| The Mormon God |  | ||
| Archive | |||
|
Posted by: Aus ® 03/25/2003, 17:20:39 Author Profile Mail author |
By definition or interpretation, what are the Mormon's view on God? is he the same God believed in the Holy Bible? are there differences?
i've heard that the Mormon God once existed on another planet as a man, and became a God through exaltation, is this true according to what Mormons believe? if so, how can Mormons be Christians if they have a different definition of who God is. If what is true about Mormons, i find many contradictions with the meaning of God in the Bible and that of Mormon Doctrine and the Book Of Mormon. i would like to hear from all viewpoints on this matter, thanks |
| | Recommend | Alert | Previous | Next | Current page |
Replies to this message
God is God Re: The Mormon God -- Aus Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Chad ®
03/25/2003, 18:40:23
Author Profile Mail author
1Chris·tian
Pronunciation: 'kris-ch&n, 'krish-
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin christianus, adjective & n., from Greek christianos, from Christos
Date: 1526
1 a : one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ b (1) : DISCIPLE 2 (2) : a member of one of the Churches of Christ separating from the Disciples of Christ in 1906 (3) : a member of the Christian denomination having part in the union of the United Church of Christ concluded in 1961that states, a Christian is a person who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ. So then, it would seem your defintion is a bit different, or perhaps a tad discriminatory. As Mormons do profess a belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ, claiming that they are not Christians is a bit off, especially since the name of the church has the actual words "Jesus Christ" in it. Also, I would point out that the term "Christian" has nothing to do with the nature of God. It would seem to me that one could profess belief in the teachings of Christ and interpret them to mean that God is whatever they personally want. Condemning that particular practice would seem to be in contradiction to the nature of what Christianity professes to be, as Christians are not asked but commanded not to judge.
However, all the semantics aside, I will address the nature of your post. "The Mormon God" as you put it is the same God everybody else worships as far as I know. Mormons simply view him as having a different nature as other religions -- much like the Jews, Muslims, etc. I believe your take on it is pretty much in line with what Mormons believe. As for your claim of contradictions, I would need to know specifically what they are in order to address them.
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Step into my web little fly ;-) Re: God is God -- Chad Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 11:25:01
Author Profile Mail author
I'm confused then Chad. According to L.D.S. theology, Jesus cannot forgive the sin of murder.
Then there is also the temple problem. If we are saved by faith alone, then there is no need for a temple. We no longer are required to do extra stuff because Jesus renders us completely saved. At least that is the Christian take on it.
As far as names are concerned, Masons don't build anything with brick or stone, but are still called Masons. The killer whale is actually a dolphin. The name argument is irrelevant.
Ramona
P.S. Permission to take some L.D.S. questions off the board Captain?
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
hehe, silly spider tricks are for me Re: Step into my web little fly ;-) -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Chad ®
03/26/2003, 11:58:06
Author Profile Mail author
For shame, it is as if you would ignore that we are expatriots together in that limbo of trying to be free of oppression.
If you want to get into the other debate, start a new thread -- but I don't know that it will be a success as there probably wouldn't be much you could post that I would disagree with.
The main thing I hate is for people to act in a manner contrary to what they profess as their faith. Fundies are the absolute worst at that. If you'll reread my post with that in mind, you'll probably see where I was going.
Now shoo, spider, I aint gettin near that web. I've been snared in it before, and it messes up my hair. ;)
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Ah, but Chad Re: hehe, silly spider tricks are for me -- Chad Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 12:45:17
Author Profile Mail author
I agree with your origianl comments. I was just trying to step further along. I'm anemic, I don't need milk I need meat.
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
OK, OK, I was just bein' hardheaded Re: Ah, but Chad -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Chad ®
03/26/2003, 22:53:58
Author Profile Mail author
;)
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: OK, OK, I was just bein' hardheaded Re: OK, OK, I was just bein' hardheaded -- Chad Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/27/2003, 06:54:16
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | | Current page
nope. Re: Step into my web little fly ;-) -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 13:57:37
Author Profile Mail author
"I'm confused then Chad. According to L.D.S. theology, Jesus cannot forgive the sin of murder."
No. There's only one unpardonable sin. D&C 132:27 states "innocent blood." The only innocent blood is that of the Lamb (figuratively). Read Heb. 6:4-6 to understand.
"If we are saved by faith alone, then there is no need for a temple. We no longer are required to do extra stuff because Jesus renders us completely saved."Sure. You've gotta have faith. But LDS have faith, too. Does that mean they're going to heaven?
