Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've always felt that was a very good question and I certainly do not have the answer to it.
It's clear enough that he had a body after he was resurrected. But why? Why was it so important? And what ever happened to it? I would assume he took it with him, but like I said ... I have no answer for that puzzle.
God knows for certain.
Yes, one day we'll know the things we wish we could know now.
The flesh does not like to be told that it is lost. It wants to puff itself up and make itself acceptable to God.
Preterist -- about a week ago, I told you I believe that your views contained some truth, but were mingled with philosophies of men. Please explain how your umbrage at my statement doesn't fit exactly with your description above.
Actually, let's keep the question rhetorical. You will just use it as an opportunity to pound out a page of the exact same claims you have repeated a dozen times in this thread.
By the way -- if you haven't caught on, godofthunder isn't Mormon. He is simply a Christian doing his best to understand and follow the teachings of Christ.
The final say isn't up to me or you. Its up to Heavenly Father. Jesus didn't debate those who didn't believe his claims, his preaching, his "proof" (even when he raised the dead right in front of them).
He just said "if they don't listen to Moses and the prophets, (the OT scriptures, Jesus referring to writings already in existance, establishing the criteria for the plan of salvation) they will not believe even if somebody rises from the dead." Jesus said that for my comfort, not as a threat to you.
i agree with you, especially the part where you say that it isn't up to us. God already created the law, before we ever came down here in fact.
Do you think the Teachers of the Law would have really believed in Jesus if he had come down from the cross? No.
All the self righteous Teachers thought they had the last laugh -- "We gotcha now Jesus" Well, they're not laughing now. In your belief, I'll have a second chance, so we'll just see.
i don't see the relevance to your earlier argument here, so i will have to reread your earlier post. i frankly don't know who will or will not have a second chance as you describe it.
mormon doctrine (and i am not sure if this is a misconception for you) does not state that we all get a second chance. in fact, the whole point of it is that we only get one. one chance to accept Christ. this life. if i do not accept the message, but have been adequately acquainted with it (and only God can judge that condition) then i, by the creature that i made myself to be, do not want to live with God, and therefore will not be forced to do so. i won't inherit.
but, let us say that i am one of those of the 'heathen nation' who never knew God in this life. pretend that i was born in some apathetic village in the 3rd century bc and never learned anything of a higher being. then yes, i would be one of the ones who, according to my beliefs, gains the chance (not a second chance because i did not have one in life) to accept Christ. the decision will still be based off of the person that i made myself to be. if i did the best with what i had, was kind and honorable, i will likely be the kind of person that will accept Christ's atonement. if i was a warmongering, raping, pillaging fiend, then even knowing now the truth, i would still not be of the heart to desire an eternal existence with God. i would instead be of the mind to have the very mountains themselves fall upon me to hide my prsence from the sight of the Lord.
now, that was an extreme example from a Godless man thousands of years ago. what about the unacquainted of today? what of the christian who grew up claiming the title because it was tradition, but never fully searched for or developed faith in God, and never decided for himself that Christ was his Savior? who am i to say that he is condemned to hell? i cannot say that. i do not know what circumstances in his life led him that way. mental and emotional handicaps, trauma, abuse (kinda the same thing in some ways...), etc, can all affect someone so as not to recognize the truth when it is right there in front of them. God has said that he will be merciful to the heathen nation. those who never had the chance to know Him. i believe that there are those in the world today, even in our own country, who count among that group. those are the people that will receive this post-mortal chance, though i would not call it a 2nd chance.
all right. long explanation. just trying to clarify what we believe.
not sure about what you mean " an arbitrary way of showing us how imperfect we are". Please explain
you were telling me that the only purpose that the commandments serve is to remind us of our imperfection. do you truly believe that there is no other purpose? you do not believe that God delights in the virtue and charity of His people? you do not believe that the path that Christ laid out through His teachings is there specifically to build the saving faith in Him that we need in order to find perfection?
