Longest Thread Ever

[Dr. Jones]

@babe (regarding #4280... my phone won't quote for some reason)

Agree with what you said, but I was broadening that well beyond the borders of Mormonism. It also goes for Protestants, Muslims, Jehova's Witness, etc.

I believe that if concrete proof did come about that supported the Bible but demolished the credibility of the BoM.. that it would only put a dent in Mormon Church attendance.

And I mean that across most all religions.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Have to head to work. Will read #4283 later and respond if I have anything to add.
Great conversation.

 

[babe]

Gnosticism was an early Christian sub-theme/cult variety that a lot of people have lumped in with some other departures from centrist doctrine and tried to marginalize. It is somewhat a mystical claim of "knowing".

People who don't need evidence to embrace some higher level of abtraction about the universe, for example, are essentially saying they "know" something a lot of folks wouldn't say they "know". This willingness to "know" can be called "faith" by some who might want to either promote or attack the faith/beliefs of others. Sometimes people will dismiss "gnosticism" by just simply saying "that doesn't make sense", but in doing that they embrace the same principle, generally, they are trying to invalidate.

LDS testimony Sundays are a celebration of the supremacy of peoples' right to believe based on our intuition and sensibilities. Sometimes they relate experiences in support of their belief, but a major trend is to invoke "feelings" to support their belief.

People of all belief categories we can conceive or label do this as well as most Mormons.

I call it "intellectual shorthand", a simplifying method of language that abbreviates the symbols to communicate easily or freely a substantial mass of conviction. We just say we personally believe in something that would take a very great mass of evidence or discussion to lay out for others. . . .

but at the end of the "testimony" there's usually still some willingness to accept further data, information, and other substantiating material and re-think core beliefs. . . . just not a lot of time to do all that every day.. . . .

 

[Dr. Jones]

^love that you're still rockin that sig, babe. xoxox

Yeah, what you said above is another way of saying the same thing.
I don't think there's an ounce of difference between 'why' people believe what they believe across religions. They say it differently, package it from different angles, but with intellectual honesty, how can we truly differentiate?

Ooh.. that topic has legs, I think. New can.

 

[babe]

So I think PKM is right to at least three orders of magnitude on this, vs. the occurrence of other possibilities. . . . but there are still the "one in a million" types of people out there who will just do things differently, whatever it takes. . . .

I could make a pretty good case showing how the "mainstream Catholic" and "bible protestant" folks do with this.

Going over their scriptures as they stand, it's pretty hard to prove anyone within a hundred years of Jesus or earlier ever cared to invoke the "Trinity" in explaining who God is, but the Christians who follow from the tradition of the creeds dating to the fourth century AD will never "see it" the way it's written. Might as well not even have a Bible if you actually aren't going to believe it. How many times does the Bible invoke the concept of God's "fatherhood" of mankind, or Jesus/the Messiah's separate and submissive mission for making an atonement for man with God?

Which brings up the reason why Mormons became Mormons in the first place. Was it because of the Book of Mormon, or was it because Joseph Smith directly took on the old dogmas of established Christian Churches and found some people were actually looking for answers to their questions about the obvious contradictions and/or nonsense of established doctrine???

I think most converts found Mormonism more rationally coherent with their readings of the Bible, and that is why the joined.

I don't hear the Book of Mormon really being used much in Mormonism, from the standpoint of authority speeches and such. . . . and it really has little to do today with what Mormons believe doctrinally. Just as the Jesus of Nazareth who took on established Jewish authority and tried to teach people to maintain their own integrity and conscience and rely on their good judgment in religion instead of "authority", the Book of Mormon does not present a scenario where people are supposed to follow some leader without reference to the written word of scripture, as the LDS Church (mainstream) does today with their dictum that the "Living oracles" take priority over the "dead prophets", thus annihilating the whole concept of the importance of scripture.

It seems there is some systemic problem that devolves from all systems mankind set up with "establishment of authority" over people. . . .yah, we might need some level of organization/leadership/governance. . . . but there is a huge propensity for humans with authority to take the easy rule to absolute tyranny.