Regards,
Ryan
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
One????? Re: nope. -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 14:05:54
Author Profile Mail author
"The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death, after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant, saith the Lord God; and he that abideth not this law can in nowise enter into my glory, but shall be damned, saith the Lord." (Doctrine & Covenants 132:27).
Then there's this:
Throughout the years Mormon leaders have further clarified the Church's position on this subject. Brigham Young declared that the idea of someone being able to repent of "murderous acts" and be saved is "nonsense". (Teachings of the Presidents of the Church, page 62).
And The D & C reminds you that the Prohpet must speak truth and cannot lead you unto error.
Yes, the L.D.S. Have faith. But is it in faith that the Lord Jesus Christ will forgive them of their sins...even the sin of murder, which according to the above is unforgivable?
If we are saved by faith alone, then there is no need for a temple. We no longer are required to do extra stuff because Jesus renders us completely saved. You still didn't answer this one.
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
how many unpardonables would you like? Re: One????? -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 15:09:17
Author Profile Mail author
That's right. But what do you think "I speak unto the Church" means, here? It might help you understand. You really should read Heb. 6:4-6
If you understood the doctrines of the Church, you might like them. Let me help you with this next one:
The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, (there's your first clue)which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder (not just any murder) wherein ye shed innocent blood, (there we go. Now that's the first qualifier. Not just any murder, but the shedding of Christ's blood. In other words, crucifying Christ afresh. But keep reading because He explains further) and assent unto my death, (okay, now pay attention here. Assent means to agree with.)
after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant...So, to sum up, one must be in the new and everlasting covenant and know what they are doing. Then, with full knowledge, one must turn against Christ with murderous hate.
"Brigham Young declared that the idea of someone being able to repent of "murderous acts" and be saved is "nonsense"."Yep. That's "acts," plural. And now you know what he meant by that.
"Yes, the L.D.S. Have faith. But is it in faith that the Lord Jesus Christ will forgive them of their sins...even the sin of murder,"
We have faith that Jesus Christ will forgive us of our sins, if we repent. Except, of course for that one sin mentioned in Hebrews. What does Heb. 6:4-6 mean to you? You do believe that it's scripture, right?
"If we are saved by faith alone, then there is no need for a temple. We no longer are required to do extra stuff because Jesus renders us completely saved. You still didn't answer this one."Because I don't believe that we are saved by faith alone. Unless, of course, you think that Cain was saved.
So, I'm asking you to clarify what you mean. Do you believe that faithful LDS will be saved?
regards,
Ryan
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: how many unpardonables would you like? Re: how many unpardonables would you like? -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 16:06:42
Author Profile Mail author
That's right. But what do you think "I speak unto the Church" means, here? It might help you understand. You really should read Heb. 6:4-6Ramona - I speak to the church means what it would in modern vernacular in D & C. Hebrews has nothing whatsoever to do with church. It touches on "sins" of the H.G.
Ryan - If you understood the doctrines of the Church, you might like them.
Ramona - Ryan dearest, did you know that in the past I frequented the inside of l.d.s. temples?? I am well aware the changing doctrines of the church.
Ryan - Let me help you with this next one:
The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, (there's your first clue)which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder (not just any murder) wherein ye shed innocent blood, (there we go. Now that's the first qualifier. Not just any murder, but the shedding of Christ's blood.
Wow, you are really reaching here buddy. A mother walking her child that is shot on the street is also innocent. Oh, but your God doesn't think she is innocent enough according to your words.
Ryan - In other words, crucifying Christ afresh.
Ramona - That is your interpretation. The words are clear as they are. You murder and even Jesus can't save you. Some savior. Where do you think Brigham Young got the idea of Blood atonement? You know, that doctrine that Salt Lake is trying to brush under the rug even though doctrine states that the prophet cannot lead members astray.
Ryan - But keep reading because He explains further) and assent unto my death, (okay, now pay attention here. Assent means to agree with.) after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant...
Ramona - Ahh, "new and everlasting covenant", those are the very same words requiring polygamy for eternal salvation.
ryan - So, to sum up, one must be in the new and everlasting covenant and know what they are doing.
Ramona - Just like I said, the mormon Jesus doesn't have enough power to save you on his own you need a special covenant.
Ryan - Then, with full knowledge, one must turn against Christ with murderous hate.
Ramona - So what, if Christ is God with power of salvation even after "murderous hate" one declares the desire for forgiveness..what Jesus ignores him? Sounds like half-assed salvation to me. I prefer the man that calls for prayer for those that are hated and despised over prayer for those loved.