i see much evidence in the scriptures that God takes particular pleasure when His children follow His commandments, not because He likes making people slog through arbitrary commandments that are really only there to make evident our shortcomings (though that certainly is a healthy product of a realistic perspective when sincerely trying to follow the commandments), but because they bring us closer to Him. every time i lust after a woman, or hold malice in my heart against my neighbor, i distance myself that much further from God, who we can all agree with Preterist's words when she says that He is immeasurably out of our league, because we diminish our faith in Him. faith is a candle light that we desperately hold against the winds and darknesses of the world, and of our own fallen nature. it needs to be cradled and fed. otherwise it dies. we have many scriptural examples of those who knew Christ and knew His path who still fell from grace.
so a apostate is when you leave LDS or are you referring to apostate Christendom ?
i suppose i could have clarified here. my bad. apostate is not leaving the church. it is denying the faith. it is throwing the light (candle allusion again) that we have been given to the gutter. i do not make a real diferentiation between you apostatizing, and me apostatizing. either way would mean that we were throwing the light,and it doesn't matter how much we had (parable of the talents comes to mind), aside in favor of worldly wisdom or the appraisal of men.
there is a lot more on my mind, but it is late and i stayed up all last night doing homework, doign data entry for work, and satisfying my urge to catch up on these boards.
note to self for next post: organized religion as a club mentality. nature of revelation. Jesus' corporeal resurrection.
twin, i enjoy this discussion. i look forward to checking the thread in the morning. it will relieve me temporarily from whatever school/work drudgery i will be so heartily enjoying on my saturday. g'night all. you guys are fun to hang with. aaron out.
Who prejudged who first? You seem absolutely determined that I'm Mormon!
But no I don't know you. All I know is what you have written here. I feel that what you have written against the Mormon religion is rude, inflamitory, disrespectful and condescending. I also know that you apparently CANNOT STOP. I simply cannot understand why. What motivates you to launch one attack after another? If it is not spite and it is not self-righteous assurance that you are right and they are wrong ... then what in the world is it?
Okay, there's something that I agree with you on. Denominations and their nonsense have done great damage to the whole of Christianity. I do not wish do identify myself with any denomination either.
If I'm understanding Mormon doctrine correctly, he is Jehovah. The God of the Old Testament. The creator of Heaven and Earth. The creator of worlds without end. The Eternal God. All powerful. All Knowing.
So far, their definition is right on the mark in my opinion. The fact that the definition is expanded to First Born Son of God the Father is where I would begin to differ with them -- maybe. If Arianism is the correct description of the nature of God, then their definition would have to be hitting fairly close. If Arianism is true.
Seems like if this is you're only intention, then you're preaching to the choir. Similar descriptions of the relation between the Father and the Son exist within Mormon "scripture." But we both know what you are IMPLYING. You are implying that the correct description of God is the description offered by Trinitarianism.
And I do wish you would get off your soapbox about "the Jesus of the Bible." What other Jesus is there? But once again, you're intended meaning is the Trinitarian Jesus.
This is one matter where I begin to doubt that you are really Nondenominational. You seem to be obsessively dedicated to a doctrine that was established by denominationalism and not by a detailed explanation in the Bible alone. The detailed description of how to understand the Nature of God, according to Trinitarianism, is almost entirely outside the Bible. The Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed. These are the "absolute proof" that the Bible lacks. If the entire text of those Creeds were actually in the Bible, then there would be no doubt whatsoever about the Nature of God.
Unfortunately, the Bible alone will strike one person one way and another person the other way. If you don't go into the Bible study with the preconception that the Trinitarian dogma is correct, it's amazing how different the Bible tends to read. You might try it sometime. The Bible is not as Trinitarianist as you might think, but it requires an open mind.
As to the Nature of God, I happen to believe that God is merciful. I think he will forgive me and others if we came to the wrong conclusions about his nature. I don't believe that He is a vindictive God who would damn all those who came to an incorrect conclusion, especially when it is not absolutely clear. Three in one or three separate beings -- one of them is the truth. Insofar as a person relies on Christ and his grace, I don't think it is terribly important to nitpick over this matter.
No arguments here.
No disagreement here. It is by and through the grace of Christ that all are saved from their sins. Nobody can find salvation without Christ. And I am eternally grateful for His infinite sacrifice in my behalf. What a bleak existence it would be without Jesus in my life!
You still manage to preach the doctrines of Born Again Christians and you're doing it in such a manner as to suggest that you also hold all who do not subscribe to this dogma as "less than Christian" and "unworthy of God's grace."