 

[babe]

^love that you're still rockin that sig, babe. xoxox

Yeah, what you said above is another way of saying the same thing.
I don't think there's an ounce of difference between 'why' people believe what they believe across religions. They say it differently, package it from different angles, but with intellectual honesty, how can we truly differentiate?

Ooh.. that topic has legs, I think. New can.

About the sig line.

I figure if anyone reads one of my long spiels they should at least have a joke at the end. I thought that line was about the funniest thing that could be said about my quest.

I once thought I had a chance to catch up with your stats. . . . you were I think at about 22000 then and I was 2000 or so. So you're still doing about ten to one my "contributions" in here, and they're not all short, either. But who knows, maybe I catch up with Methuselah, too. And if you're not still rocking the BB issues maybe I'll have a hundred years or so to "catch up". lol

 

[babe]

^love that you're still rockin that sig, babe. xoxox

Yeah, what you said above is another way of saying the same thing.
I don't think there's an ounce of difference between 'why' people believe what they believe across religions. They say it differently, package it from different angles, but with intellectual honesty, how can we truly differentiate?

Ooh.. that topic has legs, I think. New can.

Well, I'd hazard an argument that there might be some "difference" in why people believe what they believe. . . . . uhhhmmmm. . . . . lessseeee. . . . .

an ounce of difference might make it a steep bar to jump. I might have to try my old backflip. . . . nanogram I could probably clear with some ordinary effort. . . .

 

[babe]

^love that you're still rockin that sig, babe. xoxox

Yeah, what you said above is another way of saying the same thing.
I don't think there's an ounce of difference between 'why' people believe what they believe across religions. They say it differently, package it from different angles, but with intellectual honesty, how can we truly differentiate?

Ooh.. that topic has legs, I think. New can.

The ordinary "why" for beliefs is . . . . comfort. Familiarity, relationships, a place where we grew up and belong to. . . . friends who "understand" us. Family and loved ones who "know" us for what we are and accept us "as is".

The cynic in me says, though, that some people don't even care about "why". It's merely a habit, a modus operandi, . .. . an convenience to our schemes for pulling the levers, pushing the buttons, and getting what we want out of the people around us.

 

[babe]

^love that you're still rockin that sig, babe. xoxox

Yeah, what you said above is another way of saying the same thing.
I don't think there's an ounce of difference between 'why' people believe what they believe across religions. They say it differently, package it from different angles, but with intellectual honesty, how can we truly differentiate?

Ooh.. that topic has legs, I think. New can.

This opinion obviously comes from a man with a high level of idealism about people in general. . . . or at least who is willing to attribute good intentions to others very generously.

 

[PearlWatson]

I truly, truly believe that there are billions of people on this planet that would find a way not to believe Jesus is the Messiah if/when he were to return. I believe there are many millions that EVEN IF THEY WERE SURE it was Him, would deny Him.

Romans 14:11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Equivalent Mormon scripture:

Mosiah 27: 31 Yea, every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess before him. Yea, even at the last day, when all men shall stand to be judged of him, then shall they confess that he is God; then shall they confess, who live without God in the world, that the judgment of an everlasting punishment is just upon them; and they shall quake, and tremble, and shrink beneath the glance of his all-searching eye.

 

[Dr. Jones]

So, babe, please tell me what the Mormon doctrine teaches about the trinity or equivalent. If you would.

Every time I speak with a Mormon they're shocked to hear what I (as well as about every other protestant Christian) believes on this topic.. almost as if Mormons have been mistaught what most protestants believe.

 

[Dr. Jones]

@Pearl - I'll have to get to that most recent post in a while.

Later ladies and gents.

 

[Ben10]

So, babe, please tell me what the Mormon doctrine teaches about the trinity or equivalent. If you would.

Every time I speak with a Mormon they're shocked to hear what I (as well as about every other protestant Christian) believes on this topic.. almost as if Mormons have been mistaught what most protestants believe.

Can I take a crack at this?