Ryan - "Brigham Young declared that the idea of someone being able to repent of "murderous acts" and be saved is "nonsense"."
Ramona - Oh please, now you are questioning semantics? You can do better than that. So, since B.Y. was also aware of the mountain meadow massacre and did nothing to prevent it, is he unable to receive the salvation of Jesus...more than 2 were cold-bloodedly killed.
Ryan - Yep. That's "acts," plural. And now you know what he meant by that.
Ramona - Yes, that you are grasping for straws. Oops, should I have said straw?
Ryan - "Yes, the L.D.S. Have faith. But is it in faith that the Lord Jesus Christ will forgive them of their sins...even the sin of murder,"
Ramona - Nope not in accordance to L.D.S. doctrine.
Ryan - We have faith that Jesus Christ will forgive us of our sins, if we repent. Except, of course for that one sin mentioned in Hebrews.
Ramona - And the sin of murder as mentioned in D& C.
Ryan - What does Heb. 6:4-6 mean to you?
Ramona - That's easy, Paul wants his converts to Paulism to remain in the church and threatens their very souls if they depart.
Ryan - You do believe that it's scripture, right?
Ramona - Of course, the scripture of Paul. You do realize that scripture simply means anything written per Webster?
Ryan - Because I don't believe that we are saved by faith alone. Unless, of course, you think that Cain was saved.
Ramona - Funny, Cain only murdered one person.
Ryan - So, I'm asking you to clarify what you mean. Do you believe that faithful LDS will be saved?
Ramona - Sure. I bear not dislike of those L.D.S. Most of my family members belong. But then again, I believe that all those that desire heaven shall receive it...kinda like Jesus says when he tells the thief, " today I will see you in Paradise."
I also don't believe in a God that creates us imperfect, then damns His/Her creation for that imperfection. If God ultimately knows how our lives will end, creating us (especially in the preexistance and then mortally) to be damned is detestable. Nope, I don't believe in a God like that.
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
And this unpardonable sin Re: Re: how many unpardonables would you like? -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 16:26:33
Author Profile Mail author
"To whatever extent the preaching on blood atonement may have influenced action, it would have been in relation to Mormon disciplinary action among its own members. In point would be a verbally reported case of a Mr. Johnson in Cedar City who was found guilty of adultery with his stepdaughter by a bishop's court and sentenced to death for atonement of his sin. According to the report of reputable eyewitnesses, judgment was executed with consent of the offender who went to his unconsecrated grave in full confidence of salvation through the shedding of his blood. Such a case, however primitive, is understandable within the meaning of the doctrine and the emotional extremes of the [Mormon] Reformation." (Utah Historical Quarterly, January, 1958, page 62, note 39)
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
total disassociation from reality Re: And this unpardonable sin -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 17:44:21
Author Profile Mail author
The fact is that Brigham Young was the governor of Utah, and as the governor, he advocated capital punishment for those convicted of murder.
The Church doctrine of blood atonement is that the sins of all men can and are made clean in the blood of Christ. Except for those who commit the unpardonable sin, for which they must suffer themselves. (ie--their own blood, figuratively)
There were lots of anti-Mormons around, making up lies and rumors about it.
Modified by Ryan2 at Wed, Mar 26, 2003, 18:07:53
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Sorry Sweetie Re: total disassociation from reality -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 18:08:33
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
It's okay, darlin' Re: Sorry Sweetie -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 18:49:51
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona: "Read from the mouths of the prophets themselves"You mean Brigham Young? Yeah, I've read his statements in the Journal of Discourses about the law of Moses and how blood was required to be spilt by the offender. If you don't think that was the law of Moses, look it up in the Old Testament yourself.
Of course, Brigham Young never said that it was or should be a modern practice. He did make some comments which can be cut-and-pasted together with his statements regarding the Old Testament, and it could be made to appear that he was saying something which he wasn't, but that wouldn't be too honest.
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: It's okay, darlin' Re: It's okay, darlin' -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 19:59:49
Author Profile Mail author
Neither did B.Y. state that it shouldn't be modern practice. Ah, the sin of omission. And nope his statements in full are quite clear. And it sounded more like a control situation to keep members in line. Not that I blame him. It's an excellent technique.
But relinquish my soul to a human, not likely. It's mine and I will be judged for it based on me, regardless of what B.Y., Gordon B., Kimball, Smith or any of them promise about failing to lead astray. Why else would I study so diligently?