You are welcome to believe in the Born Again Christian dogma, but if you are saying that everyone who does not happen to believe in the "once saved, always saved" concept is somehow unworthy to be called "Christian" then don't mince words. Come right out and say it!
I'm glad God knows you're intentions because I can't for the life of me figure them out. Sure, go ahead and tell the world that you are so persecuted and that "the world is not hating you, they are hating Christ". Excellent play at being the martyr. Now let me think. Who was it that launched into an all-out attack on other people's religion here? Oh yeah, that's right. You.
Again with the "you're a Mormon" drivel. I'm beginning to have doubts whether you actually have read anything I've said.
It only irritates me when one of them wants to tell the world that only they get to go to heaven and everyone else is bound for hell. That or when they become self-righteous and holier than thou.
Right on the money! Well said!
Thank you very much. I will pray for you as well. We imperfect and sinful creatures cannot possibly get enough help from God, now can we?
Preterist, I don't think we differ too greatly in what we believe. I just take exception to anyone who determines to attack others for their beliefs. I know what it is like and it is not of God. Christians should behave like Christians. I still feel that you're beliefs and attitudes are incredibly similar to the Baptist denomination.
Tell you what, I won't call you a Baptist if you don't call me a Mormon. Deal?
godofthunder: Since you claim to be a fellow Christian, I do not understand why you find fault with my desire to win others to Christ. Furthermore, I am not making myself a martyr. Knowing the history of martyrdom and the grave persecutions against Christians in this world (often to the point of death), I would never place myself in that category. Misunderstood, perhaps--martyr, definitely not!
SINCE I believe that the only way of salvation is through the grace of God only, why do some find it so difficult that I would be concerned about those I believe to be outside of His grace? SINCE I believe in Hell and that those outside of Christ are destined to go there, why do some find it so difficult to believe that I am truly concerned about those I believe are headed there?
Should I not behave in a way consistent with my beliefs? Would anyone find fault if I warned people driving along a road that the bridge was out up ahead? Would anyone object to my warning and say, "you are mean-spirited and judgmental. We don't believe the bridge is out up ahead so you shouldn't try to make us believe it is!"
I am not a baptist although I agree with some of the baptist doctrines and I accept the creeds insofar as they align with the Word of God. I have great disagreements with the baptist doctrines of last things or eschatology. Their premillennial, pre-tribulational dispensationalism is gravely lacking in biblical support. I would align myself with some of the reformed groups, but sadly, most of them believe in infant baptism. There are others, such as the Methodist, who believe that one can lose his salvation and I DO BELIEVE in once saved, always saved.
There are many here who believe that I simply parrot what I have been told and have no biblical support for my beliefs. My reluctance to be denominationalized refutes that. Perhaps you would agree that there are many--far too many--who sit in their pews on Sunday mornings and take in everything their pastors tell them without question because it is easier than doing the hard work necessary to understand God's Word for one's self. I believe there are many Mormons in similar situations. The bottomline is: what saith the Scriptures? No one should believe anything unless and until he can prove it from the Word of God. And where there are disagreements among Christians, these disagreements should be boldly addressed and worked out as much as possible. The Church has not done that. We are content to sit in our little denominational groups without often understanding why. We are content to let this fracturing of the Church exist and continue--we agree to disagree! But IF we hold the Bible to be God's Word to us, we cannot be content to agree to disagree else we make the Scriptures of no value and no effect. In any specific area, there cannot be a multitude of truths. There are absolutes in science. There are absolutes in math. And there are absolutes in spiritual matters. It is not wrong to contend against someone who says two plus two equals five. It is not wrong to contend with someone who insists that the chemical compound H2O makes table salt. And it is not wrong to state that one becomes a child of God by believing in Christ, born "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12, 13).
It is still my firm contention that it was this inexcusable fracturing that inn the church that we still witness today that opened the door for Joseph Smith to promote his claim that all the sects were completely truthless and accursed of God. It is not only Mormons who rightfully criticize these manmade barriers, but all of the unbelieving world looks on with contempt and criticism. We are more proud to be a Baptist, or a Methodist, or a Presbyterian, or a Lutheran than we are to be Christian and we are eager to feud over distinctives founded not in the Word of God but in the traditions of men. Mormons themselves are not above these distinctives. In order to come together in any way, we must establish the source of our truth. If the Bible is the Word of God only insofar as it is translated correctly (according to Mormonism), what basis is there for debate?