The LDS faith believes that the God head is made up of 3 distinct individuals. God the Father, His son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. The difference between most Christian religions and that of the Mormon faith is that the trinity seems to link all 3 of those individuals into one Person/being. While the Mormons believe that the trinity (God Head) are one in perpose and thought but are not just one Person/Being.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Thanks, Ben.

That too is what I believe. As it is most Christians I know. 3 individuals and 1 spirit. And by that I mean they are entirely aligned and in sync in their ways and beliefs... but 3 individually.

 

[babe]

So, babe, please tell me what the Mormon doctrine teaches about the trinity or equivalent. If you would.

Every time I speak with a Mormon they're shocked to hear what I (as well as about every other protestant Christian) believes on this topic.. almost as if Mormons have been mistaught what most protestants believe.

So, shock me, too. I listen to folks like Ravi Zacharias, Dr. Irwin Lutzer, and the deceased J. Vernon McGee's "Bible Bus" program a lot. . . .

The BBN (Bible Broadcast Network) out of Charleston SC as delivered to Utah by Ogden's 95.5 FM station. Love the old music, and all the regular doctrinal programs. They play their signature hymn twice a day about the trinity. Not to say there aren't a lot of people with somewhat variant ideas of God who classify themselves as Protestant. . . . or Catholic.

 

[babe]

The LDS doctrine on the Godhead has at least four historical versions, beginning with an early trinity concept that is indeed found in the Book of Mormon, followed by Joseph Smith's account of the First Vision, written later. Brigham Young brought out the Adam/God idea and authorities linked it back to Joseph Smith in the Nauvoo period as well. Then there was President John Taylor's return to the emphasis on Jesus Christ in "The Mediation and the Atonement", followed by Pres. Heber J. Grant's setting up James E. Talmadge to produce the modern idea of Mormonism in his commissioned scholarly work "Jesus the Christ", an effort to harmonize Mormonism with modern Christianity on some points. . . . which makes out that Jesus was the God of the Old Testament (Jehovah) in distinct contradiction of Paul's essay in Hebrews which tried to satisfy Jews that Jesus was the final and great High Priest of the Mosaic Law, who gave Himself as an offering for our sins to bring us back to God, thus ending the need for any more Priests sitting in the Temple offering sacrifices as the Law of Moses directed. . . .

I would go with the Book of Daniel as perhaps the most explicit statement that Jesus, in the day of the Great Judgment, will be brought forth before the reigning God, The Ancient of Days, and there and then being crowned as the Prince of this creation and our direct leader.

 

[babe]

Can I take a crack at this?

The LDS faith believes that the God head is made up of 3 distinct individuals. God the Father, His son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost. The difference between most Christian religions and that of the Mormon faith is that the trinity seems to link all 3 of those individuals into one Person/being. While the Mormons believe that the trinity (God Head) are one in perpose and thought but are not just one Person/Being.

This is what I believe as well. Most of us live by "common sense" and ordinary meanings that words mean. Theologians, not so much. In Talmadge's "Jesus the Christ", the error is that he (and doctrinaire Mormons) insist that Jesus is Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament, and the creator of this world. The Adam/God concept taught by Brigham Young infers that Eloheim or JHVH, Christ, and Michael/Adam/The Archangel should be read as titles, not individual names. In the creation story, a world is made under management from Eloheim by an obedient "Christ" commissioned to do so for the man Adam, who is given the whole world for him and his posterity. . . . There are a lot of scriptures that equate Jesus with being our "Lord" and a God, particularly speaking after the atonement/crucifixion. Jesus in his own words spake often of His Father, and made of point of submitting to the will of the Father, stating that the doctrine was not His (Jesus') own, but that of His Father. Jesus told his believers that if they would continue to follow those teaching, the end result would be that they, like He Himself", when they came into the presence of the Father, would be "like Him (the Father)"

To the Jews/Israelites the YHVH God was holy, and the Messiah would be someone sent from Him. David, accordingly in Psalm 110:4 describes the Messiah (David's "Lord") as sitting on the right hand of YHVH(the GOD of Israel). That makes a distinction between Jesus and the GOD that handed down the stone tablets to Moses, and the GOD that made the covenant with Abraham. If you believe Moses' account of going up on the heights of Mount Sinai and seeing parts of GOD, if not the face of GOD, that GOD was in a human form, unless that idea is just too much for you and you want to insist it's all metaphorical or some mystical display of some kind of illusion, just "appearing to have human body parts".