With honest and warm regards,
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: It's okay, darlin' Re: Re: It's okay, darlin' -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 22:08:15
Author Profile Mail author
He didn't have to. It was the law of Moses, and everyone knew that it didn't apply now.
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Everyone??? Re: Re: It's okay, darlin' -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/27/2003, 06:19:32
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | | Current page
meanings Re: Re: how many unpardonables would you like? -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 17:13:51
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona: I speak to the church means what it would in modern vernacular in D & C.Ryan: Yep. It means that he's speaking to the Church. If a faithful member turns around and murders in full knowledge, then that's crucifying Christ afresh. It won't be forgiven.
Ramona: Hebrews has nothing whatsoever to do with church.
Ryan: The guy who wrote it might have disagreed.
Ramona: It touches on "sins" of the H.G.
Ryan: Yep. Crucifying the Son of God afresh is a sin.
Ramona: I am well aware the changing doctrines of the church.
Ryan: You can pretend that the Church believes things that it doesn't, I won't stop you. It won't help you much in a debate, though.
Ramona: A mother walking her child that is shot on the street is also innocent. Oh, but your God doesn't think she is innocent enough according to your words.Ryan: There was only one innocent person. It was a man.
Ramona - The words are clear as they are.
Ryan: Yep. Something else is becoming pretty clear, too.
Ramona: You murder and even Jesus can't save you. Some savior.
Ryan: You might be more credible if you argue against something the Church actually believes. Just a thought.
Ramona: Where do you think Brigham Young got the idea of Blood atonement? You know, that doctrine that Salt Lake is trying to brush under the rug even though doctrine states that the prophet cannot lead members astray.Ryan: Brigham Young led members to Salt Lake. Blood atonement is symbolic, like the sacrament. Too bad I won't be able to tell more about it than that.
Ramona - Ahh, "new and everlasting covenant", those are the very same words requiring polygamy for eternal salvation.Ryan: No. One man and one woman work just fine.
Ramona - Just like I said, the mormon Jesus doesn't have enough power to save you on his own you need a special covenant.Ryan: God can save anyone. But only those people who are willing to use His gifts righteously, get to have them.
Ramona - So what, if Christ is God with power of salvation even after "murderous hate" one declares the desire for forgiveness..what Jesus ignores him?Ryan: So, according to you, one must declare the desire for forgiveness? Then what happens to the Billions of people who never heard of Christ?
Ramona -So, since B.Y. was also aware of the mountain meadow massacre and did nothing to prevent it, is he unable to receive the salvation of Jesus
Ryan: It's a little hard to prevent something when you don't have control over it. You are aware of what the Chinese government is doing to it's people, aren't you?
Ramona:
"Ryan - "Yes, the L.D.S. Have faith. But is it in faith that the Lord Jesus Christ will forgive them of their sins...even the sin of murder,"Ramona - Nope not in accordance to L.D.S. doctrine."
Ryan: You argue with yourself, don't attribute it to me.Ramona - And the sin of murder as mentioned in D& C.
Ryan: Same sin. D&C makes that pretty clear.
Ramona - Of course, the scripture of Paul. You do realize that scripture simply means anything written per Webster?
Ryan: Do you believe there was anything special about Paul?
Ramona: I also don't believe in a God that creates us imperfect, then damns His/Her creation for that imperfection. If God ultimately knows how our lives will end, creating us (especially in the preexistance and then mortally) to be damned is detestable. Nope, I don't believe in a God like that.
Ryan: Neither do I. We damn ourselves by making the choice to stop progressing. But if you think that everyone will be saved, then what does the word "damnation" mean to you?
respectfully,
Ryan
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: meanings Re: meanings -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 18:03:40
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona - Even if he begs forgiveness, he won't be forgiven. What an awful God you have.
Ramona: Hebrews has nothing whatsoever to do with church....Um, Ryan you do realize it was judaism don't you??
Ryan: The guy who wrote it might have disagreed.
Ramona - Nope. Maybe you should do a little religious study.
Ramona: It touches on "sins" of the H.G.
Ryan: Yep. Crucifying the Son of God afresh is a sin.
Ramona - Nope, denying the H.G., nothing to do with Jesus.
Ramona: I am well aware the changing doctrines of the church.
Ryan: You can pretend that the Church believes things that it doesn't, I won't stop you.
Ramona - Have you ever studied Mormon history through an objective source?? I think not.
Ryan - It won't help you much in a debate, though.