I will no longer post here. I will not deny that it is sometimes hurtful to be misunderstood and demonized when trying to share the love of Christ to those I feel are in need of hearing. But that is not why I am departing. There is really nothing more to say, and I do not wish to engender more ill feelings concerning my motives and perhaps do more harm to the cause of Christ than good.
I am working on a new thread which I hope to post shortly regarding the biblical nature and work of Christ. I seek to be nondenominational and biblical and not influenced by creeds and the traditions of men in this endeavor. I would welcome your input, godofthunder! I apologize for anything that might have been perceived as demeaning or insulting. Please forgive me if I have been out of line in that regard. It was not my intent.
It is still my firm contention that it was this inexcusable fracturing that inn the church that we still witness today that opened the door for Joseph Smith to promote his claim that all the sects were completely truthless and accursed of God.
Preterist
Preterist:
The problem you have is that you never learn. You use hyperbole to make Mormon beliefs look silly, absurd, and offensive. Let me give you an example. look at your words above. I have tried to correct you on this before, but you are impervious to correction!
Joseph Smith never said that "all sects were completely truthless". I have tried to point this out to you before but you don't listen. All denominations contain truth to a large degree. It's the creeds of men that the prophet had problems with, which ironically is what you claim to have problems with!
Almost everytime you attack "Mormon beliefs" you use the same sarcastic, exaggerated language that you used in the example above. It is very misleading, even if what you say has some truth. Stop exaggerating and twisting the truth.
godofthunder: Since you claim to be a fellow Christian, I do not understand why you find fault with my desire to win others to Christ. Furthermore, I am not making myself a martyr. Knowing the history of martyrdom and the grave persecutions against Christians in this world (often to the point of death), I would never place myself in that category. Misunderstood, perhaps--martyr, definitely not!
SINCE I believe that the only way of salvation is through the grace of God only, why do some find it so difficult that I would be concerned about those I believe to be outside of His grace? SINCE I believe in Hell and that those outside of Christ are destined to go there, why do some find it so difficult to believe that I am truly concerned about those I believe are headed there?
Should I not behave in a way consistent with my beliefs? Would anyone find fault if I warned people driving along a road that the bridge was out up ahead? Would anyone object to my warning and say, "you are mean-spirited and judgmental. We don't believe the bridge is out up ahead so you shouldn't try to make us believe it is!"
I am not a baptist although I agree with some of the baptist doctrines and I accept the creeds insofar as they align with the Word of God. I have great disagreements with the baptist doctrines of last things or eschatology. Their premillennial, pre-tribulational dispensationalism is gravely lacking in biblical support. I would align myself with some of the reformed groups, but sadly, most of them believe in infant baptism. There are others, such as the Methodist, who believe that one can lose his salvation and I DO BELIEVE in once saved, always saved.
There are many here who believe that I simply parrot what I have been told and have no biblical support for my beliefs. My reluctance to be denominationalized refutes that. Perhaps you would agree that there are many--far too many--who sit in their pews on Sunday mornings and take in everything their pastors tell them without question because it is easier than doing the hard work necessary to understand God's Word for one's self. I believe there are many Mormons in similar situations. The bottomline is: what saith the Scriptures? No one should believe anything unless and until he can prove it from the Word of God. And where there are disagreements among Christians, these disagreements should be boldly addressed and worked out as much as possible. The Church has not done that. We are content to sit in our little denominational groups without often understanding why. We are content to let this fracturing of the Church exist and continue--we agree to disagree! But IF we hold the Bible to be God's Word to us, we cannot be content to agree to disagree else we make the Scriptures of no value and no effect. In any specific area, there cannot be a multitude of truths. There are absolutes in science. There are absolutes in math. And there are absolutes in spiritual matters. It is not wrong to contend against someone who says two plus two equals five. It is not wrong to contend with someone who insists that the chemical compound H2O makes table salt. And it is not wrong to state that one becomes a child of God by believing in Christ, born "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1:12, 13).