Abraham invited the GOD of Israel to walk into his tent and there fed Him some of the fatted calf and his wife's bread. . . pretty much tells me that the God of Abraham was a human being.

Paul, in his book of Hebrews, centered his explanation of who Jesus is on Davids Psalm 110:4, thereby placing the Messiah in the customary Israelite/Jewish identity and focusing on the role of mediator and the atonement, figuring Jesus in the role of the indispensable "High Priest" who makes intercession for mankind with GOD.

Daniel describes the last Judgment as the occasion where the mediator..... is brought before the throne of GOD and there crowned as Lord of Lords, and receives dominion over this world. Jesus is the one who makes intercession for us before the holy Father, on a global basis.

What all this does, in my mind, is direct our minds to the point that faith in Christ, like faith in God, does make our efforts to "follow" meaningful in our daily decision-making, and requires us to do what is right rather than things that are non consistent with being "like our Father". Some might think the old Mosaic law didn't exactly teach that somehow. I don't. Some might think that Jesus' atonement means the "work" is all done for us. I don't. Jesus said strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leads to the life entailing with becoming "like our Father". Jesus said if we will follow His teachings, that will be the result.

Jesus got into some heated debates with the priestly officers of the Jewish theological authorities because he included himself with the sacred thing about their GOD, saying "I AM that I AM" referring to the essential thing of being(should I say BEING") like His Father. I take the "I AM" expression as possessing the power of being, on a continuing basis, holy. Which is the one thing essential to anyone who deserves to be praised or held in mind as reverenced. The essence of being "God" in my mind.

 

[babe]

Romans 14:11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Equivalent Mormon scripture:

Mosiah 27: 31 Yea, every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess before him. Yea, even at the last day, when all men shall stand to be judged of him, then shall they confess that he is God; then shall they confess, who live without God in the world, that the judgment of an everlasting punishment is just upon them; and they shall quake, and tremble, and shrink beneath the glance of his all-searching eye.

I can't dispute the actual sovereignty of God. Even devils, including The Devil, actually know who God is. On the dark side of knowing that, there are those who hate the fact. Somewhere there's a scripture if my memory serves me well that states that even the devils believe in God, and even fear and tremble in His presence. When Jesus was casting out demons, they did comply. Probably hated it, though.

So when demons or devils are whispering in your ear that there is no God, they are self-knowing liars. I don't know what anyone can do about folks who choose to go that, that is their choice. I consider that God has given me a great gift in just the privileges of living in this world, of my life itself. I'd like to give a gift back to Him in return. . . . by making to my best understanding my best effort to live a life that serves Him and His, but most of all in choosing to love Him and choosing to believe the good about Him.

The devilish thing about Bill Ayers and other determined "progressives", beside the lies they make up about who they are and what they want, is the fact that they are willing liars who will purposefully, assiduously, and regardless of whatever the truth may be, go on making up any lie they can to beat down anyone who seems to be in their way. Bill Ayers, like Trotsky and other organizers for totalitarian control states, don't care what the truth is, they are determined to work the crowds and just manipulate them whatever it takes.

 

[babe]

Our "modern" totalitarian set has decided that they have the moral authority so long as they can get away with. . . .That's Nietzsche in a nutshell.

 

[babe]

Some folks who follow this modern "philosophy" have convinced themselves that God is not demonstrable, argumentatively speaking, so obviously He does not exist, according to their reasoning. . . .

Others may know God exists, and have just decided either that they don't care, or that the gains of going along with a fascist world of statists is worth the price of pretending not the believe. Others may actually just hate God. Who knows. . . . .????