Ramona - Again, study your religion objectively....what are you afraid of?
Ramona: A mother walking her child that is shot on the street is also innocent. Oh, but your God doesn't think she is innocent enough according to your words.
Ryan: There was only one innocent person. It was a man.
Ramona Mr. McConkie goes on to admit that some sins cannot be forgiven:
But under certain circumstances there are some serious sins for which the cleansing of Christ does not operate, and the law of God is that men must then have their own blood shed to atone for their sins. Murder, for instance, is one of these sins; hence we find the Lord commanding capital punishment. (Ibid, page 92)
The Doctrine and Covenants also supports the above:
And now, behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come. (Doctrine and Covenants 42:18)
Ramona - The words are clear as they are.Ryan: Yep. Something else is becoming pretty clear, too.
Ramona - What is that Ryan??
Ramona: You murder and even Jesus can't save you. Some savior.
Ryan: You might be more credible if you argue against something the Church actually believes. Just a thought.
Ramona - The church does teach it. Don't you believe your own church?
Ramona: Where do you think Brigham Young got the idea of Blood atonement? You know, that doctrine that Salt Lake is trying to brush under the rug even though doctrine states that the prophet cannot lead members astray.
Ryan: Brigham Young led members to Salt Lake. Blood atonement is symbolic, like the sacrament. Too bad I won't be able to tell more about it than that.
Ramona - That is a false statement. Consider this There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world. ....I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God....It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit... (President Brigham Young, Sept. 21, 1856, Deseret News, page 235; very similar to Journal of Discourses 4:53-54).
Suppose you found your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them, you would be justified, and they would atone for their sins, and be received into the kingdom of God. I would at once do so in such a case; and under such circumstances, I have no wife whom I love so well that I would not put a javelin through her heart, and I would do it with clean hands. (President Brigham Young, March 16, 1856, Journal of Discourses, 3:247).Symbolic...not after a follower obeys, or is commanded to obey. Again, do yourself a favor and study the history of your prophets without church edits.
Ramona - Ahh, "new and everlasting covenant", those are the very same words requiring polygamy for eternal salvation.
Ryan: No. One man and one woman work just fine.
Ramona - It may work fine for you, but you are not abiding by the commands of the Prophet Joseph Smith now. Tsk, tsk.The D & C 132:4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting acovenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned•; for no one can reject• this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory
Ramona - Just like I said, the mormon Jesus doesn't have enough power to save you on his own you need a special covenant.
Ryan: God can save anyone. But only those people who are willing to use His gifts righteously, get to have them.
Ramona - Unless as you state- "If a faithful member turns around and murders in full knowledge, then that's crucifying Christ afresh. It won't be forgiven." Aww, poor challenged diety.
Ramona - So what, if Christ is God with power of salvation even after "murderous hate" one declares the desire for forgiveness..what Jesus ignores him?Ryan: So, according to you, one must declare the desire for forgiveness? Then what happens to the Billions of people who never heard of Christ?
Ramona - What does Christ have to do with this? If I commit murder, what does it matter if I know Christ? I only have to know that murder is wrong and am sorrowful for the act.
Ramona -So, since B.Y. was also aware of the mountain meadow massacre and did nothing to prevent it, is he unable to receive the salvation of Jesus
Ryan: It's a little hard to prevent something when you don't have control over it.
Ramona - Kind of like charles Manson??
Ryan - You are aware of what the Chinese government is doing to it's people, aren't you?
Ramona - Um, yes but your statement makes no sense.
Ramona "Ryan - "Yes, the L.D.S. Have faith. But is it in faith that the Lord Jesus Christ will forgive them of their sins...even the sin of murder,"
Ramona - Nope not in accordance to L.D.S. doctrine." You were in quotes, but again you are wrong about l.d.s. doctrine.
Ryan: You argue with yourself, don't attribute it to me.
Ramona - You were in quotes. I only placed my name in error in front of your quote.
Ramona - And the sin of murder as mentioned in D& C.
Ryan: Same sin. D&C makes that pretty clear.
Ramona - You must be right Ryan and your church leaders are all wrong even Bruce R.
Ramona - Of course, the scripture of Paul. You do realize that scripture simply means anything written per Webster?
Ryan: Do you believe there was anything special about Paul?
Ramona - Nope. He was just a man.
Ramona: I also don't believe in a God that creates us imperfect, then damns His/Her creation for that imperfection. If God ultimately knows how our lives will end, creating us (especially in the preexistance and then mortally) to be damned is detestable. Nope, I don't believe in a God like that.