It is still my firm contention that it was this inexcusable fracturing that inn the church that we still witness today that opened the door for Joseph Smith to promote his claim that all the sects were completely truthless and accursed of God. It is not only Mormons who rightfully criticize these manmade barriers, but all of the unbelieving world looks on with contempt and criticism. We are more proud to be a Baptist, or a Methodist, or a Presbyterian, or a Lutheran than we are to be Christian and we are eager to feud over distinctives founded not in the Word of God but in the traditions of men. Mormons themselves are not above these distinctives. In order to come together in any way, we must establish the source of our truth. If the Bible is the Word of God only insofar as it is translated correctly (according to Mormonism), what basis is there for debate?
I will no longer post here. I will not deny that it is sometimes hurtful to be misunderstood and demonized when trying to share the love of Christ to those I feel are in need of hearing. But that is not why I am departing. There is really nothing more to say, and I do not wish to engender more ill feelings concerning my motives and perhaps do more harm to the cause of Christ than good.
I am working on a new thread which I hope to post shortly regarding the biblical nature and work of Christ. I seek to be nondenominational and biblical and not influenced by creeds and the traditions of men in this endeavor. I would welcome your input, godofthunder! I apologize for anything that might have been perceived as demeaning or insulting. Please forgive me if I have been out of line in that regard. It was not my intent.
I hope to "see" you on my thread!
Preterist
Sorry I am so slow to respond Preterist. I will be happy to add as much perspective as possible to your upcoming thread. I find the history of how the doctrines of the Nature of God developed to be quite a fascinating thing.
Real life and a rather nagging ear infection have combined to make responding a bit problematic. Apology accepted of course. It is not my right to hold a grudge against any person. And I do apologize for my own part if I was being less than civil. Personal pet peave about what I view as Christians attacking Christians (okay so perhaps they're highly unorthodox, but that is my personal conviction -- they are Christians.), but it's not much of an excuse. I promise to give a more complete response in the next couple days.
The problem you have is that you never learn. You use hyperbole to make Mormon beliefs look silly, absurd, and offensive. Let me give you an example. look at your words above. I have tried to correct you on this before, but you are impervious to correction!
Absolutely correct, and it's why I have stopped responding to her and Twin. GodofThunder can't understand why Preterist continues. It's because she is being fed and enjoys the meal. I have decided to place them both on a starvation diet.
SINCE I believe that the only way of salvation is through the grace of God only, why do some find it so difficult that I would be concerned about those I believe to be outside of His grace? SINCE I believe in Hell and that those outside of Christ are destined to go there, why do some find it so difficult to believe that I am truly concerned about those I believe are headed there?
Preterist, I just wanted to respond to this because if you believe that God draws all who will be saved by His own decision and that others are consigned to eternal hell, why are you concerned about the lost? What will happen will happen to them eternally because this is God's predetermined destiny for them according to what you believe, right? It is the right thing for them. There is nothing that you can do to change their destiny and if they are predetermined and consigned to eternal hell, it is not for us to question God about it, right? Just trying to understand. God bless.
Last edited by ShanaBrown; 01-27-2008 at 05:21 PM..
What will happen will happen to them eternally because this is God's predetermined destiny for them according to what you believe, right? It is the right thing for them. There is nothing that you can do to change their destiny and if they are predetermined and consigned to eternal hell, it is not for us to question God about it, right? Just trying to understand.
Perhaps there is a difference here. We have a pretty good idea who is saved and who is not, for the most part. God however, knows already who will not make it and that is His and only His knowledge. Since we do not know, we are to go out and preach His Word regardless and leave the rest to Him. What do you think, does that make any sense?
Perhaps there is a difference here. We have a pretty good idea who is saved and who is not, for the most part. God however, knows already who will not make it and that is His and only His knowledge. Since we do not know, we are to go out and preach His Word regardless and leave the rest to Him. What do you think, does that make any sense?
not only that, but a lot of those that God knows are going to accept His gospel will do it because they were introduced to it by other people (i suppose that this is a no-brainer though, since we are all (christians) the product of missionary work somewhere down the line...). God set the work up so that we would HAVE to be involved in it, to take it to others, to really bring it in to ourselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
