of true doctrine.
Nabstrr

I think you hit it on the head nabster - it's the taking one scripture, or even one part of one scripture and running with it to the exclusion of the context of the events that led to the scripture and the context of the entirety of the verse/ chapter/ book/ Bible/ Jesus.

There's enough text in the Bible that we can (and many have proven over the centuries that they will and have) take a sentence and stretch it to mean anything we want. Cutting and pasting a tremendous volumne of sentences from the Bible out of context is still taking it out of context, it's just doing it more at one time