Ryan: Neither do I. We damn ourselves by making the choice to stop progressing. But if you think that everyone will be saved, then what does the word "damnation" mean to you?
Ramona - It doesn't exist in Judaism. For your understanding. Damnation is for those that do not desire the presence of God.
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
If I had time Re: Re: meanings -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 19:08:23
Author Profile Mail author
I'm laughing at myself for assuming that you were Christian. Hehe.
I've enjoyed this exchange. I have to admit that I've given you a hard time on the issue of unpardonable sins, just because I wanted to. In the other issue, if you want to believe that the Church went around killing it's members you are entitled to think that. But it's not true. I would recommend that you study a little bit about the Danites and what they were up to. It might open your eyes.
I hope we get through this as friends, but I have to tell you that I don't have time for anything too lengthy. Spring Break habits are nice and all, but the real world becons me. I have a ton of stuff that I have to catch up on.
yours,
Ryan
Modified by Ryan2 at Wed, Mar 26, 2003, 19:16:38
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: If I had time Re: If I had time -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 19:30:21
Author Profile Mail author
I have enjoyed this exchange as well.
As far as believing that members were killed. Mostly those that went astray...don't want anyone wanting to follow in those footsteps. It's a good control tactic. Brigham Young was a brilliant leader in that regard...as well as finances. Smith on the other had caused bankruptcy..what twice?
Danites? Boring!! Their history was too short..only 1 year. I like a group with some historical meat.
Again, I hold nothing against the people. I just have problems when A religion says that "the prophet speaks and the thinking has been done."
And a reminder, I frequented the temples dear.
ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Ramona, Re: Re: If I had time -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/26/2003, 22:15:58
Author Profile Mail author
And it's apparent that you didn't pay much attention while you were there.
ever to disagree on the doctrines of the Church,
Ryan
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Wrong Re: Ramona, -- Ryan2 Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/27/2003, 06:20:34
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | | Current page
I disagree with this... Re: Re: how many unpardonables would you like? -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Victoria! ®
03/26/2003, 17:47:46
Author Profile Mail author
Victoria: God, according to Christian theology, does not damn his/her/it's creation for imperfection. Why do you say that?
You wrote: If God ultimately knows how our lives will end, creating us (especially in the preexistance and then mortally) to be damned is detestable. Nope, I don't believe in a God like that.
Victoria: What does God knowing the end of our lives have to do with damning us?
Modified by Victoria! at Wed, Mar 26, 2003, 17:54:38
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: I disagree with this... Re: I disagree with this... -- Victoria! Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/26/2003, 18:10:41
Author Profile Mail author
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: I disagree with this... Re: Re: I disagree with this... -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ValJohn ®
03/29/2003, 12:38:03
Author Profile Mail author
Jesus atonement is for now and our future. It is the means where "all mankind may be saved." How? By obedience to all the laws and ordinances of the gospel of Christ. Will all be obedient? No. But the disobedient after being pierced through with much sorrow will eventually all bow the knee and confess that Jesus is Christ and will have an eternal existance that is glorious. My desire is not to glory in Christ but to find glory with Him. He is going to return to the Father. I, too, want to return home.
Related link: My Homepages
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
GAG ME! This sounds like a Re: Re: I disagree with this... -- ValJohn Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/29/2003, 14:29:56
Author Profile Mail author
Isn't your God powerful enough to withdraw anything God wants, including sin? Naw, you prefer a weak God that needs a helperman a.k.a. demigod a.k.a. Jesus (man-god.)
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Re: GAG ME! This sounds like a Re: GAG ME! This sounds like a -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ValJohn ®
03/29/2003, 14:44:51
Author Profile Mail author
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Which one?? Re: Re: GAG ME! This sounds like a -- ValJohn Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/29/2003, 17:10:36
Author Profile Mail author
* -It is said that power corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely. What makes God, God is that he applies order, law, and justice (tempered with mercy). God governs. His righteous judgement makes him God. That he should share his role with his Son is comforting. It makes me truly feel like a child of God.Ramona - That is called anthropomorphism. You are applying HUMAN qualities to your gods, both The father and the father, jr.
* - Christ is the Word.
Ramona - I assume you mean Jesus. The words he used were the same words that could be found in the Jewish Bible. He taught nothing novel.
* -He was there in the beginning and knows all that is required.
