"What Jesus REALLY meant was ...."

[John1.12]

Many Christian believe that, and with good reason. The God that Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship is the God commonly known as "the God of Abraham."

Yes thats the ' claim ' .

 

[Jane.Doe]

Nearly ever time I've quoted 1 cor 15 ,1-4 .

Here's the problem with your logic Barry: LDS Christians believe every single word 1 cor 15 ,1-4. Adamantly believe such -- it is foundational.

For you to then to try to say "Mormons aren't Christian", you're adding more stuff beyond what is stated 1 cor 15 ,1-4. It makes your claim and logic for what you believe to not consistent.

 

[John1.12]

Here's the problem with your logic Barry: LDS Christians believe every single word 1 cor 15 ,1-4. Adamantly believe such -- it is foundational.

For you to then to try to say "Mormons aren't Christian", you're adding more stuff beyond what is stated 1 cor 15 ,1-4. It makes your claim and logic for what you believe to not consistent.

It says ' according to the Scriptures '

1¶Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3¶For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

 

[John1.12]

Here's the problem with your logic Barry: LDS Christians believe every single word 1 cor 15 ,1-4. Adamantly believe such -- it is foundational.

For you to then to try to say "Mormons aren't Christian", you're adding more stuff beyond what is stated 1 cor 15 ,1-4. It makes your claim and logic for what you believe to not consistent.

I said 100% of SAVED people believed/ believe the exact same Gospel message. 1 cor 1.15 ,1-4 which is the Gospel in a nut shell .

 

[Soapy]

Are the saints whom have died on Earth also dead in heaven? What about the one man on the cross next to Jesus whereas Jesus said he would be seeing him in heaven based on the man's faith? Doesn't "the communion of saints" as found in the Apostle's Creed tell you something?

Wow... what scriptures are you reading....??

‘the Farce is strong with this one’, someone said!

“Apostle’s Creed”... “Apollo Creed”, “Assassin’s Creed”...

It can always be seen that fallacy is being spoken when protagonists resort to man-made creeds... No! Creeds do not validate scriptures nor do scriptures validate creeds... Creeds are control mechanisms by autocratic church leaders.

And this is borne out by the claim of ‘Communion of Saints’... SAINTS ARE DEAD!!!

What does scriptures say about that:

• “Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?" "I am in great distress," Saul said. "The Philistines are fighting against me, and God has departed from me. He no longer answers me, either by prophets or by dreams. So I have called on you to tell me what to do. Samuel said, "Why do you consult me, now that the LORD has departed from you and become your enemy?” (1 Samuel 28:15-16)

Saul sought to consult with the dead Samuel and God was sorely displeased with him. Of course, it was NOT SAMUEL that spoke that Saul... it was not good news!

• “So he [the rich man calling from the pit of hell] called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire...... "He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.... "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'" (Luke 16:24-31)

This parable spoken by Jesus is a repulse to the idea of speaking to the dead or expecting answers from the dead.... and the Saints ARE DEAD.

Jesus is LIVING... and he said to pray THROUGH HIM, IN HIS NAME, TO THE FATHER:

• “But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your [heavenly] Father, who is unseen. Then your [Heavenly] Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.... Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. This, then, is how you should pray: "'Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven..... For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. (Matt 6:6, 8-9, 14)

Here, also, is dispelled the arguments that trinitarian uphold incorrectly that man cannot forgive man - that only God can forgive sin... how is this missed by you... Jesus states clearly that you may , and it is a good thing, that you forgive your fellow man for a sin against you.

 

[Soapy]

All the verses show the unity within the God head . They work together.

Are you on hallucination drugs, Barry?

If God uses HIS HOLY SPIRIT to anoint the Son, how is that a unity in a Godhead.

Moreover, I see you refuse to declare what you mean by ‘Godhead’. I’m pretty sure you cannot define it as doing so would expose the farcical response you wrote.

• ‘This is my Son in whom I am well pleased...’
• ‘This day
• ‘Behold my servant in whom I am well pleased.... I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT ON HIM ....
• ‘The Father was pleased that the son should be filled with HIS HOLY SPIRIT...’
  
• ‘We declare that this Jesus of which you have heard was anointed BY GOD with Holy Spirit and power’

 

[John1.12]

Here's the problem with your logic Barry: LDS Christians believe every single word 1 cor 15 ,1-4. Adamantly believe such -- it is foundational.

For you to then to try to say "Mormons aren't Christian", you're adding more stuff beyond what is stated 1 cor 15 ,1-4. It makes your claim and logic for what you believe to not consistent.

I could quote verse after verse after verse . I could say ' grace , faith , Jesus, God , Church , Father , heaven , salvation, hell , Prophets , wisdom , Holy Spirit, law , Commandments , Scripture , ect and we would not have the same meaning behind them

 

[Jane.Doe]

I said 100% of SAVED people believed/ believe the exact same Gospel message. 1 cor 1.15 ,1-4 which is the Gospel in a nut shell .

Thereby. 100% of LDS Christians are saved.

I could quote verse after verse after verse . I could say ' grace , faith , Jesus, God , Church , Father , heaven , salvation, hell , Prophets , wisdom , Holy Spirit, law , Commandments , Scripture , ect and we would not have the same meaning behind them

If you add an essay with you interpretation of every word, then that is adding a LOT to what is stated in scripture.


