I have little problem with "the God who weeps."I have a HUGE
problem, however, with the god who threatens with destruction those who refuse
to believe in him, and bow to him, and worship him.Read 3 Nephi
9:1-13 and you will see a "Jesus" who brags about destroying 16 cities
and millions of innocent people, then threatens the traumatized survivors with
destruction if they don’t turn to him!That is not a god who
weeps in any ethical or moral way.
Here is the Jesus that I, as a convert to Mormonism, believe in, and if He is
"different" than someone else's Jesus, then so be it. I believe in
the resurrected Jesus who performed the great atoning sacrifice for all mankind.
He was the only begotten son of a separate Heavenly Father and was born of the
Virgin Mary. Jesus is the only name under Heaven by which man might be saved. He
is the one who appeared as a resurrected being to his apostles as set forth in
Luke 24:36-48, and plainly said that he had a body of flesh and bones and was
not just a spirit. He requested those present to handle Him with their hands,
and He ate fish and honey comb to prove his physical reality. (Ever tried the
physical exercise of chewing a honeycomb?) He later ascended to heaven and will
return in great glory as the "same" (Acts 1:11)Jesus. My Jesus has not
died again. He has not transformed himself into some other being, nor has he in
some unexplainable way become of "one substance" with his Heavenly
Father and the Holy Ghost. "Trinity" is a non-Biblical word.
SAMHILL-The genesis for the comment comes from the following quote
by Elder Neal A. Maxwell:"We need more women who are gospel
scholars and more men who are Christians."I could have probably
worded that sentence better by emphasizing that Fiona's excellent
scholarship made this particular notion "more antiquated" rather than
merely "antiquated." However, the fact this false stereotype is
completely foreign to you is a reason to rejoice. I hope as time goes on even
fewer people will be aware that such a notion ever existed. The
sentence was worded as it appears so as to reinforce the idea that men and women
are equally capable of both living and studying the gospel. While I am pleased
you have never heard of such a thing, unfortunately I know others who have. I
hoped to do my small part to further disabuse them of the misconception.Please accept my apologies if I unintentionally caused offense or
confusion in my description.
RE: KJK: LDS reject the Greek/pagan inspired Athanasian Trinity. Wrong, Origen believed in the pre-existence and transmigration of souls. The Council
of Constantinople in 453 CE posthumously excommunicated him. (Ecc 12:7)…
the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.RE: Twin Lights, a simple
explanation of the Triune God.The word "Trinity" was first
used by Tertullian (c.155-230)well before the creed. From JS the
Inspired version. The Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are
one (*heis) these three agree as one(**en) (1John 5:7,8 KJV & JST ) . one= en(John 10:30. We are one=(en)they are one=(en) Jn., 17:20-22.
One in unity , true.(**en 1722, Preposition) But (*heis,1520=the#1)
different Greek words.Hear, O Israel: The LORD(YHWH) our God(Elohim) is
One(Echad) LORD(YHWH)..(Deut 6:4)Shema3 persons one God. "one
in substance”. Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express
image of his person(substance, 5287).Hebrews 1:3
Donn,Christ could make quantum physics explainable to a three year
old. Yet he could not provide a simple explanation of the Triune God? It just
doesn't wash. And I like CS Lewis too.As you say “They
were even capable of thinking that a child could sin in the womb or that its
soul might have sin in a preexistent state.” Verse 3 contradicts that the
man sinned (and that physical ailment was the result of sin), but not the
concept of a preexistence.I agree that God created time and that he
existed before it and will exist after it.
tomstpete:..in the Bible, God says "before me there was no God formed,
neither shall there be after me" (Isaiah 43:10) and other passages declare
that there's only one true God. And yet there are many Gods according to
Mormonism..KJK:The problem lies with you taking the verse out of context.
The issue in this and the surrounding chapters addresses idolatry, not
exaltation. The Bible says that believers receive the same reward as Christ and
will sit on his throne, be given a crown and will share/partner in God's
nature.tomstpete:..is the nature of God important or not?KJK:Sure it is. This is why LDS reject the Greek/pagan inspired Athanasian
Trinity. It preaches "another Jesus". Donn:The Rabbis had
developed a principle that There is no death without sin, and there is no
suffering without iniquity. They were even capable of thinking that a child
could sin in the womb or that its soul might have sin in a preexistent state.KJK:I’d love to see some Jewish sources about this. Also, your CS Lewis
quote still doesn’t change the fact that The Athanasian Trinity had
pagan/Greek philosophical origins.
@Twin Lights, If that was a misunderstanding, it is not one he corrected(John
9:1-4). Wrong, Who sinned..? The Rabbis had developed a principle
that There is no death without sin, and there is no suffering without iniquity.
They were even capable of thinking that a child could sin in the womb or that
its soul might have sin in a preexistent state. They also held that terrible
punishments came on certain people because of the sin of their parents as verse
3 explains Jesus contradicts these beliefs.In (2Tim 1:9 & Titus
1:2)God existed before time, implying he created time.… God who
gives life to the dead and Calls into Being things that were not.(Romans 4:17
NIV)RE: the Triune God,’ If Christianity was something we were
making up, of course we would make it easier. But it is not. We cannot compete,
in simplicity, with people who are inventing religions [JS]. How could we? We
are dealing with fact. Of course anyone can be simple if he has no facts to
bother about." “Mere Christianity” C.S. Lewis gives some other
analogies of the Tri(3) Unity.
tomstpete,I have read the NT specifically looking for the Triune
God. I do not find him. Instead, I find a Christ who consistently refers to
his father as a fully separate being.donn,Jews believed
in a pre-existence for at least some spirits. "1 And as Jesus
passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2 And his
disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that
he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned,
nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in
him."If that was a misunderstanding, it is not one he corrected.
RE: Tomstpete, is the nature of God important or not. Yes,The God Who
Weeps”. Jesus wept. John 11:35 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because
he laid down his life for us(1John 3:16)God on the Cross.We know also that
the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him
who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He
is the true God and eternal life.(1John 5:20).RE: We lived as spirit
beings in the presence of God before we were born into this mortal life. Only
Christ pre-existed not man. We didn’t have a spiritual existence prior to
earth.( 1 Cor 15:46)In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God.(14) The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among
us. (John 1:1,14).
"Together, Terry and Fiona have produced a thoughtful work that makes
antiquated the notion women are the Christians and men the scriptorians."I've never heard anyone say such a thing.Where in the
world did you get that "notion" from Kurt?
I agree with the statement that knowing who God is is of critical importance.
But I'm puzzled as to why, in discussions with Latter-day Saints, they seem
to minimize the differences between the LDS attributes of God and the Biblical
attributes of God. I.e., in the Bible, God says "before me there was no God
formed, neither shall there be after me" (Isaiah 43:10) and other passages
declare that there's only one true God. And yet there are many Gods
according to Mormonism, including three for this world. When I mention these
things Im routinely told by my Mormon friends that I'm splitting doctrinal
hairs which are unimportant. This is very confusing. is the nature of God
important or not?