Ramona - He was there in the beginning? Who was there? Your Jesus or your god? Are you a polytheist, which is in complete opposition to the First and greatest command? I believe God to exist from eternity to eternity having no beginning or ending. Who then, created your god...God Senior Father...and who created that one? Ah, but that is just more anthropomorphism, which would be comforting to a human.
* - I have confidence in his role to save.
Ramona - Wow, God must be really nasty and hateful to need his children "saved" from God.
* - When God and Christ appeared to Joseph Smith, the Father stated: "Joseph, this is my beloved Son. Hear Him!"
Ramona - But then again, Joseph had other first vision too. He had such a fancy imagination, well actually mental illness (manic depression,) which he carried to his youngest son David. You did know that mental illness is inherited?
Ramona
P.S. I know a man that also saw vision of Christ and angels. He was treated with modern medication and is functioning well.
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | | Current page
Tell me about your God, Ramona Re: GAG ME! This sounds like a -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Victoria! ®
03/29/2003, 16:00:33
Author Profile Mail author
Why do you say that God needs a "helperman" a.k.a. Jesus (man-god)?
Do you subscribe to the teachings of Christ?
Victoria
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Vicki Re: Tell me about your God, Ramona -- Victoria! Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/29/2003, 17:17:28
Author Profile Mail author
Suffice it to say, "the dog would limp", how much is determined by the fact pattern.
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Can you answer my questions? Re: Vicki -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Victoria! ®
03/29/2003, 17:24:00
Author Profile Mail author
Modified by Victoria! at Sat, Mar 29, 2003, 17:56:10
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
I already have. n/t Re: Can you answer my questions? -- Victoria! Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/29/2003, 23:31:11
Author Profile Mail author
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
No Ramona, you haven't Re: I already have. n/t -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Victoria! ®
03/30/2003, 13:29:01
Author Profile Mail author
What is your perception of God?
Victoria
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Then Re: No Ramona, you haven't -- Victoria! Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
03/30/2003, 18:24:00
Author Profile Mail author
Why do you believe that Mormons, along with Catholics (you clearly differentiate Catholics from christians in the post to which I respond)are not Christian?
Ramona
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
Defensive denistry Re: Then -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Victoria! ®
03/30/2003, 20:24:15
Author Profile Mail author
I don't recall you're having discussed your belief system here at all in the 2 years you've been posting. As I stated, you have alternately supplied information regarding Judaism, Christianity, Mormonism and Catholicism (those are TOPICS you've commented on, not differentiations) and mocked them as well. Why the need to pull teeth?
For the record. Catholicism and Mormonism, in my view, are both Christian denominations. Mormonism bears the least resemblance to Biblical Christianity with the addition of various scriptures and specificially a polytheistic belief system that is not in keeping with Biblical Christianity. When I say polytheistic I am not referring to Trinity doctrine in any way.
Now, what is your perception of God?Victoria
Modified by Victoria! at Sun, Mar 30, 2003, 22:07:15
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
I won't apologize for your inattention Re: Defensive denistry -- Victoria! Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ramona ®
04/03/2003, 10:22:24
Author Profile Mail author
Offering opinion is vastly different from "mocking." I am critical of the manipulation that most religions that you mentioned, save some sects judaism, actively participate.
Boy A - "My pastor says that you are going to hell because you don't go to the church I do."
Boy B - "But I'm a Christian."
Boy A - "But you don't belong to my Church."
These were statements made by two middle school boys. It just warms the heart.
I reject the "leave your brain at the door attitude that I see."
I am horrified that some public schools are not taught certain aspects of science because christians are afraid since the timeframe of evolution isn't "biblical." Faith seemingly rides on a calendar. Sheesh, God is supposedly infinite, yet can only have created earth just over 6,000 years ago.
I look at even your words, calling "believers" to respond to threads. You discount my belief (which you seemed to know then, or how otherwise you could not have discounted it) as inadequate, since I do not believe the same way you do.
Vicki - For the record. Catholicism and Mormonism, in my view, are both Christian denominations. Mormonism bears the least resemblance to Biblical Christianity with the addition of various scriptures and specificially a polytheistic belief system that is not in keeping with Biblical Christianity.
Ramona - Mormonism bears little resemblance based on current theology and current biblical interpretation. You should read the gnostic readings. You may be surprised by how very Mormon some christians beliefs were.
I also see mormons as no more polytheistic that any standard christian cult, sect, or religion. The difference is that mormons are honest about the nature of the God they worship. And the nature of the divine is the only difference.
Vicki -When I say polytheistic I am not referring to Trinity doctrine in any way.