I'm not a Protestant Christen. But I am a saved Christian.

 

[metis]

It can always be seen that fallacy is being spoken when protagonists resort to man-made creeds...

You obviously have a very low regard for the Apostles that were the source of the Creed passed down orally at first, so how does one have a serious discussion with a self-proclaimed expert on early Church history when you write nonsensical things like the above?

Answer: One can't, so maybe come back when you are willing to study instead of just spouting, and only then maybe I'll be interested. You have a low regard for the Apostle' teachings but an extremely high regard for yourself, and that's a terrible combination.

To put it another way: S-T-U-D-Y.

 

[metis]

I believe Every word of the bible is true

So, you're an expert in ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek and have the original manuscripts?

 

[John1.12]

So, you're an expert in ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek and have the original manuscripts?

I trust the English Just fine .I don't think the language took God by surprise .

 

[metis]

I trust the English Just fine .I don't think the language took God by surprise .

Oh, so God then rewrote the Bible in English?

BTW, apparently, using your "logic", God must have difficulty spelling because the oldest version of John's Gospel has over 100 spelling errors in it according to Anglican theologian William Barclay.

The Bible is not perfect, and even if it had been our own human limitations would prevent us from understanding such perfection. Those who insist that it must be perfect have slipped into a form of idolatry.

IOW, the Bible is about God but is not God.

 

[John1.12]

Oh, so God then rewrote the Bible in English?

BTW, apparently, using your "logic", God must have difficulty spelling because the oldest version of John's Gospel has over 100 spelling errors in it according to Anglican theologian William Barclay.

The Bible is not perfect, and even if it had been our own human limitations would prevent us from understanding such perfection. Those who insist that it must be perfect have slipped into a form of idolatry.

IOW, the Bible is about God but is not God.

Do we have any 'original ' letters/ books ? No we don't. We have Greek manuscripts for the NT . Then we have translations in the languages we speak.

 

[John1.12]

Oh, so God then rewrote the Bible in English?

BTW, apparently, using your "logic", God must have difficulty spelling because the oldest version of John's Gospel has over 100 spelling errors in it according to Anglican theologian William Barclay.

The Bible is not perfect, and even if it had been our own human limitations would prevent us from understanding such perfection. Those who insist that it must be perfect have slipped into a form of idolatry.

IOW, the Bible is about God but is not God.

//Oh, so God then rewrote the Bible in English?// This would make sense if The English translation was a different narrative to the Greek and Hebrew.But thats not the case is it ?

 

[metis]

Do we have any 'original ' letters/ books ? No we don't. We have Greek manuscripts for the NT . Then we have translations in the languages we speak.

And your point is?

As I expected, you deflected into something else rather than directly deal with what I posted.

The unanswerable and historical question is how much of the scriptures were/are Divinely inspired, and even though a person may have an opinion, there simply is no assurance whatsoever that they are correct. Plus, what we repeatedly run across here are some who say it's entirely Divinely inspired, but when some of us show them what theologians call "variations" of the same narrative, they can't deal with it.

An example is why is it that the narrative of the women at Jesus' tomb varies to the point whereas no two Gospels agree? The general story is consistent, but the details aren't.

 

[John1.12]

And your point is?

As I expected, you deflected into something else rather than directly deal with what I posted.

The unanswerable and historical question is how much of the scriptures were/are Divinely inspired, and even though a person may have an opinion, there simply is no assurance whatsoever that they are correct. Plus, what we repeatedly run across here are some who say it's entirely Divinely inspired, but when some of us show them what theologians call "variations" of the same narrative, they can't deal with it.

An example is why is it that the narrative of the women at Jesus' tomb varies to the point whereas no two Gospels agree? The general story is consistent, but the details aren't.

Take the Kjv for example. I believe its the best translation we have.

 

[metis]

This would make sense if The English translation was a different narrative to the Greek and Hebrew.But thats not the case is it ?

That's not what my point was. When you said that you believe every word is true, there's a problem. Anyone who knows more than one language well knows that some words don't translate well, especially without explanation. One example is the Koine Greek word "agape", which is translated as "love" in English, and yet "love" simply does not adequately cover it.

On top of that, the DSS showed us that some specific translations prior to 1950 were erroneous, but fortunately not that far off.

 

[John1.12]

And your point is?

As I expected, you deflected into something else rather than directly deal with what I posted.

The unanswerable and historical question is how much of the scriptures were/are Divinely inspired, and even though a person may have an opinion, there simply is no assurance whatsoever that they are correct. Plus, what we repeatedly run across here are some who say it's entirely Divinely inspired, but when some of us show them what theologians call "variations" of the same narrative, they can't deal with it.

An example is why is it that the narrative of the women at Jesus' tomb varies to the point whereas no two Gospels agree? The general story is consistent, but the details aren't.

I believe all 66 books are divinely inspired.

 

[metis]

Take the Kjv for example. I believe its the best translation we have.

It's actually not considered by translators as being that good, although later versions of it have gotten better.

The most widely used translation by theologians is the RSV. It's a bit clumsy to read though because the translators in most cases use the most direct word when translating, thus it can read a bit clumsily at times. The KJV, otoh, tends to read more "poetically", which is why so many Protestant churches especially use that version

 

[metis]

I believe all 66 books are divinely inspired.

Per your pattern, you again avoided dealing with what I posted.