Ramona - Of course not, because the Trinity isn't at all polytheistic. <-That was sarcasm. Three doesn't mean three, it means one. You simple must have faith in that concept even if 3 = 1 doesn't make one lick of sense. Oh no, generic christians are so different than mormons, because generics unterstand the "true nature of God." How belittling, yet precisely my point.
If you think I mock the religions, you are dead wrong. Religion in and of itself has no power. When Martin Luther wrote the hateful anti-semitic words in the name of Christ Jesus, that brought forth power upon it's acceptance. The power to inflict horror upon a people in the name of God. Brigham Young's words are little different. I mock what is done in the name of religions and the divisiveness that is the end product.
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | | Current page
Re: how many unpardonables would you like? Re: Re: how many unpardonables would you like? -- ramona Top of thread Archive
Posted by: ValJohn ®
03/29/2003, 14:25:01
Author Profile Mail author
In the resurrection those who are murders, adulters, and who live and love a lie" will be ressurected to a glory but be damned in their progress. No forgiveness in the world to come does not mean total damnation. It means the demands of justice have finality. King David repented in sackcloth and ashes. He again gained favor with God, but lost his status and position and reduced his eternal reward because of the death of Uriah.
Even Christ, in his mortal state, was not perfect. Sinless, yes, perfect, no. He declared, "Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect. After his resurrection, he declared to the believers in America. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as I, and your Father in heaven are perfect. Our perfection is conditional on our finding our way all the way home. Perfection is a condition of exaltation. We are to perfect ourselves her so we can become perfect and be able to enter there.
| Recommend | Alert Where am I? Original Top of thread Previous | Next | Current page
one thing Re: Re: how many unpardonables would you like? -- ValJohn Top of thread Archive
Posted by: Ryan2 ®
03/29/2003, 15:46:32
Author Profile Mail author
Hi. It's great to see such a strong believer here on this board! I took a look at your websites, and you seem like a great guy!
But I think that you are mistaken on this one point, above. Remember the circumstances surrounding his utterance: "...even as your father in heaven is perfect..." While Christ was in the earthly flesh, there were evil men who would follow him around and he had to be careful what he said, lest he be accused of blasphemy. The time had not yet come for that.
When he appeared to the Nephites, he had no such concerns because no one would have questioned who He was.
Christ had ascended to Godhood long before He was born. It is true that he took upon Himself the veil like everyone else, but
to me that is not a reflection on His perfection. It only means that he didn't remember the pre-existance. Hence, when it came time to atone for the sins of all mankind, he had forgotten (from the pre-existance) how tremendous the sacrifice was. But I believe that he made the choice in the pre-existance, with full knowledge.He increased in Wisdom and stature: To me, this means that he gained knowledge just like anyone else, and his physical body developed like that of any other man.
He gained favor with God and man: To me, this means that
nothing was handed to Him. His success in life was contingent on his choices, just like anyone else. He had to "gain" favor rather than special priviledges of His status as a God. Personally, I believe that He suffered much affliction in His childhood. He was truly a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. But someone can be perfect and still suffer. I believe the Father is even grieved at the loss of His children who go astray (myself being one of them).He grew from grace to graceTo me, again, I believe that this means that his blessings were predicated on His choices, just like anyone else. By analogy (and I mean no sacrilige here, I'm just trying to explain the concept) someone could be a perfect Chess player, but no one would acknowledge him as such. He would have to "grow from grace to grace" so to speak, by entering tournaments and never losing a game. Again, that's just an analogy. So, Christ was perfect as a baby, but He still had to display that perfection with His choices. The more knowledge he attained in this world, the more choices that were available to Him.
I just wanted to share these thoughts with you, since I view it differently. I want to make sure you aware of another perspective.
Also, the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible clarifies that Jesus was not asking questions to the scholars, but they were asking him questions! Also, it says that he needed not that any man should teach him. (Inspired version, Matthew 3:24-25) In Mormon Doctrine (under the topic: Christ), Bruce R. McConkie states:
"...he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state." And he also says, "If the sectarian world, or even the unenlightened in the Church, had the slightest concept of the dominion, exaltation, and pre-eminence of our Lord both in pre-existence, during his mortal ministry, and now that he has returned to his Father, it would seem little short of direful and presumptuous blasphemy to them. Words, either written or spoken, cannot convey such a realization; it can only come by the revelations of the Spirit..."Hey, keep up the good work!
Ryan
Modified by Ryan2 at Sat, Mar 29, 2003, 16:23:29
| Recommend |
